General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Natural ability? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 1
 
 
2015-05-13 8:54 AM


439
10010010010025
nashville, Tennessee
Subject: Natural ability?
I posted a few months ago about somebody I know who signed up for an IM with about 5-6 months to train and was almost starting from scratch. He had ran a half marathon in January at about 9:40 pace and had not been training for it. Wasn't biking at all. We all agreed that he was maybe biting off more than he could chew. Well it turns out not. He trains with a couple more experienced guys and within the first couple of months he was already biking 50 miles. He's up to running 13-14 miles at sub 8 min paces and biking 22 mph for 25+ miles. He started training the end of Feb and race is late summer. He has already done an 80 mi bike. Most people take a few months to build up to those distances and even then its fairly slow. So, not only will he be able to complete the IM but looks like he will do it fairly fast. Would you say this is a rare exception? Do some people just have a natural ability in this sport. One of the guys he trains with also went from bottom of pack to top 5% in most races in a matter of a less than a year. Thoughts?


2015-05-13 9:13 AM
in reply to: mchadcota2

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

Originally posted by mchadcota2  Would you say this is a rare exception? 

It sounds like you may be thinking it already, but yes, you have your answer to this in the responses from the other thread.

2015-05-13 9:21 AM
in reply to: mchadcota2


1660
10005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

Pretty much all the people who are in the elites/pros were dominating amateur races literally from the get-go, with less than a few months of training, or getting extremely good results in the amateur results with half-baked training plans and efforts.

 

A 15 min 5k runner is like an 18-minute 5k runner in a near-untrained state. Sounds hard to believe, but there are a few on the pointy end of the curve who are like that. I was horrified to see a friend of mine in school who at age 29, with zero sports background, a stocky rugby-like build, and only running about 6 miles TOTAL per week, 1-2 miles at a time at 13-15 min/mile pace recreationally with his wife, entered the school 5k, decided to actually go hard, and finished in 17:30. I recall asking him how his first race went, and he said "Wow that hurt! How bad is 17:30 compared to someone who trains for these things?" Yep, my jaw dropped, because I was expecting to hear 27:30, but sure enough, it was 17:30, and he backed it up with even faster times in the future (despite never seriously getting into running, even to this day.)

2015-05-13 9:39 AM
in reply to: #5115029


439
10010010010025
nashville, Tennessee
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Wow! Amazing to me how that happens. I can see other sports and things coming natural to people but endurance racing you would think just comes down to building fitness not just natural talent. But apparently it's no different
2015-05-13 11:27 AM
in reply to: 0


701
500100100
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
I don't have much belief in natural ability. I'm a musician and we discuss this a ton. In music, I'm a firm believer in the outliers theories. It's all about focusing on technique, repetition of technique and constant evaluation of the pieces and parts that make up a given delivery of a piece of music.

That being said, I think there are body types/dimensions that are suited to certain athletic pursuits. From what I've read, center of gravity has a lot to do with it. Where that is on a particular body for a given application. There's been some study on this in music as well, (finger lengths....relative lengths between fingers that sort of thing). Some of it's inconclusive, or easily overcome by other effort. Not sure that's as easily done when running/swimming/cycling is awfully dependent on unalterable physiological aspects.

That being said, in athletic pursuits, I think there are people who can wrap their brains around some things better than others. Some people can ignore the pain/discomfort better than others and simply push to higher performance. I don't think they're born with it. They just learned it somewhere along the way. They also learned how to train their body more effectively than others. That's how they can progress so quickly.

Some people have a lucky combination of having learned the mental side of it, have the right body configuration, and learned what they needed to learn about their body.

One of the other Outlier's theories is access to instruction.
"One of the guys he trains with also went from bottom of pack to top 5% in most races in a matter of a less than a year. "
Sounds like there may be some solid instruction/understanding that your friend has access to within this group. Even if they're not explicitly instructing, by joining in with them he's capitalizing on their experience.

Again, that all being said, learning or forming the brain to embrace all the mental requirements of pushing hard, learning from instruction, learning from your own body is either a skill or something else. It's possible that could be natural in the form of "luck" in the way someone's synapses lined up in the womb. Or it could be completely learned behavior.

