Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
so go forth and create.
then nobody is capable of creating a work of genius.
though i get your point
hard graft and time, that's all that is needed.
some people are so innately good at things, they're always going to be better at a consistent level than most other people
sports is a good example of this, you've got some that train as hard as possible and perform at a high level, and then some that don't train as hard but perform better, night in, night out.
at moving a ball around in your arms or whatever sport it is we're talking about.
aside from that, talent isn't even a thing
sports just are badly designed to help some people with different shaped bodies be better at it.
dozens, possibly hundreds of players in the NBA train just as hard as each other, yet a small number are able to put up 30+ points a night on a consistent basis. arguably throwing the ball in the hoop is the least athletic part of the whole game, it's about having the mental ability to get that kind of consistent accuracy. some people's brains are just wired in a way that lets them release the ball from their hands with a near-identical release each time.
of course, you could just attribute this to confidence because of course if you were tallying practice stats i'm sure most players would be on like 0.8FG shooting, but whatever. still think i'm right.
also yeah, confidence comes into it but people just choose to be confident anyway. i will make a minor adjustment and say there is probably something in the shape of a pair of hands that might be able to make it easier for some people than others but then that proves that basketball is an inbalanced game, unlike chess or other actual games
effort goes a long way but you can't say the only reason there has only been a couple of players to average 30+ PPG over their entire career is because the thousands of other players didn't try as hard as they did.
of course anybody can put up 30ppg but to average that over a decade takes something special that you have to be born with. i think the evidence is on my side.
how many minutes were these players playing? what % of attacks were they fed the ball while they were directly under the hoop? how frequently were they on the court while a defensive rebound led to a break for an easy 2 points?
maybe those up there played for teams that played a different style. maybe literally the closest thing to talent that will ever exist is that you might be a bit taller than someone. truth is they probably DID practice more, thought more about the game, studied their opponents tapes for longer and chose to believe they were the best players on the planet
because he got on the lucky end of a few thousand assists and rebounds?
i can't do this anymore. let's just say i'm right, it seems easier.
didn't andy cole become with first person to score 40 goals in a premiership season or something? and wasn't he basically just fed the ball?
tell me then, why do you think michael jordan achieved such a high career average?
i'm talking about an entire career average
i'm not denying jordan's average doesn't owe a lot to the focus and effort that he put in (as is the case with many, many players who weren't as successful as him) but there's more to it than that. i might be remembering this wrong but i think his worst season for shooting average is better than lebron's best, that shit is crazy. i'm too young to have really seen him play, all i have is stats and youtube, so i can't give you a proper analysis but it wasn't luck, you have to be in a certain zone to shoot that well and the fact that only a handful of players have ever been in that zone does strongly suggest a natural ability that you can only be born with. because the alternative answer is that thousands of amazing players never tried as hard as he did, and that's bordering on impossible.
you say yourself it wasn't luck. what is talent if not luck? everything else is effort. maybe he started earlier, that makes a big different
just for the record, luck is on my list of "things that aren't things"
like everyone talks about talent but they can never be very specific about it?
again, anyone can shoot as well as he ever has in any one game with effort, but the fact that he averages over 30 with only one other player has to imply an ability that he was born with.
see, i'm open to the idea that there have been better players for various other reasons (not sure i agree, but i'm open to it) but what we're talking about here is the ability to be consistent, and i think the stats show that that doesn't come from training and effort.
say anything specific about any one player so i'll just have to trust you on who did what. it's just i mean, when we talk about effort we can name a few specific ways a player can put more effort into getting better at something but when it becomes a talk about talent it's talked of like it's this weird mystical thing and nobody can actually offer up examples.
also, mental ability, such as concentration, can absolutely be practiced. i used to play between 12 and 14 tables of online poker for 8 or 9 hour session 5 days a week. now though? totally out of practice and need to have a good long break after 2 hours of 4 or 6 tables before i start making mistakes.
and it's not mystical, it's just for whatever reason, the hardwiring of some people's brains enables to achieve certain things instinctively. like how a savant can solve numerical problems in seconds. you might be able to learn a technique to count a room full of dominoes in five seconds, but somebody born with that ability will be able to use that in any scenario. if the scenario changes to 'count the cars on the freeway' you'd have to adapt to a new method, they won't.
so this applies to sports because in sports being consistent makes you a better player. that may not apply to something like music where you can take all the time you need to
is that a real thing?
sorry, but that doesn't sound like a real thing
it's related to autism, look it up.
there's really not a lot of facts in here
it's so vague. maybe these people tried really hard?
what is it and why is it different from the fact that these people probably tried hard at what they did. like i assume none of the name on the list on the wiki just did what they did instantly. just picked up a flute and went off on one. that doesn't happen
if you really believe the mind is capable of amazing things, you should be able to believe that in rare cases people are born with incredible talents.
dustin hoffmans good at the counting, full film
some people are naturally better at some things than others. doesn't mean you can't be as good as them with practice. except in some cases, and that's what genius is.
they just tried harder
some people are just better than other really
but are you just saying some people are incapable?
i am not creative at all and the one idea i had for a film came out the other week which is annoying
just maybe it doesn't fit into what the film industry considers creative. like you could just make a film about a dog that collects sticks because his parents died and he has to build his own kennel.
there, i just invented that, you can have it
the film idea would've been banging
i cant sing or paint. maybe i might be an abstract painter they are shit and they make millions for their work
have you tried? how hard have you tried?
youre setting me up for a fall
Who'd have thought they'd have thought of porn parody "Jingle bell-end all the way". Ridiculous
but it takes years and years of working at your craft. Which you know, is mega amounts of effort. But of course, everyone has it in them.
That everyone has one thing that they're naturally, uniquely suited to, but 99% will never figure it out. YOU could have been the world's premier bassoon player, but you'll go to your grave never having touched one.
but realised the sub-par comedy that would result beneath my D&M post if I didn't switch it out
Has anyone one else read Outliers my Malcom Gladwell? That's a really interesting book.
and I dropped my ham onto the floor.
i reckon you can get fucking good at something - genius? out of the reach of most people i think
So while talent and greatness can be inherent and learnt, to be a genius relies on using those to capitalise on a unique opportunity.
But I guess you can work hard on the talent and stuff so you're ready when the opportunity comes along.
Just look at Van Gogh for example. He wasn't any good to start with but worked hard until eventually he could draw hands. Then he ate some yellow paint and decided everything looked all swirly and TA-DA!