EPTFlaSh on: What Exactly is "Talent" in Progaming?
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
jinjin5000
United States1422 Posts
| ||
|
pebble444
Italy2497 Posts
i Hear Flash saying that he is a product of hard work over talent, and he does not feel accepted by others in that way because of it. How frustrating must that be for him. I was watching a video of Magnus Carlsen earlier this year in the chess world saying the exact same thing. So i guess it' s safe to assume the secret of success is hard work, commitment and passion, not talent. Something about self-discovery and drawing your own understandings from your experience too. | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7454 Posts
Been under a rock, I guess. That is a tremendous thing to hear. Great video, thank you Jinjin. | ||
GTR
51441 Posts
anyone that was around during his peak knew how good he was - he was just unfortunate his peak coincided with nada's. | ||
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
Thank you! | ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9103 Posts
| ||
|
XenOsky
Chile2268 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10671 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28654 Posts
What I mean about the cultural divide is that europeans and americans have a greater tendency to value talent, while asians have a greater tendency to value hard work. Europeans and Americans might genuinely say 'I was talented, but I didn't put in the work required to succeed' and think they are describing themselves positively. To an asian, I have the impression that this would be considered a fairly negative trait. I also think there's absolutely no question Magnus Carlsen is extremely talented. Not disputing that he has worked hard, too, but when a 12 year old beats semi-professional or professional adults at something, it, by default, means they managed to get good faster than their competition did, because they won't have had the opportunity to spend more hours honing their craft. And I think only a small fraction of people can play a double digit number of blindfolded chess matches at the same time, no matter how much they practice. *It is fair by both Flash and Magnus Carlsen to say that there are others who have been more talented who never became equally good. That seems entirely likely. But if you were to judge them solely based on their talent (and talent is essentially 'how fast do you improve combined with how high your potential is'), they're still in the top 0.1%. | ||
|
iFU.pauline
France1554 Posts
On January 15 2021 16:52 Liquid`Drone wrote: I do think there's a cultural divide here, and it may play into what Flash is saying. I mean, for sure, he's a hard worker, no question about that. But I think there's also no question that he is also extremely talented. People don't become the best without both possessing innate talent and working hard - and especially people who become the best at a young age / the best in their age group will always be considered 'talented'. What I mean about the cultural divide is that europeans and americans have a greater tendency to value talent, while asians have a greater tendency to value hard work. Europeans and Americans might genuinely say 'I was talented, but I didn't put in the work required to succeed' and think they are describing themselves positively. To an asian, I have the impression that this would be considered a fairly negative trait. I also think there's absolutely no question Magnus Carlsen is extremely talented. Not disputing that he has worked hard, too, but when a 12 year old beats semi-professional or professional adults at something, it, by default, means they managed to get good faster than their competition did, because they won't have had the opportunity to spend more hours honing their craft. And I think only a small fraction of people can play a double digit number of blindfolded chess matches at the same time, no matter how much they practice. *It is fair by both Flash and Magnus Carlsen to say that there are others who have been more talented who never became equally good. That seems entirely likely. But if you were to judge them solely based on their talent (and talent is essentially 'how fast do you improve combined with how high your potential is'), they're still in the top 0.1%. This video has an interesting timing as I was thinking about that just yesterday, a good way to summarize it from my perspective is that hard work can overcome talent but talent cannot overcome hard work. However, in order to be part of the best in the world, you obviously need both. | ||
|
JAG.war
United States76 Posts
