The 10,000-Hour Rule

I was once told that it takes 10.000 hours to become extremely good at something, I am talking world champion good. How does one know that? Vel, I know that you must become good at something when you spend that much time but come on, 10.000 hours? This has been on my mind for some time now and it eventually forced me to dig into this more specifically.

Image: olebulls

I found some studies around the 10.000-Hour Rule made by a professor called Ericsson and two of his colleagues. They studied the school's violin students. They divided the students into groups according to achievements, and in the best group were those who were able to become world stars. In the next group there were those who were considered very good, and in the third group there were students with little probability of being the best, but who could be somewhat good. When the researchers asked the teachers at the school what created the stars, their answer was: talent. The same said my dad but then we had a huge discussion he-he!

It turned out that the teachers were completely wrong (and my dad - hah owned). All students were analyzed for how much they had practiced purposefully and specifically since they were children. It turned out that everyone, regardless of group, started practicing when they were four years old. In the first five years until they were approx. 8-9 years old, they practiced about 2-3 hours a week. At age 9, the difference began to become apparent. The best now practiced around 6 hours a week, 8 hours when they were 12 years old and 16 hours when they were 14 years old, and they gradually increased until they passed 20 years old. They were completely dedicated, music was their focus in life, and they concentrated on improving their skills and practicing 30 hours a week. When the best had passed 20 years, they had practiced a total of almost 10,000 hours, hence the well-known “10,000-Hour Rule”. In comparison, the second best had then practiced approx. 8000 hours, and the "weakest" only 4000 hours.

They then studied pianists and found the same pattern. The most surprising thing about the studies was that they found no "natural" innate talents who got to the top without practicing thousands of hours. The researchers' conclusion was that if you have enough interest and sufficient talent, the most important thing that separates the best from the good is not only that the best practice more, but practice much more. Later I read that everything from doctors, salesmen, chess players and more has been studied, and everyone has concluded that a crucial prerequisite for success in any area is that it takes thousands of hours of experience to become incredibly skilled or to become the best of the best!

In that sense, there is little doubt that it takes the brain a very long time to automate everything required to become a master in an area. Authors have found that it takes at least 10 years to reach the "peak" after delivering their first "performance". What if you spent 10,000 hours here on the HIVE blockchain? It would have been awesome to see where you were in 10 years if HIVE still existed? Let's find out. Let's think of HIVE as something that has come to stay, so let's see where we are in 10 years. What do I want with this? Spend 10,000 hours here at HIVE and see what happens. It seems that on this platform "time is money, my friend". So why not just stay and never leave the ship?

I do not say that you should spend 10,000 hours staring at the Hive blockchain, but with 10,000 hours of reading articles and learning new things, such as playing @Splinterlands or trade NFTs in Splinterlands (or any other NFT project). Maybe play the new game @ragnarok.game that is soon upon us? I definitely will, it is after all a chess-based strategy game – I love chess wuhu! Or what about the other up and coming games like dCrops? Exode? or Dcity? They have plenty of function and there is much to learn. Be creative and write as much articles as you can. Set aside some time to explore all the new projects that are up and coming on the Hive blockchain like @chronocrypto and me self are doing. Create strategies for when and what to invest in when it comes to projects. If you combine all of the above points and have an open mind and analyze everything that sets its foot onto the Hive blockchain I believe you will be fortunate and have success in the next 10 years. Keep up folks, lets become the best of the best!

To continue on my above findings an important question that I think many are going to ask is does talent not matter? I had to read a bit and find answers to the latter question, and I figured that all people are born with a unique talent for something. Of course, an innate talent is required to become very good at something or aim for a world champion. But your innate talent is to be regarded as a raw material and a starting point and determines more what you have a natural ability for and what you should therefore invest in to become a "master" in that area. Talent is a potential that you can develop until you become a "master". Your talent is not an innate limited size, but something you can develop through being part of a great culture that practices what you want to do. Most of the members here at Hive are part of a culture that focus on technology, innovations, and learning. Especially within the crypto sphere, but also many other topics. The Hive members are usually the front figures in our local community or in our circle of friends. It takes some leaning forward skills to be part of this community.

However, how far the simplest human being can reach no one knows until they have been here and done things right for thousands of hours. What determines success is the ability to process and develop the raw material and thereby develop your talent. Does that mean that everyone can become world champions? Not really, but the point here is that no one knows how good someone can be at something they have an interest and passion for.

What do you think? Is talent innate or not?

Cheers
-Olebulls

Posted Using LeoFinance ^Beta