Natural ability VS. Trained ability

[JB Cases]

Thanks for coming on here and giving the forum a professional's opinion.....I was going to say something similar to this, but I think your opinion carries more weight.....I believe it's a fantasy for someone to achieve pro level ability without the natural talent, just by practicing like a monk for hours on end...same as all your examples in other sports listed above.....It also goes with what Mr. Irving Crane was quoted as saying...."although good practice and good instruction can help a player get better over time, there is a natural, inherent talent that either ya got, or you don't..."

Amen to that.......

That's all true but there are plenty of stories of world class athletes that are world class because of training from an early age not particularly because they were incredibly talented at.

Any aptitude test will quickly show what a person is stronger at than another person. The issue there though is that it's only a snapshot of where that person is at that moment in time without taking into account social factors and education. I am sure that there are plenty of stories of the person who was written off at something as having no talent and they came back to be world class.

In fact, the Chinese olympic gold medal hurdler Liao Shang was told that he had zero talent for hurdling and told to quit. He was not encouraged by the people in China whose responsibility it is to find and train talent. He found a local trainer and with that training went on to become the best in the world.

Here ya go - compliments of Google - seems reasonable to me.

http://expertfootball.com/training/naturevsnurture.php

I am pretty confident that most people have the ability to excel at pool if they put in the time AND have quality training. I believe that just about anyone could become a world class player barring physical disability to perform the shots. Whether they will become a CONSISTENT champion is another issue.

Can you teach someone to be mentally tough? Can you teach them to be confident? Can you teach them to be cool under pressure?

I think you can. I think any human being has the inner capacity to change their behavior. No matter what your bad habits are you can change them. If you start with no bad habits then so much the better.

The reason the baseball player was able to pick up pool quicker than other beginner level students is because his hand eye coordination was TRAINED and honed to a very high level. I am sure that if there was an accountant in the group and the group were asked to compile stats on a round robin pool tournament that the accountant would get it done faster than the professional ball player.

There is no doubt that talent plays a part in all this. Some people do seem to progress faster and pick things up easier. This relates to cognitive ability. That doesn't mean that the person who understands a concept faster than another person will be better than the person who works harder to get to the same level.

If the goal is to run a four minute mile and Joe can do it within a month and Sarah can do it five months there is no guarantee that when Sarah is able to it that Joe is even faster. He might be and then again he might not be. It might very well be that Sarah discovers something in month five that allows her to get faster than Joe.

We all know stories like that.

Other than one person being physically incapable of performing a task there is no reason why they can't be trained to perform it. We don't have any perfect "experiments" with hundreds of children being nurtured the exact same way to see if some of them are more naturally athletic than others. I happen to think that some are but at the same time I sincerely believe that barring physical disparity, any person can be trained to perform at world class levels. I didn't say that they would be the best, but certainly among the best.

 

[matthew]

It's an interesting question. I think people like Tiger Woods, Michael Jordon, and Johnny Archer all had natural ability growing up. They combined this with hours and hours of hard work, which resulted in their respective achievements.

However, I think that both natural ability and hardwork/determination in themselves, only get you so far. I suppose given two players in a head-to-head matchup, I would take the one who has used hardwork over ability. I think sometimes people overlook "heart" as the x-factor.

 

[Travis Bickle]

I recall an interesting analysis of the NBA finals a few years back that addresses this question, in a way. The person said that there was little doubt the Bulls would beat the Jazz that year. Utah had a fine team, Stockton was a terrific player, of course, but most of the games would come down to Malone and Jordan in the last few minutes. Malone might even have had a higher scoring avg. that year, but great as he was at his best, he'd never be the "natural scorer" that Jordan was. And that confidence and ability to adjust, without thinking, under pressure would be the difference. And it seems it was.

 

[ShootingArts]

exactly my position

John,

You have done a great job going into detail. This is exactly my position. There is no question that some have greater starting gifts than others. However some hugely gifted people go nowhere and far less gifted people sometimes rise to the top.

