5 ms·

If you haven't read it, "The Inner Game of Tennis" by W. Timothy Gallway (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Inner-Game-Tennis-ultimate-performance/dp/1447288505 https://

by iamben 5y ago

If you haven't read it, "The Inner Game of Tennis" by W. Timothy Gallway (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Inner-Game-Tennis-ultimate-performance/dp/1447288505 https://www.amazon.co.uk/Inner-Game-Tennis-ultimate-performa...) is worth a go. Whilst it's technically a tennis coaching book, the tennis is really just an example to explain bigger things. Anyway, there's a great story in that book where he says something like "if you want to put someone off their game, compliment them on how strong their backhand [or whatever] is today. From then on they'll think about it before every stroke and destroy their own performance."

stephenhuey 5y ago
That definitely happens to me. Additional thoughts go through a pro player’s head during penalty kicks. 11 years ago I was fascinated by a short Freakonomics podcast. The data shows that the best chance of scoring is to kick it straight down the center to the keeper. However, most people won’t do this even though their odds are better since the pain of kicking it to a keeper who does not dive to the side and instead catches your ball is far greater than not scoring! https://freakonomics.com/2010/06/14/what-to-do-with-your-penalty-kick/ https://freakonomics.com/2010/06/14/what-to-do-with-your-pen...
- im3w1l 5y ago
  Scientific studies also show that "rock" is the best throw in rock-paper-scissor*. Always shooting center is as ridiculous as always throwing "rock". * Rock and scissor are both thrown at 35%, with paper at 29.6%. The article suggests throwing paper to exploit that, but that makes no sense, since you will win 35% lose 35% and draw 29.6%. Rock on the other hand wins at 35%, draw 35% and lose 29.6% https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-blame-game/201504/the-surprising-psychology-rock-paper-scissors https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-blame-game/20150...
  - schaefer 5y ago
    In a one time throw against a complete stranger, okay. But your friends will notice that you always throw rock, and you start to lose 100% of the time.
- cutemonster 5y ago
  Also, if people started doing that, soon it would work no more
- ajuc 5y ago
  > the best chance of scoring is to kick it straight down the center to the keeper. it's called "panenka" after a player that used to do this in high-stakes games to rub it in. You have to fake your run-up well - otherwise good keepers will notice the difference in run-up and make you look like an idiot [1] I don't think it's the best chance. Panenkas are about 50-50 and normal penalties are about 70%-30%. And most of that 30% is missing the goal completely. If you go hard either side and don't miss the goal it's almost 100% no matter if the keeper dives the right way. Then there are strikers like Lewandowski who wait for keeper to decide and go the other way [2]. This is all about developing a subconscious routine and doing it mechanically without thinking. You have no time to consciously process the data and choose the other side. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWBBlpyDfUI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWBBlpyDfUI [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrXoQKmZui8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrXoQKmZui8
  - sk0g 5y ago
    While I don't have the stats to back the latter part up, the expected goal (xG) from a penalty kick is .76 - 76% of penalties end up being scored. Keepers quite often will guess right, and at that point both the placement and power have to be perfect. If they are, it's a goal practically every time, but most players will compromise on either placement or power. This may be different in recreational contexts, as professional keepers dive frighteningly quickly, and are very good at reading the body language of the PK taker.
  - jogjayr 5y ago
    A Panenka is a specific type of penalty through the center. It's a sort of chip/scoop shot and it goes really slow. It makes the keeper look foolish if it comes off. But it's slow enough that even a keeper diving to one side has a chance to recover, as seen in the video you shared. But there's also the option of taking a normal run-up and blasting it straight down the middle. No keeper is going to be able read that since there's nothing to disguise. And if they dive, it's going too fast for the keeper to recover and save. The keeper is biased toward action. If they just stand in the center and don't dive they'll be blamed for not even trying. So a hard, fast penalty down the center has pretty good odds of succeeding.
paul_f 5y ago
Malcolm Gladwell wrote about this in his brilliant essay - The Art of Failure. "When Jana Novotna faltered at Wimbledon, it was because she began thinking about her shots again. She lost her fluidity, her touch." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2000/08/21/the-art-of-failure https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2000/08/21/the-art-of-fai...
finiteseries 5y ago
Soccer/football coach Thomas Tuchel, previously at BVB & PSG and now at Chelsea is pretty well known for handing out copies of that book to his players.
caenorst 5y ago
and is there any advices in this book to avoid focusing on the technique in important moment? I used to play foosball competitively and this used to eat me when I started to doubt about my technique.
- iamben 5y ago
  Yeah, the whole book is pretty much about learning to do instinctively. You can pick up a second hand copy for very little. It's worth a read!
muzani 5y ago
This is a golden recommendation, exactly what I was looking for. Thanks so much!
coupdejarnac 5y ago
I heard this a long time ago, and it has always struck me as nonsense. Sure, mindgames are useful, but for elite athletes technique is second nature. In soccer, you're better off telling someone their sister is a whore (ie Materazzi to Zidane), kicking them in the heels, or exaggerating contact. Maybe complementing someone works better in individual sports like golf or tennis, but even then I think it would only work on the naive. I've gotten compliments in the middle of soccer games, and I usually laugh them off. I can't imagine being fooled with that sort of amateurish tactic.
dmoy 5y ago
My coach for a sport that is completely unrelated to tennis has me read that book. It is generally applicable, I agree.

