Being in zone 4:15 and practising a skill raises the skill level and reflects in the performances. At its highest level it becomes sublime and converges towards pure natural talent.
A good example of this is Lin Dan’s performance in the 2008 Olympics final. He was probably at the highest level of the 4:15 zone in the chosen field of badminton in this era.
Can we say Nadal’s performance in the Wimbledon final was equally good? Probably as good but a rung lower. He has equal focus but was not as good in flair or the state of natural talent. May be he has not mastered all the skills in his game to the highest level or may be he was facing a more naturally talented opponent.
How about Tsonga’s performance in the Australian Open? He seemed to have been in the 4:15 zone and at the highest levels possible for him. But not at the highest levels in the game in the era. Hence though he played his best possible he lost to a better equipped i.e. more skilful opponent in Djokovic.
This brings in an interesting new dimension – two people giving out their best but one is doing better than the other. I think I am missing something here. Yes, consistent practice and disciplined skill development.
Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Lin Dan, Lee Chong Wei all playing at their highest levels. How will these contests be?
Let me take four cases here.
Federer Vs Nadal – Federer is sublime, Nadal was more disciplined. Federer had more talent but one weakness that was exploited to the highest level by Nadal. Nadal at the same time had the highest skill in the shot that was countering Federer’s weakness or seeming weakness that was exposed by Nadal’s relentless high precision shots.
Lin Dan Vs Lee Chong Wei – Lin Dan has superior skills and was also playing at his best. Lee Chong’s skills do not match Lin Dan’s at their best and also he was not playing at his best.
Djokovic Vs Tsonga – Djokovic is better skilled. His baseline level is well above Tsonga’s. Hence when both gave their best Djokovic came out good.
Federer Vs Djokovic – Federer probably has the edge. Federer has to improve on his weakness which if exploited relentlessly will work against him. Djokovic need to elevate his baseline level to be the best in the game.
Lin Dan and Federer are master, most skilful.
Nadal is working hard and closing in on Federer and may be getting better than him in some of the skills.
Tsonga had a one off good run. He probably can do it again but he slips into the other clock zones quite easilym regularly and remains there for longer periods of time. Same with Raikonnen!
What about Bjorn Borgm John McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Sampras and Agassi?
It looks like there are 3 dimensions then:
Baseline and skill level – This comes by practice or natural talent. We can reach the levels of natural talent with focussed practice for longer and longer at the highest levels in the 4:15 zone on the skills that you want to develop and need.
Being in the 4:15 zone for the longest periods. Remember why Tsonga and Raikonnen fail.
Being at the highest level in the 4:15 zone is pure bliss, sublimity and natural talent.
So the process of achieving something is:
Assess and gather what the skills required are. We may have review this list to be up to date with changing times.
Taking each skill to the level of natural talent, say serve of Ivanosovic or Sampras, baseline game of Agassi, net dives of Becker, smash of Lin Dan.
How can we take the skill to the level of natural talent? Practice until it comes naturally to you whenever you want it – Sampras/Federer’s serve down the middle.
What made Sampras better than Agassi?
Sampras’s serve was not dependent on his opponent at all. He could set his own level. Agassi having a return game had just that one stroke below Sampras!
Hence there may be some skills that may be prove the point of significant different when equals are contesting. So identify the key skills that could make a big difference at crucial times.
Understanding the skills required, taking them to the levels of natural talent with determined practice in 4:15 zone, spending longest periods of non-competition time there as well, you are ready to compete and win.
If you are not winning doing all these you have to graciously accept that the opponent is better and congratulate him. Retrospectively you will be able to find a convincing reason why you lost and will be able to work on the skills to be bettered.
This should not disappoint you. You have achieved what you are destined to achieve.
May be have an American attitude rather than a British attitude not attributing the failure to an easy alibi will be useful here. It’s best to take defeat graciously and work on the reasons of failure to come out better next time. I tried my best and this is what I could achieve. I need to go back and relook at why could I not do better and work on the reasons. May be next time you will be better equipped to be a clear winner. Nadal is a great example here.