Efren started playing pool at an early age as did Jasmin. Many of today's top automobile and motorcycle racers are racing before they start the first grade. The best gunfighter of his era, perhaps any era, literally cut his teeth on an old six-shooter laying around the house. We have to have some minimum level of physical and mental abilities to perform any activity at a high level but it is always a blend of nature and nurture and I think nurture is perhaps the most important. Consider Peyton and Ely Manning. What are the odds of two superbowl winning quarterbacks in one family? Pretty good when they were aimed towards football from birth. Tiger Woods, aimed towards golf almost from birth. The Williams sisters, Serena and Venus, aimed towards tennis from a very early age. Jasmin, aimed towards pool since she was tiny. Many automobile racing families form multigenerational dynasties. I believe that has far more to do with opportunity and training then natural gifts.

Seems like nurture outweighs nature although both play a role.

Hu

That's all true but there are plenty of stories of world class athletes that are world class because of training from an early age not particularly because they were incredibly talented at.

Any aptitude test will quickly show what a person is stronger at than another person. The issue there though is that it's only a snapshot of where that person is at that moment in time without taking into account social factors and education. I am sure that there are plenty of stories of the person who was written off at something as having no talent and they came back to be world class.

In fact, the Chinese olympic gold medal hurdler Liao Shang was told that he had zero talent for hurdling and told to quit. He was not encouraged by the people in China whose responsibility it is to find and train talent. He found a local trainer and with that training went on to become the best in the world.

Here ya go - compliments of Google - seems reasonable to me.

http://expertfootball.com/training/naturevsnurture.php

I am pretty confident that most people have the ability to excel at pool if they put in the time AND have quality training. I believe that just about anyone could become a world class player barring physical disability to perform the shots. Whether they will become a CONSISTENT champion is another issue.

Can you teach someone to be mentally tough? Can you teach them to be confident? Can you teach them to be cool under pressure?

I think you can. I think any human being has the inner capacity to change their behavior. No matter what your bad habits are you can change them. If you start with no bad habits then so much the better.

The reason the baseball player was able to pick up pool quicker than other beginner level students is because his hand eye coordination was TRAINED and honed to a very high level. I am sure that if there was an accountant in the group and the group were asked to compile stats on a round robin pool tournament that the accountant would get it done faster than the professional ball player.

There is no doubt that talent plays a part in all this. Some people do seem to progress faster and pick things up easier. This relates to cognitive ability. That doesn't mean that the person who understands a concept faster than another person will be better than the person who works harder to get to the same level.

If the goal is to run a four minute mile and Joe can do it within a month and Sarah can do it five months there is no guarantee that when Sarah is able to it that Joe is even faster. He might be and then again he might not be. It might very well be that Sarah discovers something in month five that allows her to get faster than Joe.

We all know stories like that.

Other than one person being physically incapable of performing a task there is no reason why they can't be trained to perform it. We don't have any perfect "experiments" with hundreds of children being nurtured the exact same way to see if some of them are more naturally athletic than others. I happen to think that some are but at the same time I sincerely believe that barring physical disparity, any person can be trained to perform at world class levels. I didn't say that they would be the best, but certainly among the best.

 

[john schmidt]

John,

You have done a great job going into detail. This is exactly my position. There is no question that some have greater starting gifts than others. However some hugely gifted people go nowhere and far less gifted people sometimes rise to the top.

Efren started playing pool at an early age as did Jasmin. Many of today's top automobile and motorcycle racers are racing before they start the first grade. The best gunfighter of his era, perhaps any era, literally cut his teeth on an old six-shooter laying around the house. We have to have some minimum level of physical and mental abilities to perform any activity at a high level but it is always a blend of nature and nurture and I think nurture is perhaps the most important. Consider Peyton and Ely Manning. What are the odds of two superbowl winning quarterbacks in one family? Pretty good when they were aimed towards football from birth. Tiger Woods, aimed towards golf almost from birth. The Williams sisters, Serena and Venus, aimed towards tennis from a very early age. Jasmin, aimed towards pool since she was tiny. Many automobile racing families form multigenerational dynasties. I believe that has far more to do with opportunity and training then natural gifts.

