To preface this, we're covering a discussion that probably you and I and certainly the ILC has covered many, many, many times before
Originally Posted by Off Road
I think EVERYBODY can get better. But that includes the elite. And they get better even faster. That's why only about 1% of football players make it to the pros. Life (and genetics) just aint fair, but it is what it is.
Sure and that is a fair point and one that has been echoed many times, but the genetics argument is too black and white for my liking. I prefer shades of grey.
1) Are we to say the guys who are at the top 1% of football players are all genetic wonders? Is there a scale of genetic talent? The inaccuracy and generalisation just doesn't sit right with me, y'know?
2) Where does training fit into the mix? Do we really buy into the fact that the pro's would gain on any programme, that they gain despite
their training not because of it. Then why is it that so, so many of them do in fact gain despite
their training. Again generalisations.
3) It has even be said that the pro's would gain better on low volume training for the masses. Does anyone really genuinely still believe that?
My take is that it isn't a simple as a matter of 'Us Vs Them'
being the genetypically typical and Them
being the pro's. There is a scale of genetic potential which will determine inevitable outcomes, no-one denies this. Even the term genetics covers a huge range of qualities and attributes which will effect outcome.
Alongside that scale we have the 'other factors' which we can control. Diet, Sleep (to a certain extend!) and general R&R. That will also effect outcome on a weekly basis.
As well as that we have age, personality, psychology, sociology and the entire range of additional factors which are going to effect outcome on a weekly basis.
When we actually think about it. We really, really can't generalise it into 'some will make it'
and 'some won't'
And y'know, you won't know 'till you try.