March 28, 2024, 03:02:13 AM

Author Topic: On the topic of "natural" talent  (Read 3036 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dwn

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray"
    • View Profile
    • Arsenal Now!
On the topic of "natural" talent
« on: January 26, 2011, 12:46:38 PM »
Recent read a book called Talent is Overrated. The general idea is that they've done numerous studies on performance and the result don't suggest that "natural talent" exists. Regardless of the activity, (whether it was sport, music, business etc.), studies of the top performers in the world (for example Tiger Woods, Mozart etc.) all show that there was nothing "natural" about their ability. Rather than having some sort of natural predisposition, top performance is a function of time committed and quality of practice.

Time committed is usually a function of what age the person started doing their respective activity, and the amount of time per day they practiced. Quality of practice is usually a function of their coach's knowledge and ability to design practice that is deliberately focused on that individual. It also talks about the difference between what average performers call practice (typically repetition), and how top performers practice (termed deliberate practice). The latter is specifically designed to correct what you're not good at.

This is just a brief summary of what I got from it, but it was a very interesting book. It made me think Trinidad football and the commonly heard sentiment that we have a lot of footballing talent. (I recently read an article where a sports writer said we arguably have as much talent per capita as England or Spain ???)

I often ask myself why are we so attached to that idea of our wealth talent, and make it such a significant point, when there really isn't any real way of measuring it. To me its always just been a sort of feel good idea that we throw around that bears no real consequence on the quality of our national football, or doesn't differentiate us from any other country (doesn't every country have tons of talent? how can we even judge?)

I also always think that it's a kind of self defeating idea to believe that we have some sort of a natural advantage through our "talent", because it gives us this inflated (if not false) sense of our potential and (perhaps) fools us into thinking that there's a natural or "granted" element to being a top performer, or that being really one of the best performers at a given activity comes easy* for some people. It can also be bad in that if we fail, we blame our lack of talent rather than or our lack of adequate preparation/practice/dedication. (Or in the case of Trinidad football, blame our coaches because we believe that our players have so much talent!)

*On things being easy for some people what I mean is this. I'm sure if you study the lives of Maradona, Michael Jordan or any top athlete you will find that they started at a really early age, and practiced more than other people. By the time people started saying they were exceptional talents they had most likely already practiced 100s or 1,000s of hours more than other people their age. Sometimes its not as direct a relation between practice and ability, and sometimes genetics do play a role (height, etc), but more often than not the people who pick things up "easier" usually have some sort of "non-natural" development that other people didn't have. (Another thing that's notable is that "child prodigies" often don't end up being the top performers in adulthood.)

Anyway, just my thoughts (particularly after reading that book). Any ideas?
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 12:52:17 PM by dwn »

Offline Touches

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
  • Trow wine on she...
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2011, 01:09:17 PM »
What about shit talk...does it explain why some have the ability easier than others?   ;D

They have some talented people on this forum and I don't believe that it is hrs of conversing with like kind that give rise to their superior level.

I believe DAT IS NATURAL  :rotfl:


But under all kicks...I do believe that some people are "naturally" better than others and that some people are predisposed to a certain skill.

So why could some people pick up a skill quickly with little or no training, while another person with all kinda training and hrs put in and achieve the same result.

Same way they have fellas who could skim a book once and memorise the entire thing down to punctuation marks and they have others who have to write it out like pennance just to remember a 3 lines.

Hear wha! send meh a copy of the book...I waiting for the other one and we will discuss in March when I see you.





A for apple, B for Bat, C for yuhself!

Offline Touches

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
  • Trow wine on she...
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2011, 01:20:44 PM »
DWN

I find the book online...hehehe

We go chat...Look it Here

« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 01:37:05 PM by Touches »


A for apple, B for Bat, C for yuhself!

Offline DeSoWa

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3542
  • Life. Passion. FOOTBALL!
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2011, 01:33:21 PM »
I still believe that some people  just "naturally have it" than others. But practice do make perfect though!  :beermug:

Big Up!
Warrior Nation Member

Forward Thinking does not mean you cannot reflect on the Past!

Offline ZANDOLIE

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4334
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2011, 01:36:58 PM »
Have not read the book but the original research that underlies it was in large part due to work by Dr. Anders-Ericsson in the 1980's and 1990s. One of the most influential papers is called 'The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance'.  It is easyily found on a google search if you are interested, but its a little long.

