The Washington Post has tried to rain on everybody’s parade by discouraging people from believing that they can become Olympians through deliberate practice (see Why all the practice in the world can’t turn you into an Olympian).

It reviews an older study I’ve previously shared (see my post, Deliberate Practice & Red Herrings, for a more in-depth analysis) finding that genetics plays a key, if not the key, role in becoming an expert.

I do think you might find that previous post of mine useful, but here is what I think is the “money quote” from it:

It seems to me that deliberate practice debunkers often raise a red herring saying that advocates say that anybody can become an expert through deliberate practice.

I haven’t heard that…

What I have read and learned in research on the topic is that deliberate practice is the most important element in developing expertise that is within a person’s control.

So, please, if you are going to write or talk about deliberate practice, don’t do it in the context of debunking something that no one is saying…

I’m adding this info to The Best Resources For Learning About The 10,000 Hour Rule & Deliberate Practice.