# Nature vs Nurture



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

This is an old argument, as old as time really, or at least going back to when the first cavemen were fighting over cavegirl skirts and gladiators fought in ancient Rome.

It's an interesting subject and certainly one that will generate debate while dividing opinion. Their can be no doubt that in some instances it doesn't matter about environmental factors, genetic ones will always determine the outcome or phenotype of an individual/animal/plant/bacteria. This is certainly the case when you look at transgenic animals who have been genetically engineered to test disease states. The ob/ob obese mice or the myostain Schwarzenegger mice are prime examples of this where genetic engineering and specialised breeding programs have developed gene knockout mice for study.

Medicine aside however and what about sport? Do genetics really determine talent? Sports psychologists argue that it takes around 10,000 hours to become an expert performer, so with enough dedication, the right training and a lot of hardwork almost anyone can become a top performer so long as they practice enough. Sport is full of examples like this, the Williams Sisters in Tennis, Tiger Woods Golf, and Messi in football. All clocked up an enormous amount of hours honing their skills long before most of us mastered colouring between the lines.

Sports like bodybuilding or running however are slightly different in that both don't require the mastery of complex tasks, tactics and skill sets. Running in a straight line for example has far less variables than simply playing one hole in golf with the potential amount of shots that could be played from the first stroke alone.

Extreme examples, where could perhaps include another few examples like Basketball or high jump where being tall is advantageous, but you will always find expert performers that can break the mould who are not regard as the norm for the sport.

From my own experience I'm not entirely convinced that genetics are the single most important factor and people shouldn't be put off by ideas like having poor genetics or being a potential hard gainer. When it comes to building muscle It's well known that black athletes seem to have the capacity to put on lean muscle quite easily, however we've had just as many white Mr Olympias as we've had black, do we just like to conform to stereotypes and myths?? I've been fortunate enough to read a couple of papers recently that looks at the relationship between genetics and environment in different cereals grown at different locations around the Europe. These papers are an excellent example of how environment can be a major factor regardless of genetics. So the same seeds, from multiple cereals were sawn at different plots on alternative years with their characteristics recorded. The results after a couple of growing seasons, are as you expect, factors like soil content, daylight, moisture and temperature had a significant effect on the different grains, when you looked at things like yield, height, and nutrient profile (carbohydrate, fat, protein etc..). You also seen significant differences within cultivars, (seed A compared to seed A grown at location X and Y), so despite having the same genetic profiles significant differences still appeared.

This was something I was just mulling over recently and thought I'd share it with you all since it was an interesting observation I thought. I'm not saying genetics aren't important, but sometimes I think people are willing to put limitations in their own physiques or lack of results down to genetics all to easily rather than accepting a lack of hard work!

What does everyone else think?


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

i think you can overcome genetics but for every easy gainer out there who just eats and grows theres a 1000 peeps standing behind that person doing the same stuff and getting nowhere.

the easy gainer cant comprehend how difficult it is to build muscle or drop fat and advises what works for them, there are rules that work for everyone, but cos theyre not allways the quickest way to grow muscle theyre unheeded and the easygainers advice is usually what they want to hear..

theres usually a route, a what proteins best thread, when they find even a perfect diet doesnt get you over poundage plateaus, there`ll be the temptation of steroid use, they then start to grow, why? cos they have increased recovery.. this large minority will find they can only grow whilst on..

even before natural limits are exceeded they`ll only expect to grow whilst on.. (ive seen this formuale time and time again on forums)

learn to grow naturally and not lose all your gains from a gear cycle and you can overcome poor genetics, rely on the drugs and you`ll only go so far..

discard the rose tinted spectacles and focus everything you have on the next kg on your big exercises and eat a clean high protein, adequate carbs n some fat and you will grow..

of course not everyone goes the gear route and tbh i think nattys have to work even harder in some ways, you need more patience for sure, you have to think even longer term and many fall by the wayside, but if you understnad the basics on how to grow you can take your physique as far as you wish as long as your realistic.

you can most certainly go against your bodies natural inclinations and transform yourself, but inevitably at the high end of BB`ing the creme will rise to the top genticswise..

soz lol bit ranty and off point at time :becky:


----------



## Tom84 (Dec 12, 2005)

I completely agree.

