kind of an arbitrary rule. I'd probably need to spend less than 10,000 hours peeling potatoes to achieve mastery in it. I would probably have to commit far more than 10,000 hours to becoming a master historian. Starcraft is an incredibly complex, variable and evolutionary pursuit. You cannot 'master' it in any true sense of the word.

Grobyc

Canada18410 Posts

April 09 2011 02:37 GMT

#64

Of course you are going to be very skilled at something if you put that much time in to it. 10000 seems like an arbitrary number though. I would say you have obtained "mastery" in much less time than that in many cases.

moltenlead

Canada866 Posts

April 09 2011 02:44 GMT

#65

I have never heard of this but 10000 hours is a hell of a long time. Think about it in relation to other activities. If I spent 10000 hours on golf, I would have an amazing swing assuming that I started off correctly. I would say 10000 is just a number to signify a solidification of the skill set.

Depending on what you do it could take much more/less. I would probably be an expert salesman in under 200 if I started well. A good pilot always has around 20,000 flying hours (confirmation pls?). Professional atheletes/gamers have more natural talent and spend more time tweaking smaller things than us, which makes them better.

Nature vs Nurture debating incoming imo.

Navillus

United States1188 Posts

April 09 2011 02:51 GMT

#66

The 10,000 hour rule was actually found in a study of numerous disciplines, the person who did it was named Ereckson IIRC and I studied it a bit at one point for school and it's definitely a thing. They looked at chess, music, academics, some sports I think, now as to the above poster I think most sports are probably a different story because there are genetic factors that have a bigger effect than with most things (I don't mean people that are just naturally better at the sport I mean things like being bigger/taller as a kid. There's a book by Malcolm Gladwell, Outliers and it actually shows that kids who are bigger or born earlier in the year have a big advantage in sports because they're a little bigger as little kids but that small size difference means their played more so they get better faster so they're played even more etc.. etc... The book also actually mentions this very rule and for non-sports even things you would think are very much based on natural ability like music the original study found that there wasn't ANYONE in the pretty large group of violinists that they were looking at who worked much harder or much less hard than the others to achieve similar results

YejinYejin

United States1053 Posts

April 09 2011 02:55 GMT

#67

You opened a parenthesis and never closed it. Just wanted to point that out.

For music, what about perfect pitch? I know some people who got very good at piano without perfect pitch and just hard work, but I know more people who worked just as hard, have perfect pitch, and are THAT much better.

Khul Sadukar

Australia1735 Posts

April 09 2011 07:56 GMT

#68

I just stumbled upon this guys Xfire profile. http://www.xfire.com/profile/blake22/

He's played just over 5k hrs of Jedi Academy MP. Master Jedi indeed...

pigtheman

United States333 Posts

April 09 2011 08:01 GMT

#69

On April 09 2011 01:44 nitram wrote:
I have a friend that played over 500 game and hes still in bronze. It takes more than just putting time into an activity.You need a drive to better yourself.

yet that is only 500 games matters how he played the games and what not.. you need more than evidence than that ^^
time=experience=game sense= you play better in reacting to your opponent
(: that is a lot of time though...
i havent had mastery over life yet D:

ionize

Ireland399 Posts

April 09 2011 08:05 GMT

#70

So what happens if we reverse the process. Instead of counting down from 10000 hours as a goal to achieve mastery, we count upwards and check every 50/100/x (any arbitrary number of hours) on our improvement? I mean, when talent and proper training come into play, when do they? Don't you need a basic grasp of a game like SC2 first before you can profit from proper coaching or intense 1on1 with training partners? When do you start looking at your demos? I feel like not looking on my demos for the first 100+ games at all, as I'm still in learning mode and don't have a sense for what exactly is going on, so when do I start?

It's interesting to put your gaming life into the 10000 hours perspective. I don't they "you gotta fuck'n apply it. NOW!", but take a look at yourself, with all your effort and all your methods. At what point are you and how far have you gone? I played UT against bots for a long time and it honed my reflexes and aim, but nothing more. When I had a duel against a competetive player for the first time he manhandled me, but I was able to learn fast, because I had grasped the game to a certain point and was ready to move on. But what about a complete newbe? Would he be able to learn proper duels right from the spot? Doesnt he need to learn some basics first?

Herper

501 Posts

April 09 2011 08:13 GMT

#71

It's not just pure hours, you also gotta practice the right technique. Since practicing the wrong technique is just as bad as not practicing at all.

Sunstuff

Romania50 Posts

April 09 2011 16:15 GMT

#72

I don't actually think that 9k hrs would be bad either

... It's simple enough time and you can achieve mastery with anything , there's isn't a point where you can say DING ... Master of this ... You constantly improve on what you do .... Even after 40k hrs

legatus legionis

Netherlands559 Posts

April 09 2011 16:34 GMT

#73

The way I learned about this when it passes by in a book about Industrial Organization is that it isn't mastery, it's expertise and makes one an official expert.

Qoute taken from the source linked in OP seems to agree: "In addition, other studies have also shown that excellence at a complex task requires a minimum level of practice, and experts have settled on 10,000 hours as the magic number for true expertise".

An expert is simply a formal way of indicating someone is most likely more than qualified to do certain things. Be it mental or physical or whatever. It's not an answer to a certain field, it's not an end goal since the fields one can become an expert in are infinite in depth and it's nothing to strife for since it doesn't give you anything except for possible credit.
What matters is all the build up you do.

And I link this for those wanting to read up on experts indepth. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert

Prev 1 2 3 4 All

Please or register to reply.

Live Events Refresh