The Loser's Edge

[johnyandell]

Let's discuss Kyle LaCroix's article, "The Loser's Edge"!

[bottle]

Let's discuss Kyle LaCroix's article, "The Loser's Edge"!

A very good article. To me, the first thing is not to pretend and to allow yourself to feel the defeat as Federer's face clearly shows in furniture one.

One doesn't want to carry on for long. Best to get out of there, lose or win, but go ahead, do not deny the pain.

To come at this with ashes metaphor in two different disciplines, I once witnessed one side of a telephone call between the late Charlie Butt, the great crew coach of the Potomac River, and the captain of his eight-oared varsity from Washington and Lee High School in Arlington, Virginia.

Charlie had taken many prevailing crews to Henley, England, the Mecca of all rowing (if one can still safely use the name "Mecca") and his present varsity had made the national schoolboy final once again but came just short of obtaining that supreme reward even though it had the financing for the trip all locked up.

"If you don't have the taste of ashes in your mouth you weren't trying hard enough," Charlie consoled the 17 or 18-year-old captain.

Charlie's son, Charlie Butt Jr., rowed at Rutgers and now is the head rowing coach at Harvard University.

Another time, a famous writer-- nevertheless a real writer-- was holding forth at the MacDowell Colony in Peterborough, New Hampshire.

"If a day goes by when I don't write I get the taste of ashes in my mouth."

[klacr]

Thanks for reading Bottle. Glad you enjoyed it.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[scottmurphy]

Absolutely loved this article. I'm going to print copies and make sure all my students read it...particularly the juniors. Great stuff Kyle!
Scott Murphy

[nickw]

Yes, this is an excellent article, highlighting an area that is constantly overlooked by coaches and players.

I strongly promote 'progress books' for my students who show a love for the game and a desire to excel. A simple idea that allows a player to sit down after a match or even a training session, and assess how things are going by writing notes and charting scores for things they are working on. I emphasise that the result of the match is the least important detail for the progress book entry. Players can learn and improve from winning matches as well as losing them, but so many juniors are obsessed with the outcome, and their emotions are dictated by the result. They could play great, and narrowly lose a close match, and it's a disaster, or they could scrape a win playing poorly, but then everything is ok. That might be more acceptable when you've reached your goals as a player, but when your developing your game through the juniors, every match that goes by without some after-thought and analysis, is a wasted opportunity to learn and improve.

[joeldrucker]

wise indeed

Very thoughtful story. Kyle clearly sees the big picture and truly understands what makes someone a winner, a player -- and most of all, a participant in the tennis-life journey. Please, get this article in the hands of every tennis parent.

[klacr]

Absolutely loved this article. I'm going to print copies and make sure all my students read it...particularly the juniors. Great stuff Kyle!
Scott Murphy

Yes, this is an excellent article, highlighting an area that is constantly overlooked by coaches and players.

I strongly promote 'progress books' for my students who show a love for the game and a desire to excel. A simple idea that allows a player to sit down after a match or even a training session, and assess how things are going by writing notes and charting scores for things they are working on. I emphasise that the result of the match is the least important detail for the progress book entry. Players can learn and improve from winning matches as well as losing them, but so many juniors are obsessed with the outcome, and their emotions are dictated by the result. They could play great, and narrowly lose a close match, and it's a disaster, or they could scrape a win playing poorly, but then everything is ok. That might be more acceptable when you've reached your goals as a player, but when your developing your game through the juniors, every match that goes by without some after-thought and analysis, is a wasted opportunity to learn and improve.

Very thoughtful story. Kyle clearly sees the big picture and truly understands what makes someone a winner, a player -- and most of all, a participant in the tennis-life journey. Please, get this article in the hands of every tennis parent.

Scott, Nick, Joel

Thanks for the kind words. Everyone wants to be a great tennis player, but you still gotta get used to losing. Because in this sport, it's going to happen, and it may be a tough pill to swallow. But if you wanna keep playing and competing in this sport, you have to know how to handle it.

