Nature vs Nurture: New study in favor of Nature
- Thread starter iusedtoberich
- Start date
By a ton.
It's easy to make cues at a world class level ( construction wise , art is a different animal ) as soon as you figure out construction, woods and epoxy . The eyes to see how designs flow, I think is nature too. How many ugly cues are there out there from vet cue makers ?
They just can't see the flow. Even after decades of seeing other cues .
If being champions is not mostly nature, they wouldn't pay millions for studs.
Pool and playing musical instruments at a world class level is a different animal imo.
Last edited:
Was it a "samurai stroke"?
ONB
Unfortunately the other side is afraid to double the bet and go again.
If that player had trained like Dan instead of Bozo then he would have wiped the floor with the guy. But as it was he lost 9-6 playing like a donkey.
Close enough to show the other side that they can't win and were lucky that Donkey Bozo couldn't control himself.
Old Nine Baller
Banned
Don't feel bad Nostroke, many top players at many sports were frustrated. Witness Brooks Robinson; "I could field as long as I can remember, but hitting has been a struggle all my life."
I also had no talent for pool, none. A very intelligent teacher, many hours of dedicated practice, many thousands lost gambling changed all that for me
. Some things can be learned.ONB
Old Nine Baller
Banned
Was it a "samurai stroke"?
ONB
John,
My post was not in reference to you but as long as we're here let me ask you a couple of questions.
1. Do you really think Lou is "afraid" to play again or maybe he just doesn't want to go through all the crap again? Lou seems to have the mental game and the physical game to be even with you but you lack the mental game which translates to the physical game at the table.
2. Why didn't you train harder and better if you were willing to wager $10000. That's a built-in excuse for losing and nobody needs those.
I personally thought that if you had more mental control the match with Lou would've been closer. That doesn't matter now though, does it? Luck had nothing to do with it. You played your game and Lou played his and you lost.
ONB
Very good post Neil
Very wrong to compare studs to humans. Animals do not have the cognitive abilities that humans do. For them, it is mostly genes, although training also plays a huge part in them as well. Horses are trained to run, not just let loose on the tracks.
Please see my comments in Red.
I don't think that the genetic component is as obvious. I don't disagree with it but I think that humans on average perform way under their ability <- I think this true almost by definition. A few humans perform at the current known limits <- again definitionally true and it is NOT because they are somehow genetically superior to the average IMO, but more because they train like fanatics.
Having a "sports gene" may give you a head start but it doesn't guarantee success. <-agree 100%The guy with the fastest engine doesn't win all the races either <-Agree. Obviously there can't be too much disparity but if the difference between me and the next guy is a certain gene that causes him to be energetic and I have to create my own motivation then I don't think that this means he will automatically always be better than me.<- agree Now if I am short and pudgy I probably won't be much competition to the tall and lean hurdlers. <- If? JK
Was Tiger born or made? <- almost certainly both...the fact that Tiger is not 5' 2" and 240lbs is partly genetic
I say made. I don't think you can look at Earl Wood's family and find a history of golf or outstanding athletic ability. What you find is a guy who loved golf and decided he would make his son love it. <- Actually Earl Woods was a collegiate level baseball player who was offered a contract to play professionally in the Negro leagues. Additionally, in spite of learning to play golf in his 40's he became a single digit handicapper (shooting in the 70's.)
Take away all that and hand Tiger a golf club in his teens and I bet he doesn't become the superstar we know. <-Agree 100% He MIGHT have become a pro golfer anyway or he might have decided that he didn't really like golf. Or....if he really fell in love with it and decided to go nuts training then he might still have become a superstar. Although I doubt it because I think that those formative years meant he put in 10,000 hours BEFORE he was 12.
So when you enter your teenage years already knowing more about golf than 99% of the living humans who play golf....what comes after that?
$9,900
I still have lots of room left on my "The Dan Plan" wager?
Is anyone interested in taking action on Dan to earn his tour card within 1 year of reaching his 10k hour goal?
Again, we are only talking about him earning his tour card...not becoming the best, or winning a major, or even winning a PGA event...just getting on the tour.
If not willing to do it at even money, what odds would you require.
I still have lots of room left on my "The Dan Plan" wager?
Is anyone interested in taking action on Dan to earn his tour card within 1 year of reaching his 10k hour goal?
Again, we are only talking about him earning his tour card...not becoming the best, or winning a major, or even winning a PGA event...just getting on the tour.
