Killian Jornet: VK10K

Oh Please wrote:

Supposedly he split 2:01 on the ascent, which is a record in and of itself. Looks like no one has come within 4+ minutes of that, even on an ascent only race. Is there a picture of him at the top / turn around? That would seem conclusive enough...can't really short cut up to the top of Pikes Peak.

There could've been a strong tail wind that year on the way up, which helps much more than what you lose on the way down. Or the wind stops as you turn around.

FWIW you can shortcut, there are a lot of switchbacks; wasn't Kilian kind of DQ-ed one year for that? Also there is the Incline, but I assume they make sure you don't take that.

S. Canaday wrote:

What I'm saying is the 3:16 record time at Pikes is a total outlier and its just weird. At the time it was a 22-min PR for Matt. Then (in all the Pikes Peak races Matt won and ran) he only got within 18-minutes of it one other time with a 3:33 (his second best time on the mountain). Usually he ran 3:40-4:00 hours at Pikes.

Early 90's - EPO was pretty popular - just saying...

completely bogus just like all his flat running accolades. Everytime he runs flat events there is always some outlandish excuse when there is actual data then there are moments like these with no data or elapsed timing and all the fanboys just bite and believe. Folks the guy didn't run a 29 min 10k nor did he do a VK in 29, you'd have to be dumb to just believe it because he says so without actual data. Hey, I ran a 3:50 uphill today then followed it up with a 2:10 marathon, but i can only show you total time not the real data or elapsed pace hahaha

buzzcolorado wrote:

At this point it's all speculation based on garbage data. Notice how he removed the times from the IG post. I couldn't find any of his track workouts on Strava, where his 10k PR is 30:21. There are articles about his training, like

https://runningmagazine.ca/sections/training/what-you-can-learn-from-kilian-jornets-2019-training-log/

, where the numbers don't make sense, like doing 10x200 @35 and 10x400 @67. And most importantly, he's never done a flat road or track race. So...

Your post is full of bullshit.

1. He didn't remove times, they never were included in the post actually. He posted them somewhere in the comments answering a question and this comment is still there, even though instagram algorithm makes you scroll up

2. He obviously stopped regulary posting on strava for some time now, so obviously you won't see track workouts there (as well as no other training runs)

3. Yes, he's never done a flat race, but at least he did some flat stuff in training recently so we can judge his potential. Obviously it's not suprising that someone who can run a 30min 10k twice a day can go sub30 even after a vertikal k when going all out (I mean, sub30 seriously isn't that special, even women do it regulary now. Obviously the best guy in mountain running should be able to do it easily)

Weird thing was Matt was only 4 min faster on the ascent than the previous year, but he was a incredible 23 min faster on the descent ! 1:15 for the descent - but HOW ???

vogusz wrote:

completely bogus just like all his flat running accolades. Everytime he runs flat events there is always some outlandish excuse when there is actual data then there are moments like these with no data or elapsed timing and all the fanboys just bite and believe. Folks the guy didn't run a 29 min 10k nor did he do a VK in 29, you'd have to be dumb to just believe it because he says so without actual data. Hey, I ran a 3:50 uphill today then followed it up with a 2:10 marathon, but i can only show you total time not the real data or elapsed pace hahaha

Why would we be dumb to believe it?

He has the running accolades to back it up. Could Walmsley do this workout? He dominates Walmsley. So I think its pretty reasonable to believe.

You must be dumb. You realize flat races are different than mountain right? What has kilian actually done with proven data to suggest he can run sub 30 10k? He has never done it and has no track or certified race results either in the road or any flat events. He just knows his fanboys will believe ni matter what he says so he can make an outlandish claim and they won't even ask to see the real data.

vogusz wrote:

You must be dumb. You realize flat races are different than mountain right? What has kilian actually done with proven data to suggest he can run sub 30 10k? He has never done it and has no track or certified race results either in the road or any flat events. He just knows his fanboys will believe ni matter what he says so he can make an outlandish claim and they won't even ask to see the real data.

Sub 30 just isn't that hard. I would find it hard to believe someone at the top of an endurance sport that involves lots of running COULDN'T run under 30. All the best tri guys can

vogusz wrote:

You must be dumb. You realize flat races are different than mountain right? What has kilian actually done with proven data to suggest he can run sub 30 10k? He has never done it and has no track or certified race results either in the road or any flat events. He just knows his fanboys will believe ni matter what he says so he can make an outlandish claim and they won't even ask to see the real data.

I seriously don't understand why idiots like you think sub30 is such a special feat. 1180 male runners went sub30 on the track in 2019 alone (+obviously some more on the roads), it means nothing. Those who think that Kilian is some kind of serial fraud can of course pretend like he can't do better than 10.64 km in 32:25 (because you know, the deleted run from earlier the day in fact didn't happen and he only made it up to make feel himself better), but those who aren't completly deluded of course know that there is no reason to not believe the times he states. In fact, the only thing they point out is that he might be quite average on the flat indeed, as for example some of the italian guys he always dominated can go sub30 too and Joe Gray did 28:20.

The only thing I'd say, Sage, is that you are under-estimating knowing every nook and cranny on the mountain. Look at Seth DeMoor's performance this year. Go ahead and try an FKT once and then try it a 2nd time and report back to me how much faster you run. For example, do the Boulder Skyline Traverse "blind" and then try it again. Just like Kilian at SZ or Western States. Knowing the course makes a huge difference in trail running, and I think you will admit this.

No where did I state sub 30 is world class or anything. I just say that kilian hasn't produced any result that shows he can do that especially after a VK. You bring up Walmsley running 29 and Gray running 28, do you know the difference between them and kiliam? Gray and walms actually ran that time in an actual race with actual data. Kilian has not. Those guys also came from track and xc background so I wouldn't doubt they could run this workout but I don't buy kilian claim and find it interesting he always leaves out the real data to prove his claims. I mean how hard it is to just post the real gpx data and elapsed timings?

