"I admit it does seem a little fishy," she said. "It could be off."

Far more likely. I don't doubt that Lindsay Vonn is a hell of an athlete but there's no way I'm believing that. Frankly I would doubt even 62 seconds for her.

Ummm... I think it sounds more than a LITTLE fishy. At least my ego wants me to think so.

---

http://ianmikelsonracing.com/2013/

Any number of decent girls high school track teams can throw together a 4x400 relay in 4:08 or less, so it's not like a 62 second quarter miler is particularly hard to find.

But she's saying 52, right? I find that a little hard to believe.

---

"Honestly, triathlon is a pussified version of duathlon on that final run."- Desert Dude

Yeah. 52 is an entirely different kettle of fish.

4:08 is more than "decent" for high school girls relay team. But yes, there are certainly a number of high school girls in each state who can run 62 in a race. But we're talking about a skier, ostensibly doing mostly ski training but then runs one in practice.

I don't believe 62 is impossible for her, just unlikely. And no way in hell do I believe 52 or anywhere near it.

That would be good for a podium at the DI championships and it was her 8th repeat. So I'd say fishy

total BS, the absolute TOP NCAA D1 runners are 50-51 secs, and lindsey vonn doesnt (ahem) have the typical runners build. I'd go out on a limb to wager there are MANY MANY female ironman pros who couldn't run a 52 second quarter.

why would you look at Ironman pros? That would be a stupid population to look at for 400m speed. You'd have better luck with ITU pros, and even 10k speed is a drastically different game from 400m. Just look at the body types of 400m runners vs ITU pros.

my point is that they run for a living and wouldnt be able to do 52, with lindsay vonn's body comp there is NO way she could even run a 60 (on her 8th lap she said!)

I don't know what ITU pros are capable of...

She's probably not :52 fast (even she admits her self timed run is a bit suspect) but I would not be surprised if she can run a 400 faster than any female triathlete. She is, after all, world class in a sport that has a huge element of explosive leg strength used in events that last about :45 to 3 mintues. A downhill ski race has a lot more in common with a 400m than a triathlon does.

In Reply To:

why would you look at Ironman pros?

Exactly!!! I didn't click on this thread to look at Ironman pros, I clicked on it to look at Lindsey Vonn in track shorts and there are no pics...bummer.

---

__________________________________________________________________
Eat right. Get lots of sleep. Drink plenty of fluids. Go like Hell.

I remember talking to Daron Rahlves during the summer before he won the Hahnenkamm. His "off-season" workout routine was brutal and included quite a bit of cycling on a stationary bike, including a low cadence build to multiple 20 min sets @360 watts. Obviously that's sort of the opposite end of running a 400, but still pretty impressive.

Or it could be that the HUGE leg muscles developed through downhill are enough to get her around a track really fast. And 1/4 mile isn't 400m. But it's not crazy to think an Olympian might have a fair shot at being fit in a sport that rewards leg strength...

---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
willmillertriathlon.blogspot.com

Why is it that downhill skiers are so aerobically talented? It doesn't seem like the kinda sport that would require a huge quantity of aerobic talent. It seems that it would require very good fitness, but wouldn't necessarily favor those who can have 400+ watt FTP

no doubt she's fit, but 52 ain't "fit", it's close to world class. sorry

I've seen Lindsey in person. She is the Chrissy Wellington of skiing. A tremendously gifted athelete - she has that 1-in-a-10,000,000 physical ability that only the best-of-the-best have. I would not put a 52s 400m past her.

I work with Lindsey's uncle; he is suspicious of the time as he says that she has never been that fast of a runner.

Or it could be that the HUGE leg muscles developed through downhill are enough to get her around a track really fast. And 1/4 mile isn't 400m. But it's not crazy to think an Olympian might have a fair shot at being fit in a sport that rewards leg strength...
"no doubt she's fit, but 52 ain't "fit", it's close to world class. sorry"

To which I say, if she was a little off in the timing and ran a 53, a little off in the distance and was a few meters short of 400m...it's entirely plausible that someone who DOES have world class fitness (in skiing, but still, world class fitness, there's no denying) then it doesn't really seem fishy to me...

---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
willmillertriathlon.blogspot.com

If Lindsey Vonn can run a 52s 400m than Chrissie Wellington could do it in 42s.

Sincerely,
Half of Slowtwitch posters


Chrissie Wellington is better looking than Lindsey Vonn.

Sincerely,
Half of Slowtwitch posters


* I'm not picking on you in particular. I just knew that CW's name was going to be mentioned for some reason. ;-)

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

52 is totally unrealistic. The 400m is way too aerobic. I'd be way more likely to believe an equivalently fast 100m time - or maybe 200m time - than 400m time. Look at the typical skier build. Then look at a prototypical 400m runner - Warriner or Johnson. Now look at a prototypical 100m runner (i.e., NOT Usain Bolt). Skiers are explosive. The 400m is just too long for her to be that fast.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

A typical women's world cup DH run is in the 90+ second range so it's not like she isn't used to going full out for that amount of time. It does seem a bit strange but I wouldn't rule it out based on 'explosive' vs. 'aerobic'.

You also have to take into account that she is an absolutely legendary athlete - perhaps the greatest female alpine skier of all time.

lol. as if.

First off, skiing fast is alot harder than it looks. Add in the fact that many of the races start at above 8000' and it is an aerobic sport.

Plus, its alot like swimming or track cycling (or, for that matter running 400m or even a mile). Sure, if you're swimming 200m or riding in a shortish track race and it only lasts 1:50 and in theory you don't need some massive resevoir of aerobic talent to max out for 1:50 but, to get that fast, you have to train pretty hard for 4 to 5 hours a day. You can't train hard enough to go that 1:50 unless you have some incredible aerobic potential. Same with skiing, its not just popping off a :45 slolam or a 2:30 downhill. Its doing it 25 time a day (often on at 5000'+ since, well, mountain ski resorts are up high) that gets you to be .1 second faster than the rest. My theory, for some sports, to rise to the top in short race takes so much training that you need attributes that apply to longer races to to be able to train hard enough to succeed.

Don't misquote me. The "Sincerely," part denotes my sarcasm. I'm not blind.

---

Favorite Gear: Dimond | Cadex | Desoto Sport | Hoka One One

But the specificity is extremely different. A huge part of skiing is isometric-ish contractions. I.e., in a 400m, count the number of steps taken. Now compare that to the actual number of distinct contractions in a skiing event, even like slalom. It's not the same.

Skiing is also seriously quad-dominant. Running - especially something "longer" like the 400m - is going to be predominately hamstring dominant. I would think that Vonn would do best where "out of the blocks" type motion - even something like 60m, which is run indoors - is way more her style.

it's not a knock at all at her athleticism. But I'd wager pretty strongly that if you hooked up an EMG to a WC skier and hook one up to even a HS track 400m runner, that you wouldn't see ANY sort of similarity in terms of muscle engagement.

