General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 4
 
 
2012-09-18 5:02 PM
in reply to: #4416052

User image

Veteran
429
10010010010025
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
   Is she a lot smaller?  Less weight to carry around?  Does she only run and not train for triathlons though???


2012-09-18 5:14 PM
in reply to: #4417428

User image

Extreme Veteran
481
100100100100252525
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
odpaul7 - 2012-09-18 4:59 PM

Michelle that sounds like a great article to read! Now I'm absolutely certain there are those people who do it without trying and thats the natural inherent ability at play. However my original play was that the "average joe"can get to that level through work. I'm absolutely certain they won't win in those situations, but to get to that level...

It would be interesting to take a large group of college guys like yourself (all "talents", shapes, sizes), and put them on a running program for a year, two years, or whatever, and see what speeds they would be able to obtain if they all put in roughly the same work. What would Any rich folks want to finance something like this? Scrap that. Let's study women in their 30s Smile

2012-09-18 5:17 PM
in reply to: #4417033

User image

Champion
6503
50001000500
NOVA - Ironic for an Endurance Athlete
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

DV 1 - 2012-09-18 2:22 PM Most age groupers can KQ if they want to. 1:30/100 swim, 21 mph bike, 8 min/mile - with 8 minuts of total transition time - gets you in under 10 hours. None of those speeds are out of reach of most of us. Putting them together in a race takes lots of hard work, but we're not talkin about needing 25 mph bike speed or 6:30-7:00 min run splits. Where you are right now will help determine how long it will take to KQ, but any of us can do it. Saying it's not in my genes is just another excuse people like to make. Since we can't control our genes, it's the easiest thing to blame. Other things, like I don't have the time, money, etc..., are controllable if someone really wants it, so they blame genetics instead. I have a few geneticists in my family, MD practitioners, PHD researchers, a neurologist, and I've had this discussion with them before. Scientifically, the actual genetics is so minutely insignificant, that it's basically a non issue. It's the environmental factors, starting at birth, that make the difference. The poster earlier that referenced the Russian tennis players is on the right track. There's a book called Nature vs. Nuture that provides a non-athletic insight into the question, but it's more about human behavior than anything. Still, it's an interesting read, albeit very long. I'll add that you can blame genetics if youre talking about your couch potato mom and idiot dad that left you in front of the tv for the first ten years of your life and didn't feed you well. Those early years that are out of your control do play a significant role in what most people refer to as genetic predisposition, but it's the nuture side of the equation not the nature.

Wrong!

I trained for 9 months (4 years really) for my IM last year.  I did CDA in 12:43 in perfect conditions for me.  58* F Water 75 for the high.  Almost no wind.

If I took it up a notch for another year of solid training, I could get my swim to around 1:00 my bike to around 19 mph avg and could run near a 4 hour marathon in the IM.  Not even close.

I cannot ride 21 mph avg in a superfast with some pretty good bike fitness under me.  I have only broken 21 in two sprints and in a time trial.

If I gave up my job when I was 20 and had 23 years of training under my belt at this point...I'd be a different athlete.  Alas, I don't have 1.21 gigawatts.

2012-09-18 6:15 PM
in reply to: #4417452

User image

Expert
1375
1000100100100252525
McAllen
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

If you gave up your job, you would be able to. How hard did you train for those 9 months/4 years? 30 hrs/week? People train specifically for KQ for 2+ years.

Also how long have you been in the sport? Most people to put in the training for a KQ on a 9 month plan or even for a few years have already had a specific sport (for me, its swimming; others biking and running) in college and high school that they trained specifically for for several years.

2012-09-18 6:19 PM
in reply to: #4417425

User image

Champion
9407
500020002000100100100100
Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
odpaul7 - 2012-09-18 6:56 PM

90% of IM finishers can do it.


Anyone who thinks that 90% of IM finishers can KQ does not understand what it takes to KQ.

