Paracycling

[awk]

He seems to have been trying to make the point to officials before the race that the length of blades is supposed to be matched to what the length of the leg would have been

Since about January 2011. Apparently, he protested (quietly through the 'correct' channels) after the World Championships, and was ignored. The only way he was ever going to make an impact was in a public forum.....

The issue is exacerbated by the fact that he is required to continue running on the shorter blades if he wants to run in open races. So whilst those who are content to keep their sights on the Paralympics have much broader latitude within IPC rules, those who aspire to race in open competition haven't.

Chatting to a group of Aussies on Tuesday, they all felt that British comments about Pistorius complaining was "typical northern hemisphere", and that if Pistorius genuinely felt it was unfair, then he had every right to comment.

[Mrs H]

Pistorius plainly has a point - if he has to run on shorter blades for the Olympics then longer blades are clearly perceived to give an advantage and the appropriateness of the timing of his comments depends on how much he wanted to propel it into the public domain - even at the expense of a modicum of his own reputation. Perhaps he already knew it was his last big chance to do it. Perfect timing!
...but having been in the stadium on Wednesday night when he and his team broken the WR in the 4x100 and heard the reaction of the crowd particularly during the lap of honour - I don't think the public are holding it against him. He has earned the right to be listened to.

[ifor]

Karen back in Action now in the road race. 48km by the look of it.

http://www.london2012.com/paralympics/c ... index.html

[andypat]

Awk puts this very well, the conundrum being that until such point as Pistorius actually starts to win open races, its possible to argue that his blades dont confer an advantage and therefore are acceptable under the current rules. If he were to ship up and win a big open 400m race against top quality opposition, this position would be signficantly more difficult to argue, and OP might end up running himself out of a job.

I dont envy the guys who had to make the decision as to whether he could run at the Olympics or not - I suspect there was a communal sigh of relief when he didnt win anything. But then again, when they let you run again after cheating with drugs etc it doesnt seem such a tough decision to let the bladerunner run.

[Ali Wood]

Am I the only person on the planet that finds the hyped coverage of the paralympics a little surreal & embarrassing? It is undoubtedly an inspiring showcase of human resilience, and I don't want to detract from the respect due to each & every disabled athlete for competing, but does that mean we should all feel a moral duty to get excited about it?
If you think I'm just sad, what about the hundreds of thousands of people (of which I happen to be one) with other medical conditions e.g. epilepsy / diabetes / strokes / cancer / heart / kidney disease...? . Hence a little bemused. Logically any one of us might be given a category under which to compete!! Absurd!! - yes, absurd, but having heard the arguments surrounding the categorization of physical disabilities, we are already in a very bizarre world.

[andypat]

but does that mean we should all feel a moral duty to get excited about it?

No you dont have any such moral duty, any more than you have a duty to get excited about any other sport or category you arent actively involved in or support. But the fact that there isnt an olympics for fatties or diabetics doesnt mean that the Paralympics shouldnt exist. On a purely selfish front we in orienteering should applaud the marketing job the paralympic organistation has done to get the event punching so far above its weight in terms of media exposure.

From a personal perspective seeing some of the guys compete faster and better than I can with their disabilities has given me some inspiration to make a better fist of the 4 limbs I've got! Thank goodness orienteering has categories for oldies...

[denbydale]

Am I the only person on the planet that finds the hyped coverage of the paralympics a little surreal & embarrassing? It is undoubtedly an inspiring showcase of human resilience, and I don't want to detract from the respect due to each & every disabled athlete for competing, but does that mean we should all feel a moral duty to get excited about it?
If you think I'm just sad, what about the hundreds of thousands of people (of which I happen to be one) with other medical conditions e.g. epilepsy / diabetes / strokes / cancer / heart / kidney disease...? . Hence a little bemused. Logically any one of us might be given a category under which to compete!! Absurd!! - yes, absurd, but having heard the arguments surrounding the categorization of physical disabilities, we are already in a very bizarre world.

I find it rather bizarre in Trail O paralympic disability eligibility that visual impairment
is not seen as a significant disadvantage -

'Visual impairment or intellectual disability is not a reason to qualify for the paralympic class in Trail Orienteering.'

[Gnitworp]

I find it rather bizarre in Trail O paralympic disability eligibility that visual impairment
is not seen as a significant disadvantage -

'Visual impairment or intellectual disability is not a reason to qualify for the paralympic class in Trail Orienteering.'

Personally, I'd abolish the disabled category in Trail O all together, and have just one Open category that disabled people can compete in on equal terms. I thought that was the beauty of it. Stop patronizing them by segregating them.

[JK]

Well said andypat.

Ali Wood: I have a feeling that some of those impediments you mentioned would in the past have qualified you for the Para class at Trail-O, but not any more. BTW do you mean you suffer from all of those, or only "one or more of the following"?

denbydale: what type of visual disability do you think would be appropriate for Trail-O? Total blindness would mean you'd need a tactile map and would need to enter the terrain, I believe this has been trialled. Currently there are only 2 categories: Para for those with a significant physical impediment to their movement (apologies for over-simplifying, but is basically those who need a wheelchair and those whose physical disability [but not age or fitness] means they are very *slow* along the tracks) and Open for anyone else. I know two international Trail-Orienteers who have trouble with their steroscopic vision more than 50m away, but they have to compete with the rest of us.

BTW Karen finished hand in hand today with Rachel Morris in 3rd and 4th:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/disability-sport/19519150

The officials insisted on separating them as rumours suggested would have been done if the Brownlees tried that strategy for double gold ... so Karen was 4th.

