That's kind of the consensus modern psychology and trainers are coming to. Some kids just have a drive that others don't, and that is what determines how well they do.
The major difficulty with the idea of "natural talent" is that every time someone points to a skill/whatever and says, "this is natural talent" someone else finds a way to teach that skill. Here is one paper: http://talentdevelop.com/articles/ITROM.html
"Body shape" isn't what people usually mean by 'talent', and I doubt you define it that way either; but if you want to define talent to mean body shape, I will happily concede that talent is important.
Merriam Webster defines talent as a special ability that allows someone to do something well. I agree with that definition. Usain Bolt is a naturally talented runner.
You said
>The major difficulty with the idea of "natural talent" is that every time someone points to a skill/whatever and says, "this is natural talent" someone else finds a way to teach that skill.
Can anyone be trained to run as fast as Bolt or would they have to be naturally talented in the first place to be trainable?
The major difficulty with the idea of "natural talent" is that every time someone points to a skill/whatever and says, "this is natural talent" someone else finds a way to teach that skill. Here is one paper: http://talentdevelop.com/articles/ITROM.html