Talent versus Practice

[GoNavy]

Re: Talent versus Practice

"Other golfers may outplay me from time to time, but they'll never outwork me."

Tiger Woods in his book How I Play Golf, page 106.

Everything Tiger can do, he had to learn. Then he had to practice and practice some more. He wasn't born with any other ability than his ability to learn. Apparently, he used it to great effect.

I am thinking of the saying "put your mind to it". Another "I put my heart and soul into it". And "I can do anything". Two more "If I can do it, anybody can", "If he can do it, I can do it". "What a waste of talent". We never hear "what a waste of practice", instead we hear "what a waste of time".

If you look at Tiger and you don't look like Tiger, you won't believe you can do what Tiger can do. On the other hand, if you look at Moe, anything is possible.

Do you believe that you don't have the genetic makeup to do like Tiger does? If that's what you believe, you will never be able to do it. There is no magic to what Tiger does, we know everything there is to know about sending a ball to a target 300 yards away. Ask Tom Wishon and he'll tell you how to do just that. It's all about launch angle and spin and ball speed. Not about athletic ability or even special technique of this pro or that pro. Don't believe me? Look at Moe norman one more time.

Google Moe Norman CBC archive

Talent is nothing without practice.

Everyone keeps talking about Moe Norman, how many natural golfer on tour right now, is Jack Nicklaus's record ever threaten by anything Moe did, the answer is no. Could moe hit the ball good, probably, but we will never know if it holds up under competition will we...the wonderful thing about the tour is it is a proving ground, those guys are making a living out there, they are very, very good at cutting through the fluff, it it works they use it, any advantange, no matter how small, if it works they use. If it doesn't in my mind and theirs it is useless. You know everyone studies Tiger, because what he is doing WORKS, and if someone starts beating him routinely, everyone will start doing what that guy is doing, that is how we progress. If you really want to play better, fine the guy at club that is the best player, and start following him around, play with him as often as you can, and watch him closely, play like he does, and when you get better then him, fine the next guy.

What defines genius or genetics or what ever you name it, is they redefine the game, they move it to the next level on their own, they didn't learn it from someone else. Bobby Jones did it, Hogan did it, Jack Nicklaus did it, and now Tiger is doing it. That can not be learned.

[Iktomi]

Re: Talent versus Practice

If we were looking at this from the elite level I would side with talent. I read a column about the Baseball Hall of Fame that raised the question of having levels of hall of famers. When you look at the Golf Hall of Fame you could make the very same arguement. At the very elite level (absolutely the best, no question, and no discussion of era) you would have a handfull of golfers. Even if you were to lump distinguished amateurs, women, European and world golfers you would probably have less than 100 golfers. Now you have the lowest level or tier of hall of famer. These are the persons who have had fantastic careers. Chi Chi Rodriguez would be of of these persons at this level. Eight career PGA victories, 22 Champions Tour victories but at no level would he be one of the elite in his time. What separates Chi Chi from Nicklaus, Whitworth, and Player? I would assume that they all practiced, had the access to quality equipment and teaching. Even at the highest level you see the separation of talent.

As far as you and I talent and practice are much closer together. I started playing at when I was 40 (year and a half ago). Now I don't practice at the range. I have taken 2 lessons but I played 250 rounds last year. My handicap went from a 15 to a 9 in that time. I think I had some talent but I have also spent my practice time on the course. I know and play with people that spend hours on the range, take lessons all the time and don't play a third of what I do. These people have beaten me and probably will beat me until I achieve my next goal (5 handicap by next summer). Which reminds me I better start practicing.

[BrianW]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Well Done. That's a terrific achievement in one and a half years, most people take at least three years to put a reasonable game together and get to around a 20/22 handicap. You must have some natural ability for the game.

[Martin Levac]

Re: Talent versus Practice

GoNavy,

Look up Moe Norman, not Natural Golf. The two are not related except perhaps because the guy that invented Natural Golf gave money to Moe once he saw the potential gain. Moe at that time was poor and indebted so he accepted to play the puppet. Natural Golf has not produce a single professional golfer to date that I know of and it's not because of Moe, it's because the method does not work. But let's be clear about this, it's not Moe's method and never has been.