King Tiger wrote:

Weird thing was Matt was only 4 min faster on the ascent than the previous year, but he was a incredible 23 min faster on the descent ! 1:15 for the descent - but HOW ???

On last year's long and very informative PPM thread details like this were explained. Somebody posted a local news article written at the time in which Matt explained he was a little undertrained in '92 but still went all out for the summit to gap Mejia, but was then "gassed" on the descent. Thus he took a major header tripping on a rock to avoid competitors still on the climb, resulting in broken ribs and/or collarbone. That he finished at all, let alone still in 2nd (only beaten by Mejia) is testament to his cajones. And that he would descend 23 minutes faster the following year doesn't seem much of a stretch.

Sub30 on the roads (his time was faster than the women's world record BTW) is too good to be true IMO from somebody who 40 minutes earlier just did a vertical km that was within one minute of the world record, when flat running is not the guy's forte. Not saying he cheated, but GPS can have errors.

vogusz wrote:

No where did I state sub 30 is world class or anything. I just say that kilian hasn't produced any result that shows he can do that especially after a VK. You bring up Walmsley running 29 and Gray running 28, do you know the difference between them and kiliam? Gray and walms actually ran that time in an actual race with actual data. Kilian has not. Those guys also came from track and xc background so I wouldn't doubt they could run this workout but I don't buy kilian claim and find it interesting he always leaves out the real data to prove his claims. I mean how hard it is to just post the real gpx data and elapsed timings?

I see no reason why he should post the data. I mean, he's no random hobby jogger who is claiming to have broken 30 after two weeks of training, but a guy who's on top of his sport for years, never had problems with beating guys with "fast" flat PRs and now posted an impressive, but totally believeable workout. I mean, I could probably understand your concerns if he claimed that he went sub28 or even sub29 now, but even as someone who is personelly more into track and road racing I would have been shocked if someone like Jornet couldn't even break 30, probably he himself sees it as no big deal (also the two 10ks in the 30's at the same day 1-2 months ago of course clearly indicated sub30 potential, but as he set one of those to private @strava because it didn't contribute to the challenge you probably will believe it's fake)

buzzcolorado wrote:

Sub30 on the roads (his time was faster than the women's world record BTW) is too good to be true IMO from somebody who 40 minutes earlier just did a vertical km that was within one minute of the world record, when flat running is not the guy's forte. Not saying he cheated, but GPS can have errors.

You should consider that Kilian himself wrote that the VK in fact had 100 meters of flat/down parts. I would say this workout basically was 2×10k @~half marathon race pace, which obviously is quite hard, but doable with 40min of rest and going all out. Also obviously GPS isn't the best way to measure distance, but as long as there are no obvious bugs it's close enough +-20-30s.

yourpostsucks wrote:

You should consider that Kilian himself wrote that the VK in fact had 100 meters of flat/down parts. I would say this workout basically was 2×10k @~half marathon race pace, which obviously is quite hard, but doable with 40min of rest and going all out. Also obviously GPS isn't the best way to measure distance, but as long as there are no obvious bugs it's close enough +-20-30s.

That makes my argument stronger tho, right? So first he ran a VK that was really close to the world record (that BTW is not held my him), so you could say that was equivalent to an all out 10k effort for him, then 40 minutes later he could still do a hilly road 10k that was 62:30 HM pace. And he has minimal track/road experience/training. While Walmsley, who has way more experience in track, ran a 64:00 in Houston on tapered legs last year. I'm pretty confident that Jim is a better road runner (50 mile world record holder among other things), but even if I'm wrong, he's not several minutes slower over a HM.

Julian is great and a tremendous athlete. The stuff he does, crushing mountains, skiing, all day expeditions, running up Everest, running ridge lines, and so on so in is way more interesting than running fast circles around a perfectly flat track. I don't give 2 shits about a fast track 5k but do care about challenging mountain races and vertical Ks.

Not sure what the point of this thread is? Killian obviously is an incredible mountain runner with his combination of strength, endurance, and speed. Maybe in his younger years, if he had focused on track and road racing, he might have progressed into a similar talent as Ben True, but that is just unknowable speculation.

Comparing the sport of mountain running with road and track racing is a mostly counterproductive

use of one's time unless of you are a LRC denizen with no date on a Monday evening.

I'm not questioning his 23-min faster descent (from 1992 to 1993) and that story totally makes sense - although it is telling that he was "gassed" from a 2:05 Ascent. Only a few guys have run the Ascent flat out in that time (Joe Gray). No doubt he had run a bunch of Ascents in the 2:05-2:10 range. He was a monster climber at altitude. That is consistent. But in 1993 he did have a 4-min improvement on his fastest Ascent en route (2:01 split) to a 10-minute improvement for his fastest downhill ever (on his best Ascents and best Descents ever...which had already been from different years). Looks like he never ran the downhill within 9-minutes of that year (1:15 split) ever. So in '93 he absolutely crushes Mejia (not close comp.) The air pressure was nothing special that day. It was over a 21-minute PR for him in the Marathon and a time and he never got within 16-minutes of that time ever again (and remember he ran Pikes A LOT and "knew every rock"). Here are his marathon progressions times for the race leading into that record in '93 and his next two marathons afterwards: 1988: 3:38 1989: 3:39 1990: 4:00 1991: 4:06 1992: 3:43 1993: 3:16 1998: 3:44 2001: 3:53 1993 stands out a bit, no?! He was already training at altitude in Vail before he moved to Manitou/CS Springs circa 1991 apparently.