|
http://www.8164.org/talent-vs-hard-work/
Sums it up pretty well, Talent + hard work + passion is a winning formula for success. None of them are mutually exclusive. Genetics is the definition of the genetic features and constitution of a single organism, species, or group much of that which feanor1 described west african sprinters have.
If everyone has the same genetically potential for a natural talent then why isn't everyone a genius at the same things? What someone might consider signs of natural "talent" is not always evident in everyone since birth, it's something that can be developed throughout life and it's an innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment it's not defined to a single individual but also to a group of above average ability.
"If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z,
X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut."
-Albert Einstein
PS: Do your research
@WhiteDog WTF does that have to do with this? You missed Z in Einstein's formula... 
|
Talent is something u may have trained when u were young and u didnt even know... something like mouse control, keyboard speed, fast "mentality" with computers and games in general.
There is people unable to hold a mouse or write fast that seems retard when acting with a computer, those people cant be any good at SC, no matter what. But if u are confident with a computer u can just train ur way up till master league, with hard work, training, study etc. At this point i think there is something that makes difference between you and a pro, and i think it's just about the time u can devote to this game. Pros train for hours and hours and basically it's their job. And when you reach the pro level, "natural talent" come in play distinguish yourself from a Champion.
|
On March 22 2011 00:20 ChaseR wrote:http://www.8164.org/talent-vs-hard-work/Sums it up pretty well, Talent + hard work + passion is a winning formula for success. None of them are mutually exclusive. Genetics is the definition of the genetic features and constitution of a single organism, species, or group much of that which feanor1 described west african sprinters have. If everyone has the same genetically potential for a natural talent then why isn't everyone a genius at the same things? What someone might consider signs of natural "talent" is not always evident in everyone since birth, it's something that can be developed throughout life and it's an innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment it's not defined to a single individual but also to a group of above average ability. "If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." -Albert Einstein PS: Do your research
Einstein, also known as the one who fought to prove the existence of God with physics. Everybody can be wrong.
|
On March 22 2011 00:23 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 00:20 ChaseR wrote:http://www.8164.org/talent-vs-hard-work/Sums it up pretty well, Talent + hard work + passion is a winning formula for success. None of them are mutually exclusive. Genetics is the definition of the genetic features and constitution of a single organism, species, or group much of that which feanor1 described west african sprinters have. If everyone has the same genetically potential for a natural talent then why isn't everyone a genius at the same things? What someone might consider signs of natural "talent" is not always evident in everyone since birth, it's something that can be developed throughout life and it's an innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment it's not defined to a single individual but also to a group of above average ability. "If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." -Albert Einstein PS: Do your research Einstein, also known as the one who fought to prove the existence of God with physics. Everybody can be wrong.
Can you disprove God with physics?
|
A player with more talent will "only" have a higher skill level to start from and a faster skill increase.
It's like in a MMORPG.
It doesn't matter how fast you've been, once your max level.
|
On March 22 2011 00:26 Deadlyfish wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 00:23 WhiteDog wrote:On March 22 2011 00:20 ChaseR wrote:http://www.8164.org/talent-vs-hard-work/Sums it up pretty well, Talent + hard work + passion is a winning formula for success. None of them are mutually exclusive. Genetics is the definition of the genetic features and constitution of a single organism, species, or group much of that which feanor1 described west african sprinters have. If everyone has the same genetically potential for a natural talent then why isn't everyone a genius at the same things? What someone might consider signs of natural "talent" is not always evident in everyone since birth, it's something that can be developed throughout life and it's an innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment it's not defined to a single individual but also to a group of above average ability. "If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." -Albert Einstein PS: Do your research Einstein, also known as the one who fought to prove the existence of God with physics. Everybody can be wrong. Can you disprove God with physics?
No, but to be fair, he actually first rejected quantic physics because "god does not play dice". He was wrong and admitted it himself later. Nobody is perfect.
|
You mean the same Einstein who wrote the following passage?
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."
I also don't see how people seriously are arguing that anyone can be "top-class", because they're now in Masters. Masters is nowhere near "top-class" and thus not really representative. I think their definitely is a big portion of talent involved. HOWEVER it is not comparable with sports, since the amount of people actually doing it is far smaller. This makes it far easier to get high up with just hard work, but in the end the more talented people will end up at the real top.
|
On March 22 2011 00:23 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 00:20 ChaseR wrote:http://www.8164.org/talent-vs-hard-work/Sums it up pretty well, Talent + hard work + passion is a winning formula for success. None of them are mutually exclusive. Genetics is the definition of the genetic features and constitution of a single organism, species, or group much of that which feanor1 described west african sprinters have. If everyone has the same genetically potential for a natural talent then why isn't everyone a genius at the same things? What someone might consider signs of natural "talent" is not always evident in everyone since birth, it's something that can be developed throughout life and it's an innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment it's not defined to a single individual but also to a group of above average ability. "If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." -Albert Einstein PS: Do your research Einstein, also known as the one who fought to prove the existence of God with physics. Everybody can be wrong.
So just because you can't prove something it means you are wrong? It just means you can't prove it.
|
I'm a 2.7k diamond, and certainly for myself, it's more just natural than hardwork. I've only played 300 games in the ladder, however it is my 3rd competitive online game (First being CSS where I was a EAS div 1 borderline EPS player; and the other being HoN). As such, I'm used to playing games that have a lot of stress attached and can think clearly in given situations.
