A lot of people throws around the term "talented" when talking about racers, we hear it almost every day. My question to all of you is how do you judge a riders talent? what is it exactly that leads you to conclude one rider is more or less talented than another?
Help Support MotoGP Forum:
Geez Tom, as a hard question why don't you.
Of course the answers you will get to this will be so varied it will make interesting reading as people argue their various points as each person will have some aspect that they add more 'weight' to than others and so on.
For me, I will start by saying that we are talking riding/racing and not the off track type of activities (good or bad) and of course the 'most talented' does not in a lot of cases mean the best or rider with best results.
I will start by naming the most talented rider I have seen as Anthony Gobert who as we know has problems off the track, but on it was pure dynamite.
When I see talent it is about the bike control and how a rider reacts under a number of different circumstances that makes me think that this rider is talented. It is how they pass a backmarker who does not know they are there, or how they catch and pass for position following a bad start or mishap. How do they react to another rider's error affecting them, do they lose focus and ride like an accident waiting to happen or do they just regroup and get back into the groove (so to speak).
I look at a rider who looks to have all the time in the world, but a check of the times reveals blindingly quick laptimes.
I look for a rider who may not (and IMO likely is not) on the best machine, but instead is outpowered but able to catch, lead, pass and beat those with far superior equipment and do it with what looks like ease.
I look for a rider who only infrequently looks behind and then at a point of the circuit where it does not cost time (ie. where the circuit just travelled is in easy view).
It is hard to describe all aspects as above all else many are that pure gut feel you get from watching them live at a circuit as there you can hear their throttle application and gearbox usage, everything is 'nearer' when at the track.
But, just because I may see all this does not mean that they are what I term as 'truly exceptional talent' as they have to produce the goods time and time again, at different tracks under different conditions. If they are able to produce the same 'gut feel' in me after many months at different track in different races against different opposition and preferably on different bikes, then I start to wonder what we have. But ultimately, it is when that rider goes to a 'foreign' land that the judgement really starts to show as right or wrong.
Garry
Of course the answers you will get to this will be so varied it will make interesting reading as people argue their various points as each person will have some aspect that they add more 'weight' to than others and so on.
For me, I will start by saying that we are talking riding/racing and not the off track type of activities (good or bad) and of course the 'most talented' does not in a lot of cases mean the best or rider with best results.
I will start by naming the most talented rider I have seen as Anthony Gobert who as we know has problems off the track, but on it was pure dynamite.
When I see talent it is about the bike control and how a rider reacts under a number of different circumstances that makes me think that this rider is talented. It is how they pass a backmarker who does not know they are there, or how they catch and pass for position following a bad start or mishap. How do they react to another rider's error affecting them, do they lose focus and ride like an accident waiting to happen or do they just regroup and get back into the groove (so to speak).
I look at a rider who looks to have all the time in the world, but a check of the times reveals blindingly quick laptimes.
I look for a rider who may not (and IMO likely is not) on the best machine, but instead is outpowered but able to catch, lead, pass and beat those with far superior equipment and do it with what looks like ease.
I look for a rider who only infrequently looks behind and then at a point of the circuit where it does not cost time (ie. where the circuit just travelled is in easy view).
It is hard to describe all aspects as above all else many are that pure gut feel you get from watching them live at a circuit as there you can hear their throttle application and gearbox usage, everything is 'nearer' when at the track.
But, just because I may see all this does not mean that they are what I term as 'truly exceptional talent' as they have to produce the goods time and time again, at different tracks under different conditions. If they are able to produce the same 'gut feel' in me after many months at different track in different races against different opposition and preferably on different bikes, then I start to wonder what we have. But ultimately, it is when that rider goes to a 'foreign' land that the judgement really starts to show as right or wrong.
Garry
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 19 2008, 10:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Additional question. When you refer to "talent" in the context of racers, do you mean natural qualities (i.e. born with it) or qualities obtained outside of the context of racing?
To me the term 'talent' means talent no matter how or where the rider obtained it.
But, in all fairness the riders I would consider to be at that 'exceptional' level would all be classed as natural riders/racers by the majority as IMO if you are not 'born with' a high degree of talent, your chances of success are greatly reduced/restricted.
As an example within the Motorcycle world I would compare the likes of Sete to Valentino.
Sete was good, very good, able to push Valentino and sometimes beat him but you could see it was 'sheer grit' by Sete over the 'talents' of Valentino (and this does not diminish Sete's achievements in any way).