On January 15 2021 16:52 Liquid`Drone wrote: What I mean about the cultural divide is that europeans and americans have a greater tendency to value talent, while asians have a greater tendency to value hard work. Europeans and Americans might genuinely say 'I was talented, but I didn't put in the work required to succeed' and think they are describing themselves positively. To an asian, I have the impression that this would be considered a fairly negative trait. Amen. As a Westerner myself, what's strange is that we separate "talent" from "wanting to work at it" at all. Talent is a mix of IQ & personality (personality being more important), and if you didn't stick with it, you probably didn't have the "personality set" for that particular thing to begin with, and you're better off finding something else that you actually want to stick with. Maybe you were definitely talented compared to your peers on a smaller stage, but you didn't actually care about it enough to stick around and compete at a higher level. So would you have made it? Possibly, but based on what evidence? Honestly, knowing the fact that you gave up on it, probably not. There are many people who were at the same level as you, but were driven to stick with it, and then succeeded. And that's actually okay. Life is a never-ending journey to find the things we love and actually want to do. Why try to claim fame to something you didn't actually want to do (/stick with)? We don't have to be spectacular at everything we do. That's why thoughts like this hurt my soul 'I was talented, but I didn't put in the work required to succeed' and think they are describing themselves positively. Because we should always be exploring new things to hang our hats onto, not hanging onto old stories. And that's why I prefer the Eastern philosophy in this case. | ||
|
MeSaber
Sweden1235 Posts
I do sincerely believe its hard work and passion, nothing else. Sure there are some things that can make you more "talented" like very agile fingers and stuff like that. Having stiff fingers isnt that great for keyboard mechanics. Not sure i would rate this as talent though. Some are born with it some are not (i dont have agile fingers and have a very hard time using the keyboard like Flash does for example). By going with the definition Talent: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/talent It would kind of mean anyone who can predict and outplay like Flash is talented. I still believe thats not talent but hard work and passion made him think more than others because he cant outplay using mechanics only anymore. Edit: Just because you put in more hours to understanding the game better or be innovative doesnt mean you are more talented imo. It just means you work harder than others and thats why you are better. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28654 Posts
To what degree this stuff is innate and to what degree talent can be developed at an early age is interesting, but there is no point pretending that everyone has an equal potential at everything. | ||
|
ggsimida
1148 Posts
"hard work>>talent" is simply a easy feel good narrative for the masses, since obv the masses doesn't have much in the way of talent. the masses are also mostly labourers/salarymen, so glorifying hArD WoRK gets them to toil more for the shareholders and capitalists. | ||
|
Akio
Finland1838 Posts
Thanks for the translation as usual <3 | ||
|
Jonas :)
United States511 Posts
| ||
|
CoughingHydra
177 Posts
On January 15 2021 22:03 Jonas  wrote:My favorite blog on the planet wrote a post on whether the sort of insane skill in sports, science, music or anywhere else in life is due to mostly talent, or mostly hard work. I'd highly suggest that everyone gives it a read. Blog is called SlateStarCodex, and the article is titled "Parable of the Talents" Heh, I read precisely this post some time ago and would definitely recommend it (and the whole blog is awesome!). | ||
|
Sadistx
Zimbabwe5568 Posts
If you think about all the things that go into skill, other than hard work, all of them will be things that are outside of your control, and thus influenced mostly through luck. 1. Where you are born and to whom (genetic intelligence/ability) 2. How you are raised (attentive parents, passion for knowledge and work ethic) 3. Positive influences by people who are not your parents, positive experiences in general (e.g. actually winning games right away and not getting crushed 20 times in a row when you start playing), safe place to learn and improve. | ||
|
iFU.pauline
France1554 Posts
On January 15 2021 22:03 Jonas wrote:My favorite blog on the planet wrote a post on whether the sort of insane skill in sports, science, music or anywhere else in life is due to mostly talent, or mostly hard work. I'd highly suggest that everyone gives it a read. Blog is called SlateStarCodex, and the article is titled "Parable of the Talents" The example of his A+ rank in English high school was a bit lame frankly because he simply says that he did not try that hard to get his rank while other did and did not achieve the same result like a 5 years old kid. How about all the others that did get A+ rank because of their hard work? And how does he scale to world class English speaker anyway? Is it really that difficult to be number 1 in your "no name" school, in your "no name" city, with your "no name" classmates? Of course your talent will come into play and have a much bigger difference on the outcome on such a low level. Now being on top of the world is a different thing and I have never heard one single person being the best in his field stating and I quote this article : I didn’t do it! I didn’t study at all, half the time I did the homework in the car on the way to school, those essays for the statewide competition were thrown together on a lark without a trace of real effort I guess at the end it's all about the frame of reference. | ||