Chess Grandmaster Susan Polgar's father set out to make her a topnotch chess player. And she is. So's her sister and now her kids. Could be genetic. Could be learned. Statistically, I'm going with "learned".


PS....
I'm totally fascinated by the concept. My thoughts on this move. Used to be a huge believer that some people were born to do some things. Then I swung violently the other way. Now, though....I will admit to some doubts and am leaving some wiggle room in terms of the mental aspect of it. There could be some synaptical/chemical/brainy-wainy things that are prescribed at conception that have an impact. Lots of things can happen within the womb too (influx of chemicals/nutrients/hormones) that can impact the brain/body. But is that "natural"? If it can be controlled...no....or maybe yes? Like I said, I'm fascinated by it. If I went back in time, I would be someone who studies physiology/neurology and it's impact on ability.


Or I'd be a wedding planner, but that's a whole 'nother story.

Edited by jhaack39 2015-05-13 11:35 AM
2015-05-13 11:53 AM
in reply to: #5115029


1660
10005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Despite the reality of genetics being huge for top performance, in age group triathlon its almost all about hard work and not talent.

You can typically ag podium on hard work alone.

But to run with the elites or world class athletes, forget about it if you are not born with gifts.


2015-05-13 12:17 PM
in reply to: yazmaster

Veteran
458
1001001001002525
Minnesota
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by yazmaster

Despite the reality of genetics being huge for top performance, in age group triathlon its almost all about hard work and not talent.

You can typically ag podium on hard work alone.

But to run with the elites or world class athletes, forget about it if you are not born with gifts.



The age group thing is not the case in any of the triathlons I have done, at least not in the 25-50 age groups.
2015-05-13 12:39 PM
in reply to: jhaack39

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

Originally posted by jhaack39 I don't have much belief in natural ability. I'm a musician and we discuss this a ton. In music, I'm a firm believer in the outliers theories. It's all about focusing on technique, repetition of technique and constant evaluation of the pieces and parts that make up a given delivery of a piece of music. That being said, I think there are body types/dimensions that are suited to certain athletic pursuits. From what I've read, center of gravity has a lot to do with it. Where that is on a particular body for a given application. There's been some study on this in music as well, (finger lengths....relative lengths between fingers that sort of thing). Some of it's inconclusive, or easily overcome by other effort. Not sure that's as easily done when running/swimming/cycling is awfully dependent on unalterable physiological aspects. That being said, in athletic pursuits, I think there are people who can wrap their brains around some things better than others. Some people can ignore the pain/discomfort better than others and simply push to higher performance. I don't think they're born with it. They just learned it somewhere along the way. They also learned how to train their body more effectively than others. That's how they can progress so quickly. Some people have a lucky combination of having learned the mental side of it, have the right body configuration, and learned what they needed to learn about their body. One of the other Outlier's theories is access to instruction. "One of the guys he trains with also went from bottom of pack to top 5% in most races in a matter of a less than a year. " Sounds like there may be some solid instruction/understanding that your friend has access to within this group. Even if they're not explicitly instructing, by joining in with them he's capitalizing on their experience. Again, that all being said, learning or forming the brain to embrace all the mental requirements of pushing hard, learning from instruction, learning from your own body is either a skill or something else. It's possible that could be natural in the form of "luck" in the way someone's synapses lined up in the womb. Or it could be completely learned behavior. Chess Grandmaster Susan Polgar's father set out to make her a topnotch chess player. And she is. So's her sister and now her kids. Could be genetic. Could be learned. Statistically, I'm going with "learned". PS.... I'm totally fascinated by the concept. My thoughts on this move. Used to be a huge believer that some people were born to do some things. Then I swung violently the other way. Now, though....I will admit to some doubts and am leaving some wiggle room in terms of the mental aspect of it. There could be some synaptical/chemical/brainy-wainy things that are prescribed at conception that have an impact. Lots of things can happen within the womb too (influx of chemicals/nutrients/hormones) that can impact the brain/body. But is that "natural"? If it can be controlled...no....or maybe yes? Like I said, I'm fascinated by it. If I went back in time, I would be someone who studies physiology/neurology and it's impact on ability. Or I'd be a wedding planner, but that's a whole 'nother story.