Shane
2012-09-18 6:39 PM
in reply to: #4415826

Master
2460
20001001001001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

I'm going to give myself as a pretty decent example of training seriously to near-max and the results that happen when you have not-great genetics.

 

I've been running since junior high school. X-country JHS, HS. Was never faster than a 20:30 5k guy in HS, so no running stud here. Still, I trained pretty hard, and still do. I think that shows that I've got no special genetics, but am also not a genetically poor runner. (think of me as joe MOPer.)

 

About 8 years ago, I decided to 'go for it' and ramped up my training as a pure runner - 35 mpw to 55mpw to 75mpw to 85+mpw. I kept up the equivalent of 65-70mpw of training for 3 years, nearly nonstop except for postmarathon weeks. Wasn't a triathlete - all running.

 

At peak I hit 90-100mpw many times. Most of this was done on the Pfitzinger Advanced Marathoning training plan. It's hard. Plenty of speedwork. I did all of the training nearly to the "T" and only modified it to be harder than it was. Used training paces at or faster than Daniels VDOT tables or Mcmillan's calculator, so zero slacking here. I was also 30 at the time, so not particularly old.

 

I got a lot better - faster than I ever dreamed I could run. Blasted through that 20:xx 5k plateau (for 15 years) and PR'd at 18:05 at peak. HM dropped from 1:34 -> 1:24, and 10 from 43 -> 39. Marathon was 3:12.

 

Now these are good times, but a 3:12 marathon isn't even a Boston Qualifier. This is with serious, structured training. Yes, those are good times compared to a MOPer, but they are so slow compared to a elite/pro that it's laughable. I even charted my performance gains, and it was clear that after 2 years of big training, my gains were miniscule - I could keep improving, but at a drastically decreased rate. For sure, there was a real 'ceiling' and for me, based on my training.

 

It was a very eye-opening experience for me, especially since I had always thought that 'anybody' who trained hard could run 6 minute miles for a 10k. I suspect that the vast majority of people, even with an incredible work ethic and incredible motivation to improve (this was me), will experience similar things - fast improvement for a year or two, then a big plateau, far, far, away from the level of pros. And most likely a lot, lot slower than 6min/mile for a 10k.



2012-09-18 6:41 PM
in reply to: #4417411

User image

Expert
839
50010010010025
Anaheim Hills, CA
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

turtlegirl - 2012-09-18 2:43 PM

2012-09-18 6:50 PM
in reply to: #4417391

User image

Master
3205
20001000100100
ann arbor, michigan
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
DV 1 - 2012-09-18 5:24 PM

The average age grouper "training hard" doesn't even come close to their potential. Training hard as an age grouper will not get you to Kona because it's always "hard" with an asterik (family, job, money, time, ...) My opinion is that 90+% of age groupers are physically capable of qualifying. Most just don't want it bad enough, and aren't willing to make the sacrifices it requires. If you know people that have given it a go, pushed as hard as they can, have the equipment, time, money, etc... and haven't made it yet, they just need keep at it and learn to push harder. That's what the age group qualifiers do. They adapt their mind AND body in ways they never thought possible. Kona qualifying as an age grouper is within reach for us all if we want it bad enough, but that's where it starts....wanting it, and believing it's possible. Using genetics as a prequalifying prerequisite is the first mistake in the mental game if you ever plan to get their. And as an aside, so is telling someone (especially kids) that they have the right genes to accomplish a goal. Not only do you undermine the importance of hard work, you minimize the accomplishment once the goal is achieved.


This is where we link to the ST thread on getting divorced from training for an IM

Sacrifices; like my marriage, my job, my friends..........

My goal is to Kona Qualify. I am crushing myself day after day. I have also decided that sacrificing my family or my job to do so is not worth it. I may make it to Hawaii. I may not. I want it bad, but not so bad that I have lost perspective.

