One of my favorite books is David Epstein’s The Sports Gene. I’m guessing this book rests in the library of many sports fans and professionals. The comprehensive book could double as a small step stool, meaning there’s too many good points to unpack and discuss in one or 100 blogs. One major theme extending into David’s upcoming new book, Range, is early specialization. I love this topic, especially as it relates to youth sport specialization. Any conversation I’ve had with coaches, athletes, analysts, and, of course, parents is framed by the individual’s experiences. I’d like to focus on what research tells us and why the specialization OG, Malcolm Gladwell, admits to a critical flaw in his 10,000 hours theory. I heard Gladwell make his statement at the Sloan Sports Analytics Conference where he and David Epstein started the conversation comparing Tiger Woods and Roger Federer’s early specialization vs late specialization training, and success longevity. I give Gladwell so much credit for his openness and non-defensive posture. He never stops learning. So cool.
Research concludes kids who have more free play, which can still count as deliberate practice, and delay sport specialization have a higher likelihood of going pro and competing at that elite level longer than those who specialize early. Add in other studies showing playing multiple sports has the benefit of injury prevention, and we start to wonder why we specialize early at all. I believe the early specialization movement became a cultural representation of dedication to excellence and achievement in part because of our access to multiple media sources flooding our imaginations with ways we could tangibly control and guide our children towards becoming the next Tiger.
Affluent communities build specialized youth sports tracks because parents measure skill and potential greatness through performance outcomes. Unfortunately, the ability and willingness to spend money on lessons, private training, and organized travel competition created a year round business platform which became a black hole, swallowing free play, recreational play, and multi-sport participation. The opportunity for kids, in these communities, to compete later requires starting at an average age of 6. By age 12, most young athletes are forced into choosing a single sport because one sport’s practice and competition schedule restricts consistent participation in a second sport. Also, feeder systems encourage parents to enroll children early, in hopes of securing a spot on an upcoming season’s travel team, and down the line, the high school team. A third factor is socialization. Kids develop bonds and feel connected to their teammates, therefore participating less feels undesirable. Similar to the children’s levels of connectedness (increasing motivation to participate, and do more in the way of specialization), parents also build relationships and mini communities for themselves as many relive, “get right,” or vicariously live out their athletic pursuits. Early sport specialization transforms into a tunnel for parents and children, and leaving becomes more difficult at earlier ages. Ironically, studies supporting later specialization demonstrate this by revealing athletes from smaller towns, where options for early specialization are not available, lead to longer careers on the elite stage.
Returning to the Woods/Federer reference, Roger Federer (at the insistence of his mother) continued competing and participating in multiple sports even as his tennis prowess matured. Part of his enduring success comes from the range he acquired (how quickly he could learn new skills, mentally process and strategize the game, focus, and overcome failure) from other sports he was able to adapt and transfer into tennis. Roger developed multiple strategies towards dealing with on and off the court challenges, and was not limited to the resources developed through tennis only. Consider playing a second sport like speaking a second language. It’s as if Roger learned and spoke multiple languages, and his brain’s neurotransmitter plasticity nourished and developed from these languages provides cognitive quickness and adaptation when “speaking” tennis.
Now, consider Tiger. His singular focus spotlighted golf. Some of his golf specific training mimicked how multi-sports strengthen cognitive adaptation and development, however, the goal and purpose was singularly applied to golf. Clearly, Tiger worked extremely hard, and through the videos and available media, we see and feel his focused determination. Dominating the field affirmed his early commitment, however today we watch him struggle to regain that status; applying the process, the only process he learned, is not enough. Admittedly, this is an oversimplification of both these men’s entire careers. I’m slicing out a piece and magnifying it for purposes of this piece. I also acknowledge there are few sports where early specialization is critical, such as gymnastics. The environment and context of multi-sport and early sport specialization influences “what happens next”, creating a continuum where trends cluster and emerge.
The breadth and depth combination fosters innovation and growth in the workplace as well. When I studied Chemical Engineering, the curriculum included over 17 electives specifically designed to infuse breadth into a highly specialized discipline. The idea of thinking out of the box derives from having been outside of the box, and connecting those experiences to the business needs and strategies inside the box. Specialization and deliberate practice are important and necessary. Our definition of deliberate practice evolved into overly specialized formats for “x” number of repetitions and hours. However, long term exceptionalism is supported by self-feedback through free play, learning different strategies, and having them at one’s disposal when presented with a problem.