GetBetterer
Hall of Fame
Warning: Thread is rated PG-13. Parental Guidance highly recommended.
I think many of us know what SparkNotes is. It's that website we go to the night before an exam about a book we forgot to read about, or chose not to read about. There are several other websites out there that do exactly the same thing, and SparkNotes isn't number one on my list, but since many people seem to know about it than some of the other ones, I chose it as part of the title.
Now, for those of you who have seen my ideas about the mental approach of the game, you know that I support the book:The Inner Game of Tennis. It really saddens me though, when I have to read posts in which people have clearly not read The Inner Game of Tennis in which they state they did.
Normally I bold the person who says something, but this time I won't because I don't want to act like I'm directing personal attacks. Not that you can't just copy and paste the quote in Search anyways...
The two above quotes are what people have said about The Inner Game of Tennis in which they are wrong.
Now, here is how the book is laid out:
Introduction:
The Introduction in the book gives a great example of two selves. It's one of those quotes that stir up your brain a little bit in order to prepare for something you're about to read, and to help you read it actively rather than passively - a great psychological tool by the way.
After all, most people talk to themselves during a tennis match, do we not? Is there anyone here who denies this? Maybe you've heard this quote before - it's from you:
Here, The Inner Game of Tennis states:
Here Mr. Gallwey expands on the knowledge of Self 1, and Self 2.
But, before we go in-depth onto the knowledge of Self 1 and Self 2. There are a few things I would like to also make clear. Timothy Gallwey NEVER EVER EVER said you don't need technical training. Hence, the two quotes above are wrong. In the book he states:
After giving the example of a fifty-year old woman in the 70s who learned Tennis without a single lesson before. This, according to Gallwey, was in the Reasoner Report, which aired on television in 1975. Unfortunately sports psychology wasn't considered back in that time, when The Inner Game of Tennis was first written. Now-a-days it seems like a simple concept of "What?! Of course the mind affects how you play!" and such, but back before Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or even Del Potro were born and when Pete Sampras was just starting school, none of this had been researched.
Timothy Gallwey also semi-denies that this is referring to Freudian psychology about the id and superego, but this is the only place I challenge the book. I do believe the id and superego is what Timothy Gallwey is discussing, but during Tennis, they are almost linked together.
He also gives a great, mystical Buddhist quote, but I think an example would work better about discovering Self 1 and Self 2. Your "always-do-it" person, the Self 2 has habits, muscle memory, and knows a lot of things. If you were blindfolded in the seat you are sitting in right now reading this, could you find the light switch in your room? Very likely. Has someone ever sat down but you pulled the chair from under their butt at the last instant (or maybe it's happened to you)? Self 2 went "chair there, sit commencing" but then it's interrupted because suddenly at the last split second your Self 2 is confused and going: "OMG WHERE'S THE CHAIR?!" before you plop on your butt.
A Unison Between Both Selves
As previously discussed, Self 1 is your conscious side. Or, according to Freudian psychology your ego. This isn't the modern day term for ego we use to offend people, but instead it's your conscious.
When you hit a bad shot, you hate it. Why do you hate this? Because you've hit that shot before! Your body knows how to hit that shot because of past practice, and all of a sudden the shot that's gone over the net, with great depth and topspin suddenly fails - (pirate voice) Argghhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Then, Self 1 comes in. "What was that?! Grandma plays better!" Then, a struggle ensues. Self 1 attempts to take over to control the shots, when it shouldn't. Self 2 knows how to hit the shots, not Self 1. Then, despite the fact that I don't like this term I will use it, a snowball effect occurs. As you make one mistake, it grows exponentially into many.
The solution, according to Timothy Gallwey is to distract this Self 1. That way, not only does he not interfere, but your Self 2 is not distracted to allow for the good old same, deep, heavy topspin balls you regularly hit. One example Mr. Gallwey gave was to focus on the seams of the Tennis ball. He said this to a woman who apparently framed all of her shots. Personally, I tell myself to hit cross-court, down-the-line, or whatever to distract my Self 1. What you choose is what you choose. Maybe you have something else you like.
In the book, Timothy Gallwey does support technical instruction. But, it is supported to a certain point. Because from past instruction you know how to hit the shots you're hitting now, or at least we hope you do. You have to use technical instruction to the point that you don't fall into the traps of Self 1 judgment of doubt, fear, anger, amongst the other negative emotions we all have felt sometime in our life. As a matter of fact, in Chapter 5, Gallwey says:
LoL, see? It doesn't leave out technical instruction at all.
