Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Scientists continue to be divided over whether a double amputee would have an "unfair advantage" competing against able-bodied sprinters in the Olympics   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 180
    More: Asinine, International Association of Athletics Federations, Court of Arbitration for Sport, Paralympic Games, Southern Methodist, athleticism, lower leg, Oscar Pistorius, Pretoria  
•       •       •

6501 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jun 2012 at 7:41 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



180 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-27 10:17:48 PM  
Of the seven billion able bodied people on the planet, about 50 of them can run 400m in 45 seconds. And one of the few who use these prosthetics can.

The odds that the prosthetics are not an advantage are really remote.
 
2012-06-27 10:18:48 PM  

i.r.id10t: Thats why they have the Special Olympics ...

unless you want to demo a new sport that allows people with all of their original meatware to add some hardware and compete... (puts on sunglasses) ... on even footing.


It's the PARAlympics. The "Special Olympics" are a pointless "everybody gets a medal!" exercises.

IMO, your confusion reflects the real issue here. If the Parlympics were better marketed and respected, this athlete wouldn't feel the need to try to litigate his way into the traditional Olympics. Just like women don't try to litigate their way onto Men's gymnastics teams.
 
2012-06-27 10:21:46 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Some day really soon this is going to be a real issue.

[img685.imageshack.us image 460x276]


It's already a real issue. As I assume the article mentions, specialized sprinting prosthetics already result in some pretty big performance boosts.

Is the trade-off worth it? No, no it isn't. But is there an advantage from being a cyborg in certain situations? Yeah, sure. We've been able to build various organs better than god for quite a while now, albeit in more specialized contexts.
 
2012-06-27 10:26:31 PM  
Now That's What I Call a Taco!:
It's the PARAlympics. The "Special Olympics" are a pointless "everybody gets a medal!" exercises.



The PARAlympics includes events for people with intellectual disabilities.
The paralympics is the special olympics with a more politically correct title
 
2012-06-27 10:29:28 PM  
I'm sure these guys could do the same thing in sneakers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6viVx8qq66Q
 
2012-06-27 10:32:56 PM  

ViralMonkey: Now That's What I Call a Taco!:
It's the PARAlympics. The "Special Olympics" are a pointless "everybody gets a medal!" exercises.



The PARAlympics includes events for people with intellectual disabilities.
The paralympics is the special olympics with a more politically correct title


Separate organizations. Run very differently: Not everyone gets a medal in the paralympics.
 
2012-06-27 10:33:35 PM  

usernameguy: Scientists continue to be divided over whether a double amputee cyborg with hyper-legs would have an "unfair advantage" competing against able-bodied sprinters in the Olympics.

/Would neuropazine be a performance-enhancing drug?


Only if you're not addicted yet.
 
2012-06-27 10:33:47 PM  

ViralMonkey: Now That's What I Call a Taco!:
It's the PARAlympics. The "Special Olympics" are a pointless "everybody gets a medal!" exercises.



The PARAlympics includes events for people with intellectual disabilities.
The paralympics is the special olympics with a more politically correct title


Actually after looking further...
You're right - there is a separate 'special olympics' just for people with intellectual disabilities.

The Paralympic intellectually disabled athletes are still expected to compete at a meaningful level.
 
2012-06-27 10:37:53 PM  

ViralMonkey: Now That's What I Call a Taco!:
It's the PARAlympics. The "Special Olympics" are a pointless "everybody gets a medal!" exercises.



The PARAlympics includes events for people with intellectual disabilities.
The paralympics is the special olympics with a more politically correct title


Never said it doesn't include people with intellectual disabilities. Instead, I pointed out the reason its not the "special olympics with a more politically correct title":

The Paralympics is an actual competiton, with qualifying standards, records kept, and winners and losers. The Special Olympics has none of these. It's simply a local event for "special" people to feel "special" for participating in an activity. Which is great- but it's not anything remotely similar.

Id love for you to tell some amputee vets what you said. I'm sure that would work out great for you.
 
2012-06-27 10:39:04 PM  
Oscar Pistorius' 45.07s time is just under a full second slower than the slowest 400 meter record, 44.05s Angelo Taylor. Doesn't seem like he has that much of an advantage. I say let the guy run in the Olympics if he qualifies.
 
2012-06-27 10:39:11 PM  

Donnchadha: Magorn: Will that answer change when genetics has advanced to the point that we can custom build our offspring?

