5 ms·

I remember once thinking as a pretty young kid that the statistics for making it in sports vs how many kids would surely be trying didn't add up to something fa

by pawn 11y ago

I remember once thinking as a pretty young kid that the statistics for making it in sports vs how many kids would surely be trying didn't add up to something favorable. I reasoned then that it would make more sense to go for something else.

balabaster 11y ago
Statistics have little bearing on one's dedication, perspiration and determination. Talent is only about 10% of any equation. Sure - there are a thousand kids in a village all have dreams of making it to the NFL, NBA, MLB, Premier League, Bundesleague or wherever else their favourite sporting stars live... and probably 1% of them make it. Statistics say it's a fool's errand. Something that 25 years of my professional career in software has taught me... those at the top of the game got there because of grit determination and little to do with talent. The talent pool at your level shrinks every time you up your game to the next level until you see the same faces showing up time and again at every new gig. Statistically, what's the chance you'll become one of the very best programmers in the world? It's about the same as becoming a professional footballer. Becoming the very best at something just means you have to put that bit more in than those that didn't make it. The harder you work and the more effort you put in, the more the statistics skew in your favour. If making money is something you want to do until you make it to the premier league, then you've gotta be willing to go where the money is until you make it. Go live in a country where you are perhaps not the best, but among the good enough to get paid for what you currently have to offer while you continue to improve your skills. Work harder than those around you, learn from those around you, when you become the best in the pack, move on to another pack where you can learn more, improve your skills and get paid more. Lather, rinse, repeat.
- EvanKelly 11y ago
  "those at the top of the game got there because of grit determination and little to do with talent. " I think I agree with your sentiment here but want to clarify and see if you agree. There's still an EXTREMELY high talent bar to be a professional athlete, but talent, in itself, isn't enough (unless you're one of the truly rare lazy star athletes). Those who are blessed to have the talent and an above average work-ethic/determination are the ones with a good chance of making it.
  - balabaster 11y ago
    There are many way talented people unemployed because they didn't put in the effort it takes to get there. How many people have talents that they are totally aware they have, but aren't doing, yet are making a decent living doing something they have much less talent for? I can speak from personal experience for this one: My high school I.T. teacher said I'll never make it in technology and I should avoid it and do something else. My music teacher from high school and university poured every ounce of effort into my talents for music, but despite what they vocalized was a bottomless pit of talent, I can barely complete a Beethoven Piano Sonata or improvise a Saxophone Jazz standard, not because of a lack of talent or understanding, but because I didn't put in the miles to make it to the top. I poured all my effort into programming because I have an endless curiosity about how things work and programming is a bottomless pit of intrigue... Could I have become the greatest pianist or saxophonist in the world? We'll never know. As soon as I figured out how to put notes together on a musical instrument, I was bored with it, the mystery was gone and now I just play for my own amusement or the amusement of my kids. I'll be the first to admit, I'm far from the best programmer in the world, but I've managed somehow to be classified as a senior developer & architect by a jury of my peers. I've struggled every day to learn and master what it took to come this far and here I am. I will continue to struggle every day to learn and move forward to become the best that I can be. Did it take talent for me to get here? Ha! I have zero talent at programming compared to those who graduated top of their class from MIT or their computer science class. I took a software engineering course that barely covered the basics and taught myself everything useful that I know. Sheer will and determination and it satiates my curiosity. So for me to say that work ethic and determination are the only useful factors worth considering, I'm not speaking without some experience on this topic. People say it takes a lot of luck. In my experience, the harder you work and the more you put yourself out there, the more 'luck' seems to find you. In addition to this, there is always a door open somewhere - people claim it was luck that that door opened when it did. But more often than not, from the inside, it's not luck at all. You were looking at all the options in front of you and what seems like luck to an onlooker was not luck at all - the 'lucky door' was just the best option available to you at the time. You walked through the open door and stayed there until the next door opened, which once again to an outside viewer looks like luck, but really if another door had opened first, you'd have taken that one and that would have been considered the 'lucky' door - at which time you walked through that one and the cycle continues. It wasn't luck that got you got to the top - it was a million little decisions that picked one of a million routes that will get