Pliability

Discussion on the three big Chinese internals, Yiquan, Bajiquan, Piguazhang and other similar styles.

Re: Pliability

Postby Peacedog on Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:59 pm

Below is a link that displays a properly tested 33" vertical leap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9rmdU3R3TQ

For those unfamiliar with modern sports testing, the use of a Vertec is the only accurate way to determine a vertical leap and is the tool utilized by the NFL and all major sporting organizations worldwide that have an interest in this.

Ability in a vertical leap is almost entirely genetic. Beyond some minor improvements involving technique even the best coaches, like Joe Defranco, can at best add a couple of inches to a Vertec confirmed vertical.

Vertical leap ability is considered the diagnotic for inherent explosive strength, which is the primary charactertistic determining success in money sports.

The bottom line is that if you have a crappy vertical you won't do well in sports that require large amounts of explosive strength and you will not be competitive versus those that do regardless of how hard you try. Likewise, even if you have a crap vertical in a sport that doesn't require it you will still be disadvantaged against athletes that have a better one than you do as they can simply generate more power than you can for a given level of effort.

While champions may be made, because they are competing against other genetic freaks like themselves and fractional improvements matter at that point, an average person will simply get blown out by one of these guys.

Anyone pretending otherwise is simply delusional or inexperienced.
Peacedog
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 5:22 am
Location: Standing right next to your girl....

Re: Pliability

Postby Ian C. Kuzushi on Thu Jan 11, 2018 6:32 am

Peacedog wrote:Below is a link that displays a properly tested 33" vertical leap.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9rmdU3R3TQ

For those unfamiliar with modern sports testing, the use of a Vertec is the only accurate way to determine a vertical leap and is the tool utilized by the NFL and all major sporting organizations worldwide that have an interest in this.

Ability in a vertical leap is almost entirely genetic. Beyond some minor improvements involving technique even the best coaches, like Joe Defranco, can at best add a couple of inches to a Vertec confirmed vertical.

Vertical leap ability is considered the diagnotic for inherent explosive strength, which is the primary charactertistic determining success in money sports.

The bottom line is that if you have a crappy vertical you won't do well in sports that require large amounts of explosive strength and you will not be competitive versus those that do regardless of how hard you try. Likewise, even if you have a crap vertical in a sport that doesn't require it you will still be disadvantaged against athletes that have a better one than you do as they can simply generate more power than you can for a given level of effort.

While champions may be made, because they are competing against other genetic freaks like themselves and fractional improvements matter at that point, an average person will simply get blown out by one of these guys.

Anyone pretending otherwise is simply delusional or inexperienced.


Oh, so you are using professional ball sports as your definitive guide to performance on an internal martial arts forum. ::)

I wonder what Royce Gracie's vertical leap was compared to Dan Sevren's. Performance in martial arts is not simply determined by genetics, but by training in specific technique and methods. That was the point of the comment (repeated by many very experienced champion athletes) "Champions are not born, but made."

As for delusional, I would consider someone who claims to have whipped an entire room of women into a state of sexual frenzy via psycic abilities to be the very definition of that. And experience? Do you have any competition experience? Probably best not to throw stones from glass houses. Plenty of tournaments under my belt and never less than a silver or gold from white to black.

We had plenty of football, rugby, and other jocks come try out judo. They were always invited by our Sensei at the end of class to try out whatever they liked on the coaches--usually me or another assitant. They never stood a chance, even when we were instructed not to counter or attack until the last 15 seconds of five minutes. It was a good way to recruit, although only a few of the ball jocks stuck around. I think they were busy with practice and just wanted to see what it was about anyway.
文武両道。

Lord Li requires one hundred gold coins per day!
User avatar
Ian C. Kuzushi
Great Old One
 
Posts: 1819
Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Re: Pliability

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:14 am

I don't think that I, with my funky knees and smoke addled lungs, and the genetic predisposition towards laziness could ever compete on Tom Brady's level, not a doubt.

