Can everyone reach 2k?

[LePac]

What does talent actually mean?

 

[aoeplayer]

I'm very surprised by the amount of people saying "everyone" or "most people" can (like the post above). This is not true at all. Gaming requires talent. So many people here saying if everyone has the time to grind like the pros, they can reach 2k, or higher. Very delusional.. You DO need magical talent to get to a certain level. Maybe 2k needs "less" talent but 2.4? you are literally putting yourself in the top 50 players in the world in a game with very high skill ceiling. Even 2k, trust me, most people CAN'T make it because most people are not "talented enough". It's cruel to say, but it is true. But hey, do you have to be that talented to enjoy the game? you can still enjoy a game of basketball or playing guitar as a hobby even without talent. Not being talented enough to have the potential to become top 2% of everyone who plays this game is almost "normal".

If people practice basketball every day, with the right method and all the support, can most of them make the NBA? or any other pro scene? (NBL, Euro league etc) or even one of the best players in a social league in your town/university/college? or.. the starting V of your school team?
What about music? if everyone practices with the right method, with the right teachers, can most people become a once in a generation musician like Charlie Parker, Jacob Collier or Esperanza Spalding? or being able to make a living out of just giging?

The higher level you get, the more you will get what I'm saying. So many people think too highly of themselves, thinking - "I have the knowledge and intelligence. The only reason I'm not getting to that level is because I don't have the time to practice" is arrogant. It's also very ignorant and disrespectful to the top level players. On top of putting in many hours into practising, they are VERY talented. That's why when they play new RTS, or even MOBA games, they do very well. Viper doing very well in almost every game he plays (GM on SC2, AOE2 legend, AOE4 champ), Grubby with WC3, SC2, and AOE4, Marinelord getting 2.2k after about only a year and now one of the best in AOE4, list goes on. These players are pro players I know, but the story is similar to even the "semi-pros" or the casual players at top level (2k+). Some people at this level also are not talented enough to reach that pro level.

It's not just pushing buttons fast and perfecting it. It's about planning, mind-gaming, decision making, multitasking, attitude, learning method etc etc. Most of these, to get to 2k+ (probably best to say top xx%, as we need to consider ELO inflation), requires more than just practice.

You may get back to me saying "We aren't talking about reaching the pro level, we are talking about 2k". Yes I know. The amount of people with the potential of reaching 2k certainly is higher than pro level, but still, MANY and MOST people won't be able to as they are not talented enough. I'm afraid this sounds very harsh, but don't think there's an easier and nicer way to put it

But so what if I'm not talented enough to be one of the best players in the world? or the top 500 player in the world? As long as I enjoy playing, that's all that matters (given that this isn't what you live off!)

I agree that it's incredibly difficult (2k+ is more like top .6%, not 2%) and most couldn't get there.

I do think the strategy/intelligence is at times overblown (for instance, in tournaments the decision by pros about whether to drop TCs and how many, often seems random). And Viper can meme and win vs 2k players, pointing to execution>strategy.

 

[LePac]

Dunning-Krüger Effect, therefore most people remain at their level and do not reach their potential level with the same time investment (which might be 1.8k, but the person is stuck at 1.4k).

But I still don't know what talent means. Kids like Lierrey probably grew up with games, hence they learned mechanics earlier and were much fast in picking up Age2.

 

[Giuseppe551]

What does talent actually mean?

You know when you're 5 or 6 years old and playing your first organized sport and one kid is just lightyears better than the other kids? That's talent. It's not because they practiced better or more at that age (they haven't had the time), they're just good. It's God given natural ability, or, for our atheist friends out there, dumb luck I guess.

 

[Kr1lle]

I'm very surprised by the amount of people saying "everyone" or "most people" can (like the post above). This is not true at all. Gaming requires talent. So many people here saying if everyone has the time to grind like the pros, they can reach 2k, or higher. Very delusional.. You DO need magical talent to get to a certain level. Maybe 2k needs "less" talent but 2.4? you are literally putting yourself in the top 50 players in the world in a game with very high skill ceiling. Even 2k, trust me, most people CAN'T make it because most people are not "talented enough". It's cruel to say, but it is true. But hey, do you have to be that talented to enjoy the game? you can still enjoy a game of basketball or playing guitar as a hobby even without talent. Not being talented enough to have the potential to become top 2% of everyone who plays this game is almost "normal".

