God Given Talent

Easy draw

Celtic said:
The players who get to the top obviously worked hard to get there but 99.999% of the players in the world can work just as hard as Alex P, SVB, or Souquet and never even come close to world champ level.

Sorry but this game is just like every other skill on the planet, it requires natural talent to be the best in the world. There are countless players cingthere that practice more then Chris Bartrum or Donny Mills can still cannot beat them with the 6 out in 10-ball.

I know people on this forum want to all feel all special and think that they could be just as good as SVB if only they practiced as much as he does and played in all the same events. They cannot, sorry to burst their dreamy little bubble.

I am sure if they really wanted to some of the more knowledgable old school players like Jay could clue people in. They probably have stories of tons of players they knew in the past that played huge amounts of pool but never came close to a Buddy Hall level of skill. I know that Bob Strachan who I hung out with for a while played constant pool for a living for over a decade and he freely admitted that there were players like Rempe, Buddy, and the other elites that he never had a chance against and simply could never have reached their level. He played no less pool then them, and he WAS a gifted player, but very few players have what it takes to truly be the best and for those who don't it does not matter how much you practice, you are not getting there.

The people who get to the top have the key components within them that allow that level to be reached. THEN they need to put in the tremendous amount of practice time into the game and harden their nerve in gambling sessions and competition to actually reach their potential. Most players in the world don't have the key components to ever reach that top level, it is simply not in them.



"Every pro pool player praticed hard to become a pro. Thus everyone who practices hard can become a pro pool player." is a logical fallacy.
Click to expand...


When Souquet was first around in tournaments in the US he was considered an easy draw. Not only and easy draw but over weight also. So Ralph did get to where he is now by hard work, not only in practicing on the table and in tournaments. He also got him self in shape and started taking better care of himself. However he didn't harden his nerve in gambling sessions because he doesn't gamble. I do certainly agree that there are many if not most people though that no matter how much they practice they won't get to that level. Your last statement sums it up well!
 
black-balled said:
more than eleven thousand pounds sterling worth of silver is wasted every year in the course of the circulation of crowns, half-crowns, florins, shillings, and sixpences. One hundred sovereigns of the date of 1820, which were weighed in 1859 by mr. Miller, showed a loss in weight through the wear of circulation which was estimated at £1 6s. 7d. There is, therefore, more waste produced in the circulation of gold and silver coins than is generally thought of. …

mr. Miller some years ago made a number of precise experiments, from which it was ascertained that £100 worth of sovereigns lost £3 9s. 8.4d. Of their value in a hundred years; similarly £100 worth of half-crowns lost £13 11s. 8.8d.; £100 worth of shillings, £36 14s. 3.1d.; and £100 worth of sixpences lost £50 18s. 9.8d. In value, or more than one-half in the hundred years.

– the world of wonders, 1883
Click to expand...

wtf wtf wtf wtf
 
JB Cases said:
I would bet a shit load of money though that Buddy Hall could take a complete novice off the street and make them into an APA 7 inside of six months.
Click to expand...

An APA 7 is still an amature pool player though, nowhere near world class.

I would bet YOU that Buddy Hall could NOT take some random guy off the street, teach him for 10 years, and have him get in the top 3 of a fully fielded WPA world championship, ever. I am talking a random guy, not "oh, look there is Brandon Shuff, will he do?". I am talking about a random person, Buddy does not get to watch 20 guys off the street shoot and see if they show natural aptitude, he goes with the first guy who happens by on a busy street that is in his 20's. The chances of that guy actually having the natural aptitude to become a world class pool player of the level of an Alex P, SVB, Souquet, are almost nil. You would have to get tremendously lucky in the player actually having a huge amount of aptitude towards the game to have any prayer in this, most people cannot get there.

The thing is I KNOW guys who play ludicrous amounts of pool, the guy in my city who plays more pool then anyone by a long shot it good, but there are alot of players who are alot better that play alot less. There are guys that if they ever put the same amount of time into the game they would be pro level because they DO have the aptitude for the game to get there, but that guy, as good as he is, he has no chance of ever being Alex level, despite playing huge amounts of pool virtually every day. One of the best players in this city and a member of a team that has won the Vegas masters multiple times NEVER plays pool but for league, he does not play tournaments, he does not gamble, he hardly ever hits balls, and he is still one of the best players in the city. He would drill the guy I mentioned above to this day and he has NEVER put as much effort into the game. The difference? The guy who would win just has loads more natural aptitude towards the game and worked far less at it and nevertheless got way better.
 
