[connie]

Okay, I was thinking of responding with this in the thread about the girl who is terrified of riding, but I figured I'd really be hijacking that thread...

I was reading an old ski magazine the other day and noticed a little article I must have skipped before. Basically, it said that they tested a large group of people by timing them on a ski racing course and then measured the relative length of their index and ring fingers. Basically, people (especially women) who have ring fingers longer than their index fingers were always faster. If your ring finger is longer than your index finger, it's because you had more testosterone as you were developing in the womb - it's set by three months. Especially in women, this means you're more likely to be fearless or be a risk-taker and are prone to be better at sports like skiing. (I'm sure it applies to biking too, but it was in a ski mag).

Anyway, sure enough, my ring fingers are longer than my index fingers. Anyone else?

Interesting to see a scientific aspect of this vs. the normal experience-based aspect of fear and risk-taking. I wouldn't think it means that you can't love or learn to love riding if you're not genetically set up for it, but it might influence the way you learn at a minimum.

 

[MallieD]

very interesting

Hey Connie,

That's very interesting. My ring fingers are shorter than my index fingers, so maybe that's why I'm slow (I'm looking for any excuse)!!

On a more serious note, the lack of lengthy ring fingers doesn't seem to have affected my athleticism overall. I was a goalkeeper (soccer) from the time I was quite young. It's a position that requires the ability to sacrifice the body (lots of broken fingers, toes, twice broken nose and numerous contusions and concussions), so for me, at the very least, the research doesn't apply in terms of overall willingness to try scary things like mountain biking.

Now, the relation between speed and finger length sounds more targeted. So, while I might not mind bouncing off rocks and roots, it might relate to my average speed which is currently not as fast as I'd like it to be.

I'd be interested in learning more about this. Thanks for posting this. I hope you get lots of responses.

 

[mbrmegan]

interesting article

well my ring finger is longer than my index finger.

I am a risk taker and always have been one.
Once I met my husband and he taught me to ski better, I went down every double black diamond that he took me too.
Now that i am mountain biking I take any trail that comes along - sometimes I walk - but keep coming back until I can nail it.

Hubby is the same way - he just started mountainbiking a few weeks ago and already did an endo - almost - (he caught himself at the last second) last evening on a muddy wet rooted gnarly trail he decided to try on a whim

Okay, I was thinking of responding with this in the thread about the girl who is terrified of riding, but I figured I'd really be hijacking that thread...

I was reading an old ski magazine the other day and noticed a little article I must have skipped before. Basically, it said that they tested a large group of people by timing them on a ski racing course and then measured the relative length of their index and ring fingers. Basically, people (especially women) who have ring fingers longer than their index fingers were always faster. If your ring finger is longer than your index finger, it's because you had more testosterone as you were developing in the womb - it's set by three months. Especially in women, this means you're more likely to be fearless or be a risk-taker and are prone to be better at sports like skiing. (I'm sure it applies to biking too, but it was in a ski mag).

Anyway, sure enough, my ring fingers are longer than my index fingers. Anyone else?

Interesting to see a scientific aspect of this vs. the normal experience-based aspect of fear and risk-taking. I wouldn't think it means that you can't love or learn to love riding if you're not genetically set up for it, but it might influence the way you learn at a minimum.

 

[connie]

Evidently it's a staticstical indicator of all sorts of things...

http://segate.sunet.se/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0210&L=ethology&F=&S=&P=447

 

[divs]

Mine are about equal length. Maybe that explains why I'm such a big chicken on the trails. I'm gradually learning to take little risks here there...and that crashing once in a while is OK. I'm learning to be proud of my bruises & scratches, too.

-D.

 

[Spike]

"Science"

Medical studies come up with some pretty weird correlations, many of which I take with a huge grain of salt. (Or is it sand...?)

My index and ring fingers are about equal on my right hand, but the ring finger is longer on the left hand. And I am NOT a big risk taker mtber, so I guess that means I'm a right-handed biker. ;-)

Spike

 

[MallieD]

still interesting, but Spike's right...

although I already posted on this once, I will again...

