The Sports Gene And The Outliers By David Epstein

Think of something you are passionate about. Is it a skill that you are able to push yourself in? People are always told that with enough hard work you could become a master of that skill. Even without natural talent, enough hard work at a skill will eventually build up the ability. By constantly pushing oneself past their limits during practice, they can improve quicker than someone who has the natural ability and doesn’t try. However, skill doesn’t always equal success. As Malcolm Gladwell states in his book The Outliers, luck plays a large role in the ability to obtain the 10,000 hours required to become an expert in a subject. However, many studies and even the researchers of the 10,000 hour study have rejected the rule outright. I disagree with Gladwell that 10,000 hours is required to become a master, and that luck plays a much larger role than he states.

How much of what happens in our lives do we actually control? This is a question that mankind has been pondering for thousands of years. There are two different articles that could answer the question. David Epstein, the author of “The Sports Gene”, writes about a true story of fate, in which an amateur high jumper makes it to the top due to his god-given gift of a large Achille’s tendon. Malcom Gladwell argues in his piece, “Outliers,” that success depends on one’s willingness to practice or try again. Using extensive research and solid evidence, Malcom Gladwell creates a better argument that success is a result of hard work and dedication, and therefore better answers the question, “How much of what happens in our lives do we actually control?”

How much of our lives do we actually control ? Everyone has and will always have different outlooks on this question that can’t possibly be proven, we can solely try to persuade and convince each other otherwise.For example two authors had two different viewpoints on this controversial question.David Epstein, author of The Sports Gene, argues that physical ability formed at birth out ways hard work and success achieved through years of practice.The opposing author William Ernest Henley wrote a poem called Invictus that is strong and powerful to anyone that reads it, claiming that you are the master of your own destiny. These are both reasonable claims but I believe William Ernest Henry has a more convincing argument therefore he better answers the question, How much of our lives do we actually control ?

How many hours of someone’s life are necessary to perfect a skill? 300? 5000? Perhaps try 10,000 hours. In this chapter from Outliers, “The 10,000-Hour Rule”, Malcolm Gladwell argues that talent isn’t innate, but takes 10,000 hours to perfect a skill based on opportunity, talent, and practice. Throughout the chapter “The 10,000-Hour Rule”, Malcolm Gladwell effectively relies on logos--evidence from well-known figures and charts that show age similarities--to support his theory that it takes a particular window of time to offer someone the opportunity to practice for 10,000 hours to succeed at a skill. However, Gladwell ineffectively relies on repetition of evidence and failure to

Experts argue about whether or not we have control over our lives. They question if destiny is determined by fate or by choices we make in our life. Two authors both take their sides on this topic producing evidence to support their claim. David Epstein author of The Sports Gene and Malcolm Gladwell author of Outliers: Story of Success both make an argument on how much we control in our lives in which they take different sides. David Epstein wrote about a track and field athlete who had incredible jumping ability despite never practicing high jumping. Malcolm Gladwell talks about how violinists were never able to float through musical school without putting in the practice hours. They each support their side with

To work until reaching the level of mastery of anything is a massive achievement in a person’s life. What if someone told that person that if they haven’t had reached the level of mastery if they haven’t practiced a certain amount of hours. How would that make them feel? Enraged. Depressed. Speechless. Talentless. In the Chapter “The 10,000-Hour Rule” by Malcolm Gladwell, he argues that the amount of practice required for the mastery of anything is 10,000 hours. He uses examples of famous people or groups of people that the audience might know to try and dispel the myth that to be able to master something, it takes more than innate talent. Malcolm Gladwell's use of logos and imagery fail to prove his point to the author due to the statistics he uses, and the sentences he uses to prove his point that the amount of hours required for mastery is 10,000 hours.

The way a child learns to develop a motor skill can depend on various factors. For example, a child’s ability to jump can be influenced by genetics and by nature. People might argue that genetics are more important in determining how high the child will be able to jump. While others might argue that jumping is mainly determined by how you teach and train a child to jump. This is an example of the nature versus nurture debate. Although genes may play a role in developing a child’s skills. This paper will discuss how nurture has more of an influence on how a child’s motor skills develop than nature. The main focus will be how nurture plays a greater role in developing skills such as writing, running, and writing. Nurtures influence on these skills will show how genetics are not as important in the development of motor skills.

The road to greatness is a long path filled with struggle and time. Based on research by the best-selling author Malcom Gladwell inside his book Outliers popularized the idea of 10,000 hours of guided practice “the magic number of greatness”(Gladwell, 47). With enough practice he said anyone could achieve any work that of a professional. While some say the 10,000 hour rule is the key to success I believe that success is based on genetics, talent, and time period. It is whether one was born with the talent, achieved it later within life or was born during the wrong time period is what makes a master out of someone. Where the 10,000 hour rule is not a truth.

