4 ms·

Briefly, Dan is testing the hypothesis that 10,000 hours of deliberate practice is what it takes to become an expert (in this case, at golf). I've been followi

Briefly, Dan is testing the hypothesis that 10,000 hours of deliberate practice is what it takes to become an expert (in this case, at golf). I've been following his blog with interest, and he's now crossed the 20% mark. Honestly, I'm pretty impressed with where he is, given so much time to go. Previous discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2438300 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2438300

aik 15y ago
Interesting top response in the previous discussion. I disagree almost completely with him. A majority of people who play a sport (or learn any skill for that matter) are specifically not deliberate about their practice, and hence never surpass mediocrity. Within the first 50 hours or so (varies greatly depending on complexity of the skill), many of the actions required for a majority of the skill become automatic and learning slows significantly as a result. People highly skilled in something naturally (or consciously) never fully sink down in comfort and automatism, and remain deliberate and conscious about becoming better at every sub-skill within the greater. The guy attempting the 10,000 hours (supposedly, I haven't been following him to determine if it's true) is specifically talking about this latter form of practice. The person commenting may not fully understand how much more can be accomplished with heightened focus, determination, discernment, and deliberation.
- losvedir 15y ago
  The guy attempting the 10,000 hours (supposedly, I haven't been following him to determine if it's true) is specifically talking about this latter form of practice. Yes, he's very deliberate about it. IIRC, he has a top coach guiding all of his training, and the plan has been careful working away from the hole. So the first couple hundred hours (!) were all putting and then some chipping, doing careful drill after drill. Finally he can play most of the hole, albeit with only shorter distance clubs so far.
  - aik 15y ago
    Interesting. What I would love to understand is where exactly he was mentally prior to starting this challenge. Is he naturally a person who strives to grow even when tasks become automatic, or has the change of mindset been part of his training, and if so how did he make the mindshift change.
  - kerryfalk 15y ago
    That is a very interesting approach. I wish I had done that when I started playing. I have been playing the game for 20 years. My father was a semi-pro tournament player and I picked up a lot from watching him. I quickly became a "natural" (I really don't like that term, I just had a good base line to start learning from). For years I just went out and played and did fairly good. Better than average. This year I decided to really focus on practicing so I can get to scratch and the gains I've seen in the last two months are huge. This year I have gone from hitting a 5 iron about 170 yards to 200+, consistently. Starting to learn the game from the hole backwards is a great idea. When my game dropped off for a few years I stopped hitting anything longer than a 5 iron. I hope he succeeds. I haven't read a real passion for the game in the posts I've read, though. Does he love it? I believe talent = passion + time spent.
greenail 15y ago
Golf may be a terrible example for trying to prove out this rule. There are many folks with near perfect golf swings who never make it in the sport. Golf is largely a mental battle, and if you can't hold up under pressure you are not going to be able to compete. I'm not sure how he is practicing, but I'm guessing he has no where near the pressure you get in competition, and unless you have the experience he would likely crack in a competitive situation. In a tour event a single bad judgment or mental lapse can ruin 4 days of hard work. That's if you caused the issue, golf is not a fair game and a bad bounce could also ruin your day. It is a very tough game mentally, and most recreational golfers are not prepared consistent performance required for competitive golf. The other thing most people don't realize is how much exponentially better the different levels are. A club champ is not much compared with a mini tour player. Mini tour players are no where near the nationwide tour guys, and the PGA players who can win, or finish top 10 consistently are really really good. If you look at the difference between the #1 world ranked Luke Donald vs John Daly currently ranked #652 there is a very small difference in key stats. Lukes scoring average is 69.47, Daly's is 72. Greens in regulation has Luke at 67.04% and Daly at 61.36%. One big event in your personal life could totally shake up your ability to compete at these highest levels. Sergio Garcia had to take a year off after being dumped by Natalie Gulbis, and look at the downward spiral of Tiger. He may never gain the confidence to compete again. I wish him luck but I would bet he couldn't break par on a reasonably tough course from a respectable tee after his 10k hours.
- ghshephard 15y ago
  I'm not sure I'm following your argument. Are you suggesting it is highly unlikely Dan won't be comparable to a player ranked #652? That is, you are saying, on average, his key stats won't be comparable? I don't think Dan is planning on becoming a top-10 contender on the PGA, I think he would just like to play a competitive game with them. I would suggest that anyone who is ranked on the PGA, #652 on up, could be considered an expert in golf.
- dpark 15y ago
  > The other thing most people don't realize is how much exponentially better the different levels are. I hate that people so abuse the term exponential, but putting that aside, you're looking at this wrong. The skill gap between levels is smaller as you progress. The effort to hit the next level may grow drastically, but the acquired skills diminish. Think about someone who's never played teeing off against a casual golfer. How horribly will they lose, while they struggle with the basics? Now the casual golfer against the serious amateur. How will the casual golfer fare? Now serious amateur vs club pro. And so on. At each stage, the more advanced person has a major advantage, but that advantage decreases as the levels advance. As someone progresses through the learning process, they go from learning the basics, through competence, and eventually to mastery. During this they initially learn gross skills and finally learn the most delicate refinements. It's this way with every skill. If you had to wager on the underdog in a casual golfer vs club pro face-off or a club pro vs a national pro face-off, who would you pick?