Also Malcolm gladwell did an excellent synopsis of this work in 'Outliers', where he used theories of deliberate practice to critique anecdotal arguments that success is solely the result of talent. He also relates that the quality of the experience is essential to success.

The quality of the experience is what we are lacking. Other nations are ahead of us by dint of the efforts placed on coaching and suppling an environment to both encourage and incubate talent at an early age. When foreign coaches visit they always say we have talent, but they never commend us on our coaching programs.

Having been a national university and a national military champion in my particular sport here in Canada, and having seen  competitors with as much or more talent than me in Trinidad not achieving to their potential, and also having been a coach that has led several teams to gold and silver medals in provincial and national  competition its clear to me that the general coaching and competition climate in some T&T sports is very poor.  

We tend to look at coaching as a mechanistic, hierarchical and unidirectional and we tend to look at a narrow range of skills in players. Coaches blame players for failing to carry out instructions, yet are often unaware or hostile toward opening up two way communications or striving to adapt to the learning style of individual players. There is a saying...there is no such thing as a bad player, only a bad coach. Anyway, just my two cents

« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 01:40:23 PM by ZANDOLIE »
Sacred cows make the best hamburger

Offline Touches

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
  • Trow wine on she...
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2011, 01:39:25 PM »
After reading the first few pages I have come to the conclusion that Bendtner probably read this book and is a work in progress.

Mentally he feel he dey but in reality he is a goat...however with deliberate practice he can be a golden boot winner.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 01:41:05 PM by Touches »


A for apple, B for Bat, C for yuhself!

Offline maxg

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #6 on: January 26, 2011, 01:46:30 PM »
agree with both Zanders(everything) & Touches (except on the Bendtner part, doh depending on yuh support system - especially warrior system, yuh could have a talented shithound - and they will always be a work in progress, no matter what dey achieve  ::))

Offline dwn

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray"
    • View Profile
    • Arsenal Now!
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #7 on: January 26, 2011, 01:48:07 PM »
So why could some people pick up a skill quickly with little or no training, while another person with all kinda training and hrs put in and achieve the same result.

I think the idea is that they developed something that allows them to pick it up faster, but whatever it is they developed didn't come to them naturally.

Like if two adults decide they going and try to pick up tennis, both of them might have never played before, but maybe one was a more active child and developed better coordination at an early age through physical activities. It could be something innocuous that has nothing to do with tennis (like chasing butterflies and playing catch  ;D). But the point is that person would be the one who would pick it up easier, because of some sort of developmental difference, rather than through some sort of innate talent. Also, because your physical attributes develop differently when you're a child, the person who doesn't pick it up as easy will have a much harder time developing that coordination later in life.

I think a lot of it comes down to what you see as natural and how you define talent. But the main point is that its developed through some sort of traceable means (rather than something you're born with) even if you are not aware of what caused it.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 02:06:12 PM by dwn »

Offline dwn

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray"
    • View Profile
    • Arsenal Now!
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #8 on: January 26, 2011, 02:01:39 PM »
Also Malcolm gladwell did an excellent synopsis of this work in 'Outliers', where he used theories of deliberate practice to critique anecdotal arguments that success is solely the result of talent. He also relates that the quality of the experience is essential to success.

The quality of the experience is what we are lacking. Other nations are ahead of us by dint of the efforts placed on coaching and suppling an environment to both encourage and incubate talent at an early age. When foreign coaches visit they always say we have talent, but they never commend us on our coaching programs.

Having been a national university and a national military champion in my particular sport here in Canada, and having seen  competitors with as much or more talent than me in Trinidad not achieving to their potential, and also having been a coach that has led several teams to gold and silver medals in provincial and national  competition its clear to me that the general coaching and competition climate in some T&T sports is very poor.  

Right. The book touches on stuff like this. Its hard to really get into the fact specifics in a short post. But I think everything you said (esp the part about other countries being ahead because they've invested in early development), supports the argument that 'talent is overrated' and that proper systems for development are more important.

Also talent has many definitions, so when we say a footballers has talent, that definition has more to do with the player's ability (including that which they've acquired through training). Whereas the idea of "talent" that these theories are challenging refers more to something that's innate or acquired through something inexplicable. 

