tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5401280171563686515.post5675043315850798658..comments2024-03-12T12:54:32.926-07:00Comments on Life After Mastermind: How many hours to make a Competitive Quizzer?Londiniushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07871325359167581176noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5401280171563686515.post-31269869841743123732013-05-02T01:24:01.852-07:002013-05-02T01:24:01.852-07:00It`s difficult for most of us to accept that natur...It`s difficult for most of us to accept that natural ability is not a contributing factor towards the success of individuals in certain fields. Syad`s upbringing with a committed coach and older brother at hand, allied with easy access to appropriate facilities, gave him a near perfect base to build on.<br /><br />I grew up in a house full of books with a schoolteacher father who had to look up any word or fact unbeknown to him. That beginning, coupled with a boy`s grammar school education and a competitive spirit, ensured that being keen on General Knowledge and quizzes was almost inevitable. Beyond that the success one has undoubtedly depends on the quality time one spends on improving one`s capabilities. <br /><br />To be fair to Syad, he does emphasise the importance of quality of 'training' - all those hours have to be meaningful.<br /><br />The Chimp Paradox by the currently in demand Steve Peters (who has worked with Chris Hoy, Victoria Pendleton, Bradley Wiggins and Ronnie O`Sullivan), contains elements that add to Syad`s perspective - and could have helped Syad in his unfortunate final days as an elite sportsman.<br /><br />Santa Lucahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13462286947642121315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5401280171563686515.post-88886735131272092422013-04-30T03:03:20.733-07:002013-04-30T03:03:20.733-07:00I imagine that at one level my whole life has been...I imagine that at one level my whole life has been devoted, indirectly, to quizzing -- everything I hear and remember (often not deliberately making an effort to remember, though!) could come up in a quiz.<br /><br />I'm not sure I agree with Syed entirely. Although in principle perhaps, with enough hard work, anyone can be good at anything. But some people are better at certain things than others without even trying. They will then have to put in more effort to develop that skill, but I think there was some innate level even so.jim360https://www.blogger.com/profile/11827592412424749053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5401280171563686515.post-40026295830156013752013-04-28T11:32:25.640-07:002013-04-28T11:32:25.640-07:00I think that the 10,000 hours thing is not as vali...I think that the 10,000 hours thing is not as valid for quizzing at it is for other things. For example, if you participate in any kind of academic quizzing, some things that you learned in school will come up, but you didn't specifically go to school to learn quiz material. Or if you participate in pop culture quizzing or mixed quizzing, watching TV shows and sporting events and listening to music are things that you probably would've done anyway that will get you some quiz answers. I'm not sure if there is a way, though, of properly quantifying how much of that should count, though.dxdtdemonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17534247033439073645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5401280171563686515.post-19381705552294337602013-04-28T06:35:11.709-07:002013-04-28T06:35:11.709-07:00My brother was telling me about this book as well....My brother was telling me about this book as well. I wouldn't want to completely discount the idea of some people being naturally given to particular activities, but certainly, anyone who spends a very long time doing any one thing will inevitably end up very good at it.<br /><br />Mozart is an interesting example. He's often used as an example of a "natural genius", composing from the age of 4, his first Symphony at 7, his first Opera at 12 etc. etc. etc. - but actually, there's a lot more to it than that. <br /><br />For a start, all the stuff he composed as a small child is perhaps inevitably juvenalia - remarkable for one so young but hardly impressive in its own right, when compared with the mature work of even his minor contemporaries and of interest pretty much only because it's by A) Mozart and B) a 7-year old. <br /><br />Secondly (and this will be more controversial), in my view, Mozart didn't really compose any real masterpieces until the 1780s, by which time he was 26 - still young, but hardly a boy genius any more. Mozart's best work is from the last five or so years of his career; the product not of a "natural talent" but rather of a huge amount of time and experience gleaned (inevitably) from 25 years of a life in music. None of this belittles Mozart's achievement in any way (he's one of my favourite composers) but it certainly undermines the idea of him as (purely) the product of inherent or essential genius.<br /><br />In my view, the role of natural aptitude / inherent ability is primarily to enable the direction of the mastery of any particular discipline. I can accept that even if Mozart's legacy rests on the result of hours and hours of dedicated practice*, he would not have been pushed into leading a life in which so much practice took place had he not shown a natural aptitude for it in the first place. <br /><br />(*even if we make a conservative estimate that he spent, on average, say, three hours a day playing, composing, talking about, reading about or listening to music, he would have amassed over 30,000 hours by the time he was 30; enough to make him a master three times over. I suspect he actually averaged far more than three hours)BoiCymraeghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11746800400667840738noreply@blogger.com