Is talent irrelevant for great success?

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:14:58 GMT

Most fo these guys wouldn't swim because they thought of swimming as being a "gay" thing Ha! Ironic, pretty much all of us guys overseas think American Footballer's are gay (Well at least dress gay). Why the hell do you need all the padding? If its about looking hard, play rugby like the real men.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2006 06:27:31 GMT

Just thought everyone would like to watch some videos of some good swimmers. I am a little tired of long winded technique discussions. All strokes www.eliteswimming.com/swimvids.shtml George, You do find some good videos. Criag

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sun, 26 Nov 2006 06:26:18 GMT

I think so much of it is talent or at least being able to understand the words that a coach or instructor gives to an athelete about what to do. I know several young men ages 11-17. they are all "atheletes." Some had fathers who swam in college. Most fo these guys wouldn't swim because they thought of swimming as being a "gay" thing. One of them who is extremely gifted athelete, took up swimming now at the age of 14. He had never had a lessen in his life and everytime I ever took him to a pool, he would maybe do some diving & playing around. He would refuse to learn. Now this year he has decided that he should swim to increase the power of his legs. He is a wide-receiver in football and a shortstop in baseball. He is a fantastic swimmer. I was really shocked by his talent. He is swimming *** & sprinting. He is beating almost everyone he races. All of the practice races he has won (his season starts Thursday) What is my point, you might be asking. My point is that he almost instinctively understands how to get his body to do what his coach tells him to do.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:03:41 GMT

I'd definatley have to say that 'talent' is nothing but a head start. But coming from a triathlon background, i'd also have to say that swimming is the hardest to catch up on if your not born with a natural 'talent' in it already. Out of all the advantages you could have, i'd say that 1. your natural level of bouyancy, and 2. your height, make the biggest immediate difference to how fast you move through the water.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 17:01:46 GMT

Mengele -- Pretty funny George. I hear rumors of China creating "talented" babies in a state-sponsored selective breeding program for sports. Guess we'll see in the years ahead.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:40:42 GMT

I truly am sorry for some earlier remarks I made but the day I mentioned them I was in shell shock after viewing our family photos.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:33:34 GMT

A further explanation. I had gone through a very heart wrenching day yesterday. When I was in the Toronto, Hamilton area this past summer my sister gave me two family picture albums. I had opened the albums and went through them selecting pictures and sending copies to my children. There were hundreds of them. I came accross photos that I had not seen in a long time. Many of these were of my family and seeing certain ones of my brothers who are no longer with us brought tears to my eyes. Also seeing the neighbors, who I found out many have have passed on, we were the only family in the neighborhood that were not Jewish. All my friends were Jewish. I used to go to the Jewish school on Sat mornings with my friend Henry Vine. The Goldblatts, the Goldbergs, Sniders, Ginsbergs and Wieners were are friends. After the war there relatives, kids without parents, parents without their kids came to live on our street. I even worked for Elie Goldberg when I was 12 years old, my brother and I would sell fruits and vegetables from his truck a 6 qt basket of Tomatoes or Peaches $1.00. When I saw the one word GENES it brought back some memories of these stories from victims I had heard.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

knelson — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:52:53 GMT

I hear ya George. I doubt most people would want to be compared to Mengele, though!

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:30:50 GMT

Ok I get your drift, I will take your thoughts under consideration :notworthy: On second thought (No I will not) In respect for Al Wiener

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 07:44:24 GMT

I believe talent is derived from good technique and these videos are of great talent.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 07:25:43 GMT

Just thought everyone would like to watch some videos of some good swimmers. I am a little tired of long winded technique discussions. All strokes www.eliteswimming.com/swimvids.shtml

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 06:14:11 GMT

I thought I had made it plain that it was not referring to - nkfrench's post - it just brought back to me that my friend a jewish contractor Al Wiener, from Toronto with the number on his forearm had gone through experiments with the Dr. when he was a child. In Germany the goal to perfection, in east Germany and in Russia the selection of their athletes.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

The Fortress — Sat, 04 Nov 2006 02:40:12 GMT

George: This isn't a technique thread! This is more philosophical. But I love your videos. I watched some events from the 2004 Olympics on one of your clips. I'll watch these after I go have some nice relaxing coffee and go to my nice taxing workout. I've already gotten that sport of soccer out of the way for the day. Thanks! P.S. Your daughters are quite lovely!

