EPTIs SC skill natural or trained? - Page 27
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Cruncharoo
United States136 Posts
| ||
|
ducis
Canada96 Posts
On October 08 2011 22:42 Cruncharoo wrote: It's natural talent. Most gamers in Korean training houses are putting the same time in. Some will become GSL championships while others may never crack Code A. And this will not be because they trained any differently. The difference in skill between someone in code B and someone in code S in menial. People move around between the two in a matter on months. As a nationally ranked distance runner, its my experience that genetics is more often an excuse for unintelligent or soft training, then it is a valid reason for lack of performance. I know everyone here likes flow charts so: can you improve? if yes, stop complaining about nature if no, then your probably so good that genetics doesn't matter | ||
|
Pred8oar
Germany281 Posts
| ||
|
Cruncharoo
United States136 Posts
On October 08 2011 22:58 ducis wrote: The difference in skill between someone in code B and someone in code S in menial. People move around between the two in a matter on months. As a nationally ranked distance runner, its my experience that genetics is more often an excuse for unintelligent or soft training, then it is a valid reason for lack of performance. I know everyone here likes flow charts so: can you improve? if yes, stop complaining about nature if no, then your probably so good that genetics doesn't matter I'm not sure menial was the word you were looking for. Also, I'm not saying there is a large skill gap I am saying that it exists and the reason is not because of a difference in how they train. The difference is that some people given the same amount of training will be better than someone else at a given task. This is because of natural talent, genetics, however you want to put it. I am a former collegiate and professional hockey player and I have seen many people make it big by never really working that hard in their life and a lot of people who did every single thing right never be very good. Not everyone is created equal. | ||
|
JayDee_
548 Posts
On October 08 2011 22:42 Cruncharoo wrote: And this will not be because they trained any differently. Oh but it is. They might log the same amount of hours, but the player who improves the most is the one who applies the most focus and intelligence to their practice. You can call that "talent" if you want. I would call it having a strong will and determination. | ||
|
Cruncharoo
United States136 Posts
On October 08 2011 23:53 JayDee_ wrote: Oh but it is. They might log the same amount of hours, but the player who improves the most is the one who applies the most focus and intelligence to their practice. You can call that "talent" if you want. I would call it having a strong will and determination. Not everyone has the same intelligence or ability to focus. | ||
|
Akta
447 Posts
If one of two average Joes tries much harder to get good at something the hard working Joe will probably get better than the other. But when the competition gets hard enough most of us will never reach the absolute top at anything, no matter how hard we try. Like a commentator said during a tour de france couple of years ago when answering the exact same question(don't remember the exact numbers but doesn't matter): There are around 25000 registered professional bicycle racers. 5000 probably train too hard and 10000 probably train about as optimized as the top 5. So no, you can't win tour de france regardless how hard you train unless you belong to the 1 in thousands that happen to be born with good enough genes. And the opposite should usually be true as well. Without proper training you probably wont be able to win Wimbledon even if you are the most talented tennis player ever. | ||
|
svi
405 Posts
On October 08 2011 12:27 jalstar wrote: If my SAT/GRE scores corresponded to ladder ranking I'd be high masters.  Sadly being able to take tests well doesn't make you better at RTS, playing RTS makes you better at RTS. That's because there are different types of intelligences. Just because you got a max score at the SAT's doesn't mean that you that you would be good at playing a piano, just like how it doesn't guarantee that you'll be good at SC2. To be good at RTS's you need to be able to react fast (genetics and practice) and you need to be react intelligently (genetics and practice again). If everyone played 12 hours a day genetics would come into play and you would see certain people dominate just like you would in every other activity (barring trivial crap like tic-tac-toe). | ||
|
Gladiator6
Sweden7024 Posts
On October 08 2011 22:42 Cruncharoo wrote: It's natural talent. Most gamers in Korean training houses are putting the same time in. Some will become GSL championships while others may never crack Code A. And this will not be because they trained any differently. You don't really need to live at a teamhouse to perform at the best, just look at the two best players in the world NesTea and MVP. What you need however is good practice partners, and that's what the foreigner scene is missing, that's why everyone is heading to Korea. | ||
|
ScythedBlade
308 Posts