I think that people (as a whole) will generally eschew the idea of genetically building offspring. The technology will be there, but something about that idea will just be too weird and creepy to really catch on. I'm not saying it will never happen, but I don't see it becoming "normal" or at least generally acceptable anytime in the near future.


yeah, no way in hell am i gong to mortgage my house to have an genetically enhanced child that will earn 40 million a year moving a ball from point a to point b... no way.
 
2012-06-27 10:40:05 PM  

neuroflare: mr smart the great: loadin

[myspace.roflposters.com image 640x512]

/I consider it every time myself


You know there's a direct x 10 renderer out for it now? Because Spector was awesome enough to put out a real SDK for the game it can be updated forever.

http://kentie.net/article/d3d10drv/
 
2012-06-27 10:42:59 PM  
In all seriousness, this is an interesting issue. The "bionic legs" they've developed really DO give amputees speed to match an able-bodied athlete. Is that an unfair advantage? Here's a way to find out: Let an amputee race in a regular Olympics or Olympic-caliber event on a trial basis, and see how he does. If he places where a normal person would place, then it's fair. If he beats the pants off the "able-bodied" athletes, then it's "unfair' only insofar as they've got two good legs and he doesn't. Raising the specter of Olympic-class sprinters getting their legs cut off so they can win that gold medal.

Oh, and in re this:

Now That's What I Call a Taco!: The Paralympics is an actual competiton, with qualifying standards, records kept, and winners and losers. The Special Olympics has none of these. It's simply a local event for "special" people to feel "special" for participating in an activity. Which is great- but it's not anything remotely similar.


I suggest you go here Link before you make such an offensive and completely asinine statement ever again.
 
2012-06-27 10:45:25 PM  
Now That's What I Call a Taco!:
Id love for you to tell some amputee vets what you said. I'm sure that would work out great for you.


I used to train with professional athletes. Including some disabled athletes.
I get that they train every bit as hard. I get that they compete just as hard.

But I don't care. I don't want to watch "The best in the world... but for..." compete
It's not the same
I want to see the best in the workd compete.

Hell.. I used to train as hard as many of the athletes I trained with.
All I was missing was some talent
But nobody wanted to watch me run low 11s for the 100m and for the same reasons that the paralympics will never be the same spectacle as the actual olympics
 
2012-06-27 10:48:31 PM  

Jarhead_h: neuroflare: mr smart the great: loadin

[myspace.roflposters.com image 640x512]

/I consider it every time myself

You know there's a direct x 10 renderer out for it now? Because Spector was awesome enough to put out a real SDK for the game it can be updated forever.

http://kentie.net/article/d3d10drv/


[oh snap! flowchart.jpg]

thanks! UT and DX are two of my favorites of all time
 
2012-06-27 10:48:40 PM  

Magorn: I_C_Weener: I've often wondered if children of Thalidomide have an advantage in swimming events.

I know you are being silly, but on some level that question highlights just how weird this whole "performance enhancing" question really is. I used to swim pretty fast but most of my speed came from the fact that I have nigh-mutant feet (13EEEE) why is a genetic advantage okay but a chemical or material advantage not? Will that answer change when genetics has advanced to the point that we can custom build our offspring?


there was a great scifi short story back in the late 60s early 70s dealing with this. was hilarious. look at the uproar over new fabrics for swimsuits. but they allow swimmers to shave their body hair, right?

go a step further. They only test for doping around the time of the events. to be completely fair, they would need to start testing regularly at a very early age. Otherwise you could have all kinds of doping for the first 10-20 years of life, clean living for a year or two and BOOM, "ANOTHER OLYMPIC RECORD!!!"

LOL
 
2012-06-27 10:50:34 PM  

Gyrfalcon: In all seriousness, this is an interesting issue. The "bionic legs" they've developed really DO give amputees speed to match an able-bodied athlete. Is that an unfair advantage?


Uh, this guy is barely even able to qualify for the Olympics, let alone contend for a medal. It might only be unfair in the sense that he's taking up the spot from some other lower-tiered athlete who stands no chance either.
 
2012-06-27 10:51:24 PM  

ViralMonkey: Now That's What I Call a Taco!:
Id love for you to tell some amputee vets what you said. I'm sure that would work out great for you.


I used to train with professional athletes. Including some disabled athletes.
I get that they train every bit as hard. I get that they compete just as hard.

But I don't care. I don't want to watch "The best in the world... but for..." compete
It's not the same
I want to see the best in the workd compete.