And this is where the CAN I (I am sure I CAN if I give up my job and train full time) and WILL I (maybe, maybe not) discussion comes in to play. We are talking about two different things.
2012-09-18 7:29 PM
in reply to: #4417391

User image

Master
2167
20001002525
Livonia, MI
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

DV 1 - 2012-09-18 5:24 PM The average age grouper "training hard" doesn't even come close to their potential. Training hard as an age grouper will not get you to Kona because it's always "hard" with an asterik (family, job, money, time, ...) My opinion is that 90+% of age groupers are physically capable of qualifying. Most just don't want it bad enough, and aren't willing to make the sacrifices it requires. If you know people that have given it a go, pushed as hard as they can, have the equipment, time, money, etc... and haven't made it yet, they just need keep at it and learn to push harder. That's what the age group qualifiers do. They adapt their mind AND body in ways they never thought possible. Kona qualifying as an age grouper is within reach for us all if we want it bad enough, but that's where it starts....wanting it, and believing it's possible. Using genetics as a prequalifying prerequisite is the first mistake in the mental game if you ever plan to get their. And as an aside, so is telling someone (especially kids) that they have the right genes to accomplish a goal. Not only do you undermine the importance of hard work, you minimize the accomplishment once the goal is achieved.

The worse thing I can think is telling a kid who worked just as hard and put in just as much effort as the kid who beat him that he got beaten because the other kid had more heart or wanted it more.  What I would teach my kid if I had one is that not everyone is meant to win, to be a state champ, to qualify for Kona.  You give your best efforts, your 100% but that doesn't always mean you acheive your goal.  That's life.  Your self worth comes from the fact that you do your best.  My parents always said, did you do you best?  Yes?  Then we're proud of you.  Not, hey kid....90% of 12 year olds could be on toe ballet by now or 90% of 12 years should be able to do a 50m free faster than you did so I guess you just didn't work hard enough.

To discount the fact that we're all born with differences in our bones, our joints and their functionality, differences in our connective tissues and their elasticity and ability to withstand stress, differences in our amount of slow versus fast twitch muscles fibers, and I could go on, etc, etc. is just ridiculous.  God (or whomever you choose) gave you what He gave you.  You can do your best to improve upon it from birth but it doesn't change that fact that some will never reach what others will no matter the work, the effort or the heart.  To say otherwise is just silly to me and a slap in the face to those who have put in their 100% efforts and still missed the mark.



Edited by noelle1230 2012-09-18 7:30 PM
2012-09-18 7:33 PM
in reply to: #4415826

New user
54
2525
Greatest Place on Earth
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

Interesting topic!  I love this type of discussion.

I will add a couple of things about myself in the mix.  I am an older female (45) and have been an above average athlete my entire life.  I went to a country school in my youth and every year (from 4th grade to the 8th grade) I won all 11 events in the county wide field day.  They would even leave the mark for my softball throw to see if any guys would beat it.

In high school I did 3 sports - golf, basketball and track.  I never practiced any of these sports unless it was during official school practice.  So no running, no golf during summers - only during organized practice.  I have 6 state championship medals - 4 for golf (6th, 2nd, 2nd, one more 2nd) and 2 for track (2nd in the 2 mile and 4th in the Mile).  I also did quite well in basketball and had the single season scoring record for a few years.

I got a scholarship and played Div.1 golf for 4 years.  Again I never played except for organized practices.  (I still to this day haven't told my coach that I didn't play during the summers).  These days I manage to pick up a club once every 3 years or so and can still nail a drive 240 yards down the fwy.  

In my adult life I decided to lose some weight and get fit when I turned 30.  I ran did some casual running and was in the gym 6 days/week.  I have now found my passion and that is in endurance sports.  I started running races about 4 years ago and tackled my first marathon in 2009.  My training was disrupted by a broken toe (basketball injury) and so my peak week was  only 32 MPW and I had 3 long runs of 15, 17 and 19.  I finished with a 3:53 which was 3 minutes shy of a BQ for my AG. I then bought the Jack Daniels Running Formula book and set up my training based on his principles.  I ran my 2nd marathon 9 months later and finished with a 3:21 (BQ -29 mins).

