...To perform at a world-class level, what is the relative importance of genetically-granted "natural ability" vs. the hard-earned dedication and good coaching?...
Steve Swartz
Others have commented on the importance of attitude, dedication, practice, etc. as having overriding importance. While I will agree that such are absolutly necessary, I have to balk at the notion that natural ability plays a relatively minor role.
If I want to be a nose tackle, or perhaps a professional basketball center, (outside of being over 60 years old, let's say that those were my youthful ambitions); I would still be hampered by a body that was 5'11" and 145lbs. No amount of attitude or desire would make up for my lack of natural ability. Those of us on this list probably have a fair amount of natural ability in the area of shooting talent, otherwise we would not have adopted this strange hobby or taken an interest in this list. Accordingly we focus on the controllable (which can take us a long way); however, I believe we delude ourselves if we claim that natural talent plays little part in any success we might have.
-$.02 BothellBob
Having the genetics to give you a 6'7", well muscled 300 pound body would still not give you any natural ability to be a pro football player (only some of the tools needed).
I cannot accept that every healthy child in the local hospital nursery is limited in their physvial and mental development.
Nature gives us tools (healthy bodies and minds) that can be developed into anything with proper nurture. To believe otherwise seems to me to smack of "predestination".
Pat McCoy wrote:Having the genetics to give you a 6'7", well muscled 300 pound body would still not give you any natural ability to be a pro football player (only some of the tools needed).
I cannot accept that every healthy child in the local hospital nursery is limited in their physvial and mental development.
Nature gives us tools (healthy bodies and minds) that can be developed into anything with proper nurture. To believe otherwise seems to me to smack of "predestination".
Unfortunately nature doesn't give everyone the tools to do everything so yes even health people have natural limits. The tools can only be developed to the extent that they meet the requirements for what they are to be used for.
A 4 foot tall 70 lb girl who has the natural ability to play music from ear can never nurture that talent into being a power forward for the Boston Celtics. So nature unfortunately does place limits on us, sometimes some of those limits can be overcome with hard work (nurturing) unfortunately somtimes they can't.
Agreed, nature doesn't give everyone the tools to do everything, but we are talking about shooting here. I'll take the 4', 70 pound girl and nurture her to high levels if she has the DESIRE to reach those levels.
I have been intrigued by this topic, I tried to start something on a different forum entitled goals, discipline and mental management. With the exception of a couple of comments, it was a non starter.
I agree with some of the recent posts that addressed desire. I believe it is a key component of personal success in the shooting sports.
As far a nature vs nurture, I also believe that, a healthy person, has the ability to succeed in the shooting sports. The successful person has to have the desire, coupled with the self discipline and mental capability to focus shot by shot, on the conditions around them, and the mechanics to execute the shot. They have to have the ability to go beyond a shot that doesn't meet expectations, and execute the next shot to the best of their ability, independent of the previous shot, and without anticipation of the next shot.
I've been shooting for a little over two years years now, and I'm only 16, so I suppose my opinions should be taken with a grain of salt, but I do have some pretty firm feelings on the subject.
That this "world class" shooter must have both in this day and age. Shooting is just one of many sports where "world class" performance seems to continue improving. The top scores are constantly going up, records constantly being broken and to perform at this level, the shooter must have access to incredible natural ability, fantastic coaching for when the ability pauses in improvement, and a strong personal desire to improve those skills.
Without one of these important aspects, a shooter today will not reach a "world class" or Olympic level of shooting. 50 years ago, it may have been possible for someone to achieve great success without one of these. And I don't mean to downplay the successes of the great shooters from 50 years ago, but it still must be observed that the winning scores have come up since then. To shoot at the top of today's shoting world though, it takes a perfect blend of all of the things mentioned in the threads above.
Sorry for sounding a little like a kid making fun of the old farts. I don't claim to be on top of my game right now like they were then, and their accomplishments are unimaginable to me.
If you look, records are not constantly being broken, scores in general aren't going up but more people are achieving higher scores.
If you look at the records on the ISSF website shooting has some of the longest held records, Free Pistol (1980) Mens Air Pistol (1989), very few records have been broken in the 2000's (many have been equaled). Last olympics only 3 of 9 mens records were broken and 1 of 6 womens records.
I agree with your assessment that a shooter needs "incredible natural ability, fantastic coaching for when the ability pauses in improvement, and a strong personal desire to improve those skills."
The problem I see with emphasising natural ability as the foundation for world level shooting ability is that I dont think there is anything natural about delibertly causing an explosion a couple of feet from your eyes and in your hand and not reacting to the incident. I contend that shooting is an unnatural act participated in by us hard headed individuals. We just like to do things the hard way. Is there any other explanation for why we spend buckets of money on guns and equipment then aggonize over the ammo as we try to squeese a couple of more points out of our aggragate scores? Damn, I do love this sport. Good Shooting Bill horton
Natural ability is more a universal thing. The opposite is klutz.
A "natural" has the hand eye coordination, the patience, and a sharp clear mind. That ability will enhance the surgeon, the golfer, the bowler, the archer, the tiddly winker, the pub darter, the shooter.
2650 Plus wrote:The problem I see with emphasising natural ability as the foundation for world level shooting ability is that I dont think there is anything natural about delibertly causing an explosion a couple of feet from your eyes and in your hand and not reacting to the incident. I contend that shooting is an unnatural act participated in by us hard headed individuals. We just like to do things the hard way. Is there any other explanation for why we spend buckets of money on guns and equipment then aggonize over the ammo as we try to squeese a couple of more points out of our aggragate scores? Damn, I do love this sport. Good Shooting Bill horton
I don't beleive there is any natural ability to the actual act of shooting but there are natural abilities that are used in various components that make a sucessful shooter, for one the thing that you talk about over and over that being the ability to hold something steady. Other thing such as visual accutity, the ability to concentrate and focus on a signular task., bone, tendon and muscular structure, fine motor skills and others.
Some people are born with the natural ability and others have to work at them and yet others may never be able to achieve what is required, I know thats not a popular postion as the new world likes to promote that everybody can be anyhting they want if they just try hard enough, in reality that is just not the case. Don't get me wrong with hard work people can get themselves to a higher level, but we are talking about the eleite of the elite here.