Well done Karen from those of the Trail-O community who didn't manage to get down to watch her.

[JK]

Personally, I'd abolish the disabled category in Trail O all together, and have just one Open category that disabled people can compete in on equal terms. I thought that was the beauty of it. Stop patronizing them by segregating them.

In the Nordic countries competitions are open, not even a separate ranking for Para.

I can understand your sentiment, but many of the Trail-O nations (RUS and UKR for instance) get a lot of funding when their Para guys do well. If we removed the class of Para then some teams would send less Paras, the ones that did go would have less chance of winning anything which would be a vicious circle and then there wouldn't be many countries taking part. The same would happen if you only allowed Wheelchairs in Para, or only had Para at World Champs. Many able-bodied trail-O guys would lose interest and it is typically (but not exclusively) them in many countries that set up the courses.

it is my belief there should be both, but care has to be taken in course setting since someone is always going to see more of the terrain if they can jump from a standing position and lie on the ground compared to someone confined to a wheelchair.

Note that I don't believe at recent world champs any Para class would have got medals had they been just a single Open class.

[AndyC]

As I was at the WTOC I do note that the Para's ( more positive sounds like they leap out of planes) were allowed more time to travel round the course -which did seem fair as they were distinctly slower if they weren't power assisted.
I'm also aware that the Team event requires a Para to be included and that our entrant (my friend John Crosby -who qualifies because he has knees that are not his own) is actually quite a capable walker (I even have a picture of him jogging on smooth grass) but that another Brit who spends his time in a motorised wheelchair doesn't qualify because his condition "may not be permanent". Rather difficult rules to understand.
For those who doubt there is a physical element in Trail O - I was so tired after the three/four days (I did also do two Jubilee 5 events but was on a shorter course than the experts on some days) that I had to stop the car and be sick on the way home (I know I'm not the fittest but...).

[Ali Wood]

I have a feeling that some of those impediments you mentioned would in the past have qualified you for the Para class at Trail-O, but not any more. BTW do you mean you suffer from all of those, or only "one or more of the following"?

The answer is, just one! and I would not want to set up a category for it.
Suppose for sake of argument that it was that I had only one lung. A disability like this is not evident to the onlooker, and hence less 'obvious' and not 'interesting' enough to be spectated on by thousands of people, nevertheless debilitating! But someone with one arm can be famous!
I will now brush that chip off my shoulder. .. but hope I have made the point sufficiently clearly!

[EddieH]

Interesting point Alistair. But nothing is fair and I personally think it is great that these people get their moment on the limelight and I am sure it will improve the treatment obviously disabled people will get from the public, but most of all it will undoubtedly motivate some disabled to realise that they can make choices of what they CAN do.

I spend a lot of time with the emotionally disabled which can be just as debilitating. My whole reason for it is to try to get across just this message - that they can choose to remain hung up in the past or to look to the future. The paralympics is one more piece in the jigsaw of their minds towards making them realise this. It would be easy to focus on the fact that no-one acknowledges their problems just because they are not visible. The message is the same best put by W Mitchell who lost the use of his lower body and lost his hands in 2 huge accidents:

"Before my accidents I could do 10,000 things. Now I can do 9,000. I can either spend the rest of my life focusing on the 9,000 things I CAN do or dwell on the 1,000 things I can't do."

[DaveK]

Am I the only person on the planet that finds the hyped coverage of the paralympics a little surreal & embarrassing? It is undoubtedly an inspiring showcase of human resilience, and I don't want to detract from the respect due to each & every disabled athlete for competing, but does that mean we should all feel a moral duty to get excited about it?
If you think I'm just sad, what about the hundreds of thousands of people (of which I happen to be one) with other medical conditions e.g. epilepsy / diabetes / strokes / cancer / heart / kidney disease...? . Hence a little bemused. Logically any one of us might be given a category under which to compete!! Absurd!! - yes, absurd, but having heard the arguments surrounding the categorization of physical disabilities, we are already in a very bizarre world.

Ali, I just had to confirm that you are, indeed, not 'the only person' - though there may, I suspect, be very few of us! Your comments articulated much better than I could, my feelings about the paralympics generally. Having said that, I was fortunate to be taken to the athletics on Tuesday; and the other 79,999 spectators in the stadium were very excited, especially when any athlete with GB kit appeared. It was a memorable evening I have to say and the standard of competition was in the main excellent. I'm not sure if I felt 'bemused', but I just couldn't really get worked up about the whole thing which does leave me personally feeling a little .

[Clive Coles]

I think the point to grasp is that to be a parathlete you not only have to have a disability but you also need to have the drive, commitment and backing to train and develop skills that allow you to compete in a chosen set of diciplines at the highest level. That's why I salute them ~ they are an amazing group of people.

The Parathlete diciplines are controlled by a set of rules like any other sport; trying to create an even playing field where athletes with different handicaps can compete is a challenge for the controlling body. But the Paras respect the competive classes within their sports as being appropriate and get on with their preparations.

There are times when the rules do need to be questioned as with technical advances new equipment can give added advantages to the competitor. We have this situation in many sports; design of cycling or ski helmets, body clinging swim suits. skeleton bob design and of course bicycle and wheel chair racing design. You can either accept new innovations or ban them from competitions It was interesting to see the Olympic swimmers having to revert to the more conventional garb at this years Olympic/Paralympic events.

OPs comments following his race were possibly ill ltimed. He has since regretted making them in the heat of that moment. But I believe this is a matter that still needs to be reviewed once the Paralympics are over.