Hell.. I used to train as hard as many of the athletes I trained with.
All I was missing was some talent
But nobody wanted to watch me run low 11s for the 100m and for the same reasons that the paralympics will never be the same spectacle as the actual olympics


..at least until they become the cyberolympics with augmented players dunking from the half court line, high jumpers bouncing 30 feet in the air, and boxers splattering each other into goo on the first landed punch.

that's going to be awesome.
 
2012-06-27 10:51:37 PM  

kroonermanblack: My thoughts have been echoed here already I think, but for lack of anything better to do I'll vomit them on you.

I'm not so much concerned with the current level of prosthesis these guys are rocking, but it very quickly becomes a slippery slope where the mechanical beats the flesh. Even if you limit the technology somehow, these devices are still subject to engineering and manufacturing techniques which a similar competitor cannot achieve without removing his own limbs, something detrimental to his health (also the nominal reason performance enhancing drugs are no-fly).

Others have mentioned, these are strap on limbs; they always perform at peak capacity and can be battered, abused, and completely destroyed with abandon then simply replaced in an instant; flesh can only be pushed so far, so hard, and when it is destroyed, it's done.

If people get over the squeamish fear of seeing people with missing limbs, the paralympics will become a much more interesting game to watch in the future, but only if the money is there.

Flesh and blood simply can't compete with mechanics and engineering; we don't ride horses anymore for a reason.


you would also have to allow everyone use of these springs. No reason that a regular person couldnt get fitted and possibly do better still, right? but but but ....

things will get sillier before a solution gets settled on
 
2012-06-27 10:55:41 PM  

Edsel: Gyrfalcon: In all seriousness, this is an interesting issue. The "bionic legs" they've developed really DO give amputees speed to match an able-bodied athlete. Is that an unfair advantage?

Uh, this guy is barely even able to qualify for the Olympics, let alone contend for a medal. It might only be unfair in the sense that he's taking up the spot from some other lower-tiered athlete who stands no chance either.


but that is what qualifying for a countries team is all about. and sorry, but if you cant beat the guy with no feet, well you really dont belong there ... LOL
 
2012-06-27 10:55:51 PM  
I say we go old school; everyone competes naked. No shoes, no clothes, nothing.

/seriously I think that would actually be pretty cool
 
2012-06-27 10:56:00 PM  

Edsel: Gyrfalcon: In all seriousness, this is an interesting issue. The "bionic legs" they've developed really DO give amputees speed to match an able-bodied athlete. Is that an unfair advantage?

Uh, this guy is barely even able to qualify for the Olympics, let alone contend for a medal. It might only be unfair in the sense that he's taking up the spot from some other lower-tiered athlete who stands no chance either.


Did you read the same article I did?

Pistorius beat the Olympic qualifying time of 45.30 in Pretoria in March but must repeat that performance in an international meeting before June 30 to make the team for the London Games which start on July 27.

It sounds like he is as qualified as any athlete to me.
 
2012-06-27 11:03:17 PM  

ElBarto79: I say we go old school; everyone competes naked. No shoes, no clothes, nothing.

/seriously I think that would actually be pretty cool


I'll second this.

It might also make idiotic events like the Walk and synchronised swimming worth watching.

There sould be some downsides though....
Shotput.
Wrestling
 
2012-06-27 11:05:24 PM  
images.wikia.com

You shouldn't blame me! This is mankind's dream, mankind's desire, mankind's destiny! To be the strongest, to go the farthest, to climb the highest! To compete, to envy, to hate each other, and to devour one another!
 
2012-06-27 11:14:44 PM  
has anyone mentioned that the for afore mentioned swimmer would swim in circles?
 
2012-06-27 11:20:11 PM  

All2morrowsparTs: Donnchadha: Magorn: Will that answer change when genetics has advanced to the point that we can custom build our offspring?

I think that people (as a whole) will generally eschew the idea of genetically building offspring. The technology will be there, but something about that idea will just be too weird and creepy to really catch on. I'm not saying it will never happen, but I don't see it becoming "normal" or at least generally acceptable anytime in the near future.

Creepy Idea? sure. Will people shy away from it? Hardly. Look at those crazy ass parents botoxing thier kids, taking them to tanning booths and talking about surgicilly enhancing them before puberty.

If they had a chance to have designer babies they would jump on that chance in a minute.


Are you seriously comparing increasing a child's intelligence or physical capabilities or disease resistance to plastic surgery purely for cosmetic benefit?
 
2012-06-27 11:27:02 PM  

YouPeopleAreCrazy: yelmrog: This. People would kill for the chance to customize their kid.

