Natural Talent

[Parallax3D]

Shooting a gun is NOT natural, punching and throwing can be argued are natural responses though.

Neither are things like playing billiards or a guitar, but there ARE people who DO just have a natural talent for it, It takes them little effort to attain a level of skill that others would take a long time to attain, even if they practiced relentlessly. Things like better eye/hand coordination, muscle control, etc. all play into it.

What? that's crazy talk. It's all about how hard you work. Anyone can become an acclaimed professional guitarist. The ones who don't make it are just lazy.

I guess I'm just lazy. I've been playing for 30 years, and I STILL don't have any platinum selling records to show for it.

[RussellM]

I personally don't buy this natural talent thing. I started shooting USPSA about a week after the first time I fired a gun and was not good at all, after about 2 years I was C class in production. Once I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport I made GM in a relaltively short time, about 18 months. It seems to me that desire, money or time are the big deciding factors for most people.

[RangerTrace]

I personally don't buy this natural talent thing. I started shooting USPSA about a week after the first time I fired a gun and was not good at all, after about 2 years I was C class in production. Once I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport I made GM in a relaltively short time, about 18 months. It seems to me that desire, money or time are the big deciding factors for most people.

That sounds great. How old where you when you started?

[Fullauto_Shooter]

My first classification was "B" in Limited when I was in my early 30s. This came after shooting a classifier match and one other match in my first month of competition using a Glock 21 with factory ammo, a cheapie nylon holster and borrowed mag pouches. Two months later I made "A" using the same gear. Then I started practicing a lot - firied 20-30K rds a year for a couple years - and never made it past "A". Now, 15 years later and I'm still a high "A" - a fraction of a percentage point away from "M", but making "M" just really isn't important to me any more. I average a few local USPSA matches each year, mainly as practice for 3-Gun.

[motosapiens]

I personally don't buy this natural talent thing. I started shooting USPSA about a week after the first time I fired a gun and was not good at all, after about 2 years I was C class in production. Once I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport I made GM in a relaltively short time, about 18 months. It seems to me that desire, money or time are the big deciding factors for most people.

I think even with natural physiological capabilities (after squadding with you, I know you are very smart, a positive thinker, focused, and have impressive muscle speed), it still takes alot of work to get as good as you are.

I think one of the biggest differences tho is in *how* you work. I have wasted alot of time just going through the motions, not knowing what exactly to be focused on, even developing some bad habits. In the last year I feel like I've been working smarter, and getting more out of each practice, isolating the things that I'm worst at and working hardest on those things. It's showing in the results now.

Looking around me, I see alot of people that are 'practicing', but not really learning much from it.

[RussellM]

I personally don't buy this natural talent thing. I started shooting USPSA about a week after the first time I fired a gun and was not good at all, after about 2 years I was C class in production. Once I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport I made GM in a relaltively short time, about 18 months. It seems to me that desire, money or time are the big deciding factors for most people.

That sounds great. How old where you when you started?

[MarkCO]

AND, it really takes watching yourself on video and getting some good input from another set of skilled eyes.

[RussellM]

I personally don't buy this natural talent thing. I started shooting USPSA about a week after the first time I fired a gun and was not good at all, after about 2 years I was C class in production. Once I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport I made GM in a relaltively short time, about 18 months. It seems to me that desire, money or time are the big deciding factors for most people.

That sounds great. How old where you when you started?

I was 33 when I decided I wanted to be a GM and started dryfiring and doing live fire practices.

Edited January 27, 2015 by RussellM

[PKT1106]

I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport

This is the key. I watched "Pumping Iron" on Netflix a couple of weeks ago and Arnold was talking about the level of dedication it takes to be really great at something. He said once he is in the hardcore training phase for a meet, he shuts out almost everything else and dedicates himself to that one thing. He said he even missed his dad's funeral because it was so close to a meet. He said something to the effect that you almost have to be "cold" about it.

I am not advocating missing family events or shutting people out, but a lot of singular dedication goes into being great at something. Alex Gutt said he dry fires like an hour every day when we were at Ohio last year. But, he also said it was kind of easier because he worked at a gun shop at the time.

You can be good at something just picking it up, but to be great at it, you have to dedicate time. The level of commitment will determine where you end up.

[RussellM]

I decided to dedicate a bunch of time to the sport

This is the key. I watched "Pumping Iron" on Netflix a couple of weeks ago and Arnold was talking about the level of dedication it takes to be really great at something. He said once he is in the hardcore training phase for a meet, he shuts out almost everything else and dedicates himself to that one thing. He said he even missed his dad's funeral because it was so close to a meet. He said something to the effect that you almost have to be "cold" about it.