I'd actually add to that the neurological and psychological element of considering genetics. Might be a long post but here we go.

We know that an extraordinary proportion of what we do requires absolutely no cognitive reasoning. Our brain forms neural pathways and neural triggers. These are basically habits. We see this misfire on a weekly basis (if you are extremely tired and haven't processed that its the weekend - you'll follow your morning routine on a Saturday). Actually consider how many conscious thoughts you have in the morning - you never actually evaluate showering for example - its a routine.

What's more we also habitualise emotional responses to neural triggers. The easiest place to see this in bodybuilding terms is eating. A lot of people literally convince themselves they don't like certain foods or have a restrictive appetite. Taste is just a neurological sensation in the same way pain is, or feeling full. There is no such thing as pain from an external point of view, its experienced in the brain. The brain ingrains the neural pathways in response to triggers, and some of these are evolutionary (like pain) but we can overcome them. Look at any monk for example. They don't feel pain and 'deal with it' they just convince themselves that the sensation of pain in the brain is a pleasant experience.

At a very basic level you can literally tell yourself you have an enormous appetite. For example if every time you eat oats you eat chicken two hours later and you do this for 4 weeks - you'll actually start doing it without even evaluating. It will become routine. If all the time you're telling yourself this is a tiny portion of food I should eat more then you will.

If you spend your entire time saying, I have no appetite, I'm a hardgainer etc... then you'll convince yourself eating is difficult and your calorie consumption will suffer. Having no appetite is a complete nonsense. I've managed to eat 12000 calories in a single day - the idea people can't do 5000 consistently is absurd. But allowing limiting beliefs to take hold 'I have poor genetics' etc... means the neural pathways you create and habitualise will be completely negative.

We see people overcome their pre-existing neural pathways in every area of life - and we see them prosper from it. For a very easy example. Ask a guy who hits on a lot of girls and is successful what it means when they say no, go away. He'll say (I guarantee) 'They are just playing hard to get, I'm awesome.' Ask a guy who is unsuccessful and he'll say 'It's a judgment about me because I'm short/fat/bald etc....' Bodybuilding is the same. I don't know a single impressive competitor who ever says 'I work out less hard than other people and I have average genetics.' Its a self fulfilling prophecy. I've seen you Andy say 'I work out harder than most people.' I have no doubt that you do, but crucially you telling yourself you do and believing it, means you go into the gym ready to do that. I'd be willing to bet you think you have a good appetite and don't struggle with food either?

I hate people who promote negative beliefs. Its a self fulfilling excuse. Tell yourself you're the best and you will be much more likely to get there


----------



## Tom84 (Dec 12, 2005)

Fantastic thread by the way


----------



## mark_star1466868017 (Jul 14, 2011)

ooh interesting one, I'll relate this to my own training.

When I was still at school I was hopeless at sports, my coordination was poor, strength appalling and just couldn't do anything to a decent standard.

At 14 I started martial arts and I would say that for the 1st 3 years I was still pretty poor in all of these areas. I looked at others of my age and was extremely jealous of their abilities. However, i enjoyed it so kept going. Once I had achieved my black belt I really decided to do everything I could to improve. I spent hours and hours practicing techniques so that i could be better than everyone else (not that I ever was but that was what I was aiming for).

Now I could say that nature dealt me a poor hand but did it really? I knuckled down and through being bloody minded, improved to such an extent that I was really well known for the quality of my technique. The psychological side is also a part of my nature, so where does nature end and nurture begin?

Now there's a question - answers on a post card please


----------



## mark_star1466868017 (Jul 14, 2011)

been pondering

now neither of my parents were driven in anyway and so how could it have been nurture, however, I am of them so it should be nature but of course they weren't driven. Oh dear I'm getting dizzy


----------



## Tom84 (Dec 12, 2005)

Good stuff mate. I think people can disagree about ways of knowing without being disagreeable. What do you think of Andy's question?


----------



## Loz1466868022 (Oct 12, 2011)

Theres a specific gene (not sure of the name) only found in certain afro caribbean people from a specific part of jamiaca, there was a documentry about it a while back Colin Jackson, Usain Bolt and many other african athelete have this gene and were tested positive for it and it only found from that area or desendents from that area? Very interesting i beleive nature also has a big part to play, I love the thought we inherit generational memories , deja vu Anyone!