Offline Touches

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
  • Trow wine on she...
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #9 on: January 26, 2011, 02:25:52 PM »
Dwn the book going good but let me give you a real life example.

I am coaching children 3-5 yrs old football.

Many of them cant even walk some start at 2.5 yrs old still in pampers. Most of the exercises they do for the first time and they are just discovering their bodies and motor skills...standing on one foot, jumpin, walking to the side balance etc.

I would agree that at the end of the season all of them are proficient enough to do the exercises...granted I do not know what they do during the week and if any of them practice, but you do see improvements in each session.

But amongst the group a disparity exists between who doing it smoother, faster, easier, more comfortable etc.

Now over the three or so yrs that I have been doing this every season ....there will be one child, who will just make you say WOW...so advanced over all his/her peers and doing things for the first time with ease and comfort that big children cant do.

There is a little expat child close to three...the youth in pampers and could strike a ball clean, harder than most, both feet, volley, moving ball, trapping, the timing everything spot on and the parents say....he just so from birth. He could play cricket, tennis, golf everything, catch a ball, ...he just has an ability.

My point is, he is too young to be able to put any sort of time or dedication into his new activities. The toddler just is able to do these actions....I think while what I have read has merit, "Specialness" or "Talent" is a real thing and you are able to see it easily.

The Pele's, maradonnas, Zidanes and Messi's no doubt trained hard to reach where they reach but from small they had a level that training cyar make yuh reach no matter how good a student you are.
   



A for apple, B for Bat, C for yuhself!

giggsy11

  • Guest
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #10 on: January 26, 2011, 02:37:33 PM »
I disagree that talent is overrated. I believe you need to have some talent that when  you introduce hardwork it can produce and an outstanding athlete, entertainer, scholar, doctor ect. I believe we each have our particular talent which is then up to us develop that talent. Talent, hardwork and passion as well as the mental aspect are some of the ingredients for success. which is why some people are successful, more successful or less successful. It appears that Malcom Gladwell books, IMO appear to work of the same theory; the small things make the biggest difference.

Offline maxg

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #11 on: January 26, 2011, 02:46:46 PM »
agree, and to further the above points, i old enuff to have seen kids similarly at an early age, demostrate such early skill levels, and grown into total non-athletes, due to loss of interest, mental rejection or some other issues... however, the talent was there...What may seem as inexplainable, could also be due to generation transference..thus they might seemed to have been born with it, but in fact it could be genetic, sometimes even skipping a generation, wherby you would hear reference "he runs..etc..just like his grand-dad", amny studies do not account for that, as factual research is rarely acquired across generations, only visual and memmory if lucky...thus yes, they could have been born with it

and there are the late bloomers who demonstrated no 'skill' until a particular time in their maturity, and just seem to appear suddenly....but studies have shown, it could also have been the same with their previous generations as well

add: Darwin et al
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 02:51:07 PM by maxg »

Offline dwn

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray"
    • View Profile
    • Arsenal Now!
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2011, 02:50:24 PM »
Dwn the book going good but let me give you a real life example.

I am coaching children 3-5 yrs old football.

Many of them cant even walk some start at 2.5 yrs old still in pampers. Most of the exercises they do for the first time and they are just discovering their bodies and motor skills...standing on one foot, jumpin, walking to the side balance etc.

I would agree that at the end of the season all of them are proficient enough to do the exercises...granted I do not know what they do during the week and if any of them practice, but you do see improvements in each session.

But amongst the group a disparity exists between who doing it smoother, faster, easier, more comfortable etc.

Now over the three or so yrs that I have been doing this every season ....there will be one child, who will just make you say WOW...so advanced over all his/her peers and doing things for the first time with ease and comfort that big children cant do.

There is a little expat child close to three...the youth in pampers and could strike a ball clean, harder than most, both feet, volley, moving ball, trapping, the timing everything spot on and the parents say....he just so from birth. He could play cricket, tennis, golf everything, catch a ball, ...he just has an ability.

My point is, he is too young to be able to put any sort of time or dedication into his new activities. The toddler just is able to do these actions....I think while what I have read has merit, "Specialness" or "Talent" is a real thing and you are able to see it easily.

The Pele's, maradonnas, Zidanes and Messi's no doubt trained hard to reach where they reach but from small they had a level that training cyar make yuh reach no matter how good a student you are.

