Genetics make a difference?

While it is true that genetics make a sizeable difference in determining the ideal event, anyone can achieve above average, whatever that means, performance in any event with hard work. It is probably easier for a successful sprinter to transition than for a distance runner. Reason being, fast twitch muscles are hard to come by. No matter how some people work they may never be able to improve their vertical or 40 yard time after a certain point. And I think that point is realized alot faster than the max potential point in distance training. Some scientists believe you are born with a pre-determined potential for maximizing your fast twitch ability. Anyone can add slow twitch by doing distance runs. This doesn't mean everyone can become an elite distance runner. I know everyone wants to point the finger for drug use, but I feel it is no coincidence Kenyans, on average, dominate. There genetic disposition derives from generations of mountain living, simple diet, and high amounts of running out of neccessity rather than for training. This has caused an evolutionary process that over time has created a group of people with longer legs, shorter torsos, and effortless strides.

Genetics plays a HUGE role in my opinion. We can all certainly get the most out of our ability by training properly and racing to get experience with it and so on, but at some point genetics has to play a role.

In high school, I did EXACTLY the same workouts and training as the other varsity guys on the team, but when it came to race day, I beat them by a minute+ in CC and at least 45 seconds in the 3200 in track. I look back and wish I had trained more, but I didn't know any better then, and neither did my coaches.

Personally I think to be good at the sprints requires more God-given ability than being good at distances. If you just don't have it in the 100 meters, no amount of training is going to allow you to find it, but with distance races, you can improve greatly by simply doing the work.

A different set of genes will make for a different expression of energy. In the same species the varyance obviously isn't as great when comparing seperate species, but to take your question to the extreme...have you ever raced a horse, whippet, cheetah, ostrich, snail, tree, etc.? the first several wouldn't have to train at all to beat you, and you wouldn't have to train at all to beat the last few.

Could Maurice be ever beat Bob Kennedy in a 10k? Could Nicole Teter beat Wilson Kipketer? Could Bob Kennedy beat Maurice in the 100m? Simply No. No, no matter what, as long as they train as hard as they respectively do. This has everything to do with Genetics, 70% Genetics, 15% work and motivation to achieve more, 10% nutrition, 5% spiritual or whatever else helps one compete well.

OK. Those seem like good percentages to me.

What about twins that are obviously different? Twins can have body type differences and heighth differences. I'm willing to go 50% genetics but anything above that is pushing it considering the differences that people with the same genes have. I do like the other %s though, with nutrition and spirituality/motivation.

Florence Griffith Joyner

Best 100 meters: 10.49

Best 5000 meters: 20+

My old coach used to say "genetics is EVERYTHING, period." That just seems to bare itself out in everything in life.

Several years ago I attended an event where David Hemery (68 gold medalist and wr holder in the 400 m hurdles) spoke. He said that he at one time he thought that genetics was 70% of what mattered and hard work the other 30%. After winning the gold in mexico and the silver and bronze in munich, he changed that to somthing like 50/50. Obviously genetics is huge, but hard work is not to be dismissed. It's when you put the two together that great things happen!