Talent vs Training

You should check out Bounce a book by Mathew Syed

It maintains that talent is negligable unless you are talking about something like Sumo wrestling where your size is obviously very important..Thousands of hours of practice can do wonders..But I dont go along with it 100%..There has too be a strong element of talent handed down by a lucky mix of your parents DNA..Now couple this with hard work and indefatigable belief in what you can achieve ; then you can have fireworks...

Talent and training aren't separated. Talent is what training develops.

I've never seen anything that would suggest that genes play a role. So get out there and train!

Talent without training is a waste. But not everyone can even be a DI runner simply due to training.

Obviously genes play a huge role. Just the way you are built will be a huge factor in which sport you are more successful. Ex: Geb no matter what, would never be an NBA player, LaBron could never run a fast marathon, no matter how much he trained.

To deny that some runners are genetically "touched by God" is to deny reality. The best you can hope is to reach whatever your genetic limitations are by training hard.

EZ10Miler wrote:

Talent without training is a waste. But not everyone can even be a DI runner simply due to training.

Obviously genes play a huge role. Just the way you are built will be a huge factor in which sport you are more successful. Ex: Geb no matter what, would never be an NBA player, LaBron could never run a fast marathon, no matter how much he trained.

To deny that some runners are genetically "touched by God" is to deny reality. The best you can hope is to reach whatever your genetic limitations are by training hard.

None of that is true. There is no obvious gene play. Body shape (muscles) are determined by training. Lebron wouldn't be so big if he didn't work out. There have been several all time NBA greats that are Geb's size or a few inches taller.

It's all in your mind. Genes play very little role for normal people.

EZ10Miler wrote:

Talent without training is a waste. But not everyone can even be a DI runner simply due to training.

Obviously genes play a huge role. Just the way you are built will be a huge factor in which sport you are more successful. Ex: Geb no matter what, would never be an NBA player, LaBron could never run a fast marathon, no matter how much he trained.

To deny that some runners are genetically "touched by God" is to deny reality. The best you can hope is to reach whatever your genetic limitations are by training hard.

I don't understand the idea of a genetic limit. What exactly is limiting it?

If you guys think the only thing standing between you and an Olympic gold medal is "the perfect training plan" you're idiots.

Training, given enough time, can beat talent... or pushes talent to higher levels.

I am SO glad to hear that genes play no role at all! We might as well get rid of all our DNA since it does nothing for us in the least! It's just sitting there in our cells and taking up space like some free-loader. I am just going to do the exact same marathon training as the elites, and I'll be sure to have the world record in no time at all! Imagine the possibilities! After that, I can switch to swimming and set world records in that too. Maybe I can even set a record in the bench press or something. Then, if I really want to...I can become a grand master in chess and discover a unifying theory in physics! Thanks, Nah nah, for opening my eyes!

They're obviously trolling.

Either that, or they actually are that stupid. Never sure on online message boards.

runnerMATON wrote:

I am SO glad to hear that genes play no role at all! We might as well get rid of all our DNA since it does nothing for us in the least! It's just sitting there in our cells and taking up space like some free-loader. I am just going to do the exact same marathon training as the elites, and I'll be sure to have the world record in no time at all! Imagine the possibilities! After that, I can switch to swimming and set world records in that too. Maybe I can even set a record in the bench press or something. Then, if I really want to...I can become a grand master in chess and discover a unifying theory in physics! Thanks, Nah nah, for opening my eyes!

Well this is a dumb post.

1) Which genes/DNA prevent you from accomplishing those things?

2) there's no such thing as doing the training that elite marathoners do. Because they don't all do the same training.

3) we are talking about running which is primarily a muscular activity. Comparing it to chess or physics is dumb for that reason.

4) what about genes limits running performance

Talentortraining wrote:

Questions to consider:

How big a role does each play?

What constitutes talent?

What is the minimum amount of talent necessary to become an Olympian?

Does an "ultimate potential" exist for every runner? Why?

Here lies a few thoughts on the subject:

Obviously genes play a huge role. Just the way you are built will be a huge factor in which sport you are more successful. Ex: Geb no matter what, would never be an NBA player, LaBron could never run a fast marathon, no matter how much he trained.

-----------------------------------------------------------

+ 1

Ah, gotta love the people who truly believe that anything, including Olympic Gold, is capable in running with "hard work" and determination. They are all fools, but optimistic fools nonetheless.