But when someone who performs sustainibly at his level says to me "These are the exercises I've developed over the last 20 years in conjunction with highly paid professionals to help maximize my performance and minimize my injury" he has my attention. It's not like he's some broke has-been looking to score a quick buck like Dick Van Dyke's "Tai Cheng" workout tapes. He's a starting quarterback on year 18 of an estimated 23 who has been to the superbowl 7 times.

Particularly when the principles he's espousing align so closely with my own cultivation. It just makes sense.

Your mileage may vary. I know that the knowledge and experience of most forum members here vastly exceeds my own, and for that I am sorry.

It must suck to know so much that you can't learn anything new.
"This principle is very obvious and requires no further elaboration."
-Yang Cheng Fu
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Pliability

Postby cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 7:55 am

Can you make a Maradona out of a Dennis Wise or a Sugar Ray out of a George Groves. How about a Tyson out of any old short stocky H/W. Or why can't you make an Einstein out of every hard working Scientist ?

The problem with "champions aren't born, but made" is that it is too black and white to reflect reality particularly well.. and is hardly worth the effort to defend as a statement. Some people are always going to have an advantage when work is equal, whether that's physical force or mental/ skill.

That advantage comes from genetics and latent talent, where and when they are born plays a part too, both which is not something humans have a say in and can't be "made" later.. Not yet anyway. So re. location just beiong born in South America means there's more chance you'll grow up to be a better at soccer than being born in North America. As time passes things like that become part of genetic make up.

This idea that we are somehow all born equal with equal potential in any thing we choose is really smoke and mirrors IMHO. As is equal work always meaning equal results.. sometimes yes sometimes no. Putting the requisite time in has to be a given. The well worn 10k hours idea..

2 random people both putting in 10k hours in X does not make them equally capable or even champion/ elite level. I've come across people who had the desire to get good at something, whether rugby or tai chi and put real effort in. It's simply not enough on it's own. Equality, equal opportunities, equal potential it's all just 'pie in the sky' ideologically constructed.. which is ok, but I think it's best to always remember it's not a good or accurate reflection of how reality tends to pans out in the long run.

They do seem to be popular and persistent ideas though. I think we're all a bit different and have talents and potentials to different areas and perhaps not always for the exact same reasons. That all can be celebrated too. Motivation and hard work are a pre requisite for all success and successes so saying champions are made is really saying nothing at all. But it wouldn't surprise me if there's a gene for that too. With the right know how/ technology though, everything can probably be hacked..
Last edited by cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:05 am, edited 3 times in total.
The old man calmly said: “Among the mighty are those who are mightier. In martial arts, no one presumes to praise his own ability. But because you are young, you don't know the scale of the world, and are unaware of how ridiculous you are. Why be upset?”
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Pliability

Postby oragami_itto on Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:23 am

Is anyone saying that if you do these exercises you can be a fucking nfl quarterback?


You people are ridiculous sometimes
"This principle is very obvious and requires no further elaboration."
-Yang Cheng Fu
User avatar
oragami_itto
Wuji
 
Posts: 997
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Pliability

Postby Steve James on Thu Jan 11, 2018 8:43 am

I agree 100% that genetics can be a determining factor in sports performance, but only in terms of potential. It can have little to do, however, when it comes to actual championships. I think a more accurate index would be world records. You can read the stats on athletes from the post WW2 Olympics to today. So, for ex., the fastest 100 meter dashes have always been run by athletes taller than X feet. Of course, not everyone born can be the heavyweight power lifting champion and the fastest marathoner. Those are the result of genetic differences.

Making oneself a champion, however, will still go beyond genetics. Take Spud Webb, the 5'7" NBA player and one year's dunk champ. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCzo0tbgLkA


Webb's jumping ability is also genetic, but that means he is a one-in-a-million athlete of that size. If it were common, there'd be more short guys playing in the NBA. Otoh, consider that most of the pros are over 6'6".

Rather than considering genetics an advantage, think of it as specialization. The individual has to have the opportunity to use it. Then, given the will, becoming a champion is possible. But, there are long lists of gifted athletes who never became champions, and longer lists of those who never reached their potential.
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16845
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: Pliability

Postby cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:26 am

oragami_itto wrote:Is anyone saying that if you do these exercises you can be a fucking nfl quarterback?


