lack of fundamentals or lack of practice?

[FranCrimi]

Here's a prime example of childhood opportunity.... This kid plays pretty well. He is playing a Gibson Les Paul through a Marshall amp, 4x12 cabinet. He's 12. Who bought this equipment for him? I would bet my next paycheck that this kid started playing when he was around 5 to 8 years old, inspired by a parent or family member that's a musician, and they provided this kid with the opportunity to start playing guitar. When this kid is 35 and still jamming, others will say he was a natural. But the truth is, he was exposed to music at the most opportune time for his mind to soak it all up with ease.

This is very true where many athletes who become great are born into a family who is already involved in the sport. For example, both Jean Balukas and Loree Jon's Ogonowski Brown's dads owned pool rooms where top pros frequented. While the rest of us were home watching Capatin Kangaroo, these two were in their dads' pool rooms sparring with world champions. I recall when Loree Jon played in her first WPBA tournament. I think she was barely 14 or 15, but her game was so mature, like a top male player's would be in those days.

 

[BC21]

This is very true where many athletes who become great are born into a family who is already involved in the sport. For example, both Jean Balukas and Loree Jon's Ogonowski Brown's dads owned pool rooms where top pros frequented. While the rest of us were home watching Capatin Kangaroo, these two were in their dads' pool rooms sparring with world champions. I recall when Loree Jon played in her first WPBA tournament. I think she was barely 14 or 15, but her game was so mature, like a top male player's would be in those days.

Exactly. And research indicates that a child doesn't necessarily have to participate physically in the activity to benefit from such opportunities. Simply being in the environment, where they can watch and listen to what others are doing, allows the mind to soak it all up and store it away.

So a child who just watches a lot of pool from an early age, but doesn't really have an interest in playing, will have these experiences in reserve for later on in life should they decide to start playing the game. Their mind gathered plenty of useful information during the greatest window of opportunity for skill development, and that information could be quite a learning advantage later on, compared to someone who didn't have such childhood experiences or opportunities.

 

[bbb]

not sure this analogy is applicable but it could be
if i move to a foreign country as an adult and have to learn a new language
i may with time become fluent enough to feel comfortable in that new language perhaps even dream in that new language but more than likely i will always have an accent
if i move there as a young child
odds are i will be fluent and sound like a native speaker

 

[MajorMiscue]

more than likely i will always have an accent

Verdad.

 

[WobblyStroke]

Related to childhood opportunity but not so much which family you are born into as when you are born.... About 75% of varsity athletes are born in the first 3 months of the year. The reasoning goes like this.... at a young age those kids are the biggest in their age group so tend to be selected to teams and get the most playing time. That playing time translates to more learning which opens up a bigger gap between them and their peers. They get more attention from coaches, get identified as having skills in that sport leading to joining teams outside of school and even more coaching, often from better coaches at the 'rep' level. And just like that, by the time they are seniors in high school, most student athletes are born in the first 3 months. This is from memory so it could just be looking at starters, but still, massive over representation and all because of opportunities 'earned' by being born earlier and being bigger at an age when a few months of growth make a big difference.

 

[bbb]

Related to childhood opportunity but not so much which family you are born into as when you are born.... About 75% of varsity athletes are born in the first 3 months of the year. The reasoning goes like this.... at a young age those kids are the biggest in their age group so tend to be selected to teams and get the most playing time. That playing time translates to more learning which opens up a bigger gap between them and their peers. They get more attention from coaches, get identified as having skills in that sport leading to joining teams outside of school and even more coaching, often from better coaches at the 'rep' level. And just like that, by the time they are seniors in high school, most student athletes are born in the first 3 months. This is from memory so it could just be looking at starters, but still, massive over representation and all because of opportunities 'earned' by being born earlier and being bigger at an age when a few months of growth make a big difference.

interesting if true

 

[WobblyStroke]

interesting if true

First google article that popped up....

Birth month is a big factor in athletic performance • Daniel Kiikka

The development of young athletes favors those who are more mature and therefore have better physical performance. Is there room for skill?

danielkiikka.com

In it she reports on studies that show 40% of Junior hockey teams were born in first 3 months and links to other studies which report a 4X chance to make it to the big leagues....one of those is likely where I got the 75-80%.. Neat lil flow chart sums it up nicely for why the cumulative effect is so big..... Understanding that the biggest young kids will likely have the best performance and that coaches/teachers routinely pick bigger kids bc "you can't teach size" makes these early-born big kids the best performers early on. The flow chart then goes like this....