If people practice basketball every day, with the right method and all the support, can most of them make the NBA? or any other pro scene? (NBL, Euro league etc) or even one of the best players in a social league in your town/university/college? or.. the starting V of your school team?
What about music? if everyone practices with the right method, with the right teachers, can most people become a once in a generation musician like Charlie Parker, Jacob Collier or Esperanza Spalding? or being able to make a living out of just giging?

The higher level you get, the more you will get what I'm saying. So many people think too highly of themselves, thinking - "I have the knowledge and intelligence. The only reason I'm not getting to that level is because I don't have the time to practice" is arrogant. It's also very ignorant and disrespectful to the top level players. On top of putting in many hours into practising, they are VERY talented. That's why when they play new RTS, or even MOBA games, they do very well. Viper doing very well in almost every game he plays (GM on SC2, AOE2 legend, AOE4 champ), Grubby with WC3, SC2, and AOE4, Marinelord getting 2.2k after about only a year and now one of the best in AOE4, list goes on. These players are pro players I know, but the story is similar to even the "semi-pros" or the casual players at top level (2k+). Some people at this level also are not talented enough to reach that pro level.

It's not just pushing buttons fast and perfecting it. It's about planning, mind-gaming, decision making, multitasking, attitude, learning method etc etc. Most of these, to get to 2k+ (probably best to say top xx%, as we need to consider ELO inflation), requires more than just practice.

You may get back to me saying "We aren't talking about reaching the pro level, we are talking about 2k". Yes I know. The amount of people with the potential of reaching 2k certainly is higher than pro level, but still, MANY and MOST people won't be able to as they are not talented enough. I'm afraid this sounds very harsh, but don't think there's an easier and nicer way to put it

But so what if I'm not talented enough to be one of the best players in the world? or the top 500 player in the world? As long as I enjoy playing, that's all that matters (given that this isn't what you live off!)

It's a nice topic. I'm myself a full time professional musician which is a highly competetive field which only a very few can make a living in. "Talent" is a very common used word in my work and I have come across it a lot and read a lot of books about it. I'm recommending you to read "The Talent Code" by Daniel Coyle who covers what talent actually is, scientifically, and how it is not only born.

Anyway, I love to discuss talent with people. I don't really believe much in talent (yes, it exist) and I think the majority of people is respecting talent way too much, resulting in limiting theirselves and their development. However, this topic would take hours and hours to discuss and I don't really have that energy and time at the moment so I will try to be kind of short here.

I'm myself a quite new aoe2-player. Started 1,5 years ago and have almost reached 2k so I think I know what is required here. What is actually required is (very) clean build orders, some experience to know how to deal with all the common strats and consistency. I don't see where the magical born talent comes into play. Yes, you need to be fairly quick on the keyboard and have a decent hit rate with your mouse but that is things you can practice and improving, just as you go to the gym and by lifting heavier weights become stronger. I think everyone with a working body, working hands and decent intellect can reach 2k. Yes, that may not be ANYONE per say, but maybe like 95% of the aoe2-player base. But to become a 2k player some will need extreme dedication and willpower. Not everyone may do it without help and coaching, but they COULD if they want and put the effort into it. I think the same thing goes with 2,2k and 2,4k aswell but of course you need immense amount of focus, deep practice and so on to reach that. For some people easier, for some people harder. But once again, I don't see what magical born talent you need to have.

What I think separate the wheat from the chaff, is how you practice things. If you only play and don't try to correct, then you will get stuck and see it impossible to reach your goals. Deep practice is where talent is born (mostly) and that is achieved by constantly failing and correcting. That is how myelin is built, which is the substance where skills are created and therefore talent. That is science. That is why some people seem to be succeding in everything and why some people aren't in anything. It's not that some people are magically talented in everything. It's about how they approach and practice things.

If you actually start believing in yourself and stop excusing everything you don't achieve on talent, you will be amazed with how much you can improve your weaknesses.