If not willing to do it at even money, what odds would you require.
I think he is afraid.
I didn't train the right way because I had other things going on that came up AFTER the game was made and the money was posted.
Basically after January I was dealing with protecting a $100,000 investment and was more focused on that than protecting a $10,000 gambling/marketing investment. Still I had a great time going around the country playing and learning.
I felt I wasn't all the way ready a week before the match. A few of my friends knew it and I could have walked away and just let him have the 3k. But I felt like I would go for it anyway and maybe would come out ok. I feel that even where I was I would have still done way better without the emotional baggage I carried into it. I failed. Lou played decent enough, stayed calm outwardly and as much as he could played steady one pocket. He also came with some GREAT shots a few times as did I.
Anyway that's simply how I feel about it and I will think Lou is afraid and he can say he isn't and that's ok too. I personally think that no one will back him for that much again either. But if it were to happen then I would definitely put the Dan Plan into motion and make sure I didn't lose the second time.
I paid 10k for the experience and now I have it. Not at all worried and not at all feeling beaten. I got beat, I am not done. But like all "title" fights if the winner retires then the loser never gets another shot and that's the way this is right now.
Unfortunately the other side is afraid to double the bet and go again. <--The bet I would like to have, is that if/when you get called on your blustering high-rolling...reality will set in, and you will back down AGAIN !
If that player had trained like Dan instead of Bozo then he would have wiped the floor with the guy. But as it was he lost 9-6 playing like a donkey. Most people who witnessed your demise, realized Lou-ser had so much the best of it, he could dog his brains out, and still win ! (which he did)..I would guestimate you have devoted over 30-40 thousand hours, to lessons and 'training' to be just an average 'C+' player..But keep trying..
Close enough to show the other side that they can't win and were lucky that Bozo couldn't control himself. <--Or HIS cue ball
John, your only problem is, you cannot accept the fact that your genetic composition, will NEVER allow you to rise above a "BOZO" !... If you ran your business like you do your obsession with pool, you would be broke and destitute in 2 weeks ! :sorry:
Don't forget, Dan McLaughlin always has his 'Fruit Picking' career to fall back on...Where will you go if you empty out ?
John, your only problem is, you cannot accept the fact that your genetic composition, will NEVER allow you to rise above a "BOZO" !... If you ran your business like you do your obsession with pool, you would be broke and destitute in 2 weeks ! :sorry:
Don't forget, Dan McLaughlin always has his 'Fruit Picking' career to fall back on...Where will you go if you empty out ?
So says the sauced up geneticist? I was not aware that you know my physical makeup?
I know I have never aspired to be a pro player so I never tried.....you on the other hand, was it genes that kept you from being a really elite player instead of the shortstop level you were at?
Since you were a high level shortstop I think you have a good insight as to what in person's psychology might have kept them from going to the next level. I know you don't have the science chops nor know your own genetic composition but still maybe there is something that was physically wrong with you, something genetic, that kept you from being as good as Ronnie Allen and his peers?
Tell us what you think it was that kept you from the top. I know that there wasn't a lot of money in pool but guys like Rempe made a career of it. Why didn't you?
Afraid LMFAO , I hardy think so ,, the match was made to have a conclusion and it did game over ,,
Trained wrong now that's even funnier ,, you documented your practice trail here you were constantly posting how you were hanging with better players that would mop the floor with Lou ,, and of course then there is the trip to Stan's ,,
If you had the ability you had more than enough time and practice to beat a guy Lou's speed ,,I can't imagine how much practice you would need to beat a A player
Lou would be a compleat f,.,king idiot to give you a rematch the way you acted here and backing out of all the bets like you did
1
Interestingly enough, the further we go back in our family tree, the more likely we are to find instances of world class exceptional talent or skill. Unfortunately, as the number of generations increases between you and that great ancestor, the odds of you inheriting those genes/talent diminishes exponentially!
Great post, Neil! I agree with all of this. Something can be said for someone's brain being "pre-loaded" with abilities -- whether they be physical or cognitive -- and at the same time, there's something to be said for the brain's ability to upgrade and repair itself, as well.
Those in favor of "nature" are grossly overlooking that fact.
Sure, it takes time and effort to build those physical/cognitive abilities, and there's a level of dedication and effort there that most of the "nature" subscribers have neither the time or the gumption to put into it. So they write it off as "oh, the heck with this -- he/she was just born with those abilities, and I will never have that."