The point is not so much that specialness and talent aren't real. The point is more that you can't really define what it is and it won't differentiate who makes it to the top from those who won't - hence the overrated tag. What you saying not really contradicting anything in the book, except for that last part. As you keep reading, let me know what you think.

But regarding your example, because that youth is showing more ability now, he is more likely to be the one that is sent to the better coaching school and given more attention and guidance, and that will snowball into him being a much better footballer than the other other youths. He will also get more positive reinforcement that makes him enjoy playing football more, and hence continue playing it for longer.

However lets say one of those youths who cant kick a ball for nothing turn out to be real persistent and get better coaching and guidance throughout his childhood and have a better work ethic than the expat youth, by the time they are 18 he will be more likely to be a better footballer - despite the difference in ability they showed at age 3-5. (obviously is not that simple but that's the idea)

also, if you read a lot of biographies of world class athletes there always seems to be stories of some other player who was better or at the level when they were young and is now working in an office somewhere.

agree, and to further the above points, i old enuff to have seen kids similarly at an early age, demostrate such early skill levels, and grown into total non-athletes, due to loss of interest, mental rejection or some other issues... however, the talent was there...What may seem as inexplainable, could also be due to generation transference..thus they might seemed to have been born with it, but in fact it could be genetic, sometimes even skipping a generation, wherby you would hear reference "he runs..etc..just like his grand-dad", amny studies do not account for that, as factual research is rarely acquired across generations, only visual and memmory if lucky...thus yes, they could have been born with it

and there are the late bloomers who demonstrated no 'skill' until a particular time in their maturity, and just seem to appear suddenly....but studies have shown, it could also have been the same with their previous generations as well

add: Darwin et al

Good example would be Julius James. If you saw Julius play football when he was 13 you would be surprised. The man was a BEGINNER. That said, he had a lot of belief in his ability to get better.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 03:19:38 PM by dwn »

Offline ZANDOLIE

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4334
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #13 on: January 26, 2011, 04:05:08 PM »

Right. The book touches on stuff like this. Its hard to really get into the fact specifics in a short post. But I think everything you said (esp the part about other countries being ahead because they've invested in early development), supports the argument that 'talent is overrated' and that proper systems for development are more important.

Also talent has many definitions, so when we say a footballers has talent, that definition has more to do with the player's ability (including that which they've acquired through training). Whereas the idea of "talent" that these theories are challenging refers more to something that's innate or acquired through something inexplicable. 

Well short or not you made an excellent post. Its a relevant and thought-provoking topic.

If you compare the 2006 team, reffered to English press as 'a group of men plying their trade in the lower leagues of Britain', and the 2000-2004 sides its plain that a clear concise, wholisitic system in which each person works for the greater good of the whole team can be miles ahead of a grouip of individuals.

Now that is stating the obvious, but as you said 'talent' has many definitions. Physical talent can be broken down into component parts. For example when we see speed, agility and vision in an athlete like Messi or Henry what we are really 'seeing' in that person are 'beefed-up' enzymes and processes like phosphoenolpyruvate c (pepc-k) (decarboxylates oxaloacetate during gluconeogenesis), acetylcholine for more efficient nervous system response etc.

You might also say that talent may more easily be expressed according to cultural settings. Sometimes talent can be the ability to receive verbal or visual signals.  Or as a whole it can also be the sum of independent processes….the ability to subvert oneself to the group, the ability to anticipate direction before anyone else.  Although we like to pride ourselves on our laid back attitude we are a culture that is ranked relatively high on Hofstede’s internation Power-Distance index (a scale that measures degree of social stratification and deference to authority). We are ranked higher than Britain so that says something!