I'm of the opposite conclusion that the higher level you get in a field, the more you understand that talent doesn't play as big role as you think. But it's good that we both can agree upon that aslong as you enjoy your life, game and are generally happy, everything is good.

Cheers

 

[SuperskinnyBLS]

Anyone with too much time in his hands can reach 2k, it is a matter of efficient practise .

 

[MaSmOrRa]

It's a nice topic. I'm myself a full time professional musician which is a highly competetive field which only a very few can make a living in. "Talent" is a very common used word in my work and I have come across it a lot and read a lot of books about it. I'm recommending you to read "The Talent Code" by Daniel Coyle who covers what talent actually is, scientifically, and how it is not only born.

Anyway, I love to discuss talent with people. I don't really believe much in talent (yes, it exist) and I think the majority of people is respecting talent way too much, resulting in limiting theirselves and their development. However, this topic would take hours and hours to discuss and I don't really have that energy and time at the moment so I will try to be kind of short here.

I'm myself a quite new aoe2-player. Started 1,5 years ago and have almost reached 2k so I think I know what is required here. What is actually required is (very) clean build orders, some experience to know how to deal with all the common strats and consistency. I don't see where the magical born talent comes into play. Yes, you need to be fairly quick on the keyboard and have a decent hit rate with your mouse but that is things you can practice and improving, just as you go to the gym and by lifting heavier weights become stronger. I think everyone with a working body, working hands and decent intellect can reach 2k. Yes, that may not be ANYONE per say, but maybe like 95% of the aoe2-player base. But to become a 2k player some will need extreme dedication and willpower. Not everyone may do it without help and coaching, but they COULD if they want and put the effort into it. I think the same thing goes with 2,2k and 2,4k aswell but of course you need immense amount of focus, deep practice and so on to reach that. For some people easier, for some people harder. But once again, I don't see what magical born talent you need to have.

What I think separate the wheat from the chaff, is how you practice things. If you only play and don't try to correct, then you will get stuck and see it impossible to reach your goals. Deep practice is where talent is born (mostly) and that is achieved by constantly failing and correcting. That is how myelin is built, which is the substance where skills are created and therefore talent. That is science. That is why some people seem to be succeding in everything and why some people aren't in anything. It's not that some people are magically talented in everything. It's about how they approach and practice things.

If you actually start believing in yourself and stop excusing everything you don't achieve on talent, you will be amazed with how much you can improve your weaknesses.

I'm of the opposite conclusion that the higher level you get in a field, the more you understand that talent doesn't play as big role as you think. But it's good that we both can agree upon that aslong as you enjoy your life, game and are generally happy, everything is good.

Cheers

You're the horn player, right?

To be the solo hornist in a professional orchestra in this day and age takes an unbelievable amount of skill, so you guys can trust this guy knows what he is talking about!

I'll just add to what you said that most teachers/scientists agree age plays a very important role too.

The younger you start, the faster you learn and the more "ingrained" in you that thing becomes.

 

[aoeplayer]

Dunning-Krüger Effect, therefore most people remain at their level and do not reach their potential level with the same time investment (which might be 1.8k, but the person is stuck at 1.4k).

That's not D-K effect.

D-K effect is in play, in that the "high performers" in this thread are "underestimating their skills" and figure everyone can get there.

Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Rayne]

Seeing this topic back up and some recent posts on improving, I don’t think I’ve ever seen paradigm shifting being mentioned or some close-equivalent (even all the past topics talent or improving, 2k/2400 etc, don’t recall). There have been some parts of it written, but never the direct mention. I wonder why tbh. I think it’s the most important thing over any mention of talent.

I also came across a study some months ago, with geniuses and people who weren’t. If I recall the key conclusion, it was that geniuses were more open-minded over anyone else. Not many differences otherwise.

 

[Tarsiz]

Talent plays a part - you can see it with AoE 4 where players from multiple games more or less all started at the same time, there was no proven meta figured out, yet some names definitely rose above the rest of the pack. For instance Viper, Mista, MLord, RecoN, the Spanish brothers, etc. These guys have talent.

To reach 2k on a 20 year old game like AoE 2, where the meta has been figured out to tiny details and there is a wealth of information readily available online - along with thousands of recorded games for you to download, does not require talent. Talented players will reach it much faster but if you grind thousands of games you will get there.

