Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds
Quote | Reply
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/...y-vonns-talents.html

Interesting. Maybe an exaggeration but even a 53 or 54 is pretty amazing for a non D1 trackster.

To take things a step further a few former world class alpine skiers have become excellent cyclists, runners and even triathletes over the years.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ummm... I think it sounds more than a LITTLE fishy. At least my ego wants me to think so.

http://ianmikelsonracing.com/2013/
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [JoeO] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [FLA Jill] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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

Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [teekona] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah. 52 is an entirely different kettle of fish.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [FLA Jill] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
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.

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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That would be good for a podium at the DI championships and it was her 8th repeat. So I'd say fishy
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [dongustav] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [jpb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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...
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [dongustav] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [WillNJ] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
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
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [WillNJ] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [dongustav] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [mgalanter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Last edited by: GMAN 19030: Nov 5, 10 11:08
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [TBinMT] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [Rappstar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [GMAN 19030] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Chrissie Wellington is better looking than Lindsey Vonn.

lol. as if.
Quote Reply
Re: Lindsey Vonn: 400m in 52 seconds [jpb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
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.
Quote Reply

Prev Next