Don't take my word for it. Look it up for yourself.

Moe did not invent Natural Golf nor did he swing the same way that's taught in this method. Moe did not even swing in a particular fashion, instead he struck the ball better than anybody on this planet every time he struck a ball. Not probably but certainly. Don't take my word for it.

We already know how he held up in competition. In official tournaments he made 17 holes in one, 4 rounds of 59, over 30 course records and won over 50 tournaments.

When you speak of Moe, speak of the man. Otherwise it gets confusing and then whatever Moe did gets diminished in the process because of that stupid deal he made with the Natural Golf guy.

Moe Norman used up two sets of irons. They all had a small indentation the size of a dime right on the sweet spot because he struck the ball always in the same spot every time. He had to get new ones because the ball caught the sides of that indentation and went astray not to mention that the clubs became illegal for official competition.

If you had met Moe, you'd not believe what he could do. He doesn't look like Tiger, he looks like the everyday hacker with a fat belly, short arms and a funny way about him. That's why I wrote that once you take a look at Moe, anything is possible.

But whatever, you can think whatever you want. I'm just sorry that a whole bunch of people think they can't do it just because they were born this way or that way.

Isn't it ironic? They can think what they want and of all the things they can think of, they choose to think they can't do it.

Or look up that guy there in second spot on the world golf rankings. What's his name, Jim Furyk. What a strange swing yet he is second in the world golf rankings. It must be something entirely different than talent or practice because that swing is horrible. Yet he is second in the world golf rankings. Nevermind, he must have practiced that swing more than anybody else to become second in the world golf rankings with it. Perhaps it's talent? If he had talent, he wouldn't swing like that. Or would he and just use his talent to correct whatever flaw his swing produced just to show off how good he is even with that strange swing? Ridiculous. Nah, he got no talent that I can think of except perhaps that of patience. He got plenty of that with the amount of practice he must have endured to groove that swing to become, I say again, the second player in the world golf rankings.

I dunno, talent without practice is nothing. But now I think that even without talent, practice can do great things for people.

[GoNavy]

Re: Talent versus Practice

GoNavy,

Look up Moe Norman, not Natural Golf. The two are not related except perhaps because the guy that invented Natural Golf gave money to Moe once he saw the potential gain. Moe at that time was poor and indebted so he accepted to play the puppet. Natural Golf has not produce a single professional golfer to date that I know of and it's not because of Moe, it's because the method does not work. But let's be clear about this, it's not Moe's method and never has been.

Don't take my word for it. Look it up for yourself.

Moe did not invent Natural Golf nor did he swing the same way that's taught in this method. Moe did not even swing in a particular fashion, instead he struck the ball better than anybody on this planet every time he struck a ball. Not probably but certainly. Don't take my word for it.

We already know how he held up in competition. In official tournaments he made 17 holes in one, 4 rounds of 59, over 30 course records and won over 50 tournaments.

When you speak of Moe, speak of the man. Otherwise it gets confusing and then whatever Moe did gets diminished in the process because of that stupid deal he made with the Natural Golf guy.

Moe Norman used up two sets of irons. They all had a small indentation the size of a dime right on the sweet spot because he struck the ball always in the same spot every time. He had to get new ones because the ball caught the sides of that indentation and went astray not to mention that the clubs became illegal for official competition.

If you had met Moe, you'd not believe what he could do. He doesn't look like Tiger, he looks like the everyday hacker with a fat belly, short arms and a funny way about him. That's why I wrote that once you take a look at Moe, anything is possible.

But whatever, you can think whatever you want. I'm just sorry that a whole bunch of people think they can't do it just because they were born this way or that way.

Isn't it ironic? They can think what they want and of all the things they can think of, they choose to think they can't do it.

