Hard to quantify sports question

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree on poker.

I feel like that anybody with a ~100 IQ can probably be made into a reasonable winner at say 30/60 with enough study and practice. The fish in poker aren't fish because they try to learn and fail, they're fish because they don't try to learn to play the best way possible.

I think at some level there's some innante logic/reasoning/game theory stuff that probably seperates folks out, but that treshold is likely pretty high.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, and you can learn to be a good recreational fisherman. But there is some level of innate talent that must be possessed to be truly great.

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even the most marginal NBA player is an absurdly better athlete than an ordinary person. When basketball people say that Grant Long can't shoot, can't pass, can't dribble, what they mean is: He can shoot, pass and dribble better than you, better than anybody you know, better than all but a few hundred people in the world. Long's jump shot is so bad, by NBA standards, that his team never runs a play designed to set him up for it; but you could practice your jump shot every day forever and still never beat him in a game of Horse. '

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know anything about Grant Long, but it doesn't seem to me that every NBA player is better than an average person at every basketball skill. I have basically no basketball skills whatsoever, but I think think I could shoot free throws better than Ben Wallace with a little practice.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's probably true for FTs but nothing else. And it is true about the overall level of talent in the NBA being just absurd.

I remember back in the 80s, the Rockets had this scrub 12th man forward named Dave Feitl, a big goofy white guy who never ever played. I once went down to Fonde Recreation Center (legendary pickup spot, lots of great players there), and Feitl was running with 9 guys who were all 6'7" or taller and all looked chiseled out of granite. Feitl completely dominated the game, scored at will, grabbed every rebound, nailed 3s, etc. And this guy was one of the worst players in the NBA, yet he was without question the best player in a very high level pick up game. It's just a whole different level.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, you just have to go to the cage on W 4th St or Rucker to see the 2nd-tier college stars and NBDL guys dominate the best pickup players in the City on a daily basis.

I remember Kenny Smith came to one game and some playground "legend" scored like 20 or 25 in the first half on Kenny and was taunting him at the half.

Kenny outscored him like 60-4 in the second half. I think he had more than 60 actually.

NBA shooting guards regularly hit 70% or more of their 3s in practice, unguarded. Not one person at 2p2 can do that on a daily basis from NBA range. Not even close - I'm talking over 100 shots, not 10, even I can get hot and make 7 of 10 from straight away.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think there is a single 2p2 poster who could make 70/100 3s? I bet if you got the money big enough you'd find out differently, 2p2 is a big place.

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't read my post, did you?

Let's say 500 per day, for 6 days in a row. He has to make 2100+ NBA 3s with an NBA ball. I'm sure you can get me and many others to take that bet if you find a random 2p2er who thinks he can shoot.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree on poker.

I feel like that anybody with a ~100 IQ can probably be made into a reasonable winner at say 30/60 with enough study and practice.

[/ QUOTE ]Let's accept that as true. Just because one is profitable at 30/60, it doesn't mean he can go to the Big Game and clean at Barry Greenstein.

Similarly, the 26 year old multi-millionaire can become an accomplished driver, maybe even competitive on a regional basis. Doesn't mean he's ready for NASCAR, IndyCar, or Formula 1.

[gusmahler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
.

So if a guy who's been racing half of his life has only a small chance of becoming a NASCAR racer, the the average person, who has never raced before, doesn't have a chance in hell of becoming a NASCAR driver in 5 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Extend out the timeline then. Seems like your argument is still about practice and not innate ability.


[/ QUOTE ]
I was reading an article about a guitar player and I thought about this argument.

Does it matter if the difference is some innate "talent" or if it's just hard work? E.g., Steve Vai is a better guitar player than me or you or anyone on 2p2. Is it because he practiced 10 hours a day for a few years (and still probably practices a couple hours a day) or is it because he's talented?

I'm not so sure that you can so cleanly separate the two. Surely, you'd agree that Michael Jordan is talented. But it's also true that he practiced his ass off when he was in HS and college. Same is true of just about any pro athelete (or musician).

[PowerRangers]

You can easily separate natural talent/abilities and skill that is gained through experience.

Let me introduce an example that has not been used before here, but is relevant to "sports."

Bowling. Bowling has always been the "sport" for me that I think is ridiculous to be considered a sport. You are competing against an opponent, and yet, you're not. You're playing an isolated game that is being compared to another isolated game. In golf, this is the case, but, the conditions, the shots, the courses vary. In bowling, there is very minor variation from lane to lane (not enough, in my in opinion to influence the outcome), such that the bowler should be able to compensate for the differences.

