Tests vs. Screens Pt. 3 - The Counterintuitive Part
If you're trying to figure out who has the most potential, the instinct is to look for the person who’s the natural athlete, the one with the best outcome out of the box. That's backwards.
Assuming two people have identical outcomes, the person achieving it through an inefficient pattern is the one with the most room to grow, precisely because their result doesn't reflect their actual capability; it reflects effort + compensation. Clean up the pattern, and the outcome improves without them getting any stronger, faster, or more athletic. They were leaving performance on the table the whole time.
The person who is the ‘natural athlete’ is already moving efficiently to get the same result and has less slack to take up. Their outcome and their pattern are already aligned. There's still room to improve, but it comes slower, because there's no inefficiency to recover.
Take two people escaping mount. One frames, finds the angle, and times the hip escape to the opponent's weight shift to slip out clean. The other has no angle or timing, but has enough strength to bench the opponent up and muscle a knee inside.
Put both against someone 30 pounds heavier and the difference shows up immediately. The first escape barely changes, because it was never dependent on athleticism. The second collapses, because it was backstopped by a strength advantage that just disappeared. Now fix the second athlete's frames and timing, and the escape that used to cost 90% effort now costs them 20%, and it stops collapsing against bigger opponents. A dramatic improvement that was sitting there the whole time, buried under the grind.
Try to find an equivalent leap for the first athlete, and there isn't one.
This is why those who claw their way through positions are often the ones with the higher ceiling. Not because grinding is good technique (it isn't), but because once the pattern catches up to the effort, everything gets easier for them.
The way you spot it isn't by watching whether the escape works; it's by watching what it costs them to make it work.