><snip>
>>>According to the extensive research referenced and quoted in the book there is no evidence for natural, innate, talent. As an example, Tiger Woods plays as good as he does not because he was born with something special, physical or mental, but because he has put in tens of thousands of hours of focused and effectively directed training from a young age and under the guidance of expert and professional trainers, including his father. He admits this himself, by the way, and neither he nor his father ever claimed any natural talent that people so like to ascribe to him. Read the book, it may shock you :)
>>
>>Before I bother to read the book, how does he explain away idiot savants?
>
>This is a very special case. Personally I would not call an idiot savant "talented". Extraordinary yes but not talented. The book is not looking at the mentally strange but rather at people like Tiger Woods, Mozart, Kasparov, Yo-Yo Ma, Jack Welch, Ben Franklin, etc, etc. These are people who we normally think are/were great becuase of some God given natural ability and that is what seperates them from us. But is that true?

If the book asserts that there is NO evidence of such a thing as natural talent, then he has to explain idiot savants. Passing them off as 'a special case' is nothing more than a cop out. How can one play Mozart's Requiem without a lot of work and training on the piano? Sorry, if that's the best answer - 'special case', then I'm disinclined to read the book.