Practise responsible for just 1% of performance differences among elites
Starting sports at an early age does not necessarily provide athletes with an advantage, and practice levels accounts for just 1% of the difference in elite athlete performances, new research from Case Western Reserve University has found
“While practice is necessary for elite athletes to reach a high level of competition, after a certain point, the amount of practice essentially stops differentiating who makes it far and who makes it to the very top,” said lead author Brooke Macnamara, assistant professor of psychological sciences at Case Western Reserve University.
“Human performance is incredibly complex,” she said. “Multiple factors need to be considered, only one of which is practice.”
According to the study practice explains about 18% of why some athletes perform better or worse than others, with 82% of this difference attributed to factors other than practice.
The findings counter the notion that anyone can become an expert or elite athlete with 10,000 hours of practice, a theory inspired by research from Florida State University professor Anders Ericsson in the early 1990s and popularized in the mainstream since.
“The concept of 10,000 hours taps into the American ideal of hard work and dedication leading naturally to excellence,” said Macnamara. “But it does not account for the inherent differences across people and across sports.”
And despite some research suggesting starting young gives an athlete more time to build skills critical to attaining high performance levels, this study contradicts this.