I agree with Celtic

I remember a guy in the pool hall I used to play at.......He was there just about every day....practicing, practicing, practicing drills for hours and hours on a very tight table.....He got pretty darn good....got pretty highly rated in tournament play.....a friend of mine at the time who was one of those "naturally talented" guys who was good at many different physical sports was also pretty good at pool....He hardly ever practiced....well, one day he came in and played the other guy (who practiced every day for hours and hours) and practically barbecued the guy.....It was the most impressive example I can remember of what natural ability can do...
 
The mechanic can slowly, methodically, and with great care sometimes duplicate what the artist can do with apparent ease. Perhaps by chance he might rarely better the artist in some small way. He paints by the numbers so the numbers are extremely important to him. He will spend much of his life studying those numbers so as to get things aligned to produce some desired outcome. He might even get to a point where he can routinely duplicate the Mona Lisa but he could never have painted it originally.

The artist can take your breath away just playing from the heart, the ear, the eye and from all that is within. His hands are not guided by mathematics or numbers. He will easily fashion something of beauty as the mechanic struggles with his numbers and methods.

Whether canvas, cloth, hoop, or chessboard - I think these things are true.

Oh, and there is another group. They are neither.
 
itsfroze said:
When Souquet was first around in tournaments in the US he was considered an easy draw. Not only and easy draw but over weight also. So Ralph did get to where he is now by hard work, not only in practicing on the table and in tournaments. He also got him self in shape and started taking better care of himself. However he didn't harden his nerve in gambling sessions because he doesn't gamble. I do certainly agree that there are many if not most people though that no matter how much they practice they won't get to that level. Your last statement sums it up well!
Click to expand...

When was Ralf ever overweight? I have known him since 1991 and he has always been the same size since then. Also I don't know that he was ever an easy draw since at least 1991 and beyond.

Here is the bottom line on this. The COLD HARD FACTS are that in studies the difference in skill always comes down to who puts in MORE time and additionally more QUALITY time.

No one wants to hear that.

The line is always well so and so puts in the time but he never gets better. I bet that if you REALLY looked at so and so then you would find that he either isn't really putting in the time OR he isn't doing anything productive with it.

How many of you have ever TRULY shot one shot until your arm was about to fall off? I mean until it truly hurt.

How many of you have ever set up a ball frozen to the end rail and tried to make another ball frozen to the first diamond all the way at the other end of the table and draw the cueball all the way back to you? Could you do it? Larry Nevel will bet you that you miss the WHOLE ball the first time you try it. He has practiced that shot THOUSANDS of times to be able to do it on demand. He wasn't born knowing how to shoot it. And it's not something that only he can do. The difference between him and you (and me) is that he CHOOSE to put in the work to perfect that shot. Deeply. It's an awkward and uncomfortable position. Most people can't stand to be in it. Larry worked until it's totally comfortable to him.

People see that and they say MY GOD Larry Nevel is talented. No, he isn't, he just works way harder than you do to learn to do shots you won't put the time in on.

It's romantic to think that we are just more talented if we can do something well and better than others. Hollywood is built around that ideal. It's also built around the ideal that if you dig deep and work hard you can FIND the talent inside.

Doesn't ANYONE remember all the kung fu movies where the hero gets his ass kicked and then he goes to train and comes back later to kick ass? Every movie in the world is like this except Steven Segal's who has it in his contract that he shall never be defeated in movie fight.......
 
JB Cases said:
Sorry. The research shows that this is not true. In fact top chess players don't have better memories than most people. What they do is learn the language of chess and learn blocks of moves and patterns.

This was proven by testing the recall of top chess players against average people when the test consisted of placing the pieces on the board and then wiping it to see how accurately the subject could recreate the positions.

When the pieces were arranged in positions that could be in a real game the top chess players performed better than the non-chess players in recalling the positions. But when the pieces were placed in such a way as to be impossible for a regular game of chess then the recall was no better than the non-chess players.

Chess is a good game to study whether it's "talent" or hard work + opportunity. The research points to hard work plus opportunity + desire.
Click to expand...

These researchers...are THEY Grandmasters?
 
