HessStation Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 Doesn't matter what your opinion is, you're wrong. Obviously, some people have better genetics than others. That doesn't mean that you can't improve your ATHLETICISM (NOT skill) through training. ANYONE can, for example, get to a 4.5 40, or a 5-minute mile, or a 500 pound squat. Not everyone can get to a 4.3 40, but everyone can become just as athletic as most NFL players. You can definitely improve your athleticism , but I think to Ape's point, it only gets you so far. To get to the pro level there is a certain amount of god given genetics involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Yes. People are born with good hand/eye coordination or they aren't. The ones that are, lucky. The ones that aren't compensate for it with training and muscle memory, as well as researching opponents etc, in many cases (like scouting reports, watching film, knowing what to expect situationally). Those are acquired skills, that augment hand-eye coordination. Hahaha, you're wrong. Face it. If you studied ex. phys. you'd know this. It's called proprioception. It's a function of muscle spindles and, in part, golgi tendon organs. It can definitely be worked on and is NOT a skill, but an athletic trait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 You can definitely improve your athleticism , but I think to Ape's point, it only gets you so far. To get to the pro level there is a certain amount of god given genetics involved. Yes, of course. No one is denying that. I will never be Jadaveon Clowney, but I can definitely become just as athletic, or more athletic, than Gholston, for example. Genetics do have their limit, but let's not act like you can't train your way to a 4.5 flat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 Proprioception. Yes, of course. And just like anything involving athleticism, it can be improved. How so? Everything I've said is true. You're siding with people that are saying that you can't improve your athleticism through training. You're on the wrong side of the argument. You're being somewhat indignant, which I don't really remember you being. No worries, continue on with your bad self homie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC36 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Between scouring Ebay for stupid sh*t and following this thread, I have been thoroughly entertained in the last half hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Between scouring Ebay for stupid sh*t and following this thread, I have been thoroughly entertained in the last half hour. Jets helmet phone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HessStation Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share Posted February 22, 2014 Hahaha, you're wrong. Face it. If you studied ex. phys. you'd know this. It's called proprioception. It's a function of muscle spindles and, in part, golgi tendon organs. It can definitely be worked on and is NOT a skill, but an athletic trait. Hmmm, there's no way you can tell me any kid can play Major League Baseball if he just works harder than everyone else. I think it's a combination of the two and you're trying to make a definitive argument that can't really be made definitively. I do believe to get to a pro level there is a certain amount of born-with given traits involved, that, I think, you're saying can be developed in anyone, if you start early enough? Not sure I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Hmmm, there's no way you can tell me any kid can play Major League Baseball if he just works harder than everyone else. I think it's a combination of the two and you're trying to make a definitive argument that can't really be made definitively. I do believe to get to a pro level there is a certain amount of born-with given traits involved, that, I think, you're saying can be developed in anyone, if you start early enough? Not sure I agree. Yes, I am saying that ANYONE can become a pro athlete if they train and eat right. With that being said, that's maybe 5% of athletes. The rest were going to be pro athletes no matter what. I know plenty of top-tier college guys that went pro and had sh*t work ethics and terrible diets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Doesn't matter what your opinion is, you're wrong. Obviously, some people have better genetics than others. That doesn't mean that you can't improve your ATHLETICISM (NOT skill) through training. ANYONE can, for example, get to a 4.5 40, or a 5-minute mile, or a 500 pound squat. Not everyone can get to a 4.3 40, but everyone can become just as athletic as most NFL players. The ability to train properly is a skill. The level of training you are able to achieve is often determined by your natural athleticism, or maybe the right word to use is raw athletic ability? I'll never be able to do a 500 pound squat, because I have a degenerative disc problem in my c-spine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Yes, I am saying that ANYONE can become a pro athlete if they train and eat right. With that being said, that's maybe 5% of athletes. The rest were going to be pro athletes no matter what. I know plenty of top-tier college guys that went pro and had sh*t work ethics and terrible diets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 The ability to train properly is a skill. The level of training you are able to achieve is often determined by your natural athleticism, or maybe the right word to use is raw athletic ability? I'll never be able to do a 500 pound squat, because I have a degenerative disc problem in my c-spine. Obviously injuries will hinder your athletic abilities. But any able-bodied person can attain a 500 pound squat and a 4.5 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC36 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Jets helmet phone? I wish. an "i shaved my balls for this?" t-shirt and a jets windbreaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Hahaha, you're wrong. Face it. If you studied ex. phys. you'd know this. It's called proprioception. It's a function of muscle spindles and, in part, golgi tendon organs. It can definitely be worked on and is NOT a skill, but an athletic trait. Contrary to your obnoxiousness - I'm not here trying to act like I know it all. I'm just talking about my point of view. I answered the question "yes". I said people are born with a certain level of hand/eye coordination, which would be an athletic traint, no? Working to improve it would be a skill, it is a learned behavior that you volunteer to do and improve at in order to increase the ability of said athletic trait. I