you to the top if you stick at it. It may have been appeared like luck that you got to the top, but really, it was the product of those million little decisions that marched you forward to reach your goal. But at the end of the day, it was the destination you kept your eye on, not the luck it would take to get you there. You take whatever route you have to achieve your objective and reach your goal. If anyone successful thought they would only reach success by chance and luck, they'd never have set out on that path. They set out on a path because something about it calls to them, like sailors to the sea. They stuck with the path because they believed in their ability to do what they want to do, they made it because they were willing to do whatever it took to get there and it never occurred to them that they wouldn't be able to do it - while everyone else sat on the sidelines worrying about what would happen if they failed and saying "I could do that too if I had their kind of luck."
- onion2k 11y ago
  Statistically, what's the chance you'll become one of the very best programmers in the world? It's about the same as becoming a professional footballer. That's the wrong question. The right question is "What are the chances that you'll make a good living in your chosen field?" As a programmer the chances are relatively high. Even an average developer makes a decent living, and a good one can make a lot of money. As a footballer the chance of even getting to be a professional where you're paid to do it are very low. If you get to the top you'll be making a very good living, but probably not as much as a early employee at Facebook/Google/etc if you include stock (although that has little to do with programming really). That doesn't mean everyone should become developers though. People should have careers they enjoy. But if you're looking at statistics, even considering everything other than talent, trying to become a sports star is still a stupid idea.
  - davidw 11y ago
    Exactly. Programming is not a zero-sum game. There are a zillion times more people making their living at it now than 40 years ago, but exactly the same number of champion sportsball teams in whatever contest per year: 1. You can make an awesome living or have a great company without being the #1 company.
    - Domenic_S 11y ago
      I don't know if (not) zero-sum is the right way to characterize it, but I agree. Fields like sports seem to compensate on an exponential function -- the top 1% make stupid sums of money, and even people on the same professional team can make very small sums compared to the top earner. Programming in comparison is compensated on a more linear function. What that means practically is that you don't have to be the top 1% of programmers to make a good salary.
- cafard 11y ago
  Somebody in the NBA or NCAA coaching ranks used to say "You can't coach height." You can have grit by the ton, but at 5'9" you won't be playing in the paint in the big leagues of basketball.
  - balabaster 11y ago
    Height doesn't measure heart ;) This list of shortest players in the NBA would disagree with you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shortest_players_in_National_Basketball_Association_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shortest_players_in_Na...
- meatysnapper 11y ago
  Physical durability is an undervalued trait. Lots of very gifted people flame out from accumulated injuries in all sports.
- Retric 11y ago
  When it comes to sports 'talent' is 99% of the equation. The problem is being in the top 1% is still a long way from success. When you might get 1 success per 100,000 that try, we just don't have words to describe how hard that is.
- ska 11y ago
  While there is a lot of truth in this, there is also a common flaw in this presentation: Every success has a significant element of luck involved. While nearly everyone at the top of their game has worked harder than many of their peers, it's not true that everyone who worked as hard as they did has "made it". In a (particularly) full contact sport, part of this comes from injury, obviously - and it is a very real possibility for anyone trying to get there.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- srtjstjsj 11y ago
  I can't find the link now, but someone (This American Life or somesuch) published a great analysis of how the top people in every sport have inherent (non-controllable) physical characteristics that give them an edge in their sport. Michael Phelps has a bizarre chest-to-leg ratio, which is excellent for swimming. He could never be a top tennis player even if he dedicated his life to it. Serena Williams would never be a top swimmer.
  - balabaster 11y ago
    By popular opinion, bees shouldn't be able to fly... yet they do. There are many great examples of people doing the improbable [often mischaracterized as the impossible] because they put in more effort than anyone else deemed worthwhile, because they had a vision that nobody else could see... because they had a dream - and changed the entire landscape in front of our eyes, despite nobody else dreaming that was possible. You can't say for sure that Phelps could never have been a top tennis player if that had been his passion.
Splines 11y ago
Why not both? One piece of analysis missing here is the opportunity cost of trying to get into professional sports. Is there not enough time off the field to learn skills that can be used for a successful career? Possibly. If an athlete "throws in the towel" and decides to go back to school, what kind of roadblocks are there in front of him/her that make it difficult to transition?

