Natural ability

[eaoin11]

Billiards was Walter's game . obv

Ha, yes that's right of course

[itsnoteasy]

I agree with some of the points made. Ronnie Osullivan, jimmy white etc all look natural because they have spent a vast amount of their life practising a particular skill. They didn't just pick up a cue and look natural, potting balls for fun. The skills are learnt and they are easier to learn when young. When a player is also surrounded by good coaching and has professionals and top amateurs to play against then you will end up with a very good player. It's a bit like putting the ingredients into a cake lol

Is this story true?, Stephen Hendry learnt on a six foot table in his house, on his first visit to snooker hall he knocked in a sixty odd, no coaching. What would you call that?, to me if that's true ,that's natural ability, it's way beyond what an average person could do, just like a lot of top sports stars, yes they graft, yes they are coached, but they also have that extra something that most of us don't , and you can't teach talent.
You do get late bloomers, but as a general statement you can see someone, even when very young, who has something extra, at school ,the best footballer, the fastest runner, the longest jumper, an example of that could be Usain Bolt, broke every age group sprint record as he grew up, even though ,at the time ,it was thought he was completely the wrong shape to do sprinting, but he had that inbuilt talent( though they say he was quite lazy compared to some). Hard work and dedication will get you a long way, but natural ability if harnessed correctly with the first two will get you to the top.
Lastly I would say look at what Ronnie did in having a year out then winning the worlds, I doubt any other player in modern times could have done that, even if you throw Hendry and say Davis in if you disagree, that's only three people in the modern era who might have done it, why is that? If hard work and coaching can get you to the very top, are we saying the other pros don't work hard enough, or their coaching is substandard?, I doubt it, I bet they work their socks off to get to where they are, I bet they go to the same coaches that they all do, but what they can't get is those players ability, you can't buy or coach it,but you can hone it, they are born with it and have made the most of it.

[robertmac]

I believe some people simply have a natural talent and with
practise and training they become the 'super' players.

[Terry Davidson]

Terry:

When you say Higgins was already pretty good, what kind of breaks was he knocking in on average at that age?

Not certain now as it was 1986 so memory isn't what it used to be. I remember he was considered a useful young player

Terry

[ace man]

Stephen Hendry learnt on a six foot table in his house, on his first visit to snooker hall he knocked in a sixty odd, no coaching. What would you call that?, to me if that's true ,that's natural ability, it's way beyond what an average person could do...

He must have been very good on a six foot already to achieve that on first try on a twelve foot. No one is disputing the fact that world beaters like Hendry are a bit special despite everything going for them.
But I have forgotten one very important thing. Parent support...it is just as crucial as talent, practice...etc.
Most parents will HATE the fact that their child will be spending better part of their life in a snooker hall. They will be worried that their child will not be getting any degree later in life as a result of obsession with snooker. And they would be right unfortunately. It is a massive risk to let a child dedicate his life to snooker or any other sport, whether super gifted or average.

[eaoin11]

Ha, yes that's right of course

Is this story true?, Stephen Hendry learnt on a six foot table in his house, on his first visit to snooker hall he knocked in a sixty odd, no coaching. What would you call that?, to me if that's true ,that's natural ability, it's way beyond what an average person could do, just like a lot of top sports stars, yes they graft, yes they are coached, but they also have that extra something that most of us don't , and you can't teach talent.
You do get late bloomers, but as a general statement you can see someone, even when very young, who has something extra, at school ,the best footballer, the fastest runner, the longest jumper, an example of that could be Usain Bolt, broke every age group sprint record as he grew up, even though ,at the time ,it was thought he was completely the wrong shape to do sprinting, but he had that inbuilt talent( though they say he was quite lazy compared to some). Hard work and dedication will get you a long way, but natural ability if harnessed correctly with the first two will get you to the top.
Lastly I would say look at what Ronnie did in having a year out then winning the worlds, I doubt any other player in modern times could have done that, even if you throw Hendry and say Davis in if you disagree, that's only three people in the modern era who might have done it, why is that? If hard work and coaching can get you to the very top, are we saying the other pros don't work hard enough, or their coaching is substandard?, I doubt it, I bet they work their socks off to get to where they are, I bet they go to the same coaches that they all do, but what they can't get is those players ability, you can't buy or coach it,but you can hone it, they are born with it and have made the most of it.

It's just that I think it's very hard to know what any given player was 'born with' and how much of their demonstrated ability is down to extraordinary circumstances.

I at least, as a devil's advocate, want to suggest the possibility that the circumstances required (such as those I listed for Walter Lindrum) to develop into such a player might be much rarer than the 'natural' ability to do so. I suspect that a lot of people have the natural talent to be a super player if they have the desire and can give themselves the right circumstances to do so.