Skiing is explosive in a VERY different way than running is explosive. It's just illogical. It'd be like assuming that Fabian Cancellara could run a 52sec 400m because he bikes really fast and biking is an aerobic, leg-dominant sport. It just doesn't make ANY sense.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Perhaps she is using a ST calibrated timing device. A 52 second 400m would translate to approx a 60 sec 400m in real world time if that were the case.

Her ability to estimate results implies a fine future as a triathlete.

Agreed, but from what I can tell (you know, from watching TV and stuff), top level ski racers do a ridiculous amount of cross training including plenty of aerobic work, and strength work on all the muscle chains...running, cycling, stairs, box jumps, deadlifts, lunges etc...up the wazoo. Bike racers can get away with relatively overdeveloped quads and constrained range of motion (and then cripple themselves en masse running through an airport to catch a plane - per Davis Phinney if I recall the anecdote correctly), presumably because the bike supports their weight so much of the time.

I'm not saying she could actually run :52 or even close to it - but based on what they supposedly do in and out of season, I think skiers _at her level_ are pretty well rounded and do not necessarily have weak hamstrings or underdeveloped aerobic capacity relative to their genetic potential. Same with speed skaters though maybe to a somewhat lesser extent. Yes, a 90 second downhill run uses a lot of quad, but that's a tiny percentage of the training she does.

To settle this debate once and for all i volunteer to time her running around the track or a least watch her run around the track.

"Why is it that downhill skiers are so aerobically talented? It doesn't seem like the kinda sport that would require a huge quantity of aerobic talent. It seems that it would require very good fitness, but wouldn't necessarily favor those who can have 400+ watt FTP"

A 2-minute, 3,000-vertical foot downhill course requires just as much aerobic / anaerobic talent and training as an all-out 800meters AND much much more strength. And extreme agility.
In my dreams I would way rather be an Olympic ski racer than an Olympic ITU athlete. Utterly crazy and thrilling (which triathlon generally isn't).

addition: I read that Bode Miller's HR for a 60-90 sec. race was 230 or so.

It's not "ST-calibrated," it's triathletes-in-general-calibrated. Monty tells a great story of a pro triathlete who shall remain nameless who told of completing a set of like 8 x 400yds on 3:45 or something ridiculous like that. Monty pointed out that the pace-time of the repeats was actually faster than the world record for the event. Her response? "How do you know I didn't swim that fast. You weren't there..."

This story smacks a lot of "oops, I forgot to start the clock, I'll just time the last 300m. Oh, did I not mention it was 52sec/300m DURING a 400m?"

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

You'd be surprised at how much hamstring involvement there is. What you say does make sense but I think as others have said, you do have to take into account how much cross-training is involved - especially considering it's a winter sport and she has to spend a significant portion of her year off the snow. I wouldn't be surprised if she does quite a lot of running, at least in the 'off season'.

NFW did she do that. I'd be surprised if any of the ITU men could even run a 52 second 400.

---

speedySTATES

I just spent quite a bit of time analyzing her hamstrings and would have to agree with you:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/...lindsey-vonn_20.html

I too call bullshit and I'm surprised no one has tweeted her a link to this yet.

I went to school with Simon Whitfield and ran with him on the track team. He was unbeatable at the 800m to 3000m distances. Never lost a race. . . . and even he would struggle for a 52 second 1/4 mile.

HUGE fan of Lindsey. But this is a NO.

Well, I know Simon Whitfield can, since I've seen him do it. But considering that he is one of the top three or so sprinters in the ITU, I doubt there are a lot that can do it.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

HA - you beat me to the punch - yes Simon is the only one I can think of that is capable of this.

Ok, I've been happily corrected then!

---

speedySTATES

I would be surprised if she could run it in under a 65, no way in hell she even breaks a minute. You can't just go out and run a 400 fast, 100 or 200 maybe but 400 is where training makes a difference, these two sports are only slightly related athletically.

I can't believe this is even being discussed. Are you kidding me. "I threw in the mid-90's, ran a 4.4 40, with a vertical leap of 48. The reason I didn't play in highschool is the fact that the coach didn't like me." LOL. How may times have you heard that at the water cooler.

This is the biggest batch of bull$hit I have read in a long time. It was good for a laugh though. Some of your bull$hit meters need some tuning.

Google search 2009 NCAA womens 400M finals and this is what you get.

Heat 1 Semi-Finals
1 Leslie Cole SR Oklahoma 52.19Q
2 Alexandria Spruiel SR North Carolina A&T 52.46Q
3 Joanna Atkins SO Auburn 52.51Q
4 Lajada Baldwin SO Mississippi 52.89Q
5 Endurance Abinuwa SO Texas-El Paso 53.00q
6 Elizabeth Olear JR Southern California 53.86
7 Kandi Bonty SR California 53.88 [53.874]
8 Katrina Taylor SR Baylor 54.19
-- Brandi Cross JR South Carolina FS
Heat 2 Semi-Finals
1 Francena McCorory SO Hampton 51.74Q
2 Jessica Beard SO Texas A&M 51.76Q
3 Keshia Baker JR Oregon 52.33Q
4 Shelise Williams SO Arkansas 52.85Q
5 Sharay Hale FR Columbia 53.08
6 Krystin Lacy SR UCLA 53.83
7 Michelle Fedrick SR Maryland 53.88 [53.880]
8 Alishea Usery FR Florida 54.62
9 Brook Turner SR California 54.89

I remember when I was a kid in math class and the instructor would make a blatantly obvious error on the board, I would just write the correct value down on my paper knowing that it was obvious that that is what they meant to put. Other students had to verify with the teacher that the number they wrote down was incorrect. They obviously knew that the number was wrong, but they needed to seek approval for their opinion. I wonder if there is some sort of dominant/recessive trait for this type of thing.

---

Ride Scoozy Electric Bicycles
http://www.RideScoozy.com

She's up here at the moment, will have to go find her tomorrow and ask.

I was thinking about timing her at other more interesting exercises I could put her through that will take longer than 52 seconds.

At least after the first set of reps ;)

---

-------------------------------------
You don't have to like what I say but you should respect my right to say them and I'll do the same to you.

Ha. Good one.

** She has hamstrings?? I didnt notice ;).

In all honesty, judging by the lack of definition in her legs (and i examined every one of those 45 pics), she has never spent any significant time running. She sure is a hell of a skier but im pretty sure that she isnt a runner and most surely not one that can run a 52 400m.

Yeah, that's probably not a correct statement. Probably requires just as much talent and a lot MORE training given the amount of skill required at the pinnacle of the sport.

The the sport relies so much on *skill* is precisely why it certainly does not require as much aerobic *talent*.

---

---

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

I would bet $1,000 that Vonn couldn't run and break 53 seconds for 400m on a track. There is absolutely zero chance of her doing it.