That being said the ability to grind thousands of games without getting bored might be some form of talent...

 

[The_Philos]

These guys have talent.

I don't deny that they are talented, but I would also say that their time invested was/is bigger than others. And that the RTS skills from another game can translate well into another RTS (hotkey usage, eco management, counter-mechanics, etc.) with a bit of adjustment to the new game and pace.

That's not D-K effect.

Thanks, I was about to say it.

 

[zShades]

i started playing aoe2 7 years ago, first PC game, i had no hands, but being 14 yo give you huge room of improvement. I dont think i have a specific skill / skill level or whatever. Just had a lot of games, studied from the best players; trained with Vodka and Rise a lot (good friends in the same environment is always a good thing). I consider myself really good mechanically, but i started from 0 with aoe, i learned that, same as decision making and game knowledge. If players like me, using basically just thumb and index can reach 2250, you guys can as well. Make it sure to have a look to my coaching offers first KEKW

 

[OnArtu]

I'm myself a quite new aoe2-player. Started 1,5 years ago and have almost reached 2k so I think I know what is required here. What is actually required is (very) clean build orders, some experience to know how to deal with all the common strats and consistency. I don't see where the magical born talent comes into play.

It comes with multitasking, which (as far as I know but I may be wrong) is at least partially about genetics and can't really be trained over a certain point.

Just think about what you need to do to perform a very clean build order:

- Keep the TC running.
- Correctly task all the villagers.
- Constantly be aware for potential idle vills
- Keep the scout active proprerly and eventually push deers.
- Correctly lure boars
- Decide where to place resource camps
- Look at the map and strategize around it
- Scout the opponent, avoid to run under his TC, identify his strategy and formulate a plan around it.
- React to eventual laming and pressure.

While most of these tasks can be trained and probably do not depend on any kind of "talent" (even though map reading aspects should rely on spatial intelligence as far as I know), doing everything at the same time is where "talent" comes into play since not anyone has the same ability of switching tasks in a short amount of time and not everyone lose the same amount of efficiency when performing several tasks at the same time.

Experience can help dealing with lack of multitasking, since it helps recognizing which tasks are more important and should be prioritized over less important tasks that can be neglected or performed less efficiently. But this basically a workaround and deciding where to focus is a task itself and it's not guaranteed that in messy situations any player can be able to spare the amount of focus to do it correctly. Moreover, when skill level increases, this strategy tends to fall short since more talented players can gain an edge over others by being able to perform the less important tasks with higher efficiency.

For example, every player that uses hotkey and have made art of war tutorial knows how to dodge a mangonel shot and can pull it off in practice. But it's common experience that, in actual games, most players give up on their macro to do that since they're not able to focus on the micro and on economy at the same time, so if we compare 3 players:

A - Player who can't multitask micro and macro and stubbornly prioritize micro over macro and banks 2k wood in castle age.
B - Player with experience and knowledge that partially gives up on micro, prioritizes to keep a good macro find other strategies to deal with the mangonel.
C - Player that can deal with the mangonel and keeping his micro healthy at the same time.

To me it's quite clear that:

1 - You can't really train the ability of microing while managing the eco. Hotkeys and control groups help but at a certain point the bottleneck is the ability of the brain to switch the focus efficiently within the tasks.
2 - The logic consequence is that player B can get to a pretty decent level since he's going to consistently beat people like people A, but player C is going to have way more potential than player B.

Take this wallpost with some grain of salt, I am not an expert and these consideration are my personal answer to why I am struggling pretty hard with improving, and expecially why I am not able to have clean build orders even though i worked hard to improve them, but I just don't see how some of people i know/play with/see on twitch (including myself) can get to 2k.

 

[Clemensor]

You know when you're 5 or 6 years old and playing your first organized sport and one kid is just lightyears better than the other kids? That's talent. It's not because they practiced better or more at that age (they haven't had the time), they're just good. It's God given natural ability, or, for our atheist friends out there, dumb luck I guess.

Not totally disagreeing, but developement doesnt start there. Some kids for example are more out and about than others or perhaps are already doing some kind of sports with their parents etc. thus knowing how to use their body better than others.