Seems like nurture outweighs nature although both play a role.

Hu

i can show you thousands who have tried from birth to be pro golfers and they cant make it out of first stage at q school.

 

[john schmidt]

hi

i can show you thousands who have tried from birth to be pro golfers and they cant make it out of first stage at q school.

in closing ill say this is my humble opinion. if 2 people both play a million hours the one with more natural ability will be a better poolplayer in the end period.

 

[RRfireblade]

in closing ill say this is my humble opinion. if 2 people both play a million hours the one with more natural ability will be a better poolplayer in the end period.

What if one has natural mechanics but the other has natural mental focus. :grin:

 

[ShootingArts]

How focused?

i can show you thousands who have tried from birth to be pro golfers and they cant make it out of first stage at q school.

John,

Trying to do something and having an intense focus on it are two different things. I have competed fairly seriously at something most of my life. Safe to say that I have met hundreds, more likely thousands, of competitors. All wanted to be the best. Most stopped right there. They put in moderate practice and never considered being the best a real possibility. Others wanted to be the best but not if it took real effort. Some of the most naturally gifted people I have ever met fall in this category. They don't think they should have to work to be the best at anything. Then there are the people that live, breath, eat, focused on their goal.

A friend's brother decided he wanted to make a living with a revolver when he was in his early teens. What are the odds of this kid with a kid's dream being the most gifted on earth shooting a revolver? He practiced with a revolver every minute he could, he did brutal exercises designed to make him better with a revolver, and he held true to that one goal. His name is Jerry Miculek and he has made a living with a revolver all of his life and has been acknowledged the best competitor in the world with a revolver for decades. I have known a handful of people like him who have succeeded simply because they never considered any other option.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page to see a few of Jerry's accomplishments.
http://www.shootingusa.com/PRO_TIPS/JERRY_MICULEK/jerry_miculek.html

I have indicated my past level of play to you in private. As I have already said, I was absolutely terrible when I started playing pool. It took me a year until I was winning more beer than I was losing in bars. However playing 60-80 hours of pool a week, every week for years, did give me the ability to beat anyone, at least on a given day. There were some many hour sessions when I controlled every shot on the table. Nobody is good enough to win sitting in a chair.

By the way, besides being clumsy as a child, I was known for my persistence! The coach of a state championship football team at a large high school tried to talk me into playing football after scouting me at PE. Persistence was more important than being slow and clumsy. I was a quarterback sacking machine.

Hu

 

[poolplayer2093]

John,

Trying to do something and having an intense focus on it are two different things. I have competed fairly seriously at something most of my life. Safe to say that I have met hundreds, more likely thousands, of competitors. All wanted to be the best. Most stopped right there. They put in moderate practice and never considered being the best a real possibility. Others wanted to be the best but not if it took real effort. Some of the most naturally gifted people I have ever met fall in this category. They don't think they should have to work to be the best at anything. Then there are the people that live, breath, eat, focused on their goal.

A friend's brother decided he wanted to make a living with a revolver when he was in his early teens. What are the odds of this kid with a kid's dream being the most gifted on earth shooting a revolver? He practiced with a revolver every minute he could, he did brutal exercises designed to make him better with a revolver, and he held true to that one goal. His name is Jerry Miculek and he has made a living with a revolver all of his life and has been acknowledged the best competitor in the world with a revolver for decades. I have known a handful of people like him who have succeeded simply because they never considered any other option.

Scroll down to the bottom of the page to see a few of Jerry's accomplishments.
http://www.shootingusa.com/PRO_TIPS/JERRY_MICULEK/jerry_miculek.html

I have indicated my past level of play to you in private. As I have already said, I was absolutely terrible when I started playing pool. It took me a year until I was winning more beer than I was losing in bars. However playing 60-80 hours of pool a week, every week for years, did give me the ability to beat anyone, at least on a given day. There were some many hour sessions when I controlled every shot on the table. Nobody is good enough to win sitting in a chair.

