Conversation

I know this is obvious, but I think it bears repeating: the higher up you go in some skill tree, the smaller the improvements become. Which leads to some interesting observations: 1) To a novice, an expert giving feedback to the merely good will seem like nitpicking.
8
112
2) You know how in chess and tennis, people say that great players make less mistakes than good players? This is an instance of that. 3) You should expect to have to level up to notice ever smaller details and tweaks as you progress.
1
22
4) Which in turn means that as you get better, refining technique can be vastly more boring than the early skill jumps of the novice-intermediate.
1
22
This set of observations brought to you by my being consistently humbled in the judo dojo. This competition coach I talk to notices some of the smallest, most trivial things that — when taken seriously — turns out to have a big impact on the technique working.
2
18
But Buchard is able to do her throw to everyone from the same grip, regardless of their handedness. How? The answer: she forces same side players into an opposite stance, and in that tiny window when the stance switches, she attacks. Me: wtf?!
1
6
Competition coach: it’s obvious when you know what to look for. Me: wtf? Which makes me wonder what the equivalent thing is in other skill domains like programming or marketing. What tiny tweaks am I missing?
5
9
Replying to
Kinda agree with that counterpoint. In competition matches, the techniques you can use are limited to that specific sport - ie. in karate, you can use only karate moves. In a real fight tho, one does not expect a chair to come flying at you.
1
Replying to
This is good. Chess is bounded and in probabilistic domains—complex, adaptive systems—it’s different. What sports find creative edges althat alter gameplay? For me, golf is one bc of weather, multiple rds, conditions of course, and more…before we even get to my shot.
1
1