I would kill people for customizing their kids.


Well, you should get started. It's rather common to abort female fetuses in China and India and it's strictly legal to do it in the US. In the US we regularly abort fetuses with Down's Syndrome. Children are regularly given chemicals like Adderol, Ritalin, and Caffeine, which are all capable of mental performance enhancement. Hormone treatment, plastic surgery, etc., are all common.

/What's it like hating science? Do you hide when you see fire?
 
2012-06-27 11:41:17 PM  
And the only people who matter, the athletes, get no say so. And as far as I can recall, most of them have no problem with it.
 
2012-06-27 11:43:21 PM  
images1.wikia.nocookie.net

Laughs at your lesser model.
 
2012-06-27 11:46:47 PM  

meanmutton: Do you hide when you see fire?


www.codeodor.com
Fire bad!
 
2012-06-27 11:48:06 PM  

TheBlackrose: [images1.wikia.nocookie.net image 309x640]

Laughs at your lesser model.


That game was way, WAY more fun than I thought it would be. Big GRIN on my face the whole time.
 
2012-06-27 11:53:23 PM  

neuroflare: mr smart the great: loadin

[myspace.roflposters.com image 640x512]

/I consider it every time myself


Pfft. The shortcut is permamounted on my desktop.
 
2012-06-28 12:01:25 AM  

Donnchadha: I think that people (as a whole) will generally eschew the idea of genetically building offspring. The technology will be there, but something about that idea will just be too weird and creepy to really catch on. I'm not saying it will never happen, but I don't see it becoming "normal" or at least generally acceptable anytime in the near future.


If it's easy people will do it. Hell, if I had the option and I was planning on kids I can think of a list of things off the top of my head I'd want to select against. I've got OCD, which seems to run in the family. At the very least I'd get it toned down. I've got genes that make me fat. Since I'm an optimist and don't believe my kids will need the advantage of taking care of every calorie available, that gene would go. Family history of diabetes? Sure, fix that. Learning disability. Fix that. Asthma? Fix that. Blood clotting disorder? Well, I clot easy, which might be some benefit, but I'd sure as hell get my kid tested to make sure they only had one copy of the gene. Knee problems? Tendon problems? Fixed. I might skip fixing things like male pattern baldness, but as long as I've got so many things already being fixed, why not?

So now my kid is less injury prone, and less asthmatic. Less mentally ill and less likely to develop chronic illnesses. Now some other parents are doing the same thing, but they figure why not get the smart package and the dimples. Say I pass on my IQ, but everyone is boosting their kids IQ's by 60 points. Now my kid isn't even average, so I better get that fixed too. What if we can fix those things in an adult? Then there are even less moral issues. Would I take a fix for the fat gene? Sure. What if it's inheritable.

As for the cyborg issue at the heart of this article, where do I draw the line? If the essential part of the sport is effected by your enhancement, it's out. The guy who needs the golf cart to get from hole to hole in the PGA because of whatever the condition is he has got gets his cart. This guy, not so much.
 
2012-06-28 12:18:46 AM  
A human with a club instead of a forearm will beat a regular man in a fight. Its a tool designed specifically for running. Theres shoes we can give runners that increase their capabilities. We ban them. The legs should fall in that category. Restrict him to paralympics and give him a pat on the back.
 
2012-06-28 12:29:11 AM  

tzzhc4: Oscar Pistorius' 45.07s time is just under a full second slower than the slowest 400 meter record, 44.05s Angelo Taylor. Doesn't seem like he has that much of an advantage. I say let the guy run in the Olympics if he qualifies.


In the next four years I'll build myself a pair of motorized roller skates. I guess as long as I make sure I'm a full second behind the record when I use them it would still be okay for me to compete?
 
2012-06-28 12:37:18 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: Where the hell are the pictures of Khan?!?


ic.pics.livejournal.com

I don't know what it has to do with the thread, but here you go.
 
2012-06-28 12:49:47 AM  
Is it an advantage? Sure. Is it unfair? No. ANY sprinter who feels disadvantaged should feel free to have their legs amputated.
 
2012-06-28 12:54:41 AM  

The Southern Dandy: It's a slippery slope. Allowing an amputee to use prosthetic limbs is only a short step away from allow wily animals to use rocket skates.


THIS.

The more important news of this story is this, FTFA:
Icelandic company Ossur, which makes the carbon fibre limbs, and the athlete himself, are certain he has no advantage and that is it sheer hard work which is behind his success.