by iamben 5y ago

stephenhuey 5y ago

That definitely happens to me. Additional thoughts go through a pro player’s head during penalty kicks. 11 years ago I was fascinated by a short Freakonomics podcast. The data shows that the best chance of scoring is to kick it straight down the center to the keeper. However, most people won’t do this even though their odds are better since the pain of kicking it to a keeper who does not dive to the side and instead catches your ball is far greater than not scoring! https://freakonomics.com/2010/06/14/what-to-do-with-your-penalty-kick/ https://freakonomics.com/2010/06/14/what-to-do-with-your-pen...

im3w1l 5y ago
Scientific studies also show that "rock" is the best throw in rock-paper-scissor*. Always shooting center is as ridiculous as always throwing "rock". * Rock and scissor are both thrown at 35%, with paper at 29.6%. The article suggests throwing paper to exploit that, but that makes no sense, since you will win 35% lose 35% and draw 29.6%. Rock on the other hand wins at 35%, draw 35% and lose 29.6% https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-blame-game/201504/the-surprising-psychology-rock-paper-scissors https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-blame-game/20150...
- schaefer 5y ago
  In a one time throw against a complete stranger, okay. But your friends will notice that you always throw rock, and you start to lose 100% of the time.
cutemonster 5y ago
Also, if people started doing that, soon it would work no more
ajuc 5y ago
> the best chance of scoring is to kick it straight down the center to the keeper. it's called "panenka" after a player that used to do this in high-stakes games to rub it in. You have to fake your run-up well - otherwise good keepers will notice the difference in run-up and make you look like an idiot [1] I don't think it's the best chance. Panenkas are about 50-50 and normal penalties are about 70%-30%. And most of that 30% is missing the goal completely. If you go hard either side and don't miss the goal it's almost 100% no matter if the keeper dives the right way. Then there are strikers like Lewandowski who wait for keeper to decide and go the other way [2]. This is all about developing a subconscious routine and doing it mechanically without thinking. You have no time to consciously process the data and choose the other side. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWBBlpyDfUI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWBBlpyDfUI [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrXoQKmZui8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrXoQKmZui8
- sk0g 5y ago
  While I don't have the stats to back the latter part up, the expected goal (xG) from a penalty kick is .76 - 76% of penalties end up being scored. Keepers quite often will guess right, and at that point both the placement and power have to be perfect. If they are, it's a goal practically every time, but most players will compromise on either placement or power. This may be different in recreational contexts, as professional keepers dive frighteningly quickly, and are very good at reading the body language of the PK taker.
- jogjayr 5y ago
  A Panenka is a specific type of penalty through the center. It's a sort of chip/scoop shot and it goes really slow. It makes the keeper look foolish if it comes off. But it's slow enough that even a keeper diving to one side has a chance to recover, as seen in the video you shared. But there's also the option of taking a normal run-up and blasting it straight down the middle. No keeper is going to be able read that since there's nothing to disguise. And if they dive, it's going too fast for the keeper to recover and save. The keeper is biased toward action. If they just stand in the center and don't dive they'll be blamed for not even trying. So a hard, fast penalty down the center has pretty good odds of succeeding.

paul_f 5y ago

Malcolm Gladwell wrote about this in his brilliant essay - The Art of Failure. "When Jana Novotna faltered at Wimbledon, it was because she began thinking about her shots again. She lost her fluidity, her touch." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2000/08/21/the-art-of-failure https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2000/08/21/the-art-of-fai...

finiteseries 5y ago

Soccer/football coach Thomas Tuchel, previously at BVB & PSG and now at Chelsea is pretty well known for handing out copies of that book to his players.

caenorst 5y ago

and is there any advices in this book to avoid focusing on the technique in important moment? I used to play foosball competitively and this used to eat me when I started to doubt about my technique.

iamben 5y ago
Yeah, the whole book is pretty much about learning to do instinctively. You can pick up a second hand copy for very little. It's worth a read!

muzani 5y ago

This is a golden recommendation, exactly what I was looking for. Thanks so much!

coupdejarnac 5y ago

I heard this a long time ago, and it has always struck me as nonsense. Sure, mindgames are useful, but for elite athletes technique is second nature. In soccer, you're better off telling someone their sister is a whore (ie Materazzi to Zidane), kicking them in the heels, or exaggerating contact. Maybe complementing someone works better in individual sports like golf or tennis, but even then I think it would only work on the naive. I've gotten compliments in the middle of soccer games, and I usually laugh them off. I can't imagine being fooled with that sort of amateurish tactic.

dmoy 5y ago

My coach for a sport that is completely unrelated to tennis has me read that book. It is generally applicable, I agree.