There is even a book linked called "Birth Month Can Make an Athlete" which broke down NHL players by birth month. It is a down sloping linear relationship, meaning the earlier in the year you are born, the better your chances are of making it, and those chances decrease steadily every month.,

 

[bbb]

thanks for the link
although the premise and explanation seem plausable
the book says 30% of nhl players are born in those 3 months
well those 3 months are 25% of the year
is that statistically significat ...i dont now
the other stat
the 2016 UEFA European championship tournament, where 57% of the players were born on the first half of the year.
well 57% is not far from 50% (half the year)
so i would say "very interesting"
thanks again for the quick access to the link for some support for your post

 

[BC21]

not sure this analogy is applicable but it could be
if i move to a foreign country as an adult and have to learn a new language
i may with time become fluent enough to feel comfortable in that new language perhaps even dream in that new language but more than likely i will always have an accent
if i move there as a young child
odds are i will be fluent and sound like a native speaker

Yes. But if in your early childhood you would've had some exposure to that language (mom or dad or grandparent that you spent a lot of time with), even if you never learned a single word, just listening to the language at that age would give you a great advantage for learning it and speaking it more naturally years later.

 

[FranCrimi]

Yes. But if in your early childhood you would've had some exposure to that language (mom or dad or grandparent that you spent a lot of time with), even if you never learned a single word, just listening to the language at that age would give you a great advantage for learning it and speaking it more naturally years later.

I can attest to this as well but with a story in the opposite direction ---- My family is Sicilian, so I was exposed to the Sicilian dialect from birth, mainly due to my parents speaking it with their elders in the family. I even have myself on tape at 3 yrs old singing a Sicilan song. I'm sure I never understood the meaning of the words.

Then in college, I took a class in Italian, hoping to learn the 'high Italian' and maybe visit Italy one day, but it was a terrible failure for me because the teacher would pronounce something, and I'd think --- "That's not right." I was constantly reverting back to a Sicilian accent, even though I didn't really speak the language growing up other than a few words here or there.

 

[BC21]

I can attest to this as well but with a story in the opposite direction ---- My family is Sicilian, so I was exposed to the Sicilian dialect from birth, mainly due to my parents speaking it with their elders in the family. I even have myself on tape at 3 yrs old singing a Sicilan song. I'm sure I never understood the meaning of the words.

Then in college, I took a class in Italian, hoping to learn the 'high Italian' and maybe visit Italy one day, but it was a terrible failure for me because the teacher would pronounce something, and I'd think --- "That's not right." I was constantly reverting back to a Sicilian accent, even though I didn't really speak the language growing up other than a few words here or there.

That's interesting!

I wonder whether or not you would've been the star student of the class if the instructor had had the same accent for which your mind had already been primed.

It is truly amazing how much our minds pick up during early childhood, and how that information, years later, influences how we think, how we learn, how we handle emotions, and how efficiently we develop skills and talents.

For example, a child who is read to daily will enter kindergarten or preschool having heard a million more words than a child who's parents didn't read to them. I think the study said something like 4 or 5 childrens books per day turns out to be a 1 million word difference. Reading just 1 book per day to your child is about a 250,000 word difference.

Children who hear 250,000 to a million more words as toddlers, compared to children who don't get that opportunity, will do much better in reading and writing when they teach the age to start school.

 

[Dan White]

That's interesting!

I wonder whether or not you would've been the star student of the class if the instructor had had the same accent for which your mind had already been primed.

It is truly amazing how much our minds pick up during early childhood, and how that information, years later, influences how we think, how we learn, how we handle emotions, and how efficiently we develop skills and talents.

For example, a child who is read to daily will enter kindergarten or preschool having heard a million more words than a child who's parents didn't read to them. I think the study said something like 4 or 5 childrens books per day turns out to be a 1 million word difference. Reading just 1 book per day to your child is about a 250,000 word difference.

Children who hear 250,000 to a million more words as toddlers, compared to children who don't get that opportunity, will do much better in reading and writing when they teach the age to start school.

Yes, that's called HAMB, which stands for "hear a million books," which is an exaggeration but indicates the level of commitment needed to improve.