The level of dedication and effort to put into learning a skill, or acquiring a physical ability is not trivial by any stretch of the imagination. I can attest to this by the sheer amount of single-focused hard-headed effort I had to put into transforming the "no-rhythm-feeling white boy" into a very respected bass player:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=4803629#post4803629
I had to work my bloody ass off for it. But you know what? I must've done some rewiring upstairs, for all the obstacles came crashing down like dominoes -- and in very short order, too. First, knowing my way around the fretboard (that was actually easy in comparison); then, hearing that metronome click in my head (without music playing); and finally, "feeling" how to play in, out, and through the rhythm -- syncopation and the finer arts of counterpoint and polyrhythm. This happened in very short order. Almost like I woke up one day transformed, like I had new abilities. Like all that hard-headed practice and studying finally "took" and planted itself firmly in my subconscious.
Here's another thing I learned. You know how people talk of another "musically gifted person, who is 'so' good, that he/she can hear a note and immediately and perfectly identify the precise note it is"? In other words, perfect pitch? "Oh my gosh, Neil is so musically gifted, that you can hit any note on the piano while his back is turned, and immediately after the note sounds, he can tell you what that note is -- A, C#, Eb, whatever. OMG, OMG!" You've heard this before, right? (Perfect pitch, btw, is not to be confused with Relative pitch, the latter of which is the ability to identify other notes and intervals based on a reference note that you play for that person first, and he/she is able to identify the relation of that note to other notes, like thirds, fifths, sevenths, octaves, etc.)
What if I told you that even perfect pitch can be taught? Yes, that's right -- chew on that one for a bit, nature subscribers. All perfect pitch is, is being able to listen for the "chroma" in a certain note. All notes of the chromatic scale have a certain identity on the scale, that is unique to that note alone. While some people (1 in 10,000) are born with the "software" in their brains to hear the chroma (the chroma literally "jumps out at them"), it's not something you "have" to be born with. Being born with it certainly helps. But you can build it.
Here's an example: F# (F-sharp) and Eb (E-flat) are radical opposites in chroma, even though they are fairly-close neighbors on the chromatic scale in comparison to the other notes. That is to say, they are polar opposites to someone with perfect pitch cognitive abilities. Walk up to any piano in a quiet room, strike an F#, and listen carefully. Don't listen to the "scale" of the note (i.e. how high or low it is), but rather, listen deep into the sound itself. Do the same for an Eb. Alternate between them, striking an F#, letting the note die, and then hitting an Eb, and letting it die. Do you hear "Weeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrr" (somewhat buzzy) characteristic of the F#, and the "Wooooooooeeeeeeee" (dull) characteristic of the Eb? That's the chroma I'm speaking of, and this is the thing that jumps out at those with perfect pitch, where they're immediately able to identify and say "That's a F#." or "That's an Eb.". There's this famous story of a piano maker who pulled his hair out for decades trying to find out why the F# notes on his pianos were so bright and buzzy, and the Eb notes were so dull. He did everything to get to the root of it, using different materials, strengthening, using different materials for strings, etc. To no avail. One day, while fussing over this on one of his pianos, a piano player with perfect pitch cognitive abilities saw what he was doing, and asking him why he was fussing over such a beautifully-sounding piano. When the piano maker explained this "oddity" he was hearing between these two notes, the piano player explained that he was hearing the chroma in the notes themselves -- that the piano maker had trained himself to hear this, and he was already on his way to learning perfect pitch.
Yes, I've taught myself perfect pitch, because I was interested in this "mysterious god-like ability" of these people, and I wanted to know more about it in the interests of being the hard-headed complete musician I wanted to be. But contrary to those nature subscribers, perfect pitch is not an indicator of musical ability. In fact, it can be a detriment! For example, if a perfect pitch-cognizant musician is aware that a certain score is played in C# (as written and as commonly heard), and he/she hears it being played in a slightly different key (e.g. perhaps the orchestra has to play it in a different key that sounds better in the acoustics of the particular venue they're playing in), it will sound like fingernails on a chalkboard to the perfect pitch-cognizant ears. Perfect pitch is certainly useful, and does come in handy, but Relative Pitch is much, MUCH more useful, and is the cognitive ability that most who teach themselves an instrument breed in themselves. This is the ability that enables someone to hear a piece of music, hear the notes/chords/intervals, and immediately start to reproduce it.