God given talent is real. My friend quite pool for almost 15 years (not playing AT ALL) and just recently starting playing again and he's already running out from anywhere. He was born with his stroke--- he NEVER worked on it, ran drills, anything.

Regardless of what some want to believe, SOME people just stroke LASER straight coming straight from the womb. It is what it is.
 
It has always been my belief that some people can work hard and become a very good player just through hard work.. and then some people just have talent and can play like once a week, yet still get called up to the pool hall and be running out like it is his full time job like he's been doing it all week.

Then there are those people that are just so dripping wet with talent that they are naturally already world class with very little practice, some of them are lucky enough to learn a work ethic while they are young and these are the ones that become the truly elite players.
 
Celtic said:
An APA 7 is still an amature pool player though, nowhere near world class.

I would bet YOU that Buddy Hall could NOT take some random guy off the street, teach him for 10 years, and have him get in the top 3 of a fully fielded WPA world championship, ever. I am talking a random guy, not "oh, look there is Brandon Shuff, will he do?". I am talking about a random person, Buddy does not get to watch 20 guys off the street shoot and see if they show natural aptitude, he goes with the first guy who happens by on a busy street that is in his 20's. The chances of that guy actually having the natural aptitude to become a world class pool player of the level of an Alex P, SVB, Souquet, are almost nil. You would have to get tremendously lucky in the player actually having a huge amount of aptitude towards the game to have any prayer in this, most people cannot get there.

The thing is I KNOW guys who play ludicrous amounts of pool, the guy in my city who plays more pool then anyone by a long shot it good, but there are alot of players who are alot better that play alot less. There are guys that if they ever put the same amount of time into the game they would be pro level because they DO have the aptitude for the game to get there, but that guy, as good as he is, he has no chance of ever being Alex level, despite playing huge amounts of pool virtually every day. One of the best players in this city and a member of a team that has won the Vegas masters multiple times NEVER plays pool but for league, he does not play tournaments, he does not gamble, he hardly ever hits balls, and he is still one of the best players in the city. He would drill the guy I mentioned above to this day and he has NEVER put as much effort into the game. The difference? The guy who would win just has loads more natural aptitude towards the game and worked far less at it and nevertheless got way better.
Click to expand...


I'd take that bet all day. As long as the person has the desire to improve and they are not handicapped physically then I am positive Buddy Hall or any other top champion could make them into a champion.

100%

And again, it's not about the AMOUNT of time, it's about the quality of the time. I can put in a hundred hours a week on the driving range and not get any better but if I put in 20 hours a week with a proper coach I will get way better.

Someone doing drills all day isn't necessarily making themselves better. You can rarely design your own practice that is effective.

And we ALL have examples of this guy and that guy who never practices but is just super great. And I will bet that at some point that person DID practice and if you could play a tape of their life you would see when and how they learned what they know.

And I have examples of people who practiced hard and found success.

So you can hold your view, it's the common one but it's not the one science holds. The same science that has made athletes better performers is the same science that is telling you that it's not "talent" but instead hard work and deep practice. We all have our anecdotes but they have the data.
 
JB Cases said:
You're right I have no clue. So take my money. What sort of weight can I get? I don't even know what to ask for I am so clueless. I like how you are so convinced that you know all about my chess abilities or lack thereof based on my citation of a study of chess players.

My point was and is exactly what you stated, you learned to play just like everyone else did. Only those that are better than you are not here arguing about pool OR chess "talent", they are studying and learning MORE than you because they desire it more than you do.

I just went and looked at what an Expert level is. Pretty strong. I will take a Queen and a Rook for $50 a game and I am sure I am donating but I will guarantee five games.

Tell you what, let's do an all around. I don't know you at all but here is what I will do.....you give up the queen and rook for 100 a game and I will give you 11:8 in one pocket, the chess of pool, for 100 a game and we each freeze up $500 per set. If we break even then we can play ping pong or scrabble, flip for it.
Click to expand...

I gotta admit, JB, that playing chess with you and crushing you like a bug would be highly entertaining. Since you're the one who thinks that playing chess is such an easy sport to master, you should be giving me a handicap. I'll take your Queen and all of your pawns, thank you very much. :D

All joking aside, it's amusing that like a duffer, you're already asking for a handicap. Should we ever play someday, you'll be getting no handicap from me. Chess is a game of skill and talent -- either you're good enough to win based upon your abilities or you're not.
 