Or look up that guy there in second spot on the world golf rankings. What's his name, Jim Furyk. What a strange swing yet he is second in the world golf rankings. It must be something entirely different than talent or practice because that swing is horrible. Yet he is second in the world golf rankings. Nevermind, he must have practiced that swing more than anybody else to become second in the world golf rankings with it. Perhaps it's talent? If he had talent, he wouldn't swing like that. Or would he and just use his talent to correct whatever flaw his swing produced just to show off how good he is even with that strange swing? Ridiculous. Nah, he got no talent that I can think of except perhaps that of patience. He got plenty of that with the amount of practice he must have endured to groove that swing to become, I say again, the second player in the world golf rankings.

I dunno, talent without practice is nothing. But now I think that even without talent, practice can do great things for people.

I'll admit, I was one of the misinformed, I thought Moe and Natural golf were one in the same. But, this goes to my point genius or genetics only or practice only, or training only won't get you to the highest level, you have to be lucky enough to have all the pieces together. Moe couldn't putt, he didn't have the support or strong people who believed in him, mostly himself, or who knows where he would be. If anybody but Moe could do that natural golf, the tour would be fulled with'em, since there is not, I tend not to believe in it's teaching. But has I said the tour and the money, cut through the fluff, the only thing funny about anybodies swing Moe, Furyk, Trevino, the list goes on ...is the backswing, at impact they all look the same, swing path, clubface straight, hitting down and through the shot, basically fundelmental.

Now on any given day I can hit as well as most tour players, some times I can even putt good, but I can't do it consistantly enough to be on tour, I also don't have the support, I never took lessen on a consistant basis (no one took me under their wing) and it took me 40 years to get here, my window of oportunity has passed, and to be honest I just don't have the desire, I love the game don't get me wrong, and if I had the money to make a run and the services of a great coach, I'd be there in a minute, but I don't, so that is that. The differnece between someone like me and a tour palyer is about five strokes and the ability and money to do it on a daily basis. Moe points that out so painfully clear.

[Sumosid]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Any Star Trek fans out there??? I wonder how Data would golf in the hollow deck... ?

I was talking to someone the other day about how luck just seems to be there some days and not others... If you think about it, there is so much more to golf than what caused the ball to become air borne. Wind, lie, temp, altitude, up hill down hill, side hill etc... it is a wonder that some have hit a 59 game at all...

Evidently an Iron Byron was setup to hit shots with a driver. The ball was adjusted to get the tightest ball grouping, which turned out to be about 10 yards in diameter at 280 yards---cool... the most interesting part was that they then started to slightly change the ball placement forward and backward up to an inch in either direction. the landing area doubled and sometimes tripled. Perfect swing or not, you had better have your A game and concentrate 100%, or you're done.

[GoNavy]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Any Star Trek fans out there??? I wonder how Data would golf in the hollow deck... ?

I was talking to someone the other day about how luck just seems to be there some days and not others... If you think about it, there is so much more to golf than what caused the ball to become air borne. Wind, lie, temp, altitude, up hill down hill, side hill etc... it is a wonder that some have hit a 59 game at all...

Evidently an Iron Byron was setup to hit shots with a driver. The ball was adjusted to get the tightest ball grouping, which turned out to be about 10 yards in diameter at 280 yards---cool... the most interesting part was that they then started to slightly change the ball placement forward and backward up to an inch in either direction. the landing area doubled and sometimes tripled. Perfect swing or not, you had better have your A game and concentrate 100%, or you're done.

I am a trekkie...I would have said Data is not allowed to play he has an unfair advantage...microprocessor...but since they are letting skycaddies used now, I guess mechnical aids are ok now..lol

The mind can do strange things, little tiny unconscious adjustments, think about that water on the right and your brain unconsciously figures out a way to take your perfect setup and send the ball that way.

[Scragger63]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Interesting thread this...

Firstly, a comparison of 2 keen golfers.

