3 ms·

Agreed. Bobby Fisher got there in less than 10 years. https://problogservice.com/2012/03/15/what-malcolm-gladwell-really-said-about-the-10000-hour-rule/ https

Agreed. Bobby Fisher got there in less than 10 years. https://problogservice.com/2012/03/15/what-malcolm-gladwell-really-said-about-the-10000-hour-rule/ https://problogservice.com/2012/03/15/what-malcolm-gladwell-... The problem is, Gladwell never said you needed 10,000 hours to be an expert, you need 10,000 hours to be a phenom. To be so freakishly awesome, to be such a standout among your peers, that sometimes your first name is enough to tell people who you are: Peyton. Tiger. Venus. Kobe. Oprah. But in the meantime, here’s what Malcolm Gladwell said about the 10,000 hour rule and being an outlier: “In fact, by the age of twenty, the elite performers (violinists) had each totaled ten thousand hours of practice.” — p. 38 “The emerging picture from such studies is that ten thousand hours of practice is required to achieve the level of mastery associated with being a world-class expert—in anything,” writes the neurologist Daniel Levitin. — p. 40 “To become a chess grandmaster also seems to take about ten years. (Only the legendary Bobby Fisher got to that elite level in less than that amount of time: it took him nine years.) And what’s ten years? Well, it’s roughly how long it takes to put in ten thousand hours of hard practice. Ten thousand hours is the magic number of greatness.” — p. 41

sophacles 4y ago
I need 500g of flour to make bread. That doesn't mean I can make bread with just 500g of flour. You are trying to say that someone claiming 500g being necessary to making bread is hogwash because it doesn't also talk about the salt and water (etc).
- danesparza 4y ago
  I didn't mention any baking concepts. I quoted Malcolm Gladwell -- who was the originator of the "10,000 hours" rule (remark?) in popular culture.
  - sophacles 4y ago
    Let me spell out the analogy: Gladwell says you need practice 10,000 hours. In my analogy of the situation, I claim I need 500g of flour. You complain that there may be other things needed in addition to practice therefore the need for practice is bullshit. This is analogized by "you" saying that the need for other ingredients in bread somehow invalidates that the flour is needed. The point I'm trying to make is this: Stating that something is necessary but not sufficient, does not invalidate claims about what is necessary. In the quotes, I saw no claim that only 10k hours of practice was required, just that they were necessary.
  - criddell 4y ago
    Don't get hung up on the number. I've always taken Gladwell's writing to mean lots of deliberate practice (on the order of a decade) is necessary, but maybe not sufficient, to master something difficult.
- bmacho 4y ago
  Why is everyone so pessimistic? I believe that if you, sophacles, had the time, the determination, the money for 10 000 hours of tutoring of a grandmaster, and the mental/emotional/physical okay-being for the time, you could reach a grandmaster level in chess in 10 000 hours. Same for many many areas. (Polgar tried it, for a time his 3 daughters were the 3 best woman chess players, but this doesn't really count since they started very young.)
  - sophacles 4y ago
    I'm not disagreeing with you. In fact I'm pretty much agreeing -I'm saying 10Kh is necessary but not sufficient. You are saying: 10Kh of practice + tutoring costs + (implicitly) not having other responsibilities to block the learning either directly via work or whatnot or indirectly via emotional stress. That 10Kh is in your equation, but isn't the only part of the equation. That is it's necessary but not sufficient.

sophacles 4y ago

I need 500g of flour to make bread. That doesn't mean I can make bread with just 500g of flour. You are trying to say that someone claiming 500g being necessary to making bread is hogwash because it doesn't also talk about the salt and water (etc).

danesparza 4y ago
I didn't mention any baking concepts. I quoted Malcolm Gladwell -- who was the originator of the "10,000 hours" rule (remark?) in popular culture.
- sophacles 4y ago
  Let me spell out the analogy: Gladwell says you need practice 10,000 hours. In my analogy of the situation, I claim I need 500g of flour. You complain that there may be other things needed in addition to practice therefore the need for practice is bullshit. This is analogized by "you" saying that the need for other ingredients in bread somehow invalidates that the flour is needed. The point I'm trying to make is this: Stating that something is necessary but not sufficient, does not invalidate claims about what is necessary. In the quotes, I saw no claim that only 10k hours of practice was required, just that they were necessary.
- criddell 4y ago
  Don't get hung up on the number. I've always taken Gladwell's writing to mean lots of deliberate practice (on the order of a decade) is necessary, but maybe not sufficient, to master something difficult.
bmacho 4y ago
Why is everyone so pessimistic? I believe that if you, sophacles, had the time, the determination, the money for 10 000 hours of tutoring of a grandmaster, and the mental/emotional/physical okay-being for the time, you could reach a grandmaster level in chess in 10 000 hours. Same for many many areas. (Polgar tried it, for a time his 3 daughters were the 3 best woman chess players, but this doesn't really count since they started very young.)
- sophacles 4y ago
  I'm not disagreeing with you. In fact I'm pretty much agreeing -I'm saying 10Kh is necessary but not sufficient. You are saying: 10Kh of practice + tutoring costs + (implicitly) not having other responsibilities to block the learning either directly via work or whatnot or indirectly via emotional stress. That 10Kh is in your equation, but isn't the only part of the equation. That is it's necessary but not sufficient.