That same exact chapter also goes in-depth on how to watch the Professionals that you love, in order to help improve your current game. Be careful though, it is usually very difficult to introduce your Self 2 to new muscle memory. Especially if it's something it's very commonly used to such as the forehand ground stroke. This was especially important to myself, when I wanted to emulate Federer's between-the-leg shot.
Later, the chapter goes on to show a table of technical instruction, versus awareness instruction. I don't want to put this on here, because there's no real way to cite it, and therefore not giving credit to Gallwey. To the most basic of my abilities though, all I can say is, when someone attempts to change your technical aspect, for those of us who learned the game, NOTICE yourself when you make the mistake. It's best to do this with a recording device by recording yourself, since unless you have superpowers, you can't see yourself while serving, hitting a forehand, or otherwise. For those of you who got this far, it sounds like "but wait...you're saying have Self 1 be a little more dominant this time? Weren't you just deploring that?" I was deploring that for the actual game itself. However, in order to learn, your Self 1 learned it first before storing it into Self 2. It's like learning about Napoleon Bonaparte. I mention it now, so you go "oh yeah, he did this, this and this" but you weren't thinking about it before (or if you were, stop reading now and finish that history project). You remember it now because Self 1 learned it in class, or maybe on Wikipedia. Then, when asked to recall information, Self 2 can do it again. Now, studying is a little harder, and Self 2 is easier to recall in physical abilities because they're something you use just about every day such as grabbing, walking, chewing, and so forth. But everything you learned about Napoleon Bonaparte is deep within your brain somewhere, as is your forehand, your backhand and your serve because Self 1 learned the technique first.
To conclude any technical aspects, Gallwey states that if you're going to learn how to hit a new stroke, do it in steps. This sounds very obvious, but most people's Self 2 is so stuck with that one method you use, that it never wants to change. But, in order to change Self 2 must do it slowly so that the new muscle memory locks in.
The End
Now that we're towards the end of the book. Gallwey goes to discuss a few tennis games (i.e. mini-tennis, around the world, king/queen of the court, etcetera) that we can do to help our game out on a technical basis.
I think many of us know what SparkNotes is. It's that website we go to the night before an exam about a book we forgot to read about, or chose not to read about. There are several other websites out there that do exactly the same thing, and SparkNotes isn't number one on my list, but since many people seem to know about it than some of the other ones, I chose it as part of the title.
Now, for those of you who have seen my ideas about the mental approach of the game, you know that I support the book:The Inner Game of Tennis. It really saddens me though, when I have to read posts in which people have clearly not read The Inner Game of Tennis in which they state they did.
Normally I bold the person who says something, but this time I won't because I don't want to act like I'm directing personal attacks. Not that you can't just copy and paste the quote in Search anyways...
The two above quotes are what people have said about The Inner Game of Tennis in which they are wrong.
Now, here is how the book is laid out:
Introduction:
The Introduction in the book gives a great example of two selves. It's one of those quotes that stir up your brain a little bit in order to prepare for something you're about to read, and to help you read it actively rather than passively - a great psychological tool by the way.
After all, most people talk to themselves during a tennis match, do we not? Is there anyone here who denies this? Maybe you've heard this quote before - it's from you:
Here, The Inner Game of Tennis states:
Here Mr. Gallwey expands on the knowledge of Self 1, and Self 2.
But, before we go in-depth onto the knowledge of Self 1 and Self 2. There are a few things I would like to also make clear. Timothy Gallwey NEVER EVER EVER said you don't need technical training. Hence, the two quotes above are wrong. In the book he states:
After giving the example of a fifty-year old woman in the 70s who learned Tennis without a single lesson before. This, according to Gallwey, was in the Reasoner Report, which aired on television in 1975. Unfortunately sports psychology wasn't considered back in that time, when The Inner Game of Tennis was first written. Now-a-days it seems like a simple concept of "What?! Of course the mind affects how you play!" and such, but back before Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or even Del Potro were born and when Pete Sampras was just starting school, none of this had been researched.
Timothy Gallwey also semi-denies that this is referring to Freudian psychology about the id and superego, but this is the only place I challenge the book. I do believe the id and superego is what Timothy Gallwey is discussing, but during Tennis, they are almost linked together.