JB Cases said:
So you have done the research? Were you born with the ability to play chess or did you learn it?

Extremely well-refined is another way of saying well trained. Funny that to you the research is "arcane" but you are fond of beating me up using Dr. Dave and his research when you disagree with me on aiming.

You are right, those pesky academic studies are not at all related to the "real" world. Science plays no part in sports performance. Either you are a born chess player or you aren't. (rolls eyes)

I don't know what I would be rated at in chess since I only play for fun and money, would you like to gamble some to find out? I like to play $20 to $100 games. I will be at the Super Billiards Expo in a few weeks. Bring your board and let's gamble a little. I will be happy to donate a little bit to an Expert. But if you should lose then I hope you don't mind me telling everyone on here you lost to an unranked player.
Click to expand...

Just so I know, is there anyone on here you're not gambling with at the SBE, and is there any game you're not going to bet on?
 
natural gift of talent

No one will ever convince me that hard work can bring anyone to the level of a world class player in whatever sport unless that person has natural ability to begin with.....You can practice jumping and shooting baskets all you want but you can't get to the level of a Michael Jordan, because he has something you don't.....whatever you want to call it....now that isn't to say that Michael Jordan didn't practice either.....superior talent AND hard work makes one rise to the top...IMHO
 
I think that believing you must have natural talent to excel to a world-class level is just an excuse for those who are not world-class.

Today's youth (and others, too...but youth specifically) have a culture of 'it's not my fault'.

"It's not my fault I don't have money...it is the fault of the government and the 1%"

"It's not my fault I got an F in math...it is the fault of the teacher"

"It's not my fault I'm in jail for selling drugs...I was trapped by the police"

"It's not my fault I'm not a world-class player...I don't have natural talent"

Anyone with desire, hard work, and proper direction can achieve world class status. Proper Direction is easier these days than 25 years ago owing to the internet and accu-stats, etc...

If you think you have put in the work, but are still not to the level you think you should be, re-evaluate and stop making excuses...it's your fault, not anyone elses.


...just my opinion, btw.
 
You can practice til the cows come home but you'll never achieve the proficiency of someone who is gifted with ability. Even if you get close, you'll eventually break down over time whereas they go through the motions and don't really try.

Non-gifted people have to try hard. Gifted people don't try at all (or very little). People who HAVE to try hard to play really well will eventually drop their transmission playing someone who is gifted.
 
8pack said:
Figures..lol.
I just cant figure out why im so damn good at making bad bets.
I once bet 17 college games one sat.I lost 15 of them.
I would be rich if i could just bet against myself.:D
Click to expand...

And I can control the stock market. If I want it to go up I just sell all my stocks. At least it will help out the rest of the country. Eventually though, I'll decide to put it back in stocks since I can't get a decent return anywhere else, and the stock market will tank again. Sorry guys.
 
TheThaiger said:
These researchers...are THEY Grandmasters?
Click to expand...

At research and data analysis? Probably. At Chess probably not. You can probably find the study for free if you search for it.

I know how much you hate to spend money on learning something.
 
BasementDweller said:
I think the studies aren't really that arcane, but then again I have no idea what "arcane" even means so maybe they are really arcane.

It seems like they do point out that you don't need to have a great memory to play great chess. Just look at pool for a moment: I guarantee you 90 percent of the people on this site could easily memorize a handful of nine ball layouts, since it is in our area of "expertise". However, if you took 20 grand master chess players that didn't play pool, they would have a hard time memorizing those same layouts.
Click to expand...

That goes for darts as well, with players of mild retardation able to calculate finishes that mathematicians would struggle with. I'm not sure it proves much, however.

An ability to think clearly under pressure is essential, and that's innate. Of course you can IMPROVE your weaknesses, but naturally occurring, impenetrable skills are best. Temperament is hugely important here, too.

Ultimately, a top player must be strong in ALL departments, whether natural and learned. But this is all too chicken and egg for me, so if i had to choose, I'd go with Celtic's natural ability line every time, not least because of the old adage, 'you can't coach brains'.

Great players are born, no question.
 
JB Cases said:
At research and data analysis? Probably. At Chess probably not. You can probably find the study for free if you search for it.

I know how much you hate to spend money on learning something.
Click to expand...

I take the Groucho Marx defence - I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members, although this one might be more apt for Turkey Christmas Campaigners, like your good self, I have a mind to join a club and beat you over the head with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top