Not the Triumph,
But the Struggle?
Posted January 28th, 2008 at 10:45 PM by Jimmie R. Markham
Section: News & Results, Track & Field, SoundOFF, Columns, Olympics
The Olympic Creed states that:
“The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well.”
Oscar Pistorius would attest to that creed, perhaps better than any Athlete who will be allowed to compete in Beijing this summer. So it’s a shame that a couple of Italian Olympic officials missed a golden opportunity Monday during Pistorius’ visit to Milan to exemplify those ideals by pleading the South African sprinter’s case to the heartless, elitist IAAF. The Associated Press reports that a couple of IOC members instead stated that “the IOC had no jurisdiction in the dispute and it was up to the governing body to issue technical standards.”
One of the Officials did concede that the “current rules were written with able-bodied athletes in mind and did not take into account a ‘phenomenon’ like Pistorius.” That doesn’t sound like much of a struggle, much of a fight, to me.
Even if the IOC doesn’t have actual jurisdiction in technical matters, they certainly have the power of the bully pulpit, should they desire to use it against the IAAF’s egregiously discriminatory ruling that a double-amputee somehow has an an advantage over two-legged sprinters.
Shouldn’t the governing body of a movement live by its own creed? Shouldn’t it require that the governing bodies that partner with the movement also abide by that same creed? Otherwise, those words are meaningless. For his part, Pistorius has all-but given up the fight for Beijing. The larger struggle, however, the one for equality for disabled people, continues. Pistorius has set his sights on 2012 and the London Games. After all, isn’t that (according to the Olympic Creed) “the essential thing?”
Source: [USA Today]
Related Stories:
Tags: disabled athlete, discrimination, double amputee, IAAF, IOC, olympic creed, olympic games, olympics, Oscar Pistorius
Like what you see? Subscribe to our feed!
The Final Sprint
I have to strongly disagree with the tone of this article. The IAAF is not being unfair, “heartless”, discriminatory and “elitist”. They are simply protecting the integrity of Olympic and other international competition as they see it.
This issue is not a humanistic one. It is a question of fairness in competition….ensuring a level playing field.
IAAF testing determined that Pistorius’ “Cheetah” prostheses provide a clear advantage compared to running on human legs…..a 25% reduction in energy consumption needed to run a given speed.
Dr. Ross Tucker, an associate of Dr. Tim Noakes at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, has followed Oscar Pistorius’ pursuit of Olympic certification from the outset. He also has had direct, personal involvement with the Pistorius camp. Dr. Tucker considers sanctioning such technology for Olympic competition to be tantamount to opening Pandora’s box….do we start down the road of converting the Olympic Games from a human competition a technological one? For Dr. Tucker’s extensive blogs on this subject over the last seven months, see http://scienceofsport.blogspot.com/search?q=Oscar+Pistorius.
Sure, it’s natural to “feel for” Pistorius. But life sometimes produces disappointments. This kind of emotional article bashing the IAAF for doing its job is pointless and contrubutes nothing to the real issue of what is and is not fair and suitable in athletic competitions.
January 29th, 2008 at 5:49 pmI must disagree with Mr. Fortner completely. We as a species continually evolve, develop and grow and discover new ways to improve ourselves. Change is paramount and inevitable. It is how we handle this change that matters. As we have evolved we have had to include and open ourselves to differences in each of us. So now it is time to tackle those among us who are disabled. Some sort of negotiation and/or compromise was called for here. The strength and determination it took for Oscar Pistorius to come to this physical level of power and agility should be encouraged and supported not feared and discriminated against. It is never a level playing field even among those of us that do not have such an obvious disability. That is why some win and some do not. An ingredient such as heart - commitment - integrity - faith cannot be measured and surely can and does make a difference in all competitions. Your statement about “protecting the integrity of Olympic and other international competition” sends chills down my spine and reminds me of when similar words were used to exclude others based on other physical and religious “conditions”. Exclusion was not the answer here. Finding a way to include and embrace was. A missed opportunity; but one that will definitely come again.
