Message from discussion age and bridge progression
Received: by 10.66.75.100 with SMTP id b4mr629156paw.35.1352228556078;
Tue, 06 Nov 2012 11:02:36 -0800 (PST)
From: Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: age and bridge progression
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 14:02:35 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
References: <UsidndMXJbJY1wXNnZ2dnUVZ8kWdnZ2d@bt.com> <barmar-7DF1FC.email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Injection-Info: barmar.motzarella.org; posting-host="78fb7125a45724f15e21604c94a7d968";
logging-data="15052"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ZbXTsUZwXFQVr6QgQSMgc"
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
In article <email@example.com>,
derek <de...@pointerstop.ca> wrote:
> On Monday, November 5, 2012 9:53:42 PM UTC-4, Barry Margolin wrote:
> > 1. It takes time. Malcolm Gladwell claims that it takes about 10,000
> > hours to become an expert at anything. Even if it takes only one tenth
> Well, Gladwell only popularized what had already been found in more than one
> study, but he did a good job of it.
> > of that time to become reasonably competent, that's still 300 sessions
> > of bridge. And the hours he's talking about are "deliberate practice":
> > studying, taking lessons, etc., not just casual playing.
> Not entirely. It's 10,000 hours to internalize everything about the game, to
> the point where you make the right decisions most of the time, without
> consciously understanding how.
I presume that's the definition of "expert".