aik 15y ago

Interesting top response in the previous discussion. I disagree almost completely with him. A majority of people who play a sport (or learn any skill for that matter) are specifically not deliberate about their practice, and hence never surpass mediocrity. Within the first 50 hours or so (varies greatly depending on complexity of the skill), many of the actions required for a majority of the skill become automatic and learning slows significantly as a result. People highly skilled in something naturally (or consciously) never fully sink down in comfort and automatism, and remain deliberate and conscious about becoming better at every sub-skill within the greater. The guy attempting the 10,000 hours (supposedly, I haven't been following him to determine if it's true) is specifically talking about this latter form of practice. The person commenting may not fully understand how much more can be accomplished with heightened focus, determination, discernment, and deliberation.

losvedir 15y ago
The guy attempting the 10,000 hours (supposedly, I haven't been following him to determine if it's true) is specifically talking about this latter form of practice. Yes, he's very deliberate about it. IIRC, he has a top coach guiding all of his training, and the plan has been careful working away from the hole. So the first couple hundred hours (!) were all putting and then some chipping, doing careful drill after drill. Finally he can play most of the hole, albeit with only shorter distance clubs so far.
- aik 15y ago
  Interesting. What I would love to understand is where exactly he was mentally prior to starting this challenge. Is he naturally a person who strives to grow even when tasks become automatic, or has the change of mindset been part of his training, and if so how did he make the mindshift change.
- kerryfalk 15y ago
  That is a very interesting approach. I wish I had done that when I started playing. I have been playing the game for 20 years. My father was a semi-pro tournament player and I picked up a lot from watching him. I quickly became a "natural" (I really don't like that term, I just had a good base line to start learning from). For years I just went out and played and did fairly good. Better than average. This year I decided to really focus on practicing so I can get to scratch and the gains I've seen in the last two months are huge. This year I have gone from hitting a 5 iron about 170 yards to 200+, consistently. Starting to learn the game from the hole backwards is a great idea. When my game dropped off for a few years I stopped hitting anything longer than a 5 iron. I hope he succeeds. I haven't read a real passion for the game in the posts I've read, though. Does he love it? I believe talent = passion + time spent.

greenail 15y ago

Golf may be a terrible example for trying to prove out this rule. There are many folks with near perfect golf swings who never make it in the sport. Golf is largely a mental battle, and if you can't hold up under pressure you are not going to be able to compete. I'm not sure how he is practicing, but I'm guessing he has no where near the pressure you get in competition, and unless you have the experience he would likely crack in a competitive situation. In a tour event a single bad judgment or mental lapse can ruin 4 days of hard work. That's if you caused the issue, golf is not a fair game and a bad bounce could also ruin your day. It is a very tough game mentally, and most recreational golfers are not prepared consistent performance required for competitive golf. The other thing most people don't realize is how much exponentially better the different levels are. A club champ is not much compared with a mini tour player. Mini tour players are no where near the nationwide tour guys, and the PGA players who can win, or finish top 10 consistently are really really good. If you look at the difference between the #1 world ranked Luke Donald vs John Daly currently ranked #652 there is a very small difference in key stats. Lukes scoring average is 69.47, Daly's is 72. Greens in regulation has Luke at 67.04% and Daly at 61.36%. One big event in your personal life could totally shake up your ability to compete at these highest levels. Sergio Garcia had to take a year off after being dumped by Natalie Gulbis, and look at the downward spiral of Tiger. He may never gain the confidence to compete again. I wish him luck but I would bet he couldn't break par on a reasonably tough course from a respectable tee after his 10k hours.

ghshephard 15y ago
I'm not sure I'm following your argument. Are you suggesting it is highly unlikely Dan won't be comparable to a player ranked #652? That is, you are saying, on average, his key stats won't be comparable? I don't think Dan is planning on becoming a top-10 contender on the PGA, I think he would just like to play a competitive game with them. I would suggest that anyone who is ranked on the PGA, #652 on up, could be considered an expert in golf.
dpark 15y ago
> The other thing most people don't realize is how much exponentially better the different levels are. I hate that people so abuse the term exponential, but putting that aside, you're looking at this wrong. The skill gap between levels is smaller as you progress. The effort to hit the next level may grow drastically, but the acquired skills diminish. Think about someone who's never played teeing off against a casual golfer. How horribly will they lose, while they struggle with the basics? Now the casual golfer against the serious amateur. How will the casual golfer fare? Now serious amateur vs club pro. And so on. At each stage, the more advanced person has a major advantage, but that advantage decreases as the levels advance. As someone progresses through the learning process, they go from learning the basics, through competence, and eventually to mastery. During this they initially learn gross skills and finally learn the most delicate refinements. It's this way with every skill. If you had to wager on the underdog in a casual golfer vs club pro face-off or a club pro vs a national pro face-off, who would you pick?