Away from motorcycling I have used the Ivan Lendl vs John McEnroe comparison. In Lendl there was a person who had ability that through his sheer hard work he developed into a talent that made him the best in the world for a period of time. In McEnroe, there was a person who could do anything and was mercurial and almost artistic with a racquet.
But I would also that whilst people are 'born' with a talent it is generally those bought up with the sport/activity from a young age that develop the talent to those exceptional or extrordinary levels and for that, look no further than Tiger Woods.
Garry
To me the term 'talent' means talent no matter how or where the rider obtained it.
But, in all fairness the riders I would consider to be at that 'exceptional' level would all be classed as natural riders/racers by the majority as IMO if you are not 'born with' a high degree of talent, your chances of success are greatly reduced/restricted.
As an example within the Motorcycle world I would compare the likes of Sete to Valentino.
Sete was good, very good, able to push Valentino and sometimes beat him but you could see it was 'sheer grit' by Sete over the 'talents' of Valentino (and this does not diminish Sete's achievements in any way).
Away from motorcycling I have used the Ivan Lendl vs John McEnroe comparison. In Lendl there was a person who had ability that through his sheer hard work he developed into a talent that made him the best in the world for a period of time. In McEnroe, there was a person who could do anything and was mercurial and almost artistic with a racquet.
But I would also that whilst people are 'born' with a talent it is generally those bought up with the sport/activity from a young age that develop the talent to those exceptional or extrordinary levels and for that, look no further than Tiger Woods.
Garry
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ May 19 2008, 10:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>To me the term 'talent' means talent no matter how or where the rider obtained it.
My issue with that is that talent by defenition is a natural ability, so it cannt be obtained.
For me the actual influence of "talent" for any rider comes down to the argument of Nature vs Nurture. How many traits are we actually born with? How much of it is bred into us through our surroundings. There are now studies that suggest that the human brain actually alters its physical composition to suit the demands of its use meaning it can grow and change when it is trained, like a muscle.
I put it to you that in fact talent is a relatively minor influence than is commonly percieved and the term is commonly misused to cover all aspects of a riders ability that cannot be quantified in any other way.
My issue with that is that talent by defenition is a natural ability, so it cannt be obtained.
For me the actual influence of "talent" for any rider comes down to the argument of Nature vs Nurture. How many traits are we actually born with? How much of it is bred into us through our surroundings. There are now studies that suggest that the human brain actually alters its physical composition to suit the demands of its use meaning it can grow and change when it is trained, like a muscle.
I put it to you that in fact talent is a relatively minor influence than is commonly percieved and the term is commonly misused to cover all aspects of a riders ability that cannot be quantified in any other way.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 22,701
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 19 2008, 10:24 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>A lot of people throws around the term "talented" when talking about racers, we hear it almost every day. My question to all of you is how do you judge a riders talent? what is it exactly that leads you to conclude one rider is more or less talented than another?
Talent can be measured by achievement.
Talent can be measured by achievement.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2007
- Messages
- 2,708
- Location
- UK
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ May 19 2008, 11:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Talent can be measured by achievement.
Good one!
However, I think talent is measure by the ability to adapt the natural skills a rider has to suit the racing, bike, track, weather, or any situation really.
Good one!
However, I think talent is measure by the ability to adapt the natural skills a rider has to suit the racing, bike, track, weather, or any situation really.
so what you're saying is you asked a question to which you only believe there is one correct answer (your own) in order to be able to contradict whoever bothered to reply.
The thing is when it comes to 'natural' talent, how likely is it that those who have it necessarily end up on the world stage? the best out there might lack the interest, the motivation and most of all the opportunities. a comment that comes to mind is one that vale passed about a pizza delivery boy riding a banged up Kawa in the rain in London. He was talking about being 'fast' and says that delivery boy was potentially faster than him. Cool to know if you're that boy, but the truth is Vale's a multi-world champion and the delivery boy is delivering pizzas. Natural talent doesn't count for anything unless properly devloped. Sure some people have more flair, and you can tell when you look at the way they ride. Some make it look like they're working really hard and for some it looks like they're totally laid back and still making the others eat their dust.
Besides, when we talk about rider's talent, I presume you mean in a race context, in which case riding ability is a huge part of it, but it also takes a calculating brain to make it to the front consistently. Race techniques, when to lie low and follow, when to maintain your tyres, when to forge ahead, are things learnt through experience. Nobody has a 'natural born with' ability in that respect.of course you can be born with better aptitude to learn, just like people who are better at maths and have higher iq's make better chess players but even then, what you're born with is just 'potential'. unless nurtured it;s not going anywhere.