You people are ridiculous sometimes



Sorry was that a reaction to my post ?

I wasn't really following the thread very very "properly" from the beginning but I think read most of it. My post was a reaction to Ians post and the statement about Champions and I recall a thread where there were similar themes being discussed recently. Maybe not this one ? But mainly I just felt like talking about the subject matter at hand.. I'm allowed right? ::)

If it was a reaction to my post, Chill Mr.Man, I wasn't really saying anything other than what I said.. no idea why you would get upset. :)
Last edited by cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:49 am, edited 5 times in total.
The old man calmly said: “Among the mighty are those who are mightier. In martial arts, no one presumes to praise his own ability. But because you are young, you don't know the scale of the world, and are unaware of how ridiculous you are. Why be upset?”
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Pliability

Postby cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:32 am

Steve James wrote:But, there are long lists of gifted athletes who never became champions, and longer lists of those who never reached their potential.


Totally, which is why that statement only tells half a story. It might as well not, like, bother..they are born and made :)
Last edited by cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
The old man calmly said: “Among the mighty are those who are mightier. In martial arts, no one presumes to praise his own ability. But because you are young, you don't know the scale of the world, and are unaware of how ridiculous you are. Why be upset?”
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Pliability

Postby cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:39 am

Oh by the way Oragami, the only reason I think you should do any exercise is to help yourself and be a better you. If you want to be a Champ in NFL you've probably left it a little late brother :)
Last edited by cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:43 am, edited 5 times in total.
The old man calmly said: “Among the mighty are those who are mightier. In martial arts, no one presumes to praise his own ability. But because you are young, you don't know the scale of the world, and are unaware of how ridiculous you are. Why be upset?”
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Pliability

Postby cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:54 am

oragami_itto wrote:I don't think that I, with my funky knees and smoke addled lungs, and the genetic predisposition towards laziness could ever compete on Tom Brady's level, not a doubt.

But when someone who performs sustainibly at his level says to me "These are the exercises I've developed over the last 20 years in conjunction with highly paid professionals to help maximize my performance and minimize my injury" he has my attention. It's not like he's some broke has-been looking to score a quick buck like Dick Van Dyke's "Tai Cheng" workout tapes. He's a starting quarterback on year 18 of an estimated 23 who has been to the superbowl 7 times.

Particularly when the principles he's espousing align so closely with my own cultivation. It just makes sense.

Your mileage may vary. I know that the knowledge and experience of most forum members here vastly exceeds my own, and for that I am sorry.

It must suck to know so much that you can't learn anything new.


I'm following a GMB elements course for similar reasons. I'm sure his exercises are cool - never watched the clip, sorry. I honestly think your 'mistake' is not trusting your own judgement enough whilst giving others here too much credit.. All that matters is that you're getting something from it. The rest is just talking about a bigger theme here, not what exercise program(s) any one of us *should" or should not be following.
Last edited by cloudz on Thu Jan 11, 2018 9:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
The old man calmly said: “Among the mighty are those who are mightier. In martial arts, no one presumes to praise his own ability. But because you are young, you don't know the scale of the world, and are unaware of how ridiculous you are. Why be upset?”
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Pliability

Postby marvin8 on Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:03 pm

cloudz wrote:Can you make a Maradona out of a Dennis Wise or a Sugar Ray out of a George Groves. How about a Tyson out of any old short stocky H/W. Or why can't you make an Einstein out of every hard working Scientist ?

The problem with "champions aren't born, but made" is that it is too black and white to reflect reality particularly well.. and is hardly worth the effort to defend as a statement. Some people are always going to have an advantage when work is equal, whether that's physical force or mental/ skill.

That advantage comes from genetics and latent talent, where and when they are born plays a part too, both which is not something humans have a say in and can't be "made" later.. Not yet anyway. So re. location just beiong born in South America means there's more chance you'll grow up to be a better at soccer than being born in North America. As time passes things like that become part of genetic make up.

This idea that we are somehow all born equal with equal potential in any thing we choose is really smoke and mirrors IMHO. As is equal work always meaning equal results.. sometimes yes sometimes no. Putting the requisite time in has to be a given. The well worn 10k hours idea..

