Is talent irrelevant for great success?

Some swimmers have an advantage with more ankle flexibility and body type etc. Though, even with talent, hardwork is required to become great at anything.

I have to disagree. There were quite a few people on my club team who never worked hard during practice, and kicked ass at the meets. They were mostly sprinters, and I never saw them work hard at one practice, unless we were doing 25's or 50's fast. Their talent and skill really helped them through those sprints. I think if you specialize in other events, like stroke or mid-long distance, hard work and long yardage really helps. But for those 50 free-ers, working on a set that consists of a 3000 for time or 12 x 200's really doesn't help. Either you've got the skill and the speed or you don't. Anyone agree?

How are we measuring success here? Are we looking at the Michael Phelps' of the world or Joe(anna) Masters-Swimmer. There are plenty of the latter around who've been blessed with large bellies, reconstructed knees, shoulders that just don't have the rotation necessary for that perfect freestyle; maybe we "just don't have the body for swimming" or a tough case of inathleticism. I have seen too many of these folks come to the pool for the first time, or after a long layoff or injury. One of my favorite things about USMS is that we get to witness these successes almost every time I go to a meet.

If we are indeed talking about the Michael Phelps/Natalie Coughlin's of the world then it is both natural talent/ability AND hardwork ... I don't think anyone could swim lazily in pratices then churn out world record times. As for the lazy sprinters you describe, I for one can not hold a decent pace on a distance set to save my life. The interval I should be able to hold and the one I can hold are different. I bust my butt on distance sets as much as possible, but I'm not swimming as fast as teammates who I can beat in sprints. Sprinters in general don't have to do the yardage in practice that everyone else does, but in theory are upping the intensity. SO they may float through the distance sets (who needs endurance in a 50) and then bust their butts on the sets that actually are relevant to their success/stroke/event like 10 x 50 on 1:30. I have teammates that *gasp* complain about 50's on 1:30 ... to me it is heaven ... In my opinion the most successful masters swimmers have been swimming for a long time and in turn have fabulous technique ... that is the key to fast swimming.

i coach an 11 year old who often wins her events (or finishes a close second) without ever really applying herself to any practice set given. she considers herself successful (going home with lots of ribbons) but i do not. i think she performs far below her potential as a swimmer. I coach one of these swimmers also...and it puzzles me why she chooses to be last in the lane. Come race day she kicks ass...but in practice she's just chilling out. I am wondering how fast she could be with a little hard work.

Lots of people become good swimmers through hard work. As in any sport there are natural atheletes that stand out from the rest though. Better flexibility, cardio capacity, naturally muscular, coordinated, etc. When these natural talents apply themselves, then they become the great atheletes who set the records. The average person who does the same amount of work gets left in the dust. Just my observation from a ways back in the dust.

I was one of those that you described in your post...but I want to politley disagree. When swimming fast and hard... any stroke flaws can put the water brakes on pretty quickly. Maintaining a clean stoke and body posture in the water is important even if it's done at a slow pace. From personal experience...my muscles always got too tight for any distance over 150 yards to really compete in longer events. I secretly envied the 200 swimmers. But honestly...nothing feels better than thundering down the lanes like a hydroplane. ;)

Tom Jeager once said the best swimmers in the pool are the sprinters. It was his philosophy that no one chose to be the "mile guy". He just couldn't sprint as well as the sprinters so he had to train for the mile. Believe me, if I could have been a sprinter I wold have. Not because they are lazy, but you have to admit, churning out 20k a day to swim the mile sounds a lot less fun than traing for the 50/100.

lisa, you say that these sprinters "kicked ass" at meets without working hard in practice, and i assume that many swimmers gauge their success in meets by how the competition did that day. if that is ones goal (to win the day), certainly, natural talent can equal that kind of success. i coach an 11 year old who often wins her events (or finishes a close second) without ever really applying herself to any practice set given. she considers herself successful (going home with lots of ribbons) but i do not. i think she performs far below her potential as a swimmer. i think many of us less talented athletes can establish personal goals, and develop a comprhensive program to toward acheiving them.

This was also discussed in a previous thread: forums.usms.org/showthread.php