Why More Hours Won’t Always Help

#106 - Deliberate Practice and rethinking how to improve

Ciao, I am Giovanni and I scribble thoughts weekly on all kinds of stuff I find interesting. If this post made you smile or think, and you’re not already on the list, hit the subscribe button below. It’s free, and no, I won’t spam your inbox!

Hello friends, I hope you’re doing great!

The inspiration from this post comes from a book I read recently (Peak, by Anders Ericsson) on the topic of performance and learning curves. I was attracted to the book from a tweet that highlighted how the author had an interesting read on why some people could reach better performance in their fields vs the competition.

A few years ago I read another book (Outlier, by Malcom Gladwell) that had a simple yet powerful argument: practice makes perfect. The author had some interesting evidence on how the top performers in each field simply had an advantage in terms of “flight hours” vs the rest of the pack. Bill Gates spent more hours programming before coming of age vs the vast majority of people in his time, because his high school had one of the first mainframe computers in the world and by chance he got to play with it and eventually became one of the first programmers.

Gladwell distilled this insight in his famous “10.000 hours rule”: he believes that to get good at something, one needs to invest at least 10,000 hours doing it.

I actually like the simplicitiy and cleannes of the framework, and also directionally agree with the concept that in every aspect of life there never is a “silver bullet” or a secret golden rule: hard work is almost always the only thing that matters.

Having said that, reflecting on my self I often thought: how come, regardless the many hours I have put in it, I don’t seem to make material improvements in my padel skills? Or tennis skills, or guitar skills… it can’t be only a function of time.

And indeed Peak has a good point of view, in this concept of “deliberate practice”. It challenges the comforting narrative I had clung to for years: it isn’t just about time spent; it is about how that time is used.

The 10,000-Hour Rule

The premise of Gladwell’s 10,000-hour rule is simple: if you want to achieve world-class performance in any field, whether it’s sports, music, or business, you need to put in roughly 10,000 hours of practice. Gladwell’s examples painted a clear picture—hard work over time equates to excellence.

The key example Gladwell cites is Bill Gates, who, as a teenager, had an almost obsessive relationship with early computer programming. While most kids were spending their evenings and weekends in typical teenage activities, Gates was in the computer room at his school, taking full advantage of the rare access he had to a computer terminal at a time when such resources were scarce. Gates reportedly spent thousands of hours during his formative years learning to code, experimenting with programming languages, and pushing the boundaries of what he could do with computers. Gladwell argues that this early and sustained exposure to computers, combined with Gates’ tireless work ethic, laid the foundation for him to eventually become the tech visionary who co-founded Microsoft. By dedicating so much time to his passion, Gates mastered skills that gave him a significant head start over others when the computer revolution began.

Another good example is how he tries to dismantle the common myth of Mozart as a child prodigy who was born with innate genius. While Mozart is often celebrated for composing music from a young age, Gladwell points out that his early works were not particularly groundbreaking. In fact, much of what Mozart produced in his youth was derivative and did not showcase the brilliance he is known for today. Gladwell emphasizes that it took years of intense practice and relentless effort before Mozart developed into the composer who created iconic symphonies and operas. By the time Mozart reached his early twenties, he had already accumulated thousands of hours of composing, performing, and refining his craft. Gladwell uses Mozart to illustrate that, even for someone of his extraordinary talent, mastery comes through time and effort, not simply from natural ability. This reinforces the idea that talent, while important, needs to be coupled with deliberate practice to achieve greatness.

I’ll admit, when I first came across the 10,000-hour rule, it was inspiring. It gave me a concrete target. The message was straightforward: put in enough time, and mastery will follow. It made success feel almost mechanical, like a recipe where the only ingredients were persistence and time. It also gave me hope: even if you’re not born with an evident talent, you still have a chance.

And actually, thinking about it, this rule caught on for a reason—it taps into the deep-rooted belief that we can all get better at something if we just work hard enough. It’s an attractive notion because it’s egalitarian; time is something we all have in equal measure, even if our starting points are different. And for many of us, it offered hope that consistent effort would eventually be rewarded with exceptional skill.

