Summary Of Sandman's Superiority Over Bradley

Sandman's Superiority Over Bradley Generally, when someone disagrees with something, whether it be a statement given by an official or an offhand comment said by a passing stranger, they are going to say something about it. When writers disagree with something, they will write about it. Jared Sandman and David Bradley are examples of this principle; in essence, both responded to Gladwell's 10,000 Hour Rule. Both disagreed with the claim that the rule applied to writing by responding with articles full of evidence supporting their rebuttal. However, despite both supplying relevant backing to their argument, Bradley's article falls short because he is unable to focus his argument and relate to his audience. On the other hand, Jared Sandman's
He believes that the 10,000 Hour Rule is untrue because of the countless other skills that can be mastered in less time. Bradley systematically explains each example Gladwell used as a basis for his rule, ranging from the Beatles' practice time to mentioning Bill Gates and his story of becoming a computer wizard. He continues by saying that the reason most do not achieve mastery can be attributed to the time it would take to reach 10,000 hours, "about 90 minutes of practice every day for 20 years". Bradley then provides his own examples as to why the rule is wrong. He writes that the same person who Gladwell obtained his data for his rule also concluded that mastery of memorization only takes "500 to 1000 hours of training". He finishes his argument by relating how practicing for 10,000 hours is simply an unobtainable goal that few would be willing to dedicate their time
He wrote his response to a checklist written by Damien Walter. This checklist listed "seven criteria writers should consult prior to publishing their work". He did not agree with the second bullet, a section that was based on Gladwell's 10,000 Hour Rule. Sandman uses his personal experiences to argue his point that the 10,000 Hour Rule does not apply to writing. He first mentions how 10,000 hours of writing would be "the equivalent of fifty novels". He explains that this is a ridiculous notion "because if you don't know what you're doing by your fiftieth book, you aren't paying close enough attention". He brings attention to a comment made by Ray Bradbury relating how it is not just him who believes that the 10,000 does not apply to writing. He then offers a more logical benchmark of 500,000 words. After a few more anecdotes explaining the origin of that number, he ends his post with a message to future writers, "So if you're new to writing, forget the 10,000 Hour Rule. Try instead the 1,000 days rule... If you follow that schedule every day, by the end of three years, you'll have reached well over half a million