Born to win?
August 17th 2007 11:38
Are world class athletes born or are they made? The classic nature versus nurture debate rages on with compelling arguments for both sides being made.
In sprinting it is an extremely rare event to have a white person in the 100m final, in the long distance races it is highly unlikely we are going to have a single white world champion, in the Javelin it is highly unlikely we are going to have a black world champion etc.
The reasons for this could include a simple genetic disposition for people from a certain geographical area to be able to do something better than others.
For example, evidence suggests that black athletes with west African heritage are generally able to run faster than other races.
At the same time black athletes with east African heritage appear to dominate the longer distance events.
These observations would point in the direction of athletes needing to be born with the correct genetic make up in order to succeed.
Conversely, their success could also be down to (at least in part) the fact that most athletes coming from under privileged backgrounds where sport is the only option for a decent future and unfortunately a significant proportion of these families are black.
How many of you have heard about the Ethiopian or Kenyan school children having to run five miles each day to get to school?
I’m sitting firmly on the fence with this one. I believe that you need a phenomenal natural talent coupled with a huge desire to succeed at all costs.
Having just one of these qualities will not guarantee success.
To this extent training is like the polishing of a diamond.
If the diamond is not of good quality then no amount of polishing will make it shine as bright as a purer diamond.
Conversely the purest diamond in the world won’t be the brightest if it isn’t polished properly.
Where do you stand on the nature vs. nurture debate?
In sprinting it is an extremely rare event to have a white person in the 100m final, in the long distance races it is highly unlikely we are going to have a single white world champion, in the Javelin it is highly unlikely we are going to have a black world champion etc.
The reasons for this could include a simple genetic disposition for people from a certain geographical area to be able to do something better than others.
At the same time black athletes with east African heritage appear to dominate the longer distance events.
These observations would point in the direction of athletes needing to be born with the correct genetic make up in order to succeed.
Conversely, their success could also be down to (at least in part) the fact that most athletes coming from under privileged backgrounds where sport is the only option for a decent future and unfortunately a significant proportion of these families are black.
How many of you have heard about the Ethiopian or Kenyan school children having to run five miles each day to get to school?
I’m sitting firmly on the fence with this one. I believe that you need a phenomenal natural talent coupled with a huge desire to succeed at all costs.
Having just one of these qualities will not guarantee success.
To this extent training is like the polishing of a diamond.
If the diamond is not of good quality then no amount of polishing will make it shine as bright as a purer diamond.
Conversely the purest diamond in the world won’t be the brightest if it isn’t polished properly.
Where do you stand on the nature vs. nurture debate?
| 64 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by charles
ZCars
Ponderous
It's the same for swimming, not just track and field. You hardly ever see a black swimmer succeed in the pool because their bones are denser than those of a white or asian athlete.
But like you said, you can be the most supremely talented and gifted athlete in the world, but unless you put in the hard yards it is very difficult to succeed in the world of elite athletics and sport in general.
Charles.