The Blade Runner

The hot talking point in the Athletics world at the moment is whether South African and double amputee Oscar Pistorius should be allowed to run against able-bodied athletes. His recent time of 45.07 qualified him for this years World Championships and has made him selectable for the 2012 Olympics.
Now the debate over whether or not he should be running against able-bodied athletes has reopened but people are getting carried away for a second. Because he shaved half a second off his personal best they assume he is gaining an advantage with the flexing of his blades. I reckon if you could measure it that Usain Bolt has contact with ground less than Pistorius. His time of 45.07 is still way off the world record of 43.18. If Pistorius had suddenly dipped under 44 seconds then there would be a reason to question him. All he has done is earn the right to compete with able-bodied athletes. OK his time would have finished him in 5th place in Beijing but the Olympics is not only about the winning. The stories are long and infamous of Olympians who didn't come close to winning but for taking part. For being the best they can be.
Now I have read two quotes from former British 400m runners from different points of view. One a former English 400m runner and consistent runner-up to Michael Johnson seems to suggest that because you can't prove whether or not he is gaining an advantage, he therefore must be. He also compares Pistorius to an 44.5 runner who has his legs amputated and has the same type of blades as Pistorius fitted but runs 41 second times. I'm sorry but you can't declare somebody has an advantage over other competitors just on a hypothetical scenario. It would be like saying if Man United played against a team who turned up with 8 men and saying they might have an advantage.
Interestingly that was the only former British athlete to lean towards an advantage to Pistorius. Another former Welsh 400m runner and all round fun guy only had positives to say and his point that as long as the IAAF deem Pistorius worthy to race able-bodied athletes then the matter should be over. Lets be honest if an advantage has been gained and he was to win I would rather him than someone on performance enhancing drugs. While that problem remains then arguing who has an advantage over who is futile.
For clarity and an honest opinion I asked an anonymous current British 400m runner his thoughts on competing against Pistorius and how he would feel being beaten by him. The response I got was one echoed by the vast majority of people. They felt Pistorius may have some advantages but this is balanced by some of the disadvantages. He carried to say what a top lad Pistorius is which seems to indicate any success Pistorius has will be more popular than a Darren Clarke Open win. And success for Pistorius himself will be fulfilling a life long dream. From 11 months old when the decision to amputate both legs below the knee a fire burned inside him. Now that dream is a reality and to all people regardless of physical ailment or not. He is an example that nothing is possible if you work hard.
And so my line on this is simple. Until he is breaking able-bodied records or causes someone to trip during a race or they can prove he is gaining an advantage then as long as he is quick enough to compete then let the boy race. That's all Oscar Pistorius wants.