Talent, my friends, is the 1st and foremost consideration in how far you can go in this sport (and all others for that matter). And yes, talent is directly related to genetics, aerobic capacity, etc.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4376724

Well, my original post was meant to be taken with a bit more humor...but, alas, the Internet does not allow for the displays of such emotion. Anyway, though, I will answer your questions since you asked so kindly. However, I will say that my answers are coming from a genetics perspective, considering that I work within such a field.

Before I answer any specifics I will say that your questions somewhat answer your original argument in a very subtle way, and that they represent a common misconception that the link between muscular and cognitive functions is at best transparent.

Okay...here goes.

1. and 4.) Genes dictate every single thing that can or cannot be accomplished by a person. Genes code specifically for every protein in our body, which directly defines every aspect of cellular function from respiration to chemical messaging intracellularly and/or extracellularly. This 'control' by DNA means that a runner, for instance, could very easily have better systems that allow for better running mechanics, energy use and storage, VO2 max, etc. These systems are able to be trained, but the person with the better systems originally will always be better than a less gifted person when doing equal or even less training.

2.) You're right! Elites do train differently, albeit by the same fundamental principals. However, there is one flaw in your statement that contradicts your original conclusion. If genes had absolutely no role in running, then everyone would and SHOULD do the same training. It's because every runners' genes make them different that alternative training methods have developed. The fact that certain people respond better to varied training styles should show you that our genetic make-up plays a direct role in what our bodies are able to sustain.

3.) Despite your adamant comment here, I still hold that the two are not so different at all when compared at the cellular level. For runners, our genes give us explicit ratios of muscle fiber types. We are born with these types, and any changes are tiny at best. Our genes also give us specific neuron connections in our brains. The very way that we think is governed by our genes. Again, at birth, a person has the capacity to be a glass half full or half empty kind of person. People with clinical depression are that way because the cells in their brains do not code for the proper amount of 'x' substance to be made or received efficiently. Understanding this idea, it's not hard to see how a person could be genetically talented in seeing patterns or thinking strategically as would be required in chess or any science for that matter. Even artists have different perspectives about the universe that are directly controlled by small amounts of chemicals, coded by DNA itself.

Anyway, I hope I answered your questions. Please feel free to ask more.

has been who never was wrote:

Obviously genes play a huge role. Just the way you are built will be a huge factor in which sport you are more successful. Ex: Geb no matter what, would never be an NBA player, LaBron could never run a fast marathon, no matter how much he trained.

-----------------------------------------------------------

+ 1

Ah, gotta love the people who truly believe that anything, including Olympic Gold, is capable in running with "hard work" and determination. They are all fools, but optimistic fools nonetheless.

Talent, my friends, is the 1st and foremost consideration in how far you can go in this sport (and all others for that matter). And yes, talent is directly related to genetics, aerobic capacity, etc.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4376724

Except that Geb and Lebron's builds aren't set in stone nor are they limiting factors (for Geb). So there is no "+1". The entire premise was wrong.

RunnerMATON

You didn't really answer my questions regarding which genes affect ability. You just provided maybes and potential ways, but no one gets their genes analyzed so you don't know what type of system you have. Until you do get tested, calling yourself untalented is weak behavior.

Regarding training the same....no. Everyone grows up differently which gives everyone different starting states when they start training. So one way to train would never work unless we were robots that had the exact same life experiences. Even twins don't start off with the same training state.

Muscle fiber ratios aren't limited to changing in tiny amounts. They can significantly change. There's no evidence that there is a limit. Every cell in the body can probably change. Did you read about the new discovery that brain cells can switch their signaling chemicals (dopamine,etc)?

It is all in your head until you can prove it otherwise.

You can't oppose the two.

You can't become an Olympian without either.

No one that possessed great talent ever made it to the Olympics without hard training.

No one that had sub-standard talent ever made the Olympics by training extra hard.

(Unless they were put in as the sole representative for their country and did not have to produce a world class performance.)

It is all in your head until you can prove it otherwise.

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4529035#ixzz1rrCdSwaU

Then why aren't you a Major League home run hitter, or the current holder of the 10,000m WR?

Is it all in your head? I think you're being obtuse and purposely trolling.

EZ10Miler wrote:

It is all in your head until you can prove it otherwise.

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4529035#ixzz1rrCdSwaU

Then why aren't you a Major League home run hitter, or the current holder of the 10,000m WR?

Is it all in your head? I think you're being obtuse and purposely trolling.

Because I don't train for either one of those events. I've offered facts. You havent

Genetics is by far the biggest factor in determining running ability.