UPSB v3
Philosophy / 10,000 hour rule to success
-
Date: Sat, Dec 27 2008 15:10:55
Taken from another site below:
"I played it recently and—lo and behold!—they start talking about the need for ten years of practice in order to become really good at something. That part is around the 50-minute mark. Here's a rough transcript of that part:
Patton Oswalt: This is what's always painful, when I go to like, Montreal, and they have like a sitcom actor or a film actor who they have host stuff, and they're thinking, "I've succeeded as an actor, how hard can it be to be a standup, these guys are clowns." and they go up and they suck so bad, it's so painful, and then they look at you, if you get any kind of laughter, they look at you like, "Did you pay the audience off? ... What the hell is going on?"
Jeff Garlin: A lot of the young comedians, they want to be famous like that. [snaps fingers] But to me it was never about being famous, it was about being good. If I'm good, everything else will take care of itself, hopefully.
Oswalt: All the great comedians, too, if they go up, and no-one knows who they are, in five minutes they can win a crowd of strangers over, that's the power of a good standup, is, you go up and they don't know who you are, and when you're done they're like, "Wow, that was funny," rather than [infantile voice] "That's the guy from the movie! With the thing on his head!"
Garlin: But most young comedians, when I tell them that it takes a minimum of ten years before you're decent, they don't want to hear that.
Oswalt: Because they don't want to be "decent."
Garlin: Because they've been doing it two years, and they're sort of like, "No, I want to have a show!" and it's all about everything but being good, being a good comedian... I always even jump into, like, a violinist, telling a young violinist, "Well you're twelve years old, you've been playing for a couple years, it's going to take you about ten, twelve years before you get decent." They're probably going to be disappointed, but that sounds realistic, doesn't it?
Oswalt: Right, exactly.
Garlin: And I'm sorry, but doing standup the right way is as hard as playing the violin, if not harder, because you can play the violin to silence, and nobody knows if you suck...except on the inside.
Oswalt: And at the same time, you can do standup for twenty years the wrong way, and just ... I remember all these guys, these headliners that I worked with, and they would go, "I've been doing this for twenty years, so by default I'm great," and then you go, "Well, you've actually, you've done it a year, and you've repeated that year nineteen times," and that's the twenty years you have under your belt."
----------
"Early this morning, after pushing through Gears of War only to be stymied by the boss General Raam, I started reading Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers, which I had initially saved for the upcoming trips to Vegas or Hawaii.
I powered through about half the book before I went to sleep at 8:30 a.m.
His 10,000-hour rule is interesting -- basically extremely successful people from pro hockey players to Bill Gates to the Beatles put that amount of time in to perfect their craft. His point is that they had to have special breaks and access to be able to do that as a youth.
While reading this I was constantly thinking that the book itself is somewhat dated -- the Internet may be the greatest equalizer to access the world has ever been given -- imagine all the things that the Internet can do to make up for gaps in your community or culture that once would prevent you from maximizing your potential, from basic knowledge to being able to perform specialized jobs.
Anyway, it's an interesting thing to apply this to poker. What would the equivalent of 10,000 hours of play be? At a brick and mortar, 30 hands an hour, that's 300,000 hands.
Ten-thousand hours of play is about 2,500 four-hour sessions, about 83 1/3 months of play, or about 6.94 years.
And that's with playing just one table. Multitabling you can play many more hands and in the first six months of Tableratings.com, I routinely saw people pushing 120,000 hands or more.
So let's say multitabling you see cards at the extremely slow rate of 50 hands an hour. You'd need to hit 500,000 hands to make your 10,000-hour mark and at a rate of 240,000 hands a year, you could make that in just a little more than two years instead of the ten for other experts in Gladwell's book.
Even if you saw 70 hands an hour, we're talking less than 3 years to reach the milestone.
That's sounds right for the people who have jumped to huge limits and become Internet pros during that amount of time.
It's really something to think about when you play someone who has logged those amount of hours. You're still tinkering about, trying to figure it out and these others who have logged the volume likely are much closer to mastering the game -- and knowing how to take your money."
_______
The search for success has spawned a motivational industry worth millions of pounds and libraries full of self-improvement books.
It is practice, however, that makes perfect, according to the sociologist whose books have become required reading within the Conservative party. The best way to achieve international stardom is to spend 10,000 hours honing your skills, says the new book by Malcolm Gladwell, author of the best-selling The Tipping Point.
The greatest athletes, entrepreneurs, musicians and scientists emerge only after spending at least three hours a day for a decade mastering their chosen field.