By the way, besides being clumsy as a child, I was known for my persistence! The coach of a state championship football team at a large high school tried to talk me into playing football after scouting me at PE. Persistence was more important than being slow and clumsy. I was a quarterback sacking machine.

Hu

You only talking about barbox pool?

 

[ShootingArts]

I can talk any size

You only talking about barbox pool?

I have played pool on everything from the smallest barboxes to five by tens, and played well on all of them. I also simply had no local competition on a snooker table, I easily beat everyone I played. Only fair to admit that I was the only one spending 15-20 hours a week every week just practicing on a snooker table so I had a slight edge.

I was already a solid pool player when I took up snooker so once I adjusted to what shots were possible on a snooker table I was a decent player. Decent not being good enough I worked very hard on the snooker table. Nothing like a few hours on a snooker table in the early evening to make a moderately tight nine footer seem like a barbox. I credit the snooker table and the need for greater control in all areas for putting the last coat of polish on my pool game.

For years it was a rare day when I didn't spend at least some time on a snooker table, an oversized eight foot or nine footer depending on which hall I went to, and a barbox. While it can be argued just playing one or the other can harm your game on other tables playing all tables all the time definitely helps your game especially when you have to play on strange equipment. No surprise that I adjusted in a hurry to any table I played on and any conditions.

Hu

 

[poolplayer2093]

I have played pool on everything from the smallest barboxes to five by tens, and played well on all of them. I also simply had no local competition on a snooker table, I easily beat everyone I played. Only fair to admit that I was the only one spending 15-20 hours a week every week just practicing on a snooker table so I had a slight edge.

I was already a solid pool player when I took up snooker so once I adjusted to what shots were possible on a snooker table I was a decent player. Decent not being good enough I worked very hard on the snooker table. Nothing like a few hours on a snooker table in the early evening to make a moderately tight nine footer seem like a barbox. I credit the snooker table and the need for greater control in all areas for putting the last coat of polish on my pool game.

For years it was a rare day when I didn't spend at least some time on a snooker table, an oversized eight foot or nine footer depending on which hall I went to, and a barbox. While it can be argued just playing one or the other can harm your game on other tables playing all tables all the time definitely helps your game especially when you have to play on strange equipment. No surprise that I adjusted in a hurry to any table I played on and any conditions.

Hu

have you ever lost at anything you've done? you might just rival chuck norris

 

[shinigami]

have you ever lost at anything you've done? you might just rival chuck norris

Rival? Sounds like Chuck Norris might need weight~

 

[ShootingArts]

I have lost at everything I have ever done

I have lost at everything I have ever done. There are damned few things I have ever done that I haven't won at too.

"Just the facts, Ma'am" Joe Friday

Hu

have you ever lost at anything you've done? you might just rival chuck norris

 

[john schmidt]

hi

I have played pool on everything from the smallest barboxes to five by tens, and played well on all of them. I also simply had no local competition on a snooker table, I easily beat everyone I played. Only fair to admit that I was the only one spending 15-20 hours a week every week just practicing on a snooker table so I had a slight edge.

I was already a solid pool player when I took up snooker so once I adjusted to what shots were possible on a snooker table I was a decent player. Decent not being good enough I worked very hard on the snooker table. Nothing like a few hours on a snooker table in the early evening to make a moderately tight nine footer seem like a barbox. I credit the snooker table and the need for greater control in all areas for putting the last coat of polish on my pool game.

For years it was a rare day when I didn't spend at least some time on a snooker table, an oversized eight foot or nine footer depending on which hall I went to, and a barbox. While it can be argued just playing one or the other can harm your game on other tables playing all tables all the time definitely helps your game especially when you have to play on strange equipment. No surprise that I adjusted in a hurry to any table I played on and any conditions.