I believe genetics is monstrously important to be at the top of a sport.  I guess we could argue it all day, but in the end, the folks with the natural gifts will rise to the top.  We are animals, like all animals.  There is a reason race horses are bred like they are, there is a reason field trial dogs are bred like they are.  Are there outliers in people?  MAYBE......but most of them have mental abilities others can't approach....so again. Genetics.

Line up 200 6th graders and have them run a mile.  I'll easily pick out 150 who will NEVER have a chance at being an elite runner.  Give it 3 more years, no work for any of them, have them run it again and I'll throw out another 25.  Now take the last 25 and have them work the same......by the time they are physically grown you might have 1 who stands out and has a CHANCE at it.  Genetics.

There are amazingly physically gifted people among us......99% + of us are not them.  You need to be in order to be a truly elite athlete.  Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.

2015-05-13 2:03 PM
in reply to: jhaack39

User image


928
50010010010010025
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

PS....
I'm totally fascinated by the concept. My thoughts on this move. Used to be a huge believer that some people were born to do some things. Then I swung violently the other way.


Maybe your thoughts shouldn't swing so far to the extremes. Talent and performance will always be a mix of genetics and hard work. You can't get to the top without BOTH.

There are certainly people out there that don't perform to their potential, and with a lot of hard work can compete with the best. But that doesn't mean that ANYONE who starts out from no training and works/practices the same amount will reach the same point.

Our starting point AND our maximum potential are both largely controlled by genetics. How much work we do will determine how close we get to our potential.
2015-05-13 2:18 PM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image


32
25
, England
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
I think natural ability has a significant effect towards overall performance, as does training. I think of natural performance as a roughly normal distribution curve across a population. Training level I think of a highly skewed distribution, with the bulk of people towards sedentary end.

When you put the curves together, you get a moderately skewed population. Because of the skewed nature of the training distribution, it probably gives the impression that training is the overall biggest factor. Training well above the median is therefore relatively easy and delivers relatively big results when.

This probably means that only people to the far right of both training and natural ability curves have a genuine chance of being a top athlete. The good news is; even people on the low end of the natural ability curve can get disproportionately big results, relative to the average person just by doing lots of quality training.

That's my interpretation of it anyway.
2015-05-13 3:10 PM
in reply to: 5Sigma

User image


370
1001001002525
, North Carolina
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Sounds like you need to be training with them.


The pointy end is a tough place to be.

You see it in all of athletics. Some guys can go out and dominate without the work and some guys put in a ton of work just to keep up. I would say the same thing for chess, music, and art.

Some will be good with no work
Some will be good with a lot of work.
Neither will be elite
To be truly elite you have to combine the hard work and natural talent.

Left Brain- I do believe that all of those 6th graders can work and learn to run. But, youre right never will be elite.


2015-05-13 3:15 PM
in reply to: Nick B

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

Originally posted by Nick B  Left Brain- I do believe that all of those 6th graders can work and learn to run.

I agree.

2015-05-13 3:34 PM
in reply to: mchadcota2

User image

Member
1748
100050010010025
Exton, PA
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by mchadcota2

I posted a few months ago about somebody I know who signed up for an IM with about 5-6 months to train and was almost starting from scratch. He had ran a half marathon in January at about 9:40 pace and had not been training for it. Wasn't biking at all. We all agreed that he was maybe biting off more than he could chew. Well it turns out not. He trains with a couple more experienced guys and within the first couple of months he was already biking 50 miles. He's up to running 13-14 miles at sub 8 min paces and biking 22 mph for 25+ miles. He started training the end of Feb and race is late summer. He has already done an 80 mi bike. Most people take a few months to build up to those distances and even then its fairly slow. So, not only will he be able to complete the IM but looks like he will do it fairly fast. Would you say this is a rare exception? Do some people just have a natural ability in this sport. One of the guys he trains with also went from bottom of pack to top 5% in most races in a matter of a less than a year. Thoughts?


What you describe here is not that special, with a good training plan starting in February with a running base. The speed he has is just nothing special. He's running a HM at a 8 minute pace - lots of people can do this.
He's riding at 22mph for 25 miles- again no big deal.

