Yup, music, athletics, high-level research, trolling lrc...the list goes on and on.
Didn't watch the video, so maybe this is addressed, but doesn't this really depend on what "something" refers to? To get good at neurosurgery, you need to spend 7 years working way more than 6-8 hours per day. To get good at running the register at the gift shop, you can probably just do a transaction or two and consider yourself a good gift shop volunteer.
Where the logic really breaks down is that every complex task is composed of smaller components. You must be good at each component to be good at the task. If you must spend years working at something for 6+ hours per day to be good at it, then any job consisting of a dozen individual components would essentially be unlearnable. If you have to spend years of 6+ hour days doing sutures to become good at that task, and you have to spend years of 6+ hour days making entry incisions to learn that task, and you have to spend years of 6+ hour days reading various radiological images to become good at that task (and so forth), the neurosurgeon referenced above is never going to develop the full skill set required to be considered good at his job.
Tell that to Komen or Rono.
"To get good at neurosurgery, you need to spend 7 years working way more than 6-8 hours per day."
No, to get REALLY good, meaning a very top-level neurosurgeon recognized nationally, and maybe even internationally.
Taking neurosurgery as an example since you brought it up, I would think that if you totalled all the time spent in school from first grade to med school, both time in class and time spent studying, to interning you'd probably be putting in at least six hours a day on the average.
Sean Wade went to Rice on a tennis scholarship and switched to running partly, he said, because to be a top tennis player you needed to practice at least six hours a day but a runner could do it on two hours. Runners sort of have it easy in terms of practice time.
HRE wrote:
Taking neurosurgery as an example since you brought it up, I would think that if you totalled all the time spent in school from first grade to med school, both time in class and time spent studying, to interning you'd probably be putting in at least six hours a day on the average.
My point was that becoming a competent neurosurgeon requires way more than the proposed amount of practice. But you don't need to go back to first grade to make this true. The seven years of residency alone blow the 10,000 hour standard out of the water.
And really, time spent in school doesn't count anyway. The claim is that you need to spend the stated amount of time doing neurosurgery to become a good nuerosurgeon. You're not doing neurosurgery until you're a resident.
But anyway, the point is that you can't apply the same standard to every task.
If not 6-8 hours a day then close to it.
really depends wrote:
Didn't watch the video, so maybe this is addressed, but doesn't this really depend on what "something" refers to? .
I didn't watch it either, but my guess would be that Linda Ronstadt was probably addressing musical performance.
If you want to define practice time only as time spent doing the actual activity you'd probably need to find a different scale for something like neurosurgery. It's not possible to spend six hours each day for years on end cutting into people's brains. There just aren't that many people needing brain surgery and volunteers to practice on are pretty rare. The best ones would generally be the ones who get the most practice in but no, the number of hours would be well below six a day of actual brain cutting..
Sounds about right wrote:
If not 6-8 hours a day then close to it.
Volume explanations are largely nonsense.
Legions of musicians/writers of all kinds/athletes can testify that volume does not guarantee anything. Even folks with regular jobs all put in hours of work every day, yet we don't have a nation full of the highest performing anything.
Specific to singing. She didn't sing 6-8 hours a day, every day. It's not physically possible to sing well for 6-8 hours day after day. Music schools are churning out very serious, dedicated, artists with the hours Ms. Ronstadt claims that will become little more than teachers.
It is true, however, that being a reliable somebody in your field can be more successful than "talent" that does not show up for the job. Plenty of those examples. Plenty!
10,000 hours wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBHJL_splYg
I feel really sorry for her current health woes.
She's a wonderful woman, cute, and was a great pop singer.
If she was starting out today she would have been a major "benefitter" of "auto toon," her singing was terribly nasally at times...
There are however cases of natural talent, athletes who improve rapidly after a year or two of training.
Eric Jenkins, for one.
Something to remember from her younger days;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mue05fazqsI
As the story goes, she was going commando and June Carter Cash sent someone down to the Five and Dime to get her some panties because she didn't want Johnny on that stage with her feeling the breeze between her legs.
Stunning beauty and voice.
Johnny Cash appears to be horn-dogging in that video. No wonder his wife June wanted Linda R. to wear undies. No need to make the dogging more severe.