Ability, according to Gladwell, is just one factor in success. Work ethic, luck, a strong support base and even being born in the right year play a far larger role.
Just as the Beatles rose to fame with the explosion of pop culture in the 1960s, so Bill Gates’s fascination with the ASR-33 Teletype that he used at school in 1968 placed a shy boy on track to become one of the world’s richest men.
“No one – not rock stars, not professional athletes, not software billionaires and not even geniuses – ever makes it alone,†writes Gladwell in Outliers: The Story of Success.
Gladwell became one of the world’s most influential sociologists with the publication of The Tipping Point in 2000, which described how small actions could trigger social epidemics.
His new book argues that there is no such thing as a “self-made manâ€. Instead, the years spent intensively focused on their area of expertise place the world’s most successful people above their peers.
“What’s really interesting about this 10,000-hour rule is that it applies virtually everywhere,†Gladwell told a conference held by The New Yorker magazine. “You can’t become a chess grand master unless you spend 10,000 hours on practice.
“The tennis prodigy who starts playing at six is playing in Wimbledon at 16 or 17 [like] Boris Becker. The classical musician who starts playing the violin at four is debuting at Carnegie Hall at 15 or so.â€
The obsessive approach is particularly evident in sporting icons. Jonny Wilkinson, the rugby player, Tiger Woods, the golfer, and the Williams sisters in tennis have all trained relentlessly since they were children.
...
If you read about Texas Longhorn quarterback Colt McCoy, it appears he has exceeded the 10,000 hour mark already in his young career. The guy just works harder than most peopel and demands perfection of himself.
=====
The 10,000 Hour Rule: How Practice Makes Perfect
“Practice. Practice. Practice.â€
As a kid, how many times did my Dad say that to me while I was in the process of trying to learn how to do something? Is there any simpler, yet more common sense advice that you can pass along to someone who is looking to succeed in a given area? I don’t think so. Yet the concept of “practicing†is something that most of us have probably not put much thought into since we played a musical instrument or wrapped up our high school or college sports career.
What got me thinking about practice was reading Malcolm Gladwell’s new book, Outliers: The Story of Success. He wrote the book in an effort to answer the question, “Why do some people succeed far more than others?†His conclusion, and the premise of the book, is that our society, cultures, and environment play a larger role than we typically acknowledge in establishing a framework for individual success.
It was an interesting read, and I have mixed thoughts on some of his conclusions. My overall takeaway from the book was an increased awareness of these factors, as opposed to believing that they dictate whether or not an individual will achieve success in life. However, I would like to talk about one of the ideas -- the 10,000 hour rule, and how knowledge of the concept can be used to drive individual effort and success.
He explains, using a number of well-known success stories such as the Beatles, Bill Gates, and Bill Joy, that people who have demonstrated mastery in a given area often have had an opportunity to get 10,000 hours of practice under their belts. Is this the only reason for their success? Of course not, but he argues it is a contributing factor. He notes that in study after study, this magic number shows up whether the person is a musician, athlete, author, programmer, or a member of virtually any other profession.
Think about 10,000 hours. That is a big number. If you focused on practicing a specific skill for 20 hours a week, in one year you would log 1,040 hours. At that pace, it would take almost 10 years of constant effort (9.61 years to be exact…) to get to 10,000 hours.
Wow.
On one hand this seems obvious -- hard work equals results; yet this is still pretty powerful stuff. Have you ever thought you could “wing it†on talent alone? Wrong. Everybody, and that includes Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods, has to practice -- and practice a lot.
The first thing that came to my mind as I was reading this chapter – and maybe even yours as well after reading my synopsis -- was, “do I have a 10,000 hour specialty?†It is a great question to ask yourself, and quite possibly a humbling one.
The second takeaway however was that I began to immediately think about what I was doing to ensure that I have a dedicated focus (or practice time) on improving myself in those areas that are important to me. This chapter left me re-energized to prioritize my time to get those valuable practice hours into my daily and weekly routine.
I have to imagine that the reality for most of us is that if the area you want to practice is not within the context of your work life, it will be tough to get the mass of hours together to get to 10,000 quickly. As far as I am concerned however, that is ok. The more important thing is to make practice a priority.
Let me give you a personal example. Over the last year, photography has developed into a hobby, and one of the best ways to get better at photography is to take a lot of pictures. With every photo you take, you experience a success or failure and each provides an opportunity to learn how improve your composition, use lighting to your advantage, etc.
