| Tennis psychology is nothing more than understanding | | | | him is the man of dogged determination that sets his |
| the workings of your opponent's mind, and gauging the | | | | mind on one plan and adheres to it, bitterly, fiercely |
| effect of your own game on his mental viewpoint, and | | | | fighting to the end, with never a thought of change. He |
| understanding the mental effects resulting from the | | | | is the man whose psychology is easy to understand, |
| various external causes on your own mind. You | | | | but whose mental viewpoint is hard to upset, for he |
| cannot be a successful psychologist of others without | | | | never allows himself to think of anything except the |
| first understanding your own mental processes, you | | | | business at hand. This man is your Johnston or your |
| must study the effect on yourself of the same | | | | Wilding. I respect the mental capacity of Brookes |
| happening under different circumstances. You react | | | | more, but I admire the tenacity of purpose of Johnston. |
| differently in different moods and under different | | | | Pick out your type from your own mental processes, |
| conditions. You must realize the effect on your game | | | | and then work out your game along the lines best |
| of the resulting irritation, pleasure, confusion, or | | | | suited to you. |
| whatever form your reaction takes. Does it increase | | | | When two men are, in the same class, as regards |
| your efficiency? If so, strive for it, but never give it to | | | | stroke equipment, the determining factor in any given |
| your opponent. | | | | match is the mental viewpoint. Luck, so-called, is often |
| Does it deprive you of concentration? If so, either | | | | grasping the psychological value of a break in the |
| remove the cause, or if that is not possible strive to | | | | game, and turning it to your own account. |
| ignore it. | | | | We hear a great deal about the "shots we have |
| Once you have judged accurately your own reaction | | | | made." Few realize the importance of the "shots we |
| to conditions, study your opponents, to decide their | | | | have missed." The science of missing shots is as |
| temperaments. Like temperaments react similarly, and | | | | important as that of making them, and at times a miss |
| you may judge men of your own type by yourself. | | | | by an inch is of more value than a, return that is killed |
| Opposite temperaments you must seek to compare | | | | by your opponent. |
| with people whose reactions you know. | | | | Let me explain. A player drives you far out of court |
| A person who can control his own mental processes | | | | with an angle-shot. You run hard to it, and reaching, |
| stands an excellent chance of reading those of | | | | drive it hard and fast down the side-line, missing it by |
| another, for the human mind works along definite lines | | | | an inch. Your opponent is surprised and shaken, |
| of thought, and can be studied. One can only control | | | | realizing that your shot might as well have gone in as |
| one's, mental processes after carefully studying them. | | | | out. He will expect you to try it again, and will not take |
| A steady phlegmatic baseline player is seldom a keen | | | | the risk next time. He will try to play the ball, and may |
| thinker. If he was he would not adhere to the baseline. | | | | fall into error. You have thus taken some of your |
| The physical appearance of a man is usually a pretty | | | | opponent's confidence, and increased his chance of |
| clear index to his type of mind. The stolid, easy-going | | | | error, all by a miss. |
| man, who usually advocates the baseline game, does | | | | If you had merely popped back that return, and it had |
| so because he hates to stir up his torpid mind to think | | | | been killed, your opponent would have felt increasingly |
| out a safe method of reaching the net. There is the | | | | confident of your inability to get the ball out of his |
| other type of baseline player, who prefers to remain | | | | reach, while you would merely have been winded |
| on the back of the court while directing an attack | | | | without result. |
| intended to break up your game. He is a very | | | | Let us suppose you made the shot down the sideline. It |
| dangerous player, and a deep, keen thinking antagonist. | | | | was a seemingly impossible get. First it amounts to |
| He achieves his results by mixing up his length and | | | | TWO points in that it took one away from your |
| direction, and worrying you with the variety of his | | | | opponent that should have been his and gave you one |
| game. He is a good psychologist. The first type of | | | | you ought never to have had. It also worries your |
| player mentioned merely hits the ball with little idea of | | | | opponent, as he feels he has thrown away a big |
| what he is doing, while the latter always has a definite | | | | chance. |
| plan and adheres to it. The hard-hitting, erratic, | | | | The psychology of a tennis match is very interesting, |
| net-rushing player is a creature of impulse. There is no | | | | but easily understandable. Both men start with equal |
| real system to his attack, no understanding of your | | | | chances. Once one man establishes a real lead, his |
| game. He will make brilliant coups on the spur of the | | | | confidence goes up, while his opponent worries, and |
| moment, largely by instinct; but there is no, mental | | | | his mental viewpoint becomes poor. The sole object of |
| power of consistent thinking. It is an interesting, | | | | the first man is to hold his lead, thus holding his |
| fascinating type. | | | | confidence. If the second player pulls even or draws |
| The dangerous man is the player who mixes his style | | | | ahead, the inevitable reaction occurs with even a |
| from back to fore court at the direction of an | | | | greater contrast in psychology. There is the natural |
| ever-alert mind. This is the man to study and learn | | | | confidence of the leader now with the second man as |
| from. He is a player with a definite purpose. A player | | | | well as that great stimulus of having turned seeming |
| who has an answer to every query you propound him | | | | defeat into probable victory. The reverse in the case |
| in your game. He is the most subtle antagonist in the | | | | of the first player is apt to hopelessly destroy his |
| world. He is of the school of Brookes. Second only to | | | | game, and collapse follows. |