Quote: sootyj @ August 12 2012, 7:55 PM BSThttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Paralympic_Games_host_cities
fascinating their now biannual and lots of country have hosted them, including Holland and Israel.
nb it seems a shame that paralympians who train and put in as much effort as Olympians don't get the same status.
There are amateur athletes who train just as hard as the Olympians, but are not good enough. There are some very hard-working veteran athletes in the over-50 (etc.) age categories, who also train very hard. None of them get the same status. Why? Because, most people are not interested.
In winning the paralympics you are the best of a tiny % of the population who are disabled.
Additionally...
(1) This tiny-% is further reduced by the subsequent various disability classifications designed to give fair competition.
(2) The paralympics are dominated by countries rich enough for the especial facilities requires to train disabled athletes.
If you win, say, the "100m Freestyle S2" you have beaten too small a pool of people in the world to be heralded too much; not when compared to the able-bodied swimmer who wins the 100m freestyle.
Added to this a general feeling that the disability classifications are forced to be just too arbitrary. How do you quantify the disadvantage of losing a leg, compared to an arm, when doing an event? How much of the limb is gone in each case? In order to be 100% fair, everyone would have almost a completely different classification, and competing against themselves in the "S234/B3647 Freestyle".
Oscar Pistorius's advantage/disadvantage has kept scientists busy for years, and that is just one person/scenario.
"Meh" about the paras tbh. Sometimes they almost seem a bit patronising.