----------



## justin case (Jul 31, 2012)

Parky said:


> Good stuff mate. I think people can disagree about ways of knowing without being disagreeable. What do you think of Andy's question?


i believe the power of the mind can overcome almost any obstacle in life.....all the successful people in the world have sheer determination to succeed, and they do...when you meet these people you know they are special, they shine, in the old days they used to refer to it as star quality...yeah when they set their sights on something they get it and something silly like genetics wont stand in their way.


----------



## crazycal1 (Sep 21, 2005)

> If you spend your entire time saying, I have no appetite, I'm a hardgainer etc... then you'll convince yourself eating is difficult and your calorie consumption will suffer. Having no appetite is a complete nonsense. I've managed to eat 12000 calories in a single day - the idea people can't do 5000 consistently is absurd. But allowing limiting beliefs to take hold 'I have poor genetics' etc... means the neural pathways you create and habitualise will be completely negative.


dear god we come from different planets...

ive a dude ive trained for 2 years who suffers from depression and drags his ass to training without fail every week whether he feels sh1t or not and still cant nail 3000 and thats with swimming 3x a week too which gives even me an insane appetite directly after.

ive been hitting around 5000 a day until recently for a good year and was stuck under 12 stone, you cant seemingly comprehend the will power it takes for some people to eat that much..

if youve got a grehlin response on par with giving you the munchies and can do 12000 in a day, that probly takes less effort for voodoo dave to hit 3000..

dave works his ass off getting on top of his issues and would probly get either upset or angry at the use of the word absurd.

previously you`ve advised me to, eat 1 mouthful of food with 1 drink of water every time, well ive been doing that for years to the point of overhydrating to force it down, (hence my blending 3 meals to get the cals down) also to basically man the fcuk up n try harder, i got no probs with you saying that, but i am suggesting you have no concept of understanding stress and the horrendous effects it has on some peoples appetites..

habitualising my neural pathways into negativity.. LOL

my name is TheCrazyCal, i am a hardgainer, i have an awful appetite and i still look AWESOME!

Mr.Chappel ive got 20 years on you and i`m not exactly natural, but i`m on your ass and plan on looking as good in the coming years..

keep setting me standards dude!


----------



## Loz1466868022 (Oct 12, 2011)

What Parky was getting at is programming your subconscious ,its a technique used in sales also ,if there is something you want to achieve then keep telling yourself you can do it after a while these positive thoughts will end up in your subconscious so you don't have to keep telling yourself and eventually do it positively without thinking too much so it comes naturally ,I'm not saying it works for all bit it does work , if your struggling with eating knock the **** on the head your appetite will be back with a vengeance mine was after 18 years xx

Sent from my iPhone


----------



## gingernut (Dec 11, 2006)

I've competed as a runner and now a bodybuilder. Whilst plenty of training helps, and a lot of focus is require the difference between a club level runner and an Olympic Champion is that the OC is able to train more before their body succumbs to injury.

In body building some bodytypes will always struggle to put muscle on, others especially women struggle to lose bodyfat no matter how hard they diet(or say they do).

One thing which annoys me however are those who say "I was champion material at school but my coach left the area/I married/went into a job that wasn't compatible/had a rough time" unfortunately genetic physical ability only goes so far and true champions always find a way if they really want it badly. These excuses don't pass muster for me at all.

Sent from my mobile using Tapatalk


----------



## Tom84 (Dec 12, 2005)

TheCrazyCal said:


> dear god we come from different planets...
> 
> ive a dude ive trained for 2 years who suffers from depression and drags his ass to training without fail every week whether he feels sh1t or not and still cant nail 3000 and thats with swimming 3x a week too which gives even me an insane appetite directly after.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure how anything you said was at all relevant to my points so I can't really respond, nor why you had to centrise the thread on yourself. Its not about you. I also really don't appreciate being told I don't understand or empathise with stress/depression. You know absolutely nothing about me but you leap bizarrely to the conclusion I don't understand stress because I pursue study of the brain? Yes the idea that any human cannot ingest 5000 calories a day is absurd. The feelings of fullness exist in our mind - physically we are all capable of it. That was my point.