There is a company in Iceland that makes the athletes themselves. And here I thought making carbon fibre prostheses was a neat trick.

/but I do like how Ossur throws itself under the bus on this one, assuring us that their product is too crappy to be a worry.
 
2012-06-28 12:56:00 AM  
i29.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-28 01:02:02 AM  

Wittenberg Dropout: neuroflare: mr smart the great: loadin

[myspace.roflposters.com image 640x512]

/I consider it every time myself

Pfft. The shortcut is permamounted on my desktop.


Is there any mod that makes it 1920x1080? The above mod linked is still 4:3
 
2012-06-28 01:09:42 AM  
I hate that farker. His face and blades are plastered all over the place due to the Paralympics being held here in 2 months.

/cyborg
 
2012-06-28 01:27:37 AM  

Ishkur: LesserEvil: I really don't have a problem with athletes 'borging (or 'roiding) it up for our entertainment. Every year it gets harder to stop enhancement cheats in sports, why not run with it?

Because as I just explained, they are a detriment to the athlete's health. Winning is important, but not at a deleterious cost to life. If some people are willing to risk/shorten their lives for glory, that forces other athletes who don't want to risk their lives to do also just to stay competitive. It cultivates a culture of death, misery and trauma, where winning at all costs takes precedence over health and well-being. That is the very antithesis of the essence of sport.

People should not be forced to make a choice to damage their bodies just to compete.


Which is why in the original comment, the farker specifically suggested a different class. You could remain clean and still compete against other clean athletes.

/'extra '''' around the clean bits
//too lazy to put them in
///Branson could just host a new tournament on his island
////Or that tech guy who just bought 98% of a Hawaiian Island.
 
2012-06-28 02:11:19 AM  

Ishkur: [...]
People should not be forced to make a choice to modify their bodies just to compete.


That's why I suggest an "unlimited class" competition (separate from the "all-natural" class) rather than simply opening up all competition to it.

Admittedly, I also have less concern about that sort of thing in the highly optional profession of "show off how awesome your body is in the form of an entertainment spectacle" than I would be about, say, forcing coal-miners or construction workers to deal with the same sort of body-modification pressures to compete. Not entirely sure why I feel this way, but possibly I'm just cynical and jaded over celebrity-worship/entertainment-spectacle professions in general.

Still, yes, the point was that I'd like to see a separate category of competition which allowed for "anything goes" optimization/modification for those athletes willing to take the risks, while leaving existing competitions as is where the judges can argue about where to draw the line between 'cheating' and 'optimized nutrition/training/natural enhancement' (e.g. is "carbo-loading" cheating? Creatine? Ingestion of bicarbonate? 'blood-doping'? etc...[I'm assuming all THOSE examples have already been hashed out one way or another, that's just what came to mind]).
 
2012-06-28 02:21:18 AM  

Ishkur:
I don't want athletes hiked up on meth, coke, vocodin, ephedrine, a shot of espresso and two shots of whisky going into cardiac arrest on the track.


That's what they get for trying to do all that with that feeble first-generation heart they were born with!

Should have upgraded to JarvikXP HeartPro Deluxe before trying to handle that much performance enhancement.
 
2012-06-28 02:26:20 AM  
The problem is...ALL competitive athletes do things for performance enhancement. You have to. It may be "legal," like training at 7,000 feet to improve your aerobic capacity or wearing top-of-the-line equipment or being observed in a wind tunnel so as to make your suit more aerodynamic. It may be "illegal" which is everything from blood-packing to outright use of speed. When I was a competitive martial artist, I was training at 6500 feet and using herbal supplements. Did that give me an "unfair' advantage to my colleagues who lived in Sacramento? Currently the US Olympic team trains in Denver. Should that be considered an "unfair' advantage to athletes from Israel who train near the Dead Sea?

The illegality of enhancement drugs only means that either athletes use them and hope they don't get tested, or use a substitute that's never been heard of and probably will kill them sooner. I knew a competitive body builder who told me that since diuretics have been banned (bodybuilders use them just before competition to tighten their skin), a lot of people go to strichnine, which has the same effect, just the dosage is tricky. Now you may say, well, then they shouldn't compete or whatever, but let's face it. People do all kinds of competitive sports and they want whatever will give them an edge.

