Rory - natural talent

T

timgolfy

Q-School Graduate
Banned
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
787
Location
The Practice Course
Visit site
It's been said recently by various commentators that Rory is the most naturally gifted golfer since Tiger. But viewing the pictures and videos of his early life, clearly Rory had been in training since the age of 1.

Surely this is a case of nurture, not nature? (As was Tiger, Williams sisters, etc).

Is there any such things as natural talent? Proper coaching at a very young age = strong likelihood of success?
 
I am sure that there is a huge element of both. Some how you never hear about the ones who spent 24 hours a day from the age of 2 who didn't succeed.
 
. Some how you never hear about the ones who spent 24 hours a day from the age of 2 who didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

But I bet there's plenty in that class, but as you say, you get to hear about them.
Are they the ones without the Natural Talent?
 
I agree on the nurture not nature.

Was he born to do it or is it because he just did it from when he was born.

Not sure he is the best golfer or most talented since Tiger.

The two things I'm sure of with him though are:

- He sure is getting a hell of a lot of press and attention. Probably thanks to his management company seeing Rory as someone who fits the bill for some money making.

- He plays golf. Pretty well too.
 
But I bet there's plenty in that class, but as you say, you get to hear about them.
Are they the ones without the Natural Talent?
Click to expand...

That'a a very good point, actually. Do the ones with "natural talent" succeed, or is it the ones who succeed who now magically have the natural talent?
 
I think all talent has to be nurtured to truly blossom into brilliance .. talent.. natrual or otherwise thats not nurtured , encouraged & supported become ordinary in time .. same as any gift
 
You can "train" someone from a very early age but if they don't have a natural ability in whatever field it may be in, they're unlikely to progress to Superstardom. They'll probably turn out to be pretty good though.......
 
. Some how you never hear about the ones who spent 24 hours a day from the age of 2 who didn't succeed.
Click to expand...

But I bet there's plenty in that class, but as you say, you get to hear about them.
Are they the ones without the Natural Talent?
Click to expand...

They are more likely the ones without any drive and motivation.

It's a huge effort for a young kid to dedicate himself a few hours a day for 12 years before he gets anywhere.

I seriously doubt that there are any people in the catagory of playing since they were 3, played at least a few hours a day and dedicated themselves who didn't do something good.

When did Nick Faldo pick up a club, I'd say he had more talent then Rory.
 
Not sure he is the best golfer or most talented since Tiger.
Click to expand...

Who you got in mind then?
Click to expand...

Since Tiger came on the scene.

Majors - Rory - 1

Phil Mickelson - 4
Vijay Singh - 3
Padraig Harrington - 3
Angel Caberea - 2
Retief Goosen - 2

Todd Hamilton - 1

World No 1's (Since Tiger 1st became world no.1)

Ernie Els - 9 Weeks
David Duval - 15 Weeks
Vijay Singh - 32 Weeks
Lee Westwood - 22 Weeks
Martin Kymer - 8 Weeks
Luke Donald - 4 Weeks


One of them.

Personally I think he is a great player but he hasn't done it yet. He may well do it all but I'm not one for counting chickens when they may well never hatch.

These above guys have been world number 1 since tiger or they have won multiple majors.
 
Do the ones with "natural talent" succeed, or is it the ones who succeed who now magically have the natural talent?
Click to expand...
Do you do management training courses?? I think I've sat (slept) through one of your courses before
 
But I bet there's plenty in that class, but as you say, you get to hear about them.
Are they the ones without the Natural Talent?
Click to expand...

That'a a very good point, actually. Do the ones with "natural talent" succeed, or is it the ones who succeed who now magically have the natural talent?
Click to expand...

Just reading Darren Clark in the paper today. He wrote

"It's been a while since I first set eyes on Rory McIlroy. At first, he was just a wee boy who was part of my junior foundation. But it didn't take long for me to realise he had a ridiculous talent for golf."

I guess Darren saw the talent before Rory had won much.

It's an interesting debate. I agree with the posters who say you need both nature and nurture.

Rory without the application, dedication and desire - scratch player with a few club champs and county caps? Who knows.

All the application and practice without the talent...well same outcome maybe.

One thing I question with the nurture not nature argument is creativity. You may be able to "learn" how to play golf to a high standard but it's basically a mechanical, physical activity. What about Van Gogh, Beethoven, Shakespeare, Miles Davis? Practice may have given them the necessary skills, but to create great art - where does that leap of imagination come from?

What about intellectual activity. Can we all be educated to become Professors of Mathemetics? Are there people who are "naturally gifted" at Maths. What about top chess players? They all seem to show great ability really young.

But that's a whole different debate for a different forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Grant85
Sam Locke - Scottish Amateur Champion (& Scottish golf in general)
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
MadAdey
MadAdey
C
Natural talent
Replies
10
Views
2K
Deleted member 15344
D
F
correcting swing for junior
Replies
7
Views
1K
bobmac
bobmac
muttleee
"Natural" talent
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
Doon frae Troon
D
haplesshacker
The future of British golfing winners
Replies
6
Views
673
GB72
GB72
Top