yeah i was just trying to add a little more nuance.
50 will almost always be better than 36, yes. and of course we are assuming both readings being taken when optimally hydrated.
but 47 will not always be better than 43 for instance.
the problem in talking about global hemoglobin mass is that while it is much more precise, and actually what a lot of people think they are talking about when they talk about hematocrit, it's very expensive to measure. but understanding the concept would help some people in having a better grasp on our physiology and how our bodies respond to training, altitude, etc.
switching topics to genes: not all of our gene potential is being expressed constantly. isn't that why people got so excited about epi-genetics? different expressions can be activated while others go dormant. if one can accept that, i think it's not too big a bridge to cross into the idea that one's level of talent can't necessarily be known until they've explored different environments (altitude, sea-level, humidity, high heat, extreme cold) and different locales.
i content we all have more talent than we are currently expressing, at least age-graded. discovering one's talent/s is a matter of peeling back the layers consistently, and as self-knowledge edges higher and higher so too can our ability to express a talent relative to our peers.
anyway, appreciate the discussion.