The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged

[RED-DOG]

Wanting to be successful is also the product of a privileged environment.

We tend to want what our peers want.

[DaveShoelace]

Isn't this the old Nature vs Nurture question?

For me, no. This is about do you have enough control in your life to steer it in the direction you want, or is it mostly predetermined for you (by your upbringing OR your genetics).

[rfgqqabc]

People who are successful don't recognise the huge amount of luck involved in getting to where they are today.

They tend to think they are talented and hard working.

Thinking every successful person is lucky seems a bit of a comfort blanket to me.

Most successful people do work hard and are smart to get where they are.  And many appreciate when they have been given advantages and "run good" as it were.

Generally when people go from ordinary to extraordinary it will involve an atypical amount of luck though. Think about Bill Gates going to school somewhere where the parents could afford to give the school a computer. (Outliers section paraphrased)

I'm not sure why hard working and "talented" people cannot also be lucky.

For people who believe in talent, and when I say this, I don't mean, Fredrick plays seventeen instruments so he is musically talented, I mean, that 3 year old just picked up a brush and painted the Mona Lisa talented. Do people that believes in these sorts of "gifts" or whatever you would describe them as go around testing different things, or do they think they aren't talented? I was talking with a friend about the possibility of being musically gifted but never finding out. What about footballers who are "naturally talented"? Are they lucky? Coincidental hard workers?

I used to think I was "gifted" at maths. It turned out as soon as I stopped practicing then I wasn't very gifted all of a sudden.

[DaveShoelace]

People who are successful don't recognise the huge amount of luck involved in getting to where they are today.

They tend to think they are talented and hard working.

Thinking every successful person is lucky seems a bit of a comfort blanket to me.

Most successful people do work hard and are smart to get where they are.  And many appreciate when they have been given advantages and "run good" as it were.

Generally when people go from ordinary to extraordinary it will involve an atypical amount of luck though. Think about Bill Gates going to school somewhere where the parents could afford to give the school a computer. (Outliers section paraphrased)

I'm not sure why hard working and "talented" people cannot also be lucky.

For people who believe in talent, and when I say this, I don't mean, Fredrick plays seventeen instruments so he is musically talented, I mean, that 3 year old just picked up a brush and painted the Mona Lisa talented. Do people that believes in these sorts of "gifts" or whatever you would describe them as go around testing different things, or do they think they aren't talented? I was talking with a friend about the possibility of being musically gifted but never finding out. What about footballers who are "naturally talented"? Are they lucky? Coincidental hard workers?

I used to think I was "gifted" at maths. It turned out as soon as I stopped practicing then I wasn't very gifted all of a sudden.

I think about the bolded all the time. Somewhere in the world there is probably someone who has the potential to run under 9 seconds in the 100m, but for whatever reason never gets a chance to discover their talent to then work on it.

My view on talent is that when you look at the elite performers in almost any craft, you are looking at the people who started with good fortune, but then grabbed the bull by the horns and worked their asses off.

Bill Gates for example, it's true he lived within earshot of one of the first computers, but he also spent every waking moment in the computer room. Everyone thinks Tiger Woods is a natural talent, but he had put thousands of hours in of practice before he was ten.

Meanwhile, we all know someone who showed natural talent and had trials for a big football team when they were a kid, but didn't do anything with that opportunity and now have a regular job.

Everyone has some sort of unfair advantage in life, not everyone does something with it.

[The Camel]

People who are successful don't recognise the huge amount of luck involved in getting to where they are today.

They tend to think they are talented and hard working.

Thinking every successful person is lucky seems a bit of a comfort blanket to me.

Most successful people do work hard and are smart to get where they are.  And many appreciate when they have been given advantages and "run good" as it were.

Generally when people go from ordinary to extraordinary it will involve an atypical amount of luck though. Think about Bill Gates going to school somewhere where the parents could afford to give the school a computer. (Outliers section paraphrased)

I'm not sure why hard working and "talented" people cannot also be lucky.

For people who believe in talent, and when I say this, I don't mean, Fredrick plays seventeen instruments so he is musically talented, I mean, that 3 year old just picked up a brush and painted the Mona Lisa talented. Do people that believes in these sorts of "gifts" or whatever you would describe them as go around testing different things, or do they think they aren't talented? I was talking with a friend about the possibility of being musically gifted but never finding out. What about footballers who are "naturally talented"? Are they lucky? Coincidental hard workers?

I used to think I was "gifted" at maths. It turned out as soon as I stopped practicing then I wasn't very gifted all of a sudden.

It is often said Alex Ferguson is the best football manager in the history of the sport. It is also said if they had lost that cup tie at Oxford he would have been fired.

So, Mark Robbins stubs his toe or the Oxford keeper makes a fantastic save, Fergie never wins a single trophy at United.

He still possesses all the attributes that made him so successful, but wouldn't be seen as the best manager in football history.

The difference? Pure luck.

[DaveShoelace]

People who are successful don't recognise the huge amount of luck involved in getting to where they are today.

They tend to think they are talented and hard working.

Thinking every successful person is lucky seems a bit of a comfort blanket to me.

Most successful people do work hard and are smart to get where they are.  And many appreciate when they have been given advantages and "run good" as it were.