In the book Outliers, the author Malcolm Gladwell elucidates that people have to practice for more than 10,000 hours or 10 years in order to fully become successful. People can achieve more regardless of not being financially wealthy. Even though some people that have practiced for less than 10,000 hours did achieve their goals, the majority of the successful people have practiced for more than 10,000 hours. Gladwell states that, “they work much, much harder” (39). and that they have to want to stand out from everyone else. I believe that very successful people are lucky, and have talent, and are willing to work harder than everyone else.

Early specialization is characterized by year-round training in a single activity, beginning at a young age, apart from other activities with the goal of developing expertise (Ericsson et al., 1993). Ericsson and his colleagues studied pianists and violinists of varying skill levels and discovered that the expert musicians typically began training between ages four and five while the non-experts started training later in life. Moreover, a pattern emerged indicating that the level of performance attained related to the amount of deliberate practice. By age 20 the best performers had spent over 10,000 hours, an intermediate group had put in 8,000 hours, and the least accomplished group only 5,000 hours. In their theory of deliberate practice, Ericsson et al. (1993) suggest that talent plays no role in the development of expertise, rather it is an effortful activity motivated by the goal of improving performance. Typically, deliberate practice requires a high amount of concentration and must be carried out over time. The obligation to significant amounts of deliberate practice in one sport from a young age has been demonstrated as one approach to developing elite athletes (Helsen et al., 1998).

Time or Talent: Can someone be born gifted or do they have to ‘earn’ their talent? In order to be successful, 10,000 hours is required to become professional; however, in order to be successful one must be born in the right time and place. Malcolm Gladwell makes this argument by providing evidence that Bill Joy, Bill Gates, and Steve Jobs were all born from 1952 and 1958 and now became some of the most successful people in the world by their twenties. In the chapter “The 10,000-Hour Rule”, Malcolm Gladwell uses tables and anecdotes of famous people in order to create a logical argument and effectively boost his reliability (ethos). However, in the process of using charts and anecdotal evidence, Gladwell creates many logical fallacies, which makes both his logos- and ethos-based arguments ineffective.

The secret to success is arguably one of the most sought-after pieces of advice worldwide. According to Malcom Gladwell’s book Outliers, the “10,000 hour rule” is a technique that has been practiced by many professionals in their respective areas. However, some authors, such as Jared Sandman and David Bradley, disagree with the notion that 10,000 hours of practice will make you a professional. Both authors present valid points in their respective arguments, yet Sandman’s argument comes across as clearer, more decisive, more down to earth, and therefore more effective. Sandman has credibility as a published author, he is constant with his

What makes a good athlete? What separates a person on the 1st line up from a bench warmer? Where does athleticism come from? Is it from our genes, or is it a product of the environment we live in? These are the types of questions that arise in the nature vs. nurture debate pertaining about athletic ability. In 1582, British educator, Richard Mulcaster wrote that
''Nature makes the boy toward, nurture sees him forward,'' he gave the world
a euphonious name for an opposition that has been debated ever since; Nature and Nurture. People's
beliefs about the roles of heredity and environment affect their opinions on an
astonishing range of topics including sports. The nature versus nurture debate not only exists in the sporting community but also in many others. It is a very controversial topic that has puzzled researchers for centuries. There are two sides to the debate; Nature and Nurture. To be on the side on nature one believes that DNA and heredity make us who we are. In the case of sports, an athlete is born with genes that give them the ability to excel in a certain sport. On the other hand, many people believe that we become who we are because of the environment and people around us; Nurture. A nurtured athlete is an individual that has developed elite skills over time caused by rigorous training and their surroundings. Nature or nurture, which contributes more to the creation of professional athletes?

It has been argued that if genes influence behaviour and character, and we cannot choose our genes, then our behaviour is outside our control and we are not responsible. However, we take the view that genes are not deterministic, and that there is scope for an

Cote et al. (2007) points out the principle of the power law of practice, where great improvements are seen in the initial stages of practice, but the improvements level-off as one becomes an expert. This power relationship seems to be converted into a more linear relationship with increased deliberate practice. Violinists were studied, and time spent in deliberate practice was examined. By 18 years of age, experts accumulated 7,400 hours of practice, whereas intermediate-level performers had 5,300 hours, and lower-level performers only completed 3,400 hours. This linear law of practice seems to be generalizable to other domains, namely sport and chess (Cote et al., 2007, pp. 185). Although deliberate practice is very important, it is not the sole predictor of elite-level