by pawn 11y ago

balabaster 11y ago

Statistics have little bearing on one's dedication, perspiration and determination. Talent is only about 10% of any equation. Sure - there are a thousand kids in a village all have dreams of making it to the NFL, NBA, MLB, Premier League, Bundesleague or wherever else their favourite sporting stars live... and probably 1% of them make it. Statistics say it's a fool's errand. Something that 25 years of my professional career in software has taught me... those at the top of the game got there because of grit determination and little to do with talent. The talent pool at your level shrinks every time you up your game to the next level until you see the same faces showing up time and again at every new gig. Statistically, what's the chance you'll become one of the very best programmers in the world? It's about the same as becoming a professional footballer. Becoming the very best at something just means you have to put that bit more in than those that didn't make it. The harder you work and the more effort you put in, the more the statistics skew in your favour. If making money is something you want to do until you make it to the premier league, then you've gotta be willing to go where the money is until you make it. Go live in a country where you are perhaps not the best, but among the good enough to get paid for what you currently have to offer while you continue to improve your skills. Work harder than those around you, learn from those around you, when you become the best in the pack, move on to another pack where you can learn more, improve your skills and get paid more. Lather, rinse, repeat.

EvanKelly 11y ago
"those at the top of the game got there because of grit determination and little to do with talent. " I think I agree with your sentiment here but want to clarify and see if you agree. There's still an EXTREMELY high talent bar to be a professional athlete, but talent, in itself, isn't enough (unless you're one of the truly rare lazy star athletes). Those who are blessed to have the talent and an above average work-ethic/determination are the ones with a good chance of making it.
- balabaster 11y ago
  There are many way talented people unemployed because they didn't put in the effort it takes to get there. How many people have talents that they are totally aware they have, but aren't doing, yet are making a decent living doing something they have much less talent for? I can speak from personal experience for this one: My high school I.T. teacher said I'll never make it in technology and I should avoid it and do something else. My music teacher from high school and university poured every ounce of effort into my talents for music, but despite what they vocalized was a bottomless pit of talent, I can barely complete a Beethoven Piano Sonata or improvise a Saxophone Jazz standard, not because of a lack of talent or understanding, but because I didn't put in the miles to make it to the top. I poured all my effort into programming because I have an endless curiosity about how things work and programming is a bottomless pit of intrigue... Could I have become the greatest pianist or saxophonist in the world? We'll never know. As soon as I figured out how to put notes together on a musical instrument, I was bored with it, the mystery was gone and now I just play for my own amusement or the amusement of my kids. I'll be the first to admit, I'm far from the best programmer in the world, but I've managed somehow to be classified as a senior developer & architect by a jury of my peers. I've struggled every day to learn and master what it took to come this far and here I am. I will continue to struggle every day to learn and move forward to become the best that I can be. Did it take talent for me to get here? Ha! I have zero talent at programming compared to those who graduated top of their class from MIT or their computer science class. I took a software engineering course that barely covered the basics and taught myself everything useful that I know. Sheer will and determination and it satiates my curiosity. So for me to say that work ethic and determination are the only useful factors worth considering, I'm not speaking without some experience on this topic. People say it takes a lot of luck. In my experience, the harder you work and the more you put yourself out there, the more 'luck' seems to find you. In addition to this, there is always a door open somewhere - people claim it was luck that that door opened when it did. But more often than not, from the inside, it's not luck at all. You were looking at all the options in front of you and what seems like luck to an onlooker was not luck at all - the 'lucky door' was just the best option available to you at the time. You walked through the open door and stayed there until the next door opened, which once again to an outside viewer looks like luck, but really if another door had opened first, you'd have taken that one and that would have been considered the 'lucky' door - at which time you walked through that one and the cycle continues. It wasn't luck that got you got to the top - it was a million little decisions that picked one of a million routes that will get you to the top if you stick at it. It may have been appeared like luck that you got to the top, but really, it was the product of those million little decisions that marched you forward to reach your goal. But at the end of the day, it was the destination you kept your eye on, not the luck it would take to get you there. You take whatever route you have to achieve your objective and reach your goal. If anyone successful thought they would only reach success by chance and luck, they'd never have set out on that path. They set out on a path because something about it calls to them, like sailors to the sea. They stuck with the path because they believed in their ability to do what they want to do, they made it because they were willing to do whatever it took to get there and it never occurred to them that they wouldn't be able to do it - while everyone else sat on the sidelines worrying about what would happen if they failed and saying "I could do that too if I had their kind of luck."