I don't do triathlons but cycle and mtn. bike quite a bit.  I did a Gran Fondo about 9 months ago and finished 1st female overall in the timed 7 mile climb.  I think I might have to try a duathlon in the future.

I guess to summarize I think I have good genetics for anything athletic (I am adopted so I don't know where it comes from).  It doesn't matter whether it is golf, softball, running, raquetball, cycling, billiards, bowling, basketball,.......  I will add that during a race I can endure an incredible amount of discomfort and most races I can barely stand up when I cross the finish line... doesn't matter my level of fitness I will take it to the nth degree.

2012-09-18 8:54 PM
in reply to: #4415826

User image

Master
2426
200010010010010025
Central Indiana
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

Swimming obviously takes much work to develop a fast efficient stroke.  Don't know anyone who is "born" swimming 1min/100M on no training.  In the water, years of proper training trumps untrained genetics hands down.  But technique, while not irrelevant, is less critical in other tri disciplines.  Genetic limits are prob reached more commonly by AG cyclists & runners. 

There is much evidence that pure aerobic capacity (VO2max) has 2 main genetic components- baseline & trainability.  (Search on multicenter "Heritage Study" for details, with >120 scientific articles published so far). The elite endurance athlete has top genes for both baseline AND trainability, along with extraordinary drive to pursue their athletic potential.  On flip side, there is evidence that some (~5%) may NOT improve their aerobic capacity despite months of focused/structured/witnessed training.  Muscle performance & technique yes, but not aerobic capacity.  Given a reasonable endurance training regime, genetics becomes main determinant of aerobic performance results.  Hard fact seems to be that many do not have the genetics to BQ (or podium big regional event) no matter how long/hard/focused they train.

Bottom line- all the individual AG athlete can do is max the genetics/body they have. Performance results are never assured. Of course most AGers could train harder/smarter, but best evidence suggests some do indeed reach (or at least approach) their genetic limits.



2012-09-18 8:55 PM
in reply to: #4415826

User image

Champion
6503
50001000500
NOVA - Ironic for an Endurance Athlete
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

In reply to the OP

If I go to Kona, it will be because I am still doing triathlon in my 60's or 70's, or I win the lottery.

 

Here is how hard it is to qualify for Kona:

One of my good friends has tried sincerely to make it for 8 years.

He is 6'2" 165 lbs 8% BF at Races

His IM swim is about 1:01 and he can swim 100 meters in 1:10.

He can run a mile in well under 5:00 - He has a BQ (By a minute)

He is a Cat4 Cyclist.  His 40k PR is 51:56.  28.65 mph avg

He has missed KQ 3x by about 20 minutes, which sounds really close.

That means that he was about 3 MILES from the FINISH when the last Kona Qualifier crossed the finish line. Not exactly a photo finish.

 

I know 2 male KQ athletes personally (I train and swim with BEHIND them).

Both are built for it lean, narrow, small boned and have always been very good runners.

Both are independently wealthy and don't really have to show up for work. 



Edited by pga_mike 2012-09-18 8:56 PM
2012-09-18 9:44 PM
in reply to: #4417538

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
agarose2000 - 2012-09-18 6:39 PM

I'm going to give myself as a pretty decent example of training seriously to near-max and the results that happen when you have not-great genetics.

 

I've been running since junior high school. X-country JHS, HS. Was never faster than a 20:30 5k guy in HS, so no running stud here. Still, I trained pretty hard, and still do. I think that shows that I've got no special genetics, but am also not a genetically poor runner. (think of me as joe MOPer.)

 

About 8 years ago, I decided to 'go for it' and ramped up my training as a pure runner - 35 mpw to 55mpw to 75mpw to 85+mpw. I kept up the equivalent of 65-70mpw of training for 3 years, nearly nonstop except for postmarathon weeks. Wasn't a triathlete - all running.