 

[Kr1lle]

It comes with multitasking, which (as far as I know but I may be wrong) is at least partially about genetics and can't really be trained over a certain point.

I agree on most of the things. Multitasking might be partly genetics, I don't know much about it. But there are ways (as you describe with experience) to work around multitasking. For example, some things become second nature because you practice them over and over again. By making things automatic, you don't have to think about it and can prioritize your focus elsewhere and therefore lower the need of multitasking.

And regarding your player A/B/C scenario:

Not even every pro players macro and micro at the same time. At a 2k level you could easily walk back with your army, macro for 10s and engage again. How often do you see Daut micro and macro at the same time? He is not a fast player but is one of the best player in the world of all times. Even if you can use the ability to be insanely fast at switching between actions, it isn't needed for a 2k level. That's why APM isn't that telling how good you are. Because some other people may have half your APM but may use it much more wisely and therefore doing more with half the work.

 

[Rustyiesty]

Twitch

Twitch is the world's leading video platform and community for gamers.

clips.twitch.tv

Daut - When a Starcraft player plays AoE2

 

[Rustyiesty]

Observations of mine about RTS talent from 2 months ago:

Hera played the game for 1 year in Voobly to get 2k. Vortix said it was easy - https://aoe2.net/#profile-60328

You can see how he grinded 3 times, in the first month of DE to almost 1500, one month a year later to almost 1700, and six months later in six weeks to get to 2k in just over 625 games (then some EW and a month of TG to get up to 2k5 in just over 125 games).

Conclusion: Already having top RTS mechanics cuts down aoe2 learning time by almost 4x

Other examples from Genesis are:

Mlord - 3 months to 1800, back to SC2, then 4 months to 2k
RecoN - 5 months to 2k at the start of DE, with a 1 month break around 1500
Probe - one tricked Franks to 1800 in 1 month, then 2 months on his smurf for 1981

The flipside is, someone has 6k games in unranked with a 29% win rate..

 

[JazBas]

It's a nice topic. I'm myself a full time professional musician which is a highly competetive field which only a very few can make a living in. "Talent" is a very common used word in my work and I have come across it a lot and read a lot of books about it. I'm recommending you to read "The Talent Code" by Daniel Coyle who covers what talent actually is, scientifically, and how it is not only born.

Anyway, I love to discuss talent with people. I don't really believe much in talent (yes, it exist) and I think the majority of people is respecting talent way too much, resulting in limiting theirselves and their development. However, this topic would take hours and hours to discuss and I don't really have that energy and time at the moment so I will try to be kind of short here.

I'm myself a quite new aoe2-player. Started 1,5 years ago and have almost reached 2k so I think I know what is required here. What is actually required is (very) clean build orders, some experience to know how to deal with all the common strats and consistency. I don't see where the magical born talent comes into play. Yes, you need to be fairly quick on the keyboard and have a decent hit rate with your mouse but that is things you can practice and improving, just as you go to the gym and by lifting heavier weights become stronger. I think everyone with a working body, working hands and decent intellect can reach 2k. Yes, that may not be ANYONE per say, but maybe like 95% of the aoe2-player base. But to become a 2k player some will need extreme dedication and willpower. Not everyone may do it without help and coaching, but they COULD if they want and put the effort into it. I think the same thing goes with 2,2k and 2,4k aswell but of course you need immense amount of focus, deep practice and so on to reach that. For some people easier, for some people harder. But once again, I don't see what magical born talent you need to have.

What I think separate the wheat from the chaff, is how you practice things. If you only play and don't try to correct, then you will get stuck and see it impossible to reach your goals. Deep practice is where talent is born (mostly) and that is achieved by constantly failing and correcting. That is how myelin is built, which is the substance where skills are created and therefore talent. That is science. That is why some people seem to be succeding in everything and why some people aren't in anything. It's not that some people are magically talented in everything. It's about how they approach and practice things.

If you actually start believing in yourself and stop excusing everything you don't achieve on talent, you will be amazed with how much you can improve your weaknesses.

