- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

10,000 hours? Understanding the conditions for expert learning

#11

why is it sport always the paradigm of expertise and chess nowadays. As if chess was a motor skills only.

Sure motor skills also need the full mental skills to be in the game of growing one's expertise at time controlled real time performance peak, and podium glory of the best of the cream of the top, ... etc.... excellency and all.

But what about more life long expertise (that can be shared, sometimes among each other, just a thought).

Is it that chess is predominantly move-chess? a motor skill sport. Fast execution, eagle eye.. etc....

? I am not saying it is not relevant, but why so much of that. Does it have something to do, or perhaps explain the watching sport drift we might be considering these days?

Building the sport story of chess? but is that not only the high-society of chess that we watch, I mean (not me, the general we...).

Muscles, need a lot of deliberate practice to become in tune with the mental (or vice-versa), but there are other things that are more contemplative at longer time scales that don't fit in that performance sport paradigm.

why is it sport always the paradigm of expertise and chess nowadays. As if chess was a motor skills only. Sure motor skills also need the full mental skills to be in the game of growing one's expertise at time controlled real time performance peak, and podium glory of the best of the cream of the top, ... etc.... excellency and all. But what about more life long expertise (that can be shared, sometimes among each other, just a thought). Is it that chess is predominantly move-chess? a motor skill sport. Fast execution, eagle eye.. etc.... ? I am not saying it is not relevant, but why so much of that. Does it have something to do, or perhaps explain the watching sport drift we might be considering these days? Building the sport story of chess? but is that not only the high-society of chess that we watch, I mean (not me, the general we...). Muscles, need a lot of deliberate practice to become in tune with the mental (or vice-versa), but there are other things that are more contemplative at longer time scales that don't fit in that performance sport paradigm.
#12

Do you have a link to the resources you used to write this article?

Do you have a link to the resources you used to write this article?
#13

@orange-poof said in #12:

Do you have a link to the resources you used to write this article?
He already posted them previously in this topic.

@orange-poof said in #12: > Do you have a link to the resources you used to write this article? He already posted them previously in this topic.
#14

Malcolm "igon value" Gladwell?

If he said the sky was blue I'd go outside and check.

Malcolm "igon value" Gladwell? If he said the sky was blue I'd go outside and check.
#16
<Comment deleted by user>
#17

This is a good question, but in chess the time scale or experience amount scale might not be comparable to any other non speficified complexity level "practice".

There is the subrate world to learn as a floating variable. I am not sure that an hour in one "world" transposes to the same in another degree of complexity world.

There might be shared principles.. but I think each field might likely have its own more specific and specifiable and metrizable variable to bear on that question. and why only focus on expert as the baseline of learning. sure we can dream about it.. but for chess we are not all kids in development for which it is more probably to have life time span ressource to put on this... on not all lucky to have the free time later to get there.. So there are many steps of learning or skill set elements... that could be targets ..

why people talk about improvement ... I know expert is more shiny, and people seems to need the superlative superhero soap opera, or royalty to forget their own non-royalty.... (beware of neck getting stuck with a kink, while looking up all the time, I say, look around yourself, there might be invisible fog or obstacles, that nobody care to talk about).

This is a good question, but in chess the time scale or experience amount scale might not be comparable to any other non speficified complexity level "practice". There is the subrate world to learn as a floating variable. I am not sure that an hour in one "world" transposes to the same in another degree of complexity world. There might be shared principles.. but I think each field might likely have its own more specific and specifiable and metrizable variable to bear on that question. and why only focus on expert as the baseline of learning. sure we can dream about it.. but for chess we are not all kids in development for which it is more probably to have life time span ressource to put on this... on not all lucky to have the free time later to get there.. So there are many steps of learning or skill set elements... that could be targets .. why people talk about improvement ... I know expert is more shiny, and people seems to need the superlative superhero soap opera, or royalty to forget their own non-royalty.... (beware of neck getting stuck with a kink, while looking up all the time, I say, look around yourself, there might be invisible fog or obstacles, that nobody care to talk about).