|
Forums59
Topics1,049,779
Posts14,146,624
Members144,429
| |
Most Online39,925
Dec 30th, 2023
|
|
 Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Andrew Taylor]
#9810471
03/10/14 06:35 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,207
barryfish
Extreme Angler
|
|
Extreme Angler
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,207 |
Is this a google number? if so it must be true.
|
|
|
Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Andrew Taylor]
#9811226
03/10/14 03:46 PM
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 4,533
bigbass94
TFF Team Angler
|
|
TFF Team Angler
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 4,533 |
I don't think I'm quite there yet! Haha.
Last edited by bigbass94; 03/10/14 03:46 PM.
"If people concentrated on the really important things in life, there'd be a shortage of fishing poles." - Doug Larson
|
|
|
Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Andrew Taylor]
#9811513
03/10/14 05:39 PM
|
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 25
Scott Anderson
Outdoorsman
|
|
Outdoorsman
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 25 |
I have played a lot of hours of golf. However there are young kids that can beat me and they have only been playing a few years.
|
|
|
Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: superfamous]
#9812269
03/10/14 10:59 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,529
Big C
Extreme Angler
|
|
Extreme Angler
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,529 |
that might be a good number to throw out, but in many fields some reach a top level quicker and some are never capable. This is correct. Originally the term was (pretty much made out of thin air). It was originally from a book called "The Sports Gene" and the "theory" has been widely criticized. ............. The SPorts Gene Actually, the 10K hours "rule" wasn't pulled out of thin air, it came from the early 2000s published studies of master violin students by Dr. Anders Ericsson, an FSU psychologist and adopted by many publications since. It's a pretty decent indicator of how long it takes to raise your game to the "expert" level in anything, but as others have mentioned, it's not an exact science (with the endless variables involved in this discussion, no amount of hours could ever cover everything). He also stated that 10K hours of practice alone wouldn't make anyone an expert, but that it took "deliberate practice" with constant improvements and tweaks to truly master any particular activity. He stressed that 10K hours of practicing terrible technique would only serve to yield terrible results. Learning from mistakes and constantly pushing yourself over time at your activity is more important than any arbitrary amount of hours. Actually, had you read my link, you would have noted to the very article you cited. I also said it has been widely criticized and it has.
BIG C
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.
Sir Winston Churchill
|
|
|
Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Andrew Taylor]
#9812284
03/10/14 11:04 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,529
Big C
Extreme Angler
|
|
Extreme Angler
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,529 |
Also, in actual sports, the genetic component far surpasses any amount of practice. I could practice (focused and the most thorough practice possible) and I simply do not have the genetics to hit a baseball 450 ft. Roughly only one. In a million do.
BIG C
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened.
Sir Winston Churchill
|
|
 Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Andrew Taylor]
#9812443
03/11/14 12:09 AM
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 263
bo james
Angler
|
|
Angler
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 263 |
interesting number, 10,000 hours. i passed that hourly mark long ago. but, some of us remain merely insane, as we keep repeating things over and over expecting different results  . i keep going all the time. still love it though crazy or not  . bo
|
|
|
Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Andrew Taylor]
#9812450
03/11/14 12:13 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,211
coachallentca
TFF Celebrity
|
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6,211 |
yes I am an expert on how not to catch fish..
|
|
|
Re: 10,000 Hours
[Re: Big C]
#9812470
03/11/14 12:19 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 194
superfamous
Outdoorsman
|
|
Outdoorsman
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 194 |
that might be a good number to throw out, but in many fields some reach a top level quicker and some are never capable. This is correct. Originally the term was (pretty much made out of thin air). It was originally from a book called "The Sports Gene" and the "theory" has been widely criticized. ............. The SPorts Gene Actually, the 10K hours "rule" wasn't pulled out of thin air, it came from the early 2000s published studies of master violin students by Dr. Anders Ericsson, an FSU psychologist and adopted by many publications since. It's a pretty decent indicator of how long it takes to raise your game to the "expert" level in anything, but as others have mentioned, it's not an exact science (with the endless variables involved in this discussion, no amount of hours could ever cover everything). He also stated that 10K hours of practice alone wouldn't make anyone an expert, but that it took "deliberate practice" with constant improvements and tweaks to truly master any particular activity. He stressed that 10K hours of practicing terrible technique would only serve to yield terrible results. Learning from mistakes and constantly pushing yourself over time at your activity is more important than any arbitrary amount of hours. Actually, had you read my link, you would have noted to the very article you cited. I also said it has been widely criticized and it has. Your link mentions the original study, but your post claimed it was originally from the book and the 10k theory was pulled out of "thin air". It's arguing semantics. Definitely an interesting discussion though - too many variables to dial in with a blanket "number". I agree with you on genetics taking precedence over practice time in most sports though. Some things you just need to be born with...
|
|
Moderated by banker-always fishing, chickenman, Derek 🐝, Duck_Hunter, Fish Killer, J-2, Jacob, Jons3825, JustWingem, Nocona Brian, Toon-Troller, Uncle Zeek, Weekender1
|