Also you don't eat 5000 calories a day. I did notice the post a while back where you analysed it. On the meals you took the carb food weights as carbs and so grossly overstated the number. 100g rice is not 400kcal. 100 carbs is 400kcal. 100g rice is not 100g carbs. It was much closer to the high 2000's kcal mark

Anyway I'd like to carry on the actual discussion with everyone without making this personal (again its almost every thread) as this is an incredibly interesting thread.


----------



## renshaw (Jun 5, 2012)

Loz said:


> Theres a specific gene (not sure of the name) only found in certain afro caribbean people from a specific part of jamiaca, there was a documentry about it a while back Colin Jackson, Usain Bolt and many other african athelete have this gene and were tested positive for it and it only found from that area or desendents from that area? Very interesting i beleive nature also has a big part to play, I love the thought we inherit generational memories , deja vu Anyone!


I've read about this also... i think, well it comes to mind when i read what you said Loz!! Or has someone read it in the past... 

Guessing this is about when you try something new and your a "natural" its like you've been doing it for years... Or something is obvious to you and not to others!

Very interesting topic.. well now its off topic!

as parky said, about not being incontrol this is linked to criminology and my actually area of Aspergers and Autism where the effects are allot more obvious then in the most of us!

I'm guessing it all relates to them times where you deal with something really well and think afterwards "wow, where did all that just come from?"

Not sure how well I'll explain this but will try to relate it to what we are talking about.

If you put all people on a scale including Autism.. you'd spot allot of your traits by putting neurological typical in the middle and autism at one end... Remember its a " Autism Spectrum disorder" its not fixed.

You'd find your not actually at the point on the line where you thought you was general 10% more to the side.. based on how good you are with imagination, creatively, social communication/social situations!

People with Aspergers actually have to spend more time in practising in the above areas to get it to be common place for them.

How often do you struggle and have to work hard to enter a new situation and become comfortable.. that is the point its became subconscious.


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

renshaw said:


> I've read about this also... i think, well it comes to mind when i read what you said Loz!! Or has someone read it in the past...
> 
> Guessing this is about when you try something new and your a "natural" its like you've been doing it for years... Or something is obvious to you and not to others!
> 
> ...


The so called "Fast Gene" which your referring to has actually been identified in multiple population groups, Jamacian, african, european and so on. However there is a lot more going on than simply having the right genes. You have to consider the frequency (if they are inherited from one generation to the next) of the genes if they are dominant or recessive (more likely or less likely to be expressed), methylated or not methylated (swtiched on). You also have to consider that new data from the human genome project has recently identified that the junk rejoins of DNA that were previously thought to be redundant the "exons" are poorly understood. Scientist now believe like epigentic methylation they act as switches in the expression of genes.

So when you consider all those variables how important is the so called"fast gene" when environmental stimulus can effect the levels of expression and the phenotype for talent.


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

mark_star said:


> ooh interesting one, I'll relate this to my own training.
> 
> When I was still at school I was hopeless at sports, my coordination was poor, strength appalling and just couldn't do anything to a decent standard.
> 
> ...


This is actually a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

Becoming an expert performer requires a tremendous amount of effort and practice as Rose has also eluded to. Mozart the is a brilliant example.

Regarded by many to be a genius and expert performer in his youth, when you look closer you can see his story is exactly the same as yours Mark or mine.

His father was a world renowned classical music teacher, ahead of his time when it comes to technique and was especially motivated to push his son Mozart Jnr to become a world class performer. By the time Mozart was 6 he had accumulated a phenomenal amount of hours practicing well over 2,000 it's estimated. his early compositions however aren't regarded as great, more rehashes of contemporary works. However the sight of a 6 year old playing these works obviously created the myth that he was blessed with a talent or gift. But when you consider the 2,000 hours that he put in, is it any wonder he was so talented?? nobody ever seen the early practice sessions, his cag handedness and lack of coordination. It was not until Mozart's late teens by the time he was around 19 and had managed to accumulated the 10,000 hours of practice required was he finally able to complete his masterpeice. Similar stories are also told about the great artist Picasso.


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

renshaw said:


> I've read about this also... i think, well it comes to mind when i read what you said Loz!! Or has someone read it in the past...
> 
> Guessing this is about when you try something new and your a "natural" its like you've been doing it for years... Or something is obvious to you and not to others!
> 
> ...