There is a guy at my club, he's been playing 2 (maybe 3) years, has had numerous lessons, owns the latest brand name clubs and practices 3-4 times a week. He hits between 150 - 200 practice balls before his Saturday comp round and his handicap floats up over 25 or so. Having asked him, he has a low round of 95, and averages about 105.

Me, I have been playing on and off for about 15 years, have had only one lesson in my life, never hit a practice ball, play with 2nd hand clubs and my current handicap is 18. In the last 6 months (after a 3 year period of not touching a club) I have a playing average of 91 with a low score of 82.

This fellow is probably younger and more athletic than I am. I have never played a round with him, so I am unsure what part of his golf game troubles him. It is obvious that he has a serious work ethic when it comes to practice. In my case, I played a lot of tennis as a younger fellow before I took up golf and I have never had any trouble with ball striking, other than where it goes AFTER I have struck it. Personally, I think it much easier to stand still and hit a stationary golf ball than it is to have to move to hit a moving tennis ball. This of course (like many things) is arguable.

Ok, the moral of this story is I guess that no two individuals are the same and that I think, like all things in life, talent and practice are only two factors of the countless factors that go towards making up the whole.

I have no idea how much better (or worse) a golfer I would be if I hit as many balls as the fellow I compared myself to. Equally, I have no idea how better (or worse) he would be if he put his clubs away for 3 months...

Perhaps it is fair to say that the Talent vs Practice part of golf may have a 1% influence on the less than 5% of the golf game that is physical. I still think that golf is a game played predominantly "between the ears..." which is a place where neither Talent nor Practice have any much bearing at all...

Cheers

[Neil18]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Good post scragger.

Here endeth thy thread!

[paterick]

Re: Talent versus Practice

i read a good true story about a women who won wimbleton once. she was one of these out of the blue dark horses that just reared her head one season. after she won, she played a little but soon departed almost as fast as she came to the top.

during the finals they interviewed one of her past coaches and learned that she learned the game of tennis on the courts of Houston. not the privy clubs, but at the local parks. she would practice and practice and through her junior years she really never made the club or school teams. according to the local camp coach ther were, "more talanted players" that came and went that would pass her up for the positions on the teams. they would come and then go on to other thangs but she just kept on practicing and wouldnt give up. after years of struggling she finaly made. the coach said she had heart!

so now we have another variable in the equation for success. i am sure there are more and talent, practice, athletic intelegence, etc are all proably just a few in the pot that makes us what we are.

[Ian Hancock]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Sorry I haven't had time to read all the posts, so forgiveness needed If I repeat.

Talent is not just what Tiger has, I think Tiger and many others have is God given, sure talented with hand eye coordination, great players have great hand eye-coordination but they have something else what most people don't have....................a winning ability thay are born with, in Leyman terms BOTTLE, GUTS, DETERMINATION.................these are trats of great players.

I come from a darts background, playing for Staffordshire many years ago I met Eric Bristow and Phil Taylor, in fact I have played both on a few occasions and I will never forget the comments both made at totally seperate times, thoses comments were........

Eric........There is only three people in this competition that can go on and win it......!!!

Phil........You can write the names of the possible winners here today on the back of a bus ticket.........!!!

Both comments clearly mean that there are only certain types of people capable of closing the game out at that level.

In Golf the same applies, good or great hand eye coordination makes a good player, you can also learn this, in life though some are naturally better than others, however what seperates a scratch player from the rest is their mind, great course management, great temperament, no fear of a good score and finally supreme trust in their swing, 99% of scratch golfers play golf not swing.

Just my soap box moment.

Ian.

[Martin Levac]

Re: Talent versus Practice

The mind can be practiced and teaching methods rely on that. It isn't for nothing that the school books always include multiple examples of the same basic equation, especially for algebra.

The mind is a wonderful thing. It's composed of many different parts, each with its own purpose or job. For example, there's the frontal lobe where the id resides. Its job is to think consciously and basically control every other parts of the brain. Other parts include the motor cortex. Its job is to control the muscles. It doesn't think, it acts following orders from the id. It, too, can be practiced. In fact, that's exactly what we do when we go to the practice range and hit ball after ball: We practice the motor cortex.