 

At peak I hit 90-100mpw many times. Most of this was done on the Pfitzinger Advanced Marathoning training plan. It's hard. Plenty of speedwork. I did all of the training nearly to the "T" and only modified it to be harder than it was. Used training paces at or faster than Daniels VDOT tables or Mcmillan's calculator, so zero slacking here. I was also 30 at the time, so not particularly old.

 

I got a lot better - faster than I ever dreamed I could run. Blasted through that 20:xx 5k plateau (for 15 years) and PR'd at 18:05 at peak. HM dropped from 1:34 -> 1:24, and 10 from 43 -> 39. Marathon was 3:12.

 

Now these are good times, but a 3:12 marathon isn't even a Boston Qualifier. This is with serious, structured training. Yes, those are good times compared to a MOPer, but they are so slow compared to a elite/pro that it's laughable. I even charted my performance gains, and it was clear that after 2 years of big training, my gains were miniscule - I could keep improving, but at a drastically decreased rate. For sure, there was a real 'ceiling' and for me, based on my training.

 

It was a very eye-opening experience for me, especially since I had always thought that 'anybody' who trained hard could run 6 minute miles for a 10k. I suspect that the vast majority of people, even with an incredible work ethic and incredible motivation to improve (this was me), will experience similar things - fast improvement for a year or two, then a big plateau, far, far, away from the level of pros. And most likely a lot, lot slower than 6min/mile for a 10k.

 

Pretty cool read....thanks for posting this.  That's some amazing work!

Here's genetics:  my son is 14, a Freshman in High School.....he has a PR of 16:50 in a 5K....he has trained "seriously" for 1 year....never has ran more than 30 miles in a week.  He also swims a :56 100 and a 5:20 500. (short course - yards)  He can easily hold 23 mph for a 12 mile sprint triathlon.  How??  Because he comes from a background that includes many sub 4:30 milers and 2 professional tennis players. One of my daughters may be faster competing against women....we'll see.

Yes, they put in a decent amount of work.....but there is no way you can get to that point at that age without some really good genetic capability....you just can't.



Edited by Left Brain 2012-09-18 10:06 PM
2012-09-19 7:19 AM
in reply to: #4415826

User image

Veteran
660
5001002525
Northern Illinois
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

Genetics play a huge part at the pointy end of our sport. There is no way around that.

 

As a 46 year old I will also say that I think genetics play a huge part in being able to stay healthy. Some people break down much more easily then others especially as we age. You see it all the time in the threads on this site. People will be talking about their training and it will often include some sort of injury. Being able to train consistently and hard and stay injury free is a huge advantage to the average AG and I don't think we should discount the role genetics play in that ability also. Let's face it, most of the people on this site are "average age groupers". I think we often only think about genetics when it comes to the people that are winning the age group. I'm just saying that genetics plays a role with everybody.

2012-09-19 7:28 AM
in reply to: #4415826


72
2525
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

Ok.

mike - is your friend able to bring together all his times. stand alone times are great for stand alone sports. what makes triathlon such a awesome sport is it requires top times across 3 sports right after another. also, not sure if your logs contain all your training but your not going to kona based on what is in your 2011 training. thats reality. then again you may not have all your training in the logs and may not have been trying for an ironman!

ag runner hit on exactly what i was talking about earlier in the thread regarding pushing yourself past a certain point. yes there is talent based on her post but it also takes a certain mental ability to hit certain times and deal with the discomfort of getting there.

left brain - was your son a soccer player by any chance? reason i ask is i have more than a handful of friends who played soccer forever, got to hs and ran xc and threw down some wicked 5k times in that realm (16:40-17:20).

2012-09-19 8:44 AM
in reply to: #4415826

New user
54
2525
Greatest Place on Earth
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

jrichardtri - I also think the mental aspect is huge.  I am a fan of Noakes and think there is something to the central governor theory, whether or not it happens exactly as he says is, of course, debatable. I am always surprised when some of my friends will finish a half marathon and say they went all out and took it to the brink, but then the rest of the day they have plenty of energy with very little soreness. I do train more than these friends and run a bit faster and if I go all out during the race I definitely hurt.

