Tuesday, March 28, 2006

No Time.

Reading Malcolm Gladwell’s “Blink” in the past week has been a kind of enlightening experience. The idea behind the book is that as humans, our unconscious has a much stronger effect on our everyday interactions than we realize. Most interestingly, he discusses “quick-splicing”, the idea that our sub-conscious makes quick decisions on our behalf before we really have a chance to think about something. Without going deeply into examples and studies from the book, he essentially theorizes that we are all the time making decisions and judgments that we don’t realize we are making. These decisions and judgments range from seemingly unimportant, understanding what someone means when they point to a painting on the wall, to profoundly significant, hiring a tall person instead of a short person because we respond to taller people in a more positive way. Gladwell states that we are all more racist/sexist/discriminative than we want to believe and that the idea behind the book is realizing this so that we can do something about changing it.

All of this has little to do with volleyball, but as I started thinking about the connection between our “quick-splicing” abilities and sports it became clear that sports are all about fast decision making. It is generally accepted that the best athletes, the ones who reach the highest levels, are the ones that can separate themselves out mentally. To me, “quick-splicing” plays a huge role in this when someone steps onto the court. If you ask a great player, in the middle of a match, why they decided to step two steps to the left in order to be in position for a dig, I don’t think they will be able to answer that easily. Of course they will say, the position of the block, the tendency of the hitter and other things all came together to help make the decision. But, I would argue that there is more to it than that. Our brain makes calculations all of the time, whether or not we are consciously telling it to, and those calculations play a major role in how we react to stressful situations like the middle of a rally on the volleyball court.

We’ve all experienced standing at the net, saying specifically that the opposing team’s setter is in the front row, and as soon as the play takes place the setter dumps the ball down on our side and no one on our team makes a move for the ball. How can something like this happen? We just said that we should be ready for it. Everyone heard that the setter was front row, but no one registered the information. I think a lot can be explained by understanding that our brain is thinking without us realizing it. When the play gets underway, our brain begins to run automatically, we have little or no time to think about what is happening, the things we do are decided by a new part of our brain.

What about beach volleyball? I think many of us have experienced having the other team make a short cut shot, a shot that in the moment, seems impossible to get to. So, we don’t run after it because we have already decided it isn’t reachable. Yet, we all know that in reality, if we did try as hard as possible to get to that ball, we would reach it a certain percentage of the time. It is this negative reaction, deciding that we can’t, that is the challenge for us as volleyball players. How do we overcome the bad “quick-splice” where our brain gives us poor information?

Through experience mainly. In the book, Gladwell references a company that trains body guards. The guards are forced to undergo several severely emotional tests in order to be able to eventually have better control over their body in these stressful situations. They must fight with rabid attack dogs, more than once, until they are able to deal with the situation in a calm and rational manner. They go into a dark house where they are shot with rubber bullets at different intervals, they can feel the bullets and the experience is just like being shot for real, until their body can cope with the shock of the situation. Eventually, they are able to function and maintain a normal level of decision making because of the heavy testing. I’m not recommending that a volleyball player go to these extremes, but if you want to break these bad habits, these bad quick-decisions your brain is making for you, you have to force yourself to go beyond your normal comfort zone.

The idea behind the book is incredibly interesting to me. I’m not positive there is any real connection between sports and Gladwell’s thoughts but I feel strongly somewhere in my brain that there is something there that athletes can use. And I guess there isn’t anything wrong with trusting my intuition.

15 comments:

Kinger said...

I definitly think that we, as volleyball players, are "quick splicing" constantly during gameplay. For example, when a middle player is hitting a quick ball, he has to take in a a ton of information in a very short amount of time (set height and location, blockers position, his own relative position to the net and to the setter...etc...)At least the better middle blockers will compute all this info and "quick splice" it to produce the appropriate attacking motion or whatever. I think that setters must have to "quick splice" more than anyone because they have a rediculous amount of info to take in before every set choice. Anyways i think i could ramble on for a long time so i'm going to cut this short.
When I read the facial recognition section with that Ekman guy, I couldn't help but think how good that guy would be at poker!

Jordan said...

EXACTLY! That guy would dominate, he would be reading stuff on you that nobody else would even know was happening.

But the real question for me is if some people are better at quick splicing than others. And could you count that among things like jumping ability, timing, hand-eye coordination, etc.. in what makes a great athlete? Are some people just blessed with that gene?

Anonymous said...

Hove,

I would have to say that some are just blessed with the gene. Of course experience helps to make these quick decisions better, but if it was all based on practice and experience you wouldn't have the number of young phenoms that you see in sport today. Lebron would have to be a perfect example. They (the basketball world) say he has phenomenal decision making and passing skills...able to see the open man when nobody else can, a little like Wayne Gretzky could in hockey. They must have been born with superior ability to "quick splice" information to attain the wanted response. I know that there are also people at the other end of the spectrum that make terrible "quick splice" decisions all the time. I guess like hand eye coordination and jumping ability, some have the gift and others don't.

