If you had to choose between those two persons. who would it be?

[Raelbo]

So your theory is that anyone can do anything as long as they put in enough time and effort? Then why aren't there more professional athletes out there? If it's just as simple as practicing for 10,000 hours.

1) It's not my theory. I didn't come up with it. But I do believe the theory is solid and backed up by solid research.

2) There is nothing "simple" about practising something for 10 000 hours. Even if you spent every waking hour of each day training, that is over 600 days. At 40 hours a week, that's 5 years.

You take (almost) anyone, doing (almost) any activity, working solidly on it every day for 5 years, I guarantee you they get very, very good at it.

To perform any task successfully you need to have at least a modicum of talent to begin with.

By definition a "normal" person is equipped with enough natural talent to do most "normal" activities. Certainly a computer game like WoW fits within the definition of "normal".

And to tell you the truth, I've seen players spend from 10pm to 4am practicing their DPS on a target dummy and never once improving.

Sorry, but I simply do not believe this. If you spend six hours practising something, you will get better. That being said, you can't expect to spend 6 hours on a practise dummy and suddenly become a pro.

The sort of numbers that count are measured in months/years. If you have someone in your raid group for a year, raiding 5 times a week, and they are genuinely trying, I cannot believe they won't improve. Yes, I have raided with someone who after 2 months we had to let go, because he was terrible. The reason though was simple: He never put in the effort. He would attend raids, play a lot of WoW and participate, but he was always passive, never pushed himself, never tried to learn.

If somebody is having a hard time grasping the concept of a DPS rotation, or how healers need to switch between their large heals and their small heals based on damage, etc etc, then they really can't improve.

I don't disagree with you. But I firmly believe that the only reason this might happen is if the individual wasn't committed to improving. If they genuinely wanted to be better, and were prepared to do whatever it takes, they would learn. Most people who don't learn, simply won't learn. They're either too lazy, too scared to try, or too hard-headed to listen to others (all of which btw are good reasons to drop a player from your raid lineup).

That's all being a hardcore raider is, a ton of math and a large amount of logic to realize "Oh shoot, this boss is using X ability, let me use Y ability to counteract it!" without being told.

And a ton of practise/experience...

In this situation you're looking at more of a correlation versus causation deal. Do they spend a lot of time in game because they're good, or are they good because they spend a lot of time in game? I'm guessing the former.

No. Just no. They spend a lot of time in game because they want to excel. They are good because they spend a lot of time in game.

But I do see where you are coming from though. Often someone who starts out reasonably good at something will be more motivated to stick with it and work at it than someone who fails at the start. But there is absolutely no way that anyone, having never touched a computer game or heard of WoW, starts playing WoW and a week later is competing for world first kills. It literally takes years of dedication to get to that level of skill.

Also many good players in World of Warcraft come from other video game genres where the skills translate well.

Yes, skills resulting from spending time playing other video games.

And this is the point I've been getting at, that sometimes a player is just so good that it's silly to take the lesser skilled player over him, just because of attendance issues. If you know for a fact that Player B isn't going to stand in crap, isn't going to miss that crucial heal or tank swap, then you can be relatively sure of your success.

And I am sure that in the short term this strategy will serve you well. I prefer to think long term though. My real life experience has taught me that perseverance, hard work, dedication, are far more important attributes to success at anything than natural talent alone.

Most people oozing with natural ability tend to be arrogant and lazy, believing that their innate superiority will keep them ahead of their inferior contemporaries. They tend to underestimate the capacity of normal people to achieve greatness through determination, and by the time they figure it out, they are beaten. That being said, when someone oozing with natural ability comes with that determination and drive to excel, you land up with something special. Roger Federer, Lionel Messi, Michael Schumacher, Tiger Woods, Donald Trump, Barrack Obama (the list goes on). Yes, these people have a gift. But they would never have achieved what they did without immense amounts of hard work and dedication to their craft.

I don't entirely disagree with you that a poor player could become skilled with enough effort. But most people don't have the necessary capabilities to perform better. They lack focus, they don't have quick fingers, they don't have any drive, etc.

Just because someone fails to perform better doesn't mean they lack the capability. It most likely means they lack the desire, and have failed to put in a real and sufficient effort. Focus, slow fingers, and drive are all things that can be overcome. Focus and drive by a shift in mentallity. Quick fingers through practise.

My entire point basically is that I'd rather take someone who raids less hours per week that I know is good rather than take someone that can make it every hour, but I have to remind them not to stand in fire, or explain mechanics fifty times each week to them.

As I said at the outset:

my answer is made with a proviso: I would choose the *more committed* player

If you are having to explain tactics to someone fifty times each week, and if they never learn to step out fire, there is a clear commitment issue. That player is clearly not trying.

EDIT: @ Raelbo, the point I'm getting from the poll is that the player who can't make it to every raid is just so exceptional that it actually costs you to not have them on your roster. If that player is so talented that they can shoot progress forward just by the mere fact of being there, then having someone who is not even equal to half their skill will not net you an increase in progression. I wouldn't start assuming that you take any skilled player no matter what their attendance availabilities are. Attendance is very important, I just feel that each guild has the wiggle room for 1 or 2 players that won't make it to every single raid, but just by the fact of them being there it makes the guild's progress so much better.

And the point I am getting at is that this works only for short term gains. If you have a truly committed player, they will ultimately end up doing more for your raid group.

The poll was "hypothetical" for a reason, and the OP stated as much:

top guilds usually have raiders both skilled and active

This is not a simple coincidence. People at the top of their game are those putting in the effort. Your example of the "brilliant" yet unreliable player is pretty much fictional. They might seem that way to a new guild struggling to find their feet, but once you are in a group that raids together regularly, and consistently and has been doing for a significant period of time (years), you realise that these supposedly "skilled" players are not nearly as godlike as you once thought.

[Deleted]

A lesser skilled player will most likely remain a lesser skilled one where as the more skilled one with less attendance might switch schedule or something and get more time to play.