Boxing training

Kelso

Me and my friend were having an argument about whether you need natural talent to be a boxer or if anyone picked up at a young age and given proper training could make it to a decent (olympic) standard. What does everyone else reckon?

ROCKMAN

Kelso wrote: »

Me and my friend were having an argument about whether you need natural talent to be a boxer or if anyone picked up at a young age and given proper training could make it to a decent (olympic) standard. What does everyone else reckon?

My 2 cents

Anyone picked up at a young age and given the proper training and willing to put in the hard work , can and should be able to make a certain level be county or what ,
As for national or Olympic level my answer would be NO,
I really believe that any of your top boxers now and over the years have had something special weather you call this natural talent or what, I 'm not sure.
Yes the level of coaches as a hell of alot to do with it, Which helps to explain why as fighters come up through the ranks and start meeting and training with the next level of coaches you can see great improvements.

One thing of note when you say Olympic level any Irish or European Boxer getting to the Olympics in the first place is a hell of a achievement .To get there through from Europe is very hard , As for winning medals at the games :D:D

JMCD

My 2 cents are in my opinion is that there is no such thing as "natural talent" i.e I dont think you could say anybody has a natural talent for boxing,football,snooker or whatever the case might be.

Everybody who has achieved fantastic success so fantastic that people start calling it "natural talent" have worked thir nuts off! You read any sportsman/woman autobiography and find out how hard they have worked to get to the position there in.

Even if you take lets say Ronnie O Sullivan.....who to me is the best snooker player ever to grace the green baize and you go back to when he was ten and look at how much he practiced! Even at ten he would maybe do 6-8 hours of practice which gave him a fantastic foundation to go on and do what he has done and there-in be called a natural! He wasnt born with those exceptional skills.......he acquired them through endless hours of practice.


Even look at Paddy Barnes he has achieved a bronze medal at the olympics even do he lost his first 15 fights as an amatuer yet if im not mistaken (Although I could be:rolleyes:) Paddy Barnes has been described as a naturally talented boxer but if you were to watch his first 15 bouts as an amatuer I bet that no one was calling him a natural boxer.My point being thet Paddy put the hours in and got the end result. Its a fact the more ya put in the more ya get back.

Dont get me wrong EVERY body is born with a talent(s) I just dont think its as scientific as being born a natural boxer or musician or anything else for that matter.Its up to the individual to channel their talents and develop more and work extremely hard.


So to answer your question Kelso I think somebody of the age of lets say 24 could start boxing and get to an olympic level if they really really really wanted it! It would be extremely difficult but with hard work and dedication anything is possible!:)

Mikel

Of course there's such a thing as natural talent. You also need hard work to get anywhere. You can compensate for lack of one with the other up to a point.
No amount of hard work will get me to the level of an olympic boxer or sprinter, they have gifts I don't. Saying that does not mean they haven't worked hard to get where they are.
Think of all the athletes and footballers etc who never made it because they weren't good enough, some of them would have worked as hard as anyone, but they couldn't make up the difference.

JMCD

Mikel wrote: »

Of course there's such a thing as natural talent. You also need hard work to get anywhere. You can compensate for lack of one with the other up to a point.
No amount of hard work will get me to the level of an olympic boxer or sprinter, they have gifts I don't. Saying that does not mean they haven't worked hard to get where they are.
Think of all the athletes and footballers etc who never made it because they weren't good enough, some of them would have worked as hard as anyone, but they couldn't make up the difference.

Alrite Mikel,

Well I personally think what seperates top athletes from ordinary ones is the mental side of things.Not "natural talent".....sure they ARE talented but I just dont think they were born and were just going to become elite athletes.

Just look at Roy Keane.......if he was to be judged on talent alone there is no way he would of reached the heights he reached........he probably would of just stayed in Ireland with Cobh or that or maybe played his career in the 2nd division in England only for his fantastic mentality.

AlanSparrowhawk

boxing is no different to any other sport with regard to nature/nurture/genes/environment/opportunity/luck

Mikel

JMCD wrote: »

Well I personally think what seperates top athletes from ordinary ones is the mental side of things.Not "natural talent".....sure they ARE talented but I just dont think they were born and were just going to become elite athletes..

Maybe it seperates Bolt from Asafa Powell, but it's not what separates him from me.

JMCD wrote: »

Just look at Roy Keane.......if he was to be judged on talent alone there is no way he would of reached the heights he reached........he probably would of just stayed in Ireland with Cobh or that or maybe played his career in the 2nd division in England only for his fantastic mentality.

Pretty much what I said too, agree with this

boxing is no different to any other sport with regard to nature/nurture/genes/environment/opportunity/luck

ROCKMAN

Mikel wrote: »

Of course there's such a thing as natural talent. You also need hard work to get anywhere. You can compensate for lack of one with the other up to a point.
No amount of hard work will get me to the level of an olympic boxer or sprinter, they have gifts I don't. Saying that does not mean they haven't worked hard to get where they are.
Think of all the athletes and footballers etc who never made it because they weren't good enough, some of them would have worked as hard as anyone, but they couldn't make up the difference.

Call it natural talent, something special etc etc, As I said in my post 99% of sportpeople have to work very hard along side any natural ability to make it to the top of their sports, However , to prove you are right that there is such a thing as Natural Talent I have one Name


Matt Le Tissier

Fall_Guy

Yes, there is such a thing as natural talent. Some people have naturally quicker rexlfexes, better co-ordination, are naturally faster, stronger etc...alot of these things can be improved upon due to intense commitment and training. If two competitors have similar work ethic, determination and the benefit of top quality and all other factors (size, weight, reach etc) are the same, then the more natural athlete will be at a higher level.

OP, You mentioned the Ronnie O'Sullivan example. I would look at it the other way round to be honest, i think he proves the existence of natural talent. Yes, he practices very hard when in the zone. He has also gone weeks without picking up a cue outside competition. When you watch him play he can clearly to things with ease that the majority of the other players struggle to do, and there is no doubt that all top snooker players train ridiculously hard (in terms of table practice). You would have a hard time convincing me that he is the most committed of the players in the top sixteen if his autobiography is anything to go by.

Ofcourse, "natural talent" is not a pre-requisite for success, but a naturally gifted person willing to work as hard as someone with less natural talent is gong to be better, end of story. In many cases, they will be better than many people without working as hard....(your matt le tissier's, alex higgins', john daly's etc..)

Athletics is another prime example. I have no doubt that if I was to have lived in Jamaica since I was two and had trained as hard as my black friends day in day out for years, I still would have been eating their dust in the 100m sprints every year at sports day! The only people I would have beaten would be the kids that I worked harder than (some of them, anyway!).

I suppose another thing that can be thrown into the mis is the whole desire/work/ethic/determination thing. Is it a natural talent (just like natural speed) to be able to work hard day in/day out always pushing yourself to the limits while others might be taking a breather? Is raw hunger a natural talent? My thinking would be no, as someone can lose their hunger (due to factors like success, personal problems etc...) alot quicker than they can lose attributes like natural quickness and speed.

I know this is ridiculously long-winded, but I guess what I'm saying is that while natural talent definitely exists it is not the be-all and end-all

cowzerp

Fall_Guy wrote: »

Yes, there is such a thing as natural talent. Some people have naturally quicker rexlfexes, better co-ordination, are naturally faster, stronger etc...alot of these things can be improved upon due to intense commitment and training. If two competitors have similar work ethic, determination and the benefit of top quality and all other factors (size, weight, reach etc) are the same, then the more natural athlete will be at a higher level.

OP, You mentioned the Ronnie O'Sullivan example. I would look at it the other way round to be honest, i think he proves the existence of natural talent. Yes, he practices very hard when in the zone. He has also gone weeks without picking up a cue outside competition. When you watch him play he can clearly to things with ease that the majority of the other players struggle to do, and there is no doubt that all top snooker players train ridiculously hard (in terms of table practice). You would have a hard time convincing me that he is the most committed of the players in the top sixteen if his autobiography is anything to go by.

Ofcourse, "natural talent" is not a pre-requisite for success, but a naturally gifted person willing to work as hard as someone with less natural talent is gong to be better, end of story. In many cases, they will be better than many people without working as hard....(your matt le tissier's, alex higgins', john daly's etc..)

Athletics is another prime example. I have no doubt that if I was to have lived in Jamaica since I was two and had trained as hard as my black friends day in day out for years, I still would have been eating their dust in the 100m sprints every year at sports day! The only people I would have beaten would be the kids that I worked harder than (some of them, anyway!).

I suppose another thing that can be thrown into the mis is the whole desire/work/ethic/determination thing. Is it a natural talent (just like natural speed) to be able to work hard day in/day out always pushing yourself to the limits while others might be taking a breather? Is raw hunger a natural talent? My thinking would be no, as someone can lose their hunger (due to factors like success, personal problems etc...) alot quicker than they can lose attributes like natural quickness and speed.

I know this is ridiculously long-winded, but I guess what I'm saying is that while natural talent definitely exists it is not the be-all and end-all

Good post and mostly on the ball, natural talent certainly exists, but without it been trained then it wont hack it, i alway's punched hard, but with training i could hit harder faster and not get hit myself. I could also always take a big shot, this cant be learned, for boxing this is a natural talent! A trained unnatural fighter would beat a non trained natural fighter 9 out of 10 times.