I also agree that there are very few men triathletes that could run 52 seconds for a 400m, I would guess less than 10 in the ITU WCS races and that's being gracious its probably more like 4-5. In 70.3 and 140.6 racing I doubt there are more than 1 or 2 athletes that could run 52, and again that's being generous. I would be surprised if anyone could actually run a 52.

Someone mentioned women, that is a joke. There is not a woman triathlete that could run 52, period.

does anyone not want to know what the other laps were? this was the 8th lap!

it would show up in a hurry i would think.

or perhaps she was running on an indoor track.....

---

---

Tim

Agree with all that, except for the dearth of 52 second 400m capability in ITU racing. I did a 53.x 400m in college, in a decathlon, on an indoor track, and I was a high jumper who did 4:49 in the 1500. 52 isn't that fast for guys who can do 15 or lower for a 5km.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

I seriously give Lindsay credit for 62 seconds.....could she go 52 seconds for say 400 YARDS? Perhaps. I don't think that 52 seconds for 400 METERS on the 8th rep is even remotely close to possible .... even for her. Also keep in mind that she likely does a lot of running training...you don't just go out and and run 8x400m set at the track off no run training....and really, even if she did them in 72 seconds, you have to be pretty well trained to do an 8x400m each in 72 seconds.

I would suspect there are very few Ironman pro triathletes on the planet that could do 52 second 400m, but I suspect there may be a few age groupers who are perhaps a few years out of Div1 college track programs who could do 52 second 400m easily, but at the same time, would have a hard time breaking 2:20 for an Olympic tri!

Kdw fixed that....he posted the link for the sports illustrated shot.

If Chris G is timing Lindsay at the track, I volunteer to run the workout...just give me a 100m head start per 400m rep.

Sure, but there's a significant aerobic component and a very significant anaerobic force component too. I consider it to be a lot like short distance swimming - a very demanding mix of aerobic/anaerobic talent and skill.

Maybe a better way of looking at this is:

• 52 seconds is 13 seconds per 100m pace....how many triathletes or skiers can run that fast ?
• Gebreselassie and Tergat ran 56 seconds in the last lap of the Sydney 400m ...that's 14 second 100m pace http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5D56ZAvcxN0

Just when I was about to post about my self timed 2:02 marathon

There just happens to be video of her workouts. Being far from an expert on running, or skiing, or pretty much anything else, does that look like a workout that would assist someone in obtaining a fast 400m time?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnGorzSm5Rk

I am not sure I understand the comparison to ITU/Ironman athletes. How does being a great 10k or marathon runner make one a great 400m runner? Doesn't the very nature of training for distance have a direct effect on top speed?

And finally, while not saying I believe her reported time, I don't think its that hard to believe that just because someone excels in one sport means that they can't also be world-class in another. There are people who have won medals in both the Summer and Winter Olympics (although the first one that comes to mind was in track cycling and speed skating, both massively quad-heavy sports).

---

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Starting from scratch...

In Reply To:

Kdw fixed that....he posted the link for the sports illustrated shot.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Re: the whole aerobic issue with skiers - I'm not a scientist by far, but my N=1 knowledge agrees with the strange mix of aerobic/strength conditioning. My wife is a former D-I Downill/Super-G skier. Her legs are strong as anything, and once she gets going on inline-skates or a bike, she's like the Energizer Bunny.

Now I'm off to watch her run on the treadmill......

---

__________________________________________________________________
Eat right. Get lots of sleep. Drink plenty of fluids. Go like Hell.

More skill? Certainly.

More talent in a general, overall sense of the term? Quite possibly.

More "aerobic/anaerobic talent"? Not a chance.

"I did a 53.x 400m in college, in a decathlon, on an indoor track, and I was a high jumper who did 4:49 in the 1500. 52 isn't that fast for guys who can do 15 or lower for a 5km."

The 400m doesn't work that way. Just because you can break 15:00 min in a 5k doesn't mean you can run a 52 second 400m.
Look at it this way, since you ran a 53. could you run a 15 min 5k? That logic doesn't work. I would agree with you about a miler who runs 4:10 but not a 15 min 5k runnner.

These guys are training to run 10k's or longer. Plus these guys are running in triathlon and are specifically training all 3 sports, not just a running focus. I would like to know what some of the pro's on here could run for a 400m. Not when they were in high school, college, but right now while training for triathlon. It would probably be close to the numbers I posted above.

I would say a decathlete has a much better chance of running 52 for a 400m because its an anaerobic event. A lot of speed is required to pole vault, hurdle and sprint, plus jumping gives you the explosive power.

Just a fewf comments (not specifically directed at Rappstar):

1) Downhill skiing (at that level) requires a tremendous aerobic ability. Skiers train specifically for a 1-2 minute high energy outputs events.

2) I have witnessed my former triathlon swim coach (a recently retired world class 100m breast stroker (1min02 long course) at the time, a guy who had never run (except for catching a bus may be). He went 58 seconds in converse cotton shoes (on a 400 m track, the 1976 Olympic training track). He won lots of beer on that 'under-60' bet that evening (on top of a harmstring sprain).

Having said that, I don't believe 52 sec on a 400 meters track, not for one second. But i would put lots of money on her over any Ironman athlete, male or female. Across sports, she is an absolutely formidable talent (think Gretzky like, Ali like, or Wellington like).

Francois in Montreal

apropos of nothing, but, last year while skiing at mammoth, i jumped onto a downhill course and passed a guy who was doing a training run. he was really digging, but, i guess i was just having a good day. at the bottom i waited for him. he flipped up his goggles and it was bode miller. he congratulated me. "you got me good," he said.

maybe i misremembered it. i'm just sayin'.

:52 never even came close to happening. not even remotely close. bottom line: if she was an actual track athlete, she has recorded times. we can look them up. if she was not a track athlete, and stepped out onto a track, cold, and ran :52, by herself, she should have stopped skiing right then and there. she's a great skier. but she would've been the best female quarter miler of all time. and the best half-miler. and probably the best 200m runner.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Maybe she ran 400m repeats...down the mountain.

I think people who don't follow winter sports may not necessarily appreciate her greatness. She is certainly in the same realm as a Gretzky or Ali. She could very well be the greatest ski racer (male or female) of all time. Winning a ski race is much like winning a golf tournament - only the slimmest margins separate the best from those struggling to stay on tour, and it's the same dynamic as golf where all you can really control is your own performance. She is arguably much more consistent a winner than even Tiger Woods (although Tiger's been at it for longer).

I think it's lame that a professional athlete would even bring this up in public and say shit like "no one believes me" or "seems a little fishy" when it's quite obvious that said time wasn't even remotely possible for someone of her physique, sport and training background. She should know better to check that out with her agent or training partners to get a sanity check before blabbing about it on the internet.

