I guess I’m on a bit of a rampage providing evidence that some of our achievement culture’s most cherished beliefs about performance, specifically, grit and the ’10 years, 10,000 hours’ rule, are not all they are cracked up to be. To add further fuel to the fire, here are two articles that provide persuasive arguments against the impact of ‘deliberate practice’ as the greatest contributor to athletic success.
Don’t get me wrong, deliberate practice is a necessary contributor to athletic performance; you have to develop the skills necessary to succeed. I’m not suggesting that athletes sit around until they are 13 and then pursue their sport vigorously. An early start and skill development is important as a foundation for later success (but the research suggests that it is overrated, contrary to popular belief). But based on the evidence, deliberate practice is not sufficient in an of itself, nor is it the most important contributor. I continue to believe that genetic influences (e.g., body type, skeletal dimensions, muscle mass, VO2 Max capacity) are the most significant contributors that separate the great from the good. As the legendary basketball coach once said, “You can’t teach height.”
This perspective is discouraging because it means that only certain people are capable of athletic greatness and, athletic success isn’t entirely in our control. But the reality is that there are so many things in sports (and life) that we can’t control. All we can do is give our best effort (through deliberate practice) and see how far we can go. It may be to the top of the podium, but if it isn’t, we can still feel tremendous satisfaction and pride in those efforts and then apply them to another avenue in our lives (e.g., education, career, another sport or avocation) for which we might be better suited (i.e., genetically wired) for success.
BTW, here’s the full article that discredits the ’10 years, 10,000 hours’ theory.