With the 10,000 hour rule now at the forefront of my mind, I am in the process of establishing a personal goal to get more photography hours on the books. I am likely going to set either a goal that is activity-based, i.e. “take at least 50 pictures a week,†or time-based, i.e. “dedicate at least two hours a week to taking photos,†so I can continue to improve my photography skills. At this pace, my ramp to 10,000 hours may take awhile, but that is fine. The real change is making a formal commitment to practicing and getting better.
The 10,000 hour rule has really gelled a lot of ideas I have had around personal self-improvement and success and has changed the way I am looking at how I am working toward my personal goals. I would encourage you to think about how it applies to your life as well. What is it that you want to do better? Are you practicing? Are you on a path to hit 10,000 hours?
As the old saying goes – practice makes perfect.
http://www.kenclarksblog.com/2008/12/the-1...es-perfect.html
_______________
My thoughts on this
Just read the first 40 or so pages of the book Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. It's really interesting so far, and right now it is talking about the correlation between practicing a skill and the level at which you can perform that skill.
They noted that elite violinists had accumulated 10,000 hours of practice by the age of 20, the "good" players had accumulated about 8000 hours, and the average players had only practiced for about 4000 hours. This was consistant for many, many different learned skills. Music, mathematics, computer programming, skill based sports such as basketball, soccer and ping pong. Basically, they found that natural talent helped get you into the talent pool that was divided up into performing a task at moderate, exceptional and incredible levels. The only difference between those levels was time spent practicing.
The researchers could not find someone who was among the very best who did not spend a massive amount of time practicing the skill, and they also could not find an individual who spent the necessary years practicing the skill who was not among the elite performers. Virtually everyone fell along the same line relating work to results. Even Mozart, who was supposedly the greatest child prodigy of all, did not complete his best work until 20 years of composing several hours a day. His "natural talent" was nothing more then an incredible workload over an incredible length of time.
===========
What are your thoughts?
Does this apply to Pen spinning?
How about Eriror, spinning for 3-4 years, I wonder how long he practiced ea. day and the type of practicing?
Would pen spinning require less than 10 years, seeing as you can spin almost all of your awake hours, or does the 10,000 hours only apply to dedicated intense practice.
Either way I would reccomend you checking out the book Outliers, whether you believe in the 10,000 hour rule or not because it's very interesting either way =] -
Date: Sat, Dec 27 2008 15:17:38
This seems like an interesting concept I might look into that book
-
Date: Sat, Dec 27 2008 19:16:50
Yep I have a feeling that we've only started to see what we can do with a pen, I mean we haven't even hit the half way mark with any serious competitive spinner.
-
Date: Sat, Dec 27 2008 20:59:43
Right? This could be the first generation of spinners =]
Eriror, who we all hail as amazing hasn't even hit 10,000 hours of practice yet, think of how elite spinners will be in just 5 years?
But, how about the fact that pen spinning doesn't hold people very long, Kam has spun for what, 15 years? Yet he isn't the most amazing spinner we all know.
the practice has to be continually evolving, dissecting your skill and re building it and constantly improving.
Less time modding and more time developing new techniques and skills?
And this may also be why kids, who learned charge and TA as little kids aka 5-9 seem so much better at those tricks at my school?
There is one kid who learned it from his brother really young, and his charge is pretty beautiful haha.
I'd be very intrested in seeing videos of a few of the most creative/ well known pen spinners in practice.
Watching Bonkura practice, i'm sure you would see that he constantly took apart his finger pass making it smoother etc. -
Date: Sun, Dec 28 2008 12:03:02
I dont think its a good article
1 day = 24h
100 day = 2400h
400 day = 9600h
I am not spinning full year, and i think im a godd spinner nao. -
Date: Sun, Dec 28 2008 12:06:40
When it says good, it means world class in a highly competitive field. Think how many guitar players there are, to be considered a good guitar player compared to all those they are saying takes 10,000 hours of practice. Now in PS now one has spun for that long so you can`t really compare it to that.
Your notions of `good`are different it doesn`t make it a bad article -
Date: Sun, Dec 28 2008 13:50:21QUOTE (Skrzat @ Dec 28 2008, 07:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I dont think its a good article
1 day = 24h
100 day = 2400h
400 day = 9600h
I am not spinning full year, and i think im a godd spinner nao.
You may, But as awesome said, you could have many tricks down, but I would hardly think you could compete with Eriror with any chance of winning.
How many hours in a day do you spin and what kind of practice do you observe wen you do? that could be why you are a decent spinner in such a short amount of time.
