You think the average person is capable of Olympic feats simply with training and dedication?
Here's a reasonable example: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetorch/2018/02/20/587356461/h...
It didn’t work for Dan McLaughlin when he tried to go from nothing to pro in golf.
https://www.archery360.com/2017/05/26/celeb-world-class-arch...
- Liz Swaney, the woman who may have singlehandedly gotten the Olympic Committee to add a minimum acceptable skill level qualification (TBD) [0]
- Did you happen to catch any of the men's curling in PyeongChang? [1]
- And who could forget the inspiration behind _Cool Runnings_? [2]
[0]https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/19/elizabeth-swaney-olym...
If we make a more modest criterion like "be within x% of the victor" or more interestingly "beat the records from an older olympics", then it gets more doable. Look at how many people can run a four minute mile now, for example.
> simply with training and dedication
The training is expensive and takes over your entire life, and the dedication required is really the thing people empathise with Olympic athletes for. In some sense the real achievement is not giving up.
So, I think the OPs point was, if you could compare one individual with themselves they would perform/grow better in an environment with more performing peers.
I would add, not everyone with the “raw talent” can deal with the stress and pressure of competitive environments the same way.
It's obvious when you look at people and conclude from, say, physical stature, that a person is exceedingly unlikely to succeed as a professional linebacker. But somehow we do not even allow for the possibility of our cognitive limits being set by a combination of our genes and our experiences.