Nature vs Nurture: New study in favor of Nature

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.

Thing is science and psychology are answering these questions. I feel that those who say it's just god-given talent and that most people just can't get there are about the same as people who thought that performing lobotomies were the way to cure mental illness.

People can be neurologically damaged, they can be chemically imbalanced and those things can be sometimes regulated with drugs....and sometimes they can be regulated with willpower as some psychiatrists have found out.

Thus your questions are valid yet they are questions that some like San Jose Dick refuse to even ask. For guys like him every human has a line that they cannot cross no matter how much they try and until I see actual science that PROVES conclusively that an otherwise able-bodied person of sound mind can't reach world class performance with deep practice and training, I will be of the opposite opinion. And that opinion is that every such person can always get better than they are.

And someday, probably in our lifetime for those of us in our 40s, we will probably see it come to pass that we can be tweaked genetically and biologically to BE more adept at whatever we desire to excel at.

we already know that some drugs will do that, adderall, cocaine, ritalin, viagra, pain pills, etc....We know that cyclists have figured out how to use blood transfusions and hormones to enhance their performance.. and steroids, etc...
 
Green Rep received.

"Your (comments) are primarily responsible for changing my opinion on this issue. Once my thinking changed I began to practice hard and I started improving again. Us humans have nearly unlimited potential. Thanks for helping me believe this again."

This to me is what it's all about. The negative view is - you will never be good so stop trying.....and the positive view is you can be great keep trying....

Why not encourage everyone to do all that they want to in order to get as good as they can? That would be a much better world than one where everyone is slotted into whatever someone else thinks is their place in life.

Bet the pool room owners would appreciate the positive encouragement as well.
 
[...]
Simply put, Nature matters! and so does Nurture! Trying to deny the impact of either is the height of ignorance.

Really -- did you hear me say or imply that nature doesn't matter? I never said that. If you want to get into insults, I counter with reading comprehension skills are fundamental. Read carefully. I never denied the impact of nature to help speed up the process of becoming really, really good at something. What I said was in reference to those that think nature is the "be all, end all" of what you can do in life, which I disagree with.

We all have mental blocks or obstacles to overcome. Some more than others. Some have no obstacles at all, and are those gifted people. But for those to say that those with obstacles are "hopelessly chasing ghosts," I say horse puckey.

The "either you have it right out of the chute, or you don't" nature subscribers are a prime example of the extremists in our society. You know the type; "black or white," "hot or cold," "left or right," "democrat or republican (and hard wingers to boot)," etc. These "all or nothing" types have lost the meaning of the word, moderation. They seem to have lost the ability to see the countless shades of gray between the polar "born with it by nature" and "has to work his/her ass off for it" extremes.

Yes, the real question is, "how much do you want it?" We all say we'd love to be world champions, or even just to be really, really good at something. Well, what are you doing about it? How bad do you want it? There's a stark difference between "would like," "want," and "need." Where you fall on that scale, really determines your motivation to go get it.

-Sean
 
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.

Hold on there hot rod I have kept my comments cordial ,, and will continue to do so unless you don't ,,, I don't hold grudges like you do ,, but that's ok if you do
Personally I think SJD does get carried away but I don't the history between you 2


1
 
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.

More mis-information John...You never remember ANYTHING you read !..I have not 'practiced' for total of 90 minutes, over my entire lifetime ! .......I know this has always irked you, because I have always played about 15-20 balls better than you, (at one pocket) and you practice 'til your eyes bleed ! :eek:

I "GOT IT" (as you call it) when I was 16 years old !..Of course I could have only spotted you 10 balls at that time :embarrassed2:..NURTURE over NATURE that, willya !..You need to 'stifle' John, you are a little short on ammo. :sorry:

PS..And, who said I played UNDER the 'top guy's' ?...If you don't mind, I think I'll take this guy's opinion, over yours, on my game !...It was one of his last few posts at onepocket.org...Some really fascinating recollections, from the late, great professor ! ;)