If you could train yourself to make the same exact motion on every single 1st roll (never needing to pick up a split or a spare at all), you'd be the world's greatest bowler-just roll a strike everytime, right? Is this from practice or innate skill? Clearly someone who practices this same motion 4 hours a day is going to be a great bowler. But who has the time? Professional bowlers do...

I am suggesting that you can take a random person who has never bowled in his or her life (at least 18 years old), have them trained and bowl 8 hours a day for 1 year, and turn them into a professional bowler (they can consistently bowl >260).

Anyway, that example was slightly tangential, but the point is that "sports" like fishing, golf, bowling, darts, poker are not sports require a "natural talent or ability," but rather can be perfected with proper training and practice on any person of normal intelligence and athletic prowess (to mean we aren't training a crippled wheel-chair bound man to hit a golf ball, as that becomes a different sport).

[MCS]

[ QUOTE ]
If you could train yourself to make the same exact motion on every single 1st roll (never needing to pick up a split or a spare at all), you'd be the world's greatest bowler-just roll a strike everytime, right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't bowl, but as I understand it, it's important to be able to adapt to different lane conditions and such.


[ QUOTE ]
I am suggesting that you can take a random person who has never bowled in his or her life (at least 18 years old), have them trained and bowl 8 hours a day for 1 year, and turn them into a professional bowler (they can consistently bowl >260).

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is true, because I think there are probably a lot of people that bowl a ton who still couldn't play on tour. I wonder to what degree the ability to handle pressure matters--it seems pretty crucial.

If I thought it WERE true, I would probably do it.


[ QUOTE ]
the point is that "sports" like fishing, golf, bowling, darts, poker are not sports require a "natural talent or ability," but rather can be perfected with proper training and practice on any person of normal intelligence and athletic prowess

[/ QUOTE ]

I would totally disagree with you re: golf specifically, and probably with most of the others as well. A lot of the best players in those fields were awesome pretty early on. I don't think poker is a sport, but whatever.

There are a bunch of kids playing golf, so I'd think talent matters a lot. Top juniors become PGA touring pros at a pretty high rate. I guess Tiger was swinging a club early on and all, but I can't imagine I'd have been able to do what he did at 2 years old no matter how much my dad made me practice in my crib.

[NicksDad1970]

Pretty awesome post Dids.

I think most people with top notch trainers, equip etc could become equal to a driver like Reed Sorenson, David Stremme, Travis Kvapil, Scott Wimmer etc.

I'll call those guys third tier drivers.

To make it to second tier I'd say you would need quite a bit of natural skill and all those other things to have the abilities.

To make it to a top tier you would need everything going for you to include just plain and simple more abilities.

I think the top skilled pure racers out there are Tony Stewart, Kyle busch, Jeff Gordon, and 1 or 2 more I can't think of right now.

Last time I said that to someone he asked me out of the top tier who did I think was best. I said Tony Stewart was hands down. Well that wasn't the right thing to say to him. He blasted me about Gordons championships etc.

I told him that Tony was still the best driver but Jimmy Johnson had a better team. Jimmy Johnson's team is better because JJ can chill and not let his temper get the best of him on a REGULAR basis, Chad Knaus (JJ's crew chief) knows what JJ is thinking before JJ does.

There is a lot more to winning races than pure driver skill.

NASCAR is a sport but I think the skill/ability to marketability ratio is a lot less than about any other sport.

I mean Jeremy Mayfield is a better driver than half the drivers that start each race but he's not young and good looking.

[quirkasaurus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thremp- Whoever can afford a go-kart, basically.

[/ QUOTE ]Yes, you can just buy a go-kart. But it's more than just that. Your 7 year old wants to race, so you get him a go kart. But you also have to take him to the track once a month (or more often). You have to teach him how to race. And once he gets good, the cars get more and more expensive. And the travel takes you farther and farther from home. An Andretti parent would tolerate all that because racing is "in his blood." A typical middle class parent will just put their kid in some more convenient sport.

[/ QUOTE ]
And people wonder why Americans suck at the international level of racing. Brazil, Germany, England, etc. all have lots and lots of kart racing leagues for kids. If we had such a system I would imagine our talent pool would be much greater.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like the ABA ( lawyers ) would ever allow such a thing.
The first kid that gets hurt - - - the league would get
sued for billions and that would be the end of that.

heck, i don't even see DIVING BOARDS any more in America...
:-(