Rory - natural talent

.Nurture the nature and retire when your son/daughter is a millionaire. :D
Exactly Rory Clearly had a natural talent as from ten years old he had the same swing. But he still practised 50 hours a week throughout his teens. He then left school at 15 to pursue his career so those around him clearly seen that he had the potential to go forward and make something of himself. And for the millionaire £9.3million in just career earnings at the age of 22. Phowar!! :D
 
One common theme in all these "Rory" posts of late,and that seems to be trying to belittle and/or discredit his win on Sunday.Maybe if he was English he'd get more credit for the win ?
Rory obviously has some natural talent,but he has been nurtured,and obviously at some point his parents decided he had the makings of a future golfing star,and his future was mapped out for him.
Tiger seems to have been modelled into what his father wanted.Much like the Williams sisters,and he clearly has issues due to the regimented upbringing,and these have manifested themselves in recent times with the breakup of his marriage,sex scandals etc.
Faldo was an only child,his parents would go to great lengths to make sure he had what he needed in every sport he showed an interest in.Apparently he was very good at several sports besides golf.Whilst he may have been very succesful as a golfer,his selfishness and win at all costs mentality has alienated him from lots of people.Although many pro golfers respect his achievements,he could probably count his friends on the fingers of one hand.
I hope Rory keeps winning,not only is he a great golfer,he has the personality to go with it.
 
That's not to discredit the result - far from it. He was head and shoulders above everyone else because of those putts and drives.

I thought his iron play was the thing that seperated him.

He did drive the ball well but his GIR was very high and a lot of those shots were close to the hole.

same for me, his approach shots were nothing short of ridiculous over the entire 72 holes....
 
I think Mungoscorner captures the biggest difference between Tiger and Rory - highlighting the reason why I think he has such big potential.

Rory has had his natural ability nurtured; his swing is his swing it's never been coached just reinforced. He's at his best when he just "plays golf" as he did last weekend. That's much easier to do consistently than trying to recreate the current idea of a perfect swing.
 
Maybe if he was English he get more credit for the win ?
I agree

Jeez there's some huge chips on some shoulders around here...

We're not all proclaiming Rory as the new Messiah because he isn't. He's an extremely talented Golfer who will probably go on to win loads of titles but to this point he's won 3 as a Pro. Ok, one of them is s Major but the World of Pro Golf is littered with names who have only won one.

Why the cry of "foul"? Why bring borders into it? He's from N Ireland, he's from the UK, he's from Europe.
He "belongs" to all of us. Just like Luke, Monty and Woosie.

I think he's getting plenty of credit for the win. It was an astonishing performance. No doubt at all.
When he's won a few more, then he'll get the "Messiah" treatment but not until he does. One win doesn't make you the best.

And for the record I hope and believe that he will go on to win plenty more. He wont beat Jack's record - nobody will, not even Tiger. But he'll have a hatful if he keeps doing what he's doing.
 
How many majors does it take to fill a hat? And while we are at it, what sort of hat? If it's a ten gallon sombrero, it'll take some filling. If it's a skull cap, then it could be full already. We need more info.
 
Natural talent and nurtured talent both have one thing in common - and that's talent. All this bollox about natured vs nurtured is just that - bollox.

Does it really matter? Is it really relevant? No.

What matters is that every now and then someone comes along with an extraordinary ability to do something so well the whole world stands up and takes notice.

Personally I couldn't give a stuff whether Rory or Tiger or anyone else for that matter where thrust into golf as soon as they could walk, what I care about is that I'm lucky enough to witness them doing it.
 
why is anything good over scrutinised for both good and bad... lets just enjoy the fact he played great golf, whether he be N. Irish, French, American or an eskimo

It was a great tournament (apart from the incessant adverts on sky!!!) and I for one cant wait for the next and the rest of the year :)

Well played Rory, you had a blinder!
 
the child has to have a certqin degree of "natural" talent but the child mind is very easy to mould into whatever the parent wishes it to be,whether it be golf, snooker or knitting, if you do it often enough eventually you will become very good. IMO the parents genes have nothing to do with it-
there was an experiment carried out years ago on this very topic. Nature v nurture and nurture won everytime, a hungarian guy had 3 daughters all of whom become world chess champions and neither he nor his wife could even play the game before they conducted the experiment, purely because he pushed them into spending every spare moment they had doing chess stuff, IMO its the same in most top athletes, Rory falls into this category

anyone interested in the nature v nurture argument should read a book called Talent is overated by geoff colvin or bounce by mattew syed
 
when people talk about naturally gifted sports starts it doesn't mean they were born a golfer or with a perfect swing.
They were born with a natural amount of co-ordination, either hand/eye or foot/eye. If co-ordination is natural it makes the sport so much easier to learn and develop. Hence why a large number of sports stars you hear 'could have' played more than one sport.
 
The Collins English dictionary defines talent as ...

"The natural ability to do something well"

So by definition, talent is natural, of course, it can be nurtured. So like I said, discussing the difference between the two is bollox :D
 
In every walk of life those who succeed have a talent in their chosen field. Was it a natural thing. Maybe not. I can't think many four year olds decide to become pioneering heart surgeons or scientists but they have an aptitude twards something which gets nutured and developed. Spot is much the same. There has to be an inherent talent to begin with (i.e. the ability to hit the ball straight) but lets recognise the work that McIlroys parents and first pro, and family friends too reading the news, did for the youngster. Clarke acknowledged he had a great swing from a young age but it was the money and sacrifices the parents made that enable the talent to be nutured and developed into what it is today.

In the end you will never get far without raw talent but you'll never get to the pinnacle on talent alone. It needs to be harnessed and developed
 
I've been putting off reading Matthew Syeds book "Bounce" for about a year because the whole premise offends me. However, I have to say it's a right rivetin' read and the more I get into it, the more I understand where he is coming from.

Tiger and the Williams sisters, and Mozart (incidentally) all have the same thing in common, and that is they all practised to excess because they loved it. Rory is probably the same, so whatever the answer, I guess we'll never know.
If any of them had done it on little practise and pure aptitude then we'd know one way or the other.

The indisputable fact (if you believe the book) is that all the highest achievers of all time have all worked their socks off.
 
Top