Natural talent...

[79.]

How would you define it?
To my opinion, the historical 200m Olympic race
in Mexico 1968, gave a clear and extreme defini-
-tion of what it means at the highest level to
be exceptionally gifted:
The great, the unforgettable Tommie SMITH who
was injured seemed to fly effortlessly, while
others (John CARLOS particularly) were plowing
the track.
Roger BAMBUCK who was also a 200m finalist in
Mexico said that the main difference between
Tommie SMITH was his unreal natural talent.

Which "natural talent" impressed you the most.
(Not necessarily a world-class champion. A rising
talent, for example.)?
I remember Garry HILL had been very impressed by
Jeremy WARINER this Spring comparing him to a
horse in a thread.

[EPelle]

Re: Natural talent...

Reggie Williams, River City High School, W. Sacramento, 1988. Exceptional range (22,xx in the 200m; 4.08,78/8.59,61 state double; 8.16,79 with a 2.01 closing 800m at Golden West; 14.19,9 solo all-comers run) -- all off of 25 miles per week.

His fall xc running was interrupted by football practices and games, and his spring track was interrupted by baseball practices and games.

The guy had talent - pure and simple. Williams stepped on a high school track, and it was lights out (except for his Arcadia loss to Ian Alsen in April, 1988).

Yes, I forgot: 1987 Cross Country State Division III Champ (15.29 - a 15-second margin over runner-up, Scott Cole).

[tafnut]

Re: Natural talent...

Whether his 9.4y in tennis shoes with no training is apochryphal or not, Houston McTear may have been the greatest natural sprint talent ever. Maybe even more than Bob Hayes!

[fg]

Re: Natural talent...

This natural talent question seems to me highly subjective. By natural do you mean someone who has not trained for the event they show exceptional talent in when judged against other trained atheletes or is the time posted or achieved the ultimate judge of the talent.

This natural talent issue it seems to me is relative to the viewers/judges experiences in the particular events. I think a better analysis of talent would be use of the word "initial". Initial talent is that unique gift that is shown without training. The ability to repeat that talent over a long period of time against proven talent is the true test of a natural gift.

[tafnut]

Re: Natural talent...

Something I have always been envious of is the 'talent' to translate hard work into greater and greater results. In college I trained as hard as (if not harder than!) my my teammates and although I was initially faster, by the end of two years they had all surpassed me. I would think Jonathan Edwards is a perfect example of that kind of talent. Olympic champions always seem to be able to make that push to an even higher peak even after great success up till then. 'Initial' results are not the only indicator of talent.

[malmo]

Re: Natural talent...

"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not, nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not, unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not, the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent." - Calvin Coolidge

[ffanin]

Re: Natural talent...

<"Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not, nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not, unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not, the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent." > Pietro Mennea (200m WR holder after T.Smith)

[paulthefan]

Re: Natural talent...

There are many many mega talents, .. and certainly McTear was a talent but before this becomes a Houton McTear natural talent religious experience let me offer some of my own guide posts to consider .. to recommend someone as having had truely far end outlier natural talent it should either be someone that actually did become the great sprinter or an era OR someone that never competed at the top level at all. At least in the later case their can always exist some plausible or rather un-disprovable case for the person and in the former case there can be no air-tight case against.

By my self imposed criteria: Tommie Smith passes by a wide margin. For some reason it is harder for me to put MJ in that category but it could just be my bias and preconceived notion of what a sprinter is supposed to look like, leg length, running style..

Actually for those reasons I admire and respect MJ far more.. he seems more of a phenome to me for having done what he did the way he did it.

[Jon]

Re: Natural talent...

>If I hear about one more Houton McTear natural talent religious experience Im
>going to faint...




Stay WELL clear of the Sub-10 message board then!!

[paulthefan]

Re: Natural talent...

.. strange about McTear, it seems like in every event there are "figures" for some reason that capture the attention of the masses in ways that are so far beyond their accmplishments..

To consider McTear in the same league as Hayes to me can only be explained by some kind of emotional attachment born out of something not readily explained with statistics.

First the notion that because someone runs a T second 100M in HS means that he is automatically going to run T-D second 100M as an adult defies all evidence.
McTear may well have been one of the greatest HS talents in the world.. that and 50 dollars will get you a great seat in the Montreal olympic stadium.

For instance if you love HS football you can find countless great HS running backs all over the country setting HS rushing yardage records.. how many go on to be NFL rushing leaders.. does it diminish the greatness of their HS accomplishments.. no, not at all, it is just a totally different thing to excel as a HS running back and to exel on the greatest stage of fine tuned adults playing football..

McTear was a great HS phenome, we should appreciate that. But that does not mean that he was ever destined or could have been the top sprinter in the world as an adult ...

Personally I think it is very difficult for that type of body/frame type to reach the absolute top. It can be done, Ira Murchison, Remingo (he perhaps a fluke the exception that more proves the rule), but it is very rare.

[tafnut]

Re: Natural talent...

>>For instance if you love >HS football you can find countless great HS running backs all over the country >setting HS rushing yardage records.. how many go on to be NFL rushing leaders..

Talking about somebody like Kenny Hall of Sugarland is mixing apples and oranges. He only had to outrun HS defenses. In T&F, however, you have to beat the clock. Whether or not HT became an elite is irrelevant to his talent. He ran afoul of several bad situations. Bob Hayes did not. I am not a particular fan of HT (but I AM of BH), but there was the perfect case of talent unfulfilled due to bad 'management' (both by his own counsel and others')

[gh]

Re: Natural talent...

In the modern age McTear would win the World Indoor 60 title every two years but be lucky to make the 100 team every few years. Too short for true greatness outdoors.

[Jon]

Re: Natural talent...

>In the modern age McTear would win the World Indoor 60 title every two years
>but be lucky to make the 100 team every few years. Too short for true greatness
>outdoors.




So he was a bit of a Jason Gardener, in a way...?

[tafnut]

Re: Natural talent...

>In the modern age McTear would win the World Indoor 60 title every two years >but be lucky to make the 100 team every few years. Too short for true greatness >outdoors.

I'm not sure if was just his height, but I totally agree he never mastered the full(!) 100.

[gh]

Re: Natural talent...

<<So he was a bit of a Jason Gardener, in a
>way...?>>

No, unlike Gardener he was actually a world-class 100 talent :-)