I am not advocating missing family events or shutting people out, but a lot of singular dedication goes into being great at something. Alex Gutt said he dry fires like an hour every day when we were at Ohio last year. But, he also said it was kind of easier because he worked at a gun shop at the time.

You can be good at something just picking it up, but to be great at it, you have to dedicate time. The level of commitment will determine where you end up.

No doubt. In the beginning I was doing 1-2 hours of dryfire a day and live fire twice a week. These days my arms and hands only let me do 45 minutes to 1 hour a day of dryfire but I will live fire 1500 rounds a week this year starting as soon as the weather allows.

[lee blackman]

Hard work always supersedes natural talent...

[Gooldylocks]

Shooting a gun is NOT natural, punching and throwing can be argued are natural responses though.

Someone can be more athletic, but that is not necessarily natural either. Maybe desire is natural, but kinesthetic intelligence (KI) is debatable as to whether it is learned or if you are born with it, likewise eye-hand coordination. Since there is no actual control case for either, the argument is theoretical....

All that is to say that performance levels are time shifted as well as shifted based on the persons background, KI, desire, physiology, and ability to learn.

I disagree. I think that there is a certain level of natural talent that goes along with it, as we all know someone who can pick up just about anything and be better than average, even without ever doing the activity before. That is not to say that working hard doesn't count but several of those things that you listed (physiology, KI, etc) are exactly what I think of when I think of natural talent. There are certainly people that are born athletes, that don't have to eat anything but ramen noodles and ice cream and can still just hop up and go for a 5 mile run or 30 mile bike ride. These people are naturally superior to lesser gifted people.

Can those that are lesser gifted work hard and be better than naturally gifted people? Absolutely, and in my experience are generally more driven to work hard and get better. Whereas someone might show up and get classed as an A the first time they ever go shooting, they might never commit the effort to being any better versus that person who is a C now but is really really determined.

I ride downhill mountain bikes a fair bit, and there is certainly some natural talent that some people have. Aaron Gwin rode a downhill bike for the first time in 2008 and by 2009 was the United States national champ and was racing on the World Cup circuit. To deny that some people are naturally gifted seems kinda naive to me.

[CHA-LEE]

I am not sure where this discussion is going other than endless circles. Yes there are the few rare people who are statistical anomalies (Naturally Talented) which can jump into a skill based sport/hobby and quickly excel at it with what seems like little to no effort or practice needed. These people do exist but they are the rare anomalies verses the average person starting a skill based sport/hobby.

We could debate until the end of time on how "Good" these anomalies could/should be when they jump into the practical shooting sports. We could also endlessly debate how much training or practice they DON'T have to put into the craft to perform well. All the while, its a waste of time for everyone involved to debate about it because these anomalies rarely adhere to a specific skills acquisition or improvement trajectory.

All we can do is look at the skill level and performance of the average shooting population and deduce an "Answer" to the question that started this thread. The simple answer is C or B class, based on the data that is available. Beyond this, its a waste of time to wonder how an anomaly shooter would end up in the classification system.

[motosapiens]

I think it's much more interesting to just wonder how could *I* can get, with the amount of practice I'm willing to put in. That question will eventually be answered.

[Nimitz]

thx. i've been lucky to get to shoot with several of the top shooters in our sport and they all share the same thing ... and extraordinarly well developed set of skills born of an extraordinadry drive to success. natural talent was never part of the equation for any of them ...

[Desmo412]

I grew up around guns but very rarely got to shoot a pistol. A friend of mine took me to a match, handed me a steel master and rig, and I shot my first match (had never seen a match before). I had an open gun built over the winter and started the next season with it. I classified initially as B, but made it to Master within 3 or 4 months. My fundamentals are still very lacking, but shooting on the move and shooting fast came easily to me. Now I need to start practicing and dry firing to build up those skills I am lacking

[b1gcountry]

There is a human tendency towards emphasizing natural ability over study or practice. I spent a lot of time reading about it when I was in education classes, and being a student teacher.

Some people have more natural ability than others, but usually not as much as they think. When hearing about others who excel with little effort, one's natural tendency is to down play the amount of effort you expended for the same results in order to preserve self image. This becomes a sort of one-upsmanship game in the lower to middle aechlons of any pursuit. The top folks tend to be more honest about it because everyone works hard, and everyone knows it

[Nickoli]

I made C my first year, I also shot 3gun that first season. Last year I made it to the higher side of B with 1 M classifier. I don't run any dry fire practice but I was shooting a match, USPSA or 3gun almost every weekend last year with a couple nationals in the mix.

