Originally Posted by
HardyWeinberg
Interesting series of articles on the role of genetics in tippety-top tier athletes (athletes competing at their physiological limits vs comparing skills):
http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011...and-genes.html
There is a reductionist approach where 'everything' is accounted for and the only variable left is genetics maybe I am getting more reductionist as I get older and don't have time to take every single assumption apart but it seems compelling to me.
Fascinating read. I'm not sure his diversion into chess helped his theme though. Just about anyone with basic aptitude can reach the expert level in Chess, and to become really good you almost have to start at a very early age. Like gymnastics in that respect. And then you have to enjoy a high level of competition in the formative years. There are only a few exceptions, and even the great natural player Capablanca followed this pattern.
I played in an Open tournament many years ago with one of the Polgar sisters mentioned in the article and I had the opportunity to observe her briefly. I didn't get the chance to play her unfortunately - she was winning and I was treading water way down the ranks - but I could see that she was zoned. Everyone does that, but this girl was
gone. It was almost scary. I think that that level of concentration is a result of training, 100%, and so it doesn't advance the author's argument. Not to take away from the Polgar sisters' natural gifts, but he missed the mark there.