Ses,

Chad

Kinger said...

in the old nature vs nurture argument i am a firm believer that its a combination of both that produces the outcomes that we see in people. With respect to what makes some people better athletes than others I think that a combination of genetics and experience is the answer. We are born with a certain genotype that is passed down to us by our parents. I like to think of it as we are born with certain ranges of possibilities for all aspects of our being. So say that someone is born with a certain amount of raw athletic talent, that athletic potential is represented by this line [----------]. Now our phenotype is the actual physical expression of our genotype...so its kind of like what we've done with our potential to this point. So for the person in question, maybe he's at [----], half his raw athletic potential. This expression of his genes is a product of his enviromental experiences. So for athletics it would be how much he trains or practices or eats or whatever that might influence his capabilities. My point is that we are all born with different ranges of potentials. Whether or not their is a gene for 'quick splicing', i doubt it. It is probably the combination of a series of mental abilities. Anyhow I think some start with a greater potential for athletic prowess but this is no guarauntee that they will be an elite athlete they still need to turn their genotype into the desired phenotype through certain enviromental experiences. So, most of the best athletes are the people with superior genotypes for athletic ability and mental acuity that are nurtured in the right manner, but some are those with mediocre genotypes but who train extra hard and do everything possible to reach the full potential of their genotype.
thats just my opinion...i'm too lazy to proof read this so im not sure if it will make any sense

Anonymous said...

Kinger,

Makes sense and I agree...everyone knows there are the Rudy Rudigers of the world that make it because they are willing to go through hell to make it, while other people that are born with more of a 'gift' might not have to do a damn thing to be as successful, but if they worked just as hard they could be twice as good. Transferring somebodys head on another persons body would make some fantastic athletes.

Ses,

Chad

Anonymous said...

Hove,

Just wondering what you think about the new system of picking the 'team of the year' and of course referee of the year. In one way a good idea but on the other hand, how many games have people in this 'committee' actually seen. I can tell you for sure I have seen some of them, but only a couple of times. To me it is hard to pick a team of the year when you don't see too many games. Besides, I thought it was nice that people on the 'team of the year' were picked by their colleagues. Maybe some people did not vote properly, but I don't think too many people could argue that the teams in the past have included pretty deserving guys. Nobody in this league is in elementary school anymore, you would think that they could choose the most deserving players. Anyways, just wondering what you thought. Peace,

Chad

Jordan said...

Yeah, I just read about it on volleynet. I had been planning on writing about that anyway. Comments coming later today or tomorrow...

Anonymous said...

Hi,

Yes, I just read it myself, and the same thoughts ran through my mind. I mean. I have seen Fred Sturm in Aalborg a couple of times, but the others...For the women, it must be strange to have the team picked by a national coach who doesn't even live in Denmark. How many matches has he seen?
Why is sensorship even needed in this?
The persons figuring on the lists from the past years, that might have gotten "friendly" votes, are nowhere near the "real" best playes, measured in votes offcourse.
Also, how does a player know what coach is best? You cannot vote for your own coach, and you haven't been trained or coached by any of the other coaches ?!? What criteria do you base your vote on?

The Beef, seeing germans everywhere...

Anonymous said...

As for the quick splicing, i beleive that this solely is based on experience.

I beleive that the genes are a indicator of your potential physicly, but that your motor skills incl Quick splicing is based on the individuals experiences in life where the first 12 years is probably the most important.

As for the Team of the year.

At first i also found it strange that the "board" was people who basically havent seen the players.
But remember that its the coaches who nominate , and the board who decides.
Also if you wanna make something new you want a general approach to it, and not just look at who the board is now.

I think they will look at the nominations from the coaches, and only really decide if there are twists.

/William

Anonymous said...

Yo. I am guessing that it is a friendly beef that you have with me...even though I am not German...AT ALL! Its been a tough week though and it would feel really good to lay some chump out. So if you have a problem leave your name and I'll meet you at the bike racks at recess...serious.

Anonymous said...

Hi Daniel,

I have no beef with you...seriously. I just picked up from somewhere that you were German. And I felt, from seeing your match against HIK that it was funny that Sascha got a red card, while you didn't even get a lifted finger or a yellow card after your gesture towards the ref, after he said you stepped on the line in your serve...
I'm sorry if you feel offended.

Mikkel "The Beef" (HIK II)

Kasper said...

Hey,

Just for the record: I didn't invent this new system for Team of the Year (and I never voted in the old system) but I am a part of the committee.

First of all, I have heard both positive and negative reactions to the new system. The old system seemed to sometimes get the reputation that players voted tactically or maybe even decided as a team who to vote for.

I don't know if there could similar problems with the new system.

Like William said, the committee will of course use the nominations from the coaches and not make completely autonomous decisions.

As for watching games, I know that for example Tony Westman has had assistants videotaping matches for him, so he does have something to rely on.

It's a new system and we will see how it works. It's not like it has to stay like this forever if it doesn't turn out well.

Jordan said...

Ha ha, Daniel, take it easy. I would also recommend that you don't challenge "the beef" to a fight. (Although if you do, I would love to be there to see it).

Anonymous said...

hahaha...no worries mikkel...i'll meet you at the bike racks Hove!

Anonymous said...

Hi Daniel,

Ok. You know it's often difficult see ironi in written text, so I just wanted to be sure ;)

//Mikkel