Also, I only go to that level of effort on race day. There is no way mentally or physical I can get myself to that point for a workout.



2012-09-19 9:02 AM
in reply to: #4418017

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
jrichardtri - 2012-09-19 7:28 AM

Ok.

mike - is your friend able to bring together all his times. stand alone times are great for stand alone sports. what makes triathlon such a awesome sport is it requires top times across 3 sports right after another. also, not sure if your logs contain all your training but your not going to kona based on what is in your 2011 training. thats reality. then again you may not have all your training in the logs and may not have been trying for an ironman!

ag runner hit on exactly what i was talking about earlier in the thread regarding pushing yourself past a certain point. yes there is talent based on her post but it also takes a certain mental ability to hit certain times and deal with the discomfort of getting there.

left brain - was your son a soccer player by any chance? reason i ask is i have more than a handful of friends who played soccer forever, got to hs and ran xc and threw down some wicked 5k times in that realm (16:40-17:20).

 

He was not a soccer player.....he played baseball.  He was 13 and asked to do a triathlon with me.....a sprint, and ran a 1:10.....a year later he runs a 400M/12 mile/5K sprint in 56:00-58:00 and can easily win local/small regional races and get on the overall podium for some bigger races. We haven't let him run any races longer than a sprint to this point.....and may not for a few years.  Right now he's swimming 6 days per week and running XC.  The kid just has a tremendous aerobic capacity...but there is no activity prior to the age of 13, except a few years of swim lessons when he was 4-7 at the local Y.....and a pool in our backyard where he spent most of his days in the summer, that you could point to as a way to explain his "gift".  In the 4th grade he ran a 6:12 mile....without ever having ran a step except for playing.

He is not alone.....I watched 50-100 of these kids race all summer in the elite series.  Prepare to be "teened" in the coming years....triathlon has trickled down and alot of these kids come out of national swim programs....and they are scary fast with big engines.

2012-09-19 9:09 AM
in reply to: #4415826

User image

Regular
234
10010025
Madison
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?

mike - is your friend able to bring together all his times. stand alone times are great for stand alone sports. what makes triathlon such a awesome sport is it requires top times across 3 sports right after another.

Also, I only go to that level of effort on race day. There is no way mentally or physical I can get myself to that point for a workout.

The first above is huge. Can you bring it all together, on race day. You've got to have your training done, your nutrition right, and all the other nuances of the day go well for you. Like not getting run over in the swim and losing a couple minutes getting your head right. Not dozing off a bit on the bike and staying focused for the whole ride. You know, yadda yadda yadda.

The second point above is why so many people will not get to their peak fitness abilities. You really do need to get yourself to that mental and physical threshold to truly excel in a sport. If you cannot do it, and are ok with that, there's no problem with that.

2012-09-19 9:11 AM
in reply to: #4418171

User image

Regular
234
10010025
Madison
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
Left Brain - 2012-09-19 9:02 AM
jrichardtri - 2012-09-19 7:28 AM

Ok.

mike - is your friend able to bring together all his times. stand alone times are great for stand alone sports. what makes triathlon such a awesome sport is it requires top times across 3 sports right after another. also, not sure if your logs contain all your training but your not going to kona based on what is in your 2011 training. thats reality. then again you may not have all your training in the logs and may not have been trying for an ironman!

ag runner hit on exactly what i was talking about earlier in the thread regarding pushing yourself past a certain point. yes there is talent based on her post but it also takes a certain mental ability to hit certain times and deal with the discomfort of getting there.

left brain - was your son a soccer player by any chance? reason i ask is i have more than a handful of friends who played soccer forever, got to hs and ran xc and threw down some wicked 5k times in that realm (16:40-17:20).

