Mountain Project Logo

Athleticism- trainable or inborn?

JNE · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 2,110
Aerili wrote: All those poor, world class, endurance non-athletes. Who should tell them?
It is my opinion that literally any human could do well at these sports given enough training. For whatever reason, our biological systems seem innately well adapted to longer endurance sports, and not so much for power sports. As an aside, ever wonder why those athletes tend to have such ashen skin? Could it be they are oxidizing without cellular replacement? Just a thought.
Emil Briggs · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2013 · Points: 125
reboot wrote: It may be called "powerlifting" but that doesn't mean it's power at all. Try Olympic lifts, those are actual "power" lifts.
Olympic lifting also depends on flexibility, tendon energy storage and technique which complicate the picture. The first two decline with age, the third can improve with age.
Stephen C · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2016 · Points: 0
JNE wrote: It is my opinion that literally any human could do well at these sports given enough training.
This is not even a little bit true. If you don't believe me then I suggest trying. Attempt to run a 2:05 marathon. Attempt to win a world cup xc mountain bike race. There are different levels to everything. Some people are naturally predisposed to being good at certain things. I didn't think this was really up for debate...
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
Emil Briggs wrote: Olympic lifting also depends on flexibility, tendon energy storage and technique which complicate the picture.
From wikipedia:

Powerlifting: Powerlifting is a strength sport
Olympic weightlifting: Weightlifting tests aspects of human ballistic limits (explosive strength)...Properly executed, the snatch and the clean and jerk are both dynamic and explosive

Emil Briggs wrote: The first two decline with age, the third can improve with age.
Athletes in more skilled sports tend to peak later, not earlier. Given the peaking age of Olympic weightlifters (mid 20's), it's easy to conclude it isn't an overwhelmingly technical sport.
Emil Briggs · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2013 · Points: 125
Stephen C wrote: This...most normal, untalented, people will never be able to achieve elite levels in any sport no matter how much training they put in. That goes for endurance sports, strength sports, coordination, etc.
Yep. How high you can go in any particular sport depends a lot on what your genetics dictate. Most people never actually reach their genetic limit though because that would require dedicating your life to that sport which won't pay the bills unless you are elite.
JNE · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 2,110
Stephen C wrote:There are different levels to everything. Some people are naturally predisposed to being good at certain things. I didn't think this was really up for debate...
And the whole of humanity is predisposed to certain things...also a point I did not think was up for debate. I might also mention that the perspective which says that humans are innately better as a group at some things as opposed to others does NOT mean that one could not develop a competition in which some people are able to demonstrate a significant advantage over others at certain things, so I am not really sure where this nugget of wisdom came from:

Stephen C wrote:This is not even a little bit true. If you don't believe me then I suggest trying. Attempt to run a 2:05 marathon. Attempt to win a world cup xc mountain bike race.
Emil Briggs · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Sep 2013 · Points: 125
reboot wrote: From wikipedia: Powerlifting: Powerlifting is a strength sport Olympic weightlifting: Weightlifting tests aspects of human ballistic limits (explosive strength)...Properly executed, the snatch and the clean and jerk are both dynamic and explosive Athletes in more skilled sports tend to peak later, not earlier. Given the peaking age of Olympic weightlifters (mid 20's), it's easy to conclude it isn't an overwhelmingly technical sport.
Explosive strength is hard to separate out from tendon energy storage though. For example sprinting is considered a power sport but a key factor in sprinting ability is how much energy gets stored and released from your tendons on each stride. Even if your muscles can generate a lot of force rapidly (the definition of power) you won't be a top level sprinter if your biomechanics are inefficient.
Stephen C · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2016 · Points: 0
JNE wrote: I am not really sure where this nugget of wisdom came from:
It came from you basically saying that endurance is a lesser athletic attribute than strength, power, whatever. My point is that it is not. I am also talking about elite athletics, not 5.13 climbing, rolling off the couch and simply completing a marathon, competing in high school sports. None of those are elite.
JNE · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 2,110
Stephen C wrote: It came from you basically saying that endurance is a lesser athletic attribute than strength, power, whatever. My point is that it is not. I am also talking about elite athletics, not 5.13 climbing, rolling off the couch and simply completing a marathon, competing in high school sports. None of those are elite.
Interpretations interpretations. I said:

"When we talk about athleticism in a general sense, it seems to me speed is importantly and indirectly referenced"

Which you interpreted as

"It came from you basically saying that endurance is a lesser athletic attribute than strength, power, whatever."

No, I flat out said that the general population does NOT think of repetitive endurance exercises as comprising their personal view of athleticism (though I would argue they comprise their personal view of overall fitness i.e. overall ability to sustain a workout which would actually lead to more athleticism), and furthermore stated that I am one of "those people".

Otherwise I argue that the professional sports people watch would all have people running around for hours on end, with lots of slow-motion close ups of the 100th, 2000th, or 1000000th stride. Instead, power is the focus of pretty much all of them, and is a key factor in any activity people consider "REALLY athletic".
Stephen C · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2016 · Points: 0
JNE wrote: Instead, power is the focus of pretty much all of them, and is a key factor in any activity people consider "REALLY athletic".
That's like...your opinion, man.
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
Stephen C wrote: That's like...your opinion, man.
Aren't we all just expressing our opinions?

There's a reason distance runners/cyclists are typically referred to as endurance athletes vs just athletes.

