Should luge be cancelled?
Accounting for risk in sports.
The tragic death of young Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili during a practice on the eve of the 2010 Olympics has not only cast a dark pall over this year’s Winter Olympiad, it has also raised questions about a notoriously dangerous sport. While debates will rage on over whether host-nation Canada afforded foreign lugers ample practice time, or whether exposed steel beams ought to have been covered, the deeper question is how and to what extent we allow athletes to risk their bodies.
In 1894, Olympic founder Pierre de Coubertin proposed a motto that would stick: “Citius, Altius, Fortius” — Latin for “swifter, higher, stronger.” There’s no question that the Olympics – and sport in general – ask athletes to expose themselves to greater risks than the rest of us. This is a central appeal of sport, especially for many of the extreme sports that populate the Winter Olympics in particular.
But even for non-athletes, regulated risk is an important feature of society. I’m allowed to gamble my money on the stock market, or get in a car despite the high prevalence of auto accidents each year.
But some risks are more heavily regulated than others. I must be 21 to drink, and can only gamble in certain states and territories. I will be fined for failing to wear a seat-belt. And so on.
What is the difference between risks I’m allowed to evaluate for myself, and risks that the state will not permit me to take? Is the distinction arbitrary?
This is a big question, but the case of sports is somewhat unique. Because the demand for exteme athleticism is sufficiently high, the development of professional sporting associations has become an widely accepted mechanism for regulating risk. Football players may expose themselves to greater bodily harm, but when they do so they are required to follow the stipulations of the National Football League when it comes to protective equipment, injury treatment, and rest. And, when professional associations fail, they come under state scrutiny.
The International Luge Federation (FIL) is now scrambling to react to the implications of Kumaritashvili’s death, proposing a future track limit of 85 miles per hour. The odd turn is not only that this limit would fall far below the speed records set on many tracks around the world, but that it would essentially invalidate the entire 2010 Vancouver luge competition, which has seen lugers routinely reaching or exceeding 90 miles per hour.
Luge is a dangerous sport. Traveling over 80 miles per hour without any kind of protective gear (save for a helmet) makes even the slightest human mistake potentially fatal. Those who practice the sport should do so with full knowledge of the risks involved and with the assurance that they are protected by a minimal set of sound regulations. Vancouver’s awful accident may not help us decide what should count as an acceptable level of risk on the luge course, but it undoubtedly demonstrates an unacceptably ad hoc approach.
-Sam
Related posts:
- Steroids and the dangers of sports
- If you win, a gold medal
- Should sports be protected from international politics?
- Involuntary risk
- Preventing the next Deepwater Horizon
ShareComments
Leave a Reply
