“In-depth discussions of sports that require prior knowledge” Big Food, Big Garden, Big Life

p. 191 of A World of Experience Teachers’ Edition, published by American Book Company copyrighted in 1963. The story, “Jim Thorpe,” in Chapter 4, “Game Champions,” was written by Robert H. Shoemaker.

The ~~crappy old~~ story concludes with some questions.

SOME THINKING
Do you think there is such a thing as a “born athlete”? If so, was Thorpe one?
How were Thorpe and Ruth alike?
What were some of the causes of Thorpe’s success?
The 1912 Olympics brought both success and failure to Jim Thorpe. What was the cause for success? for failure?
What were some of the causes of his decline?
What are some of the amusing sidelights of Jim’s career?

Bo probably knows the answers to these questions. I do not– I didn’t read the story. But that’s not the point. The point is that if you want to spare the poor little children the unpleasantness of not knowing stuff, you might attempt to teach them that stuff, so that they, like Bo, would know.

3 Responses

“born athlete”

Yes. Thorpe? Don’t know…probably.

I have horses. Used to ride a lot when I was younger. I’ve observed a lot of riders. There is no doubt that some people have a natural ability. There is also no doubt that some with a natural ability think that _because_ they have a natural ability, that they are ipso facto superior riders. In fact, given the choice between a rider with natural ability and a rider who is willing to work hard and long, I’ll take the hard worker. I believe s/he will achieve greater skill. Maybe not faster, but better. Of course, if a person has both natural talent and the will to work very long and very hard at developing skills, s/he is likely to be superior to either of the individuals aforementioned.

Thorpe probably had natural ability and applied himself long and hard. He became a star as a result. He would not have been that star had he not applied effort to learning the skills that developed his natural abilities.