Autistic disorder is an interesting one, again this could be environmental also. the enteric nervous system ENS of the gut is the biggest collection of nerves in the body out with the brain, a so called second brain. There's quite a bit of work just now in my field looking at how the gut microbiota might possibly influence this condition. The gut microbiota is inturn influenced by environmental factors. Imagine though bacteria influencing your emotions........ I digress


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

I'm not entirely convinced by the subject of a hard gainer, I think we all have the capacity to make gains or reach a potential way beyond our expectations, so long as your willing to set no limits.

Marks post was brilliant and got the point I was making perfectly about practice. It reflects my own experience perfectly. When I first started bodybuilding back in 2005 getting ready for my first show in 2006, I made great gains and though I had good genetics for it, compared to most, that i was special in someway destined to go to the top because of some sort of god given talent, for putting on muscle in comparison to my peers. When I look back at it though and really analyse it I can see that simply isn't true.

All through primary and high school I had the nickname Mushy, because I was the smallest weediest kid in the class, with a bowl cut like a mushroom. I was basicly a streak of p***. I was rubbish at football and most other sports that required any sort of coordination. However I was good at swimming, gymnastics and athletics, and I always tried my hardest to win or at least do my best. I became good at football playing in goal rather than outfield and played right up until I was 22 at all levels for pretty good amateur teams.

When I think about it though it shouldn't be any surprise that I was good in that position, since I was good at tasks that involved running, jumping, agility and flexibility, so it transferred well to the position. In essence I already had accumulated hundreds of hours of practice for the position before I ever played there.

Then when was around 14 I wanted to get better in that position, I started going for runs, doing push ups, sit ups and got some weights to help me be a better footballer. I was always the fittest in the team, most push ups sit ups and so on. Then I joined the gym at 16 to lift heavy free weights to help me out again on the football park.

By the time I was 18 getting ready for my first show I'd probably been training for at least 6 years with push ups and so on. I hadn't gone through that awkward phase of struggling to do ten press ups and bicep curl 4kg, because I'd done it around 6 years earlier. It's little wonder I made great gains in the gym. All the neurl pathways were in place, I had baseline strength, and already had the winning mentality fostered via sports. I wasn't gifted in comparison, I just had a head start on my peers by a couple of years.

I think one of the major differences between a hardgainer and one that makes great gains is more or less their backgrounds. If someone comes from athletics or has played sport to a high level for years, they can make great strides and progress, they don't ever have to struggle with the lack of gains initially. compare that to someone who's never lifted any weights or sports. and suddenly becomes inspired to exercise, what chance do they have in comparison.

Just for example i trained two clients last year, both were friends and decided to get fit. One was a high school athlete took PE classes the other never really done much but was around 1 ft taller and probably at least a stone heavier. within 6 months the shorter lighter highschool athlete was considering doing powerlifting contests. The other taller client was still trying to build the foundations of a decent baseline fitness and strength.

One last thing on gene environment interactions. Your typical rice plant has far more chromosomes and genes than you or I, so don't consider the cereals or plants to be inferior when it comes to interactions with genes and enviornment.


----------



## renshaw (Jun 5, 2012)

AChappell said:


> Autistic disorder is an interesting one, again this could be environmental also. the enteric nervous system ENS of the gut is the biggest collection of nerves in the body out with the brain, a so called second brain. There's quite a bit of work just now in my field looking at how the gut microbiota might possibly influence this condition. The gut microbiota is inturn influenced by environmental factors. Imagine though bacteria influencing your emotions........ I digress


Yeah I've seen a massive difference between Adults who has alway been in care and adults from family..The ones that have been in care are generally more skilled then the ones that are mothered. Probably surprising. But goes back to the nurture elements of this topic.

Its s good topic and i.e. people like Mozart, Einstein have been suspected to have the condition to some degree. As well as allot of uni tutors. This is based on them being able to be very good at one subject and obsessively dedicate time to doing one thing over and over again.

Do you think Darwin watching monkeys for ten years is a normal thing to do?? Not but that is weird but if someone has that much dedication AND spots things others cannot they cannot be average.

Hence Autism isn't really classed as a learning disability the thing is allot of people with autism also are have a separate diagnose of learning disability.

So if you just have Autism in some degree it could make you gifted.