Cochran’s in San Francisco, was anything and everything, simply the greatest pool room ever. 1028 Market St. was the actual address. I worked there in 1963. I got paid two dollars an hour and often I’d pay someone five bucks an hour to work for me so I could be in action. Public transportation was $.15. I didn’t own a car and neither did my friends.
Ronnie Allen won the One Pocket tournament there in 1962. When it was over nobody hustled him to play for money. Ronnie gave Earl Whitehead 8 to 5 and the break and won easily. Here are some of the denizens of that unforgetable era

“Ears”, smart and clever, a real good game maker.
100 Ball Blackie, still played a nice game in his dotage. We used to kid him and call him 10 Ball Blackie but he used to run 100’s on the 5’ X 10”.
“Kansas City Whitey”, a real rascal, his parents sent him $2,000 a month to stay away from home.
Jesse, “The Go Away Kid”, a flashy young black player with much gamble.
“King of the open table”, so called because on the “open Table” ( a 6’ X 12’ snooker table) anyone could play for the time. The King would go months without losing a single game but wouldn’t play for money.

“One Eyed Hank”, a brilliant but troubled player, spent half of every year at sea, killed himself with an overdose of LSD, or so it was said. I loved Hank and I still miss him.
“Mexican Phil”…A really good One Pocket player, moved like a ghost, was a terrific gambler, but couldn’t leave the bottle alone.
“Okie Sam”…Very good all round player and scuffler. He came from the Eddie Taylor school of pool. He died of cancer, broke and lonely.
Ronnie Allen displayed his power One Pocket game to everybody. He was aggressive and fearless and really unbeatable.

Frank “Bananas” Rodriguez…One of the sharpest gamblers I ever knew. He was a perfect gentleman and a very fine One Pocket player.
Canadian Dick…The resident philosopher. On the 6x12 table by the counter, there was a daily “out hole only” game. To give you an idea how good Dick played, one day in that game, 11 times in a row, he one railed his ball into the out hole. He moved to Burlingame and managed a pet store until he passed away.

“San Jose Dick”…He liked action so much that he would sometimes rent two tables next to each other and play two opponents at once. At the time, Dick played about as good a One Pocket as anybody in the world. <--
Jack Perkins…A flashy young and sharp gambler who played One Pocket about a ball or so under Ronnie.
“Harry the Russian”…Used to hang around with “Bananas”. Harry was a good game maker and took care of himself.
“Hawaiian Paul”…Worked at the Palace down the street. Paul played as good a Nine Ball as anybody in the world but only against weak players and for small money. ($3 to $10 a game) Paul also played very good golf.
Rusty Jones, a high roller and one of the classiest gamblers I ever knew.

Denny Searcy, the best stroke of any player ever. It’s too bad scientists didn’t examine it when he was maybe the best player in the world.
Philipino Gene, a good card player and hustler.
“Oakland Blackie”, Bucktooth’s uncle and a top shortstop.

Earl Phillips, a venerable older player who never said a word but was tough to beat for the dough.
“Sleepy Bob”, a very fine player.
Johnny Vivas, played everything good, too bad he was a heroin addict.
Tugboat Whaley, grand old-timer who was one of the few willing to share knowledge.

While I was there, notable visitors included: Clem, Boston Shorty, Artie from Chicago, Jack Stamper, Eddie Taylor, Richie Florence, Weldon Rogers, Jack Cooney, Al the Plumber, Portland Don, Cole Dickson, and Joe Salazar (Tracy Joe then.).

Quite a crew, wouldn't you say?
 