onion2k 11y ago
Statistically, what's the chance you'll become one of the very best programmers in the world? It's about the same as becoming a professional footballer. That's the wrong question. The right question is "What are the chances that you'll make a good living in your chosen field?" As a programmer the chances are relatively high. Even an average developer makes a decent living, and a good one can make a lot of money. As a footballer the chance of even getting to be a professional where you're paid to do it are very low. If you get to the top you'll be making a very good living, but probably not as much as a early employee at Facebook/Google/etc if you include stock (although that has little to do with programming really). That doesn't mean everyone should become developers though. People should have careers they enjoy. But if you're looking at statistics, even considering everything other than talent, trying to become a sports star is still a stupid idea.
- davidw 11y ago
  Exactly. Programming is not a zero-sum game. There are a zillion times more people making their living at it now than 40 years ago, but exactly the same number of champion sportsball teams in whatever contest per year: 1. You can make an awesome living or have a great company without being the #1 company.
  - Domenic_S 11y ago
    I don't know if (not) zero-sum is the right way to characterize it, but I agree. Fields like sports seem to compensate on an exponential function -- the top 1% make stupid sums of money, and even people on the same professional team can make very small sums compared to the top earner. Programming in comparison is compensated on a more linear function. What that means practically is that you don't have to be the top 1% of programmers to make a good salary.
cafard 11y ago
Somebody in the NBA or NCAA coaching ranks used to say "You can't coach height." You can have grit by the ton, but at 5'9" you won't be playing in the paint in the big leagues of basketball.
- balabaster 11y ago
  Height doesn't measure heart ;) This list of shortest players in the NBA would disagree with you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shortest_players_in_National_Basketball_Association_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shortest_players_in_Na...
meatysnapper 11y ago
Physical durability is an undervalued trait. Lots of very gifted people flame out from accumulated injuries in all sports.
Retric 11y ago
When it comes to sports 'talent' is 99% of the equation. The problem is being in the top 1% is still a long way from success. When you might get 1 success per 100,000 that try, we just don't have words to describe how hard that is.
ska 11y ago
While there is a lot of truth in this, there is also a common flaw in this presentation: Every success has a significant element of luck involved. While nearly everyone at the top of their game has worked harder than many of their peers, it's not true that everyone who worked as hard as they did has "made it". In a (particularly) full contact sport, part of this comes from injury, obviously - and it is a very real possibility for anyone trying to get there.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
srtjstjsj 11y ago
I can't find the link now, but someone (This American Life or somesuch) published a great analysis of how the top people in every sport have inherent (non-controllable) physical characteristics that give them an edge in their sport. Michael Phelps has a bizarre chest-to-leg ratio, which is excellent for swimming. He could never be a top tennis player even if he dedicated his life to it. Serena Williams would never be a top swimmer.
- balabaster 11y ago
  By popular opinion, bees shouldn't be able to fly... yet they do. There are many great examples of people doing the improbable [often mischaracterized as the impossible] because they put in more effort than anyone else deemed worthwhile, because they had a vision that nobody else could see... because they had a dream - and changed the entire landscape in front of our eyes, despite nobody else dreaming that was possible. You can't say for sure that Phelps could never have been a top tennis player if that had been his passion.

Splines 11y ago

Why not both? One piece of analysis missing here is the opportunity cost of trying to get into professional sports. Is there not enough time off the field to learn skills that can be used for a successful career? Possibly. If an athlete "throws in the towel" and decides to go back to school, what kind of roadblocks are there in front of him/her that make it difficult to transition?