That motor cortex is your friend. It's my friend anyway. Just looking at a player, I can learn how to do something. I can either think about the techique or simply absorb it directly with the motor cortex. It feels sort of natural that way, like a second skin. But it doesn't stop there. If I don't practice, whatever I learned, I will forget. That's the special ability of the brain: It forgets. Since the motor cortex is part of the brain, it forgets as well. That's why once we stop practicing, we begin to lose the ability to perform at the same level. Gradually, our potential level drops. That's what it means to be out of practice. Bear in mind that practice also trains the muscles so when we stop, the muscles also lose their ability to perform the action gradually.

Think of the term methodical or systematic for this one. Once you learn how to do something, it'll become easier to do if your id forgets about it while the motor cortex is given full responsibility to do whatever it is that you want to do. Think "send ball there", act and the motor cortex will do the rest. Sounds like magic but that's what happens when you get into the zone. Just like in the army, the general gives orders, doesn't care who or how they're carried out, instead he cares only about the result. A lot of us are still stuck in the technical aspects of the swing and because of that, we can't hit the ball well. Oh but we can certainly tell you everything there is to know about the golf swing, that's for sure. Furthermore we get confused between the what and the how. What are we trying to do and how are we trying to do it.

Into the zone. Out of touch. Sayings we use to denote our present ability or perception of our ability.

Determination and free will is not something we are born with. We learn that, unfortunately many of us don't learn it. We don't learn how powerful it can be, how powerful it is.

I can do anything. I want to do it. I will do it.

But then if you start with the thought that you can't do anything, you won't be able to do anything afterall. That's what we mean by "I can". My kung fu is better than your kung fu.

What about if you don't try? Do you know if you can or can't do it? No. Why would you want to begin with the presumption that you can't do it? You don't know, start with the presumption that you can until you get to the point where there is no possibility that you can and then, only then accept that you can't. Which means nothing for anything else. Try first.

It's like the difference between a loser and a coward. The loser tried, the coward didn't. Or the difference between the winner and the quitter. The winner is the loser who kept going while the quitter just quit.

The mind can be practiced and it starts with "I can".

Put it another way. Practice is the simple repetition of something to become good at it. How many times have you repeated to yourself that you can't do it? Well there's your answer.

[SevenBall]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Good post Martin and also, you have to accept that you, even when you suck at something, must still put the hours of work in to get where you want to be. It's not like you get to scratch and say, "Hey, I better practice 4 hours a day now." You even have to do that (or how many hours you need) when you are at a 26 handicap.

I was lucky, I was born sick - I love to practice. Getting out on the range by myself with a CD playing in my ear (I take down my portable CD player) is about as good as it gets for me.

[kbp]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Psycho-babble aside, SOME peoples minds are genetically "wired" for certain talents. They see, feel, think and process information in a way that’s suited for a particular "specialty". Genius, I think is the best way to describe it. The greatest artists, musicians, scientists, athletes, etc. All the mind games and practice in the world are not going to produce true "genius" out of thin air.

Does this natural gift need to be exploited through hard work, practice and mental toughness to be get to the absolute top of their field? Absolutely. Can hard word, practice and mental toughness alone put anybody at the absolute top of ANY field just because they want it bad enough? No. Could Tiger Woods be Albert Einstein if he tried? Could Nicklaus be Picasso? Could Mickelson be Jimi Hendrix? Never.

Bottom line, mental attitude, training, and practice CAN take you to YOUR potential in a particular activity, but at a certain point, we are all limited, depending on the activity.

[cyc53870]

Re: Talent versus Practice

Here's one way of isolating talent and taking practice out of the equation-

Imagine if somehow everyone in the planet played about 18 holes of golf daily since childhood and had a handicap... Think of the possibilities... Where would you be in the worldwide ranking? Mind-boggling... It could be the next golf movie...