Last edited:
More mis-information John...You never remember ANYTHING you read !..I have not 'practiced' for total of 90 minutes, over my entire lifetime ! .......I know this has always irked you, because I have always played about 15-20 balls better than you, (at one pocket) and you practice 'til your eyes bleed ! :eek:

I "GOT IT" (as you call it) when I was 16 years old !..Of course I could have only spotted you 10 balls at that time :embarrassed2:..NURTURE over NATURE that, willya !..You need to 'stifle' John, you are a little short on ammo. :sorry:

PS..And, who said I played UNDER the 'top guy's' ?...If you don't mind, I think I'll take this guy's opinion, over yours, on my game !...It was one of his last few posts at onepocket.org...Some really fascinating recollections, from the late, great professor ! ;)
I see. So you never ever practiced. You were not a top player. By top I mean elite. You were of course a top shortstop according to all reports. James has a ton of respect for your game.

I was just wondering what stopped you from being one of the greats? Lack of practice maybe?

And I don't practice all the time. In fact this past week I went out once. Played with james Walden for an hour and went home.

I do read a lot though so I don't stay ignorant. Instead of leaning on superstition and supposition I prefer to learn when I can.

You should try it. :-)
 
I see. So you never ever practiced. You were not a top player. By top I mean elite. You were of course a top shortstop according to all reports. James has a ton of respect for your game.

I was just wondering what stopped you from being one of the greats? Lack of practice maybe?

And I don't practice all the time. In fact this past week I went out once. Played with james Walden for an hour and went home.

I do read a lot though so I don't stay ignorant. Instead of leaning on superstition and supposition I prefer to learn when I can.

You should try it. :-)

If Grady's says you play one pocket as good as anyone in the world , I would say that's elite ,,, but what do I know


1
 
If Grady's says you play one pocket as good as anyone in the world , I would say that's elite ,,, but what do I know


1
Said. Grady is gone. Unfortunately Grady's assessment is but one of the few of that opinion. Respectable comment for sure but without much in the way of actual accomplishments to support it.

I think Dick knows he was a ball under the best and he knows his name will not be among the first mentioned when speaking of one pocket greats. But he is in the one pocket hall of fame and I would guess they don't induct people who couldn't play.

I am just curious to know what was the difference between Dick and Ronnie? Why did Dick always need weight unless he tricked Ronnie somehow?
 
Said. Grady is gone. Unfortunately Grady's assessment is but one of the few of that opinion. Respectable comment for sure but without much in the way of actual accomplishments to support it.

I think Dick knows he was a ball under the best and he knows his name will not be among the first mentioned when speaking of one pocket greats. But he is in the one pocket hall of fame and I would guess they don't induct people who couldn't play.

I am just curious to know what was the difference between Dick and Ronnie? Why did Dick always need weight unless he tricked Ronnie somehow?

I don't know much about 1 pocket but even if he's getting a ball he would hardly be a shortstop or maybe I'm wrong ,, Shane was getting weight from Scott is he a shortstop one pocket player also


1
 
I don't know much about 1 pocket but even if he's getting a ball he would hardly be a shortstop or maybe I'm wrong ,, Shane was getting weight from Scott is he a shortstop one pocket player also


1
Good point. OK low level pro who never made it to the elite level. Now, why not? Because he was genetically inferior or because he did not practice enough?
 
And I don't practice all the time. In fact this past week I went out once. Played with james Walden for an hour and went home........ I do read a lot though so I don't stay ignorant.

Proving once again, that you CAN'T read !..I have finally figured out, there is only one thing you are better at, than trying to debate ANY subject, and that is staying ignorant !..If I can penetrate your gray fluff, I would make you an offer...Exchanging insults with you is fun, because I have so much the best of it, but lets get down to business !

I respect James' game too..How about this for a good fair match-up..James can coach you, and I will coach Lou ?
..Race to 10 games, even, (for ????$$$$) and you get one game on the wire !..We will give you your usual requirement, of 4 mos. practice, professional tutoring, and browbeating and insulting Lou and I ! (that is if Lou thinks ANY amount of money, is worth ever seeing you again ?)

Now, before you go into your usual "OK, YOU'RE ON, PUT UP $100,000" rant..Lets talk about posting a reasonable forfeit amount, and I'm sure we can accomodate, at least a 20K wager..Please give this your utmost [sic] sensible consideration !..Maybe something fruitful can evolve..After all, this is how the first match came about, isn't it ? ..We should be able to wrap up negotiations, and get it on by New Years, 2015 !