Now if you tell me he is 70 years old, and weigh's 300lbs doing this, I would say he is gifted.
2015-05-13 3:51 PM
in reply to: 0

User image


1502
1000500
Katy, Texas
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by Left Brain
Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.




You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:

Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chess
Run a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess players

For the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.

That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.

Edited by 3mar 2015-05-13 3:53 PM
2015-05-13 4:11 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image


32
25
, England
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by Left Brain
Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.




You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:

Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chess
Run a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess players

For the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.

That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.


Definitely Agree. To be at the top of any fiercely competitive activity requires a mix of both effective training and innate talent.
2015-05-13 4:13 PM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.

You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chessRun a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess playersFor the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.
Yeah, I'll buy that.....I can't play guitar and would only really enjoy chess if the pieces were on fire and shooting at each other. I guess the gifts that allow you to be at the top of those endeavors just aren't as apparent to me.


2015-05-13 7:53 PM
in reply to: Left Brain


1660
10005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

I can pretty much guarantee that I could get you to love chess within a few days or even hours of introducing you to it 'for real'. If you like the competitive aspects of sport (this includes triathlon), competitive chess pretty much captures the psychology of it and a lot more. 

2015-05-13 8:11 PM
in reply to: mike761

Member
587
500252525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by mike761

Originally posted by mchadcota2

I posted a few months ago about somebody I know who signed up for an IM with about 5-6 months to train and was almost starting from scratch. He had ran a half marathon in January at about 9:40 pace and had not been training for it. Wasn't biking at all. We all agreed that he was maybe biting off more than he could chew. Well it turns out not. He trains with a couple more experienced guys and within the first couple of months he was already biking 50 miles. He's up to running 13-14 miles at sub 8 min paces and biking 22 mph for 25+ miles. He started training the end of Feb and race is late summer. He has already done an 80 mi bike. Most people take a few months to build up to those distances and even then its fairly slow. So, not only will he be able to complete the IM but looks like he will do it fairly fast. Would you say this is a rare exception? Do some people just have a natural ability in this sport. One of the guys he trains with also went from bottom of pack to top 5% in most races in a matter of a less than a year. Thoughts?


What you describe here is not that special, with a good training plan starting in February with a running base. The speed he has is just nothing special. He's running a HM at a 8 minute pace - lots of people can do this.
He's riding at 22mph for 25 miles- again no big deal.

Now if you tell me he is 70 years old, and weigh's 300lbs doing this, I would say he is gifted.


While just focusing on the original post & not the discussion of nature v. nurture going on here, I kind of agree of with mike. IMHO, far too many people just plain do not train with the correct intensity. For this guy, he has gone out & done the work, therefore he is reaping the rewards. If he started training in Feb then why should he not be completing an 80 mile bike ride?
2015-05-13 8:26 PM
in reply to: TriJedi

User image

Expert
2373
20001001001002525
Floriduh
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by TriJedi

Originally posted by yazmaster

Despite the reality of genetics being huge for top performance, in age group triathlon its almost all about hard work and not talent.

You can typically ag podium on hard work alone.

But to run with the elites or world class athletes, forget about it if you are not born with gifts.



The age group thing is not the case in any of the triathlons I have done, at least not in the 25-50 age groups.


+1 not in my AG either.
2015-05-14 4:35 AM
in reply to: Left Brain

User image


1502
1000500
Katy, Texas
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.

You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chessRun a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess playersFor the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.
Yeah, I'll buy that.....I can't play guitar and would only really enjoy chess if the pieces were on fire and shooting at each other. I guess the gifts that allow you to be at the top of those endeavors just aren't as apparent to me.


Some of them have swords...
2015-05-14 5:06 AM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Extreme Veteran
5722
5000500100100
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.

You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chessRun a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess playersFor the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.
Yeah, I'll buy that.....I can't play guitar and would only really enjoy chess if the pieces were on fire and shooting at each other. I guess the gifts that allow you to be at the top of those endeavors just aren't as apparent to me.


Some of them have swords...


I suggest he start with this, and maybe play checkers rather than chess.



