June 8, 2013
100 Percent of the Game Is Half Mental
By GEOFF MACDONALD
I thought of a wonderful little article by Allen Fox, the former Pepperdine men's tennis coach who played at the highest levels of the game and has since become the eminence grise of sports psychologists, as I watched the immensely likeable and charismatic Frenchman, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, play David Ferrer on Friday in a men's semifinal at the French Open. Fox recounts the 2000 Wimbledon final between Patrick Rafter and Pete Sampras. Like all of Fox's writings, the difficult and painful truths that tennis exposes are laid out like a cadaver awaiting a scalpel. Fox describes how each player allows the score --- and their emotions relating to that score --- to influence how they play and, even more importantly, their level of motivation as they compete in the match.
To Fox, their response was all too human, but not terribly rational if viewed from a calmer perspective. Down a set and trailing in the second-set tiebreaker, Sampras had a hangdog expression and seemed to tense up as Rafter played with verve and daring to go up 4-1. But here Rafter double-faulted, then missed a routine volley to let Sampras back in the match. After the second set, Rafter was never the same, as if his only chance at winning was to go up two sets to love against Sampras.
According to Fox, both players allowed the score to affect their play. "What can we learn from this? First, both Rafter and Sampras yielded to the temptation of letting the score of the match impact their level of motivation. When events turned against them, both experienced a dousing of their competitive fires. Sampras needed his opponent to falter in order to pump himself up. Rafter weakened when he blew the second set. For periods of time, each competed at less than 100 percent efficiency."
I thought of this as I watched Tsonga lose a tight second set. He had a set point on Ferrer's serve, but missed a backhand return long by six inches. Ferrer went on to win the second set in a tiebreaker. Tsonga was now down two sets to love, a seemingly insurmountable lead, but Tommy Robredo won three straight matches after being down two sets to love in this year's French Open. What was he thinking?
The answer, according to Fox, was that Robredo --- like all great competitors --- recognized that he had the power to choose his own response to the adversity he faced. And he refused to give up his control of the decision about how to compete when faced with a deficit of two sets to love. Tsonga, by contrast, behaved in a way that is perfectly rational (and all too human), by cooperating with Ferrer to lose in a wholly acceptable, dignified way. But was Tsonga's decision rational? Fox would say no, Tsonga behaved irrationally. Think about it: You just played a dead-even set in which you had a set point, but you lost in a tiebreaker. In a game with a clock, you're right, you're probably toast. But with the unique scoring system in tennis, you don't have to get it all back at once. You can focus on each point, each game, and maybe you can climb back into the match by winning the third set.
But what Fox is suggesting is difficult; in fact, it may be what separates the top five players from the rest of the tour. Fox notes that the top players are masters at staying in the moment with an optimistic attitude of acceptance for the reality of the situation, nothing more, nothing less. "They did not allow a negative situation to discourage and weaken them. Their performances did not deteriorate when they got behind. If anything, they got tougher. They made sure to control their mental and emotional states to make sure they always had the maximum chance of winning the next point.They exerted this control themselves and did not allow it to be determined for them by the score. To allow that would be to give up control of a vital performance factor that they are capable of controlling. And no truly great competitor does this."
Tsonga let go of his chance to beat Ferrer after his one opportunity to win the second set. To make a move into the top echelons of the game, he must deepen his mental approach. He can hit the ball, he can really play, but does he have the will to play each point with purpose and commitment? If so, he can cut out the loose errors that hurt him in the big matches. As Fox writes, "If you are 100 percent motivated, emotionally on balance and concentrating fully, you will not make those few needless errors."