know you say I'm wrong - but your explanation seems to say otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC36 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 How many of you have studied ex. phys.? (before you criticize my opinions) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Contrary to your obnoxiousness - I'm not here trying to act like I know it all. I'm just talking about my point of view. I answered the question "yes". I said people are born with a certain level of hand/eye coordination, which would be an athletic traint, no? Working to improve it would be a skill, it is a learned behavior that you volunteer to do and improve at in order to increase the ability of said athletic trait. I know you say I'm wrong - but your explanation seems to say otherwise. Improving your athleticism is not a "skill". Training is not a "skill". Are you saying that someone who naturally runs a 4.5 is more athletic than someone who trains to run a 4.5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 How many of you have studied ex. phys.? (before you criticize my opinions) Studying ex. phys. right now. What are your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt39 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Improving your athleticism is not a "skill". Training is not a "skill". Are you saying that someone who naturally runs a 4.5 is more athletic than someone who trains to run a 4.5? Gaining mass while maintaing speed/quickness is a skill. Staying healthy is a skill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Obviously injuries will hinder your athletic abilities. But any able-bodied person can attain a 500 pound squat and a 4.5 40. It is not an injury. It is a physical condition that runs in my family. You said anyone. You are wrong, or misinformed. It doesn't even have to be about disabilities, or conditions, or injuries either. Some people will just never be coordinated enough to perform the exercises properly to achieve pro athlete levels of accomplishment. Coordination, in my opinion, is a natural athletic trait. Something you are born with. Yes, you can improve on it, but how much is limited per the individual. A blanket statment like anyone can squat 500 pounds and run a 4.5 forty is naive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeC36 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Studying ex. phys. right now. What are your thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Improving your athleticism is not a "skill". Training is not a "skill". Are you saying that someone who naturally runs a 4.5 is more athletic than someone who trains to run a 4.5? Absolutely. Running a forty is as much about speed training and getting out of the blocks than it is pure speed. Give me the guy who rolls out of bed with zero training who runs a 4.5 over the dude who trained for weeks at ELITE and runs the same time. Innate speed shows that he has a higher baseline of speed than the guy training for it, there's no arguing that. If that's his baseline, one would have to imagine his ceiling is that much higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Gaining mass while maintaing speed/quickness is a skill. Staying healthy is a skill. Doesn't take any skill to lean bulk. It is not an injury. It is a physical condition that runs in my family. You said anyone. You are wrong, or misinformed. It doesn't even have to be about disabilities, or conditions, or injuries either. Some people will just never be coordinated enough to perform the exercises properly to achieve pro athlete levels of accomplishment. Coordination, in my opinion, is a natural athletic trait. Something you are born with. Yes, you can improve on it, but how much is limited per the individual. A blanket statment like anyone can squat 500 pounds and run a 4.5 forty is naive. Oh, let's take a generalized statement and push it to the extreme. Obviously I'm referring to able-bodied individuals. And, yes, any ABLE-BODIED PERSON can squat 500 and run a 4.5 with proper training and nutrition. It's that puppet guy. Not watching it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Absolutely. Running a forty is as much about speed training and getting out of the blocks than it is pure speed. Give me the guy who rolls out of bed with zero training who runs a 4.5 over the dude who trained for weeks at ELITE and runs the same time. Innate speed shows that he has a higher baseline of speed than the guy training for it, there's no arguing that. If that's his baseline, one would have to imagine his ceiling is that much higher. Obviously we're assuming they both have good technique. Fine, let me put it this way: If someone is naturally fast and strong, are they any more athletic than someone who trained to get as fast and strong as them? No. The untrained natural athlete may have a higher ceiling, but that's not what we're talking about. I'll say it again: not everyone can get to a 4.3. Every able-bodied person can get to a 4.5. Whether your train or have the speed naturally is irrelevant. At the end of the day, they're both still running a 4.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayNoToDMC Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 How many of you have studied ex. phys.? (before you criticize my opinions) Assistant substitute gym teacher here. I could have ran a 4.2 and squatted 800 pounds if I didn't have a passion for teaching. I really abuse the sh*t out of the not yet athletic fat bodies and nerds. Enough dodgeball and they'll be thanking me one day from the combine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Improving your athleticism is not a "skill". Training is not a "skill". Are you saying that someone who naturally runs a 4.5 is more athletic than someone who trains to run a 4.5? I tried to clarify this earlier, to me athleticism is the word I associate with God given ability. The sh*t you are born with. Skill is the word I use to describe this sh*t you train to be able to do. You are using the word athleticism to describe the final product - no matter how it's achieved. Which I get... Now. But in your first post, the one I disagreed with, you weren't using the word athleticism the same way. You had decoupled athleticism and training, which makes no sense now when contrasted with the way you are explaining things now. It's fine. I see where you are coming from, and I managed to get there in spite of your obnoxiousness. (Note: that is the proper use of "in spite") As far as training not being a skill. You are dead wrong. Is driving a car a skill? Yes. Why? Because you learn how to do it, practice and get better at it. Same as training. Any trainer that doesn't understand that someone they are coaching needs to learn what they are doing, before they attempt it at high intensity.... has no business training other people. Is deisgning a website a skill? Yes. Same reasons. Except with this example, you can make the argument that God-given artistic traits (like athletic traits) are going to give you a higher ceiling of ultimate ability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Doesn't take any skill to lean bulk. Oh, let's take a generalized statement and push it to the extreme. Obviously I'm referring to able-bodied individuals. And, yes, any ABLE-BODIED PERSON can squat 500 and run a 4.5 with proper training and nutrition. It's that puppet guy. Not watching it. It's not an "extreme" when all I'm doing is considering the ~90%+ people that don't fall into the bucket of "anyone". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Any trainer that doesn't understand that someone they are coaching needs to learn what they are doing, before they attempt it at high intensity.... has no business training other people. Yeah, no sh*t. You have to learn to perform the movements that will aid your athleticism correctly. Those movements require skill (very little). But the PRODUCTS of the movements (increased athleticism) is NOT a skill. You can't simply learn to run fast and lift heavy weights, you have to train for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BroadwayJoe12 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Obviously we're assuming they both have good technique. Fine, let me put it this way: If someone is naturally fast and strong, are they any more athletic than someone who trained to get as fast and strong as them? No. The untrained natural athlete may have a higher ceiling, but that's not what we're talking about. I'll say it again: not everyone can get to a 4.3. Every able-bodied person can get to a 4.5. Whether your train or have the speed naturally is irrelevant. At the end of the day, they're both still running a 4.5. You're making the false assumption that everyone who runs the same 40 or benches/squats is equal regarding every other athletic attribute. The vast majority of the time, the guy who naturally runs the 4.5 is more athletic and explosive, given his ratio of fast to slow twitch muscle fibers. Sure, you can have some guy train to equal some of those objective marks, but odds are he's not going to be as fluid in the hips or as agile, considering he's mostly slow-twitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Obviously we're assuming they both have good technique. Fine, let me put it this way: If someone is naturally fast and strong, are they any more athletic than someone who trained to get as fast and strong as them? No. The untrained natural athlete may have a higher ceiling, but that's not what we're talking about. I'll say it again: not everyone can get to a 4.3. Every able-bodied person can get to a 4.5. Whether your train or have the speed naturally is irrelevant. At the end of the day, they're both still running a 4.5. Bold = wrong. That is exactly what everyone here is talking about, except you. You are just telling us we are wrong, while the actual subject matter flies over your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 It's not an "extreme" when all I'm doing is considering the ~90%+ people that don't fall into the bucket of "anyone". You underestimate what the human body is capable of. If you've ever spent time in a gym setting, "~90%+ people" can easily attain a 3/4/5 total in just a couple of years. 500 squat after a few more years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 Yeah, no sh*t. You have to learn to perform the movements that will aid your athleticism correctly. Those movements require skill (very little). But the PRODUCTS of the movements (increased athleticism) is NOT a skill. You can't simply learn to run fast and lift heavy weights, you have to train for it. Training for it IS the process of learning to do it. God almighty. You've got to be kidding me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Lonelyhearts Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 You underestimate what the human body is capable of. If you've ever spent time in a gym setting, "~90%+ people" can easily attain a 3/4/5 total in just a couple of years. 500 squat after a few more years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TehFalcon63 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 You're making the false assumption that everyone who runs the same 40 or benches/squats is equal regarding every other athletic attribute. The vast majority of the time, the guy who naturally runs the 4.5 is more athletic and explosive, given his ratio of fast to slow twitch muscle fibers. Sure, you can have some guy train to equal some of those objective marks, but odds are he's not going to be as fluid in the hips or as agile, considering he's mostly slow-twitch. Considering you can't even recruit all of your muscle fibers at once, your fast-to-slow ratio isn't as important as people think. Becoming more explosive is more about CNS adaptation than anything. Someone who is "not fluid in the hips" can work on that with proper training. I don't see why people are getting butthurt about my comments. I'm simply saying that any able-bodied person can become just as athletic as the average NFL player. Obviously, everyone can't run a 4.3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity28 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 You underestimate what the human body is capable of. If you've ever spent time in a gym setting, "~90%+ people" can easily attain a 3/4/5 total in just a couple of years. 500 squat after a few more years. Yes. That's ultimately what this all boils down to... you go to the gym more than me. When your brain/mouth coordination lets you down, that seems to be your go-to insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayNoToDMC Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 You're making the false assumption that everyone who runs the same 40 or benches/squats is equal regarding every other athletic attribute. The vast majority of the time, the guy who naturally runs the 4.5 is more athletic and explosive, given his ratio of fast to slow twitch muscle fibers. Sure, you can have some guy train to equal some of those objective marks, but odds are he's not going to be as fluid in the hips or as agile, considering he's mostly slow-twitch. Slow and fast twitch is covered in anatomy and physiology, not gym teacher class. So we're going to disregard this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.