Serendipity and Learning

When you train under a pro, the way they teach you is different. Especially, if you are going to learn something as a pro that you have already played as an amateur. If you are learning for the first time, there is no unlearning or what you typically want to call as instinctive.But if you have played the game before, a long time goes off in erasing those bad habits and learning the new way. The new way, or coach way you will observe in most of the games is all about technique. Each day you have to go through a warm up, a few routines, learn a few things and then try it out and see if you can bring it all together. They key here is learning those techniques and replacing those old methods with these new methods until it becomes "instinct". At that point, you will always, no matter what, not run to pick the shuttle in the court, but take steps. You will, no matter what, keep your guard up, not down. Your footwork will, no matter what, never let you down. How does that happ...

There is a big difference in learning something in an amateur way and learning it in a "professional" way. And by professional, I dont mean, learning it in a way so as to make money out of it. When I say professional, I mean, learning it from a coach than by learning it yourself. Or learning it the right way is perhaps a better way to put it. We all learn to play badminton for instance. The way we play is an antithesis to way it is played in a "real" game. In the way we learn, the objective is to hit the shuttle at the player -so that the amateur game does not get spoilt by having to pick up the shuttle. Also remember, most of the time, the amateur game is played not on real courts, but just a few lines that define the boundaries. And really, we are playing, "goodminton" not badminton - where the objective is to keep the shuttle in play, not outwit your opponent. You play this way for a few years and then by chance hit the courts for a "real" ...

I was discussing with an uncle on Professional Courses and in those few minutes, we ended up discussing quite a few thoughts. Like, the effect of having coaching classes for professional courses. Like, how everything is broken down to beat the system. Like, how does one find ones own intrinsic motivation. Like, the need to know how to break through the first inflection point during studies and get to the next level. Like, the need to work with ones own hands right from childhood. The answer for each of these may not be intuitively believe to be wrong (and there may not even be a right or wrong answer) and I hope to examine each of these over the coming few weeks.

Each time I have had a discussion on strengths and weaknesses, the question I have been asked or faced with is should I work on my weak areas or areas of strength. Conventional wisdom states the former, but over the last few years the view has veered towards the latter. Certain weaknesses are "fatal flaws", but other than that I believe that working on your strengths are far more rewarding in the long run. I cant think of a better example than sports. And in particular, this story comes to mind. The story of the one armed boy who learnt judo. But think about it. Think of how Virender Sehwag would have felt when he was drafted into the Indian cricket team to partner with a certain Sachin Tendulkar. It is a different matter altogether that not too many people have as de-cluttered a mind as Sehwag (read this interview of his) , but any other person in his place would have worried about how they can ever keep pace with Tendulkar. So, if you were Sehwag and you were in the...