|
Rus_Brain
Russian Federation1893 Posts
On January 15 2021 07:19 AttackZerg wrote: I will be pretty much thankful, should you help me doing good things by sharing few bucks to the fund.The esport.fund is funding Flashes team? Been under a rock, I guess. That is a tremendous thing to hear. Great video, thank you Jinjin. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28654 Posts
On January 15 2021 23:25 Sadistx wrote: Talent can also be described as luck. If you think about all the things that go into skill, other than hard work, all of them will be things that are outside of your control, and thus influenced mostly through luck. 1. Where you are born and to whom (genetic intelligence/ability) 2. How you are raised (attentive parents, passion for knowledge and work ethic) 3. Positive influences by people who are not your parents, positive experiences in general (e.g. actually winning games right away and not getting crushed 20 times in a row when you start playing), safe place to learn and improve. Isn't the degree to which you can work hard gonna be influenced by your work ethic which is also luck-based? | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7454 Posts
On January 16 2021 01:36 Rus_Brain wrote: I will be pretty much thankful, should you help me doing good things by sharing few bucks to the fund. You got it! edit - Done! | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
Personally, I've found that getting to a state of mind where you are constantly analyzing your performance on a mental level, helps in faster growth a lot. An example I like to use for gaming is the following (less applicable for other games, more for some): If you use a specific strat/playstyle and you're not succeeding are you: a) Going to repeat the same thing b) Trying something else c) Trying to identify the issue Those who repeat the same thing, are unlikely to succeed. Those who try something else, may succeed or may fail even worse. Those who work out what the actual problem was, are the most likely to find success. If your strategy is losing, you cannot win the game without changing it. Can you successfully transition before the game is over, or are you straight-up forfeiting the map with inability to adjust? The issue can be just not pressing buttons well enough, but it can also be a simple "what the opponent is doing generally counters what I'm doing", making your strategy inefficient. In that case, you can either tweak the approach to take account the weakness and try to mitigate it, or see if you can change into a more efficient strategy and carry it through. | ||
|
outscar
2832 Posts
| ||
|
greenturtle23
86 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25111 Posts
By want of recourse to another area, music, some people are just outright tone deaf. I played a fuckton of guitar and really developed a musical ear, can write music (not very well), a few other instruments passably. I’d be staunchly in the middle group, most of my ability comes from the grind and the passion, you pick up a lot even subconsciously just by throwing yourself in. We’ve all met people who really enthusiastically join in the bar singalong and you don’t want to burst their bubble but they’re missing almost every note. Not because of their vocal range (mine is pretty limited!), but because they just don’t actually parse what is in key and what isn’t. You see this a fair bit in talent show auditions on TV. I don’t think if these people ground 24/7 they’d be as ‘talented’ as me, they’re just lacking a crucial component. At the other end of the scale, hanging around musicians some of those folks have abilities I couldn’t grind out, for example the rare specimen who possesses perfect pitch. I’d imagine the Starcraft continuum is vaguely similar. I’d say a limited amount of folks would be a C rank or a Plat player in SC2 even if they were paid to do it full time. A solid chunk of us could be an S rank player if we had optimal conditions to grind full time. Then there’s that level above that can do it with relative ease and it’s that level you need to be at to even countenance taking a shot at being a pro. Then amongst really talented, hard-working pros there’s still some X factor, as the skill floor gets higher and higher those margins are tiny, but still hugely impactful. And that is talent, or