The thing is when it comes to 'natural' talent, how likely is it that those who have it necessarily end up on the world stage? the best out there might lack the interest, the motivation and most of all the opportunities. a comment that comes to mind is one that vale passed about a pizza delivery boy riding a banged up Kawa in the rain in London. He was talking about being 'fast' and says that delivery boy was potentially faster than him. Cool to know if you're that boy, but the truth is Vale's a multi-world champion and the delivery boy is delivering pizzas. Natural talent doesn't count for anything unless properly devloped. Sure some people have more flair, and you can tell when you look at the way they ride. Some make it look like they're working really hard and for some it looks like they're totally laid back and still making the others eat their dust.
Besides, when we talk about rider's talent, I presume you mean in a race context, in which case riding ability is a huge part of it, but it also takes a calculating brain to make it to the front consistently. Race techniques, when to lie low and follow, when to maintain your tyres, when to forge ahead, are things learnt through experience. Nobody has a 'natural born with' ability in that respect.of course you can be born with better aptitude to learn, just like people who are better at maths and have higher iq's make better chess players but even then, what you're born with is just 'potential'. unless nurtured it;s not going anywhere.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ May 19 2008, 10:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Talent can be measured by achievement.
Roger, in seriousness what do you mean?
I understand that if one wins a great number of titles one must therefore be talented, but would you say that it shows the most supreme talent or just the person who used it best?
Given that you are a VR fan I will try to put what I mean into motorcycling terms. I personally have seen a great many number of racers come through the ranks starting in the late 70's / early 80's. In that time (IMO) Gobert is the most talented I have seen and whilst Vale comes close I do not rate him as a the best I have seen, although he would likely be in the top few of those that used their talents best.
Hope that kinda explains it.
Garry
Roger, in seriousness what do you mean?
I understand that if one wins a great number of titles one must therefore be talented, but would you say that it shows the most supreme talent or just the person who used it best?
Given that you are a VR fan I will try to put what I mean into motorcycling terms. I personally have seen a great many number of racers come through the ranks starting in the late 70's / early 80's. In that time (IMO) Gobert is the most talented I have seen and whilst Vale comes close I do not rate him as a the best I have seen, although he would likely be in the top few of those that used their talents best.
Hope that kinda explains it.
Garry
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ May 19 2008, 11:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>so what you're saying is you asked a question to which you only believe there is one correct answer (your own) in order to be able to contradict whoever bothered to reply.
I asked a question because i think it will be interesting to learn about other peoples opinions on the matter. In exchange i will present my opinion and ask what people think of that. It's called a discussion.
I asked a question because i think it will be interesting to learn about other peoples opinions on the matter. In exchange i will present my opinion and ask what people think of that. It's called a discussion.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ May 19 2008, 11:19 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Talent can be measured by achievement.
I aggree with this to an extent but what about someone like McCoy. The guys got oodles of talent but not such a great record sheet
I aggree with this to an extent but what about someone like McCoy. The guys got oodles of talent but not such a great record sheet
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 22,701
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Gaz @ May 19 2008, 11:31 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Roger, in seriousness what do you mean?
i mean exactly what i said. no cryptic meaning. and im not getting drawn into a pissing match, bikergirl probably hit the nail on the head here.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>so what you're saying is you asked a question to which you only believe there is one correct answer (your own) in order to be able to contradict whoever bothered to reply.
i mean exactly what i said. no cryptic meaning. and im not getting drawn into a pissing match, bikergirl probably hit the nail on the head here.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE <div class='quotemain'>so what you're saying is you asked a question to which you only believe there is one correct answer (your own) in order to be able to contradict whoever bothered to reply.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (odessa @ May 19 2008, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I aggree with this to an extent but what about someone like McCoy. The guys got oodles of talent but not such a great record sheet
Could you explain why you feel McCoy has talent particularly worthy of mention?
Could you explain why you feel McCoy has talent particularly worthy of mention?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 19 2008, 12:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I asked a question because i think it will be interesting to learn about other peoples opinions on the matter. In exchange i will present my opinion and ask what people think of that. It's called a discussion.
there is no need to be so patronising tom. if you wanted a discussion, you would have presented your opinions from the outset, rather than asking a question which you didnt reply to until someone else had. that's not a discussion, that's baiting.
there is no need to be so patronising tom. if you wanted a discussion, you would have presented your opinions from the outset, rather than asking a question which you didnt reply to until someone else had. that's not a discussion, that's baiting.