January 30th, 2008 at 5:13 pm[…] My recent post titled “Not the Triumph, But the Struggle?,” about Oscar Pistorius and the IAAF’s decision not to allow him to compete in the sport of track & field, generated some interesting feedback from one of our long-time readers. Jim Fortner of Jim2.net, in his reply to my article that accuses the IAAF of being unfair, heartless, discriminatory and elitist, wrote that “this issue is not a humanistic one. It is a question of fairness in competition and ensuring a level playing field.” Mr. Fortner also wrote that “this kind of emotional article bashing the IAAF for doing its job is pointless and contributes nothing to the real issue of what is and is not fair and suitable in athletic competitions.” I replied to Mr. Fortner via e-mail today. Here is my reply to his comments: Thank you for commenting on my post. Although I always appreciate my readers’ feedback, I have to say that I disagree with your characterization of my article as being “pointless” and “[not contributing] to the real issue of what is and is not fair and suitable in athletic competitions.” I also disagree with your position that “this issue is not a humanistic one.” […]
January 30th, 2008 at 7:04 pmI understand and respect your opinion, Jodi. In fact, my heart agrees with it. However, viewing the subject dispassionately, my head doesn’t.
Olympic track and field is a human competition, not a technological one. Artificial aids to performance should not be permitted unless they can be utilized by all participants….that’s called maintaining a level playing field. And the playing field is level today for all who are capable of meeting the Olympic qualifying standards. Those of us who can’t, whether it’s due to lack of legs or genetically imposed limits on VO2max, are simply not capable of getting onto the playing field…..that’s life. Granting Pristorius’ request, much as one might want to, wouldn’t constitute greater leveling of the playing field; it would change the nature of the field by introducing an non-human, artificial element that cannot be leveled. There is a difference.
Certainly, technology (such as improvements in shoes, fiber glass vaulting poles, etc.) is often introduced to the sport to enhance safety or performance. However, such technological enhancements can be used by all who choose to do so, or they aren’t allowed. Accepting technology that benefits a select few alters the inherent nature of competition….that’s what I meant by maintaining the integrity of the sport.
January 30th, 2008 at 8:04 pmHi Jim - thanks for the sentiment :-)- I do appreciate it. I too respect your opinion and feel good that your heart is on my side! I believe we will have to agree to disagree on this subject. One last thought however - I wonder how many genetic differences truly exist between each of us that we have not discovered as yet? And when they are discovered, as is the case of
January 31st, 2008 at 1:00 pmLance Armstrong, will we know how/or want to test for these differences in order to maintain the integrity of the sport? As far as I am aware, he has an advantage because his heart is stronger as well as being significantly larger. Each beat of Armstrong’s heart is going to move twice as much blood; as a result, Armstrong’s heart only needs to beat half as often to keep things oxygenated. This helps to increase his endurance and strength. Which then leads us to ask what genetic advantages will be permissible and which ones will not be? And lastly who gets to decide? Sounds a bit frightening to me and could quite possibly send us down a path that I for one would never want us to go down.
You are absolutely right, Jodi. People like Lance and other world class athletes do enjoy advantages that us normal folks don’t. However, they are “natural”, not artificial, advantages. They are ultimate limits determined by genetics, not by engineering.
We may disagree on what the outcome of Pristorius’ quest SHOULD be, based on current information. (That could change with more INDEPENDENT testing.) But we don’t disagree about what we wish the outcome COULD be. I’m just not ready to condemn the IAAF for the way they have handled the situation so far. I think they have simply done their job as they view it to protect the best interests of the sport and all competitors, rather than risk that to satisfy the desires of an appealing special case.
This really is a polarizing issue. And that’s OK. There is no rule that it must be viewed from only one perspective. And, as Jimmie said yesterday, it does produce thoughtful discussion.
January 31st, 2008 at 1:44 pmHello boys! This much is certain - we could spend endless hours debating this issue and I must say I have thoroughly enjoyed the exchange! I hope as you do Jim that the future holds a solution that will blend your heart and head and make me and Jimmie and Oscar immensely happy. Until then I expect we will continue to support and persuade all who will listen to own beliefs. I can’t help laughing though that it is technology that has indeed enabled us to discuss just what technology should or should not be able to do! One thing I must know - are we all rooting for the Giants????!!!! Have a wonderful Super Bowl weekend! Take care and be well.
January 31st, 2008 at 7:15 pmBTW - JLJ = Jodi - sorry for the confusion! :-)
January 31st, 2008 at 7:29 pm“One thing I must know - are we all rooting for the Giants????!!!!”
Yep. We are on the same page on this one. :)
February 1st, 2008 at 1:05 pm[…] Buzz from the Blogshpere: www.thefinalsprint.com […]
February 25th, 2008 at 1:25 pm[…] “Not the Triumph, But the Struggle? […]
April 9th, 2008 at 5:09 pm