Two Scoops wrote:Well, this is just my opinion. I'm okay if no one agrees with me, but in an attempt to clarify my point:
When I say "trainable" I'm talking about being able to increase a capacity, or raising a threshold. Strength and endurance, for example, are highly trainable. Take a weak person and put him on a good strength training program and they will gradually increase their strength threshold, i.e., he will get stronger in the specific training movements and this will transfer over into every day activities. (I also argue that strength is a skill in itself that must be practiced, but that's a whole other conversation.) Likewise, take a couch potato and have him run hill sprints a few times a week and cardiovascular endurance will improve, there will be carryover into other real world activities, and his endurance threshold will rise, not indefinitely of course, but it will rise substantially in any untrained person.
Balance is more like handedness. If you're ambidextrous, you're gifted. Most of us are right or lefty, and that's pretty much it. You can't train your way into being lefty if your righty. You can practice a whole set of movements and skills, and improve your dexterity with your off hand, but you're not going to raise the threshold of your handedness.
My central point in the last post was that I don't see the value in spending a lot of time or energy on training balance since the benefits are realized very quickly. Train balance to the point you demonstrate competency in the movements you're interested in and then do occasional maintenance to preserve the competency. Spend the other time training things that can actually improve, or are more susceptible to erosion, like strength, endurance and flexibility.
A final point, athletes with superb balance do spend a lot of time "training" balance, but it is more accurately described as practicing balance. They are completive in sports that require balance because they had good balance to start with, and they are honing that balance in practice. They did not develop that balance with drills, etc. I'm reminded of how many people, coaches even, will make the argument about the value of sprinting on body composition by saying, "Look at an elite sprinter's body, then look at an elite marathoner's body, which body do you want... the sprinter's?... then sprint!" I say "bull pucky." Elite sprinters are elite sprinters because they have a lot of fast twitch muscle which is good for sprinting, and which is why they look the way they do. Their bodies chose their sport, their sport did not choose their body.
Your point regarding "handedness" is pretty much false. It takes dedication and years of proper training but becoming as strong with one hand as the other is definitely possible. Few elite basketball players, for example, go into their teen years ambidextrous. It is at that age that coaches will begin harping on the idea of using their weak hand for everything. Eating, brushing their teeth, etc. - All of the little things. You can train yourself to become dexterous with your off hand. It simply gets harder as you get older, like any other athletic endeavor and many intellectual ones.
Frankly - the same goes for balance. Especially the balance needed to be a properly coordinated athlete. With regards to your upper limits (for example: being able to scale a cable-car wire to the top of a mountain) there are obviously some people that are going to be more naturally gifted than others. But teaching proper balance with regards to disc golf competition? It is something that can be learned and improved upon fairly constantly over time. Mark has commented on my balance in the past, years ago, and I can honestly tell you I went through high school as a clutz. The balance I have on my feet, the ability to stay within myself and throw coordinated disc golf shots comes entirely from training and practice.
You start with strength, and from strength comes coordination and balance. Most people don't understand that you need to start by building strength in order to build balance. They do silly little balance exercises that don't really help anything on their own - but if they took the time to work on a set of simple body-weight calisthenics they'd find that they are capable of far more than they believed.
As for the sprinter's body vs the distance runner's body... When I was a frosh in college I was 5'10 and 135 - and very much looked the part of the distance runner that I was running the 10,000M in track. I'm 5'10 and 165, and it isn't fat I've put on. Nor is it bulky muscle. It is all lean muscle. I look more like one of those compact sprinters than I do a distance runner these days, even if I can still pump out miles. But right now I'd find it far easier achieving the varsity 100M standard from my HS days than the varsity 1600M standard, that's for damn sure.