Should I want to go into the higher levels, then I could sit and learn build orders, timings, fuck it, even the damage that each units do (:D), but I'd just rather sit and play the game.
|
On March 22 2011 00:29 gruff wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2011 00:23 WhiteDog wrote:On March 22 2011 00:20 ChaseR wrote:http://www.8164.org/talent-vs-hard-work/Sums it up pretty well, Talent + hard work + passion is a winning formula for success. None of them are mutually exclusive. Genetics is the definition of the genetic features and constitution of a single organism, species, or group much of that which feanor1 described west african sprinters have. If everyone has the same genetically potential for a natural talent then why isn't everyone a genius at the same things? What someone might consider signs of natural "talent" is not always evident in everyone since birth, it's something that can be developed throughout life and it's an innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment it's not defined to a single individual but also to a group of above average ability. "If A equals success, then the formula is: A = X + Y + Z, X is work. Y is play. Z is keep your mouth shut." -Albert Einstein PS: Do your research Einstein, also known as the one who fought to prove the existence of God with physics. Everybody can be wrong. So just because you can't prove something it means you are wrong? It just means you can't prove it.
I was just not going deep into it, he was wrong about quantic physics, and everybody can be wrong. Name dropping him on a conversation about talent does not mean anything.
On March 22 2011 00:28 VicTimEyes wrote:You mean the same Einstein who wrote the following passage? Show nested quote +"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." I also don't see how people seriously are arguing that anyone can be "top-class", because they're now in Masters. Masters is nowhere near "top-class" and thus not really representative. I think their definitely is a big portion of talent involved. HOWEVER it is not comparable with sports, since the amount of people actually doing it is far smaller. This makes it far easier to get high up with just hard work, but in the end the more talented people will end up at the real top.
Einstein did not believe in a personal God, but he said himself that he was a "religious". It's complicated, I'm not a pro either, just don't try to find one quote to makes me look like I'm wrong when I'm not.
My turn to quote him :
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."
|
Talent, natural talent, at anything is part of any skill. I can play baseball, for example, but I have no real athletic talent.
However, Starcraft II, and video games in general, I have a natural affinity for. Talent, I will note, will only take you so far. You have to hone your talent into skill, understanding, and precision. This is true for any activity. Talent will only get you so far, and in rare cases, your talent can take you to the top.
|
its not natural in the "born with it" sense. Your propensity to become good at Starcraft more quickly than others definitely correlates with how well you've learned to train yourself, which is something that is built upon from an early age in life and applies to most things in life. Reaction times and reflexes can be improved upon, but some of it is genetic.
I think the big mistake people fall into is when they think just alot of repetition is a good way to improve... its not. It's useful for developing a couple of skills, but the problem with this approach for non-BW or RTS players for instance, is that they never learn an important aspect of the game that veterans already know... strategy. You need to think about the game twice as often as you actually play it.
|
Starcraft 2 is alot of repetition/training due to the heavy macro focus and low focus on micro.
|
Practice makes perfect tbh. Everyone sucks at Starcraft in the start.
|
I think anything on this world comes down to practice. Talent is subtle and only present and useful versus someone that has trained as much as you.
|
I think the position most supported by current evidence from SC2 and Brood War is that there seems to be some natural ability(or at least ability which exists prior to SC training) that can make it harder or easier to become reeaaaaaaaaaally good, some of which is obvious, such as an affinity for hard work, and some of which seems to be more nebulous. But anyone, trained hard enough, and made to understand the game and how to get good at it, can compete at a very, very high level. Nobody can make it without training.
|
On March 21 2011 23:08 intrigue wrote:
i'd like to add that hard work does not mean just mindlessly grinding out games. starcraft is an rts, after all. nothing is sadder than seeing people stuck at a certain level over thousands of games - at that point, they're just reinforcing bad habits.
40% of the players with a few hundred or more games at this point are going to be in Bronze or Silver, since only the active players define the division boundaries, and most of the active players now have played that much.
I'll tell you this much, I'm in Silver with about 1000 games and I can show you in clear objective ways how I've improved at the game since release. It's like night and day. In fact, I can demonstrate how I've improved since last month. Thing is, all the Silver and Bronze people I play have been playing as much as I have, and they've improved as well. There really are not many people who are regularly playing on the ladder who aren't serious about improving at this point.
Learning the game by itself doesn't get your promoted -- it's learning the game FASTER than other active players.
Edit: Put another way, it's really not possible for every active player to be in the top 50% of active players.
I used to run into a lot of players doing placements whom I'd attack and they -- hadn't built anything. Maybe they had some buildings and some workers and that's it. It's been a very, very long time since I've seen a player like that except in 3v3 and 4v4.
|
you have to be able to think about the game in a certain way for practice to be productive.
otherwise you'll keep doing sentry zealot pushes no matter how many times your opponent builds roaches.
|
|
|
I say it's a part of both. Some people might practice forever and still don't get there. Hand speed and reaction, sure you can train it, but the decision-making, game sense, and general strategy skill needs some kind of affinity, in my opinion.
That's why even in Korea, some players are decisively more dominating than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
