02/05/2026
Iโve been asked multiple times this week around my thoughts on Lindsey Vonnโs decision to pursue another Olympic campaign while living with an ACL-deficient knee that occurred on 30 Jan.
Understandably to many outside the elite sport set up, often due to myths and misconceptions around injury, it seems to have sparked strong opinions, but much of the public conversation misses the reality of how elite sport, elite rehabilitation, and elite decision-making actually work.
Having worked with high performance athletes making these very decisions, I wanted to share some of the likely decisions, conversations and risk management strategies that have led to this decision.
Obviously I donโt have specific insider knowledge on this particular case, but itโs an education opinion based on my professional experience.
The key message is that this is not a case of an athlete recklessly ignoring a fresh injury or charging downhill on a swollen, unstable knee.
Vonn has lived with complex knee pathology for years, has undergone extensive rehabilitation and multiple surgical procedures across her career, and has repeatedly demonstrated that she can train and compete with a knee post significant injury.
In sports medicine terms, she falls into what is often described as a โcoperโ category: an athlete who, through exceptional strength, neuromuscular control, movement strategy, and task-specific adaptation, can function at a very high level, potentially despite the absence of a ligament that is traditionally viewed as essential.
Importantly, her situation exists within a tightly controlled ecosystem that most recreational athletes and general public never experience โ daily access to rehab and treatment, sports physios and physicians, frequent imaging and performance testing, individualised strength and conditioning, constant load monitoring, and ongoing reassessment of risk within a tight knot, first class multidisciplinary team well versed in managing these risk / reward scenarios, specifically when such a big prize is within a defined and explicit time period.
That framework turns unknown danger into managed risk.
It also matters that downhill skiing, while undeniably hazardous, is largely predictable and sagittal-plane dominant, with stiff boots and the option of bracing that can offer additional mechanical support, making it more compatible with an ACL-deficient knee than many cutting and pivoting field sports such as rugby, basketball and football, which is where Iโm sure most of the comments of negativity and doubt will be coming from, as these sports have a lower threshold for managing the potential ACL deficient risk.
None of this suggests the choice is risk-free; Vonn will be acutely aware of the possibility of further exacerbation or injury and any potential affect on her long-term knee health.
But elite sport has always involved conscious acceptance of risk. The crucial point is autonomy: Vonn is not being coerced, misled, or left uninformed. She is an exceptionally experienced athlete, supported by a multidisciplinary medical team, choosing to pursue a time-limited, deeply meaningful goal with full understanding of the potential consequences.
That reality can coexist with the message that this is not a model for recreational athletes and not a blanket endorsement of competing with an ACL rupture. It is, instead, a highly individualised exception โ a reflection of extraordinary preparation, supervision, and personal choice, rather than recklessness.
We donโt know if and how she will perform at this stage, we simply know the risk of trying in order to achieve such a potential reward has been carefully considered and deemed acceptable at this stage, whilst a carefully managed and controlled review and monitoring plan is in place.
This does not mean โYou should play (insert sport) with a torn ACLโ, or that โSurgery is unnecessaryโ, or that โRehab alone is always enoughโ
It means elite cases are individualised exceptions, not templates. Most recreational and sub-elite athletes do not have the same neuromuscular capacity, do not have the same support systems and perhaps most importantly, do not face Olympic-level decision calculus.
This story is not about glorifying injury.
It is about:
Long-term adaptation
Exceptional physical preparation
Medical oversight
Informed risk-taking
Athlete autonomy
Most of the perceived controversy comes from the shock and awe media reporting and sensationalism.
Perhaps a more accurate headline would be:
โAthlete with chronic ACL-deficient knee, extensive rehab history, and full medical support chooses to pursue one final Olympic cycle after comprehensive risk assessment.โ
That doesnโt sound as sensational โ but it is far closer to reality.
