My riding coach (who is nationally ranked and has been in the top 25 riders nationally in Eventing) says the exact opposite - in her opinion, talent will only take you so far, and effort will take you the rest of the way – and in fact, in her observation sometimes the people with the most talent never become successful because they are used to the way it “comes easy” and give up when additional progress becomes hard work. Wheras those with average talent, who have already fought their way into the middle ranks through determination, will just keep fighting their way to the top, tooth and claw. The combination of talented AND hardworking is actually rather rare.
Hello Again, while I am inclined to agree with your riding coach that the most talented may not be the best competitors - I believe that there is a lower bar, below which no amount of work and practice can overcome a lack of talent or aptitude. IOW, one needs to have at least that average talent to be able to be trained to be a competitor. Without some kind of natural feel for the activity training will only take one so far.
What you just typed is not at all the exact opposite of what Xema said. Unless your coach is telling you that talent is irrelevant, and it doesn’t sound like it. Think of it like this, each person has a range of how good they can be at a certain thing. One person’s range might be from 1-5 while another might be from 3-10. The latter is more talented, but if they don’t practice and train hard they’ll perform at a 3 or 4 and the less talented person can overcome them.
I am not certain that some of the sailing events could not be crewed by someone in very good, but not great shape, so long as they are partnered with someone who is outstanding as a sailor. If you are too big to be a coxwain, and do not wish to compete in the cold (curling), I think your best shot would be sailing.
Very true. At my curling club, there are some outstanding senior curlers. However, they’ve been playing for many decades, starting in their 20s or 30s. The new curlers in their early-to-mid-20s range from good to phenomenal. Those in their 30s and early 40s are passable. Those in their 50s and over … pretty bad, even playing lead.
Now, this is true BUT - I have taught horseback riding myself (to beginners) and I will say that in my career spanning 4-5 years and a couple hundred students, most fell within the range of “average.” They might have strengths and weaknesses that varied with the individual but most were ok. A few were more than averagely talented.
On the other hand I can think of one individual who literally had zero aptitude for the sport. I kept teaching her a long as she kept showing up, but she did not progress at anywhere near the average rate. In year she learned what the average person learns in a month (what the talented person learns in a week). People without ANY natural feel for sport are as rare as the people who reach the highest pinnacle of success. Note: many people who think they are rather bad at sport, in reality have really just gotten very bad instruction at some point. Most people do just fine.
And at any rate, the OP CLEARLY falls in the range of the “averagely athetically talented” in fact, he’s well above average as far as running is concerned. I have yet to meet the person with above-average talent in one athletic area who falls on the extreme tail of the curve in another.
Just learning to cross-country ski is difficult for many adults. It is a non-obvious skill learned most easily in childhood.
Additionally, the top biathletes are not that far off the top cross-country skiers; in fact, some of them (Ole Einar Bjørndalen for example) have competed in straight cross-country at the international level. Finally, biathlon requires a difficult trick. You have to shoot at a small target immediately after strenuous activity, when most people’s heart and lungs are making them bounce around far too much to get a good shot. Somehow you must make your body hold very still in spite of itself.
Not saying it requires anything superhuman - in fact, biathlon grew out of military exercises that every able-bodied man in some countries was expected to take part in - but to start at the age of 47 and reach Olympic-medal levels? No.
Another friend was an excellent XC skier but note quite elite enough to win at the Olympic level. She took up Biathlon having never shot before and nearly made the Olympics one year but her shooting under pressure fell just short.
An interesting article in the Times here on endurance sports and the nature/nuture split when it comes down to pain management - and the fact that for many intensely physical disciplines pain management is a determining factor in deciding who wins medals.
Si
Curling looks pretty easy (I know that’s a winter sport, though).
I think you’d also have to juice up as well as train, though. I have now reached the point where I assume every single Olympic athlete is on the needle.
I’m not going to read the whole thread again, but did the OP take qualifying into account? I don’t think he really has 1512 (minus days since OP) days.
Without wishing to jump on you, have you ever fenced?
You make it sound like a crapshoot: “40 1-minute epee fights, each winnable by a single touch”. Yes, winnable by a single touch—losable by a single touch as well. You’ll be up against people who’ve been fencing since they were five, yet still weren’t good enough to make the Olympic fencing team proper of their nation.
Yes, a little. I’m not very good. 
I didn’t mean to make it sound like a game of chance. However, as I understand it from my reading, it is rare for a pentathlete to come from a pure fencing background. The most desireable background is apparently swimming.
Again:
-*possible[/i, as opposed to likely
-full time+ training
-unlimited money for best coaches, facilities and equipment.
And occasionally, by no touch. From this site:
(Note that epee is scored electrically, so it’s relatively easy to insert a secret switch that a cheater can activate to score a hit when none was made. To discourage this there is now thorough testing to detect such cheating.)