2015-05-14 7:14 AM
in reply to: marcag

User image

Member
1748
100050010010025
Exton, PA
Subject: RE: Natural ability?
Originally posted by marcag

Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.

You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chessRun a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess playersFor the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.
Yeah, I'll buy that.....I can't play guitar and would only really enjoy chess if the pieces were on fire and shooting at each other. I guess the gifts that allow you to be at the top of those endeavors just aren't as apparent to me.


Some of them have swords...


I suggest he start with this, and maybe play checkers rather than chess.




Now this I have some natural talent for !!!
2015-05-14 7:40 AM
in reply to: 0

User image

Champion
6503
50001000500
NOVA - Ironic for an Endurance Athlete
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

It sounds like your friend found his calling.  Now what does he DO with that?

I am the exact opposite.  Sophomore year of high school, my soccer and basketball coaches had the same conversation with me. "Mike, your footspeed is perfect for golf." Took their advice.

Roll to 22 years later.  I trained my butt off and did my first marathon in 5:00, my first 70.3 in 6:36, and IM CDA in 12:43 (top 40%), swam 4.4 Miles, and got my brick at Savageman.  Your friend will beat people like me to the finish line, but he was made for it and I worked for it.



Edited by pga_mike 2015-05-14 7:47 AM
2015-05-14 9:17 AM
in reply to: marcag

User image

Pro
15655
5000500050005001002525
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

Originally posted by marcag
Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain
Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.
You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples:Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chessRun a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess playersFor the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level.That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.
Yeah, I'll buy that.....I can't play guitar and would only really enjoy chess if the pieces were on fire and shooting at each other. I guess the gifts that allow you to be at the top of those endeavors just aren't as apparent to me.
Some of them have swords...
I suggest he start with this, and maybe play checkers rather than chess.

 

SHOTS of beer? 

No.

Use bottles.....make the pawns light beer, rooks can be pale ale, knights can be pilsner, bishops can be IPA, queens can be wheat beer, kings can be a good stout.  I'll play.....but I'm still going to need pretzels and a ballgame in the background at minimum.

2015-05-14 10:10 AM
in reply to: 3mar

User image

Extreme Veteran
2261
20001001002525
Ridgeland, Mississippi
Subject: RE: Natural ability?

Originally posted by 3mar
Originally posted by Left Brain Teaching someone to play chess is not running a sub 4 minute mile......you can't just learn to do that.
You had me until here and then you lost me. You're comparing playing a game at all, to finishing a run at a specific time. In order to compare apples to apples: Teach someone to run a mile = teach someone to play chess Run a sub 4:00 = Play chess at a level to beat 99.99% of chess players For the second line, both require genetic gifts. You can't "learn" either at that level. That goes for piano, guitar, poker, business, skateboarding, or whatever. In order to be at the pointy end of the stick at anything, you need a gift.

Aren't you arguing semantics at this point?  You both are saying the same thing. 

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Natural ability? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 1
 
 
RELATED POSTS

Bike ability vs Running ability Pages: 1 2

Started by lengthcroft
Views: 4322 Posts: 41

2013-07-09 12:17 PM Left Brain

Bike Advice - Climbing Ability?

Started by ninecrushes
Views: 1849 Posts: 10

2009-03-05 4:18 PM BRinSM

Indoor Trainers with ability to record power (watts)

Started by roadrunner1659
Views: 2903 Posts: 8

2008-11-15 6:57 PM keyone

Ability to hold breath longer

Started by TerryW
Views: 1324 Posts: 19

2007-11-21 8:17 PM rstocks3

HIM ability woes

Started by thegomer
Views: 972 Posts: 5

2006-02-28 5:41 PM TriBodyboarder
RELATED ARTICLES
date : May 30, 2012
author : MultisportWorld
comments : 0
How to run stronger with lower risk of injury.
 
date : February 28, 2012
author : greggseltzer
comments : 6
Why barefoot running is not suited for the average runner.
date : September 12, 2007
author : Nancy Clark
comments : 0
This article on protein supplements answers your questions as to the relevance of protein shakes, refueling after workouts and designer protein versus natural sources.