a genetic natural aptitude or whatever you want to call it. You’ve filtered for the best of the best, they all work pretty damn hard and still there are gaps. In absolute terms, Roger Federer isn’t that much better than most top 100 tennis players, especially if we plotted it on some graph including everyone who picked up a tennis racquet. But he’s got that little extra something that makes him a GOAT candidate vs being a solid tennis pro. Whatever that is, Flash has it in BW. As a silly aside there’s probably a lot that many of us could be the best in the world at, but it doesn’t appeal or we never get exposed to it. For all I know my genetics could see me having the potential to be the best juggler in the world, but I never knew! I feel Flash is one of those rare folks who out of all the hobbies and jobs open to us humans is actually doing the one he is best at. | ||
|
kaspa84
Brazil169 Posts
| ||
|
zimp
Hungary951 Posts
| ||
|
JAG.war
United States76 Posts
On January 16 2021 04:35 Cephiro wrote: I've always thought of any skill as a thing where a person may have a slight innate affinity for something, but at a level of mastery, the effect of that is just a drop in the ocean. What matters is how hard/much you work, building up experience, and how efficiently you do it. That's why it's not a simple question of "whoever works more is better", but the way you work is also important. That's why some people improve faster than others, they are able to get more out of the same hours put in, and that in itself is a skillset which can be trained as It’s interesting how you immediately dismiss “having an affinity for something” right at the beginning like its a minor thing, and then go on to count things like “building up experience” and efficiency as if they matter more. I’m borderline OCD about efficiency but would always favor passion more. Because without passion what is driving the work? It’s a natural prerequisite to greatness. That said.. as someone who's recovering from an extremist sense of efficiency (and by extension perfectionism), I’m bound to think a certain group should heed your advice... if you have the passion and also lack a proper mindset for efficiency then you’re going to waste a significant amount of time reaching the potential you’re destined for. I work in the field of music where this is as rampant as ever. Most people who join the field glorify the art beyond reason and make it their life’s journey to recreate the wheel to write a single great song (if they’re lucky), instead of just learning from those before us, adding our own twist and creating an entire collection of great songs that a new generation of people can love. Is that not good enough? Inefficiency comes in all shapes and forms, but it always stems from mindsets that we chose to have. So choose to be wise at something and then go figure out how to be wise as it. | ||
|
jinjin5000
United States1422 Posts
On January 16 2021 10:57 zimp wrote: I wish he said a few words about the talent of Fantasy. next video im translating will be exactly that. won the vote in the strawpoll in discord lol | ||
|
oxKnu
1179 Posts
On January 16 2021 10:45 kaspa84 wrote: Talent is the ability to work extremely hard while not seeming to. Best post in this thread by far. People that work hard with seemingly no issues are the ones that succeed the most. Happens in sports/engineering/business etc. Be it that they have insane competitive drive/thirst for money/unreal passion for what they do. The formula is actually quite simple: You will be successful at something(way above the mean) if: - time is not a constraint - rate of improvement is steadily linear - you are naturally not distracted by anything else So in other words, the people that are by default positively obsessed with something will get exceptionally good at it. I imagine 95% of people fail at most of the above (distractions, they value social norms more, failure to accommodate their life to their passion, inability to isolate stress, too dependent on external validation). That's why that same percentage of people end up getting old in safe, 9-5 dead-end jobs. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On January 16 2021 19:36 jinjin5000 wrote: next video im translating will be exactly that. won the vote in the strawpoll in discord lol Well damn now I can't wait. Thanks for translating all this stuff for us jinjin. | ||
|
iFU.spx
Russian Federation369 Posts
To sum it up: Talent = passion + joy + fun And the final formula: how fast your skill will grow = time spent * talent * mental/physical health. Everyone can do anything at super high level, but most of us losing fun on the road | ||
Peeano
Netherlands4987 Posts