I just took a a very careful look at my fingers and my ring fingers are actually significantly shorter than my index fingers. That would mean I'd be on the very low end of the testosterone transfer, meaning I'd be an incredibly timid person when it came to athletics. My parents, family & friends would beg to differ!

Connie, any chance of you scanning in the article. I'd like to read it. Or tell me what mag/issue date? It still sounds interesting, but perhaps a bit one sided.

 

[CarolinaGrl]

Both of my ring fingers are longer though this is more pronounced on my right hand. Maybe that's why I only have to shave the right side of my back??

 

[connie]

although I already posted on this once, I will again...

I just took a a very careful look at my fingers and my ring fingers are actually significantly shorter than my index fingers. That would mean I'd be on the very low end of the testosterone transfer, meaning I'd be an incredibly timid person when it came to athletics. My parents, family & friends would beg to differ!

Connie, any chance of you scanning in the article. I'd like to read it. Or tell me what mag/issue date? It still sounds interesting, but perhaps a bit one sided.

I'll look for it again when I get home to let you know where I saw it.

 

[AZtortoise]

very interesting. both my ring fingers are longer than the index. i am not that ballsy though. on the other hand, i rarely see women in my age bracket on bikes(i am 50). does that explain the observation that many of us are/were tomboys?

Rita

 

[downhilldoll]

Okay, I was thinking of responding with this in the thread about the girl who is terrified of riding, but I figured I'd really be hijacking that thread...

I was reading an old ski magazine the other day and noticed a little article I must have skipped before. Basically, it said that they tested a large group of people by timing them on a ski racing course and then measured the relative length of their index and ring fingers. Basically, people (especially women) who have ring fingers longer than their index fingers were always faster. If your ring finger is longer than your index finger, it's because you had more testosterone as you were developing in the womb - it's set by three months. Especially in women, this means you're more likely to be fearless or be a risk-taker and are prone to be better at sports like skiing. (I'm sure it applies to biking too, but it was in a ski mag).

Anyway, sure enough, my ring fingers are longer than my index fingers. Anyone else?

Interesting to see a scientific aspect of this vs. the normal experience-based aspect of fear and risk-taking. I wouldn't think it means that you can't love or learn to love riding if you're not genetically set up for it, but it might influence the way you learn at a minimum.

hhmmmmmmmmm.....both of my ring fingers are longer.
ok so next time im racing, i will take a pole and see if im faster than the shorter index finger gals. if not what can i use as an excuse??
lis

 

[oldbroad]

Whoa, both of my ring fingers are much longer than my index fingers!
I was going to say I was not a risk taker until I got older, but then got to thinking about when I was a kid and jumping off the barn rafters into the hay piles at my uncle's farm, climbing trees, and teasing my older sister into a frothing rage. (That last one was the riskiest of all!)
Mmmm, that might also explain why I'm really good at putting up & mudding wallboard.

Quick survey of my 2 daughters: Older one - both ring fingers a bit longer - risk taker? not really, but much, much more out going than her younger sister. Younger one - left hand = much longer ring, right hand = equal lenght - not a risk taker & sort of shy.

 

[connie]

I'll look for it again when I get home to let you know where I saw it.

Skiing - Feb 2003, page 116.

At Your Fingertips: Your skiing destiny could be revealed by the lengths of your digits. Written by Evelyn Spence. Based on a study by JT Manning in Liverpool, England.

 

[pfunk]

bizare

hmmmmmm there must be many variables. My ring fingers are both either equal or slightly shorter. It's kinda hard to tell.

1) I've always been a tom boy.

2) I was never aggressive in any sport UNTIL I found mountain biking.

3) It's taking risk, and over coming fear that keeps me interested.

4) I've ridden flat peddals for 3.5 years, because I'm too chicken to try clipping in.

5) Flats allow me to take more risks (as does armor)

hmmmmmmm. interesting