What differences do you expect between a person who plays sports daily and a person who never plays? 3 sentences
Answers
Answered by
2
I was a horrible lacrosse player in high school: bad at catching the ball, slow, and not very aggressive. Yet I'd spend hours at a handball wall with my stick: throwing, catching, repeating. I played on winter leagues, and woke up early for 6 am pickup games. Freshman and sophomore years, I made it onto the junior varsity team — a miracle. By 11th grade, it was time to try out for varsity lacrosse. This is when my history teacher — the varsity coach — pulled me aside and suggested I shouldn't bother. I'd probably be cut, he said (adding that I was getting very good grades). For me, practice did not make perfect. Lo and behold, I now have scientific validation. A meta-analysis in Perspectives in Psychological Science looked at 33 studies on the relationship between deliberate practice and athletic achievement and found that practice just doesn't matter that much. More precisely, the analysis found, practice can account for 18 percent of the difference in athletic success. Put another way, if we compare batting averages between two baseball players, the amount of time the players spent in the batting cage would only account for 18 percent of the reason one player's average is better than the other. Even more simply: Some people are just better at sports than others, and the difference cannot be made up by practice alone. There was a reason I lagged behind my peers on the lacrosse field. They probably had a natural advantage on me.
"One important thing — that's easy to misunderstand— is that this is looking at variance across people, not within an individual," Brooke Macnamara, the lead author of the Perspectives paper, tells me. "So if a person practices, they will get better. Almost across the board, practice should improve one’s performance." But it also means that for the same amount of practice, some will end up being better at sports than others. "Essentially, learning rates vary," Macnamara says. "Some people improve very quickly with less practice, while others require much more practice." The analysis found this 18 percent figure is roughly true no matter what type of sport is being played. Practice accounts for the same difference in performance in bowling as it does field hockey, two completely different activities. Practice also explains fewer differences in ability the further an athlete ascends into higher levels of play. Which suggests "deliberate practice loses its predictive power beyond a certain level of skill," the study reports. The analysis also found that the age when athletes started their sports didn't change this figure much either.
Hope it helps please mark as brainliest
"One important thing — that's easy to misunderstand— is that this is looking at variance across people, not within an individual," Brooke Macnamara, the lead author of the Perspectives paper, tells me. "So if a person practices, they will get better. Almost across the board, practice should improve one’s performance." But it also means that for the same amount of practice, some will end up being better at sports than others. "Essentially, learning rates vary," Macnamara says. "Some people improve very quickly with less practice, while others require much more practice." The analysis found this 18 percent figure is roughly true no matter what type of sport is being played. Practice accounts for the same difference in performance in bowling as it does field hockey, two completely different activities. Practice also explains fewer differences in ability the further an athlete ascends into higher levels of play. Which suggests "deliberate practice loses its predictive power beyond a certain level of skill," the study reports. The analysis also found that the age when athletes started their sports didn't change this figure much either.
Hope it helps please mark as brainliest
Similar questions