Glad John allowed me to write it. Glad I got to an opportunity to practice with Jarkko. Glad Jarkko appreciated my backhand and my willingness to attack the net. Glad Jarkko shared his insights with me. Glad I took Jarkko's advice. Glad Jarkko kicked my ass in practice so I could practice it first hand.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[nickw]

Kyle, I'm glad you made the very most of that opportunity with Jarkko! Especially asking him something that would provide you/us with valuable insight, instead of the same boring stuff that reporters insist on asking the pro's when they talk to them. Great stuff!

[klacr]

Kyle, I'm glad you made the very most of that opportunity with Jarkko! Especially asking him something that would provide you/us with valuable insight, instead of the same boring stuff that reporters insist on asking the pro's when they talk to them. Great stuff!

Big Opportunity. I wasn't going to blow it. He was down to Earth and more than willing to discuss. Tennis reporter questions become some unenthusiastically redundant. Its painful to watch pressers most of the time. Although its a two way street as players can put up a wall and give banal answers. I penetrated Nieminen's defenses by hitting with him. He was unguarded and in his element, on the court. I "let" him win so he didn't feel threatened by my question
By "let" I mean, He's damn good and a reason why he was #13 in the world.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

[stotty]

A few comments about the loser's edge...

Much has been written about the benefits of losing. It’s become a cliche. The truth is of course a player can lose too much. The loser’s edge is nothing knew to me nor any other coach but the article did provoke my thoughts, and being the forum this is, I’ll speak them.

For me, the real core to developing a good mentality lies in learning from every experience: experience of winning, experience of losing, experience of watching and learning from other players, experience even of situations outside tennis - it’s a blend. Some people learn quickly from experience, some don’t. It’s often what separates successful people from less successful ones - in life and not just tennis. To a degree, you can tell how far a player might progress at tennis by how quickly he learns from his experiences. Those of you who remember Nadal’s early grass court matches and how quickly he learned and improved from match to match will know what I mean.

An Aside:
I heard a wonderfully insightful quote by the singer Tony Bennett. He was commenting on the late Amy Winehouse and the tragedy of her life, and how if she could have lived a little longer she might have made it through the mess she found herself in. He said, “Life teaches you how to live it—if you live long enough”. I thought that was an amazing insight on life. The way he delivered it in this documentary film about Amy really struck a cord. You had to witness it to get the impact. Amy was gifted. Had she lived to be an older woman she may have been turned out as wise and balanced as Tony Bennett. Sadly she didn’t.

But what I find most interesting, if not slightly provocative, about Klacr’s article are the stories told within it:

Those kinds of loses can be very painful. They can drive players off the tour--as happened to Bjorn Borg after his last attempt to win the U.S. Open ended in a bitter loss to John McEnroe in 1981.

I have yet to encounter an American with a different take on Borg’s exit from the game. I can excuse Klacr as I doubt he was born then so can only go on information fed by others. Maybe McEnroe was a contributing factor, maybe McEnroe had nothing whatever to do with Borg quitting tennis. To say McEnroe was the cause would be over simplistic and...well...downright wrong.

Borg’s self-destructive symptoms started before McEnroe, and he played very little tournament tennis in 1981. I am not going to bore the forum with the details. But to say McEnroe was the primary cause of Borg walking out on tennis would be doing the great Swede a terrible injustice.

It was a shame Borg quit. He was getting better despite playing very little. A handful of his first serves towards the end of his career were clocked at a tad over 120 mph, which is impressive with a wooden racket. Borg quitting tennis aged just 26 was the saddest thing to happen in our sport. Oddly enough I always felt Borg quitting tennis negatively impacted McEnroe. Perhaps not straight away, but a few years later.

An aside:
Bergelin was more a mentor than a coach, and he hardly ever worked on Borg’s game technically. He was inclined to let a player run with his natural style of play. Borg’s formative years from a technical standpoint were spent with Percy Rosberg, who advised Borg to keep his double-handed backhand rather than switch to a one-hander, as was often the advice back in the day. Interestingly it was Rosberg, some years later, who advised Edberg to get rid of his the two-handed backhand and switch to a one-hander. Rosberg clearly didn’t have fixed ideas. Sadly, in my experience, influential people with fixed ideas tend to be more persuasive than freestyle folk. They win out more often than not.

