Supertraining

<getting up on the soap box>

Just my uneducated opinions here.... I take a simplistic view of this.

I find this whole activity of measuring the blade's mechanical
advantage interesting but pointless.  Measurements mechanical and
metabolic advantage should not come into the equation. It should not
be about how good the prosthetic is.

Our thinking has become clouded by our desire to be sensitive to
"non-traditionally-abled" athletes.

At what point in the advanced design of prosthetic devices would an
athlete be disqualified from competing against athletes with more
typical anatomies? How much 'spring' off the block would disqualify
the prosthetic? When there is a 2% advantage? Measured how? Compared
to what - my leg and foot or yours or the 'average' leg and foot? When
the prosthetic catapults the sprinter over the finish line without
having taken a step?

It's almost like having stock cars and formula one's in the same auto
race. "Oh - but they both have the same tires, engines and power
ratings."  Well - sorry - that is not the point. One's a stock car and
ones a formula one. End of discussion.

Pistorius is an amazing athlete. Inspring. But he should compete
against others in his own class of race.

Perhaps we could have several different classes of sprinting
competition (somewhat tongue in check):

"Natural" (no HGH/steroids/drugs/prosthetics)
"Juiced" (any drug you like, no prosthetics)
"Assisted Natural" (no drugs, prosthetics only)
"Natural Open"  (no drugs, prosthetics optional)
"Wide Open) (anything goes, HGH, steroids, prosthetics, stilts...)

<descending from soap box>

Jim Lorenz
Los Altos, USA

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "carruthersjam"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Relevant to previous discussions on the list:
>
> http://www.iaaf.org/aboutiaaf/news/newsid=44917.html
>
> Monte-Carlo - The IAAF is pleased to announce that the Court of
> Arbitration for Sport ("CAS") this afternoon has declared that Oscar
> Pistorius (RSA) is eligible to compete in competitions under IAAF
> Rules.
>