Reps
The security of practice over the uncertainty of competition.
Repetition. Is it the only way to get better?
In golf, discussion around reps comes up constantly. “To swing sweetly and sure, you must first find it in the dirt. Hit the range, bucket after bucket, keep sending them until you have a swing you can trust.”
The other sport—the one that has kept me clothed and allows me to pay green fees—is following a similar path. Cricket’s greatest modern-day batter, Steve Smith, has helped shape a generation of volume-hitters with his fixated approach to preparation and curation. Many young players I see now prefer the security of practice over the uncertainty of competition.
The 10,000 rep rule is further evidence of industries creating work for themselves at the expense of unsuspecting athletes. The rule suggests it takes 10,000 consistent repetitions to master a skill, and 1,000 to break a bad habit. A coach identifies a weakness, builds a fix, then sits back and watches the athlete rinse and repeat 1,000 times. Six days a week — two weeks to break the habit, then infinite reps to maintain the fix. Robotic. Boring.
Scale isn’t always the answer. In this case, it dilutes the influence of the coach and suppresses the natural instincts of the player.
Process will only get a player so far. What separates is self-awareness—the ability to find your own feels, the ephemeral sensations that tell a player something is working, or not. A feel in your swing, your footwork, your release. They come and go—you have to be OK with that. Productive athletes constantly look for feels, listening, exploring. In that moment, no coach, no rep count, no algorithm—just you and your craft.
Nick
More reading—if you want! Remember, scale isn’t always best.
One against my position
And one supporting it