Application of the concepts described in The Inner Game of Tennis

Rino

Banned
The Inner Game of Tennis puts forward some very interesting concepts on the mental side of the game. It seems to be widely renown as a valuable and respected piece of literature, and many seem to hold it in very high regard.

But what Id like to know is has there been any verified application of these concepts, ie: has there been any studies of individuals applying these concepts and quantified results recorded and , or is it all just here-say? Is there any professional tennis player or professional coach out there that can say they deliberately apply these concepts and monitor continual application and performance?

Even Gallwey in his book only refers to only anecdotal evidence of his concepts working. For example, quote "One day when I was practicing this form of concentration while serving, I began hitting the ball unusually well. I could hear a sharp crack instead of the usual sound at the moment of impact. It sounded terrific, and the ball had more speed and accuracy. After I realized how well I was serving, I resisted the temptation to figure out why, and simply asked my body to do whatever was necessary to reproduce that "crack." I held the sound in my memory, and to my amazement my body reproduced it"

There are a lot of anecdotes in his book starting with "one day"...

If there are any studies or examples of deliberate professional application of Gallwey's concepts Id appreciate being directed to them.

I don't mean to criticize Gallwey at all, I'm fascinated by what he puts forward - I just think this could be a really interesting avenue of research that Id possibly like to look into myself.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
What is this the form of concentration that he was talking about?

Maybe others have also experienced forms of concentration but don't necessarily describe it the same way this author does.
 

LakeSnake

Professional
The way to find out is to experiment on yourself. I know that "bounce, hit" helps me concentrate when I get off. The sequel to it, called "Playing the Game" has more concrete examples of how to use the philosophy he presents.
 

kiteboard

Banned
People loved Jonathan livingston sea gull as well. A teleporting sea gull. No one can shut off desire, thought, emotion, and if you try, look what happens to honesty. Fire in the belly is the reason why people become great/good players, not the opposite. Now that Raonic is feeling and showing more of it, he now has a chance to win a slam.
 

Rino

Banned
People loved Jonathan livingston sea gull as well. A teleporting sea gull. No one can shut off desire, thought, emotion, and if you try, look what happens to honesty. Fire in the belly is the reason why people become great/good players, not the opposite. Now that Raonic is feeling and showing more of it, he now has a chance to win a slam.

Funny you say that - I was watching Raonic courtside the other day and couldnt help notice his complete emotional detachment from the game.
 

Rino

Banned
The way to find out is to experiment on yourself. I know that "bounce, hit" helps me concentrate when I get off. The sequel to it, called "Playing the Game" has more concrete examples of how to use the philosophy he presents.

???? No such thing
 
Impossible to quantify and evaluate in terms of specifics as its not a physical instruction manual but a mental guideline for ultimately simply letting go.
I've never actually heard a top player mention this book but I do know that it is seen as something of a mental bible on the challenger/futures circuit.
Personally I find good value in the book and its concepts. Though much of it is obvious, it is a good read and for me it is a help.
 

Rino

Banned
Impossible to quantify and evaluate in terms of specifics as its not a physical instruction manual but a mental guideline for ultimately simply letting go.
I've never actually heard a top player mention this book but I do know that it is seen as something of a mental bible on the challenger/futures circuit.
Personally I find good value in the book and its concepts. Though much of it is obvious, it is a good read and for me it is a help.

Impossible to quantify - why do you think that? What about all the hundreds of psychological interventions and theories of learning being applied out out there in places like schools and medical fields - do you think they have come out of thin air with no scientific grounding behind them, based only on anecdotal evidence?

What's the difference?
 

Ash_Smith

Legend
Hey @Rino

I have a love/hate relationship with that book (which usually tips more towards the hate side).

Gallweys principle is very similar to that put forward by Daniel Khaneman in "Thinking Fast and Slow", the idea of a conscious, logical mind and an unconscious, less rational mind. Khaneman suggests that much of the time we rely too much on the unconscious mind in our daily business and should use the conscious logical mind more often.

In procedural memory tasks however we want to limit conscious control - in elite performers this is where a great number of errors stem from. However, we are not all elite performers, many of us therefore require some conscious control of our actions in order to properly sequence them.

Our issue is that we like to over analyse and frequently have too many swing thoughts in our heads when we play. Limiting this to one or maybe 2 key thoughts is vital when we are at the cognitive or associative stage of learning.

The earlier referred to " Bounce - Hit" works not because it "occupies the conscious mind and allows the unconscious mind to control actions" (singing a song or counting sheep would do that), it is a timing cue which helps many people focus on what is ofter a serious flaw.

So, yes by all means when you are an autonomous learner, occupy your conscious mind (but do it through tactical targets rather than singing maybe), other wise determine your key swing thought and focus on that.
 
Impossible to quantify - why do you think that? What about all the hundreds of psychological interventions and theories of learning being applied out out there in places like schools and medical fields - do you think they have come out of thin air with no scientific grounding behind them, based only on anecdotal evidence?

What's the difference?
Why make a scientific experiment out of a mindful aesthetic? Like a bar counter argument that goes on and on and on.
It works for some. As they might say in certain quarters it works if you work it outside of that it doesn't work but other mental relaxation techniques work just as well.
Horses for courses.
It is that simple.
 
Last edited:

Fintft

G.O.A.T.
Hey @Rino

Our issue is that we like to over analyse and frequently have too many swing thoughts in our heads when we play. Limiting this to one or maybe 2 key thoughts is vital when we are at the cognitive or associative stage of learning.

The earlier referred to " Bounce - Hit" works not because it "occupies the conscious mind and allows the unconscious mind to control actions" (singing a song or counting sheep would do that), it is a timing cue which helps many people focus on what is ofter a serious flaw.

So, yes by all means when you are an autonomous learner, occupy your conscious mind (but do it through tactical targets rather than singing maybe), other wise determine your key swing thought and focus on that.
Hi Ash,

Thank you for answering my question from another thread (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/inde...e-of-things-to-think-at-during-a-shot.553668/).
My 23 old girl Canadian born in Romania coach agrees with you as well....

About "Bounce-Hit": maybe it works on both accounts?

There were other things from the Inner game of tennis that I personally liked, one being the advice to worry only about things under your own control (if I'm not confusing the source).
 

LakeSnake

Professional
We only have a limited amount of concentration and we must choose where to apply it. Gallwey suggests some tricks to help focus the mind. A couple of them have helped me when I was mentally going the wrong direction. Eventually, we must get in enough good repetitions so that dependable skills are developed; tricks are not sustainable. I suspect Gallwey's book hasn't revolutionized the rec tennis world meaningfully for the same reasons Dale Caregie's book didn't create an army of well-liked and friend-having people, or why the ever-expanding libraries of diet books haven't stemmed the ranks of ever-expanding waistlines. Any plan or recommendation or advice must be consistently followed over time to be effective. Homeostasis being what it is, how could that ever happen?
 
Top