Mikel

Fall_Guy wrote: »

Yes, there is such a thing as natural talent. Some people have naturally quicker rexlfexes, better co-ordination, are naturally faster, stronger etc...alot of these things can be improved upon due to intense commitment and training. If two competitors have similar work ethic, determination and the benefit of top quality and all other factors (size, weight, reach etc) are the same, then the more natural athlete will be at a higher level.

OP, You mentioned the Ronnie O'Sullivan example. I would look at it the other way round to be honest, i think he proves the existence of natural talent. Yes, he practices very hard when in the zone. He has also gone weeks without picking up a cue outside competition. When you watch him play he can clearly to things with ease that the majority of the other players struggle to do, and there is no doubt that all top snooker players train ridiculously hard (in terms of table practice). You would have a hard time convincing me that he is the most committed of the players in the top sixteen if his autobiography is anything to go by.

Ofcourse, "natural talent" is not a pre-requisite for success, but a naturally gifted person willing to work as hard as someone with less natural talent is gong to be better, end of story. In many cases, they will be better than many people without working as hard....(your matt le tissier's, alex higgins', john daly's etc..)

Athletics is another prime example. I have no doubt that if I was to have lived in Jamaica since I was two and had trained as hard as my black friends day in day out for years, I still would have been eating their dust in the 100m sprints every year at sports day! The only people I would have beaten would be the kids that I worked harder than (some of them, anyway!).

I suppose another thing that can be thrown into the mis is the whole desire/work/ethic/determination thing. Is it a natural talent (just like natural speed) to be able to work hard day in/day out always pushing yourself to the limits while others might be taking a breather? Is raw hunger a natural talent? My thinking would be no, as someone can lose their hunger (due to factors like success, personal problems etc...) alot quicker than they can lose attributes like natural quickness and speed.

I know this is ridiculously long-winded, but I guess what I'm saying is that while natural talent definitely exists it is not the be-all and end-all

Bingo!

JMCD

Fall_Guy wrote: »

Yes, there is such a thing as natural talent. Some people have naturally quicker rexlfexes, better co-ordination, are naturally faster, stronger etc...alot of these things can be improved upon due to intense commitment and training. If two competitors have similar work ethic, determination and the benefit of top quality and all other factors (size, weight, reach etc) are the same, then the more natural athlete will be at a higher level.

OP, You mentioned the Ronnie O'Sullivan example. I would look at it the other way round to be honest, i think he proves the existence of natural talent. Yes, he practices very hard when in the zone. He has also gone weeks without picking up a cue outside competition. When you watch him play he can clearly to things with ease that the majority of the other players struggle to do, and there is no doubt that all top snooker players train ridiculously hard (in terms of table practice). You would have a hard time convincing me that he is the most committed of the players in the top sixteen if his autobiography is anything to go by.

Ofcourse, "natural talent" is not a pre-requisite for success, but a naturally gifted person willing to work as hard as someone with less natural talent is gong to be better, end of story. In many cases, they will be better than many people without working as hard....(your matt le tissier's, alex higgins', john daly's etc..)

Athletics is another prime example. I have no doubt that if I was to have lived in Jamaica since I was two and had trained as hard as my black friends day in day out for years, I still would have been eating their dust in the 100m sprints every year at sports day! The only people I would have beaten would be the kids that I worked harder than (some of them, anyway!).

I suppose another thing that can be thrown into the mis is the whole desire/work/ethic/determination thing. Is it a natural talent (just like natural speed) to be able to work hard day in/day out always pushing yourself to the limits while others might be taking a breather? Is raw hunger a natural talent? My thinking would be no, as someone can lose their hunger (due to factors like success, personal problems etc...) alot quicker than they can lose attributes like natural quickness and speed.

I know this is ridiculously long-winded, but I guess what I'm saying is that while natural talent definitely exists it is not the be-all and end-all

Well I cant argue with that! Fantastic post and very well put. I can see what you mean alright......After hearing what has been said I DO believe there is natural talent but I guess what I was trying to get across was that I dont believe any one single person was put on this earth to do one specific thing because of their natural talent. Take Usain Bolt........I dont believe he was put on this earth to shatter the 100m world record natural talent or not..........if he hadnt of chosen athletics as a young lad and directed and commited all his time and dedication to the sport he wouldnt of achieved what he has achieved.

ryoishin

What about knock out power?

God given or trainable.

cowzerp

ryoishin wrote: »

What about knock out power?

God given or trainable.

Both, some people have natural punch power but with trained technique the power of anyone is drastically improved..true ko power is a god given ability.