I'm not sure that failure is the word you want - I would call them setbacks. Failure suggests finality, it is the point where you are out of options and have to change goals. Overcoming failure means how to restart on a new goal after giving up on the last one. Overcoming setbacks means how to stay focused on a goal despite interference and things not happening as you hope.
My simplest answer is to pick the right goal. You know its the right goal when you can envisage countless possible setbacks but it would seem absurd that they could cause you to abandon your goal. Give up on reaching the Olympics because you run out of money, have a bout of flu, or a parent dies? It should feel like a non-sequitur. Your goal needs rise above the inevitable twists and turns of life - it should not just be a "fair weather" goal you would drop when clouds pile in.
Your interest in the goal should be deep. It should not be for the moment it can be said it is done but for the transformation that achieving that goal brings. You must not simply want to reach a finish line, you have to want the life that comes after crossing that finishing line. If life after reaching a goal is little different or you are indifferent to that life, it is a weak goal, it won't sustain you through the hard times.
you need to like the life you'll live to get there. most olympians like training above all else, just like great entreprenours like working above all else.
I would say that there has to be some type of incremental reward but expecting to like life all the time is not the right mental place to be in. IMHO it is a huge cause of failure because it makes you so fragile to setbacks. It filters out far too many important journeys that will include brutally tough times. Such journeys can only be "liked" in the rear-view mirror when it includes the contrast with the good-times and relief/pride of overcoming the bad. If you do not expect to enjoy the journey but still commit to the destination, you have a better mindset to get there.
Pro-athletes are probably a bad example for anything other than being pro-athletes. I have got the impression from some of the interviews with swimmers and tennis players that they utterly loathe training with a passion especially when their way of life is was designed for them by their parents before they ever had any self-direction.
There's a difference between enjoying your job and not having any desires to do anything else. The former is normal and healthy, the latter is (imo) not a good strategy for working efficiently. I love my job but I don't think I'd be better at it if I poured 100+ hours/week into it. I'd probably just feel burnt out and unproductive.
Maybe so. Probably so. Most people. But I'm having a difficult reaching the bottom of the binary declarations up-stream. Commenter #1 said, essentially, "Loving work the most is key". Commenter #2 responded (I summarize): "Nuh uh."
I don't think anyone said anything about 100+ hours/week. I was hoping that commenter #2 might appear and give us some deep insights, but that appears to have been a bridge too far...
I don't have a 9~5 working for the man, but there is very little that happens during my waking hours that I wouldn't classify as related to work. I'm fortunate that this is not one task, so it doesn't weigh on me like fighting with a C compiler while sitting under florescent lights in a cube farm might. That's kind of work is fine - I like that too - but I couldn't do it for more than about 70-80 hours/week.
For athletes, the most important part is recovery. They only spend 3-4 hours per day "working", the rest is spent traveling, preparing, eating and sleeping. The key is good recovery, to be fully energized and focused at "working" sessions, for maximum quality (and productivity).
It also helps if you have a coach, a manager and a private chef. And I think the same also applies if you want to be a successful entrepreneur: Quality over quantity. You have to love it though, because it's often hard work, and painful.
My simplest answer is to pick the right goal. You know its the right goal when you can envisage countless possible setbacks but it would seem absurd that they could cause you to abandon your goal. Give up on reaching the Olympics because you run out of money, have a bout of flu, or a parent dies? It should feel like a non-sequitur. Your goal needs rise above the inevitable twists and turns of life - it should not just be a "fair weather" goal you would drop when clouds pile in.
Your interest in the goal should be deep. It should not be for the moment it can be said it is done but for the transformation that achieving that goal brings. You must not simply want to reach a finish line, you have to want the life that comes after crossing that finishing line. If life after reaching a goal is little different or you are indifferent to that life, it is a weak goal, it won't sustain you through the hard times.