Well I've taken way more punches in Krav than I've taken in even boxing. In our Krav club we spar every week in Mma gloves and go pretty hard at times and against multiple opponents, when we grapple we have Mma gloves on and the guy on the bottom is punching us trying to stop us doing the technique and we work hard on ground and pound. So Krav Maga does do hard sparring and contact. Maybe not all places do but ours certainly does
I think to some extent it's the same effect psychology studies found with kids who were praised for being smart. They tended to work less hard at tasks they might fail at, giving up rather than failing, presumably because it challenged their view of themselves as smart. Replace "smart" with "talented" and the mental task with a sport, and you would get the same effect.
well you cant instal talent by training someone, it must have always been there !
and telling kids they are stupid ( or hopeless at sport), means they have a habit of believing you.
well sort of, most people can get better at most things, with dedication, but there is a genetic limit on how far that can work, they can only be so fast or so strong. yes you can win fights just on aggression, until you run in to a more talented fighter who is equally aggressive, then your sat on your bum.
What you're saying is that hard work doesn't overcome hard work and talent/genetics. But that wasn't the OP's question.
Which of the three styles you are training interests you the most? Or you could ask which one seems to come the easiest to you. In the grand scheme of things, 8 months is not very long for one style, let alone 3. Starting you MA journey by mashing 3 three styles together may not be the best utilization of your time. It is entirely possible the systems could conflict with each other, especially considering you are just getting started. Find a base to build your skills on. Get proficient in one style then I think you will find your training curve will accelerate.
You seem to have some difficulty comprehending some of the posts.
no you said they had NO natural talent , now you've introduced an undefined term of " gifted "
that's very much the question in the thread title .?
I tend to agree with this...unless they are all taught at the same facility. MMA gyms, for instance, do a good job of teaching multiple styles at the same time. I'm pretty much okay with someone starting two styles at once (it slows the start, but I think they make up that time a year or two later, and probably move a bit faster), but three separate styles seems a heavy load.
That all depends how you define talent.
No, it asks if hard work can make up for a lack of talent. It doesn't make a comparison to hard work PLUS lack of talent.
Talent; natural skill or abilities. The natural endowments or skills of a person.
no you said they had no natural talent, that's twice iv3 had to tell you what you clearly posted. so where did the talent they later had as " good fighters" come from, ?
what ? now your rambling
I'm pretty sure he's suggesting anyone who succeeds at a competitive level must have talent. Which is bollocks, but convenient for him because then none of us can give him an example that he would accept as refuting him. Either they haven't proven they can beat the talented, or they actually were talented you just failed to notice.