On October 09 2011 00:08 Akta wrote: Lot of people have romantic views on stuff like this and want to believe that if you work hard enough you can achieve anything you want, which isn't true of course. If one of two average Joes tries much harder to get good at something the hard working Joe will probably get better than the other. But when the competition gets hard enough most of us will never reach the absolute top at anything, no matter how hard we try. Like a commentator said during a tour de france couple of years ago when answering the exact same question(don't remember the exact numbers but doesn't matter): There are around 25000 registered professional bicycle racers. 5000 probably train too hard and 10000 probably train about as optimized as the top 5. So no, you can't win tour de france regardless how hard you train unless you belong to the 1 in thousands that happen to be born with good enough genes. And the opposite should usually be true as well. Without proper training you probably wont be able to win Wimbledon even if you are the most talented tennis player ever. Actually, the model to look at where if you work hard enough you'll succeed is pretty much "mostly" true. It's not a romantic view or anything, but the "hard work" model that people love to explain is a bit wrong. Here's how you should look at it for why some people become more successful: Think of "skill levels" as a graph search. Each time you put in hard work, there's a probability that you might traverse a node, and our final goal is to traverse to the "success" node. So in the end, in simple terms, hard work will help you try to hit a new level each time. But sometimes you might be unlucky and be stuck trying to hit the next level over and over again. By no means are you stuck at that level ... it's jsut that you happen to be unluckily unable to get past that level for a lot of tries. | ||
|
svi
405 Posts
On October 08 2011 18:03 Big J wrote: Like EVERYTHING IN LIFE IS PURE PRACTICE, SC is pure practice as well. Ofc everyone is born slightly different, but from the day the egg and the sperm meet, everything becomes learning and being taught. There is no such thing as natural skill. Mozart didn't just start making music. He was raised that way. All he ever saw was his father and sister making music. Just ask any progamer out there: -) training the game -) thinking about the game -) talking about the game -) experimenting in the game -) experiencing the game -) practicing the game -) focusing on the game -) playing the game ... that's all they ever talk about, if they tell you what makes them good players. lol what a joke... To deny talent is to deny reality. No matter how much training you have you'll never be able to be better than Michael Jordan in basketball if you're 4 foot tall with bad reflexes just like how you'll never be able to do better math than Gauss if you have an average IQ. We all have limits and we should be realists and accept that. SC2 is not a very competitive activity though outside of Korea, so people with 80 IQ's can probably be top players if they practice way more than the rest, since the competition pool is very bad. | ||
|
TheBomb
237 Posts
| ||
|
Fealthas
607 Posts
| ||
|
BarBond
United States3 Posts
| ||
|
TheBB
Switzerland5133 Posts
| ||
|
amatoer
Germany212 Posts
From my point of view, talent affects two things: 1) the learningspeed: The more talented you are the easier you can understand and use your new abilities (but this might also be just a matter of interest). This is how talents are scouted: they do extremely well for their age, even though they dont seem to practice more than guys of the same age. 2) the learningcap: talented player can accomplish more in their category than the average-joe. That is the reason, why 99,99% of the people do not win any mayor tournament in any big, highly competative sport (e.g. snooker, chess, tennis...), just because they reach their skill cap earlier than a "talented one". It's like they have a bigger harddrive than a normal person that allows them to save more things than a normal person. Whatsoever, that means that a Bronze-Player cannot say "meh, I am just not talented in this game", because he is noway near the level where talent matters. From Bronze to GML you need three things to improve: practice, practice and practice. I am not even sure that the GSL Champions play on a level where only (and I say only, because in other games, being #1 normally means being the most talented player) talent counts. SC2 is still very young and I mean very, very young. The gaming-enviroment still has to develop imo. At the moment, I would say that it's like 90% practice and 10% talent, that takes you to the Top of GSL. We could talk about BW, where you obviously have to have some specific traits like endurance and dedication to be in the kespa top 5. But well. I'm in Germany, they are in Korea. I can only guess what the day of a progamer is like, so judging more about sc progaming would be guessing. We could talk about where the talent comes from. Is it "given" a priori to the people? Is it connected to your days/weeks/months before birth? Or the early childhood years? Is it all in the genes? Many questions, but that's more a topic for psychologists, neurobiologists and other crazy people. | ||
|
Holey
United States68 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On October 09 2011 00:24 svi wrote: lol what a joke... To deny talent is to deny reality. No matter how much training you have you'll never be able to be better than Michael Jordan in basketball if you're 4 foot tall with bad reflexes just like how you'll never be able to do better math than Gauss if you have an average IQ. We all have limits and we should be realists and accept that. SC2 is not a very competitive activity though outside of Korea, so people with 80 IQ's can probably be top players if they practice way more than the rest, since the competition pool is very bad. reflexes can be trained, IQ/math can be trained... Denying that means that you're hiding behind the fact that you are a lazy. If people with an artificial leg can run 100m under 11sec, I don't accept that someone blames "bad luck to be born with low IQ", for being unable to do whatever they want. | ||
|
Cruncharoo
United States136 Posts
| ||
|
nira
United States116 Posts
| ||
| ||