For me, I've spun 18 months or more, yet I'm hardly mediocre, this is a result of spinning for "fun" and not constantly trying to progress my spinning as a whole
.
I think hard work, and/or good instruction plus someone who has the time to put in the effort results in the elite spinners.
I'm just wondering if people like Eriror ever had the chance as novice spinners to meet more knowlagable spinners, or if it was the result of observing other people spin online? -
Date: Sat, Jan 3 2009 00:58:08
I read that book. It is a good book. Lots of fun anecdotes and small biographies, and it provides a interesting (more or less) new angle to the world and how we view success.
But I don't really think the 10000 hour rule applies to penspinning. You will be one of the world's best way before you get to you 10000th hour of determined practice. I doubt there is even anyone in the world who have practiced for 2000 hours. That would be one hour of practice(not just fooling around) everyday for 5½year.
I think there has to be a lot more practitioners than penspinning currently has for the 10000 hour rule to apply. And even then I think the evidence to support it is still a bit thin. -
Date: Sun, Jan 11 2009 16:30:22
Heh, I can tell from the thread title that this is about Malcolm Gladwell's "Outliers"? I haven't read the book, but he cites 10 000 hours as the amount of time required to become an expert at anything. This is not necessarily equivalent to mere "success" per se; this number sounds more along the lines of becoming one of the best. The only reason I haven't read the book is that I don't think Gladwell researches his material nearly well enough. I read "Blink" by him, which just felt like a discursive series of anecdotes. So in "Outliers", I'm not even sure how he arrived at 10 000 hours; it's almost as if he chose that number out of thin air, since:
A] That number probably varies significantly from person to person.
B] You can become an "expert" in certain areas way sooner. If you practice PS 1 hour per day, 10 000 hours means 10 000 days, which is over 27 years. If you practice 3 hours a day, it would still take you 9 years to become an expert at spinning? I don't think so...
Plus, "outliers" are statistically anomalous points, whether they are much greater than or less than the average. So, an outlier can also mean someone who is incompetent at something. -
Date: Tue, Jan 13 2009 06:09:56
Tialys raised some valid points, I wouldn't take the book at face value. Of course, logically practice does make perfect, but another factor is how you practice. The intensity of the practice will determine how good you can get, if you just go through the motion, there is no point to doing it.
-
Date: Tue, Jan 13 2009 17:10:56QUOTE (Gunblakes @ Jan 13 2009, 07:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Tialys raised some valid points, I wouldn't take the book at face value. Of course, logically practice does make perfect, but another factor is how you practice. The intensity of the practice will determine how good you can get, if you just go through the motion, there is no point to doing it.
I think you are right on that one. Gladwell's point is not so much that ten thousand is some kind of magic number. It is more his point that there really is no such thing as natural talent, but that what matters and what gives success is how much you practise, how you are allowed practise and in what kind of enviorment you grow up in. That is really the focus of the book and it really does that in a great way. But ofcourse if one does not like the author's style of basing a thesis on anecdotes, then that's alright. But I personally find it is exactly that which makes Gladwell's books interesting, even though it might end up closer to realm of entertainment than the realm of science.QUOTEPlus, "outliers" are statistically anomalous points, whether they are much greater than or less than the average. So, an outlier can also mean someone who is incompetent at something.
He actually does touch on that side too, when he gets to talk about how Korean commercial pilotes used to have a unusual large amount of crashes, because of the nature of the Korean norms for interacting with person in a superior position. -
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 11:18:29
that's no rule, that's just statistic
ever heard of prodigies? O_o
if you are talented for something then you sure as hell don't need t 10k hours of practice, to call it "perfection"
and what is "perfection"?
sure, you will develop your skills with every hour, but some will develop their skills faster, and some slower... -
Date: Fri, Jan 23 2009 15:18:30
Don't these "prodigies" need to spend countless hours from a young age in their field. Mozart could be considered a prodigie but he spent countless hours composing. I think its impossible for some on to be good at something with a greatly reduced effort then other people. Some people might learn a bit faster then other people, but never at a rate that they can learn things 10X faster or anything like that.
I think saying a prodigie is so naturally good at something thats why their better then everyone else, is disrespectful to the time and effort they put into it, and is trying to justify why you aren't as good at everything you want to be by placing it on "luck" of not being born with the right talent. -
Date: Sat, Jan 24 2009 00:23:38QUOTE (minche @ Jan 23 2009, 06:18 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
that's no rule, that's just statistic
ever heard of prodigies? O_o
if you are talented for something then you sure as hell don't need t 10k hours of practice, to call it "perfection"
and what is "perfection"?
sure, you will develop your skills with every hour, but some will develop their skills faster, and some slower...
He touches on that as well, and he talks about how people think this, but in truth, it all comes down to how much they practice and what kind of practice.
Sure I might be taller, thus making me a little tiny bit better at basketball, people note that you are a little better and basketball and thus you try to develop your basketball skills more because you enjoy it.
He also talks about how no one is "selfbuilt" and it comes down to the people around them and there environment, ( just luck.) -
Date: Sat, Jan 24 2009 17:45:41QUOTE (shoeman6 @ Jan 23 2009, 07:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>He touches on that as well, and he talks about how people think this, but in truth, it all comes down to how much they practice and what kind of practice.
Sure I might be taller, thus making me a little tiny bit better at basketball, people note that you are a little better and basketball and thus you try to develop your basketball skills more because you enjoy it.
He also talks about how no one is "selfbuilt" and it comes down to the people around them and there environment, ( just luck.)
So which is it, then? Those two things seem to conflict with each other.
-
Date: Sat, Jan 24 2009 18:14:59QUOTE (Tialys @ Jan 24 2009, 12:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>So which is it, then? Those two things seem to conflict with each other.
Not really, the first sentence is saying everyone has the potential to become great, the seconded bolded one says that in order for them to develop it, they need the right environment and people to help them. I don't see how they contradict with each other =/
I get from it that everyone can "choose" to practice more than anyone else, but for them to make the descion it takes special circumstances. -
Date: Sat, Jan 24 2009 20:34:30
may i guess this is a lame book?
like really lame book
he says lot of things, but nothing really...
quazi-psychology, you can be happy if you want to be happy, if you feel beautiful you will be beautiful.... stuff like that -
Date: Sat, Jan 24 2009 21:43:58QUOTE (minche @ Jan 24 2009, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>may i guess this is a lame book?
like really lame book
he says lot of things, but nothing really...
quazi-psychology, you can be happy if you want to be happy, if you feel beautiful you will be beautiful.... stuff like that
No, it is really not that kind of book. It takes more of a sociologic angle than a psychological one, it looks at society and how it picks the ones to be successfull. It does not come with any lies about you can be anything you want, on the contrary, it looks at how really successful people have often been really lucky to get to they are at.
I personally think it is a great book, it is not for nothing that it has been on the top of NY Times non fiction bestseller list since its release. -
Date: Mon, Jan 26 2009 19:24:31QUOTE (TheOnion @ Jan 24 2009, 10:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>No, it is really not that kind of book. It takes more of a sociologic angle than a psychological one, it looks at society and how it picks the ones to be successfull. It does not come with any lies about you can be anything you want, on the contrary, it looks at how really successful people have often been really lucky to get to they are at.
I personally think it is a great book, it is not for nothing that it has been on the top of NY Times non fiction bestseller list since its release.
that really doesnt mean much
-
Date: Mon, Jan 26 2009 19:55:42QUOTE (TheOnion @ Jan 24 2009, 04:43 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>No, it is really not that kind of book. It takes more of a sociologic angle than a psychological one, it looks at society and how it picks the ones to be successfull. It does not come with any lies about you can be anything you want, on the contrary, it looks at how really successful people have often been really lucky to get to they are at.
I personally think it is a great book, it is not for nothing that it has been on the top of NY Times non fiction bestseller list since its release.QUOTE (minche @ Jan 26 2009, 02:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>that really doesnt mean much
that part is what gives the sentence its meaning, remember that its all one sentence so you have to look at the whole thing. You would think a grammar nazi like you would of known that
-
Date: Thu, Feb 12 2009 13:29:11
I don't think this rule/concept/prodigies applies to pen spinning..
because new tricks keeps getting created.
practicing for 10 000 hours won't work for pen spinning
-
Date: Fri, Feb 13 2009 14:53:25
Iruini626
I wouldn't say that's true, how is that any different that lets say Bill Gates and programming?
New programs and computer languages are developing rapidly.
If you have your 10,000 hours it's most likely that it is going to be YOU who are creating the new tricks and concepts. -
Date: Fri, Feb 13 2009 23:42:06
There are very few things where 10 000 hours would be insufficient practice time. Pen spinning is not one of them.
10 000 hours = roughly 5 hours/day for 5.5 years -
Date: Sat, Feb 14 2009 07:06:38
Wasn't this on Daily Planet like a lonnnnnnnnnng time ago?