I think that practice is essential, but that some people in any field are fundamentally more talented than others, and that if a talented person practices as much - or rather as constructively - as someone with less natural gifts, then the person with the innate talent will always have an edge.  As the soccer pundits often say, if any team can match another for fitness, workrate and commitment, then the class will out in the end.

60% talent (from god) - 40% practice

Hmmm... even if someone is playing dice with the universe + alocate some people with advantages + disadvantages at birth, dont we see / hear every day of people who overcome these disadvantages every day?

Things like long legs, or good balance might play some role, as would natural flexiblity etc, but legs can be lengthened or shortened ( by shoes ), flexiblity can be improved over time, likewise stamina, balance etc.   

I suspect that it maybe 70% practice ( planned out logically ) , 20% character ( strengths learned from a parent / guardian ) and 10% luck ( or natural God given abilites ).

As for the soccer pundits, I dont believe them for a second If the same two teams played every day for 1000 years, one would expect ( in the same way you would expect a coin to show heads/tails ) the average to come out at 50-50.    

That said its possible ( in theory ) that a coin will never land on tails... 

- Edited by Hugh1a on 03/12/2009 at 12:30

"If the same two teams played every day for 1000 years" - are we talking about what can be achieved in the course of a human life or are we talking about the evolution of a species?  If you're going to look at events over thousands of years, yes, it's possible that a child will eventually be born ready-made with a strong grasp of the genetic memory of his tribe - and this is what I would call natural born talent.  Someone who has to work hard to attain a level he started off life at is already at a disadvantage - and if he dedicates himself to self-improvement and development over the course of his life anywhere near as much as the person who started miles behind then the gap will never be closed.

He he, no, I was just trying to get a bit of physics into it - if two mutually opposing forces collide the resultant is the negation of both, meaning that the sporting pundit, though poetic, is usually talking bonkers.   When one team beats another, its cos they are either stronger/better or they are lucky.   

Statisics state that where the outcome of a premise is 50-50 that on average the result over time is 50-50, except that in practice, that doesnt happen ( as luck has no memory  - giving arise to the idea that something e.g. God is controlling fate )thats the only point I was making.  It was waaaaaayy  off topic.  Sorry. 

Ok, so some (Ericsson) would argue that it doesnt matter about the genetic memory of your tribe, that extended deliberate practice beats that into a pulp, now combined them together perhaps you get more I dont know.

I think that if we mystify dance, then we are in danger of saying, ' oh what can  I do, I'm not a born dancer'  BUT if we demystify it then we could end up saying 'hey, if I work hard, practice properly and often, I can really excel with this'.

I'm just reminded of a story of the first son of the Duke of Yorkshire, he was born without arms or legs and able to speak in clicks - he became an expert horse rider, rifle shot, and fathered 5 kids!

Doesnt that point to success being made rather than inherent?

Anywho, just interested in what peoples thoughts were - no grrrr or arrrrrr intended.   ( sigh - Sept 19th is so far away :'(  )

Tc/H.

- Edited by Hugh1a on 03/12/2009 at 14:37

Sigh, yet again, proof that coffee is not my friend      The actual point in the middle:  on mystification vs scientific explanation of what is required to improve + get really good at salsa, was the point I was trying to make - please ignore any uh...coffee induced waffle. 

- Edited by Hugh1a on 04/12/2009 at 09:49

Born without arms and legs but managed to become an expert horse rider and rifle shot?  That's nothing - George W Bush was born without a brain and HE managed to become president of the United States of America.

Hmmm, good point Ciaran, and a great rebuttal to the argument too.   So perhaps you either need to be born talented ( God given ), practise hard ( self given ) or have to be mind numbingly rich and stoopid?    

Hmmmm..... now all I need is a lotto win.

Hey Folks,

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year t-yas-all    

Just wondered if anyone caught the 'Torville and Deane'  documentry over the holidays?      It was pretty interesting in some respects - especially the talk with the discussion with the coach.   Firstly it was all ' you could tell they were destined for greatness, born with silver stars in their hair etc'   then she got down to brass tacks:

Torville was picked because he had pure blond hair, very eye catching on the ice.     Deane because she had an 'edge' over other girls ( read:: aggression/competitive streak ) and she looked a good 'match' for Torville.

What was really interesting was the early ages they started practicing and the seriousness of them, even from the beginning.   2 times a week was the initial startup, with more and more hours being added until they were basically, eat,sleep and breathing ice.

Lo and behold, they then became 'good at it' and even won a few competitions????