Optimism and Delusions
What's Wrong with Michael Chang and What he Needs to Do
by Dr. Roland A. Carlstedt
Listening to Michael Chang's interview after his straight set loss to
Nicolas Lapenti you'd think he won the match. Sure it's o.k. to be
optimistic, however, Chang takes Seligman's concept of personal optimism
to new heights, almost to the point of being delusional. While most
experts doubt that Chang will ever find his top-10 form, he is convinced
he'll make it back to the
upper echelon of the game. Although we expect champions to talk like
Chang, and more importantly continue to train hard and fight, he has to
learn that mental toughness alone will not do it especially when technical
and tactical deficiencies are obvious. It'll take much more to brake the
emerging modern game that is rapidly passing Chang by.
In Chang's case we see one of the mentally toughest players of all time
actually falling victim to those very traits that once made his psyche the
best in the game. His positive attitude fails to recognize the negative in
his current game. His mental discipline has turned to stubbornness, and
the repressive coping he still exhibits is more unconsciously structured
toward warding off doubts about his ability to compete with big-boys and
the imminent demise of the career that defined him, than fending off
disruptive thoughts during a match. In other words, the unconscious
psychological armor that once propelled him to heroic heights by
suppressing common doubts players often experience during critical moments
of competition, functions more to protect the super-star's ego than
facilitate stellar performances.
Even though Chang has fallen well out of the top 10, he doesn't seem
to recognize his game is no longer up to snuff
|
This often occurs when disparity exists between one's self-image and
the reality of one's actual ability or inability. Chang's inability to
recognize or admit that his present game as is is no longer up to the task
of beating most of today's players is an example of a sort of "sport
cognitive dissonance." Essentially, what this means is that if what
you believe about your game does not jive with what is happening, you'll
restructure your thought processes to protect your self-image. For
example, Chang, even though falling well out of the top 10 doesn't think
or recognize that his game no longer is up to snuff, instead, consistent
with his beliefs, self-image, and value system, he tells us how much fun he
is having and that it's just a matter of time before he finds his old form
and ranking.
He has adjusted or modified his thought processes to his
current predicament in such a manner that the essence of his ego or
self-perceptions are not threatened, even though the reality of his
situation shows that his game is no longer consistent with his self-image.
This disparity, if not recognized and addressed, will hinder Chang from ever
reaching the top again.
What Chang is experiencing is common when an athlete nears the end of
his or her career or when their game no longer keeps up with developing
advances in a sport.
When I coached Ronald Agenor at the start of his comeback at the age of
34, he told me he wanted to at least get into the top-15 or a semi-final in
a Grand Slam tournament. I said, "Fine, but what are you going to do
about it?" I asked if he was willing to change his game to adapt to a
style of play that was not around when he started playing almost 20 years
ago. How could he possibly reach such grandiose heights with the game he
played almost two decades ago?
Here lies one of the major problems with Chang and other players who
are slipping into tennis oblivion, they usually are not willing or serious
about making drastic but necessary changes to at least have a chance at
making another run to the top. Oh, they'll tell you they will do anything
to reach that illusory goal, but in reality, just as they are bound by
firmly entrenched psychological and behavioral patterns, so too their
technical and tactical is usually etched in stone.
The only hope for Chang may be to totally revamp his game, but is he
willing?
|
This doesn't have to be so. Research clearly indicates that
psychological and neuropsychological changes can be made. A top athlete is
actually better able to make drastic changes than a novice, so that
indeed, "an old dog can learn new tricks", provided the new
tricks are learned in an efficient and systematic manner. In tennis this
is difficult because most players are unwilling to pay for resources that
are readily available to older players involved in team sports; this means
having trainers and coaches familiar with the latest research in motor
learning and neuropsychological processes.
As I see it, the only hope for Chang is to totally revamp his game. He
should consider a more powerful racquet, flattening out his excessive
topspin, and inducing the first pressure or big-shot in a rally. He should
no longer play the percentages like he did in the past, instead he must
get extremely aggressive and end points as soon as possible.
Systematic training would help him implement a new game and that may be the
only hope for him. The same applies to Agenor and Vince Spadea who can't
even qualify for major events any more.
The time has come for a Chang make-over, and that means restructuring
the mental characteristics that once made him one of the toughest players
and using them to learn and effectively use a new technical and tactical
game.
Your comments are welcome. Let us know what you about think
this article by emailing
us here at TennisONE.
Dr. Roland A. Carlstedt has followed the professional
tennis tours since 1985, fulltime from 1989-1998 in which he on average
attended 25 tournaments a year including all Grand Slam events and
important Davis Cup ties. During this time he complied perhaps the most
extensive database in existence on the psychological performance,
tendencies, and profiles of most ATP and WTA players. His annual
Psychological World Rankings for Tennis have been published since 1991
more than 500 times in over 40 countries. His rankings and data are based
on his Psychological Observation System for Tennis. Interestingly his 2000
rankings which were released prior to the 2001 Australian Open had 2 of 4
semifinalists and 8 of 16 quarterfinalists on them including such unlikely
players as Arnaud Clement and Sebastian Grossjean. His 2001 rankings will
appear in TennisONE at the end of the year.
|