 

He was not a soccer player.....he played baseball.  He was 13 and asked to do a triathlon with me.....a sprint, and ran a 1:10.....a year later he runs a 400M/12 mile/5K sprint in 56:00-58:00 and can easily win local/small regional races and get on the overall podium for some bigger races. We haven't let him run any races longer than a sprint to this point.....and may not for a few years.  Right now he's swimming 6 days per week and running XC.  The kid just has a tremendous aerobic capacity...but there is no activity prior to the age of 13, except a few years of swim lessons when he was 4-7 at the local Y.....and a pool in our backyard where he spent most of his days in the summer, that you could point to as a way to explain his "gift".  In the 4th grade he ran a 6:12 mile....without ever having ran a step except for playing.

He is not alone.....I watched 50-100 of these kids race all summer in the elite series.  Prepare to be "teened" in the coming years....triathlon has trickled down and alot of these kids come out of national swim programs....and they are scary fast with big engines.

Sounds a bit like a Lance Armstrong beginnings. Don't let the bike world take him away from us in the tri world!

2012-09-19 9:18 AM
in reply to: #4418200

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
djrigby9 - 2012-09-19 9:11 AM
Left Brain - 2012-09-19 9:02 AM
jrichardtri - 2012-09-19 7:28 AM

Ok.

mike - is your friend able to bring together all his times. stand alone times are great for stand alone sports. what makes triathlon such a awesome sport is it requires top times across 3 sports right after another. also, not sure if your logs contain all your training but your not going to kona based on what is in your 2011 training. thats reality. then again you may not have all your training in the logs and may not have been trying for an ironman!

ag runner hit on exactly what i was talking about earlier in the thread regarding pushing yourself past a certain point. yes there is talent based on her post but it also takes a certain mental ability to hit certain times and deal with the discomfort of getting there.

left brain - was your son a soccer player by any chance? reason i ask is i have more than a handful of friends who played soccer forever, got to hs and ran xc and threw down some wicked 5k times in that realm (16:40-17:20).

 

He was not a soccer player.....he played baseball.  He was 13 and asked to do a triathlon with me.....a sprint, and ran a 1:10.....a year later he runs a 400M/12 mile/5K sprint in 56:00-58:00 and can easily win local/small regional races and get on the overall podium for some bigger races. We haven't let him run any races longer than a sprint to this point.....and may not for a few years.  Right now he's swimming 6 days per week and running XC.  The kid just has a tremendous aerobic capacity...but there is no activity prior to the age of 13, except a few years of swim lessons when he was 4-7 at the local Y.....and a pool in our backyard where he spent most of his days in the summer, that you could point to as a way to explain his "gift".  In the 4th grade he ran a 6:12 mile....without ever having ran a step except for playing.

He is not alone.....I watched 50-100 of these kids race all summer in the elite series.  Prepare to be "teened" in the coming years....triathlon has trickled down and alot of these kids come out of national swim programs....and they are scary fast with big engines.

Sounds a bit like a Lance Armstrong beginnings. Don't let the bike world take him away from us in the tri world!

I'm not trying to compare him to anyone.....and there are kids in the country who beat him pretty regularly....but he's catching up.  Crazy as it seems (this year was his first in the elite series, and he is race age 15) he was already behind some fast kids.

As long as he loves it, and right now he can't get enough of working out and hanging out with kids who do, then I'm all in for him.  Time will tell.

2012-09-19 10:24 AM
in reply to: #4415826

User image

Extreme Veteran
1648
100050010025
Subject: RE: Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work?
I think genetically there are big differences between sprinters and distance runners. What made me able to do a 50 free or 110 hurdles fast, but when I was younger I could not hold a distance at all. Vs my husband who BQed in his first marathon but runs the same pace in a 10k and barely faster in a 5k. I would think he has a better chance of Kona qualifying. I can still kick his butt in a 100 off the blocks. As I get older my endurance improves, but genetically I was programmed as a sprinter when I was at prime competitive age. ETA I was in the pool 3+ hours many days in late high school and college and had a not last 200 and definitely would lose the 500 at a college meet unless there was a stomach flu going around or something.

Edited by Moonrocket 2012-09-19 10:28 AM


New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Genetics and natural talent vs. hard work? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 4