[pizza_worker]

He did say who she was, and explained the relevant information about her that made his point.

I think it made his lecture even better - he was able to communicate using an anecdote about someone I never heard of, but gave enough context for it to make sense to me. Most people don’t think about this.

[heymijo]

Agreed. He did explain, and still I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of someone unfamiliar with her. If I have never heard of her, how strongly does that anecdote land to convey the message about knowledge being a big K in the formula and far more important than talent?

Were you familiar with her prior to the lecture?

Did you know what the iconic hands in the air thing meant?

[probst]

I had never heard of her before and still do not know who she is. All the same the example worked well for me. Whether I had heard of this person or not seems of little importance.

The point he was making was that talent by itself is insufficient. While presenting her as a case study he gave enough information to convince me that this person clearly was someone with a lot of physical talent. Specifically he mentioned that she was an olympic gymnast and moreover that she wasn't only excellent but one that would routinely get full marks. All the same she was not good at skiing because she lacked knowledge of skiing and practice (in his words the main factors contributors to quality).

[baby]

Hey! Interestingly I watched that video a few months ago and I didn’t know who that person was. It did trip me up and I had to listen to that passage twice to understand what he was trying to say. The rest of the video was amazing though!

So you definitely have a point.