ABSTRACT In sports, athletes are frequently challenged to make decisions under time constraints. The ability of skilled athletes to make successful and seemingly effortless decisions in these situations is often referred to as intuition. However, how athletes develop intuition remains to be elucidated. A key issue highly debated between proponents of opposing theoretical views is whether the development of intuitive decision-making benefits from the involvement of deliberate cognitive processes (explicit vs. implicit). In this perspective paper, we critically assess theoretical arguments and empirical evidence for these contradictory views. Moreover, by delving into cognitive psychological assumptions rooted in dual-process theory, we elucidate the proposed processes underlying the development of intuitive decision-making. While the use of implicit approaches seems to be increasingly questioned in this domain, a promising recent theoretical proposal argues that intuition is formed through repeated practice of deliberative processes. We argue in favor of this approach and present suggestions for empirical research to test the proposal for the development of intuitive decision-making in sport. Finally, we illustrate suggestions for future research and critically discuss the potential and limitations of such an approach.