Nobody ever says power athletes because it's understood power is part of the definition of athleticism.
Mark E Dixon · · Possunt, nec posse videntur · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 974

This thread has strayed from my OP, pretty much SOP on MP of course.

By athleticism, I mean the characteristic that lets some people be pretty good at a lot of sports and maybe really good at the ones they focus upon.

My theory is that these folks have innate high trainability, slow detraining rate, and excellent body awareness. The ship has sailed for me as far as the first two, but maybe I can improve a little on the last.

In my view, some endurance athletes, some climbers, some power athletes would have this characteristic of athleticism and some others wouldn't. The others would just be pretty good or really good at a single sport that suited their genetics.

It's funny- 15 years ago you'd probably have to be athletic (in my sense) or just adapted genetically to climbing to reach 5.13. Now it's apparently just a beginner/intermediate accomplishment.

Mike Lane · · AnCapistan · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 880
3 body types
This has a ton to do with how successful one is in any particular physical pursuit. You can try real hard but overcoming a body type disadvantage will restrict your amount of success. No matter how much success you have, defying your genetic predisposition will by definition mean you have limitations.
llanSan · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2014 · Points: 130
Mike Lane wrote: ...will by definition mean you have limitations.
1) climber Genes
2) boxing Genes
3) weightLifter Genes
Lalp · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2013 · Points: 35

read The Sports Gene by David Epstein

Mike Lane · · AnCapistan · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 880
Sanllan wrote: 1) climber Genes 2) boxing Genes 3) weightLifter Genes
4) Videogamer/Cosplay genes
JNE · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 2,110
Sanllan wrote: 1) climber Genes 2) boxing Genes 3) weightLifter Genes
Actually, according to bodybuilder.com, the best bodybuilder genes are 1). I imagine 3) is the body type which is best for enduring long cold winters with a dearth of available food, whereas 1) is the body type that develops when there are plentiful resources around (so in tropical regions or where agriculture has been around for a long time). Thus fast twitch muscle fibers are most prevalent in 1), and least prevalent in 3). If I had to guess, I imagine the best endurance athletes are 2) and the best power athletes are 1), but that is just a guess.
llanSan · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Aug 2014 · Points: 130
JNE wrote: Actually, according to bodybuilder.com, the best bodybuilder genes are 1). I imagine 3) is the body type which is best for enduring long cold winters with a dearth of available food, whereas 1) is the body type that develops when there are plentiful resources around (so in tropical regions or where agriculture has been around for a long time). Thus fast twitch muscle fibers are most prevalent in 1), and least prevalent in 3). If I had to guess, I imagine the best endurance athletes are 2) and the best power athletes are 1), but that is just a guess.
So number 3 are best in what sport?
Dan Austin · · San Francisco, CA · Joined Oct 2010 · Points: 0
Sanllan wrote: So number 3 are best in what sport?
Sled dog racing.
Aerili · · Los Alamos, NM · Joined Mar 2007 · Points: 1,875
JNE wrote:It is my opinion that literally any human could do well at these sports given enough training. For whatever reason, our biological systems seem innately well adapted to longer endurance sports, and not so much for power sports. As an aside, ever wonder why those athletes tend to have such ashen skin? Could it be they are oxidizing without cellular replacement? Just a thought.
Good thing this is just an opinion then. I find it a strange opinion, but whatever. Some sports may require less skill, but I definitely think you are making a big claim by assuming this means the entire population has the means to excel simply due to that fact. The average population is typically 50/50 slow twitch/fast twitch, but this is not true for endurance athletes (much higher % on the slow twitch). VO2max also has some genetic determination. Not to mention the mental aspects of athleticism which cannot be trained equally in all people.

There's a reason distance runners/cyclists are typically referred to as endurance athletes vs just athletes.

Nobody ever says power athletes because it's understood power is part of the definition of athleticism.
(quote function not working)

People, particularly people working in the actual field as well as medical professionals, refer to both power and endurance athletes as just "athletes" (I would know, I've been around enough of them/was one of them), and they also differentiate each group when appropriate. I used to explain routinely to people that I coached power athletes specifically in track and field. Athletes are athletes; they just come in different flavors. You talk about their specialties when you need to. If there is a bias it's probably yours.

Mark Dixon wrote:My theory is that these folks have innate high trainability, slow detraining rate, and excellent body awareness. The ship has sailed for me as far as the first two, but maybe I can improve a little on the last.
Mark, how would you measure body awareness in a way that predicts "athleticism", whatever that is?

Interestingly, research has shown that there is no difference between pro's and amateurs when it comes to measuring the components of skill - things like reaction time and hand/eye coordination for instance (among several things). Also, interestingly, world class athletes come from all combinations of genetically determined baseline fitness and response to training: i.e. high baseline/low response, high baseline/high response, low baseline/high response, etc.

People seem to most like to watch two things: skill-based sports and team sports (not mutually dependent). I wouldn't say this is because they are the only things that represent athleticism, but rather they are just more visually engaging, require social interaction (humans like this), and can be broken into short segments good for TV and/or to allow bathroom breaks at the stadium. Some of it is probably cultural too.

Many skill-based sports require good conditioning for a wide spectrum of energy substrates. Basketball, soccer, and lacrosse (just to name a few) require a higher degree of aerobic power - which is directly tied to endurance fitness.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Training Forum
Post a Reply to "Athleticism- trainable or inborn?"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.