2 random people both putting in 10k hours in X does not make them equally capable or even champion/ elite level. I've come across people who had the desire to get good at something, whether rugby or tai chi and put real effort in. It's simply not enough on it's own. Equality, equal opportunities, equal potential it's all just 'pie in the sky' ideologically constructed.. which is ok, but I think it's best to always remember it's not a good or accurate reflection of how reality tends to pans out in the long run.

They do seem to be popular and persistent ideas though. I think we're all a bit different and have talents and potentials to different areas and perhaps not always for the exact same reasons. That all can be celebrated too. Motivation and hard work are a pre requisite for all success and successes so saying champions are made is really saying nothing at all. But it wouldn't surprise me if there's a gene for that too. With the right know how/ technology though, everything can probably be hacked..

Being born with athletically gifted genes in not the major factor in becoming a champion in most established sports. "Champions aren't born, but made" is more important than being born with favorable genes.

Important factors that make most champions include:
• Starting early in competitive activities related to the sport.
• Motivation (e.g., can include poverty) and mindset.
• Good trainers (e.g., technique, strength and conditioning)
• PEDs.
• Etc.,

PowerfulJRE
Streamed live on Oct 4, 2017

Bryan Fogel is an American film director, producer, author and playwright. His documentary "Icarus" available now on Netflix, documents the uncovering of the Russian doping scandal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2FCBIpKCdI
Last edited by marvin8 on Thu Jan 11, 2018 2:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: Pliability

Postby cloudz on Fri Jan 12, 2018 2:35 am

marvin8 wrote:
cloudz wrote:Can you make a Maradona out of a Dennis Wise or a Sugar Ray out of a George Groves. How about a Tyson out of any old short stocky H/W. Or why can't you make an Einstein out of every hard working Scientist ?

The problem with "champions aren't born, but made" is that it is too black and white to reflect reality particularly well.. and is hardly worth the effort to defend as a statement. Some people are always going to have an advantage when work is equal, whether that's physical force or mental/ skill.

That advantage comes from genetics and latent talent, where and when they are born plays a part too, both which is not something humans have a say in and can't be "made" later.. Not yet anyway. So re. location just beiong born in South America means there's more chance you'll grow up to be a better at soccer than being born in North America. As time passes things like that become part of genetic make up.

This idea that we are somehow all born equal with equal potential in any thing we choose is really smoke and mirrors IMHO. As is equal work always meaning equal results.. sometimes yes sometimes no. Putting the requisite time in has to be a given. The well worn 10k hours idea..

2 random people both putting in 10k hours in X does not make them equally capable or even champion/ elite level. I've come across people who had the desire to get good at something, whether rugby or tai chi and put real effort in. It's simply not enough on it's own. Equality, equal opportunities, equal potential it's all just 'pie in the sky' ideologically constructed.. which is ok, but I think it's best to always remember it's not a good or accurate reflection of how reality tends to pans out in the long run.

They do seem to be popular and persistent ideas though. I think we're all a bit different and have talents and potentials to different areas and perhaps not always for the exact same reasons. That all can be celebrated too. Motivation and hard work are a pre requisite for all success and successes so saying champions are made is really saying nothing at all. But it wouldn't surprise me if there's a gene for that too. With the right know how/ technology though, everything can probably be hacked..

Being born with athletically gifted genes in not the major factor in becoming a champion in most established sports. "Champions aren't born, but made" is more important than being born with favorable genes.

Important factors that make most champions include:
• Starting early in competitive activities related to the sport.
• Motivation (e.g., can include poverty) and mindset.
• Good trainers (e.g., technique, strength and conditioning)
• PEDs.
• Etc.,

PowerfulJRE
Streamed live on Oct 4, 2017

Bryan Fogel is an American film director, producer, author and playwright. His documentary "Icarus" available now on Netflix, documents the uncovering of the Russian doping scandal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2FCBIpKCdI



I covered most of that, the point is that work etc. being equal and what should be a given anyway; that's when natural born attributes make the difference. In fact they are the difference. There's an optimum work capacity for everyone that isn't all that different.. Some people have natural endurence for example like Bisping, he can party hard and still have better cardio than everyone in the room, so I'm told.. People are born and made - Champion athletes included.