PS..Perhaps we should exchange email, and phone nos., so as not to bore the already disgruntled forum members..(also to avoid a potential Wilson 'hammer ban')..What say you ?

SJD--World Class, Top Pro Level Negotiator :eek:

__________________
 
Last edited:
Lou won't play. Point is moot. But when I am ready, as I told him, I will challenge him directly. If he wants a group to back him then he will arrange it with you then.
 
I wrote "+5 Handicap" - there's a big difference

Duplicate Post
 
Last edited:
I wrote "+5 Handicap" - there's a big difference

I didn't say a "5 Handicap," I wrote "+5 Handicap" - there's a big difference......I've played with several +4 and +5 Handicap players and they shoot in the mid to upper 60s.

Today, 08:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ Wiley View Post
Wow, you just showed your cards didn't you - a "+5 Handicap" averages 5 under, not 5 over. I can't believe you're trying to pass yourself off as a good golfer.....that's ludicrous.

I know all the guys you played golf with in Ft. Worth.....they all consider you a sucker and used to beat you out of your $30 every day......what a gambler you must have been.




I think you're wrong about the handicap thing..

A five handicap means that you average 5 over par.

Jaden <-----a 13 handicap...
 
I didn't say a "5 Handicap," I wrote "+5 Handicap" - there's a big difference......I've played with several +4 and +5 Handicap players and they shoot in the mid to upper 60s.

Today, 08:03 AM
Quote:

You must've missed it...You should stop typing, long enough to read a post or two occasionally ! :o

................................http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=4804473&postcount=110

...Your imaginary, made-up, golf bulls**t ended several pages ago, when you had no reply to this ! :cool:
 
Last edited:
Really -- did you hear me say or imply that nature doesn't matter? I never said that. If you want to get into insults, I counter with reading comprehension skills are fundamental. Read carefully. I never denied the impact of nature to help speed up the process of becoming really, really good at something. What I said was in reference to those that think nature is the "be all, end all" of what you can do in life, which I disagree with.

We all have mental blocks or obstacles to overcome. Some more than others. Some have no obstacles at all, and are those gifted people. But for those to say that those with obstacles are "hopelessly chasing ghosts," I say horse puckey.

The "either you have it right out of the chute, or you don't" nature subscribers are a prime example of the extremists in our society. You know the type; "black or white," "hot or cold," "left or right," "democrat or republican (and hard wingers to boot)," etc. These "all or nothing" types have lost the meaning of the word, moderation. They seem to have lost the ability to see the countless shades of gray between the polar "born with it by nature" and "has to work his/her ass off for it" extremes.

Yes, the real question is, "how much do you want it?" We all say we'd love to be world champions, or even just to be really, really good at something. Well, what are you doing about it? How bad do you want it? There's a stark difference between "would like," "want," and "need." Where you fall on that scale, really determines your motivation to go get it.

-Sean
Was not trying to insult you or anyone else for that matter...simply stating my opinion that anyone who truly believes that either nature or nurture Is 100% responsible for success in skill acquisition is largely uninformed.
 
You, have repeatedly proved that you have *absolutely* no clue what I will or will not do.

Lou Figueroa
OK. I think you won't play. You said you won't. So I believe you. You are however free to change your mind. We will see when the time comes if you do.
 
You, have repeatedly proved that you have *absolutely* no clue what I will or will not do.

Lou Figueroa

John's wrong about lots of stuff, but he's absolutely correct when he says you won't play him again for the same amount, or close to it.

Personally, I don't think you're afraid to play him. In fact, it's probably a smart move on your part. Sure, you won the match, but you didn't run him over like a lot of people thought you would. Because of this you of all people probably realize that you don't have to win if you play him again. You were the better player, but not by much. On any given day, either of you is capable of beating the other, but is no more than a 55% favorite in my opinion.

I'd love to see a rematch, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
 
Back
Top