He also gives a great, mystical Buddhist quote, but I think an example would work better about discovering Self 1 and Self 2. Your "always-do-it" person, the Self 2 has habits, muscle memory, and knows a lot of things. If you were blindfolded in the seat you are sitting in right now reading this, could you find the light switch in your room? Very likely. Has someone ever sat down but you pulled the chair from under their butt at the last instant (or maybe it's happened to you)? Self 2 went "chair there, sit commencing" but then it's interrupted because suddenly at the last split second your Self 2 is confused and going: "OMG WHERE'S THE CHAIR?!" before you plop on your butt.
A Unison Between Both Selves
As previously discussed, Self 1 is your conscious side. Or, according to Freudian psychology your ego. This isn't the modern day term for ego we use to offend people, but instead it's your conscious.
When you hit a bad shot, you hate it. Why do you hate this? Because you've hit that shot before! Your body knows how to hit that shot because of past practice, and all of a sudden the shot that's gone over the net, with great depth and topspin suddenly fails - (pirate voice) Argghhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Then, Self 1 comes in. "What was that?! Grandma plays better!" Then, a struggle ensues. Self 1 attempts to take over to control the shots, when it shouldn't. Self 2 knows how to hit the shots, not Self 1. Then, despite the fact that I don't like this term I will use it, a snowball effect occurs. As you make one mistake, it grows exponentially into many.
The solution, according to Timothy Gallwey is to distract this Self 1. That way, not only does he not interfere, but your Self 2 is not distracted to allow for the good old same, deep, heavy topspin balls you regularly hit. One example Mr. Gallwey gave was to focus on the seams of the Tennis ball. He said this to a woman who apparently framed all of her shots. Personally, I tell myself to hit cross-court, down-the-line, or whatever to distract my Self 1. What you choose is what you choose. Maybe you have something else you like.
In the book, Timothy Gallwey does support technical instruction. But, it is supported to a certain point. Because from past instruction you know how to hit the shots you're hitting now, or at least we hope you do. You have to use technical instruction to the point that you don't fall into the traps of Self 1 judgment of doubt, fear, anger, amongst the other negative emotions we all have felt sometime in our life. As a matter of fact, in Chapter 5, Gallwey says:
LoL, see? It doesn't leave out technical instruction at all.
That same exact chapter also goes in-depth on how to watch the Professionals that you love, in order to help improve your current game. Be careful though, it is usually very difficult to introduce your Self 2 to new muscle memory. Especially if it's something it's very commonly used to such as the forehand ground stroke. This was especially important to myself, when I wanted to emulate Federer's between-the-leg shot.
Later, the chapter goes on to show a table of technical instruction, versus awareness instruction. I don't want to put this on here, because there's no real way to cite it, and therefore not giving credit to Gallwey. To the most basic of my abilities though, all I can say is, when someone attempts to change your technical aspect, for those of us who learned the game, NOTICE yourself when you make the mistake. It's best to do this with a recording device by recording yourself, since unless you have superpowers, you can't see yourself while serving, hitting a forehand, or otherwise. For those of you who got this far, it sounds like "but wait...you're saying have Self 1 be a little more dominant this time? Weren't you just deploring that?" I was deploring that for the actual game itself. However, in order to learn, your Self 1 learned it first before storing it into Self 2. It's like learning about Napoleon Bonaparte. I mention it now, so you go "oh yeah, he did this, this and this" but you weren't thinking about it before (or if you were, stop reading now and finish that history project). You remember it now because Self 1 learned it in class, or maybe on Wikipedia. Then, when asked to recall information, Self 2 can do it again. Now, studying is a little harder, and Self 2 is easier to recall in physical abilities because they're something you use just about every day such as grabbing, walking, chewing, and so forth. But everything you learned about Napoleon Bonaparte is deep within your brain somewhere, as is your forehand, your backhand and your serve because Self 1 learned the technique first.
To conclude any technical aspects, Gallwey states that if you're going to learn how to hit a new stroke, do it in steps. This sounds very obvious, but most people's Self 2 is so stuck with that one method you use, that it never wants to change. But, in order to change Self 2 must do it slowly so that the new muscle memory locks in.
The End
Now that we're towards the end of the book. Gallwey goes to discuss a few tennis games (i.e. mini-tennis, around the world, king/queen of the court, etcetera) that we can do to help our game out on a technical basis.
Last edited:
