Share this comment
I came across this paper today, which seems to say the opposite of your point: academics.hamilton.edu/….
At least for competitive swimming, the differences between amateurs and professionals are qualitative, not quantitative. The professionals aren't just practicing harder - they practice in very different ways. The author classifies the …
© 2025 Bryan Caplan
Substack is the home for great culture
I came across this paper today, which seems to say the opposite of your point: https://academics.hamilton.edu/documents/themundanityofexcellence.pdf.
At least for competitive swimming, the differences between amateurs and professionals are qualitative, not quantitative. The professionals aren't just practicing harder - they practice in very different ways. The author classifies the differences in three categories: technique, discipline, and attitude.
The reason it might seem like hard work is most important is related to Simpson's paradox. Most people will gravitate toward competitions against opponents with similar ability. And within a given level, the winners are probably the people who work the hardest. But according to this article, working harder within the same basic strategy isn't enough to reach the next level.
I think perhaps the reason for this is that people generally don't know what the crucial ingredient is to be successful - even if it seems very simple to those who are already successful.
Innate ability matters too. Phelps was a phenomenal swimmer because of his combination of hardwork, quality training, and physical attributes.
Josh Foer ‘s book Moonwalking with Einstein makes the same point in the context of improving one’s capacity to memorize
And focus