Gerry Lindgren really could run 25 miles at sub-2 Marathon pace.

sub sub elite local hobby jogger wrote:

I mean you can go over the top with your reactions but it doesn't change the fact that Lindgren abandoned his family and made up stuff about his running that basically was as fantastical as Sidd Finch. He ran some fast times at a young age but I don't find him to be a runner worth admiring or continue spreading the falsehoods about his training.

That's a pretty harsh take. I think this article does a better job providing some of the background. Obviously, Lindgren battled some pretty serious demons; and it seems like a lot of great endurance athletes do.

-

You can ask him questions on his Facebook page. He sometimes will give a serious answer.

Hemingway of 139 characters wrote:

sub sub elite local hobby jogger wrote:

I mean you can go over the top with your reactions but it doesn't change the fact that Lindgren abandoned his family and made up stuff about his running that basically was as fantastical as Sidd Finch. He ran some fast times at a young age but I don't find him to be a runner worth admiring or continue spreading the falsehoods about his training.

That's a pretty harsh take. I think this article does a better job providing some of the background. Obviously, Lindgren battled some pretty serious demons; and it seems like a lot of great endurance athletes do.

https://vault.si.com/vault/1987/05/18/a-life-on-the-run-once-upon-a-time-gerry-lindgren-was-the-uss-best-distance-runner-then-he-disappeared-swapping-the-responsibilities-of-marriage-and-fatherhood-for-a-new-identity-and-a-succession-of-odd-jobs-the-author-an-old

-

I read the entire article. Perhaps I am hardened, but I find myself mostly unmoved. He clearly lied about more than his running accomplishments. Seems like there could have been difficult things during his childhood and birth that affected his ability to make wise long-term decisions and he also grew up in an era when men didn't discuss or even acknowledge their struggles. Running can provide a way for us to deal with this things.

Regardless, I still don't think he is a person that the running community should lionize. His life is a cautionary tale at best. There are better ways to deal with our problems than to run away from them.

stan the corgi wrote:

You can ask him questions on his Facebook page. He sometimes will give a serious answer.

And that’s what you guys should do. I know he used to come on here a lot. As I said before people didn’t believe his claims.

But they didn’t attack him personally and judge his personal life.

Unless you know the full story you guys are in no position to judge him. I bet there are many skeletons in all of your closets not out for public display because nobody would care anyway.

otter wrote:

stan the corgi wrote:

You can ask him questions on his Facebook page. He sometimes will give a serious answer.

And that’s what you guys should do. I know he used to come on here a lot. As I said before people didn’t believe his claims.

But they didn’t attack him personally and judge his personal life.

Unless you know the full story you guys are in no position to judge him. I bet there are many skeletons in all of your closets not out for public display because nobody would care anyway.

Very well said. I only made points based on his athletic ability. I don't think I made any statements that aren't corroborated. We don't have to take Gerry's word on what he accomplished.

If some posters think that their commentary on his personal life, from afar, negates his athletic achievements, then it seems like those commenters are first illogical, also sheltered in their personal life, and then also shallow thinkers.

Lots of people with deep-seeded personal and psychological issues are massively successful, but that's neither here-nor-there. You poster bums aren't psychologists, but if you were, you are unprofessional to provide commentary on an individual you haven't interviewed/consulted.

I've heard of this story as well as the 4 minutes pace for 4 miles (roughly) xc.

It's my belief he would have run in the 2:06-2:10 range for the marathon in his time.

That's B.S. You did make claims about him that haven't been verified: the 200 and 300-mile weeks. Let's face it: they aren't believable. He clearly lied a lot, so anything that he says that sounds unbelievable shouldn't be believed. For instance, his description of how he almost ran the first sub-2-hour marathon, but collapsed just before the finish, is clearly not true, and not even based a real event.

Yes, the guy was good. Best male US high school runner ever, quite possibly. But there is no reason to think he trained much differently to any other runner of his caliber. The only reason to believe, for example, that he ran a weekly 88-mile long run is that he said so. But he's the same guy that said he barely missed a sub-2 marathon which was basically at his 10k pace. When anybody calls B.S., guys like you always start pointing out that he was really fast and had a tough childhood. Fine, but that doesn't mean he's not a liar. If his best-ever result was 27:11 for 6 miles, then he probably did training runs, workouts, long runs, etc, that were similar to other people of that caliber.

The problem, as I see it, is he has spouted so much garbage about his supposed accomplishments, that some people think, wow, at least SOME of it must be true. They use outlandish claims he made to back up other outlandish claims he made. He was fast, after all. If he didn't do 350-mile weeks, he probably did something close to that, right? After all, he said he would go out for 10-milers in the middle of the night, just for the heck of it! And he did 88 mile every Sunday! So if he wasn't getting 300 a week, he was probably at least getting 200-250. And so on.