I suspect that our coaches are not only susceptible to overlooking the less ‘flashy’ cultural attributes of talent, but of also suppressing them.  And I think our deference to authority is the very thing that prevents us from breaking these poor practices because we are reluctant to accept innovation, challenge established authority, honour merit and upset the social pecking order. The only time we seem to accept authority is when it comes from the mouth of a European. And it works in reverse too. Can you imagine any other T&T coach except Terry Fenwick that can get a pass to so harshly criticize the TTFF and not be completely ostracized from the local football fraternity? I agree with most of what Fenwick has to say but the day Fevrier or Bertille play they have an opinion…

Another reason we do so poorly is we rarely encourage curiosity and liquid thinking. Everything we do comes from receiving second hand information from those to whom we defer, and that is tied into our rigid conception of the passage of communication as a one way channel from a percieved authority to passive receptor. There is still some good though. I’m glad that at least we are learning from a more enlightened Dutch model that is concerned with more wholistic and quantifiable indicators of success.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 04:09:57 PM by ZANDOLIE »
Sacred cows make the best hamburger

Offline Football supporter

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5209
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #14 on: January 26, 2011, 04:30:41 PM »
Everyone starts off with the same set of tools (well, most people) i.e 2 legs, 2 arms, etc  Some children develop quicker than others in certain skill sets, so one child may walk at 9 months another may not walk until 18 months. Same with speech, coordination etc

This is due to changing evoloutionary cycles. 5,000 years ago, a child that didn't walk by 12 months probably died. Now, walking at an early age is not essential.

So eveyone develops at a different pace due to their needs. A child who is always carried and nurtured may walk later than a child who spends a lot of time with other children and needs to be mobile to compete or play.

A U.S. college coach recently said to me : Find me the fastest 16 year old in Trinidad. The rest I can teach him.

Other coaches look for the tallest player, regardless of touch etc.

I saw Crouch play at 17. He was shit. We all took the piss. But he scored a goal. Then a series of coaches have developed his abilities and he plays his role well.

My point is, every child has potential. But they need to want to progress. The rest can be taught. The only natural abilities that can put you ahead of the pack are height and speed. Those 2 things cannot be taught.

Offline Touches

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
  • Trow wine on she...
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2011, 04:32:12 PM »
Ok DWN and Zando

What about Usain Bolt?

Yes he had to put in training...but I think his talent is one that is unquestionable.

No amount of deliberate practice by anyone could beat Usain...at least I dont think so in the near future. I think he is an exception to this theory.


A for apple, B for Bat, C for yuhself!

Offline ZANDOLIE

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4334
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2011, 04:54:39 PM »
Ok DWN and Zando

What about Usain Bolt?

Yes he had to put in training...but I think his talent is one that is unquestionable.

No amount of deliberate practice by anyone could beat Usain...at least I dont think so in the near future. I think he is an exception to this theory.

I don't know much about bolt, but didn't Tyson Gay cut his tail a few months ago in some race in Zurich or Sweden?  I don't think its solely a matter of  talent with him. Its more ability, very slightly different from talent. In the same way that a fast sausage dog can't outrun a very slow greyhound. The sausage dog could have a greater talent for running relative to the greyhound but still coast in last because the greyhound has more ability?????

Yuh asking some tough questions boy! I have little knowledge of sprinting but maybe other people with experience could shed some light

Now mind you if Bolt is an exception to the theory then I think its still valid
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 04:57:34 PM by ZANDOLIE »
Sacred cows make the best hamburger

Offline fish

  • Sr. Warrior
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
  • "Study the past if you would define the future"
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2011, 05:47:22 PM »
Ok DWN and Zando

What about Usain Bolt?

Yes he had to put in training...but I think his talent is one that is unquestionable.

No amount of deliberate practice by anyone could beat Usain...at least I dont think so in the near future. I think he is an exception to this theory.

I don't know much about bolt, but didn't Tyson Gay cut his tail a few months ago in some race in Zurich or Sweden?  I don't think its solely a matter of  talent with him. Its more ability, very slightly different from talent. In the same way that a fast sausage dog can't outrun a very slow greyhound. The sausage dog could have a greater talent for running relative to the greyhound but still coast in last because the greyhound has more ability?????

Yuh asking some tough questions boy! I have little knowledge of sprinting but maybe other people with experience could shed some light

Now mind you if Bolt is an exception to the theory then I think its still valid


You mean when he was injured?!

