no this is a complex enough issue that I find myself unable to get indignant and angry at any party involved

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

interesting issue, although not a well researched article.
Right off the bat, states that swimming doesn't have a similar rule. Paralympic swimmer are required to black out their goggles or pull their caps over their eyes.
A little off topic I know, but just thought it was funny.
Para athletes are amazing, and the para-tri categories are horrible for every disability. Triathlon is well behind the curve on this issue.

I think we are going to see more and more of this across the para athletic world. Sports are inherantly biased toward those most physically gifted and creating divisions that separate those with physical imparements will lead to those more phyically impared at a disadvantage to those that that are only slightly impared. Whare is that line drawn? i don't know, but I've always found it a hard rub with "elite" levels of the disabled division.

On this perticular subject I can speak with a little perspective since my dad is legally blind (20/200) when not wearing his contacts or glasses. Just because he's legally blind though doen't mean he can't see, and i don't think he'd remotely qualify for any special division of sport because of it. I think that the difference between being 20/200 vision and totally blackout blind is a very large one, adn one that would certainly gain you a critical advantage on the run, assuming you were as good a runner.

I'm not sure if the Athlete in question is 20/200 without correction or with, I jsut know tht at 20/200 you are able to see quite a lot. My father, for instance, used to water ski all the time @ his 20/200 vision. of course his friends did try to run him into docks.

I think that it is really hard for a "mostly blind" Athlete to argue to a totally blind one that they are being put at a disadvantage by being made as blind as they are.

---

This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time. - Fight Club
Industry Brat.

Is this different that RD's allowing folks to wear wetsuits if the water temp exceeds the max but not allowing them to be counted in the standings?

---

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz

I emailed Skip a couple of weeks ago about this issue and other things. Basically: deal with the rules or don't play in the big game....any ITU/worlds race.

Surfing around a little on the internet, legal blindess is when your corrected vision is not better than 20/200 and 20/200 is approximately the same as being a -2.00 to -2.50. Assuming this is correct, I used to play rugby, without glasses or contacts, when my eyes were both around -6.00 to -6.50. I had some problems fielding high kicks, which was one good reason to move to the front row, but it was generally not a problem (maize and blue = good; anything else = bad). I would not want to ride my bike without glasses on at a - 6.0 because I would not see road obstacles that could cause me to wreck my bike and take some people with me. I most certainly would not want anyone driving whose corrected vision was no better than 20/200. If this correlation is accurate, then there is a big difference between 20/200 and being actually blind. So, grouping people that are 20/200 with correction and people that are actually blind does not make a lot of sense to me. Of, course, if what I read on the internet about the comparison between 20/200 and -2.00 to -2.50 is not correct, then I might have a different opinion.

I boycott the Chicago triathlon because too many other people do it, and it would cost me a lot more money to do it than to do a race somewhere in metro Detroit.

In paralympic swimming, all athletes who fall into the B1 Category (No light perception in either eye up to light perception, but inability to recognize the shape of a hand at any distance or in any direction.) are required to wear the black out goggles. The other visually impaired athletes compete within their division.

The Visually Impaired Athletes within USA Triathlon are not looking to have advantages or anything, they are looking to have their division broken up into categories so as to level the playing field. Categories such as:

Class B1
No light perception in either eye up to light perception, but inability to recognize the shape of a hand at any distance or in any direction.

Class B2
From ability to recognize the shape of a hand up to visual acuity of 20/600 and/or a visual field of less than 5 degrees in the best eye with the best practical eye correction.

Class B3
From visual acuity above 20/600 and up to visual acuity of 20/200 and/or a visual field of less than 20 degrees and more than 5 degrees in the best eye with the best practical eye correction.

"Leveling the playing field" by requiring an athlete who has lived their entire life with an inkling of vision, and requiring them to "run in total darkness" is completely absurd.

If you want to read in more detail, read all the slowtwitch posts here:

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

I am boycotting it becuase they are putting a fuckin unsafe race for everyone.

UTI has actually f'ed up more categories then just the blind ones, Para sports in general are hard to classify to make it "fair" for everyone but cycling, swimming, and track seem to have figured it out?

Basically the UTI is dumbing down the sport to get it into the paralympics, they are basically saying "Hey you may be the best but to make it "fair and lovy dovy" for everyone we are just going to eliminate the best and the worst athletes and meet some place in the middle"

---

My Blog of Me