Good example is Sheldon Cooper in the Big band theory TV show who has aspergers and is incredibly anal about small elements of his life


----------



## gingernut (Dec 11, 2006)

AChappell said:


> I'm not entirely convinced by the subject of a hard gainer, I think we all have the capacity to make gains or reach a potential way beyond our expectations, so long as your willing to set no limits.
> 
> Marks post was brilliant and got the point I was making perfectly about practice. It reflects my own experience perfectly. When I first started bodybuilding back in 2005 getting ready for my first show in 2006, I made great gains and though I had good genetics for it, compared to most, that i was special in someway destined to go to the top because of some sort of god given talent, for putting on muscle in comparison to my peers. When I look back at it though and really analyse it I can see that simply isn't true.
> 
> ...


Agree with the background thing and muscle memory from years of training plays a big part even if that just means your body recognising training and saying "Ah we are on this again, let's get back to it".

I was very similar to you Andy in that I was pretty good at individual sports, for me it was those involving a blend of some strength and some stamina, weight training came in to support the athletics and I've missed out that beginners bit where you can't co-ordinate the dumbells or recreate an exercise by just seeing it done in front of you. Have had several years out at various points but it comes back very quickly.

I do have a close relative who came from an unfit, slightly always over weight background up until their middle life. They ended up turning into a very good standard veteran marathon runner, however this did take a good 5 years perhaps a bit more. Seasoned athletes often swap sports and get to the same level or higher within 12months, although I put a lot of this down to their mental attitude too. If you are used to training at a good level that's the way it is in anything you do(which can include stuff outside sport too).

Some hard gainers simply aren't eating enough, just as some who are overweight don't realise or admit just how much they actually eat and how little exercise they get.


----------



## Neil R (Oct 29, 2006)

Great thread! 

The true champions are a combination of hard work and talent.

The old saying "hard work beats talent, when talent wont work hard". But when talent works hard, its game over! 

Another one I like to consider, is one I picked up whilst reading Emmanuel Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason", where he poses the question

"Define 'Space'?."


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

Neil R said:


> Great thread!
> 
> The true champions are a combination of hard work and *talent*.
> 
> ...


From the last couple of posts though Neil is that is there really such a thing as talent. Almost anyone can learn how to do complex tasks or skills, to different degree's it really just comes down to the amount of hours put in or the use of purposeful practice to take your skills to the next level. I can't accept that someone like Andy Murray was exceptionally talented, he was more or less born with a racket in hand and pushed from a very young age by his mother, a tennis coach at the national level. A dewar Scottish guy from Dublain, i'd expect the same results from myself or you if we were thrust into his shoes, at a young age. The major difference in his game over the last few years has been about improving the mental side of his game, thats the real difference


----------



## Neil R (Oct 29, 2006)

*Talent*

Definition

[C or U] (someone who has) a natural ability to be good at something, especially without being taught.

If we use the Oxford Dictionary definition, then it would come back to (in the case of Andy Murry) how good he was the first time he used a racket? i.e- Prior to any teaching, this therefore would be his level of Talent.

Which would mean a learned skill is not Talent (by default I guess?), its hard work.

Would you agree?


----------



## justheretosnoop (Jun 15, 2012)

I would suggest the likes of Andy Murray or Tiger Woods etc even being able to successfully swing a racket/club at the ages they first started surely shows some form of natural talent? Tiger Woods was going round a par 3 course at the age of what, 5 or something stupid like that? I've probably put more man hours into golf over the past 20 yrs than he did by the age of 5 but he'd still have beaten me!

Look at kids on the playground playing footy. They'll all pretty much put in the same hrs playing before/during/after school but some simply seem to be born to wear a pair of boots.

I agree practice makes perfect (and more) and that anyone can achieve anything within reason but I also think some people are simply born to do certain things.

Either way, i'm now thinking of a route to force my 13 month old down before it's too late!!


----------



## roadrunner11466868009 (Mar 28, 2011)

When growing up there where 2 local boys, older than me so I new of them rather than knew them personally. One was pushed from a young age to be an Accountant the other a professional footballer. Both tried their best to achieve what their parents want for them. To cut a long story short neither could hack it, (they didn't have the natural talent required for their chosen career) So over time both committed suicide. Very sad.