The problem is compounded by the fact that society in general doesn't give awards to the cleanest athletes; we give them to whoever wins. Nobody ever got an endorsement from Nike because they came in 23d at the past four Olympics but never tested dirty: Nike gives endorsements to whoever got the gold medal. We don't lionize the baseball player who strikes out all the time, we cheer for the guy with the most home runs. And unless or until that changes, athletes will do what they have to do TO WIN, not to be clean.
 
2012-06-28 02:30:31 AM  

Epicanis:
Still, yes, the point was that I'd like to see a separate category of competition which allowed for "anything goes" optimization/modification for those athletes willing to take the risks, while leaving existing competitions as is where the judges can argue about where to draw the line between 'cheating' and 'optimized nutrition/training/natural enhancement' (e.g. is "carbo-loading" cheating? Creatine? Ingestion of bicarbonate? 'blood-doping'? etc...[I'm assuming all THOSE examples have already been hashed out one way or another, that's just what came to mind]).


I really like this concept, but will sponsors get on board? I bet the athletes in the "anything goes" competitions would find it extremely hard finding them. Sure, the supplement/steroid suppliers will back them since they'd be using their products, but I couldn't imagine someone like Nike actively promoting a sport/athlete that uses performance enhancing drugs.

I keep thinking back to Phelps and his bullshiat PR campaigns after the last Olympics. He ran scared in the aftermath of a release of a picture of him hitting a bong. Hung up on interviewers because they make a joke about him hanging out in the clubs. The guy was so afraid of losing sponsors and making money that he became a public phony.

You'd need a really ballsy sponsor (Under Armour perhaps?) that would get behind this and all that it represented in the scheme of the sport and public perception. I'm with it though - I want to see the great heights these athletes are willing to push themselves to.
 
2012-06-28 02:51:50 AM  

tzzhc4: Oscar Pistorius' 45.07s time is just under a full second slower than the slowest 400 meter record, 44.05s Angelo Taylor. Doesn't seem like he has that much of an advantage. I say let the guy run in the Olympics if he qualifies.


You can't measure an advantage by looking only at one result. It is a matter of the difference between two results, and as far as I can tell there's no unaided baseline to compare his machine-assisted times to (and if there were, it wouldn't be contemporaneous so there would just be a further dispute about how much of the improvement is from training as opposed to changing feet).

mrjared: Is it an advantage? Sure. Is it unfair? No. ANY sprinter who feels disadvantaged should feel free to have their legs amputated.


In the same way that any sprinter who feels disadvantaged by a user of performance-enhancing drugs should feel free to damage his health in order to stay competitive. Your assumption seems to be that there's no one who actually cares that much about winning...I wouldn't bet on it.

/fins for swimming? catapult arm for the shotput? rollerblades for the marathon? none of them unfair as long as its an amputee using them?
 
2012-06-28 03:01:58 AM  

coolio mack: Epicanis:
Still, yes, the point was that I'd like to see a separate category of competition which allowed for "anything goes" optimization/modification for those athletes willing to take the risks[...]

I really like this concept, but will sponsors get on board? I bet the athletes in the "anything goes" competitions would find it extremely hard finding them. Sure, the supplement/steroid suppliers will back them since they'd be using their products, but I couldn't imagine someone like Nike actively promoting a sport/athlete that uses performance enhancing drugs.[...]


Not necessarily drugs (though those would also be relevant), I'm also thinking surgical or even "cybernetic"/"bionic" enhancements (the rule would be that all modifications have to be "integral" rather than something merely strapped on or carried). In my mind, any enhancement that might also be plausibly relevant for correcting injuries or illnesses would be the kind of things expected in the "unlimited class" competitions.
 
2012-06-28 03:05:19 AM  

Gyrfalcon: The problem is...ALL competitive athletes do things for performance enhancement. You have to. It may be "legal," like training at 7,000 feet to improve your aerobic capacity or wearing top-of-the-line equipment or being observed in a wind tunnel so as to make your suit more aerodynamic. It may be "illegal" which is everything from blood-packing to outright use of speed. When I was a competitive martial artist, I was training at 6500 feet and using herbal supplements. Did that give me an "unfair' advantage to my colleagues who lived in Sacramento? Currently the US Olympic team trains in Denver. Should that be considered an "unfair' advantage to athletes from Israel who train near the Dead Sea?


Is what you're doing (or its equivalent) *permissible* preparation/equipment/action for some athletes but not for others? Are those athletes competing directly with one other? If so, then yes, you probably have an unfair advantage.
 
2012-06-28 05:05:08 AM  
I didnt ask for this

~ A.jensen
 
Displayed 50 of 180 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report