I wasn't putting things in terms of factors by importance; like major factors. there are plenty of factors, like coaches you mention. There are a number of factors at work but if you don't have some of the "right struff" for the sport to begin with then forget it. I could have all you mention and still not 'be a champ' at basketball for example @ 5 foot 8" tall.

When you have an elite group that are well matched, often it will be the most disciplined physically and mentally that get an edge. Beyond that the edge comes from natural talents and attributes. The best of the best are the ones that combine the hard work and all the factors come together and on top of that are naturally gifted. Natural talent and genetics are still big factors however way you cut it.
Last edited by cloudz on Fri Jan 12, 2018 3:52 am, edited 8 times in total.
The old man calmly said: “Among the mighty are those who are mightier. In martial arts, no one presumes to praise his own ability. But because you are young, you don't know the scale of the world, and are unaware of how ridiculous you are. Why be upset?”
cloudz
Great Old One
 
Posts: 2528
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:00 am
Location: London UK

Re: Pliability

Postby marvin8 on Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:20 am

cloudz wrote:
marvin8 wrote:
cloudz wrote:Can you make a Maradona out of a Dennis Wise or a Sugar Ray out of a George Groves. How about a Tyson out of any old short stocky H/W. Or why can't you make an Einstein out of every hard working Scientist ?

The problem with "champions aren't born, but made" is that it is too black and white to reflect reality particularly well.. and is hardly worth the effort to defend as a statement. Some people are always going to have an advantage when work is equal, whether that's physical force or mental/ skill.

That advantage comes from genetics and latent talent, where and when they are born plays a part too, both which is not something humans have a say in and can't be "made" later.. Not yet anyway. So re. location just beiong born in South America means there's more chance you'll grow up to be a better at soccer than being born in North America. As time passes things like that become part of genetic make up.

This idea that we are somehow all born equal with equal potential in any thing we choose is really smoke and mirrors IMHO. As is equal work always meaning equal results.. sometimes yes sometimes no. Putting the requisite time in has to be a given. The well worn 10k hours idea..

2 random people both putting in 10k hours in X does not make them equally capable or even champion/ elite level. I've come across people who had the desire to get good at something, whether rugby or tai chi and put real effort in. It's simply not enough on it's own. Equality, equal opportunities, equal potential it's all just 'pie in the sky' ideologically constructed.. which is ok, but I think it's best to always remember it's not a good or accurate reflection of how reality tends to pans out in the long run.

They do seem to be popular and persistent ideas though. I think we're all a bit different and have talents and potentials to different areas and perhaps not always for the exact same reasons. That all can be celebrated too. Motivation and hard work are a pre requisite for all success and successes so saying champions are made is really saying nothing at all. But it wouldn't surprise me if there's a gene for that too. With the right know how/ technology though, everything can probably be hacked..

Being born with athletically gifted genes in not the major factor in becoming a champion in most established sports. "Champions aren't born, but made" is more important than being born with favorable genes.

Important factors that make most champions include:
• Starting early in competitive activities related to the sport.
• Motivation (e.g., can include poverty) and mindset.
• Good trainers (e.g., technique, strength and conditioning)
• PEDs.
• Etc.,

PowerfulJRE
Streamed live on Oct 4, 2017

Bryan Fogel is an American film director, producer, author and playwright. His documentary "Icarus" available now on Netflix, documents the uncovering of the Russian doping scandal:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2FCBIpKCdI



I covered most of that, the point is that work etc. being equal and what should be a given anyway; that's when natural born attributes make the difference.

Of course, genes are the difference if everything is equal. But, they are not equal. Athletes have different backgrounds, motivations, workouts, trainers, etc.

cloudz wrote:In fact they are the difference. There's an optimum work capacity for everyone that isn't all that different.. Some people have natural endurence for example like Bisping, he can party hard and still have better cardio than everyone in the room, so I'm told.. People are born and made - Champion athletes included.

