George Michael Bluth wrote:
29:15 at Chilepepper?
So his 29:09 would eclipse that. Is Chile Pepper 10k now? It was definitely short when I ran it.
George Michael Bluth wrote:
29:15 at Chilepepper?
So his 29:09 would eclipse that. Is Chile Pepper 10k now? It was definitely short when I ran it.
What was the course like? I've heard some people suggesting it was a little long, maybe like 10.3K.
"And it is fundamentally WRONG. As has been posted on this thread already, one's talent level changes EVERY SINGLE DAY."
No it is NOT.
You are confusing talent with ability. One's ability changes every single day. Talent != ability. Talent is innate. Ability is developed. Talent does not change. Ability does.
A 12 year can have supreme talent. He is still not going to beat a semi talented 18 year old. When that 12 year becomes 45 he is still talented, but he's not going to beat most semi talented 24 year olds. Age is an important factor in ability, not in talent. Though, of course, at a certain point talent will not longer matter at all.
For distance running (long or middle), clearly talent is not enough. One needs years of training, the correct motivation, and a little luck (avoid injury, find the right coach, etc). A runner with talent, motivation, years of training is going to beat another runner with lesser talent with equal amounts of motivation, training and luck. Less talented runner can and do beat more talented runners all the time, but only because they have greater motivation and luck (one could say motivation [or grit] is a form of talent).
Now it is difficult to gage talent level. German seemed to be a supremely talented 15 year old. He ran 4:22 (or was he 14) after a few months of light training. We know what he ran at 18 with about 2 years of semi solid training. There were mind boggling times for an American born runner.
But was he more talented than, say Ryan Hill? Probably, but maybe not. Some mature faster than others. At 18 he might have been at the same physical development level as most 23 year olds. Maybe he was not going to keep improving at such a rapid rate that most 18 years old do, because he was already mature.
Still, even if more talented, the slightly less talented Hill has passed him in ability. Maybe German can catch back. Maybe not.
Talent: the level at which a brain is in harmony with it's internal and external environments coupled with a body that can closely mirror the brain.
Generally an increase in the story of our ego creates resistance in the body, which means it can not transmit energy as it is done in nature, which in turn leads to a decline in one's talents.
If I had minimal longterm memory I reckon I'd be fast as s.it.
Cute. But WRONG on all counts once again.
Sure you can make up definitions all you want. Talent is simply the ability to do something well. It changes. All the time. To argue otherwise is simple ignorance and wishful thinking.
Here, let me make this easy for simpletons like you. A boy of 14 is 5' 10" and a decent basketball player. In the next two years he has a huge growth spurt and is now 6' 8" and dominates HS basketball. His ability to play basketball well has drastically increased. He now has more talent than he did when he is 14. That is, his talent level has changed.
Does one's body magically stop changing when one turns 18? 21? ??? Actually, it NEVER STOPS CHANGING. It changes really fast from 0 through 16,17,...,23 for most people. After that it changes more slowly until one is pretty advanced in age. Then the rate of change increases again (unfortunately). Anyone who thinks otherwise is unimaginably ignorant. And the unavoidable conclusion is that TALENT NEVER STOPS CHANGING.
Sorry, but it is simple logic, regardless of how inconvenient that may be for your cute saying.
"Talent is simply the ability to do something well."
oxford english dictionary wrote:
"Talent is simply the ability to do something well."
Pretty sure that is what I said. Do you have some kind of point?
Emily K. wrote:
What was the course like? I've heard some people suggesting it was a little long, maybe like 10.3K.
It was not long. It's a pretty flat, fast course, and it was a 10k.
Must be Smith wrote:
"You know me" must be Smith, still trying to blame German for his own inability to coach good runners, and for how he messed up German which is own asinine ideas about training and eating. Granted, he's a good recruiter.
Wow, you caught me.