Zola Budd's daughter--talk about genetics! Wow.

ksu wrote:There is a simple answer: no one knows if genes have anything to do with it.

Actually, people know that genes have something to do with it but can't say exactly what is genetic and what is not in any particular case.

Get edumacated wrote:

ksu wrote:There is a simple answer: no one knows if genes have anything to do with it.

Actually, people know that genes have something to do with it but can't say exactly what is genetic and what is not in any particular case.

That means that they don't know if genes have anything to do with it.

Why don't most people consider personality as the most important genetic trait in these discussions? How much you want something is surely a genetic trait?

jono wrote:

Why don't most people consider personality as the most important genetic trait in these discussions? How much you want something is surely a genetic trait?

Why is that surely a genetic trait?

ppdo wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Good grief. Most of you think that if you just train hard enough or smart enough or long enough that you'll be able to drop some elite times. BS. Doesn't work that way. Tune up a Yugo all you want, it's not going to outrun a Ferrari.

Genetics is THE biggest thing for POTENTIAL in an athlete. Budd's daughter has it.

Whose genes would she have if not her parents?

And how do you even know that she and her mother have the same genetics?

Bad Wigins wrote:

You don't think maybe Zola taught her everything she knows?

Nothing genetic about it. If your parent is an expert at something, you've got an excellent chance of being even better than them, even if you're adopted.

Knowledge about running isn't the main thing. We can train and eat and sleep to be the best we can be, but the limit is ultimately governed by your inherent talent...genes. Lots of you for some reason don't want to believe that, and I'm not sure why that is. Don't a lot of you run a LOT and train pretty much the best way possible? Do you all think that somehow if you got into Salazar's group that you'd be world class runners?

Better training will help a little bit, but assuming you are already doing ENOUGH training, tweaking it a little bit isn't going to turn you from 3rd best on your mediocre team to one of the best in the country.

ksu wrote:That means that they don't know if genes have anything to do with it.

kdidi wrote:

SMJO wrote:

Because you are one of those people who is convinced that stuff like that will usurp the genetic component.

I never said I was convinced that stuff like that will usurp the genetic component. What are you talking about?

Let's just assume when a post comes up with the user name of a few random letters who repetitively spews some variation of "They don't know if there is a gene etc. etc." that it's you posting and people like you invariably believe that any manner of wishful thinking is the key to athletic success.

Get edumacated wrote:

ksu wrote:That means that they don't know if genes have anything to do with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_ignorance_fallacy

People who argue like this have a gene that predisposes them to it.

Get edumacated wrote:

ksu wrote:That means that they don't know if genes have anything to do with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible_ignorance_fallacy

You're talking about yourself.

You say that they know that genes have something to do with it but don't know exactly what. That is the same as saying they don't know if genes have anything to do with it or not. You're using your own statements to deny your own statements.

How do you know genes have something to do with it if you can't say exactly how much???

SMJO wrote:

Let's just assume when a post comes up with the user name of a few random letters who repetitively spews some variation of "They don't know if there is a gene etc. etc." that it's you posting and people like you invariably believe that any manner of wishful thinking is the key to athletic success.

I don't invariably believe that any manner of wishful thinking is the key to athletic success and I never said I did. You keep accusing me of things and putting words in my mouth. Why?

Because you don't have the intellect to form your own thoughts into words..

kdidi wrote:

I don't invariably believe that any manner of wishful thinking is the key to athletic success and I never said I did. You keep accusing me of things and putting words in my mouth. Why?

a valid argument so he's acting like a fool

The people who argue against genetics being a major factor in athletic ability probably think that the 'pro-genetics' people are talking about a 'running gene' that makes you good at running.

The problem is at the very basic level of understanding.

Kudos to you wrote:

SB wrote:

...

Why does so much discussion on this board have to devolve into the most simple-minded ideological non-debates? For instance, you know that underlying this discussion so far is the "libtard" belief that anyone can be great if they only try hard enough, versus the "libertarian-tard" assertion that any and all observable social hierarchies are embedded in immutable natural differences. These are not the only options.

Hey, you used, 'libtard'! Nice job! Now I know your post should be taken seriously.

You don't understand the function of quotation marks in this context, do you?

Flagpole wrote:

Knowledge about running isn't the main thing. We can train and eat and sleep to be the best we can be, but the limit is ultimately governed by your inherent talent...genes. Lots of you for some reason don't want to believe that, and I'm not sure why that is. Don't a lot of you run a LOT and train pretty much the best way possible? Do you all think that somehow if you got into Salazar's group that you'd be world class runners?

If knowledge weren't the main thing, you wouldn't need coaches. Running fast is a skill.

But you misunderstand anyway. The main thing is development. The adult is not determined by the coding proteins but by what the child does. Environment determines what coding genes are switched on and off, and when. Most people have the right coding genes to be great athletes, but if they're not on at the right time while they're developing, once they're adults it's too late. Zola Budd's daughter was probably running, training effectively and adapting physically from a very early age, whereas most runners don't start until high school.

Salazar might not turn me into a world-class runner. But what if he adopted a 5-year-old orphan? I'd be surprised to see the kid not grow up to be an elite.

Wow. You really believe that if Alberto Salazar adopted some random kid that just because he grows up around Salazar (and supposedly Salazar makes him train) that he would become an elite runner? Ok then. We have nothing to discuss.

Bad Wigins wrote:Salazar might not turn me into a world-class runner. But what if he adopted a 5-year-old orphan? I'd be surprised to see the kid not grow up to be an elite.

So you are saying if Salazar adopted a 5-year old Ryan Whiting he would turn out to be an elite distance runner? Not likely.

Professional running is full of elite athletes who grew up training in different sports (swimming, soccer, basketball) but switched to running because they turned out to be good at running and not at the sport they really wanted to do. Epigenetics and training no doubt make a significant difference but some people just lack the underlying potential to be elite in a particular sport however much they train.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Salazar might not turn me into a world-class runner. But what if he adopted a 5-year-old orphan? I'd be surprised to see the kid not grow up to be an elite.

How old was Galen? Years ago Salazar was the speaker at a marathon expo. He said he believes we would have more great runners if we could start training them from a very early age like gymnasts, baseball, basketball, tennis, etc. Young kids routinely get shipped off to gymnast or tennis camp where they train and compete year around and are schooled by tutors. That isn't happening in running.

Prince Fielder was taking batting practice on major league fields when he was 12. The only gene he got was the fat gene.

I understand some people are predisposed to be better at some things than others so it is really about finding what you have the capability to be the best at.