Some things in life come easy. Some are earned and some are indeed gifted. However to succeed in anything professionally competitive you need to be able to work hard but also efficient, strategic. The latter being even more important as bad practice but hard work can actually make worse... Something I don't really see people touch upon (sorry if I missed it) is the value of having a good mentor: Good coaches/teachers can present in a way and hand you certain tools that make it easier and thus more fun (or vice versa) to achieve a higher level. If you aren't able to work hard, no talent nor tutoring is going to save you in a competitive scene. It's totally understandable a gifted pro like Flash wants his hard work praised, but I'm glad that Flash seems to have started to accept that just hard work won't cut it. I'll always remember around 2008-2009 where Flash got really upset when people kept saying he is talented in a fomos/des interview. (I'll try to dig up and link said interview later). I'm quite curious what Flash will say about Fantasy, who I always kinda deemed to be uncle oov's puppet. I have always wondered if Fantasy have been better off or worse without iloveoov back in the day and how it affected him when people, (yes, like myself), attributed his win (or loss) to oov's coaching rather than his own hard work. Has Fantasy ever talked about that? Thanks for the translations! | ||
|
oxKnu
1179 Posts
On January 16 2021 23:37 Peeano wrote: Interesting thread. Something I don't really see people touch upon (sorry if I missed it) is the value of having a good mentor: Good coaches/teachers can present in a way and hand you certain tools that make it easier and thus more fun (or vice versa) to achieve a higher level. ..because it's less relevant today in the era of open information and endless possibilities towards accumulation/aggregation of knowledge. Sure there are psychological aspects to having a mentor figure but let's be honest, if you have the drive you can find out a lot of things today from your chair in your pajamas. In other words the system has been simplified to just the capabilities of the individual to achieve mastery. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11552 Posts
On January 16 2021 23:54 oxKnu wrote: ..because it's less relevant today in the era of open information and endless possibilities towards accumulation/aggregation of knowledge. Sure there are psychological aspects to having a mentor figure but let's be honest, if you have the drive you can find out a lot of things today from your chair in your pajamas. In other words the system has been simplified to just the capabilities of the individual to achieve mastery. I think you are significantly underrating the ability of a mentor to highlight important aspects of a subject and save time. eg if I tell you to find something in a 1000 page book, that might take you a while, but a mentor who knows the book can go say "hey that's in chapter 2". Just having access to knowledge does not mean you can utilize it quickly, and maybe more importantly verify its accuracy and scope. If you've ever done any research in an academic environment you will quickly recognize how difficult it is to find the words or context of something even if you know what you are looking for. | ||
|
Timebon3s
Norway688 Posts
On January 16 2021 22:33 iFU.spx wrote: I thought about it a lot. And i came up with that there’s no such thing as talent at all. What people call talent is a simple joy of doing what are you doing and making fun. To sum it up: Talent = passion + joy + fun And the final formula: how fast your skill will grow = time spent * talent * mental/physical health. Everyone can do anything at super high level, but most of us losing fun on the road I actually came to post this exact thing, but you worded it perfect. This is what my life experience tells me. I know it's true for me at least. | ||
|
oxKnu
1179 Posts
On January 17 2021 02:36 FragKrag wrote: I think you are significantly underrating the ability of a mentor to highlight important aspects of a subject and save time. eg if I tell you to find something in a 1000 page book, that might take you a while, but a mentor who knows the book can go say "hey that's in chapter 2". Just having access to knowledge does not mean you can utilize it quickly, and maybe more importantly verify its accuracy and scope. If you've ever done any research in an academic environment you will quickly recognize how difficult it is to find the words or context of something even if you know what you are looking for. Perhaps 1% of 1% actually try to attain expertise in these type of fields anyways. And in most cases (academics let's say) the foundation is already set to have access to that type of mentorship. You don't necessarily try to do advanced academic research by not already having roots in that system. Those circles are very sparsely populated anyways, so much that the problem is mostly about funding (rather than finding adequate advisors). Still we are in a game forum talking about a game with quite the history and that's a complete different environment. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25111 Posts
