Talent is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class Performers from Everybody Else

Product Information

Why are certain people so incredibly great at what they do? Most of us think we know the answer—but we’re almost always wrong. That’s important, because if we’re wrong on this crucial question, then we have zero chance of getting significantly better at anything we care about. I read this as a primer to the study of expertise, which is something I'd like to learn more about academically. So my rating of 3 stars is more a reflection of my intrinsic interest in the topic than the quality of the book. As a piece of writing and reporting, I'd put it at 2 stars--Colvin is at his best when he is explaining Anders Ericsson's research, but a bit out of his depth when he tries to draw independent conclusions. For example, chess grand masters are familiar with 10-100x more chess positions than non experts, so every time they see a board, they can efficiently catalog it in relation to all this knowledge. This is why they can play 20 chess games in parallel and remember what's happening in each one. It's not that their memory is better in general. In fact, studies show that while chess masters can memorize real-world chess positions far better than normal people, if you show them completely randomized chess positions, the memory of chess masters is no better than that of anyone else. When Tchaikovsky finished writing his Violin Concerto in 1878, he asked the famous violinist Leopold Auer to give the premier performance. Auer studied the score and said no—he thought the work was unplayable. Today every young violinist graduating from Juilliard can play it. The music is the same, the violins are the same, and human beings haven’t changed. But people have learned how to perform much, much better.” His follow-up book Humans Are Underratedwas the second book on Four Minute Books, so I thought it was time to make it a set.

Talent Is Overrated : GEOFFREY COLVIN - Archive.org

Then I look at the piece of paper from the previous day. I look at each idea and try to write a paragraph about it with my own words and tone. Ericsson posits it takes 10,000 hours of practiceto achieveworld-classstatus. (He’s the originator of the famous 10,000-hour rule the media overstresses.) That’s about 2.75 hours per day for ten years. He would dress up like a court minister,his sister like a princess, and they would play music to bedazzled audiences that happily paid to see the youngsters display their marvelous talents. [ 1]There are numerous good points about this book: good information based on solid scientific research; pretty good writing (not master level but close); cogent argument and so on. That being said, this book leaves several threads hanging: why experience does not necessarily led to mastery and what distinguish learning through deliberate practice from normal working experience.

Talent Is Overrated: What Really Separates World-Class

It’s a clever title, made me want to know more, but unfortunately the rest didn’t quite manage to expand on that idea well enough. It ain’t so much the things we don’t know that get us into trouble. It’s the things we know that just ain’t so.”Penguin Canada Inc.) • Penguin Books Ltd, 80 Strand, London WC2R 0RL, England • Penguin Ireland, 25 You can start at any time. It just depends on how far between zero and Tiger Woods or Mozart you want to travel. You can make pizzas for 20 years, and still make crappy pizzas (please don’t do that, I love pizza). In fact, Wolfgang's first piece of music that is highly regarded didn't come until he was 14 - after 10 full years of practice. [ 2] WHAT ABOUT TIGER WOODS? For examples, studies of world-class musicians showed that the best performers showed no particular signs of excelling earlier in life, nor any ability to acquire skills faster.

Talent Is Overrated PDF Summary - Geoff Colvin | 12min Blog Talent Is Overrated PDF Summary - Geoff Colvin | 12min Blog

But I don’t think he managed to explain well enough how these world class performers do that. As it stands I thought it was a nice read, but is probably not going leave much behind because I already knew the idea of the born genius is severely flawed at best. For the record, I believe talent exists. I think one day we’ll find genes governing specific abilities. But I don’t think talent is the whole story or even the beginning. I thought this was refreshing because there is already a plethora of information on deliberate practice available, so just talking about the practice itself would not do much. Hats off to you, Mr. Colvin! Mozart did produce compositions at an early age, but his father was a composer who started training him at age 3, and it was the father who transcribed—and likely improved—all those early compositions. What do you really believe? Do you believe that you have a choice in this matter? Do you believe that if you do the work, properly designed, with intense focus for hours a day and years on end, your performance will grow dramatically better and eventually reach the highest levels? If you believe that, then there's at least a chance you will do the work and achieve greatNot many books calm you down and make you excited to get going at the same time. This one does. In Talent Is Overrated, Geoff Colvin pops the “it’s all about talent” bubble, but in the same breath lets you know that the best time to plant a tree would’ve been 20 years ago.