I'm of the opposite conclusion that the higher level you get in a field, the more you understand that talent doesn't play as big role as you think. But it's good that we both can agree upon that aslong as you enjoy your life, game and are generally happy, everything is good.

Cheers

Very interesting mate. I'm a working musician myself (jazz) and for your music part, I can't agree with you more! I only used music as an example as a lot of people overrate talent in music. In saying that, I think a lot of people also underrate talent in sports (e-sports included). We often talk about how an athlete/progamer spends many hours training hard, but with music we talk too often about how talented someone is. So yeah, sorry to be contradicting to myself lol.

My students say one of the most used phrase by me is "talent is overrated". I did see an odd student here or there that are tone deaf, or rhythm deaf (I use this to explain someone who has 0 sense of rhythm.. I've seen a very few), but most students, with practice, I believe can get to quite a high level. The difference maker is the motivation and perspiration.

My personal opinion about what talent is in music - how early you are exposed to it and the kind of music.

Now onto gaming though, I actually think gaming requires more talent than music. Or sports in general. For example, coming into this world with Lebron James' body or Westbrook's athleticism (I'm Westbrook fanboy.. but not a good time to be (() in my opinion is talent. Of course you have to put in lots of work to maintain and use this talent well, but you have a massive advantage already. With esports, I think the biggest one is "mind-gaming". A little less with AOE2 as build order counters are not as hard counters as some other RTS games (mainly the Starcraft series), but this is a huge one. Civ drafting would be part of this. Something that can relate heavily to this is poker. I'm guessing no one would argue with me that playing poker at a top level requires a very specific talent. Calculating odds, reading people, etc. This is very similar to gaming at top level and is evident through the amount of progamers becoming successful in poker. There are other "talents" such as reaction speed, or decision making, but this may also be a factor of age, or how early you started to work on these factors.

I definitely think people underrate talent in esports and sports. Being a 2k player myself (probably 19xx as I only hit 2k once, but it's nice to call myself a 2k player lol), when I watch the pros play I think to myself "okay I can NEVER get to where they are". Most of these situations are where they show creativity, patience, and decision making skills. Quick walling, microing xbows/mangos, dodging arrows etc are very cool to watch, but is not what I feel where talent is shown.

But to your point about music, I definitely think talent is overrated!

When you said "If you actually start believing in yourself and stop excusing everything you don't achieve on talent, you will be amazed with how much you can improve your weaknesses.", yes there's truth to that. But I can also say that "not having enough time" is also an excuse. A disrespectful one to the ones who has the motivation to spend their time into what they love. Also, I've seen countless times where a person who clearly doesn't have talent in a field they want to go for struggles with their life as they did not see the reality soon enough. Sometimes you have to face the reality. Everyone can do and become everything is not true at all! The people who know me irl would be surprised that I just said this because they all know I'm a very progressive person, but we need to make sure we don't lie to ourselves. The problem with what I said though is that some people may give up too quickly and use the excuse of talent too quickly so I get why you said that in the first place.

Anyone with too much time in his hands can reach 2k, it is a matter of efficient practise .

This post on the other hand, is a perfect example of an arrogant and disrespectful mindset (unless he is trolling.. I'm sorry!). How many times have we seen a player accuse you when you beat them saying something along the line of "you need to get out more", "you play too much", "you a virgin" etc etc and how pathetic is that?

 

[TheCapybara]

I think a lot of the debate emerging here is mostly around people using 'talent' to refer to a few different phenomena. For instance, it's hard to imagine that anybody could just walk up to a PC for the first time, load up AoE2 having never played a video game in their life and then instinctively know how to make the game work for them in a coherent, smooth way.

When we talk about somebody having 'talent' for games, what that probably means is they're already (likely subconsciously) applying knowledge/skills they already have. For example, someone might be a good typist, which will doubtless make learning hotkeys and utilising them easier since they are confident on a keyboard. Same as when someone has played football and then tries another sport (e.g. hockey), there will be aspects like the spatial awareness which they've developed which can transfer and give them a big boost, which could be construed as 'talent' for this new sport they've never played before.

Essentially, 'talent' is just a codeword which covers a whole range of characteristics, such as experience, skill, knowledge, as well as things like genetic aspects which might favour people trying their hand at something (e.g. quick eyes). Many of these genetic traits can then be enhanced through targeted (or even general) training, such as improving multitasking ability, speed, stamina etc. But I am a firm believer that 'talent', when used to mean natural aptitude or ability for something, is often overplayed because it's a more convenient explanation than delving in-depth into reasoning based on people's prior experience and skillsets.

 

[ponciliano]

What does talent actually mean?

Latent, that are often genetic, capabilities of performing certain activities. Some people are naturally faster to process some informations, stronger etc. than others. And that applies to cognitive fields as well. Also people seem to have a natural inclination to perform some things. If you really enjoy math, your 8h of consecutive studying will almost always be more productive than somebody else's 8h of consecutive math studies. And also you'll willingly do it more frequently, with more associated positive emotions. So, those people will be more "talented" at math than others, even though the latter also put a lot of effort in it, and perform considerably better in general.

Well, I think this kinda explains "talent" well.

 

[Rayne]

Essentially, 'talent' is just a codeword which covers a whole range of characteristics, such as experience, skill, knowledge, as well as things like genetic aspects which might favour people trying their hand at something (e.g. quick eyes). Many of these genetic traits can then be enhanced through targeted (or even general) training, such as improving multitasking ability, speed, stamina etc. But I am a firm believer that 'talent', when used to mean natural aptitude or ability for something, is often overplayed because it's a more convenient explanation than delving in-depth into reasoning based on people's prior experience and skillsets.

I agree with this a lot. Not trying to sound disrespectful to anyone, but talent as a reason for why some are better than others is much like a 4Head answer. That’s why I always try to distance myself from it as much as I can, and prefer deeper answers to the why.

I actually wonder about the genetic side of things and how far it goes with “talent.” I thought of studying some genetic fields years ago, but haven’t gotten around to it. Neurology actually explains a lot on talent in general, but it is a hard subject to handle emotionally. I even came across one thing related to musicians (seeing as there’s 3 here), and it was fascinating but a little creepy.

 

[MaSmOrRa]

Very interesting mate. I'm a working musician myself (jazz) and for your music part, I can't agree with you more! I only used music as an example as a lot of people overrate talent in music. In saying that, I think a lot of people also underrate talent in sports (e-sports included). We often talk about how an athlete/progamer spends many hours training hard, but with music we talk too often about how talented someone is. So yeah, sorry to be contradicting to myself lol.

My students say one of the most used phrase by me is "talent is overrated". I did see an odd student here or there that are tone deaf, or rhythm deaf (I use this to explain someone who has 0 sense of rhythm.. I've seen a very few), but most students, with practice, I believe can get to quite a high level. The difference maker is the motivation and perspiration.

My personal opinion about what talent is in music - how early you are exposed to it and the kind of music.

Now onto gaming though, I actually think gaming requires more talent than music. Or sports in general. For example, coming into this world with Lebron James' body or Westbrook's athleticism (I'm Westbrook fanboy.. but not a good time to be (() in my opinion is talent. Of course you have to put in lots of work to maintain and use this talent well, but you have a massive advantage already. With esports, I think the biggest one is "mind-gaming". A little less with AOE2 as build order counters are not as hard counters as some other RTS games (mainly the Starcraft series), but this is a huge one. Civ drafting would be part of this. Something that can relate heavily to this is poker. I'm guessing no one would argue with me that playing poker at a top level requires a very specific talent. Calculating odds, reading people, etc. This is very similar to gaming at top level and is evident through the amount of progamers becoming successful in poker. There are other "talents" such as reaction speed, or decision making, but this may also be a factor of age, or how early you started to work on these factors.

I definitely think people underrate talent in esports and sports. Being a 2k player myself (probably 19xx as I only hit 2k once, but it's nice to call myself a 2k player lol), when I watch the pros play I think to myself "okay I can NEVER get to where they are". Most of these situations are where they show creativity, patience, and decision making skills. Quick walling, microing xbows/mangos, dodging arrows etc are very cool to watch, but is not what I feel where talent is shown.

But to your point about music, I definitely think talent is overrated!

When you said "If you actually start believing in yourself and stop excusing everything you don't achieve on talent, you will be amazed with how much you can improve your weaknesses.", yes there's truth to that. But I can also say that "not having enough time" is also an excuse. A disrespectful one to the ones who has the motivation to spend their time into what they love. Also, I've seen countless times where a person who clearly doesn't have talent in a field they want to go for struggles with their life as they did not see the reality soon enough. Sometimes you have to face the reality. Everyone can do and become everything is not true at all! The people who know me irl would be surprised that I just said this because they all know I'm a very progressive person, but we need to make sure we don't lie to ourselves. The problem with what I said though is that some people may give up too quickly and use the excuse of talent too quickly so I get why you said that in the first place.



This post on the other hand, is a perfect example of an arrogant and disrespectful mindset (unless he is trolling.. I'm sorry!). How many times have we seen a player accuse you when you beat them saying something along the line of "you need to get out more", "you play too much", "you a virgin" etc etc and how pathetic is that?

Seems like you are agreeing with us here, the topic is about being able to reach "2k" (which in this context should be understood as being very very good, but not at the very top), not about being able to become the best player in the world.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember Bill Evans saying something along the lines of "I'm the least talented musician I've ever seen. Everything I accomplished in music I did so through hard work and hard work alone."
Surely an exaggeration but interesting nevertheless! :D

Essentially, 'talent' is just a codeword which covers a whole range of characteristics, such as experience, skill, knowledge, as well as things like genetic aspects which might favour people trying their hand at something (e.g. quick eyes).

I'll add to this something else I've seen in a lot of "talented" kids: that ultimate drive and will to become better, no matter the circumstances.

The capacity to still wake up and practice 7-8 hours a day even when you're totally not feeling like doing it and every single cell in your body is screaming "stay in bed!".

That for me personally is also a big part of being talented.

 

[Rayne]

It’s interesting to see some responses attached to talent. Seen some of them before too.

Is being seriously driven a talent? Is being too stubborn to accept anything less than a goal one as well? An ability to grind things out endlessly? A certain mindset? There’s nothing magical per se about any of these things, more just achievable skills no? There’s also nothing innate to any of these things too.

 

[JazBas]

Seems like you are agreeing with us here, the topic is about being able to reach "2k" (which in this context should be understood as being very very good, but not at the very top), not about being able to become the best player in the world.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember Bill Evans saying something along the lines of "I'm the least talented musician I've ever seen. Everything I accomplished in music I did so through hard work and hard work alone."
Surely an exaggeration but interesting nevertheless! :D



I'll add to this something else I've seen in a lot of "talented" kids: that ultimate drive and will to become better, no matter the circumstances.

The capacity to still wake up and practice 7-8 hours a day even when you're totally not feeling like doing it and every single cell in your body is screaming "stay in bed!".

That for me personally is also a big part of being talented.

I'm not sure if you've read everything I said. I totally agree with talent playing part in music. Very overrated. You do get the odd ones on each side of the extreme (extremely talented, "genius", or extremely hopeless, e.g. tone/rhythm deaf), but with gaming, I think it's underrated. The problem here is this idea leading to some arrogant people thinking that the only, or one of the big reason some people are 2k+ is because they have the time to do so. This is proven wrong by many players in two ways - some people not getting even close 2k with years of playing, and some getting there with minimal games. There's definitely lots of talent involved and some people just doesn't have it. 2k may not seem that much of a high ELO, but it is top 0.06% (according to someone else) for a reason. Many and most players won't be able to make it because they are not "talented enough". For some, it actually may be that they don't have enough time, but for most, it's talent. Now the talent referred here can mean many things like the learning attitude. I've explained this part further on the last paragraph.

Shades posted how if he can reach 2250 with his conditions, anyone can. You can put this in reverse. How talented is he that with his disadvantages he still managed to reach 2250?

Something I very much agree with is your last paragraph though. I always thought the word talent doesn't only apply to natural and genetically given skillset, but things like being able to motivate and grind is a huge part to it. T
I know there are other words to describe this trait in a person but to me, like you, I think this is also a talent

 

[sheeesh]

Top pros adopt LELs and have a month to prepare them for a tournament with 2ks 11
Get Adam Sandler in this too somehow