Why do people consider running a talent?

And I a, not undermining the hard work you 16 minute guys do, you are all awesome and very mentally tough. But somewhere along the line, you HAVE to realised that you’re also talented on top of just very dedicated and hard-working?

talent beats training wrote:

Brian Herron ran 47 in the 400 in 8th grade. That's talent, not training or coaching. Grace Ping ran 16:25 in 8th grade. She is doing the same training today as then but running slower. Talent is the answer. Mary Cain peaked in her teens. Talent.

Sprinters aren’t stupid enough to fall for the “hard work” trumps talent troll; only distance runners are dumb enough for that.

Talent is the biggest factor for how fast someone is. Someone who is not that talented will never be elite no matter how much they train. That being said true champions need talent and hard work. This stuff isn't rocket science.

If you think talent doesn't play a part in success you are probably talented and just want to feel special by claiming you "work harder" than anyone else.

yens wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

Sorry, you are living proof that no amount of effort will produce the talent of intelligence.

10000 hours will.

10000 hours will only confirm what you were born with.

Elite running is all down to talent. It doesn't matter how hard you train and take care of yourself, but without talent you'll never be elite.

In Spain we've had a few late bloomers who didn't run until they were in their mid/late 20's and now are excelling in 1500m/3000m and Marathon.

I always wonder how much talent is hidden out there, and how many people that could be running fast are bulking in the gym...or being sedentary :(

Bekele is a MF talent.

WRs

2,000m 4:49 i

5,000m 12:37, 12:49 i

10,000m 26:17

Thon 2:03:03

He has done so much. XC epic. Up next is Tokyo in a few weeks where we will see his true talent unleashed again. He has been unlucky with injuries and busy with family and business but hopefully this will be a better year for him.

dont pull that card wrote:

Talent is the biggest factor for how fast someone is. Someone who is not that talented will never be elite no matter how much they train. That being said true champions need talent and hard work. This stuff isn't rocket science.

If you think talent doesn't play a part in success you are probably talented and just want to feel special by claiming you "work harder" than anyone else.

The opposite can be easily said for the slow runner that he is not willing to put his heart and soul out towards running and just blame talent for it .

Instead of pointing fingers towards who's right and wrong , how about we try to question what we already know to get a deeper perspective . I am beginning to have a strong feeling that motivation is what replaces what most people perceive as talent .

Maybe its unanswerable , maybe its unexplainable but how about we march a bit closer to the truth .

Hidden JARED TALENT wrote:

Elite running is all down to talent. It doesn't matter how hard you train and take care of yourself, but without talent you'll never be elite.

In Spain we've had a few late bloomers who didn't run until they were in their mid/late 20's and now are excelling in 1500m/3000m and Marathon.

I always wonder how much talent is hidden out there, and how many people that could be running fast are bulking in the gym...or being sedentary :(

The issue here is no one really knows exactly how these so called late bloomers lived their lives in the past and no one bothers to do a biography on them because they are not world famous . Just because they didn't partake in the sport of running in the past and suddenly got to elite level in few years time doesn't mean they are talented . They could have been physically very active in many other ways as a kid or during early years .

So the question still remains as to whether running is a talent we all possess but turn into a lesser talent with our overall lifestyle and our motivation for the sport . If so then the meaning of talent will start to mean multiple things combined and not just a simple single factor like most people think of it .

Only someone who hasn’t really put their heart and soul into running could think that if they did, they would be elite. Most people on this site have done enough running to know that no matter how much running they do they won’t run 13 minutes. Most probably trained their whole life to run 18 minutes so they know how much talent it takes to be good at running. Poor Mary Cain was mentioned but she is probably the best example that the stubborn morons can see to help convince them that running is based almost entirely on talent. As a teen, she rose to national class and near world class level. She trains as hard today in what should be her prime running years, but her talent has faded. Jim Ryun had never run and within a year or two, he was the best runner in the country.

No, that question does not remain. Everyone except morans like you and a few others recognize that talent exists in running and most humans don't have it nor do they need it.

How fast are you and how much of your potential are you pursuing?

Yes and those of us who train for a few years at run 18 flat, believe it or not still have above average talent compared to the average person. Just think about how naturally unathletic the population is as a whole and I’m not just talking about the obesity status. I grew up in the early 90s before excessive screen time so every single kid was active ... only a few were fast or fastenough to enjoy running as persue it.

This is a complete load of crap unless you're only talking about the very best D1 schools. I know plenty of guys with similar experiences as this:

“because I did it, everybody else should be able to do it”

Active as young doesnt decide wether you can be a good runner. But most people that starts young have the time to train and people that we believe are talentet will often be noticed and get into running early. They may also get epigens switch on faster.

Genes have something to say to what training you respond best to and how fast you will improve, but less on end result. But people wvo doesnt improve fast will rarelly commit as much to running

Blah blah blah. wrote:

“because I did it, everybody else should be able to do it”

What part of "I know plenty of guys with similar experiences" don't you understand? Consistency and work ethic is way more important than talent unless you're at the elite level.

I went to the same HS and college as one of my teammates. At HS, he was a pothead who skipped workouts and races, did the bare minimum to not get cut from the team, and never broke 65 in the 400 as a freshman or a sophomore. He finally got serious about academics and track in his junior year, ran sub 60 by his senior year, and ran a 54 by the time he graduated from college. He even ran one of our college 4x4 legs, though to be fair, that was only because our #3 guy was injured at the time.

Shoot, you don't have to look far. For all the hate that jamin gets, even he ran a 15 minute 5K, and I don't think he had any HS or college track experience.

Fi wrote:

Active as young doesnt decide wether you can be a good runner. But most people that starts young have the time to train and people that we believe are talentet will often be noticed and get into running early. They may also get epigens switch on faster.

Genes have something to say to what training you respond best to and how fast you will improve, but less on end result. But people wvo doesnt improve fast will rarelly commit as much to running

I would argue that unless somebody has a naturally robust metabolism, potential is absolutely decided in childhood as that is when the metabolic genes that are activated for life get turned on (or off). This is when your body is growing as is when your body is deciding what it wants to grow into. Whether you turn on your fat burning or fat hoarding genes is up to what you spend your childhood doing. Once you reach adulthood, not all of these genes can be turn back on or off.

About 1/3 to 1/2 of the country is walking (or barely walking) around with an impaired metabolism. It is widely accepted in the medical comminuty that cancer isn’t reversible, this is to do with genes being activated but so is metabolic sydrome, it isn’t always reversible and a lot of people wreck their bodies for life by being fat and lazy growing up and when they decide to try and get in shape and improve their body composition in adulthood, they find that they can’t and wonder why. They wonder why they can run their 6 minute miles yet still have a gut that will not shift, I know many like.

There is no cure for metabolic sydrome as we speak, you can lessen its appearance and impact with diet, sleep, stress management and exercise but as far as we know so far, metabolic sydrome is partially irreversible. Your childhood shapes all of this.

And you could argue that body fat% and metabolic flexibility is a HUGE part of endurance training. If you have a genetic predisposition to metabolic sydrome and cannot get under 15% body fat, even with all the training in the world, that naturally slim 6% bf guy is always going to have a vo2 advantage and you should probably switch to powerlifting.