Offline ZANDOLIE

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4334
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2011, 06:03:57 PM »


You mean when he was injured?!

if you mean Bolt, he could have been injured during the race. i don't follow the sport so i can't speak about particulars. but i did hear he was well beaten by Tyson Gay, so that could be why
Sacred cows make the best hamburger

Corbeaux

  • Guest
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2011, 06:24:11 PM »
I can tell you fom experience talent is mabye about 90 percent false...... yes its good if you have 2 arms or legs or are taller or shorter than other people but besides that...co-ordination...nervous system ,brain functioning...and muscles can all be developed.  I can tell you from knowing ppl who hav succeded in different aspects of life dat dey put in rell hard work....bolt 2... but most ppl dnt kno this and feel they are naturally gifted. In 2011 dey shouldn hav ppl who think like dis.....d eart is round...na flat.  D body iz d ultimate adapter!!
« Last Edit: January 26, 2011, 06:30:38 PM by Corbeaux »

Offline Cocorite

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2406
  • John 5:24
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2011, 06:40:23 PM »

Excellent discussion fellas. I read Malcolm Gladwell's "Outliers" and it was informative, to be sure.

TOT = Interest, Time On Task, Attitude, Opportunity, are some of the combined contributors to success. . .

These are MUST READS for T&T's football program
 
Socawarriors Need A Winning Mentality

Offline dwn

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
  • "Hands that help are holier than lips that pray"
    • View Profile
    • Arsenal Now!
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #21 on: January 28, 2011, 04:05:45 PM »
A quote from a guy about Southampton's youth development:

"We screened them not for football ability – that is not necessarily the key at that age – but for intelligence and athleticism. You can teach them the rest. If they're not clever and not athletic, you'll find it hard to push water uphill. We spent money on the facilities – an indoor sports hall, a wonderful gym, banks of computers for the lads to use and for us to assess them on – and bought a local hotel, Darwin Lodge, for £250,000, where the boys lodged. We installed Julia Upson to run it, and she was like a mother to them. We made sure their diets and education were right, that their entire lives were stable. By the time I left, Southampton had the whole sweep necessary to produce not only players of quality but players who are also decent people."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/jan/28/southampton-alex-oxlade-chamberlain

Offline Observer

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 5428
  • The best gift for a footballer is Intelligence ---
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #22 on: January 28, 2011, 04:26:42 PM »
Have not read the book but the original research that underlies it was in large part due to work by Dr. Anders-Ericsson in the 1980's and 1990s. One of the most influential papers is called 'The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance'.  It is easyily found on a google search if you are interested, but its a little long.

Also Malcolm gladwell did an excellent synopsis of this work in 'Outliers', where he used theories of deliberate practice to critique anecdotal arguments that success is solely the result of talent. He also relates that the quality of the experience is essential to success.

The quality of the experience is what we are lacking. Other nations are ahead of us by dint of the efforts placed on coaching and suppling an environment to both encourage and incubate talent at an early age. When foreign coaches visit they always say we have talent, but they never commend us on our coaching programs.

Having been a national university and a national military champion in my particular sport here in Canada, and having seen  competitors with as much or more talent than me in Trinidad not achieving to their potential, and also having been a coach that has led several teams to gold and silver medals in provincial and national  competition its clear to me that the general coaching and competition climate in some T&T sports is very poor.  

We tend to look at coaching as a mechanistic, hierarchical and unidirectional and we tend to look at a narrow range of skills in players. Coaches blame players for failing to carry out instructions, yet are often unaware or hostile toward opening up two way communications or striving to adapt to the learning style of individual players. There is a saying...there is no such thing as a bad player, only a bad coach. Anyway, just my two cents



  :applause: :applause: No one is born to do anything. Ok! One may be born with certain physical attributes, but it is the amount of quality time spent on a given activity that  is the ultimate development tool. In most instances this is further fostered by the environment and the importance placed on the sport, or activity within the culture one grows up within.
Both books are interesting reads
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead
                                              Thomas Paine

Offline Preacher

  • We doh smoke or drink or pop pills. When we light the mic is strickly jess skills
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3389
    • View Profile
Re: On the topic of "natural" talent
« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2011, 01:41:10 AM »
They just saying that because they can't measure it.  First off, the play of the game is to unpredictable to over simplify players performance.  The question that I would ask.  If what they claim is true how can the explain why some players still develop better than others, even in  in controlled environments?  There is something instinctual about players that simply separate them from the rest. In my opinion.  :)  Somethings get recorded and stored at a cellular level and passed on through the generations, only to show up offspring.  That is called natural. :)
Of course natural is not a substituted for development. 
In Everything give thanks for this is the will of God concerning you.

 

1]; } ?>