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 17:34:14 GMT

leslie - i agree, minus the weight thing I am a typical backstroker. I've never seen a fast heavy backstroker before - I can't really explain how that worked out in the survey. I guess it's just the height thing - if you're taller you will weigh more. that makes sense. natalie coughlin is skinny, and so is ryan lochte and aaron piersol. :D

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 17:13:03 GMT

I will give it a looksee, swimmerlisa. But tell me, are you a sprinter or a distance backstroker? leslie - i wish i was best as a 50 swimmer, but i specialize more in the 100/200 back. I wish there were longer distance events for back, like a 1000 or just a 400.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 17:11:16 GMT

I'm loving this link, by the way. The average height of a female backstroker, give or take a few, is 5'7. I also think it's strange that backstrokers have the highest weight. that surprises me. interesting too that backstrokers have the longest torsos and shortest legs. leslie you'll like this: sprinters have a higher vertical jump.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 16:59:07 GMT

I'm a backstroker and I'm only 5'5 and a half. :D This link, www.usaswimming.org/.../DesktopDefault.aspx - is pretty interesting. It goes into details describing height to weight relation in swimming, also examining the average age, size, and weight of swimmers. Give it a looksee.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 15:35:21 GMT

I am referring to the fact that some tried to select what they considered the cream of the crop. The superior being. I think we all know this is not natural. Sorry if I offended you but grow up.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:53:58 GMT

Ah, Yes, mental grit gets you to the finish wall first. Whomever wants it badly enough. And, still a cool thread, love it. Donna

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:45:19 GMT

Good genes -- you also need to pick the right parents. I think talent includes differences at the cellular level how energy is produced and consumed. Better mitochrondria. More ability to adapt to training and do a better workload at any given training level. Better developed nervous system that allows better coordination, more symmetry, and better recruitment of the muscle fibers. You remind me of this fellow and his experiments (not you) Dr. Josef Mengele, nicknamed The Angel Of Death, and the other Nazi doctors at the death camps tortured men, women and children and did medical experiments ...

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 14:27:43 GMT

There are so many aspects to talent. I think it takes talent to be able train hard and consistently. Your body has to be able to tolerate the stress without breaking down AND you have to mentally be able to handle all the preparation and find accomplishment rather than boredom. Good genes -- you also need to pick the right parents that will also be supportive and not drive you out of the sport during your developmental years. I think talent includes differences at the cellular level how energy is produced and consumed. Better mitochrondria. More ability to adapt to training and do a better workload at any given training level. Better developed nervous system that allows better coordination, more symmetry, and better recruitment of the muscle fibers.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

The Fortress — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 11:54:52 GMT

My recollection is that Kristina was 5'4" and under 100 pounds. She was also really good at the 400 IM. I'm sure Frank would know this with more precision. And Natalie Coughlin isn't too tall. I think she's only 5'8." But she has that unbelievable underwater work. All's I know is that I am always the shortest backstroker at swim meets. (I should say that my coach is a really good backstroker and she's only 5'5" or 5'6".) And I'm giving you 10 seconds or more on me in that 200 back ... The best local backstroker in my age group, the WR holder in SCM, is Lisa Van Pelt Diller. She's super tall too with great turns. And my secret nemesis is pretty darn tall too, as you know.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

swimmieAvsFan — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 11:42:21 GMT

Mollie: As I said in my PM, you are totally cooking my goose in a 200 back. In my experience, backstrokers are usually tall and lean like you. But wasn't there that little Kristina Egerzeski that held the backstroke world records for awhile? is she little? i can't remember what she looks like. and i think she may still hold the 200 record...

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 10:27:30 GMT

Leslie: answer hazy, ask again later.

RE: Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Former Member — Fri, 03 Nov 2006 10:03:31 GMT

I would only add that hard work should also be smart work. Even if you have that more than a smidge of natural talent, hard work with poor application of technique, or overwork with no recognition of physiological realities can ruin a 'talented' swimmer, just as surely as one with lesser talents can surpass them by training hard and smart.