I respect Bergelin immensely. He was real man. Honest and strong. If I have one criticism of him it’s that he may have let Borg down tactically. McEnroe was the one player Borg needed to adjust against. He stood way far too far back when returning Mac’s serve and left the court open far too often for easy volleys in doing so. He needed to take those returns far earlier even if it meant sacrificing some of his famous steadiness in the process; something tough to do with a wooden racket but he absolutely had to make that adjustment. It might have made all the difference. Whether it was Bergelin’s lack of acumen or Borg’s stubbornness that prevented this adjustment I doubt we will now ever know. It’s so obvious these days when you watch the old films. Ashe was the only one to do employ the tactic. He played Mac 5 times in 1979 and had a 3-2 in head to head lead using this tactic. It worked.

The other story in Klacr’s article is this:

In 2011 he was angry and contemptuous after Novak Djokovic's famous forehand return on match point reversed the course of their U.S. Open semi-final. He called the return "lucky" and said that Novak had given up.

Sour grapes maybe...but Federer was right. It was a correct and honest assessment. If you watch that particular game where Djokovic hit his best forehand ever, you will see a Djokovic who seemed almost on the verge of tears. He had given up that game, and the match, and was wandering around in a malaise over what he had squandered. He bashed that forehand then a few moments later found himself in a position he had never expected. Again this was a tennis experience to be learned from...an “accidental” experience from which Djokovic “accidentally” took much away. He learned that a big tennis match can turn on a sixpence. He’s drawn on that experience in tight matches ever since. He doesn’t have as strong a nerve as Borg had, but nevertheless he has in his own way become a player very difficult to beat.

So there you are. I hope my observations are acceptable to the author. I wanted to pat him on the back for his fine article (and I am in a way) but found I had a things to say and one issue I wanted to clear up.

[johnyandell]

Stotty great post. I edited in the Mac reference, so let me take that one not Kyle. The problems had in fact started earlier...I was watching the Canada tournament that year before the open. I was startled to see Borg make a causal unforced error hitting a ball like 10 feet long. I thought to myself there is some fundamental shift.

Maybe the Mac match at the open could be better described as the last straw. But there was finality to that match and Borg and everyone else I think knew it.

[klacr]

stotty,

Thanks for reading. I appreciate it. As a fellow coach, I know time is our most valuable commodity. The time you sacrificed to read and write an organized and lengthy post was not done in vain. Your comments, critiques and questions are always welcomed by me, on any article, on any thread.

What's so interesting about your comments, as well as others has been your interpretation of the article.
I agree on your points on losing.
What is interesting is to think that the true origin and original idea of the article, at least in my initial brainstorming, was to talk about how tennis players are...losers. Big losers. How top players can lose every week and come back the next week. All that losing must get tiring. Tennis players, even the top ones, have a very good probability of losing....every...single...week.

But through perhaps a sub-conscious pull, through my past and current life, it evolved into the dealing with losses. As much fun as it is to win, and trust me, it's fun, you also need to know how to handle a loss, which inevitably, will happen. Not just on the tennis court.

My conversation with Nieminen always stayed with me, I remember his words and how he seemed so, for lack of a better term, cavalier about it. I thought to myself, "Wow, This guy is a great loser."

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton

P.S. 1981 US Open. Great year, I think. But the better year was 1982, That's when I was born

[don_budge]

Borg's retirement…was tennis' loss.

I have yet to encounter an American with a different take on Borg’s exit from the game. I can excuse Klacr as I doubt he was born then so can only go on information fed by others. Maybe McEnroe was a contributing factor, maybe McEnroe had nothing whatever to do with Borg quitting tennis. To say McEnroe was the cause would be over simplistic and...well...downright wrong.

Borg’s self-destructive symptoms started before McEnroe, and he played very little tournament tennis in 1981. I am not going to bore the forum with the details. But to say McEnroe was the primary cause of Borg walking out on tennis would be doing the great Swede a terrible injustice.

It was a shame Borg quit. He was getting better despite playing very little. A handful of his first serves towards the end of his career were clocked at a tad over 120 mph, which is impressive with a wooden racket. Borg quitting tennis aged just 26 was the saddest thing to happen in our sport. Oddly enough I always felt Borg quitting tennis negatively impacted McEnroe. Perhaps not straight away, but a few years later.

