I read through the post until it got to the appendix which was longer than the post itself at which point I gave up. It never actually made the point in the title, but I guess you can infer it...
I read through the post until it got to the appendix which was longer than the post itself at which point I gave up. It never actually made the point in the title, but I guess you can infer it based on these major themes:
1)Most people don't deliberately practice.
2)Deliberate practice can be an effective learning tool.
3)You should use deliberate practice.
Which is solid advice, if your goal is specifically to get good at whatever you're trying to do.
But it's an extremely elitist way of making that point, which tracks given the title. And it takes way, way longer than is necessary to actually say it.
Okay so I have a ton of experience with Overwatch, so I can pretty much only speak to the points about that that the author makes. I spent two years playing Overwatch semi-competitively at the...
Okay so I have a ton of experience with Overwatch, so I can pretty much only speak to the points about that that the author makes. I spent two years playing Overwatch semi-competitively at the platinum/diamond level, and I can tell you that there are thousands of committed players that are doing all the things that he says lead to success. Everyone playing tournaments and pick-up-games are entirely dedicated to improvement, get constant feedback from both their peers and professional coaches (I, for example, have had my VODs reviewed by at least three separate professional OW /coaches), and play the game for over 20 hours a week, yet still do not improve for the most part. In the 11 months I was on my Overwatch team, the average player moved from high platinum to low diamond. This is not the 95th percentile success that the author implies will happen. It is clear that the author does not actually understand much about how to improve in OW (likely due to having a lot of experience with other FPS's and being able to climb quickly due to talent, existing aim ability, etc). This is particularly evident when he speaks about the forums (which is known not to be representative of the community at large), when he says that OW players who want to improve don't get feedback, and most shockingly says that "Overwatch provides the tools to make it relatively easy to get feedback," which is unequivocally false. There is absolutely no system in place to get VODs reviewed, get decent feedback from professionals, or make standing teams to participate in tournaments. All of that has to be sought out by the player, and it is pretty hard to find those resources, although they are growing. Perhaps his most heinous statement was this: "when you can get to 95%-ile by fixing mistakes like "not realizing that you should stand on the objective", you don't really need a lot of talent to get to 95%-ile." It shows a complete misunderstanding of the problems facing the middle tiers of Overwatch and demonstrates that the author has no understanding of even the least complex aspects of the game. Honestly, it seems that the author has hardly played Overwatch at all. I would be interested to look at his career profile and win statistics.
Looking at the appendix, the list of "things you'll regularly see at slightly above 50%-ile" just comes off as a laundry list of things he's seen one or two people a week do and attributes it to the whole playerbase at that Elo. It honestly just sounds like a person who believes that he's "too good to be in plat," so insults all his teammates with these surface-level observations without actually understanding the true depth of the game. The rest of of the appendix continues to just be the author listing things he's seen people in plat do and complaining about it, all with a lot of elitism and a holier-than-thou attitude throughout.
The phrase "It's generally not too hard to fix these since the mistakes are like the example above: simple enough that once you see that you're making the mistake, the fix is straightforward because the mistake is straightforward" is just so inane and out of touch that I don't even know where to start.
I've never read anything by this guy before, but I definitely do not want to read anything by him again. To me, he seems elitist, self-indulgent, and entirely unaware of the problems that others might have.
I read through the post until it got to the appendix which was longer than the post itself at which point I gave up. It never actually made the point in the title, but I guess you can infer it based on these major themes:
1)Most people don't deliberately practice.
2)Deliberate practice can be an effective learning tool.
3)You should use deliberate practice.
Which is solid advice, if your goal is specifically to get good at whatever you're trying to do.
But it's an extremely elitist way of making that point, which tracks given the title. And it takes way, way longer than is necessary to actually say it.
Yeah I've read maybe 20 of Dan Luu's post and, though recency bias is at play, I'd say this is his weakest.
Okay so I have a ton of experience with Overwatch, so I can pretty much only speak to the points about that that the author makes. I spent two years playing Overwatch semi-competitively at the platinum/diamond level, and I can tell you that there are thousands of committed players that are doing all the things that he says lead to success. Everyone playing tournaments and pick-up-games are entirely dedicated to improvement, get constant feedback from both their peers and professional coaches (I, for example, have had my VODs reviewed by at least three separate professional OW /coaches), and play the game for over 20 hours a week, yet still do not improve for the most part. In the 11 months I was on my Overwatch team, the average player moved from high platinum to low diamond. This is not the 95th percentile success that the author implies will happen. It is clear that the author does not actually understand much about how to improve in OW (likely due to having a lot of experience with other FPS's and being able to climb quickly due to talent, existing aim ability, etc). This is particularly evident when he speaks about the forums (which is known not to be representative of the community at large), when he says that OW players who want to improve don't get feedback, and most shockingly says that "Overwatch provides the tools to make it relatively easy to get feedback," which is unequivocally false. There is absolutely no system in place to get VODs reviewed, get decent feedback from professionals, or make standing teams to participate in tournaments. All of that has to be sought out by the player, and it is pretty hard to find those resources, although they are growing. Perhaps his most heinous statement was this: "when you can get to 95%-ile by fixing mistakes like "not realizing that you should stand on the objective", you don't really need a lot of talent to get to 95%-ile." It shows a complete misunderstanding of the problems facing the middle tiers of Overwatch and demonstrates that the author has no understanding of even the least complex aspects of the game. Honestly, it seems that the author has hardly played Overwatch at all. I would be interested to look at his career profile and win statistics.
Looking at the appendix, the list of "things you'll regularly see at slightly above 50%-ile" just comes off as a laundry list of things he's seen one or two people a week do and attributes it to the whole playerbase at that Elo. It honestly just sounds like a person who believes that he's "too good to be in plat," so insults all his teammates with these surface-level observations without actually understanding the true depth of the game. The rest of of the appendix continues to just be the author listing things he's seen people in plat do and complaining about it, all with a lot of elitism and a holier-than-thou attitude throughout.
The phrase "It's generally not too hard to fix these since the mistakes are like the example above: simple enough that once you see that you're making the mistake, the fix is straightforward because the mistake is straightforward" is just so inane and out of touch that I don't even know where to start.
I've never read anything by this guy before, but I definitely do not want to read anything by him again. To me, he seems elitist, self-indulgent, and entirely unaware of the problems that others might have.