Hitting the Plateau: The Limits of Repetitive Practice

But then I started thinking: how come that, after investing years into tennis (or padel) I do not see the consistent effort to naturally lead to steady improvement? No matter how many more hours I spent on the court, I didn’t feel like I was getting any better.

Many people experience this plateau, where it feels like they’ve reached the peak of their abilities and no amount of practice seems to help them break through it.

This happens because of how we practice. After learning the basic skills, we often fall into a routine, repeating what we’re comfortable with rather than challenging our weaknesses. Instead of targeting the areas where we’re struggling, we stick to what feels good or familiar, even if it no longer leads to improvement. In this way, the effort becomes “mindless repetition,” reinforcing habits but not refining them.

This is where the idea of deliberate practice, as introduced in Peak, made things click for me.

The Concept of Deliberate Practice

The idea of deliberate practice shifts the focus from the quantity to the quality of hours. Ericsson’s research shows that it’s not just about putting in time but about pushing your limits in a specific, measurable way that leads to true progress. This kind of practice is mentally demanding, constantly forcing you to confront your weaknesses rather than coast on your strengths.

1. Specific, Well-Defined Goals

One of the most important aspects of deliberate practice is setting clear and specific goals for improvement. Instead of vague aspirations like “get better at tennis” or “improve my game,” deliberate practice requires you to focus on concrete objectives, like “improve the accuracy of my backhand” or “increase my sprint speed by half a second.” This focus allows you to hone in on specific skills, making your practice sessions more productive. Without targeted goals, you risk wandering through practice without a clear direction.

2. Immediate Feedback

Practice without feedback is like driving with your eyes closed—you have no idea if you’re heading in the right direction. In deliberate practice, feedback is essential for identifying mistakes, adjusting technique, and measuring progress. This must come from someone that masters the field like an experienced coach or a mentor. Immediate feedback helps keep your practice sharp and on target.

3. Pushing Beyond Your Comfort Zone

Deliberate practice requires you to consistently push yourself beyond your current abilities. It’s not about repeating what you already know how to do; it’s about challenging your limits. This is where growth happens—when you’re slightly out of your depth and have to stretch to improve. In Peak, Ericsson explains that true progress comes from operating at the edge of your capabilities, where mistakes are frequent but serve as learning opportunities. In tennis, this might mean practicing against a more skilled opponent or focusing on weak areas that you normally avoid because they are difficult.

4. Focus and Intensity

Finally, deliberate practice demands complete focus and intensity. It’s not enough to just go through the motions; you need to engage deeply with the task at hand. This means being mentally present and avoiding distractions during practice sessions. The more concentrated and mindful you are, the more likely you are to absorb new techniques and correct mistakes. Deliberate practice is tiring not only physically but also mentally, because it requires a sustained focus on improvement and learning.

A Fresh Perspective on Making Progress

Peak gave me a new lens for looking at the parts of my life where I’ve felt stuck—whether it’s tennis, work, or even personal projects. For the longest time, I held onto the idea that just putting in more time would eventually get me where I wanted to go. You know, the whole “just keep going, it’ll work out” mindset. But after hitting some frustrating plateaus, I realized that wasn’t enough. What this framework put into words is a basic concept that I had never declined in this way: it’s not just about the hours; it’s about how you use them.

And actually in the past months I have found myself applying this whenever I felt like I was not making any progress in a field of my life. And honestly, I’ve found that AI, especially ChatGPT, has been an unexpectedly helpful companion in this process.

Over the past few months, I’ve used it to talk through areas where I felt blocked, get insights, and help me come up with a plan for deliberate practice. It’s like having a sounding board that’s available whenever I need it, whether for work, hobbies, or just figuring out next steps.

If you’re feeling stuck or unsure about where to go next, I highly recommend giving it a try. It’s been a game-changer for me.

Wish you a fantastic weekend,
Giovanni