Slow news day.

At the risk of repeating myself, she is already the best female skier of all time. AFAIK if she suddenly became the best female 400m runner of all time she'd be taking a pay cut.

I doubt she called a news conference about it something. It was probably something she said off hand forgetting that she was talking to a reporter or something (and not knowing enough about track and field to realize how ridiculous it sounds).

ahhh sorry...there is no DH or SG in NCAA ski racing...SL and GS only.

"The 400m doesn't work that way. Just because you can break 15:00 min in a 5k doesn't mean you can run a 52 second 400m."

I personally would disagree. A 15 minute or less 5k is really fast. In high school I was only running low 16's for the 5k (cross-country) but run a sub-51 second 400m. Heck I would sometimes go out in a 54 during 800 meter races. Anyway I would be really surprised if some of these ITU guys who are running sub 5 minute miles for a 10K couldn't lay down a 52.

I agree with this. 400m is not like the 40m-50m dash or even a 200m. I would be willing to bet that she would be an incredible 50-100m sprinter but 400m is a totally different event. I'm also suspect of the coach clocked deal. I was "coach clocked" with a 4.2 40 my freshman year in highschool, which in "real life" was probally 4.5-5.0. In the NFL that much difference determines where you are drafted! I would bet that her 52 is actually 60+. I've seen her training vids (many times) and that style is very similiar to football training where being extremely fast for a short amount of time is the most prized skill.

I also think it's amusing to watch endurance athlete's try to equate spriniting times with endurance times. An endurance athlete's idea of fast is different from a sprinter's idea of fast.

I think you are coming at it from the opposite side. He didn't say that someone who can run 52 second 400 can run a sub 15 minute 5k.

A lot of that looks like exactly what an elite 400 meter runner (or hurdler) would do in the gym (among other things, and along with lots of running). The drills, the squats, lunges, sled etc... Sure, it's a produced video, but none of it looks staged. No, she didn't run :52, but anyone who is still saying she couldn't run :65 after watching that based simply on the idea that skiing is so different from running is equally off base. There are (edit: or at least were 10 years ago) mixed gender groups of amateur tri-geeks busting out :65 at the end of track workouts who don't (didn't) train with anything like the combination of variety/specificity that is seen in that clip.

The difference between a 52 and a 65 is astronomical. Like the distance from Mercury to Pluto astronomical...

---

---

When someone pulls laws out of their @$$, all we end up with are laws that smell like sh!t. -Skippy

Exactly.

Post: "The 400m doesn't work that way. Just because you can break 15:00 min in a 5k doesn't mean you can run a 52 second 400m."

I personally would disagree. A 15 minute or less 5k is really fast. In high school I was only running low 16's for the 5k (cross-country) but run a sub-51 second 400m. Heck I would sometimes go out in a 54 during 800 meter races. Anyway I would be really surprised if some of these ITU guys who are running sub 5 minute miles for a 10K couldn't lay down a 52.


So your telling me that everyone who breaks 15min in the 5k can run a 52 second quarter? That is absolutely not true.

Yes there are plenty of people who can, but its not a direct correlation. Yes there are some ITU guys that can do it, but I am claiming that it is still rare because they are training for swimming, biking and running.

Just looking at your speed you were probably a better 400/800/miler in HS than a cross country runner, so of course you think 52 seconds is easy and should be easy for a 15min 5k guy, but true endurance athletes with little to no speed will have a very hard time running a 52.

In Reply To:

ahhh sorry...there is no DH or SG in NCAA ski racing...SL and GS only.

Just checked with the boss - the pic of her in her skin suit in a tuck is her at nationals in what she says was Super-G, I had mistaken it for DH, but she is sticking with that. Have they changed it since 1989? Or, can I actually tell her she's wrong? (please say yes since I never seem to get to do that). We still have her Dynamic VR27s in the basement.

---

__________________________________________________________________
Eat right. Get lots of sleep. Drink plenty of fluids. Go like Hell.

I would be willing to bet that she would be an incredible 50-100m sprinter but 400m is a totally different event

Why on earth would she be better at a sub 15 seconds effort when all of her training is geared toward a 1 to 2 minutes all-out effort ????? As has been stated by a few others, a skiing maximal effort is actually not that dissimilar to a 400 m run. What is clear from this thread is that downhill skiing seems like an extra-terrestrial sports to many.

Find yourself a small hill, and go do 10 one-minute uphill repeats running/walking in the squat position. This will give you a better idea at some of the training downhill skiers do. That's not exactly the same as running 400 m repeats on the track, but it's not that far either.

Francois in Montreal

Right so she's great in a sport where what... 12 countries compete (like hockey or... dare I say it triathlon). To be great in the 400m you have to line up against 200+ other nations best; almost everyone has had an opportunity to run a lap of the track or the schoolyard and can compete in a footrace. To be a great skiier, you have to be from a country with snow and parents with plenty of disposable income. Her ability to transfer her skiing to running a 400m is purely hypothetical, but it's as big a leap (or bigger) to say she'd be world class in the 400m that it would be to make the suggestion in the other direction. As a keep follower of winter sports I certianly appreciate her greatness AS A WINTER SPORTS ATHLETE in a niche sport, not running, not swimming, not soccer.

A 52 second 400m did not happen. No chance. Zero.

In many ways, track running is equally a 'niche' sport as skiing when you compare it to soccer. Not many countries put the emphasis on running that say Ethiopia or Kenya do. Even in the USA the best athletes are by and large drawn towards other sports.

To say that the top runners are lining up against 200+ countries' best runners is a bit disingenuous, and to say that they're lining up against 200+ countries' best athletes is flat out false.

You're comparing a niche sport to 2 other niche sports (running and swimming) and then throwing the least 'niche' sport ever (soccer) in there as well. Not comparable at all.

Skiing is niche in comparison to Running.

In some countries yes, in some no.

In a global sense yes.

In a global sense there are only 196 counties in the world :) 195 states and slowtwitchia

---

---

When someone pulls laws out of their @$$, all we end up with are laws that smell like sh!t. -Skippy

"she is already the best female skier of all time."

if you don't count annemarie moser-proll, hanni wenzel, petra kronberger and janica kostelic you might be right. then again, she might not even be the best american skier ever, depending on where you rate tamara mckinney. but i'll grant you she's very good, one of the best ever. still, the 52sec quarter thing is silly.

and i wouldn't mind these sorts of silly things that come up if it wasn't that they always seem to be silly too fast, rather than silly too slow.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Let me help this thread:

I think if you take into account the level of competition she gives moser-proll a serious run for her money. She's competing in a golden age for women's alpine skiing. The rest on your list don't come close IMO.

"I think if you take into account the level of competition she gives moser-proll a serious run for her money. She's competing in a golden age for women's alpine skiing. The rest on your list don't come close IMO."

moser-proll is probably not the best skier on my list. kostelic is. look at olympic medals won, the quality of the medals, the number of overall (annual) world cup wins. the one and only area where vonn might beat some of these gals is the number of race wins, and i think you have to look at the opportunities for world cup race wins in the old days versus now. it's like how many ironman wins do you have in a career. it's a bit easier to rack them up with 25 or 30 ironmans taking place in a year versus 6 or 7. i don't see that vonn comes close to kostelic, and i'm not sure her stats beat mckinney. rivals, yes, beats, i don't think so.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

and i wouldn't mind these sorts of silly things that come up if it wasn't that they always seem to be silly too fast, rather than silly too slow.
[/reply]

Exactly. The number of people I meet who broke 4 min for the mile is astoundingly higher than the number I meet who actually have, and I've met a few. Some fast runners may say that those who do triathlon only do it because they weren't good enough at one of the other 3 sports, some swimmers or roadies may say the same thing. I would consider those comments disrespectful, just as I consider Vonn's comment disrespectful (or at the very least ignorant) to those women who can/do run 52 sec. for 400m. I have the utmost respect for the amount of training that goes into any of these sports and having trained for triathlon, I can say that I am in awe of what the top people in this sport are able to accomplish both in training and in competition. I am also in awe of what Vonn can do, and Gretzky and Ali. My comments regarding the niche nature of her sport were meant to demonstrate the point that if someone were to suggest Cathy Freeman could have recieved a top flight bib number in a World Cup Downhill we'd all be laughing, just as we should be laughing at the suggestion that Vonn could run anywhere close to 52 seconds without having specifically dedicated years of her life to doing so.

We are most likely talking real US nationals...not NCAA nationals...never been SG in NCAA racing...

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Athletics (e.g., track and field) is probably the second most popular sport in the world after soccer. Track and field is the 2nd most popular US high school sport for both men and women http://www.nfhs.org/content.aspx?id=4208. Track and field athletes are at the leading edge of human capability, there are almost no barriers to entry to keep out talent like the huge amounts of money to do skiing, hockey, golf, triathlon etc.

You are a genius. Yes, in maybe 6 or 7 countries skiing may be marginally more popular than running, but in the other 200 plus countries running probably dominates skiing by a factor of five and in 75% of the countries in the world there are zero skiiers. So stop being stupid, skiing is a niche sport by any reasonable definition.

We need an ST online track meet. Just send in your 50, 100, 200, 400m results....feel free to use the Vonn inflation factor, otherwise known as the ST-FTP fudge factor. Now I need to go do some squats and plyometrics to get ready for the track meet. Even with 25% inflation, I won't be breaking 60 seconds for the 400m. I'll be working on my starts for the 50m. I have a chance at that with all the deadlifts and squats that don't help me in triathlon :-)

Will I be disqualified for being honest about my times?

Ok, here is the deal. THere is absolutly no way she runs 52, in a workout, or ever..The fact(if in case she did say this)is that in order for her to say this, one of two things are apparent. First off, she has no idea what running on the track means, never really done any real workouts on the track, and is just clueless. In that case, it makes sense that she spouts off something so fanciful, figures it sounds about right, and figures no one will call her on it anyway..This is what I think really happened, and I agree that she would be lucky after a lot of training, to come within 10 seconds of that time, a world away..

The other thing is that she just flat out lied, knows it is a lie, but figures all her little twits would just wash it down with her other twitters of the day..I do not know her, so I will assume she is just ignorant of what she said.

I guess she could have been on an indoor track, or her watch stopped early or broke, she just read it wrong,(maybe 72??), but she did not run a 52....

Ms. Freeman cruising the track in Sydney in the early rounds:



Ms. Vonn using quads to take the fastest route down :-)



Now let's get them to exchange suits!

Disqualified? No. Just slower than most :)

We could even mail out timing chips and mats to participants in the virtual track meet, but of course, guys would just place the matts 25% closer than they really should be and the end result would be compliance with the ST inflation requirements.

"I will assume she is just ignorant of what she said."

no doubt. but, as i said, it's uncanny how everybody's always ignorant faster. and i agree with the prior sentiment expressed that these sorts of statements disrespect the accomplishments of the athletes who really did do these times.

my over/under: 76sec. all out, shaved and tapered, juiced, lathered, focused, i'd wager my dollar against anybody's that this is the true quarter-mile ability. and this takes nothing away from her skiing ability, which is undeniable. but, monty, you and i could name names of folks we know who were caught out "misremembering." this is just the latest in a long, sad line of them.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You're kidding me...I'd like to hope that she can run faster than 76 for 400m. I put her in the mid 60's. I know 15 year old high school girls who are nowhere close to the athlete that she is cranking out 62!

i'm just sayin'.

once you take somebody out of their own wheelhouse, there's almost always a very large gulf between what that somebody is allegedly *capable of* versus what they actually *do*. i used to spectate that at every annual carlsbad 5000, back when all the triathletes from the world over would gather to train in san diego.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

PV accurately remembers his 400m times. More accurately, how agonizing they were; hence why I went back to PV. A lot less agony running 100 ft and a lot more fun falling to the mat :)

I think you're a tad high though; my dollar is on a flat out 70. This way she can tell the world she ran a 4:40 mile. Although I would like to see her shaved and lathered, I'd sure as H#ll be focused!

---

---

When someone pulls laws out of their @$$, all we end up with are laws that smell like sh!t. -Skippy

100 posts. This is hilarious ... So glad I tossed this out there. It made my Friday.

100% agreed. Considering it was her 8th lap; she would have blow away the 09 NCAA championship field. LMAO

Google search 2009 NCAA womens 400M finals and this is what you get.

Heat 1 Semi-Finals
1 Leslie Cole SR Oklahoma 52.19Q
2 Alexandria Spruiel SR North Carolina A&T 52.46Q
3 Joanna Atkins SO Auburn 52.51Q
4 Lajada Baldwin SO Mississippi 52.89Q
5 Endurance Abinuwa SO Texas-El Paso 53.00q
6 Elizabeth Olear JR Southern California 53.86
7 Kandi Bonty SR California 53.88 [53.874]
8 Katrina Taylor SR Baylor 54.19
-- Brandi Cross JR South Carolina FS
Heat 2 Semi-Finals
1 Francena McCorory SO Hampton 51.74Q
2 Jessica Beard SO Texas A&M 51.76Q
3 Keshia Baker JR Oregon 52.33Q
4 Shelise Williams SO Arkansas 52.85Q
5 Sharay Hale FR Columbia 53.08
6 Krystin Lacy SR UCLA 53.83
7 Michelle Fedrick SR Maryland 53.88 [53.880]
8 Alishea Usery FR Florida 54.62
9 Brook Turner SR California 54.89

She probably measured in yards ;)

---

______________________________________

"thoughts become things, choose the good ones"

Thats the semi finals, but yeah 52s is seriously fast. If you consider 52 to be 52.99, that would be the 50th fastest woman in the US for 2010. So while I'd bet money that she was mistaken/exagerating, its not so fanciful as to be impossible.

Keep in mind that every once in a while someone does come out of nowhere to post incredible feats.

http://www.jonesbahamas.com/?c=123&a=7189

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

Post: Thats the semi finals, but yeah 52s is seriously fast. If you consider 52 to be 52.99, that would be the 50th fastest woman in the US for 2010. So while I'd bet money that she was mistaken/exagerating, its not so fanciful as to be impossible.

Keep in mind that every once in a while someone does come out of nowhere to post incredible feats.

I know everyone says they don't believe it and think she was mistaken, which is true because there is no way she could run that, ever.
I still don't understand the people who think "it's not so fanciful as to be impossible"

Bottom line it is impossible for her.

i think what everyone is forgetting about this is that this is all just a fluff piece to keep ms. vonn's name in the papers, keep her relevant. i mean, talk about slow news day.

Again, I think its a serious long shot that she could run 52, like lotto longshot. But exactly what makes it impossible? She's a great athlete, powerful legs. A bit muscular, but I don't think her height/weight is too far off Sanya Ross's.

Like I said highly improbable, but what completely makes it impossible?

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

Like I said highly improbable, but what completely makes it impossible?

I cannot speak for others, but when I think it is impossible, I'm referring to the context of the original article. She did it in a workout, without blocks, spikes, competition, ect?? A time that if run in a meet, would get her to the finals?? Yes, impossible..

Now could she do it if she ran track exclusively for the next 10 years, was a running natural?? Maybe, but still highly improbable..

I'll by your context arguement. But High school girls have run 53.XX without 10 years of commitment if they are naturals, so why not a 28 ish year old woman (guessing on age). Again look at Donald Thomas.

Never High jumped to World class in a few weeks. Pretty much national class in a day in basketball shoes. Given that HJ is more technical than running the 400m I'd say that is more improbable than a top flight skier running a time that would make her the 50th fastest 400m runner in the country.

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

Bear in mind that Thomas was a basketball player and the approach for a lay up or dunk is quite similar to the high jump approach. He had built up most likely a great approach without even knowing it. Not downplaying his accomplishments at all, he went on to win Osaka.

The drastic difference is that for a distinct sport from athletics to say that you ran a time 2 seconds off the gold medal in the last olympics, a time that was ran many times in the qualifiers, is ludicrous. High school athletes have also ran in the olympics, won various gold medals, and while yes, they are phenoms; to insinuate that a hot (albeit a lil chubby compared to Chrissie) athlete that doesn't train for that event can run olympic qualifying times when the physical capability isn't there is the crazy part (IMO). Donald Thomas is a case of an athlete that had the physical ability and was kind of training for an event that he didn't realize he was much more capable in than basketball. Read: he was an unrealized high jumper playing basketball, not a baller turned jumper. Its unfortunate though that he didn't do better in Beijing, I've heard he's goofy as all get out and fun to be around on the track.

---

---

When someone pulls laws out of their @$$, all we end up with are laws that smell like sh!t. -Skippy

You don't need the Carlsbad 5000. Show up at ANY race - of any kind - anywhere in the world. Thankfully, they don't hand out the checks and trophies based off what people say they did in workouts.

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Quote;

"she is already the best female skier of all time."

if you don't count annemarie moser-proll, hanni wenzel, petra kronberger and janica kostelic you might be right. then again, she might not even be the best american skier ever, depending on where you rate tamara mckinney. but i'll grant you she's very good, one of the best everly]

With 33 world cup victories she is clearly tops in US skiers. and according to www.ski-db.com she is 6th world wide and may be moving up this year.

"With 33 world cup victories she is clearly tops in US skiers. and according to www.ski-db.com she is 6th world wide and may be moving up this year."

well, as i said, it's easier to rack up world cup victories now because there are more events, more opportunities, than in generations past. tamara mcckinney never had a chance to race combined, and only at the end of her career had super g. mckinney has a pretty good case to be made, still, vonn's overall world cup victories stand out. i won't argue the point. but best skier ever? (a case which you happily did not make.) not yet. but she's certainly got a great case to make for seventh best ever.

moser-proll: 6 overall world cup championships, 4 world championship golds, 1 olympic gold, 1 more olympic medals
kronberger: 4 overall world cup championships, 1 world championship gold, 2 olympic golds
janica kostelic: 7 overall world cup championships, 5 world championship golds, 4 olympic golds, 1 more olympic medal
hanni wenzel: 2 overall world cup championships, 2 world championship golds, 2 olympic gold, 2 more olympic medals
vreni schneider: 3 overall world cup championships, 3 world championship golds, 3 olympic golds, 2 more olympic medals
anja parson: 2 overall world cup championships, 7 world championship golds, 1 olympic gold, 5 more olympic medals
lindsay vonn: 3 overall world cup championships, 2 world championship golds, 1 olympic gold, 1 more olympic medals

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Because this 28ish year old woman has committed her life to being very specifically focused on a sport that involves 0 running. I could see it if she was world class in a sport that actually involved sprinting, but she simply isn't. She doesn't train for long sprints, and none of her ski training is going to teach her how to run fast for that long. Donald Thomas played a sport that involved a lot of jumping and foot placement already, all he needed to do was work on his form to adapt it to his new sport.

I just put an ST callout to Lindsey on her FB page. Hopefully she accepts.

---

Ben McMurray
Northern Michigan Small Farm Venture ---> http://facebook.com/hillvalleymi [/size]

In terms of participation you're right.
In terms of revenue, you're way off.

"I just put an ST callout to Lindsey on her FB page. Hopefully she accepts."
I'm sure a world champ has other things to do with her time ... While 52-53 is out of range, all it would take is a 55-56 to truly impress. I see the haters have her down for a 70.

I've learned a long time ago to not pay attention to any times from someone who doesn't race regularly.

As an example, one of my Facebook "Friends" recently posted that he used to be able to bench press 600 lbs. The guy is about 6'7" and not even as muscular as most NBA players, let alone a big guy like Barkley or Karl Malone, neither of which can bench press anything close. I might have believed 400 lbs, but there is no F'ing way he could bench press 100 lbs over the VA state record!!!

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I find that 52s 400 hard to believe and call BS

---

---

len = len + 20; /* add some buffer */

See, this is where the negative hyperbole is just as bad as the bogus time assertion. Did you watch the training clip posted above? How about this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZTlFGqys-w

Pay attention at 1:44 - that's the exact drill you can see Kenyan distance runners doing in warmups.
Also take a look at 3:15.

You are correct that a downhill race doesn't "involve" running, but to say that means the sport as a whole involves zero running is a pretty insular view. Swimming doesn't involve doing situps. Does that mean Phelps couldn't hold his own in a situp workout? (Maybe he couldn't, but I'm not going to assert that his being a swimmer is the reason).

Dan, after watching Vonn's gym clip with the agility drills and sled work, you seriously think she couldn't get around a track in :76? 5 seconds of googling indicates that at some point (before she started to peak) she got pulled out on a long ride with the Mancuso sisters and (allegedly) realized aerobic fitness could be useful, and now she allegedly does 3 hours on the stationary bike. Yeah I know for every article like that there's one saying that the reason the british ski team sucks is they do aerobic training.

Apolo Ohno also does a sport that "involves 0 running"...yet he allegedly runs 1-2 hours daily.

Obviously Vonn didn't run a 52 second quarter, and I agree that the assertion itself is highly irritating to anyone who knows anything about running. But when it comes to academic speculation on what she or someone who trains similarly could pull off, to say :76 seems equally disingenuous.

Another thing that seems to be missing from the discussion... even if we all stipulate that the :52 is impossible (and I certainly do), doesn't the fact (?) that her regular regimen seemingly includes RUNNING 8 QUARTERS...at any speed...go slightly against the whole "she can't possibly even run :65, because skiers don't run" thinking?

Dev,

I think you are underestimating the mechanics of running a 65 second 400m for a non-runner. To run at a near all out effort and maintain control of your form takes practice. Granted downhill skiing is a largely about body control/balance, but it is totally different than skiing. It would take a lot of practice. I know I would look like a mess if I went out for a 65 sec 400m right now (not sure if I could even run this fast) and I have been running for years, but not practicing my sprinting.

I won't comment on the 400 time, as others who know far more than me about running have made excellent points. However, I have to weigh in on the status of Mrs. Vonn's greatness. I don't think it's fair to simply measure her greatness by the number of WC victories or medals she has racked up. If she stays healthy and motivated, that list will grow for many years to come. IMO, what really elevates her to potentially greatest of all time is the fact that she is one of those rare transformational athletes who has changed the way people evaluate what's possible in her sport.

Her athleticism, agressive lines, and strength have transformed the way coaches and athletes look at women's skiing. Alberto Tomba and Bode Miller did the same thing in Men's skiing.

I think I phrased that poorly. She doesn't train to run; nothing she does in her training is aimed at producing and results running. Running is tangental, not a focus, just a tool. Same way the plyometric warmups that Kenyans do are tangental to their running- doing the drill by themselves does almost nothing (Incidentally, I've never seen Kenyans doing that drill. Many others, but not that one). Shuffling around cones down a hill does nothing to make one a world class sprinter. Agility and balance drills don't make you fast. Its all about specificity of training. Vonn's training is set up to have her performing in a sport in which she never runs. Thats what I was getting at. Even cheerleaders run in practice occasionally.

Apolo Ohno's sport is physiologically much closer to running than is Vonn's, so I would expect him to run more. I highly doubt Ohno would run a 52 either.

Thats my point. She has been training (presumably) a lot like a 400/800m runner. Ballastic exercises, repeat quarters,, etc. I'm assuming that her couch isn't risking knee injuries by having her run quarters without some longer steady running.

I seriously doubt she can run a 52, but she's a great athlete, trains some for running, and this year in the US 2 Freshman HS girls ran under 53 for 400m. So why is it impossible for LV to do it.

I put it in the same league as meeting some guy who says he ran under a 4 minute mile in HS. I'm highly skeptical, except its been done by 4 guys in the US, so before I lay into the guy, I'm at least going to ask his name.

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

Plyos and track repeats are only a very small portion of the training of a serious 400/800 runner. Her training has some superficial similarities, but they're not at all the same. Her training is oriented towards a different sport, so she will go about it differently. Lance illustrated this wonderfully with his marathons- he was an uber-elite endurance athlete who ran a couple of decent marathons. Above average? Absolutely. World class? Not a chance. And he spent a few months preparing specifically for it.

Keep in mind we aren't talking world class. Not even national class. Giving the benefit of the doubt and calling 52.99 "52" she would be the 50th best this year in the US, and only the 3rd best High School Freshman.

Do you really think someone with world class talent in the 400 couldn't do 52.XX off of fairly light training if she were already in great general shape? That 5 seconds slower than Sanya Ross's best.

Its highly unlikely that LV could do it. Its not very unlikely at all that someone could do it.

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

if anyone knows lindsay vonn, i'll bet my $1000 against her $200 she can't break 62 seconds. i'll bet my $1000 even money she can't run 65. not that she's interested in my $1000. but, no, she can't run 52, she can't run 62, and she probably can't run 72. but she's one helluva skier.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I remember seeing that NBC special where they talked about how Apolo trains like 8hrs a day, 7 days a week. When it's not coming directly from the athlete's coach - usually in a very specific context - these numbers are way overinflated.

Do you know how much "real" runners run? Like a guy, say Craig Mottram? Mottram said he would run anywhere from 10-14 hrs a week. So based off 1-2hrs a day, that basically means that Ohno - who is a speedskater - is running as much as someone who ONLY runs and is one of the very best in the world at it.

If Ohno ran even 5hrs a week, I'd be shocked. The vast, vast majority of pro triathletes I know - really good ones included - do not run "one - two hours per day." And again, that's a sport where running is actually an integral part of it.

I get that your point is really that Ohno isn't a runner but runs quite a bit. But what that "alleged" training really shows is how casual most athletes are with training volume. I'm sure a lot of it is the media hype. I can see a reporter being "disappointed" with an athlete "only" training 25 hrs a week. So they basically just exaggerate everything. And of course, the average person has no real context, so they think "wow, that's amazing!"

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Not ever having seen her run I'd put the over / under around 75. I haven't been arguing that she can run 52, I think she made a mistake. I'm arguing that its not impossible for a fit woman, who does some sprint specific training, to run 52.

Heck I think if someone described Chrissie Wellingtons history prior to her first IM win, this same type of thread would happen. Most would call bullshit. No athletic background a little bit of mountain biking for transportation, etc.

Styrrell

---

Styrrell

Heck Jordan, I ran a lot more than 1-2 hrs a day as a coach! Now granted that was run 100ft, rest 5 minutes, run 100ft, rest 5 minutes :)

Slowman I'll match your $1000 and say she can't do 62, but I aint so rich as to put a g on 72.

---

---

When someone pulls laws out of their @$$, all we end up with are laws that smell like sh!t. -Skippy

"I think she made a mistake."

i think she made two mistakes. the second was talking (bragging?) about her 52sec quarter with a reporter.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Lindsey Vonn vs ITU Women's front pack over 400m, with track spikes....I'm putting my $$$ on Ms. Vonn :-)

Rahlves' sister had pro triathlon ability so genetics are probably on his side.

I wish I was there to see it. Maybe she could have gave me a few pointers.

