The discussions I’ve been having with people surrounding talent is interesting. Most don’t like the idea that I don’t believe in talent, it doesn’t rest easy with them. They’re always searching for some reason why talent exists, someone they know, or someone we mutually know, to prove me wrong. But I don’t believe in talent, and I probably won’t change my beliefs soon.
My personal non-belief in talent is nothing new. Malcom Gladwell is a champion of this topic. If you haven’t read his work, or have been sleeping on his work as of late, or just want a refresher for this conversation, I really suggest that you listen this.
[spoiler]
Tanner Hall is a great example of a ‘talented’ athlete, where it’s really just hard work and opportunity combined with sequencing of events. I want to make this clear, I have the utmost respect and admiration of Tanner. This is in no way belittling him or his accomplishments. He’s a friend and I’m using him as an example because I have a firsthand knowledge of his background. Tanner grew up in Montana skiing, in his early teens moved to Park City to train moguls more intensively. He was enrolled in a modified schooling program where he could ski as much as possible. Through this program Tanner skied and was coached far more than any of his peers. As you would expect, if you move to a winter town to train and get home schooled, you’ll be better than other kids your age who have a ‘normal’ life course. This gave him opportunities for the next 5 years to pursue a career as a professional mogul skier. At the beginning of the ‘freeskiing’ movement Tanner quit moguls and started ‘freeskiing’. With the background and support of skiing moguls and getting coached daily, water ramping and trampoline training in the offseason, Tanner had the background knowledge and intuition to transfer his mogul skiing skills/foundation to the new movement in skiing. And being at the beginning of this evolution in skiing, there wasn’t much competition for him, and naturally he became successful. In 2001 Tanner won his first gold medal in big air at the X-Games.
From here on out Tanner has been deemed ‘talented’. But really, Tanner had the opportunity and work ethic to be the best skier our generation has seen. It’s not some magic dust that floated onto Tanner in some Montana hospital when he was born. The fact that Tanner has persevered through 2 injuries which would end a common pro skier’s career, and dominated big air, slopestyle, pipe and big mountain skiing, is proof to how hard he works. I can personally attest that he is more driven and focused than anyone I have ever seen in my career.
Tanner is essentially my reiteration of Gladwell’s points. Talent doesn’t exist, you need opportunity and hard work. Tanner has this. I think this comes to the root of people’s unease with my opinion. All you need is the hustle and the desire to make it happen, the opportunities will come and it’s up to you to seize them. There’s no magic that makes someone better/smarter/more able than you. Most people don’t like this as it’s intimidating and a big weight to carry, but I find it liberating.
[/spoiler]
COMMENTS
LEAVE A COMMENT
I agree with the basic points of this, and yes that is a liberating perspective. But I have always believed in the “X factor” – a variable that you can’t put your finger on which can be attributed to a person’s “talent” in one way or the other. The X factor doesn’t always exist in every situation, but how does the old saying go- 10% talent, 90% determination?
It’s the people that don’t have the opportunity and are still out standing that I think of as talented though. Or the people that do something for a day and are better than someone that’s done it for years. It’s clear that for some people that some things just click and make sense to them when other people struggle, its those people who are talented in my opinion. To be the best, as Freedle says, you need to be determined enough to build on that talent
talent exists. people are not born equal. but talent does not equal greatness. hard work and circumstances are more important than talent, but greatness does require a baseline talent some (not many) posses. examples: armstrong, choe, HST, obama, thall.
I like Anthony’s point of view. Really you could say that “talent” is more of a circumstance. There are certain genetic traits that will make someone better at certain sports. For example: Name one pro skier that is over 6’2″? Shorter people have a lower center of gravity which makes balance easier- which could be confused with talent.
There will always be people who are better genetically disposed for certain things, but greatness is determined by work ethic and taking advantage of circumstances.
As long as we recognize that hard work can compensate for genetic advantages or favorable circumstances, we will move from a state of being a victim, to controlling our own destiny.
That’s why I say “amen” to Anthony. The world would be a better place if everyone relied on hard work to get what they want and not blame lack of talent for their failures.
anthony isn’t this the same as, if not very similar to determinism?