----------



## Hougenie (Oct 5, 2012)

Well it seems a shame to leave this thread lingering on the last post....very sad indeed!

Im going to try and make this short.

I think nurture plays more of a role than nature.

Genetics, I feel, only really play a part at the extremes eg an inherited condition or a professional athlete.

In my opinion there are people who are naturally gifted but ths only really comes to the fore at the highest levels eg in this context Mr Olympia. I do not think that your average Joe training at the gym can really state poor genetics as a cause for no growth....there are many many more factors that hinder you than genetics.

Interestingly even the great Messi was far from a genetic gift and required growth hormone as a youngster to compete at a physical level with his peers, however, as Andy has stated the many many hours of practice have made him what he is today (be it or not a little naturally gifted)

In terms of disease, even inherited conditions, there a certain conditions that skip generations etc, so I think it would be very difficult to prove a genetic link in families for a certain sport/talent.....again Andy and his point about Mozart agree with this.

Cal, your post about depression is nothing to do with genetics. Depression is caused by many factors and most would fall into nurture I guess, so your chap who cannot eat enough calories because of this is not at a genetic disadvantage, it is because of his low mood which will hinder training itself, as well as motivation, sleep disturbance, nutrition and the list goes on.

Anyway back on point....have you ever noticed it is often the physically smallest/thinnest teens that turn to the gym and end up "a beast" without anything other than good nutrition and plenty of work.

Also the statement "choose your friends wisely - you become them" comes to mind. There is some truth in this and I think again goes with nurture. If your mates are all hardcore gym goers - your results will more than likely improve. Equally if all your mates go out and get p1ssed 3x a week, it is likely you will follow suit and become a lesser physical specimen.


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

Dorsey said:


> I would suggest the likes of Andy Murray or Tiger Woods etc even being able to successfully swing a racket/club at the ages they first started surely shows some form of natural talent? Tiger Woods was going round a par 3 course at the age of what, 5 or something stupid like that? I've probably put more man hours into golf over the past 20 yrs than he did by the age of 5 but he'd still have beaten me!
> 
> Look at kids on the playground playing footy. They'll all pretty much put in the same hrs playing before/during/after school but some simply seem to be born to wear a pair of boots.
> 
> ...


Tiger Woods father had a grand plan for him right from the start. His father realised this was a sport where he could potentially push his son to earn millions. The Williams sisters are the same he was literately was born with a club in his hand. If you had practice for 5 years your bound to be good at it.

The rules of purposeful practice apply though Dorsey, the boys that have there skills honed by consistently playing football against better opposition and with better coaching will always develop to a level beyond their peers. Motivation is also obviously still key, doing something because you enjoy it is also important. top performers tend to put in more hours practising as a consequence, it takes the right amount of goal and task orientation also.

László Polgár

conducted a famous experiment to test such theorys of purposeful practice. He believed champions are made not born.

László Polgár - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

roadrunner1 said:


> When growing up there where 2 local boys, older than me so I new of them rather than knew them personally. One was pushed from a young age to be an Accountant the other a professional footballer. Both tried their best to achieve what their parents want for them. To cut a long story short neither could hack it, (they didn't have the natural talent required for their chosen career) So over time both committed suicide. Very sad.


A sad story, and there are numerous examples of children being pushed to do sports and never quite making it despite pushy parents. Although thankfully most don't end up in suicide. In order for any child or trainee to be successful they have to want to achieve the goal and they have to enjoy doing it. Practice can't be laboured otherwise they simply won't make it and coaching techniques need to be of a standard to push and challenge the individual otherwise your simply training on autopilot and you never get any better.


----------



## AChappell (Jun 1, 2011)

Hougenie said:


> Well it seems a shame to leave this thread lingering on the last post....very sad indeed!
> 
> Im going to try and make this short.
> 
> ...


This is a great point and truly a great example of nurturing. British cycling for example has cleaned house at the Olympics recently, as do the Chinese table tennis team, and the Australian swimming team used to. Metroflex gym in Texas, and Temple in Birmingham as well as a few other gyms up and down the country have always produced the top amateur bodybuilders around the country for years. These places become hubs and centres for excellence where progression in practice is the name of the game and hard work is what matters. The FA have recently tried to create their own arena where they hope to have the same sort of atmosphere with the national football centre.


----------

