5 ms·

I once read a very interesting, barely-upvoted reddit post titled "I suck at Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu". It was written by a black belt, himself a formidable combatan

I once read a very interesting, barely-upvoted reddit post titled "I suck at Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu". It was written by a black belt, himself a formidable combatant and instructor, who no one would accuse of "sucking at BJJ". His rationale was that compared to world champion BJJ athletes, he was barely a blip on the radar of the sport itself. Although he had achieved significant mastery relative to the everyman, or even the average advanced practitioner, he was still woefully far off from the true limits of the sport. This can a tremendously valuable mindset to take up in mathematics; especially when one is a student learning under the factory model of modern school, where one is evaluated relative to their peers and the institution itself, rather than relative to the limits of what is possible. Countless "gifted and talented" students have been done a tremendous disservice by being informed at a young age by the system that they are "good at math" or "good at English" because they show relative aptitude in memorizing and regurgitating simplified models of advanced material. Terry Tao is lucky to be so smart that he was already somewhat well-known and successful by the time he learned the truth that these administered tests of ability are arbitrary; it would be tremendously helpful for modern students to learn the same, much earlier.

dvt 6y ago
This is a great post, and I think you often tend to see that kind of humility in top competitors -- especially athletes. I remember a guy in my social circle back at UCLA was an Olympic discus thrower: extremely talented, hard-working, gifted, and intimidating. One of the most humble, respectful, and down-to-earth people. He spoke with great reverence of the sport and his competitors and teammates. My sister's boyfriend was an Olympic-level swimmer and he has the same exact attitude. From my own experience playing Counter-Strike at world-class levels, I found that, generally speaking, the best players were the most humble and down-to-earth; the ones that talked shit were not only bad teammates, but sub-par players in general. These days, I'm much better than the average Joe at first-person-shooters, but I always point out that I'm actually pretty bad: I'd get easily beaten even by mid-tier semi-pro teams. Interestingly, this is a side-effect of our human brain not quite grasping exponential growth (or log scales). Going from the 95th to the 96th percentile is much harder than going from the 50th to the 85th.
- anonymousDan 6y ago
  On the other hand I've just been watching the last dance on Netflix and Jordan talked shit non-stop :)
  - dvt 6y ago
    Hah, when you're the 1% of the 1%, you might be allowed to do that ;)
  - rubidium 6y ago
    Not when he started.
- selestify 6y ago
  Why do you think this correlation between top-tier skill and humility exists?
  - abcc8 6y ago
    It may be that those who would trash talk or incessantly complain aren't focusing as much on how they can improve their performance?
  - dvt 6y ago
    I think that those highly skilled communities tend to be very small and very tight-knit. So there's quite a bit of self-selection that happens: no one wants to train with someone that constantly talks trash or complains.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - toss1 6y ago
    I'd say there's several factors working in the same direction At the very top levels, everyone has very close to the same level of preparation in terms of physical training, equipment, and mental preparation. A lot of the result comes down to your mental edge on a particular day, and some luck. The mental edge is the most fickle and difficult part of the skill set, yet it is virtually everything at the top. So, everyone recognizes that they may have an on or an off day. Recognition that just in general, a position at the top is fragile, and it is not about your previous result, but your next result, which is uncertain. Recognition that your competitors are also extremely good and prepared, and respect for them also leads to humility. Then, even if they've got multiple world championship seasons under their belt, they see the context of the other greats in their sport (or similar in their field). The post-qualifying and post-race interviews in Formula 1 auto racing often provide great examples. The top qualifiers will almost always say something like: "we qualified well, we think we're prepared, and hope for a good result tomorrow.". And after winning the race, it's about the team effort and the way things fell into place to make the win. I can't recall hearing anything resembling trash-talk in that environment.
rotexo 6y ago
That last paragraph hits home. I was always ‘good at school’ (even though I spent a lot of effort studying to maintain that status), up until I got to my PhD program and I couldn’t just ‘regurgitate simple models’ and succeed anymore. I got my PhD in the end, but I’m not as successful as many of my peers have been. Acceptance that I am not an elite scientist and committing to the work anyways was the thing I learned in grad school that has helped me in industry so far.
- quacked 6y ago
  Obtaining a PhD seems like the academic equivalent of growing and harvesting a crop, or creating a profitable business. It's so insane that students can make it all the way to hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and dozens of years of hard study before anyone actually requires them to produce something original that yields additional value.
  - sjg007 6y ago
    Well you have to learn the skills to produce the cash crop.. that's what takes a long time. The adage that overnight success takes 10 years. Well that applies to everyone, including academics.
abhayhegde 6y ago
I think our system has to stop this. Instead of appraisals that indicate fake proficiency, if they truly wanted to encourage, they could show the next higher level and gently ask us to pursue the path until we are bored. Instead they slam the top students with not just the title 'genius', but also the burden and self-doubt that comes along with it -- which only amplifies later as we move up the ladder.
- quacked 6y ago
  I agree. Once, I read a piece that alleged "you're not a true intellectual until you've contributed an original thought to the existing paradigm". No one at school had ever said anything of the sort; as we all knew, true intellectuals got incredible grades and were lauded by the system as genius PhDs. I don't know how to stop these appraisals of fake proficiency without dismantling the entire school system. There are so many students today that feel the burden of "being smart" and strive to prove it to everyone who's watching, who don't realize that they're not actually that smart, and that most people who are watching don't particularly care.