Anyway, I think my point in all this, is that with enough dedicated, and I repeat, dedicated (did I mention dedicated?) effort, your brain WILL rewire itself. It's part of the adaptation of our species, and it's in our genes.
No, I'm not saying that if you "dedicate" yourself to being 7-feet tall (when you're only 5'8"), that you can achieve this. Let's be reasonable. I'm talking mainly things that involve the brain, directing the muscles. Other than feats of superhuman strength or speed due to physical muscle fiber makeup (e.g. more slow-twitch or more fast-twitch muscle fibers that are a genetic thing), the human being is a remarkable, adaptable machine. Only those machines programmed with chicken-little software limit themselves.
-Sean
Well, finally a response..a little whiney, and weak in the fact department, but better than the 'NO BET' you gave me
last time !..I don't recall ever claiming to be more than a good, solid one pocket player, who bet all he could, and
played with anyone who came through the door !
Your evaluation of me, does not count near as much as Buddy, Frost, RA, Grady, Ed Kelly, Cooney, Eddie Robin, or
any of the guys that knew me, and my game..But nice try John, that will ALWAYS be your best game...'trying' !
SJD
PS...I would have loved to have played even one pocket with Rempe, it was NOT because I didn't try ! By the way,
I played RA all through his (and my) prime years, and let me enlighten you, Ronnie had NO peer's at one pocket,
thats why I always got 9/8.
Last edited:
The issue isn't whether you can or can't get yourself to become really good at something if you only spend enough time...the question is how much time? And is that time the same amount of time for all of us? If not, why not? ...could some of those reasons be due to nature?
Why does it take one person 23,000 hours of directed practice to become a chess master while another achieves it in 3,000? While others never ever get there within their lifetime? Is it simply their practice methods? or are there other factors at work?
Why was Greg Norman able to break 90 after a month of playing golf? While others will never achieve that level of skill?
I can recall growing up (as I'm sure we all can) there was always that one kid who could run faster than everyone, could kick a ball farther, and could beat the crap out of most of us. Was this due to his pre-K kickball/boxing lessons?
Finally, if you and I both spend the same of time practicing diligently, will we be equally skilled? If not, why not? can we look in our genes to find an explanation? perhaps not the only explanation, but an explanation.
Simply put, Nature matters! and so does Nurture! Trying to deny the impact of either is the height of ignorance.
Last edited:
Well, finally a response..a little whiney, and weak in the fact department, but better than the 'NO BET' you gave me
last time !..I don't recall ever claiming to be more than a good, solid one pocket player, who bet all he could, and
played with anyone who came through the door !
Your evaluation of me, does not count near as much as Buddy, Frost, RA, Grady, Ed Kelly, Cooney, Eddie Robin, or
any of the guys that knew me, and my game..But nice try John, that will ALWAYS be your best game...'trying' !
SJD
PS...I would have loved to have played even one pocket with Rempe, it was NOT because I didn't try ! By the way,
I played RA all through his (and my) prime years, and let me enlighten you, Ronnie had NO peer's at one pocket,
thats why I always got 9/8.
Still, answer the question. Before you quit, in your opinion, what kept you from becoming as good as those guy you mention.
I seem to remember reading that you kept practicing and taking beatings until one day you just "got it" and from that moment on you played just under the top guys.
And I THOUGHT I was doing pretty good learning from many good and great players. In fact I did use many of the shots and moves I learned from them and even called a few out after the shot during the match.
But on reflection I think it would have been better to find a great teacher/player and stick with them like a boxer does in training camp.
Anyway I wouldn't trade my experiences for a do-over. I made a lot of friends and had a great time. Was worth way more than 10k to me.
As for Lou and a rematch, sorry if you can't handle a little barking you shouldn't play in the first place. Lou was completely happy to bark at me and call me all kinds of names to get the game.
The way I "acted" was to state my thoughts and attempt to document my travels unmolested. You notice that SJD is STILL barking and calling me names and you don't have a damn thing to say to him do you?
No, because you are hypocritical. You want me to "behave" a certain way yet YOU and SJD and a few others take the liberty to call me names and put me down at will.
Anyway, the point is that I am 100% certain that had I taken the other route with a dedicated coach and a dedicated practice routine then the outcome would have been different.
So I still feel that NURTURE would have beat "nature" if I had practiced correctly and deeply.