Hu

i tinkered with snooker and in a few months ran 7 centuries including a 145. i did that on a 6 by 12 with a pool cue at 9mile billiards in pensacola.i dont think it helped or hurt my poolgame.to me snooker is fun and challenging .i quit after the 145 because i know im nnever going to get serious at snooker so i stuck with pool.the guy who owns the table had it in his house and played snooker for 25 years with a high run of 68.
in a few months i almost ran a perfect game. so again if your going to be good it happens quick.

 

[poolplayer2093]

I have lost at everything I have ever done. There are damned few things I have ever done that I haven't won at too.

"Just the facts, Ma'am" Joe Friday

Hu

you play pool at a world class level. shoot a pistol at a world class level. did you break Steve Prefontaine's records too?

i bet you throw a mean right hook that nobody could stand up to either

 

[ShootingArts]

i tinkered with snooker and in a few months ran 7 centuries including a 145. i did that on a 6 by 12 with a pool cue at 9mile billiards in pensacola.i dont think it helped or hurt my poolgame.to me snooker is fun and challenging .i quit after the 145 because i know im nnever going to get serious at snooker so i stuck with pool.the guy who owns the table had it in his house and played snooker for 25 years with a high run of 68.
in a few months i almost ran a perfect game. so again if your going to be good it happens quick.

John,

Needless to say, 145 is outstanding but still a long ways from 147 because it means you didn't get back to the seven ball once or twice so basically you missed playable shape once or twice in your run. Still better than I have ever done. The gifts that you were born with that have helped you succeed in other areas helped, as did the level of pool you were already playing.

We have both already stated in other posts that the length of time someone takes to rise to their highest level of performance is dependent on their natural abilities amongst other things. Reading your posts it seems you have been an athlete since your early years. I was anything but an athlete. I think our different perspectives are why we see the time it takes someone to become their best at something a bit differently. It didn't take me too long to reach my peak at snooker either because it was more of an adaptation than a new skill. However most things I have ever done have required a lot of time and effort to reach my personal best level. Best estimate, it took me over 5000 hours to reach near my best at pool and probably another 3000-5000 hours to reach my highest level of play. Definitely not fast or easy for me.

Hu

 

[ShootingArts]

curious now

you play pool at a world class level. shoot a pistol at a world class level. did you break Steve Prefontaine's records too?

i bet you throw a mean right hook that nobody could stand up to either

I don't settle for mediocre at anything I do. Do you?

Your reading obviously isn't world class. I made it very plain that I didn't shoot a pistol world class. I set local records because I am a tough competitor regardless of what I am competing at and the format of the particular matches favored my skills and abilities.

As for Pre's records, what part of "slow" didn't you understand. They timed me in the hundred yard dash with an hour glass because they got tired of turning an egg timer over!

Who have you been talking to about my pugilistic skills and why? :grin: :grin: :grin:

Hu

 

[JB Cases]

i tinkered with snooker and in a few months ran 7 centuries including a 145. i did that on a 6 by 12 with a pool cue at 9mile billiards in pensacola.i dont think it helped or hurt my poolgame.to me snooker is fun and challenging .i quit after the 145 because i know im nnever going to get serious at snooker so i stuck with pool.the guy who owns the table had it in his house and played snooker for 25 years with a high run of 68.
in a few months i almost ran a perfect game. so again if your going to be good it happens quick.

And what ywe don't know is how intensely the man who owned the table in his house took the game. Did he truly practice the drills and the patterns or did he just play? If he practiced then what did he practice and with whom? Did he have any kind of training at all?

I don't understand why someone who can run centuries on a 6x12 doesn't go after the big money in pro snooker. But aside from that your experience only proves what we have said. Because you trained intensely you gained a greater understanding of what the balls do. I have seen your demonstrations, you know shots that other pros don't because you make it a point to understand the dynamics of the game more than most.

That's training not talent.

Once you show another pro a shot they haven't seen before they can then go on to master it and may even add to it. That's because their skill level is high enough that there is no problem with their fundamentals and ability to execute.