Focus, self belief, desire to practise and improve, an analytical approach to improving your game might be the things that set some players apart as much as anything else, and they are all things that are developed as well.

[Scott M]

I think intelligence plays a huge part.

A lot of snooker, especially at the early stage, comes from being able to look up techniques online/devising good practice routines/analysing the game, something which those who have less intelligence either won't be mentally capable of doing, or would find it too boring, and just keep practicing on the table not improving.

Rich parents also plays a part, as sorry but snooker is quite inaccessible in that no kid can afford to play about 20 hours per week paying £4 per hour, that's £80 for somebody with no income.

[CoachGavin]

Natural ability

I reckon if you listed the players by how many hours they have played you would find that the players nearer the top would be the ones people would call 'natural' talents. If the hours played are also quality such as practising with better players such as Ronnie did when young or working on technique like Davis did with his father then the player has the potential to be very good. You are then left with the will to win, concentration and mental skills like the ability to play under pressure to become a great. It's been proven in other sports such as tennis with the Williams sisters that players can be made as long as they enjoy the sport. athletics is slightly different as physical attributes plays a big part but even then I'm sure Usain bolt would not be Olympic 100m champion if he was born in a country not interested in sprinting. Jamaica meanwhile has a steep history in sprinting.

[Terry Davidson]

Steve Davis has said he was never what he would consider a 'natural' player but rather was a made player through practice, dedication and motivation. I think the will to win is the necessary ingredient when coupled with those attributes.

Terry

[MikeTheBigMonster]

He must have been very good on a six foot already to achieve that on first try on a twelve foot. No one is disputing the fact that world beaters like Hendry are a bit special despite everything going for them.
But I have forgotten one very important thing. Parent support...it is just as crucial as talent, practice...etc.
Most parents will HATE the fact that their child will be spending better part of their life in a snooker hall. They will be worried that their child will not be getting any degree later in life as a result of obsession with snooker. And they would be right unfortunately. It is a massive risk to let a child dedicate his life to snooker or any other sport, whether super gifted or average.

That's what I experienced with my parents... When I was 7, there was a 9ft snooker table at my house but when I was 11 the table was taken away because of my obsession to snooker game. My parents really thought I would neglect my studies... They just didn't bother too much about my interest in snooker game.
Today I'm a Master graduate thanks to my parents for that. I still play snooker because it's my best favourite game, make average breaks, no the pro type but with good experience and consistency... but who would have known I could have done it better today on snooker table if the table was still there... sad

[itsnoteasy]

CoachGavin and Terry, are you saying we are all the same, everyone has exactly the same ability at everything , it's just that some work harder?.

[Terry Davidson]

CoachGavin and Terry, are you saying we are all the same, everyone has exactly the same ability at everything , it's just that some work harder?.

Not really. There will be some people with better hand-eye coordination and better learning abilities.

However, I think the proof as far as snooker pros go is in the pudding. If you look at the present top 16 pros all of them started playing when they were very young, somewhere between 8-12yrs old and all of them stuck with it. If you look at the very top, Ronnie started when he was 8yrs old, Trump started at that age also, along with Shaun Murphy, Hendry, Higgins, etc. etc.

In order to become a top pro a player these days has to start really young, stick with it AND have supportive parents and has to practice every day. Now there are probably a lot of kids who start playing when very young but other things get in the way, like girls, school, maybe a job, lack of resources from parents, getting a car, etc. etc. Youth and dedication more important considerations than natural ability. A kid can have all the natural ability in the world but not be dedicated and will never become good but kid with normal natural ability and dedication would go farther.

Terry

[itsnoteasy]

I see what your saying Terry, yes talent can get wasted, or put to one side because of life getting in the way, and although I think it's the most important thing in your cake (to borrow CGs analogy) without the other ingredients it may not be enough.

[tedisbill]

"The myth of talent and the power of practice" - Matthew Syed

[itsnoteasy]

In this book is he saying he's just a lazy git lol, because he never reached the very top of his chosen sport, and as it's nothing to do with talent, just hard work and practice, is he therefore admitting he didn't do enough of either ,otherwise he would have been the best. Or is it more like,he did do as much as he could ,and got to the highest point he could but just ran out of talent, and came up against people better than him, not just folk who worked harder.
In snooker we have been told for years that an Asian takeover was just round the corner, but it hasn't really come to pass,despite the millions that play it(I'm guessing there) is that because they don't practice hard enough, I would be surprised if that were true, or have they just not unearthed the true talents that are almost certainly out there. It is a very interesting subject and one I hadn't even considered , as I just took it that top sportsmen were born, not made, I suppose it's the eternal nature vs nurture argument, but it doesn't matter how hard you train a Chiwawa it won't beat a greyhound in a race.