---

-Michael Welch My Blog
Supported by: TEAM ZOOT Swiftwick
For all your endurance shopping needs

Hold on a minute Dan... a few hours ago you had the even money bet at 76 seconds and here you are at 65. Why the sudden enthusiasm?

"a few hours ago you had the even money bet at 76 seconds and here you are at 65. Why the sudden enthusiasm?"

a few hours ago was my guess. now it's my bet. i only bet on a sure thing ;-)

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You are a genius. Yes, in maybe 6 or 7 countries skiing may be marginally more popular than running, but in the other 200 plus countries running probably dominates skiing by a factor of five and in 75% of the countries in the world there are zero skiiers. So stop being stupid, skiing is a niche sport by any reasonable definition.

Again this post shows a total misunderstanding of downhill skiing. Yes there is only about 15 countries where it is practiced. But in theses countries, downhill skiing is arguably the best organized sport to bring out talent. Most skiers enroll in ski clubs at 5-6 years old, start to seriously race at 8. You have hundreds of these in the USA and in Canada. The level of coaching is high, and, mostly, there is a lot of money involved. That means, training camps, top equipment and great facilities.

Yes it is a niche sport obviously, but the depth of talent and the ability to develop it is fantastic. Nothing like triathlon which is a niche sport at a whole other level.

I don't know enough about track sports to comment, but I doubt it comes anywhere close to the level of skiing when it comes to developing depth and talent.

Obviously, she did not run 52 seconds, but to dismiss the ability of top skiers based on the fact that skiing is a niche sport is just plain ignorant.

Francois in Montreal

...every high school in the country has a track and field team.

Can gurantee she cannot run those times...
Like guarantee

Now? or back in 2010 when this thread is from? :o)

The thread is old as the hills I would like to chime in.

My dormmate was a lower-tier WC apline skier. He was also national junior elite (Think he won) the 400m on, as he said "minimal training".

To be a great alpine skier you need sick AWC. You need to be born with it, then work it even higher with training. Sprints of different kinds is used, both running and on a bike. He did around 48 at 16.

Maybe 52 is too fast for a world class female skier. Maybe she would need actual track training to do it. No doubt she could if she set her mind to it though.

---

Endurance coach | Physiotherapist (primary care) | Bikefitter | Swede

 
Can gurantee she cannot run those times...
Like guarantee


I'll guarantee that she can run those times. But I won't like guarantee that she can

Who are you talking about?

You are right ...For example Markus Larsson has stuck with it fir many years ...
The plyometrics the Scandinavians do in dry land are second to none
Aamodt and Kjus could both do standing back flips and could both probably KQ hungover

No prob, family ties

So you're saying plyometrics are the key to long course?

Lol...not entirely ...druken rambling may though

Actually, downhill skiers have more in common with motocross racers or pursuit cyclists.

can't speak to pursuit cyclists. But the motocross and alpine skiing relationship is right on the money. I knew a 2x World Champ MX racer (Donnie Schmit, 125cc and 250cc, RIP). He "never" skied, but ran into him once skiing and he was jaw dropping, outrageously good. He probably was a good runner too, though I never ran with him.

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

Way too aerobic? I don't think so. I don't know if this was legit but aerobic capacity has little to do with it. Phosphagen system capacity, lactate tolerance....speed

---

Simplify, Train, Live

here's the problem:

52.46 Olivia Baker (Columbia, Maplewood, NJ)
52.52 Kaelin Roberts (Poly, Long Beach, Ca)
52.82 Zola Golden (Arlington, LaGrangeville, NY)
52.95 Kendall Ellis (Aquinas, Ft Lauderdale, Fl)

that's the list of high schoolers who ran under 53sec last year in high school. in the entire U.S. and only 13 more of them ran faster than 54sec.

track is not lacrosse or volleyball. huge numbers participate, everywhere in the country, every ethnic group. the kids in this list start with age group clubs before they ever get into high school.

if she self-timed her 400m after high school, fine, but if she didn't start racing T&F hard core way earlier she'd never have had the ability to run anything like these times.

the only thing we know now that we didn't know in 2010 is that BOTH world famous skiers and world famous politicians are world famous liars (or at least self-deceivers) when it comes to running times.

i wouldn't care, i don't care, except that it demeans and belittles the accomplishments of those who have worked to achieve high standards in their sports, whether a 52sec quarter or a 2:50-something marathon.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I am just waiting for the Vonn vs Brownlee track meet. 100m, 400m, 800m. I want to see 13.xx, 56, and 1:59

well, you do know that johnny brownlee, in his winter training, slalom skis? once when the world cup came to his mountain he jumped in and took the bronze.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

LOL! So much bullshitting going on here, but in sports it seems "smack is crack".

I ran the 400 in high school, so I knew the girls who ran the 400 and I knew their times. Typically, at the conference level, girls were running 70-80 secs. At the Regional Championships I think we had one girl go under 60, barely. At the state championships, one girl went under 57. This was 1958-59-60. Cinder tracks, except for States. If LV can run under a top high school athlete's 400 time from the 1960's, say, I'll eat her shoes. You just don't get that kind of leg turnover from downhill skiing. She may be able to run under 70, but I'd be surprised.... Don't get me wrong, I think she's a phenomenal athlete, but specificity rules and training is important.

EDIT: I just looked at the current girl's high school record for Ohio for the 400. It's 51.63.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

Taking it a bit far there. Comparing to cinder tracks in the 50's, really??

There is a huge difference between 52 and 60 and again to 70. Breaking 70 isn't hard, 60 is quite difficult and breaking 52 means you'll probably be at the Olympics in the future.

So, the world record until 1962 was 53.4. Current record is 48ish (drugged East German). 5-6 sec faster now. That one girl under 60 would be more like the 52-54 that Slowman listed for the fastest high school times last year. Things have moved forward in 50 years.

Well, yes, a bit of a stretch, but the cinder tracks really weren't the big change. Training regimens, supplements, and better equipment. I ran barefoot til the 10th grade. I'm not kidding. When I got track spikes they were so heavy I refused to wear them for a few weeks. Then I got stepped on....

Also, I think the 400 is more of sprint these days. In high school it seemed more like a distance race to me. "When will this goddamned thing end?"

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

Oh, yes, totally agree. Different race today, but the same distance. The leg turnover on these top girls is simply phenomenal. I wonder what the rate is? 220? Stride length is probably over 45 inches too.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

Don't forget that Johnny Brownlee gets to the bottom of the slalom run and rather than take the lift up, he runs the hill which is 400m in VERTICAL and of course does it in sub 52 seconds. That would be a stratospheric VAM of around 30,000 meters per hour but let's pretend I did not give you the math and let's just believe the sporting smack talk.

Brian Williams thinks Vonn has a lying problem.

I'm impressed! She must have some sprinter DNA in her.

I'm pretty sure she's got some Pro Golfer DNA in her

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin