Sheer talent...or 10,000 hours to make a pro

[stotty]

A BBC article exploring the benchmark statement that it takes 10,000 hours practice to becoming fully accomplished at a chosen sport or other endeavours.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26384712

[hockeyscout]

I agree and disagree

I think it takes about 30,000 to 40,000 hours to be a functional coach by the way (maybe more).

By the way ask pro athletes if they were talented. They'll usually laugh at you, and just say they had more passion for it than their peers, and that took them the right way. They also say they had some interesting breaks (perfect storms) along the way.

I have a lot of discussions with my kid about the 10,000 hour rule. It's a crock of shit in many ways. I always tell her it's about being in trance like state. In fact we got a game where I will sneak up on her and catch her out of state, and laugh about it. For some reason I can't do it much anymore, she's in her own little world on the court, and I am in my own little world with hockey! I am sure a lot of you here understand. That is the key, and you know, you know all kidding aside, it's in some of us for some reason! And the best development tool is love, find someone who loves the game, surround them with the same people, and boom, magic happens. However, get these types of people surrounded by those without the same athletic values, and oh boy, watch the fireworks go off, and see the coaches claim mommy is bad, dad is bad, kid is uncoachable - uncontrollable and all the rest.

This 10,00 hour rule concerns me a bit because you got a bunch of kids training like Rocky with no rhyme or reason and not developing a the feel one needs to develop for their own body (remember, every pro has a different style, no matter what the sport, and their is a reason for that).

The best players have always been the kids who train with the most purpose and deliberate thought and that's it. The one's who eat, sleep, dream and want to be the best, are the ones who become the best. Their are kids who can play tennis for six hours, and cry when you take them off the court, and believe in their brains they have only been playing for an half an hour. Some kids will click through tennisplayer.net all day instead of watching cartoons on their day off. I'd think the best one's have at least 60,000 to 100,000 of tennis experience, because they play, but they also unconsciously think it all day. I once read Agassi's old man used to dream tennis. Doesn't surprise me. That's why he ended up revolutionizing the sport. So, yes the 10,000 rule is true, and any one can do it, but the ones who get to kind of an unconsious state about it are the ones that become the top 100 players in the world.

Also, something often overlooked is the perfect storm. Things happen in life that turns some kids into champions. At 6 Martina told Maria's dad he was a future Wimbledon champ. The dad was to stupid to know any better, he believed it and it happened. Agassi's dad destroyed three older brothers and sisters, and found a perfect touch with the youngest one (I think he finally reached his 30,000 in coaching hours and was a master, and was just ready to build a champions game). The Zboys didn't have waves after 10 am in California, so they started to street surf. Right time and right place is an important component of the 10,000 rule as well.

Do I believe in talent? Well, no. I believe in tools. Gretzky has miraculous hands, however he was small, and he basically re-hot wired himself to be able to compete. However, he was called uncoachable - stubborn and a slow processor by coaches, and his daddy was described as crazed hockey dad, yet they came up with a set of rules for playing the game of hockey with the brain. When the Russian's came to Canada in 1972, they amazed us by playing better hockey than us after less than 20 years of exposure to the game. The Russian magic was they were the first to use Olympic sports methodology (cross sports training), real scientific principals, body type (endomorph, mesomorph, ectomorph etc) principals and a whole wack of things. What was so interesting about this when Gretzky and his dad first saw this they laughed at it, and remarked they were already doing this stuff, and in fact we're doing things that frankly we still can't understand. The interesting thing about the Gretzky's, and the Polgers, were they were unconsciously great, which is something us coaches, teachers and educators don't understand! It's hard to pint-point what the Gretzky clan did because they know, but they don't know, they had fun, and they played a different version of the sport. Interestingly many claim Wayne was a better baseball and long distance runner than he was a hockey player. However, those two athletic skill-sets, from those two sports, made him superior at hockey. Much like the Z-boys, everyone said what they did was not skate boarding, however, to them it was skateboarding, and all I know is it looked so much better than what anyone else was doing, and it was a game changer. So, yes, long hours are important, and I think if it's deliberate, unconventional and fun, even better! I do not believe in naturally talented kids. I do believe in tool-sets. Some athletes are great in one area, and bad in others, and need to deliberately hard wire their bodies in new ways. They somehow find a way to do it.

[lobndropshot]

It is all about passion. If you are passionate about what you're doing you will easily get the practice and hours required to be great.

[10splayer]

I agree that passion and commitment etc are all very important, but talent is also. Problem is. i think when people think of "talent" they think in terms of physical prowess. But in reality, it comes in many forms...When Courier was number 1 in the world, he was constantly reminded how "untalented" he was compared to Agassi. His response was brilliant and something i agree with. "Playing big points well, court sense, mental toughness. dogged determination, concentration, etc are alll talents i possess."

When you look at a Gretzky,or Hingis, or a Larry Bird it's hard to see talent in the physical form, but it's there. There "talents" transcended the physical.

[stotty]

Quality practice

The great thing about tennis is there are so many qualities a player can bring to the table, natural talent certainly being one of them, but also mental characteristics such as fortitude, resolve and intelligence to name but a few. You can also build yourself a game whereby a more talented player can find it hard to get at you. It's these elements that make the game so special.

Innate natural talent has never been satisfactorily explained for me. Why are players like Federer and Nastase swimming in it while others have less or even none? What are the triggers for talent? I doubt a world-class player can be made without a certain degree of talent.

I always tell parents that having a lot of talent is no guarantee of anything, and that many other qualities come in to play. Having talent is just a great start.

What's 10,000 hours anyway if they are incorrectly spent.

What is it some famous pianist said: "I practice twelve hours a day and one at the piano."

You can practice in your head...

[lobndropshot]

It's not about talent. It is about being head over heals in love with a sport.

[klacr]

It's not about talent. It is about being head over heals in love with a sport.

Beautiful.


Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Bought and paid for...10,000 hours, 10,000 10sPlayer's and 10,000 dollars

The great thing about tennis is there are so many qualities a player can bring to the table, natural talent certainly being one of them, but also mental characteristics such as fortitude, resolve and intelligence to name but a few.

What's 10,000 hours anyway if they are incorrectly spent.

What is it some famous pianist said: "I practice twelve hours a day and one at the piano."

You can practice in your head...

In Howard Cosell's book "I Never Played the Game" he emphasizes that both tennis player's and golfer's are bought and paid for...just like thoroughbred race horses. Don't forget 10,000 dollars as a down payment.

Aaron Krickstein's father Dr. Herbert Krickstein could have lived like a king but instead lived rather frugally that belied his status as one of the top pathologist's in the metro Detroit area and beyond. For each of his four children he laid out the foundation to give each the opportunity to pursue the sport or activity of their passion. He invested huge sums of his money into the futures of his children. He not only invested his money but his wife Evelyn devoted her time to the nonstop itinerary of getting the kids to their lessons and matches...not to mention food and laundry. Herb and Evelyn were the blueprint for parenting teamwork...I wish them well wherever they are. It takes more than time and money too...what about love?

I absolutely hate that number. Almost as much I detest the term "split step". What's in that number? What the hell is a "split step"? It's misleading. The article goes half way in summing up the research and an explanation where that ridiculous arithmetical value came from. It's a stupid number. But come to think of it...I like listening to 10,000 Maniacs. Maniacs...10,000 of them inside of one head. Ouch!

The book is Bill Tilden and from the book of Tilden...it takes one year to learn to play the game of tennis. It takes five years to become a tennis player. It takes ten years to become a tennis champion. I find that equation to be much more suitable...but that may just be a philosophical preference of mine. Or...it takes one trip around the sun to learn how to play tennis and five trips around the sun to be a tennis player. Ten trips around the sun...you are a champion my son!

But if you divide 10,000 by 10 you get 1,000. So 1,000 hours a year for 10 years. Further break down might take us to approximately 3 hours a day for 300 days of the year. That's 900 hours a year so after 10 years you are deficient 1,000 hours. Or you could practice 8 days a week like the old Beatles song and that would give you how many hours a year. Oh never mind...what's in a number. Is that why they call it tennis? Or what is in a name? Asks bottle. He asked me that when I first debuted on the forum. It takes a hell of a lot of practice we can surmise. More or less. Depending upon the amount of talent...and the amount of money.

I hope that it offends you now...dear readers. I know how much you hate philosophical and theoretical discussions. Almost as much as you hate tactical discussions. Many of you would like to restrict the conversation to forehand technique and they would also prefer that you agree with everything that is acceptable to the group think. ATP forehands only...plus they must be endorsed as ATP forehands. A new buzz word arrived on the forum...armchair keyboard theoretical coaches. Something to that effect. Wonderful touch to describe someone that doesn't share your opinion. Someone who might dare to believe in the artistic touch...or flair as it is. At one point in time...I had a coaches pass to the U. S. Open. Papers please! Accreditation police!

I love it when everyone's panties simultaneously get in a bunch...Nadal and 10,000 10scoaches pulling their collective shorts out of their asses becomes a metaphor for some tennis coaches. But if a human being starts playing at the age of 12 with what used to be termed a normal upbringing, the necessary physical prerequisites along with the mental acumen to be able to conceptualize the complex game of tennis...and he falls in love with tennis...at 17 he is playing some rather serious tennis and in another 5 years he is playing with the elite of the world. Perhaps even earning a college degree in the process. You don't have to be a professional athlete to be an expert at something...that is what the research shows.

What does it take more than talent, which of course is a huge variable in the equation? Well...for one thing it takes a lot of luck. Forget about becoming a professional...I have learned to hate that term as well when it comes to describing a tennis player. Professionalism has killed the natural passion for the game...come to think of it maybe it wasn't the racquets so much as the money. I guess the racquets were sort of a derivative of the money. With me so far? I know you hate this discussion too. So what?

For another thing it takes a lot of courage. You have to have an individual streak a mile wide. Like car salesman and real estate brokers dogged determination to close a deal...you have to be willing to kick your grandmother in the shins in order to win a tennis match. You gotta be mean. You gotta be tough. Like I told Nikae once...you gotta be like that Nikae. Apparently you also have to be willing to ingest PED's.

I think another huge factor is what our lobanddropshot and our klacr have highlighted. For the love of the game. You don't hear that expression anymore. Even the question for the thread asks...or to make a pro. Like a bunch of monkeys mimicking "show me the money". Is that any way to introduce a five year old to the sport or anyone else for that matter? With the end goal cumulating in the material reward of some money. But that is what it is all about these days...acquisition of money has surpassed love as the number one need in Maslow's hierarchy of needs...the single most important thing a human being needs to feel good about themselves. Cash for self-esteem. Actually cell phone's are running a close second to cash. Indeed...what is this world coming to people? A forum contributor asked this recently. I digress.

Down payments...frequent installments. Time is money. Mortgages and jobs. It only amounts to "Death on the Installment Plan" as explained by dear old Ferdinand Celine. Huge factors no doubt...but so is talent. But many have talent in poorer neighborhoods or even ghettos. You must have leisure time plus you gotta show me the money. It's a rare combination at any rate...either you have some money and no time or you have some time but no money. Or you could have both and no talent.

I guess we are back to luck again. How about 10,000 monkeys in a room with 10,000 typewriters for 10,000 years? Will one of them type out the King James Version of the Bible? It's a numbers game too!

You gotta have the will to sacrifice. One of the books on my nightstand is "Will" by G. Gordon Lilly. Women and relationships...they sort of come in a distant second to the tennis player's love of the game. Remember that to a tennis player love means nothing. A tennis player must live by the philosophy of "the virtue of selfishness" to the extreme. Everything must be dropped as a means to the end. Machiavelli should have made a great tennis player. At the very least he would have made a great tennis coach.

So what does it take...talent or 10,000 hours? It certainly would be nice to be blessed with 20/13 vision and the luxury to while away your time pursuing your passion for chasing tennis balls. It certainly wouldn't hurt to have some old money behind you...it always was a game for the rich and affluent. Old money makes such a succulent sound. But that was until it became a franchise sport and prospects might get financing against future earning potential. It takes a combination of a lot of things really. But in the final analysis...if you are going to spend 10,000 hours doing some activity as tennis you must have the desire to chase tennis balls to the point of exhaustion nearly every day of your life. Your conscious and your subconscious must always lead you back to the tennis court to get your fix. You must have the mentality (passion?) of a Chocolate Labrador Retriever who will literally run himself to death to chase a stupid ball or anything else for that matter.

I think it takes about 30,000 to 40,000 hours to be a functional coach by the way (maybe more).

But yeah...you can practice in your head. You can whistle while you work too. Dreaming is for free. Come to think of it you have to have the ability to dream as well. What about that...dreams?

[bottle]

Malcolm Gladwell is the one who started all this numbers business. He needs to re-read what The Little Prince said about adults (they only think about numbers). Recently, Gladwell attacked The Hotchkiss School in Lakeville, Connecticut for its smaller class size, seeing 20 as ideal.

I loved having 20 students when I taught English because of the conversational possibility, but what if the teacher is especially suited to handle six?

Other critics have recently attacked Gladwell for this obvious glitch in his thought and I tend to agree with them. To add on, I will use the typical language at Hotchkiss in 1955-7 . Malcolm Gladwell is a weenie and a fink.

On the other hand and just to contradict myself a bit, there were real bullies in that prep school atmosphere. The football captain, e.g., knocked one kid off of his feet in a stairwell just because he was Jewish.

But at least the bullies didn't succeed in cutting anyone's long hair off the way Mitt Romney did at Cranbrook.

[klacr]

Talent or Hours or Both? Questions. Why?

I got into this game because I was inspired by some players. Some players who are now coaching federer and Djokovic. And no, I'm not talking about Severin Luthi and Marian Vajda.

I love this game. Always have, always will. I've worked very hard in this game. Dedicated loads of hours. Lots of sweat. Lots of tears. Sacrificed a huge chunk of it as well. My own decision, no one else. I've put in way more than 10,000 hours. 20,000, 30,000, 40,000... I'm sure of it. I never liked numbers though. Especially not that 10,000 hour one.

I'm also a big believer that practice does not make perfect...Perfect practice makes perfect. I thought I worked hard and I thought I did everything right. But where am I? Not on tour. Don't get me wrong. I love where I am and the way my life has turned out. But I still wonder where I went wrong in the process.

What is talent? Is talent different in tennis than in other sports? Does talent truly exist?

Is talent a kinesthetic or cerebral feel of the tennis ball? A mastery of athleticism with ease? Talent is a strange thing. Is it a mental talent or is it physical? Does it have to be both for a player to succeed?

Some would say I had the physical talent. High pain thresold, Strong, tall, solid legs, big calves, a well built and live right arm and shoulders developed over the years through laps in a pool and in the ocean swimming against currents. 20/15 vision. Strong athletic genes from parents that played basketball in college and strong work ethic from when they were off the court and working on their families farms tending to livestock and the crops in Pennsylvania.

So I guess I must not have worked hard enough. I worked as hard as any kid my age possibly could, and pretty certain I worked even harder than most adults pursuing their dream. Maybe I miss the mental skills needed. I considered myself a fairly smart and cerebral kid but maybe I was a dunce with tennis? Maybe I should have started with a platform stance like Sampras and not a pinpoint stance like Krajicek? Maybe a strong semi western grip and not a classic eastern/continental. But I wanted to attack the net, didn't wanna make that severe grip change if I came to the net. Never could hit a two hander for the life of me when I played. One-hander was always my better shot. So where did it all go wrong? Did it go wrong? What could be deemed as successful?

I know I'm asking alot of questions but hopefully thay give us something to think about.

Deep questions. Or shallow questions. Depends how you view it. Perhaps questions for Cranbrook Students (Bloomfield Hills on the shores of Kingswood Lake) C'mon bottle, you remember Dead Poets Society? and even questions for Mr. Herbert Krickstein as to where his son went right and where I went wrong.

Take this post as me just using it as therapy after a full day on the courts, or use it to continue this conversation. Talent or the hours?

There are so many interesting opinions and viewpoints on this site from so many great coaches. i wish I had met some of you when I was growing up. Perhaps under your guidance I could have been a contender. Perhaps competing for the Dubai title instead of Berdych or Federer. You never know.

Maybe I did master tennis after all? Just not the way I ever imagined I would.

I still love tennis. Always have. Always will.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

Talent

I like to take physical and mental qualities out of the equation. I know many will disagree with me...but I prefer to call them attributes. Attributes alone will stand a person in no stead against someone who is talented. Natural talent for the game is something separate, at least for me it is.

The word talented gets really misused. At the Olympics we hear things like he's a talented cyclist...or talented rower. There is no such thing as a talented cyclist...you just peddle, that's it! Same with rowing. It's just about fitness and attrition, talent doesn't come in to it. Tennis, soccer...now that's different. People can have a natural talent for sports like these.

Ten years ago I went on a course taken by the Spanish coach Luis Mediero. He reeled of a list of players and asked coaches who they thought were the most talented and who the least. Most coaches were inaccurate. Some even thought Ferrero wasn't all that talented. Many coaches failed to recognise the "natural" from the "workhorse". I found that worrying.

[don_budge]

A Question. Dreaming is for free...Blondie and the old Apache. Having FUN!

Some would say I had the physical talent. High pain thresold, Strong, tall, solid legs, big calves, a well built and live right arm and shoulders developed over the years through laps in a pool and in the ocean swimming against currents. 20/15 vision. Strong athletic genes from parents that played basketball in college and strong work ethic from when they were off the court and working on their families farms tending to livestock and the crops in Pennsylvania.

What could be deemed as successful?

I know I'm asking alot of questions but hopefully thay give us something to think about.

I still love tennis. Always have. Always will.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

Without any evidence other than what you have written here on the forum I would ask you one question? How were you in the quickness department?

One of my theories about professional tennis...is that the top players are all exceptional shot makers and separating themselves from the herd is often a matter of getting into a balanced position to make a good swing more often than the other guy. Getting into position being a combination of skills and/or instincts...such as quickness, anticipation and tactical acumen.

Seeing as your physical stature is larger than average that would be where I would start to look for room for improvement. Once you see improvement in the ability to get into position better on a shot by shot basis...it is pretty easy to theorize from there that everything starts to improve. My dear old tennis coach Sherman Collins used to stress to me that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link...once you shore up that weakest link it could set off some really significant chain reaction.

From what you have described to us about your game...if you could have improved your ability to get into position by a factor of 10% for instance...your overall ability may have improved by a factor of 25%. I am only theorizing you see. If somehow at an early age you had determined that quickness was going to be a determining factor with regards to your end results as an overall tennis player you may have taken upwards of a year to really concentrate on developing that alone and at the same time envisioning how to incorporate the improvement into your overall game.

Tactics is of course another area where a tennis player can always seek improvement. All of my technique training and teaching is predicated on only one thing...the evolution of tactics. For an armchair bound, theoretical, keyboard pounding coach...my tactical training is my forte. I put mine up against anyone's...and I make my charges feel that way. When I send someone onto the court they are fully prepared to do battle one way or another. It's a tremendous learning experience...tactical acumen. Perhaps this may have been another area where you may have sought another 10% quantum leap.

You may have gone from a guy who got bageled by David Nalbandian to a guy who was making the quarterfinals at Wimbledon and the U. S. Open. Some might see this kind of theorizing as a bit of a stretch but not me. Judging from your boyish love and passion for the game I wouldn't put any limits on your levels of potential success...when dreaming the sky is the limit.

Perhaps this is another area where you may have used some assistance...dream analysis and dream creation. Dreaming is for free...you know. An old Apache man taught me that in the Arizona desert. If I had met him when I was young...who knows. Instead I went back to the office...started kicking ass and taking names. I ended up the boss...it was a great comeback by most unconventional means. Machiavelli would have been very proud of me...I can assure you.

Come to think of it...you can put dreaming up there with talent and time well spent. My friend hockeyscout alluded to dreams. Blondie knew it too... listen to Eat to the Beat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRPaf0-RtjM

Blondie - Dreaming

When I met you in the restaurant
You could tell I was no debutante
You asked me what's my pleasure
A movie or a measure?
I'll have a cup of tea and tell you of my dreaming
Dreaming is free
I don't want to live on charity
Pleasure's real or is it fantasy?
Reel to reel is living rarity
People stop and stare at me We just walk on by - we just keep on dreaming
Feet feet, walking a two mile
Meet meet, meet me at the turnstile
I never met him, I'll never forget him

Dream dream, even for a little while
Dream dream, filling up an idle hour
Fade away, radiate

I sit by and watch the river flow
I sit by and watch the traffic go
Imagine something of your very own
Something you can have and hold

I'd build a road in gold just to have some dreaming
Dreaming is free
Dreaming
Dreaming is free
Dreaming
Dreaming is free

But your time has been well spent. It kept you out of the bars...at least some of the time. You never robbed any banks or knocked off any party stores. You have become who you are. Evolution. You are a leader among men and your destiny awaits you. All of that work wasn't for nothing. It all adds up you know. I would like to have troops of tennis players just like you. Sooner or later I would have one of them typing out the King James Version of the Bible. If not...so what. It would be a lot of fun trying.

"Tennis for the Bloody Fun of It"...ala your old Aussie buddy Roy Emerson and his pal Rod Laver. I would have literally gangs of enthusiastic tennis players around me. Thanks for sharing your dreams and your success story. It's very inspiring to read you. We should get together with a couple of the other characters here on the forum and call ourselves an institute.

Yeah...what about fun? Isn't that a big part of it too? Whatever happened to having fun?

[klacr]

Thanks for the breakdown don_budge. My post was simply put up to ask what the questions about what a player needs, the talent or the practice. I used myself as an example. I appreciate the thoughts and I can tell from your line of questioning you are a good coach. My speed? I'm actually pretty fast, the problem is I'm fast for guys my size. No where near the explosiveness of someone who is 6 feet tall and 30lbs lighter. My tactics are pretty sound but in my opinion, I think everyone can use help in this department.

So what does it take more of to become a master or expert? Talent or hours or both? I know some don't like to use the word "talent", so if its not talent, what word do we use to describe someone with "talent"? Attributes is a good word. What attributes do we absolutely need. Can these attributes be improved, learned or gained or is it just luck of the draw?

As for a tennisplayer.net forum get together, I mentioned to another member in private that it would be great to have a tp.net meeting. A time and place where we can all meet, banter, share ideas, learn from each other and maybe watch some great tennis. Indian Wells or Miami 2015 anyone?

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[don_budge]

Nice volley...klacr!

Thanks for the breakdown don_budge. My post was simply put up to ask what the questions about what a player needs, the talent or the practice.
Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

My post was only theoretical...as if someone had actually asked me. I know that you were not asking for my advise...but I was offering it to a make-believe student. It was an exercise that I took on all by myself without anyone asking me to do it. It was a great opportunity to further explore the process of expressing myself...as a tennis coach. As a writer. As a human being. As a make believe ghost writer.

It all adds up. This process that I have engaged in has really helped me to develop as a communicator of tennis to my students. The interactive process with you and others has been an extraordinary tool to develop myself as a teacher. It helps me to organize my thoughts. It helps me to develop my teaching personna. My alter ego.

I know that some find my theoretical approach and use of my keyboard annoying...to which I can only say that what I do is for my amusement but I share it with others so that hopefully there is some "food for thought" that they might find palatable. I don't see myself as the be all and end all of coaching tennis...but my students do. I actually have them believing that I am the worldsbesttenniscoach! How funny is that?

By the way...I don't doubt that you are "fast" but being quick is a whole other animal. Tactically speaking...every player can use someone in their corner assisting them through the process of developing a game plan.

[klacr]

All good don_budge, I'll gladly take your coaching advise any day. Thanks for your interest. I understand what you mean 100%. Getting back to the thread, let me propose another question. What comes first, the talent or the practice and hours? Kinda like chicken and the egg.

And yes, there is a difference between fast and quick. I was fast, but Nalbandian beat me 6-0, 6-0 very quickly. Slight consolation, I did win the warm-up.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton