Forum

Search posts

 

7b_wizard -

practise versus ``talent´´

(no matter which level you're on - just started or world champion ..)
How much do you think that all your skills are (to which part) a result of practise or hard ``work´´, perseverance, or else
(to which part) did they ``come to you´´ by a natural preference for juggling (or object manipulation or artistry oror) or by a natural predisposition or a love for juggling making learning easier (than e.g. for the average juggler, or e.g. than learning another skill or art of motion or sportive activity)?

  1. no talent or predisposition or preference - it's 100% hard work or perseverant regular practise or strong will only got me there.
  2. some talent or predisposition or preference - but mostly practise or work or perseverance or strong will.
  3. a good portion of talent or predisposition or preference - but somewhat more practise or work or perseverance or strong will.
  4. about equal.
  5. somewhat more talent or predisposition or preference - but it couldn't have grown & developed without a notable and regular amount of practise or work or perseverance or strong will.
  6. notably more talent or predisposition or preference - but it won't yield without a bit of practise or coping with or some will to improve.
  7. I learn extremely fast and don't see upper limits below highest levels. I think, I'm a ``natural´´.
  8. other \ depends \ easy for s'swaps and few prop tricks, but hard for numbers \ easy for basic patterns, but hard for tricks


A few aspects helping to answer:
Even Gatto said sth like, there's no such thing talent on his level or for him - it was all hard hard work.
Think of what you can't do even though you think you should.
Was your decision or how you got to juggling totally intrinsic (=absolutely "yours" and the only thing to do, ``necessary´´ in a way) or could it just aswell have been something else, another hobby or activity.
Do you see yourself improving and learning much faster than others (that's the point, not learning easy stuff fast only).
Do others admire the speed you improve or learn (while you yourself might not have noticed).

And a question that I'm interested in:
Do you think or have you experienced a hidden talent waking up after already having juggled for a good while? Do you think that's possible to ``wake up the natural inside you´´?

This is a competition thread which ran from 30th Sep 2017 to 10th Oct 2017. View results.

7b_wizard - - Parent

I myself am somewhere between 2 and 3, but sill blundering a real lot when not yet warmed up or when not concentrating, also failing over long phases, makes me say "2", even though I hope for it to become easier, maybe the natural skill inside waking up, some day when I've reached my goals and then not having to so much do at the limit anymore. I don't think I'd have gotten where I am without the inner decision to dedicate to the 7b cascade, which is maybe rather a preference than ``natural talent´´, who knows.

7b_wizard - - Parent

If i get 13 catches of 9b today or 7b > 100 c, I'll change to "5" ;o])

Daniel Simu - - Parent

You're asking multiple questions at once, which makes it hard to answer correctly...

I think I have some but little natural talent in learning object manipulation skills. However I am extremely predisposed to love juggling which makes it incredibly easy to spend countless hours on practice. So effectively my natural affection for juggling makes me a good juggler?

7b_wizard - - Parent

Yes, [>>"multiple wording"<<], wanted to include a wide range of viewpoints for "talent\\not talent".

Okay, that makes it a bit difficult ("little natural talent, but love for juggling making practise easy"),
but, as the question is scaled along "talent vs. practise", I'd say, your description says, that your love for juggling sort of enables or helps you to make up for little natural talent. But you don't sound, like new skills ``come to you´´ or that your natural afffection for juggling makes learning (notably) easier than for the average juggler or than another activity - at least not in a way that would spare you to still having to practise a whole lot. That would be a clear "2", I'd say.

So, @ all, if in doubt, feel free to read the options as roughly ..

1. 0-5% talent - 95-100% practise (hard work only)
2. 5-25% talent - 75-95% practise
3. 25-45% talent - 55-75% practise
4. 45-55% talent - 45-55% practise (equal)
5. 55-75% talent - 25-45% practise
6. 75-95% talent - 5-25% practise
7. 95-100% talent - 0-5% practise (pure talent, just do it and it will naturally succeed in ridiculously short time)

Orinoco - - Parent

I put myself down as a number 2. I think I'm very similar to Daniel, I got good at juggling because when I first started I enjoyed it so much I did nothing but practice. Perhaps because of my enjoyment I didn't realise it was 'hard work'.

peterbone - - Parent

Agreed. The choices are made a bit complex by the 'love of juggling' part, which I think makes the vote lose focus on the nature vs nurture argument. I think that any natural aptitude is very small, but I voted 2 for the same reason as you.

Interesting Gatto's comment that he thinks it was all hard work. Where does that quote come from? On his own forum years ago he said that he believes he has some kind of natural advantage and sees things "in slow motion". Although I don't believe that at all I do think that believing it helped him a lot.

Scott Seltzer - - Parent

I always thought that seeing things in slow motion is acquired. When you first start attempting 5 balls it feels frantic and crazy fast and impossible. After a while (perhaps a few years or more), it can seem slow and simple. Gravity obviously hasn't changed but your perception has.

Sometime after I was pretty solid with 5 balls, I remember when it really clicked even more and became truly effortless. I fondly remember that as my juggling nirvana.

7b_wizard - - Parent

That 'love of juggling' wording is due to me trying to exclude, that ``talent´´ (which anyway is hard to seize as notion) need be determined by some genetic predisposition, let alone by a distinct ``juggling gene´´. And I tried to allow, that a wunderkind could feel as a natural without a need to have genetic evidence, without the need to have been ``born as juggler´´, just with love of juggling, then. Also, I wanted to avoid any discussion about whether ``(genetic) talent´´ even exists or not.

That Gatto statement is nothing like a citation with a source; I had it in mind, read it somewhere - it might be a mere rumour or misinterpretation (alas, I have no idea, where I got that from).

Mike Moore - - Parent

I'd put me somewhere between 5-6. When I can dredge up enough time to practice daily, I feel my progress goes by leaps and bounds, and it seems like I could be /very/ good if I were to try to make a career of juggling (or prioritize it higher).

There are certainly people who pick things up faster than me, but that population seems to be somewhere between 10-25 % of jugglers I know. There's probably some selection bias in there.

pumpkineater23 - - Parent

I'm a 2. I find it very difficult to understand juggling patterns and I've always learned everything slower than most. My love of juggling has helped me keep up the practicing.

Marvin - - Parent

This poll has now ended. The results are:

  1.   no talent or predisposition or preference - it's 100% hard work or perseverant regular practise or strong will only got me there. (0 votes)
  2.   some talent or predisposition or preference - but mostly practise or work or perseverance or strong will. (6 votes)
  3.   a good portion of talent or predisposition or preference - but somewhat more practise or work or perseverance or strong will. (1 vote)
  4.   about equal. (0 votes)
  5.   somewhat more talent or predisposition or preference - but it couldn't have grown & developed without a notable and regular amount of practise or work or perseverance or strong will. (0 votes)
  6.   notably more talent or predisposition or preference - but it won't yield without a bit of practise or coping with or some will to improve. (1 vote)
  7.   I learn extremely fast and don't see upper limits below highest levels. I think, I'm a ``natural´´. (0 votes)
  8.   other \ depends \ easy for s'swaps and few prop tricks, but hard for numbers \ easy for basic patterns, but hard for tricks (1 vote)

 

Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post

Green Eggs reports