Bisping has better cardio because he runs. He trains and does not rely on a cardio gene.

Bisping says McGregor is doing the wrong cardio workout and his trainers are yes men. At 2:08, "You got to run. . . . Nobody likes to run. It's a pain in the a**. Running sucks. . . . "


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUihLVk-ssk

cloudz wrote:I wasn't putting things in terms of factors by importance; like major factors. there are plenty of factors, like coaches you mention. There are a number of factors at work but if you don't have some of the "right struff" for the sport to begin with then forget it. I could have all you mention and still not 'be a champ' at basketball for example @ 5 foot 8" tall.

When you have an elite group that are well matched, often it will be the most disciplined physically and mentally that get an edge. Beyond that the edge comes from natural talents and attributes. The best of the best are the ones that combine the hard work and all the factors come together and on top of that are naturally gifted. Natural talent and genetics are still big factors however way you cut it.

I agree with you to a certain extent. I believe we are speaking of different contexts. It also depends on what sport. In Icarus, the Olympic athletes became champions as a result of taking PEDs, training and recovery, given that they all had the genes for their particular sport.

Using sprinting as an example, I believe there is a gene for raw sprinting, as most successful sprinting champions are black. What makes one black person champion over another black person are the factors that I listed, given they both have the same sprinting gene.

Tai Chi may require a more variety of skills than raw sprinting. A person can be a natural athlete. But, his success will depend more on his teacher, motivation, years of practicing, etc, not a Tai Chi gene.
Last edited by marvin8 on Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

Re: Pliability

Postby Steve James on Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:50 am

Well, sprinting depends on several factors, part of which is simply the percentage of fast twitch fibers. I think it's better to think of why greyhounds are the fastest breed of dog, rather than to consider race. Consider that for a long time, the best long distance runners were African (Ethiopian) and "Black" in US terms; but the fastest sprinters were from the US -not Africa. In fact, body type is the relevant genetic feature, and "race" is inconsequential. For example, nowadays, some of the best long distance runners are from Latin America. In cycling, Colombian riders are coming to the fore. But, there's only been one or two "black" professional cyclists.

The point I was going to make is related, though. I was just going to write that genetics play a big part in team sports. If Brady had been 5'3", he'd never have been chosen to play quarterback on a team, no matter how he exercised. Who we (society) thinks will be successful at a certain endeavor is often the one chosen. That is a form of genetic selection.

Before the PRC participated in the Olympics, there was a scandal about how they chose their athletes. One story went that at around 4 years of age, children would be lined up. Tall ones would be chosen to play one sport. Then they'd be asked to hold out their arms to see which ones had the longest. And so on, and so on, until the "ideal" candidate for the team was chosen. If it was gymnastics, the children would be stretched to find the most flexible, etc. That sort of selection may yield candidates with the most potential, but that won't guarantee success or winning.

In the US, it's still unusual to see a Black swimmer on the Olympic team. Otoh, there's only one Michael Phelps. If you compare his body to Usain Bolt's, you'll see obvious differences. In fact, here some are: https://bodywhat.com/?1=02d09q79&2=103507wo
"A man is rich when he has time and freewill. How he chooses to invest both will determine the return on his investment."
User avatar
Steve James
Great Old One
 
Posts: 16845
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 8:20 am

Re: Pliability

Postby marvin8 on Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:00 am

A discussion on practice vs the sports gene.


42analytics
Published on Mar 10, 2014

Many impactful innovations in sport and beyond were created by visionaries that dared to think differently. Finding a new and radical way of approaching a traditional task -- one that may even run counter to conventional wisdom -- is risky but potentially "game changing" too.
This panel will bring together the pioneers who have found success by challenging the status quo in their field. The discussion will focus on questions such as: What seeded the initial idea for change? Who inspired them? How did they overcome obstacles and gain buy-in to their vision? Once established, how does one continue to innovate in the face of new imitators? And, what is the next great opportunity for innovation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXBhINPoKEk
User avatar
marvin8
Wuji
 
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:30 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Xingyiquan - Baguazhang - Taijiquan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

cron