A good example of this is Lin Dan’s performance in the 2008 Olympics final. He was probably at the highest level of the 4:15 zone in the chosen field of badminton in this era.
Can we say Nadal’s performance in the Wimbledon final was equally good? Probably as good but a rung lower. He has equal focus but was not as good in flair or the state of natural talent. May be he has not mastered all the skills in his game to the highest level or may be he was facing a more naturally talented opponent.
How about Tsonga’s performance in the Australian Open? He seemed to have been in the 4:15 zone and at the highest levels possible for him. But not at the highest levels in the game in the era. Hence though he played his best possible he lost to a better equipped i.e. more skilful opponent in Djokovic.
This brings in an interesting new dimension – two people giving out their best but one is doing better than the other. I think I am missing something here. Yes, consistent practice and disciplined skill development.
Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Lin Dan, Lee Chong Wei all playing at their highest levels. How will these contests be?
Let me take four cases here.
Federer Vs Nadal – Federer is sublime, Nadal was more disciplined. Federer had more talent but one weakness that was exploited to the highest level by Nadal. Nadal at the same time had the highest skill in the shot that was countering Federer’s weakness or seeming weakness that was exposed by Nadal’s relentless high precision shots.
Lin Dan Vs Lee Chong Wei – Lin Dan has superior skills and was also playing at his best. Lee Chong’s skills do not match Lin Dan’s at their best and also he was not playing at his best.
Djokovic Vs Tsonga – Djokovic is better skilled. His baseline level is well above Tsonga’s. Hence when both gave their best Djokovic came out good.
Federer Vs Djokovic – Federer probably has the edge. Federer has to improve on his weakness which if exploited relentlessly will work against him. Djokovic need to elevate his baseline level to be the best in the game.
Lin Dan and Federer are master, most skilful.
Nadal is working hard and closing in on Federer and may be getting better than him in some of the skills.
Tsonga had a one off good run. He probably can do it again but he slips into the other clock zones quite easilym regularly and remains there for longer periods of time. Same with Raikonnen!
What about Bjorn Borgm John McEnroe, Edberg, Becker, Sampras and Agassi?
It looks like there are 3 dimensions then:
Baseline and skill level – This comes by practice or natural talent. We can reach the levels of natural talent with focussed practice for longer and longer at the highest levels in the 4:15 zone on the skills that you want to develop and need.
Being in the 4:15 zone for the longest periods. Remember why Tsonga and Raikonnen fail.
Being at the highest level in the 4:15 zone is pure bliss, sublimity and natural talent.
So the process of achieving something is:
Assess and gather what the skills required are. We may have review this list to be up to date with changing times.
Taking each skill to the level of natural talent, say serve of Ivanosovic or Sampras, baseline game of Agassi, net dives of Becker, smash of Lin Dan.
How can we take the skill to the level of natural talent? Practice until it comes naturally to you whenever you want it – Sampras/Federer’s serve down the middle.
What made Sampras better than Agassi?
Sampras’s serve was not dependent on his opponent at all. He could set his own level. Agassi having a return game had just that one stroke below Sampras!
Hence there may be some skills that may be prove the point of significant different when equals are contesting. So identify the key skills that could make a big difference at crucial times.
Understanding the skills required, taking them to the levels of natural talent with determined practice in 4:15 zone, spending longest periods of non-competition time there as well, you are ready to compete and win.
If you are not winning doing all these you have to graciously accept that the opponent is better and congratulate him. Retrospectively you will be able to find a convincing reason why you lost and will be able to work on the skills to be bettered.
This should not disappoint you. You have achieved what you are destined to achieve.
May be have an American attitude rather than a British attitude not attributing the failure to an easy alibi will be useful here. It’s best to take defeat graciously and work on the reasons of failure to come out better next time. I tried my best and this is what I could achieve. I need to go back and relook at why could I not do better and work on the reasons. May be next time you will be better equipped to be a clear winner. Nadal is a great example here.
No comments:
Post a Comment