I suggest, stick to facts that are ACTUALLY verified. He set some great HS records that stood for ages, and he once tied for a 6-mile WR. He was one of the top distance runners in the world for a while. Nothing more, nothing less.

The thing with Gerry Lindgren's legend is that no one can prove if he actually did the training he and others have claimed he has-there is no real evidence. But you also can't prove he DIDN'T do any of those things. He was the best in the country in his prime (shrugs shoulders).

Greg wrote:

I've heard of this story as well as the 4 minutes pace for 4 miles (roughly) xc.

It's my belief he would have run in the 2:06-2:10 range for the marathon in his time.

Why? 2:06 would be remarkably fast for a low-28 10k runner. And yes, I'm aware that there are examples of people who have done it with perhaps even slower 10k PB's in more recent years (although I suspect that's largely because they never specialized in track events).

Did he ever do anything at all longer than a 10k to show you that his marathon time would be vastly superior to his 10k? If anything, it seems like he was better at shorter events, like the 3-mile/5k. I suspect you too are falling for the idea that some of his claims, at least, must be true, or close to true. All the crazy training runs he said he did, where he'd take off at a mad sprint and just keep going. He must have been a complete mileage monster, because he said he was. But, he said a lot of things.

Again, I don't deny that he was a very good runner. But I'm just going with what we know. He ran the equivalent of 28-low for 10k. The WR for the marathon at that time he was active was around 2:12. No reason to think he would have utterly destroyed the existing marathon WR. If you're going to assume he was capable of so much more than what he did, you should grant the same to all runners. Billy Mills should also have run 2:06-2:10, for example.

Last I heard, you had to finish to determine pace, especially way back when. Don’t waste your time with this nonsense.

It's remarkable that you stick on the same point as me: he couldn't have run 200-300 miles per week AND competed well in 2-6 mile races. Your rationale is that he inflated his training to talk himself up when he was on top.

Funny thing is, his training volume IS verifiable, according to lots of people who were around at the time, along with his 80 mile long training sessions when he was in College at WSU, etc.

So what does that leave us with? A guy who makes Walmsley look like a baby, and could simultaneously threaten to win a championship 5k or 10k in NCAA D1 in the year 2019. Does this add up to anything? You really don't think so?

By the way, replying to a previous poster, I think 80 miles is what most people would call "all day" without literarily meaning an exact 24 hr. period.

But maybe I am wrong. Since he didn't have all the lasers and gps data of Kipchoge, we can't be sure that he ever did anything... not even his 6 mile WR. It doesn't matter if other people saw him do it, I guess...

Wrong. We do know (in the sense that one "knows" something) that he tied for the 6-mile WR (well, he got 2nd in the race, so in today's terms he didn't really tie for the record). We know that in the same way we know that, for example, Hank Aaron hit 755 home runs in MLB. It could be a lie, but it isn't.

The other stuff - the 88-mile runs, the 350-mile weeks, etc - we don't know. We'd have to be pretty stupid to take them at face value, given Lindgren's propensity for lying. So what if supposedly some college teammates kinda backed him up, or if Jack Daniels said he might have actually done 350 mpw? They're not saying they saw him run 350 mpw or they bicycled alongside him while he ran 88 miles every Sunday. They're just choosing not to be rude. If I was Jack Daniels and a large part of my career was based on studying famous runners, I probably wouldn't go around calling them liars either. Maybe some of his teammates believed him - who knows? Doesn't mean he did it.

Think of it this way: if Galen Rupp - who is significantly faster than Lindgren was at 5k/10k, and has run an actual (not hypothetical) 2:06 marathon - started claiming that he did 88-mile long runs every week, and 350-mile training weeks, would you believe him?

Fizzy O'Logic wrote:

...who abandoned his family

19 posts until the cockroaches come out of the woodwork?

You're slipping.

quit being an a55wipe wrote:

Fizzy O'Logic wrote:

...who abandoned his family

19 posts until the cockroaches come out of the woodwork?

You're slipping.

This^

Love the holier than thou morons who come on here and cast stones. By the way, a few years ago when people were also piling on, his former roommate came on and told the story of how he would have to go pick up Gerry on a Sunday and that he was often "70 or 80 miles away".

Regardless, the guy could run and he did it well. Also keep in mind, we have lost some great resources, that would regularly post on LRC, because jealous, talentless, anonymous, "runners" would come on here to trash them. Thanks.

Just because someone was 70 or 80 miles away doesn't prove that they ran there.

Anyway, that just strikes me as weird. Like, "hey, would you mind doing a 3-hour round-trip drive to come get me (again)? I did another one of my "runs", and still haven't figured out how to plan ahead or how to turn around at the halfway mark and run back to the start."

Yeah, most roommates would be down with that. Sure.