Based on this story:

‘I’m handing back my medal’: Is Paralympic sport classification fit for purpose? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/disability-sport/41253174

I must admit I’ve always treated para-athletics as a demonstration of ability, rather than genuine competition, due to the obvious flaws within the classification system.

Thoughts?

It’s a very difficult issue clearly. Realistically there’s a range of disability across any one category where one athlete is materially advantaged against another for this reason alone. An athlete at the margin between categories could the most advantaged in the field with one outcome or the least with the other.

So if classifiers are not independent you have to ask serious questions. I would think independent classifiers and regular review of the whole field of athletes across an event category would be necessities and not somewhere they can cut costs.

A tough one this.

I suppose if it were purely ‘mechanical’, its fairly easy. “Below the knee amputation/missing on one leg? That category. Both legs? That one. No movement below the waist? Over there in that one.”

Problem is, that only works for a limited number of disabilities. When we get to eyesight, for example. Totally blind, or partially sighted? The latter is a lot harder to categorise than a missing leg.

Can it be fair? Sort of… As I see it, for some things it can be totally fair, for others there will always be a degree of ‘opinion about the extent of a disability.

Is it time for the tasteless “They’re all winners” joke?

No, but surely they could come up with a handicap system.

Sport is by definition unfair as people with specific advantages will always tend to rise the top (e.g. tall rowers).

This specific instance is not really any different to weight categories in other sports (Boxing, Marital Arts, weightlifting) where people will almost always strive to be at the top of a category. That people seek to game the system shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.

It really is a tough call. As the article says above a certain level of competition, where athletes are competing for funding then “marginal gains” start playing their part. At the sharp end of all competition there is very little sportsmanship going on, it’s all about results, because results matter when it comes to competition. One feeds the other, and on, and on, etc.

I read an article recently about an athlete, can’t remember the sport, who was at the one end of a classification, he was lower third in the results table, but if he “faked” his disability a bit he’d be in the next category where he’d then be clearing up in the medals. He said something along the lines of the temptation was there but he’d be cheating himself. Someone else whose moral compass was a bit skewed could be the one that does cheat.

There was a piece on the BBC about a paralympion footballer at the Rio games. He had been a Liverpool trainee but been in a car crash at 17 years old, it took him 2 or 3 years to get over his injury, but was now fully recovered, unfortunately for him that recovery time ended his professional football career. He was now leading a normal life, but because he had a brain bleed during the accident it qualified him for a paralympic category.

The BBC eulogised over the hardship of his story, but to me it felt like, as sad as it was, he currently was not disabled in any way and he only qualified on a technicality.

Paralympion is a wonderful thing, but more than any other it exemplifies “being the best you can be”. Gaming the system to win, instead of demonstrating participation and enjoyment of sport just seems really wrong.

It reminds me of the Caster Semenya debate – a woman with male chromosomes and a body closer to that of a man, but is classified as a woman.

These sort of topics are ripe for internet arguing. I’d love to join in, but will inevitably get accused quite quickly of being discriminatory. All I will say is that I’m happy to watch the paralympics when the disability is clear cut (e.g. blind, missing limbs, etc.), but when it seems a bit grey (e.g. cerebral palsy) I find it harder to engage in it as a pure contest. I also find it hard to engage when they mix obviously different disabilities in the same category (e.g. dwarfism and missing limbs).

Andd there’s a para athlete who had a bit more of a limb removed to move them into a different category….

I did say on a discussion about Oscar Pistorius that artificial limbs should not be allowed in comptition as it would be too tempting for some competitors to have perfectly functioning limbs removed in order to get a performance advantage.

One things for sure – I don’t envy those trying to come up with the classifications.

“a demonstration of ability” you patronising ****.

“a demonstration of ability” you patronising ****.

You can read it that way, if you want, but that’s your problem, no mine.

Sport is by definition unfair as people with specific advantages will always tend to rise the top

This – Usain Bolt is advantaged because of his physique, Semenya because of her chromosomes, etc. There will always be people better suited. But despite that – it’s just not enough to be physically advantaged over others, it’s also about effort and willpower and sacrifice. You could fit me with the best blades known to man and I’d still be halfway down the track when Johnny Peacock’s doing post-race interviews.