Drills

[Paul Arden]

Open skills vs closed skills, Vince, not what is meant by the term “skill”.

According to you skill means adaptability, but a closed skill doesn’t require it, so a closed skill is therefore not a skill.

Does that make sense?

Cheers, Paul

[VGB]

Hi Nils

The definition of skill in McMorris (2014) is identical word for word to the one in McMorris (2004). This is from the 2014 edition of his book: McMorris.png

You provided the 2004 summary and I gave you the updated version of 2014. He changed his mind based upon better information.

think it makes a lot of sense to start off with definition like that one that is sufficiently general to work for most sports irrespectively of whether they are on the closed or open end of the skill continuum

Why not analyse the sport that you are doing? I am fishing the same river tomorrow that I fished Monday. The levels will have fallen with the flow backing off a bit, the wind has swung 180 degrees, temperatures have been dropping and the fish will have moved. The only certainty I have is that I will not be able to go out and make the same casts with the same equipment as I did on Monday. My environment is continually changing and I can only prepare for it in general terms, I also make a lot of ad hoc equipment changes. I need to be adapt my core technique to be able to cope with my students and that is what I teach my students, to explore the range of potential control of different configurations in different environments.

If casting was so narrow and predictable as you paint it, I would take up another sport because becoming more effective an efficient at a bit of stick waving would bore me senseless.

Regards

Vince

[VGB]

Hi Nils

Throwing similar distances in competition using the 170 technique means that they performed equally well and doesn’t imply that they are equally skilled at using that technique. Being able to perform better than the other in competition after competition under different weather conditions, as well as when casting from a boat, standing in the water with water up to your waist, or on the shore with obstacles behind you using variations of the 170 technique (it is my go-to distance fishing cast) would indicate that you master that technique better than the other person. That is, you are better skilled at using it.

Being able to vary your technique to adapt to the environment sounds like skill to me

Regards

Vince

[VGB]

Open skills vs closed skills, Vince, not what is meant by the term “skill”.

According to you skill means adaptability, but a closed skill doesn’t require it, so a closed skill is therefore not a skill.

Does that make sense?

Not according to me Paul but according to some of the top coaches in the world, probably because they deal with the real world. Let’s look at the precise words at Post 17 again:

IMG_2527.jpeg (16.7 KiB) Viewed 127 times

Do you see the bit that says adaptation of techniques in the contexts that require them. If the context does not require them, then there’s no need to adapt the technique.

Staying in the casting realm, can you tell me what fly casting contexts do not require you to adapt your technique?

If stick waving is such an invariant and predictable technique wtf have you found to talk about in here for the last 25 years? It can’t involve wind affecting the cast because that wouldn’t happen

Regards

Vince

[NM]

Vince,
Yes, the McMorris definition from that I provided in post #162 was taken from Definition of Skill (5.1.1) | IB DP Spo ... TutorChase and referred to the first edition (2004) of his book. The one I gave you in post #180 is from the second edition (2014).The definition of skill in the two editions are identical, though. I have looked at both.

And yes, being a successful small-stream fisher require many skills. Most of them would be discrete, self-paced, and some also closer to the closed than the open end of the spectrum. You may be a true master of none, but still a fairly skilled fisher or a true master of some, with no or little mastery of some of the others, and therefore fairly low skilled small stream fisher. And being a very skilled small-stream fisher doesn’t imply that you also are a skilled big-stream or saltwater fisher. And the fact that the water level is different today than yesterday, and thus that the fish may be in a different part of the river, and you may have to use a different technique to get the fly to it doesn’t mean that the skills you need to use are open. The spot you need to cast to may be stationery and today’s water level may be stable. In contrast, Paul’s snakehead shot taking case may be classified as requiring an open and externally phased set of skills.

[Paul Arden]

So you’re saying that Schmidt and Lee got the definition of skill wrong in Motor Learning and Performance. The very book that we often quote from and hold in such high regard, managed to get it wrong in the very first chapter that the rest of the book was built on.

Just think how many students of motor learning will have read that and now attach a different meaning to the word “skill”. Many of them will have gone on to be professionals and researchers, all now holding a different meaning to the work “skill” from you. A whole community of professional coaches no less, isn’t that an ironic twist of fate?

Cheers, Paul

[VGB]

And being a very skilled small-stream fisher doesn’t imply that you also are a skilled big-stream or saltwater fisher.

I agree Nils, you may have to become more adaptable, reacting to a change of equipment and environment. Would you say that someone that could fish both environments well was a more skilled angler than the caster that could only fish one?

Regards

Vince

[VGB]

Hi Paul

So you’re saying that Schmidt and Lee got the definition of skill wrong in Motor Learning and Performance. The very book that we often quote from and hold in such high regard, managed to get it wrong in the very first chapter that the rest of the book was built on.

The book is now on its 6th edition and the 7th edition is going to be published soon, the one we have is the 5th and we bought it because it was cheaper to do so. The first chapter is now called “Chapter 1. Evolution of a Field of Study”. Science evolves as new information becomes available, it’s up to you whether you adapt or keep doing the same thing.

Just think how many students of motor learning will have read that and now attach a different meaning to the word “skill”. Many of them will have gone on to be professionals and researchers, all now holding a different meaning to the work “skill” from you. A whole community of professional coaches no less, isn’t that an ironic twist of fate?

My post 17 suggests that professional coaches and researchers have already adapted to the new information. What you do is entirely up to you.

Regards

Vince


Regards

Vince

[Paul Arden]

As in like the meaning of the word “skill” has changed. How exciting. We will have to look out for the next edition to see if they are aware of this change in definition. Otherwise we can write to them and let them know so that they can be up to date with edition 8.

[NM]

And being a very skilled small-stream fisher doesn’t imply that you also are a skilled big-stream or saltwater fisher.

I agree Nils, you may have to become more adaptable, reacting to a change of equipment and environment. Would you say that someone that could fish both environments well was a more skilled angler than the caster that could only fish one?

Regards

Vince

Vince,
Most people would agree that someone that truly master many more skills than another person would be more skilled. That is just how most use that word. One can classify individual skills as being part of a hierarchy of skills, or a skills pyramid, and say that the sum of all those individual skills and how skilled you are at combining them determine how skilled you are. McMorris when discussion skill classifications ask whether it is better to break a skill into its component parts than to place it into a definite category. There’s a related, and interesting, discussion about the pros and cons when learning a complex and composite movement of breaking that movement into its component and working separately on improving each part before putting it all back together again. That discussion is of course related to our earlier discussion of the pros and cons of internal and external cues. We do, of course, in practice use both approaches. Working on the haul without holding a rod, or just the rod without a line, or while side casting and placing the line on the ground between the back and forward cast; practicing blocking the forearm and flipping over the wrist while just holding the rod butt section; practicing the frisbee backast part of the 170 by actually throwing a freebee, are some examples.

Regarding your hang up on adaptability. While adaptability isn’t, and shouldn’t be, part of the standard generic definition of skill, it may well be an important aspect of some skills. In fly casting, for example, we do make constant micro adjustments to our movements when extending and shortening the line, changing gear, or casting against the wind instead of with a strong tail wind. Being skilled at using the 170 distance-casting technique or the standard accuracy stroke requires that you are able to make those adjustments well. That is part of what’s required for being a good distance or accuracy caster, and part of what we are working on when practicing tournament casting as well as when practicing our casting skills for fishing.

Nils