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2006
- Messages
- 22,701
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (odessa @ May 19 2008, 11:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I aggree with this to an extent but what about someone like McCoy. The guys got oodles of talent but not such a great record sheet
it all depends on the level in which your measuring talent. mccoy wass very talented compared to me but no so talented compared to the top motogp riders or wsb riders come to think of it.
it all depends on the level in which your measuring talent. mccoy wass very talented compared to me but no so talented compared to the top motogp riders or wsb riders come to think of it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ May 19 2008, 10:48 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>i mean exactly what i said. no cryptic meaning. and im not getting drawn into a pissing match, bikergirl probably hit the nail on the head here.
Not trying to draw a pissing contest, was interested in terms as I outlined, no hidden agenda.
And agreed that Bikergirl pretty much nailed it.
Garry
Not trying to draw a pissing contest, was interested in terms as I outlined, no hidden agenda.
And agreed that Bikergirl pretty much nailed it.
Garry
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2007
- Messages
- 2,708
- Location
- UK
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (roger-m @ May 19 2008, 11:55 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>it all depends on the level in which your measuring talent. mccoy wass very talented compared to me but no so talented compared to the top motogp riders or wsb riders come to think of it.
That is true if you measure talent by acheivement...and you do so it make sense from your point of view....from my view Gary has no talent cause he was unable to adapt his awesome style to meet the needs of the day and win.
That is true if you measure talent by acheivement...and you do so it make sense from your point of view....from my view Gary has no talent cause he was unable to adapt his awesome style to meet the needs of the day and win.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (MigsAngel @ May 19 2008, 10:59 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>That is true if you measure talent by acheivement...and you do so it make sense from your point of view....from my view Gary has no talent cause he was unable to adapt his awesome style to meet the needs of the day and win.
God as a McCoy fan the comment above pains me (even if i agree in part).
But, if circumstances change (ie. Two-Stroke to Four Stroke, 990 to 800 etc) does it lesson one's talent if they struggle to cope of can one be talented at one aspect/class but not at another?
I would say yes (and where McCoy fits in), but that it would have a major affect on thinking in regards to overall talent ratings (ie. do they have the talent to change with the times type thinking).
Garry
God as a McCoy fan the comment above pains me (even if i agree in part).
But, if circumstances change (ie. Two-Stroke to Four Stroke, 990 to 800 etc) does it lesson one's talent if they struggle to cope of can one be talented at one aspect/class but not at another?
I would say yes (and where McCoy fits in), but that it would have a major affect on thinking in regards to overall talent ratings (ie. do they have the talent to change with the times type thinking).
Garry
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ May 19 2008, 11:49 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Could you explain why you feel McCoy has talent particularly worthy of mention?
Well Tom it is only my opinion but I always say actions speak louder than words
<object width="425" height="350<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/B3MbBiGGI-k</param><param name="wmode" value="transparent</param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/B3MbBiGGI-k" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350</embed></object>
<object width="425" height="350<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gELHaZIDJqM</param><param name="wmode" value="transparent</param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gELHaZIDJqM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350</embed></object>
If you fail to see that Mccoy has any talent that is particularly worthy of mentioning then you need to pay closer attention...
Migs how can someone have an awsome style but yet be untalanted?
Your just looking at talent as in victories, I look at talent as how a person controls a bike
Well Tom it is only my opinion but I always say actions speak louder than words
<object width="425" height="350<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/B3MbBiGGI-k</param><param name="wmode" value="transparent</param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/B3MbBiGGI-k" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350</embed></object>
<object width="425" height="350<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gELHaZIDJqM</param><param name="wmode" value="transparent</param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gELHaZIDJqM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350</embed></object>
If you fail to see that Mccoy has any talent that is particularly worthy of mentioning then you need to pay closer attention...
Migs how can someone have an awsome style but yet be untalanted?
Your just looking at talent as in victories, I look at talent as how a person controls a bike
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bikergirl @ May 19 2008, 11:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>there is no need to be so patronising tom. if you wanted a discussion, you would have presented your opinions from the outset, rather than asking a question which you didnt reply to until someone else had. that's not a discussion, that's baiting.
It's only baiting to the people who are incapable of discussion because they see disagreement as some kind of challenge. I'm not interested in a competition to win everyone over, i started this to talk about bike racing. I want as many people as possible to dig in
It's only baiting to the people who are incapable of discussion because they see disagreement as some kind of challenge. I'm not interested in a competition to win everyone over, i started this to talk about bike racing. I want as many people as possible to dig in
Similar threads