An aside:
Bergelin was more a mentor than a coach, and he hardly ever worked on Borg’s game technically. He was inclined to let a player run with his natural style of play. Borg’s formative years from a technical standpoint were spent with Percy Rosberg, who advised Borg to keep his double-handed backhand rather than switch to a one-hander, as was often the advice back in the day. Interestingly it was Rosberg, some years later, who advised Edberg to get rid of his the two-handed backhand and switch to a one-hander. Rosberg clearly didn’t have fixed ideas. Sadly, in my experience, influential people with fixed ideas tend to be more persuasive than freestyle folk. They win out more often than not.

I respect Bergelin immensely. He was real man. Honest and strong. If I have one criticism of him it’s that he may have let Borg down tactically. McEnroe was the one player Borg needed to adjust against. He stood way far too far back when returning Mac’s serve and left the court open far too often for easy volleys in doing so. He needed to take those returns far earlier even if it meant sacrificing some of his famous steadiness in the process; something tough to do with a wooden racket but he absolutely had to make that adjustment. It might have made all the difference. Whether it was Bergelin’s lack of acumen or Borg’s stubbornness that prevented this adjustment I doubt we will now ever know. It’s so obvious these days when you watch the old films. Ashe was the only one to do employ the tactic. He played Mac 5 times in 1979 and had a 3-2 in head to head lead using this tactic. It worked.

Here's one American that isn't buying the McEnroe explanation. I never believed for an instant that it was John McEnroe that drove Bjorn Borg to a premature retirement. I find that notion to be preposterous.

I believe that a number of things were working on the Borg psyche and it was the change that the game was taking that was the final straw. It wasn't that McEnroe was challenging him…it was that a number of other obscure players might challenge him because they were playing with oversized graphite racquets. There isn't any doubt in my mind that this was weighing on him heavily.

I often cite that Borg when making a comeback some ten years later used his trusty wooden Donnay. This was either insanity or he was making a point. Nobody to my knowledge has stood up and agreed with me which only convinces me more that I may be absolutely correct in this. I know Swedes and the Swedish psyche. Borg had a reverence for the game and its traditions. Deep down inside he was seething that he climbed the mountain to the top of the game using the standard sized wood and the newcomers were taking a short cut and cutting into his kingdom.

Bergelin too was a real Swede. His outlook may have been a bit narrow, fixed and locked. This is typical Swedish behavior. It works for them and it works for their society. Borg's technique was a bit limiting as far as his range of tactical options went. He maximised for instance a great all court game using the two hand backhand and "strong" gripped forehand. He did have a very effective serve that may have been underestimated.

It's a good thoughtful article…I need to read it more carefully. I love the fact that Stotty made such a lengthy and opinionated post. To me…that is what really gives a lot of these articles traction. Contributions from the forum increase the dialogue which only serves to increase the range of understanding.

[EdWeiss]

A terrific article by Kyle - should be required reading for all players and parents. Two separate observations on the topic:

First, in a recent book, Zen Tennis, co-authored by former U.S. Open singles semi-finalist Bill Scanlon, Bill has an interesting observation about dealing with loss. As a former top 10 player, he is often asked by parents to look at their child to assess their ability/talent for the game. Bill notes that good coordination and good mechanics are traits he often sees in the kids he is asked to look at. But Bill then notes that the most important trait that he looks for in assessing the ability of a player to go far and reach his or her potential is not skills like coordination or strokes. Rather, if he was to pick-out one trait or skill it would be the ability to deal with loss in a constructive manner rather than be devastated by it. On a personal level, this is exactly the issue of a student I have been working with who has talent and strokes to beat the band.

Second, I was reading a very good book on the culture or "way" of martial arts. The author recommends that if a student has a match with an opponent and loses (or for that matter just spars with an opponent), the the student approach the victorious opponent after any loss (or the sparring partner) and ask him or her for observations about the student - what they could do better, what they did well, etc. I know that doing something like this is so different than the mentality that many tennis players have but sure is an interesting thought.

Again, a great article by Kyle.

[klacr]

Thanks for reading Ed.

I saw that book by Scanlon. Was curious about it. Any good? May pick it up to take a browse.

Kyle LaCroix USPTA
Boca Raton