On January 17 2021 02:36 FragKrag wrote: I think you are significantly underrating the ability of a mentor to highlight important aspects of a subject and save time. eg if I tell you to find something in a 1000 page book, that might take you a while, but a mentor who knows the book can go say "hey that's in chapter 2". Just having access to knowledge does not mean you can utilize it quickly, and maybe more importantly verify its accuracy and scope. If you've ever done any research in an academic environment you will quickly recognize how difficult it is to find the words or context of something even if you know what you are looking for. It’s an important observation you make there, definitely something that I can relate to. There’s great information out there but I’ve found myself overwhelmed with where to start, whose information is actually good etc etc. Mentors really do help a lot | ||
|
TT1
Canada10007 Posts
On January 16 2021 22:33 iFU.spx wrote: I thought about it a lot. And i came up with that there’s no such thing as talent at all. What people call talent is a simple joy of doing what are you doing and making fun. To sum it up: Talent = passion + joy + fun And the final formula: how fast your skill will grow = time spent * talent * mental/physical health. Everyone can do anything at super high level, but most of us losing fun on the road Passion/joy/fun is more in line with work ethic imo, talent is being able to absorb info and figure the game out on your own (or anything else, this isn't strictly BW related). Always being able to perfect/optimize your play/process, you develop those skills through life experiences (competing at an early age plays a big role). Work ethic/discipline can make you a high end progamer or competitor/athlete but when you put talent + work ethic together you get generational competitors. The type of ppl who are on a different level. It's very hard to have both those aspects in any discipline. But at the end of the day talent is nothing without work ethic, whereas you can make something of yourself with work ethic and discipline. That's why work ethic is way more valuable, imo. Talent is the polished layer (there's multiple layers) that goes on top of work ethic, work ethic is the foundation. | ||
|
Cephiro
Finland1934 Posts
On January 16 2021 18:12 JAG.war wrote: It’s interesting how you immediately dismiss “having an affinity for something” right at the beginning like its a minor thing, and then go on to count things like “building up experience” and efficiency as if they matter more. I’m borderline OCD about efficiency but would always favor passion more. Because without passion what is driving the work? It’s a natural prerequisite to greatness Mm, I simply consider that a very different aspect than passion. You can have passion for a thing you don't have affinity for, and you can not have passion for a thing you do have affinity for. What I consider affinity is where in a certain skillset/field you are inexperienced in, you make those early steps easily because it just "clicks" for you. It's more true for the easier steps, but it can also be beneficial with the advanced concepts. Passion for me is a combination of how much you enjoy a field and how devoted you are to it. It is very possible to become extremely skilled at something without enjoying what you do, but it's not a journey I would see almost anyone choosing. Someone with passion is going to fuel their own drive to surpass themselves as they go further and not suffer from burnout or similar as easily. It's easier to put a ton of hours into improving at something if it's what you enjoy doing! | ||
|
JAG.war
United States76 Posts
On January 16 2021 10:35 WombaT wrote: As a silly aside there’s probably a lot that many of us could be the best in the world at, but it doesn’t appeal or we never get exposed to it. For all I know my genetics could see me having the potential to be the best juggler in the world, but I never knew! I feel Flash is one of those rare folks who out of all the hobbies and jobs open to us humans is actually doing the one he is best at. It's funny.. you present this as silly (and I completely understand why), however I've always considered this to be one of our life's greatest purposes: to constantly seek out what we're made to do. Given the appropriate attention, there are probably about 1,000 things we'd be Good at, 100 things we'd be Great at, and 10 things we'd be World-Class at. To be in the last two categories, you have to be passionate about it, at least for a solid amount of time. But having countless directions to start with, our Great and World-Class categories are hard for us to find... so it's important for us to dive into every curiosity and over time uncover our passions. And then if you have a proper growth mindset, you can end up as the Flash in whatever "thing that you do". Or if you spread yourself out over 2+ passions — which suits me personally — can be great at several of them. | ||
| ||
