Ah, silly me. I just wondered if his inferior athleticism as a runner was related to his not having normal legs. Maybe it’s all a coincidence.
Hack them off and get prosethetics, and apparently you would! 
This is similar to the discussions about bench shirts in powerlifting.
At some point, it is no longer the athlete, but the equipment. If you are allowed to use prosthetic limbs, why not a go-cart? If a bench shirt, why not a fork lift?
Regards,
Shodan
Perhaps a less extreme example can be revealing.
Consider Jim Abbott, a successful pitcher (and Olympic gold medalist) born with only one hand.
I am having trouble envisioning a rule that would allow any kind of hand enhancement in the game of baseball, either MLB or in the Olympics. Baseball is not jai-alai. Consequently, it is less than clear to me why prosthetic legs could be permitted in a competitive sport when a prosthetic hand almost certainly should not be.
What seems more likely to you, that this guy is a phenomenal runner that is hampered by his condition or that he’s an ok runner that is aided by what studies have shown let him expend less energy to run?
This is an easy call–it’s ridiculous to allow it.
Competition is all about equality–an equal chance to show what your body can do with the same equipment as everyone else.
The situation you describe arises only because of the politically correct determination to pretend the differently-enabled are not differently-enabled.
Give Oscar permission to use his carbon-fiber springs and a non-amputee is gonna get some to attach to his (regular) feet.
While we’re pretending that a natural handicap cannot be corrected by artificial means to the point where it’s an advantage, let’s allow paraplegics to post their marathon wheelchair division times against some bozo running on his own two legs…
A fair question… and yet, Casey Martin does get to use a go-cart.
You’re serious? I pick #1. Or at least, #1a: I think he’s probably a phenomenal runner in any regard. If he wasn’t, I suspect other people with the same disability would be able to outrun him. But they apparently are not doing that.
While he may be able to expend a little less energy in running, I don’t think it makes up for his disability. I don’t think it even comes remotely close. If it did, I think you’d be able to find some disabled runners that might be able to compete with the world’s fastest runners. But you’ve said his time wouldn’t be all that remarkable for a talented high school runner, and it’s about a second slower than the world record.
Yes I’m serious. A phenomenal runner compared to Joe Schmoe, sure. The reason that other people with the same ability can’t outrun him is that there are a very small amount of people with no legs. He’s the cream of the crop for no-legged people. I’d also think that disable people self select away from being athletes even if they can be successful. The reason disable runners can’t compete is a function of the self-selecting nature and their small population, not because technology can’t help them enough.
Not a fair comparison. The cart did not give him an advantage. his health kept him at a huge disadvantage. His career is already done.
I give Martin a pass because golf is not about walking the course. The fact that they walk the course is more about showmanship than athletic achievement. Martin still has to stand by himself, hit the ball by himself, using the same clubs as everyone else.
Sprints are entirely about running down the track, this prosthetic is designed to help run down the track, so it’s out.
This a perfect example of bending the rules for the differently-enabled.
Mr Martin has a bad hip. The court system (against the recommendation of Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer, as I recall) decides to permit a golf cart to overcome the handicap.
Is that a net advantage? Not testable; there is no way to test a non-handicapped Casey Martin against the real Casey Martin.
What Casey Martin playing with a golf cart is not, is PGA-rules golf (for that age group).
Let us now turn to the problem of allowing the visually handicapped to use special eye correction with telescopic magnifying lenses so that they can compete in the 300M target-shooting events…
Oscar Pistorius would not be able to compete in the Olympics anyways because he is too slow.
http://www.usatf.org/events/2008/OlympicTrials-TF/entry/qualifyingStandards.asp
I’m not sure what evidence is out there to support you, but I have to admit that’s a reasonable possibility. However, it seems to me that Pistorius has lost major events to single amputees, which makes me wonder if he has an advantage over them.
This was also, apparently, the opinion of the judge who held the opposing opinions of Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer in less esteem.
The thing is, rules are rules. Whether they are stupid, or favor one group over another, is irrelevant. They are entirely artificial constraints. If you don’t like 'em, go make your own rules for your own groups. Any number of rules prevent a wide variety of folks from participating in that sport under that sanctioning body. Since when do the courts get to decide what the rules of golf are?
Sorry those are for the US trials, but the Olympics has similar time qualifications. I just cannot find them.
I’m about fifteen strokes away from being a scratch golfer, so I realize I’m not the best example. But – do you play golf?
I can tell you that there is, for me, a substantial difference between playing 18 holes with a cart and 18 holes on foot. And playing 36 holes in one day on foot, something I’ve done maybe four times in my life, has really wiped me out. In contrast, playing 36 holes using a cart is tiring, yes, but not devastatingly so.
So I question the statement that golf is “not about walking the course.” If you walk the course, you get more fatigued than if you get to ride. Apparently, Mssrs. Nickalus and Palmer, who were BETTER than scratch golfers, agree with that assessment.
I’m wondering what evidence you relied upon to form your conclusion. In particular – how often you play, what your handicap is, and how often you’ve played more than 18 holes in one day sans cart.
I admit I don’t have any cites at the moment. I’m not sure I could find any either. Given that there are no cites that he would be faster with normal legs I have to go with my reasoning and the tests that were done that show that the prosthetics are an advantage.
It is kind of a weird thing to be brought up though since he’s not even close to being fast enough. I suppose they want to get the rules in before Asafa Powell gets his legs eaten by an alligator or something.
Do you carry your own clubs though? That makes a huge difference. I don’t think I’d have much of a problem playing 36 holes if someone else was carrying my clubs for me. FTR I do play, but I would get lucky to break 100. I’ve never played 36, but I have tacked on extra holes before.
I don’t think in the OPs case he should be allowed to compete, he has technology that no one else would be able to have. This is more like the swim suits that came out 6-7 years ago, the Olympic committee would not allow anyone to use them unless everyone had access to them.
Yes, I do. Not often, and I suck toes, but I’ve played in the summer, 18 holes, carrying my clubs on my own back. I’m not even laughably a top flight athlete, though at the time I did my own caddying, I was at least fit. It isn’t that hard. Sure, you get more tired walking than riding, but anyone who’s performance is measurably affected by walking the course, while the caddy does all the heavy work, needs to quit their 2 pack a day habit.
If the game is actually about how well you handle the grueling conditions on the links, they should carry their own clubs.
BTW, sucking at golf is inherently more tiring than being good, because you have to walk all over creation to find your ball, the rough on this side of the fairway, that side of the fairway, the sand trap (3 times) and finishing up with 4 putts before running off to the next tee so you don’t hold up the group behind you for too long.
You got something against John Daly?
No one said it was about that.
So what about Freddy Couples? He has lots of back pain that can be aggrevated by walking a course-- especially a hilly one. Or, if someone has an injured knee-- they’d be helped a lot if they could ride the course.
So, even if a perfectly fit, uninjured golfer wasn’t at a disadvantage because he had to walk (and I don’t agree that he wouldn’t be), there is still an advantage to be had over injured golfers. And since we have no reasonable way to differentiate between who is “really” injured at any given time, it’s unfair to allow one person to ride if everyone can’t ride.