Generally when people go from ordinary to extraordinary it will involve an atypical amount of luck though. Think about Bill Gates going to school somewhere where the parents could afford to give the school a computer. (Outliers section paraphrased)

I'm not sure why hard working and "talented" people cannot also be lucky.

For people who believe in talent, and when I say this, I don't mean, Fredrick plays seventeen instruments so he is musically talented, I mean, that 3 year old just picked up a brush and painted the Mona Lisa talented. Do people that believes in these sorts of "gifts" or whatever you would describe them as go around testing different things, or do they think they aren't talented? I was talking with a friend about the possibility of being musically gifted but never finding out. What about footballers who are "naturally talented"? Are they lucky? Coincidental hard workers?

I used to think I was "gifted" at maths. It turned out as soon as I stopped practicing then I wasn't very gifted all of a sudden.

It is often said Alex Ferguson is the best football manager in the history of the sport. It is also said if they had lost that cup tie at Oxford he would have been fired.

So, Mark Robbins stubs his toe or the Oxford keeper makes a fantastic save, Fergie never wins a single trophy at United.

He still possesses all the attributes that made him so successful, but wouldn't be seen as the best manager in football history.

The difference? Pure luck.

What's to say that he wouldn't have joined another team and been equally, or more so, successful? Or indeed that perhaps he might have been even more successful had he not had a few unlucky breaks in some of the seasons Man U didn't win a title?

Plus he actually won the match, which I presume had some element of skill to it.

I don't really consider the above example as a good one about someone being lucky. Now if Fergie had got his start in management because his uncle was on the board of a club, that I would rank more in the lucky side of things.

Like Formula One for example, if you have any involvement in that at all you are probably very very lucky, as it's not a sport most people can open doors to even get a chance at trying.

[bobAlike]

Why was it luck that United beat Oxford? Should Oxford have won? I don't get this way of thinking at all.

Why do you need to be very very lucky to be in F1? Surely you need driving skills and access to lots of money, is that luck? This has more relevance to the original question you posed.

[DaveShoelace]

Why was it luck that United beat Oxford? Should Oxford have won? I don't get this way of thinking at all.

Why do you need to be very very lucky to be in F1? Surely you need driving skills and access to lots of money, is that luck? This has more relevance to the original question you posed.

Yes, that is exactly luck.

If you participate in F1, you had access to money early in your life, so you could start young. In theory someone from a humble background could earn a small fortune to get started, but you most likely would be in your 30s by the time you get behind the wheel.

Meanwhile, though not without luck in many forms, a young kid can show promise in football and turn it into a career from any background.

[The Camel]

Why was it luck that United beat Oxford? Should Oxford have won? I don't get this way of thinking at all.

Why do you need to be very very lucky to be in F1? Surely you need driving skills and access to lots of money, is that luck? This has more relevance to the original question you posed.

One game, which they were presumably about evens to win. If you don't think there is a massive amount of luck involved in who wins, you don't understand variance.

50% chance Fergie never has the career he did.

Of course he would never admit he was lucky. Successful people rarely do.

[RED-DOG]

Isn't this the old Nature vs Nurture question?

For me, no. This is about do you have enough control in your life to steer it in the direction you want, or is it mostly predetermined for you (by your upbringing OR your genetics).

Sorry to sound dense Baz, but if we take away upbringing and genetics, what's left?

[arbboy]

Why was it luck that United beat Oxford? Should Oxford have won? I don't get this way of thinking at all.

Why do you need to be very very lucky to be in F1? Surely you need driving skills and access to lots of money, is that luck? This has more relevance to the original question you posed.

One game, which they were presumably about evens to win. If you don't think there is a massive amount of luck involved in who wins, you don't understand variance.

50% chance Fergie never has the career he did.

Of course he would never admit he was lucky. Successful people rarely do.

Huge amount of luck involved imo.  Agree with camel here.  Sport is so results orientated.  When did a football manager ever get sacked for having a team that was miles ahead of their EV curve and just having good results due to short term variance?  Never.  Dozens of managers get sacked every season because short term variance went against them over a lol tiny sample size though which is the flip side of the coin.

Short term variance allows managers to get bigger jobs than their talent would allow for quite often as well because chairmen are so results orientated.  Brentford getting rid of their manager after a successful season by a stats based owner was the only example i can think of a club getting rid of a successful manager.

[George2Loose]

Nigel Adkins springs to mind too at Southampton.

Alan curbs at charlton, Gary megson at Bolton and Sam allardyce st Blackburn. Wp all 3

[Woodsey]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

[bobAlike]

Why was it luck that United beat Oxford? Should Oxford have won? I don't get this way of thinking at all.

Why do you need to be very very lucky to be in F1? Surely you need driving skills and access to lots of money, is that luck? This has more relevance to the original question you posed.

One game, which they were presumably about evens to win. If you don't think there is a massive amount of luck involved in who wins, you don't understand variance.

50% chance Fergie never has the career he did.

Of course he would never admit he was lucky. Successful people rarely do.

Does preparation come in to it? How far are you taking this theory on luck back? If that sperm never made its way......

[arbboy]

Meh, sports is a poor example, real life in the long run is a better measure.

It is the same.  It is a business.  People have lucky short term breaks in sales jobs and other careers which make them seem better than they are to results driven/short term thinking senior management which gives the employee a chance of promotion to kick onto a higher level through success which is quite often just luck based.