The problem I have, without practice all the time and my main focus being on 3gun, is inconsistency with classifier stages. I have a 95% and some down in the 50s. I have reviewed a lot of my videos and watch my progress over the last 2 years of shooting USPSA and 3gun. I always try to squad with other shooters that I know are better than me. When they are running the stage I watch how they do it. Foot placement, where they reload, watching where they have their guns when moving around the stage. This has been the biggest help. I try to take things they are doing and see what works for me. I use matches as my practice.

Its very possible a person with natural tallent could easily make A but a B for sure.

[Nimitz]

you are correct. Natural talent is a preception thing. since the average person has no frame of reference to understand what it means to practice 5 hrs a day, 6 days a week for say 4 years to prepare for the Olympics, they chalk up the competitior's ability to natural talent since they literally can't comprehend what it would be like to train like that since they've never done it

[motosapiens]

you are correct. Natural talent is a preception thing. since the average person has no frame of reference to understand what it means to practice 5 hrs a day, 6 days a week for say 4 years to prepare for the Olympics, they chalk up the competitior's ability to natural talent since they literally can't comprehend what it would be like to train like that since they've never done it

But anyone who has ever competed at anything has observed other people that train the same amount or less, yet progress faster. Some people are just better at some things. It doesn't hurt to acknowledge that as long as one doesn't use it as a crutch or excuse for not making an effort to improve.

[Ultimo-Hombre]

you are correct. Natural talent is a preception thing. since the average person has no frame of reference to understand what it means to practice 5 hrs a day, 6 days a week for say 4 years to prepare for the Olympics, they chalk up the competitior's ability to natural talent since they literally can't comprehend what it would be like to train like that since they've never done it

But anyone who has ever competed at anything has observed other people that train the same amount or less, yet progress faster. Some people are just better at some things. It doesn't hurt to acknowledge that as long as one doesn't use it as a crutch or excuse for not making an effort to improve.

So after watching everyone take a piss on this thread....

Moto hits it on the head right here.

If more people were into shooting legitimate competition ( instead of TV's in the desert ) we would see more " natural talent" types yes?

We arguably produce the best ball players in the world right? Because we expose damm near all our youth to those worthless sports! So naturally talented individuals end up there. What percentage of the worlds top soccer players do we produce? Bleh..

given the exact same investment in training no two dudes are gonna improve at the same rate. Life is not fair!

[Nimitz]

not sure the important piece of this is how long it takes to you achieve a goal vice someone else but whteher or not you can achieve it because you don't have the same drive or interest or will to do it ...

I have never put a time on when I will achieve my untimate shooting goals, only that I will achieve them because I'm committed to do whatever is required to get there ...

i realize that because of my current position I can make the kind of commitments that many cannot but I also started 30 years later than most so I do have significant handicaps to overcome but none of that really matters since I've decided that I will succeed.

For me, that is the only 'talent' that separates champions from everyone else ...

[motosapiens]

not sure the important piece of this is how long it takes to you achieve a goal vice someone else but whteher or not you can achieve it because you don't have the same drive or interest or will to do it ...

I have never put a time on when I will achieve my untimate shooting goals, only that I will achieve them because I'm committed to do whatever is required to get there ...

i realize that because of my current position I can make the kind of commitments that many cannot but I also started 30 years later than most so I do have significant handicaps to overcome but none of that really matters since I've decided that I will succeed.

For me, that is the only 'talent' that separates champions from everyone else ...

Assuming that you are willing to concede that people do improve at different rates (for the same amount of time/effort), does it not also seem reasonable that they might have different upper limits to their improvement?

I don't care how hard you work or for how long, not everyone is capable of playing in the NHL, or winning the Tour de France, or running a 4-minute mile. Is there a reason to believe shooting is different?

[Ultimo-Hombre]

not sure the important piece of this is how long it takes to you achieve a goal vice someone else but whteher or not you can achieve it because you don't have the same drive or interest or will to do it ...

I have never put a time on when I will achieve my untimate shooting goals, only that I will achieve them because I'm committed to do whatever is required to get there ...

i realize that because of my current position I can make the kind of commitments that many cannot but I also started 30 years later than most so I do have significant handicaps to overcome but none of that really matters since I've decided that I will succeed.

For me, that is the only 'talent' that separates champions from everyone else ...

How do you define success amigo?

[Solvability]

The flip side of this is the shooters who will never shoot well. I saw one guy practice and take class after class - he just could not shoot - so in my opinion he lacked the talent not the will.