http://www.intuyuconsulting.com.au/files/Focus_-the_hidden_driver_of_excellence.pdf a summary of Chapter 15 of Focus, a book by Daniel Goldman. Chapter 15: The myth of 10,000 hours Anders Ericsson, whose research spawned the 10,000 hour rule of thumb: “You don’t get benefits from mechanical repetition, but by adjusting your execution over and over to get closer to your goal. You have to tweak the system by pushing, allowing more errors at first as you increase your limits’ (pg 163) The secret of winning is “deliberate practice”, where an expert coach takes you through well-designed training over months or years, and you give it your full concentration Whilst hours and hours of practice are necessary for great performance, it is not sufficient. How experts in any domain pay attention while practicing makes a crucial difference. Experts practiced with full concentration on improving a particular aspect of their performance that a master teacher identified (pg 164) Smart practice always include a feedback loop that lets you recognize errors and correct them. When practice occurs while we are focusing elsewhere, the brain does not rewire the relevant circuitry for that particular routine. Daydreaming defeats practice. Learning how to improve any skill requires top-down focus at first. As you come to master the new routine repeated practice transfer the control of that skill to the bottom-up circuits that eventually make its execution effortless. Experts keep paying attention top-down for longer, concentrating actively on those moves they have yet to perfect, correcting what’s not working, refining their mental models, or focusing on particular feedback from a seasoned coach. Those at the top never stop learning. (pg 165) Focused attention, like a strained muscle, gets fatigued. World-class competitors build in rest and restoring physical and mental energy as part of their training regimen. Optimal practice maintains optimal concentration. When it comes to application of attention, it takes doggedness. You need persistence even though it may be boring (pg 167) Specific muscles respond to particular training regimens. So it is with attention training. Concentration on one point of focus is the basic attention builder, but that strength can be applied in many different ways. In the mental gym, as in any fitness training, the specifics of practice make all the difference. (pg 169) Negativity focuses us on a narrow range – what’s upsetting us. Positive emotions widen our span of attention, we are free to take it all in. In the grip of positivity, our perceptions shift. When we are feeling good our awareness expands from our usual self-centred focus on “me” to our more inclusive and warm focus on “we” (pg 170) In part, positivity reflects the brain’s reward circuitry in action. This circuitry seems vital for motivation and having a sense that what you’re doing is rewarding. Our executive area can trigger this circuit, making us better able to sustain positive feeling, as in keeping going despite setbacks, or just grinding away towards a goal that makes us smile when we picture what reaching it would be like. And positivity, in turn, has great payoffs for performance, energizing us so we can focus better, think more flexibly, and persevere. (pg 171) A focus on our strengths urges us toward a desired future and stimulates openness to new ideas, people, and plans. Spotlighting our weaknesses elicits a defensive sense of obligation and guilt, closing us down. (pg 172) You need a negative focus to survive but a positive one to thrive. The bias found by Marcial Losada to be most effective was a positive / negative ratio of at least 2.9 good feelings to every negative moment – this is true for high performing teams as well as people who flourish in life. (pg 173) Coaching with a positive bias that begins with a person’s dreams and goals that lead to a learning path that yields that vision are far more effective than those that focus on a person’s weakness.
There is a TED talk about it The First 20 Hours - How to Learn Anything: Josh Kaufman at TEDxCSU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MgBikgcWnY you only need 20 hours actually to be good at something, but you must learn the correct way. 10.000 are for those who are at the pinnacle and pursue to be the best so assume you do badminton 2 hours a week, you only need 10 weeks (2 and a half month to be good at badminton) but you must get the correct information first
I like your points, especially the positivity v. negativity and focused attention. I'll be sure to take note
I like the idea of just 20 hours, rather than 10,000. But then I suspect another process may be in play here as well. E.g. if you practice 30 minutes a week, would you become just as good in 40 weeks? Or 15 minutes a week, then that would be 80 weeks (or roughly 1.5 years)? At some point, you would say that is probably not going to work. So it seems there's still a threshold, or another element here, other than just the grand total.
20 hours to get good at forehand straight clears... 20 hours to get good at forehand cross clears... 20 hours to get good at the movement from the centre to the forehand clear... I think it'd be crazy to say that "if you can play a forehand straight clear, you can also play a dropshot, a backhand netshot, and a backhand smash".
It doesn't sound right either, Charlie. If we go back to the 10,000 model, would you expect an elite professional spends 10,000 hours in forehand straight clears, 10,0000 hours in cross clears, etc.?
The most common things I've heard associated with 10,000 hours are musical instruments and chess, and 10,000 hours suggests a complete mastery of them. I would like to think that each play takes 20 hours to master, same with each song. 20 hours per task is maybe more appropriate, but I think 10,000 for mastery of the whole thing is more apt.
Short-Circuiting 10,000 hours: David Gerhard at TEDxRegina [video=youtube;r3kocjx69g4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3kocjx69g4[/video] The first 20 hours -- how to learn anything | Josh Kaufman | TEDxCSU [video=youtube;5MgBikgcWnY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MgBikgcWnY[/video]
I still think 20 hours for the entirety of badminton when it has so much footwork, hand eye coordination, and variation in muscle control just on playing shots is outlandish. And positive thought processes while they can help - what really helps is just getting down to it and doing the task. A positive mindset just helps you keep doing that task. I mean I get what he's saying, you don't need 10,000 hours to be good at something, but I think 20 per task makes more sense.
10.000 times practicing a certain stroke to master the stroke i would say like practice 10.000 times a backhandclear and you will have a good backhandclear
. I did some calculation. The difference between 20 hours and 10,000 hours is 9980 hours. The key take away is the "turning point" in the "20-hour" video beyond which progress may slow down. And yes, I agree with you, it's not gonna be exactly 20 hours (or 10,000 hours) for everything. But from the numbers, I suspect we're all forever on the rapid growth phase.
What I mean is, taking 20 hours to get good at say the forehand net shot, another 20 hours to get good at the forehand lift, another 20 to get good at forehand clear etc. etc. and then you hit the point of slow improvement. When you consider that plus footwork, crosses, etc. etc. I suspect you're looking at a fair few hundred hours to 'get good at badminton'.
the first part is probably right. 20 hours to get good at something. The last paragraph is definitely not true. 20 hours to be good at badminton? It took me 3-4 hours to learn a good spinning netshot consistently and more to use it in a game. I'd go with Charlie and 20hours for each individual shot.
This 20 hours thing is quite theoretical. In practice I suspect nobody gets good at anything in 20 hours.
Music and singing is all around us from childhood. So he isn't truly from scratch. He is also experienced at getting on stage so he's not a scratch performer. I think he does show what can be done in 20hours. Extrapolating to badminton, you can definitely train for 20 hours in badminton intensively (if you body can take the intensity). As pointed out, can you develop all strokes to be good and perform in 20hours is quite another issue. Our benchmark for badminton is to be good at games so I don't think it is going to be that easy for badminton. Otherwise, there would be not the demand for coaches.