Thread: Natural Talent vs Hard Work

Originally Posted by ioan

Talent is nothing if it is not used and trained thoroughly. Living proof is Kimi Raikonnen.

Schumacher got where he got because he worked hard to maximize his talent at all times.




Stirling who? I might have missed his great achievements and numerous F1 titles that give him the ground to judge the man who achieved infinitely more than him in F1. And no, being born in the UK is not an achievement.

What a surprise (i.e. not one at all) to find this in amongst a variety of otherwise eloquent, respectful posts.

Maybe, ioan, you might like to explain to us how, using your own faulty criteria, you expect your own views to carry any weight.

Now back to the topic.

Originally Posted by D-Type

Assuming you are serious.

Who was the driver considered the successor to Fangio?
Who was the second foreigner to win the Mille Miglia (and in record time)?
Who beat the all-conquering F1 Ferraris in a privately entered year-old car - twice?
Who won the Tourist Trophy no fewer than seven times?
Who won the Nurburgring 1000km three times in succession?
Who won a Coupe des Alpes en Or for three successive Coupes des Alpes?
Who has a higher wins to starts ratio than any current F1 driver?
Who was considered "The man to beat" by his peers?

Someone, alas, whose achievements mean nothing to those with a joyless, statistical approach to measuring sporting greatness, and a complete lack of appreciation for history.

Originally Posted by jens

I would like to add that often it is not clear to separate "talent" and "hard work" at all. By this I mean that you actually need talent to work hard, which means a person has the ability, stamina, concentration, etc, to put in excessive and also efficient hours in improving himself.

This is an excellent point, very well put. It applies to all forms of work, not just that of the F1 driver. Some people just have greater 'capacity'.

Originally Posted by Malbec

As for further down the food chain its noticeable that those drivers who have a good budget and can keep buying time in the car generally move further ahead of those without money regardless of talent so I think that tells us the answer. Practice is worth more than 'talent'.

Well, in the instance you describe, money is worth more than both. Let's not forget either that drivers in various formulae can simply surprise with their ability, even when tarred with the 'pay driver' brush.

Originally Posted by Malbec

Isn't that more about a loss of confidence? On any objective basis I don't think Stirling Moss suffered neurological injury after his accident and what he describes sounds more like being completely out of the zone, something that was discussed recently in an interesting thread in the F1 forum.

At the top end of motorsport we're looking at guys who've spent in most cases more than a decade perfecting their driving and have therefore had a lot of practice. I don't think we can judge the effect of hard work vs talent on how they develop once they are in a formula that is in the public eye.

As for further down the food chain its noticeable that those drivers who have a good budget and can keep buying time in the car generally move further ahead of those without money regardless of talent so I think that tells us the answer. Practice is worth more than 'talent'.

Thank you.
I was hoping you might pipe in.
Its odd----formerly being a driver (rider) who did do it the 10-15 hours a week training (riding) path for roughly 10 years before just cracking into paid driving (start money) for a couple of seasons..---when I hear people going on about this subject--"natural talent" for driving fast...and more broadly , "sports". I'm wondering where the strange belief comes from..
(Max Weber jumps up with his explanation of attitudes about "the blessed' and Protestant (Calvinist?) theories about "predestination")

It did give me a decade of daily working and interacting with world elite and "top 10" type guys..

My opinion from watching men in the top of the world, and men on the way up and them afterwards, and the guys 1 or 2 steps below--like me and my mates---is the overarching difference is WILL...or desire....and the aforementioned empty head...seriously (it must be empty at the highest levels.)
It's not quick reactions----even at over 59 years old and after hands and fingers broken 4-5-6--12 times some fingers--- still have reaction time average 0.181 seconds----it's not some genetic thing (except if your parents were rich) .
Its will..

And you are very likely right on the Moss thing.. I have seen literally thousands of crashes in 20 years of moto-cross and have had 3-4 friends who dinged their brains, and never were the same--ie slow walk, bad focus, slurred speech...and one, Axle Regnell from Stockholm, still glowed with passion and will--very difficult even to recall how bad it was for him..

But I have seen others already "at the top" have one serious crash or break one big bone--one time femur and bang! "it" is gone.

There was no neuro/brain damage, the femur healed, the guy (man did he have a hottie for a younger sister, damn!) knew still how to ride, but something clicked, he "found Jeebus" and never was the same.

Then I have seen some friends break many bones repeatedly, or (me0 rip up knees in chronic ways and in tramatic ways and we're like the dumb Knight at the Bride in Pythons "Search for the Holy Grail" just too damn dumb to know we're seriously buggered--so hard was the training, that even the answer to crashes became semi-automatic: get going.
(I remember one first turn incident ramming where a "save' --from crashing resulted in detached anterior ligament, ripped up later meniscus and I stoppedblind for a second. my mechanic runs up helps me off---I say "Wot da Fawk, eh? Me filthy leg won't straighten" and I tried putting the toe down--leg is bent andyou lean. Blinding pain and lost balnace and fell over howling, but hopped up and ask mechanic "What's all dis, den? dammit let's try that again..." and promptly fell over again.

My brilliant solution? I told hm to start the bike, and help me slide on--and not have to straighten the leg...
It NEVER entered my empty skull to NOT keep going---well 2 laps later it began to creep in...

Will. Or "Will to"... for many it was a will to match the vision in their head of "doing something juste comme ca"

Most were very good at visualisation of what they must do..said one friend "Its pretty crazy to think you can go out on the track and do something with your body and the bike if you can't have a picture of what it is you must do.."

I guess that empty head thing should be more accurately "The ability to make the head become empty" For me that was about 6-8 seconds before the start gate fell.