Talent can be the best gift or the worst
Talent can be the best gift or the worst
It's all relative. Someone who can run a 4:20 mile with very little training can probably run sub 4 if they get serious. Meanwhile someone may only run a 6:00 mile and they only run 4:50 eventually with serious training. Or maybe they're a 5:15 with minimal training and a 4:28 with serious training. If you take a bunch of random people off the street and make them try a new sport that was just invented, they will not all be the same. One of them will be the best one because they have the most 'talent' at that sport. Every single one of them will get better if they practice, including the most talented one. If anyone is remotely close to the most talented person in the beginning, if the talented person doesn't work at it, the second in line person will probably become the best with a little bit of practice.
the age old saying,
hard work and talent beats hard work when hard work doesnt have talent
It takes both. There are plenty of talented people that work hard. If you rely on just talent or just hard work you will come up short.
Talent comes in different forms. There are plenty of runners who can run fast with minimal training, but when you try to train them, they get hurt all the time. Likewise, there are slower runners who take a long time to reach their potential, but rarely get hurt. There are also runners who can run fast with minimal training and never get hurt with training, and they are truly gifted.
But there's even more nuance to it than that. There's a concept called "trainability." Some people are "high responders" - they might start off slower than others with minimal training, but respond a lot better to training and end up faster than their peers in the end.
No one knows when you will reach your potential or how fast you can run. That's part of the beauty of the sport.
"Hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard. But when talent works hard *points to self* you're f***ed." - Craig Lutz about winning nxn his junior year
That is just not true the majority of the time. A sub 4 miler can run 5 minutes on no training while 95% of the people can't run sub 5 regardless of training.
It's generally, but not always true. Like Roger Bannister ran a 4:24 mile at 18 years old only training for 30 minutes a day 3 days a week. Many people can run 90 mpw and dedicate their life to it and never come close to that time. But when someone talented like Bannister works hard they achieve great things, which he did.
If you do not have the talent, no amount of training will make a man run sub 11 for the 100M.
Day 1 the talented kid beats the hard working kid.
Day 1,000 the hard working kid destroys the talented kid.
I have seen this play out many times. And I have been that hard working kid myself.
Appreciation?? wrote:
Talent comes in different forms. There are plenty of runners who can run fast with minimal training, but when you try to train them, they get hurt all the time. Likewise, there are slower runners who take a long time to reach their potential, but rarely get hurt. There are also runners who can run fast with minimal training and never get hurt with training, and they are truly gifted.
But there's even more nuance to it than that. There's a concept called "trainability." Some people are "high responders" - they might start off slower than others with minimal training, but respond a lot better to training and end up faster than their peers in the end.
No one knows when you will reach your potential or how fast you can run. That's part of the beauty of the sport.
There's truth to this in the sense that until you try you can't know if you have talent.
Once you've trained for a few years and can't run a 5k in 17 minutes, it's clear you've not got much talent. With sprinting and jumping the talent or it's absence is evident on the first few tries. I can't dunk a basketball however much I train.
citius5000 wrote:
Day 1 the talented kid beats the hard working kid.
Day 1,000 the hard working kid destroys the talented kid.
I have seen this play out many times. And I have been that hard working kid myself.
This is only true if their basic talent levels are similar. Most folks just can't run 5k in 16 minutes.
citius5000 wrote:
Day 1 the talented kid beats the hard working kid.
Day 1,000 the hard working kid destroys the talented kid.
I have seen this play out many times. And I have been that hard working kid myself.
No you haven’t seen it many times. This is made up. This is a myth that many Letsrun posters cling to.
The premise is dumb. For some reason it’s always presented this way. Reality never plays out the way you’ve outlined.
bulwinkle wrote:
citius5000 wrote:
Day 1 the talented kid beats the hard working kid.
Day 1,000 the hard working kid destroys the talented kid.
I have seen this play out many times. And I have been that hard working kid myself.
This is only true if their basic talent levels are similar. Most folks just can't run 5k in 16 minutes.
Are you sure about that? Imagine if every man in the world loved distance running. You think most would fail to run 16:00 at their max potential?
I would be more inclined to believe that 16:00 5k runners are rare simply because it takes many years of hard training for most people to get there, not because most people lack the genetic ability to get there.
It's almost entirely about genetic talent.v like 95%. The other few percent is diet sleep and finally hard work.
When I ran D1 the incoming class was diverse but we all trained exactly the same with the same level of dedication.
After a year some guys snuck under 16, some guys ran 1355.
No donkeys in the Kentucky Derby
"You think most would fail to run 16:00 at their max potential?"
I think most would fail to break 20, maybe even 25. I know you guys think it's all about people being overweight, but there are plenty of skinny people that are just "slow", relative to you and the other self selectors.
"Imagine if every man in the world loved distance running."
This is even more farfetched than that they would break 16:00...
citius5000 wrote:
Day 1 the talented kid beats the hard working kid.
Day 1,000 the hard working kid destroys the talented kid.
I have seen this play out many times. And I have been that hard working kid myself.
Until you step outside of competition within your team.
Appreciation?? wrote:
bulwinkle wrote:
This is only true if their basic talent levels are similar. Most folks just can't run 5k in 16 minutes.
Are you sure about that? Imagine if every man in the world loved distance running. You think most would fail to run 16:00 at their max potential?
I would be more inclined to believe that 16:00 5k runners are rare simply because it takes many years of hard training for most people to get there, not because most people lack the genetic ability to get there.
You would be wrong.
@Appreciation wrote:
"You think most would fail to run 16:00 at their max potential?"
I think most would fail to break 20, maybe even 25. I know you guys think it's all about people being overweight, but there are plenty of skinny people that are just "slow", relative to you and the other self selectors.
"Imagine if every man in the world loved distance running."
This is even more farfetched than that they would break 16:00...
Grown men? Most grown men would fail to break 20:00? This is either a troll reply or you are new to running
Young men who fail to break 20:00 are not actually trying that hard to get faster