Take someone like me and show me the same shot and I might not be able to execute it simply because I don't have the same level of trained skill. I know that if I put in the time and had someone to guide me then I could develop that skill.

How do I know this? Because I, and others, have seen my game go up each time I get quality instruction from people like Danny Medina, Toby Flaherty, Jose Parica, Cliff Joyner, Rodney Morris, Joe Salazar, among others. However I don't put in the requisite time to master the things they show me so it doesn't become ingrained.

The old saying goes that the amateur practices until they get it right and the pro practices until they can't get it wrong.

You said that if two players played a million hours then the one with more natural ability would be the better player. I agree but they would both be world class players and the one with more natural ability would not win all the time against the other one.

 

[john schmidt]

And what ywe don't know is how intensely the man who owned the table in his house took the game. Did he truly practice the drills and the patterns or did he just play? If he practiced then what did he practice and with whom? Did he have any kind of training at all?

I don't understand why someone who can run centuries on a 6x12 doesn't go after the big money in pro snooker. But aside from that your experience only proves what we have said. Because you trained intensely you gained a greater understanding of what the balls do. I have seen your demonstrations, you know shots that other pros don't because you make it a point to understand the dynamics of the game more than most.

That's training not talent.

Once you show another pro a shot they haven't seen before they can then go on to master it and may even add to it. That's because their skill level is high enough that there is no problem with their fundamentals and ability to execute.

Take someone like me and show me the same shot and I might not be able to execute it simply because I don't have the same level of trained skill. I know that if I put in the time and had someone to guide me then I could develop that skill.

How do I know this? Because I, and others, have seen my game go up each time I get quality instruction from people like Danny Medina, Toby Flaherty, Jose Parica, Cliff Joyner, Rodney Morris, Joe Salazar, among others. However I don't put in the requisite time to master the things they show me so it doesn't become ingrained.

The old saying goes that the amateur practices until they get it right and the pro practices until they can't get it wrong.

You said that if two players played a million hours then the one with more natural ability would be the better player. I agree but they would both be world class players and the one with more natural ability would not win all the time against the other one.

first of all if two people play a million hours odds are neither one is going to be world class .secondly to say if i just spent the time i would be great is a little much.
i know many people who have been around billiard industry for their whole life.been to exibitions,seen accu stats,have a table at home,play in leagues ,play in tourneys ,read the books ,taken the lessons and after all that corey duell would have robbed them after playing 2 years.
trust me as a general rule world class is born not made.
you think there is people who have not played golf there whole life ,had every oppotunity and instruction to be great.
they usually end up very good but very good and world class is worlds apart trust me i know.
anybody can play real good pool but to say if i just played everyday i would play like the pros is kidding themselves

 

[JB Cases]

first of all if two people play a million hours odds are neither one is going to be world class .secondly to say if i just spent the time i would be great is a little much.
i know many people who have been around billiard industry for their whole life.been to exibitions,seen accu stats,have a table at home,play in leagues ,play in tourneys ,read the books ,taken the lessons and after all that corey duell would have robbed them after playing 2 years.
trust me as a general rule world class is born not made.
you think there is people who have not played golf there whole life ,had every oppotunity and instruction to be great.
they usually end up very good but very good and world class is worlds apart trust me i know.
anybody can play real good pool but to say if i just played everyday i would play like the pros is kidding themselves

No one is saying that just because someone plays every day they would be world class.

What I am saying is that if you take someone and nurture them with the same amount of experience as Efren had, same type of learning experiences, same tutors, same everything then it's very likely that this person will be a world class player as well. Will they be as good as Efren? Probably not because that's where personality and cognitive skills come in.

So I'll agree with you then that champions are born if you'll agree that they are also formed.

Efren Reyes without any introduction to pool might have just been a world champion farmer instead. However he did become involved in pool and was competing against tough competition for money at a young age. There is no denying that these experiences honed his skill.

I am fairly certain that if Efren Reyes had been born in a remote village with one broken down pool table and no one to teach him more than the basics that he would never have reached any decent level in pool.

Do you at least agree with that?