dvt 6y ago

This is a great post, and I think you often tend to see that kind of humility in top competitors -- especially athletes. I remember a guy in my social circle back at UCLA was an Olympic discus thrower: extremely talented, hard-working, gifted, and intimidating. One of the most humble, respectful, and down-to-earth people. He spoke with great reverence of the sport and his competitors and teammates. My sister's boyfriend was an Olympic-level swimmer and he has the same exact attitude. From my own experience playing Counter-Strike at world-class levels, I found that, generally speaking, the best players were the most humble and down-to-earth; the ones that talked shit were not only bad teammates, but sub-par players in general. These days, I'm much better than the average Joe at first-person-shooters, but I always point out that I'm actually pretty bad: I'd get easily beaten even by mid-tier semi-pro teams. Interestingly, this is a side-effect of our human brain not quite grasping exponential growth (or log scales). Going from the 95th to the 96th percentile is much harder than going from the 50th to the 85th.

anonymousDan 6y ago
On the other hand I've just been watching the last dance on Netflix and Jordan talked shit non-stop :)
- dvt 6y ago
  Hah, when you're the 1% of the 1%, you might be allowed to do that ;)
- rubidium 6y ago
  Not when he started.
selestify 6y ago
Why do you think this correlation between top-tier skill and humility exists?
- abcc8 6y ago
  It may be that those who would trash talk or incessantly complain aren't focusing as much on how they can improve their performance?
- dvt 6y ago
  I think that those highly skilled communities tend to be very small and very tight-knit. So there's quite a bit of self-selection that happens: no one wants to train with someone that constantly talks trash or complains.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- toss1 6y ago
  I'd say there's several factors working in the same direction At the very top levels, everyone has very close to the same level of preparation in terms of physical training, equipment, and mental preparation. A lot of the result comes down to your mental edge on a particular day, and some luck. The mental edge is the most fickle and difficult part of the skill set, yet it is virtually everything at the top. So, everyone recognizes that they may have an on or an off day. Recognition that just in general, a position at the top is fragile, and it is not about your previous result, but your next result, which is uncertain. Recognition that your competitors are also extremely good and prepared, and respect for them also leads to humility. Then, even if they've got multiple world championship seasons under their belt, they see the context of the other greats in their sport (or similar in their field). The post-qualifying and post-race interviews in Formula 1 auto racing often provide great examples. The top qualifiers will almost always say something like: "we qualified well, we think we're prepared, and hope for a good result tomorrow.". And after winning the race, it's about the team effort and the way things fell into place to make the win. I can't recall hearing anything resembling trash-talk in that environment.

rotexo 6y ago

That last paragraph hits home. I was always ‘good at school’ (even though I spent a lot of effort studying to maintain that status), up until I got to my PhD program and I couldn’t just ‘regurgitate simple models’ and succeed anymore. I got my PhD in the end, but I’m not as successful as many of my peers have been. Acceptance that I am not an elite scientist and committing to the work anyways was the thing I learned in grad school that has helped me in industry so far.

quacked 6y ago
Obtaining a PhD seems like the academic equivalent of growing and harvesting a crop, or creating a profitable business. It's so insane that students can make it all the way to hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and dozens of years of hard study before anyone actually requires them to produce something original that yields additional value.
- sjg007 6y ago
  Well you have to learn the skills to produce the cash crop.. that's what takes a long time. The adage that overnight success takes 10 years. Well that applies to everyone, including academics.

abhayhegde 6y ago

I think our system has to stop this. Instead of appraisals that indicate fake proficiency, if they truly wanted to encourage, they could show the next higher level and gently ask us to pursue the path until we are bored. Instead they slam the top students with not just the title 'genius', but also the burden and self-doubt that comes along with it -- which only amplifies later as we move up the ladder.

quacked 6y ago
I agree. Once, I read a piece that alleged "you're not a true intellectual until you've contributed an original thought to the existing paradigm". No one at school had ever said anything of the sort; as we all knew, true intellectuals got incredible grades and were lauded by the system as genius PhDs. I don't know how to stop these appraisals of fake proficiency without dismantling the entire school system. There are so many students today that feel the burden of "being smart" and strive to prove it to everyone who's watching, who don't realize that they're not actually that smart, and that most people who are watching don't particularly care.