Hi everyone. Here is a video I took while I was in beautiful Bali doing a corporate event as a surprise guest for FOX Sport. The video is just a bit of fun. There was a crocodile on stage and you’ll see me play with monkeys and drink one of the rarest types of coffee in the world which has an interesting story to it. Check it out if you need a quick time waster:)

If you enjoy the video please subscribe to my YouTube channel and let me know what you think on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook.

In this episode I’m traveling all around Europe Interviewing tennis stars, filming for CNN and visiting my grand daughter.

Some of the things you’ll see in this video is me playing tennis with the Bryan Brothers, behind the scenes footage with Nicolas Almagro and me visiting my grand daughter for her 3rd birthday in Norway. Some of the countries I visit are Spain, Norway and the UK. No surprise that I’m a bit tired!

If you enjoy the video please subscribe to my YouTube channel and let me know what you think on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook.

In this mess of yet another father, son, coach, tennis association relationship gone wrong I wonder where Bernard sits in all of this. Is he is getting the necessary psychological support needed for a young person to continue his life in the pressure cooker of the world tennis tour?

Parents and tennis associations around the world put incredible amounts of pressure on young players to perform. They are sent on national teams to play for their country. The individual players have their own expectations to deal with let alone their team mates and country. Also things such as physical exhaustion, homesickness, schoolwork and even broken hearts that can come with being a teenager.

Just some of the questions that come straight to my mind are:

• Could this incident have been prevented?




• Has a professional mental health expert ever talked to Bernard and his father or had one offered by Tennis Australia?




• Do tennis associations have the support in place for players and parents?




• Is it their duty to do so?




• As tennis is a solo /individual sport is it up to the individual to find their own support?




• What happens when young players don’t perform or live up to expectations or get injured?




• What happens to the young person when they are dropped from the team and national squad and lose much needed sponsorship or funding to fuel their dreams?




• How damaging is this to their mental well being?




• Should young players be sent on to centre court in front of thousands of spectators and millions of TV viewers?




• When they finish their match what then? Do they have someone to talk to?




• Is there a professional in the mental health area available for them?




• Where is the “duty of care” from these associations?




• Have associations even considered this a necessary service?

Don’t believe that this is just a tennis issue the same thing happens across all sports in all countries. Recently a top NFL (American Football) player committed suicide to the surprise and shock of the entire nation. In my experience there has never been a proper support structure in any of the tennis associations, or for that matter any structure poor or not.

If a serviceman goes to war he needs support upon return to deal with the horrendous things they have seen. Suicide and depression are always around the corner.

Similar principles apply to sport and tennis. Surely these kids need some duty of care as well. Do we have to wait for something tragic to happen before something is put in place for young sportsmen and woman under extreme pressures?

This incident should be a wake up call to all sporting associations and / or clubs.

This is an issue close to my heart and I am doing something about it! More on that as it happens.

What do you think? Do tennis associations need a suport structure to help their players? Let me know on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook.

If you are a golfer you don’t know how you are doing in competition unless you look at the scoreboards as you walk around the course. You can choose to ignore them, and play each shot as it comes, and simply let the final score be whatever it is.

A Formula One racing driver on a hot qualifying lap, can choose to ignore the data on his steering wheel, just drive flat out, and find out later where he is on the grid for the race.

In tennis you have no such choice thanks to the Umpire, , and at least two large electronic scoreboards at either end of the court. If you are a tennis player I wonder how you would play if you did not know the score? Knowing point by point exactly what the score is, and how you are doing, brings extra mental pressure which some players deal with better than others.

Being ‘scored’ means you are being judged, and this always cranks up the pressure. How do you deal with it, and how can you do a better than job your opponent?

This mental challenge is all about managing the voice in your head, the monkey mind, so he does not overreact whatever the score, winning or losing. How well you deal with him, can have a serious effect on how you play the next point and game, negatively or positively.

“Being scored means you are being judged, and this always cranks up the pressure”

Coaches and commentators, often speak about the ‘vital 7th’ game, because they believe it is mentally the most important of the set. At the very least they argue it will ‘set you up’ to win the set! Are they right, or are they bigging it up too much? Does this impact on you negatively, tempt you to ‘try even harder’, and maybe tighten up a bit? Lets have a closer look at this scoring phenomenon…….

Imagine this scenario. You are leading 5-1, so the pressure has gone up a notch, but all you have to do is close out the set, and you have at least four chances to do so. Just keep on doing what you were doing, and all should be well. Job done?

How about 3-3 and it’s your serve? Better not drop it now and give your opponent the chance to serve for 5-3, and then you will have to break back immediately, or the set has gone.

Feeling a bit more pressure now, just because of the score? Will you play safe, slow your serve down, go for it even more, or can you stay calm and maintain your natural rhythm? Can you keep on doing, what you have been doing?

“Being up rather that down in a match brings more pressure because there is more to lose”

The final permutation is you are 4-2 up and serving for 5-2, and this is when your monkey mind will need managing, because he knows how important this game is. Suddenly he is awake, tempted to interfere and make sure you don’t mess it up. ‘Come on now, what a great chance, we need this game, must win the first point, got to get my first serve in, can’t make any unforced errors…….must try even harder etc….’. Can you hear him chattering away?

Being up rather that down in a match brings more pressure because there is more to lose, your expectation level is higher, and your monkey mind is more worried you might blow it. The pressure is less if you are losing.

I think this is proved by what I call the ‘sod it’ mode of playing tennis. How many times have you suddenly started playing great stuff when the match looks completely lost and you are staring at a heavy defeat? You have just gone into sod it mode. The monkey has stopped interfering with your best game because he expects you to lose. Now you can return to playing at your very best, free from worrying about the score.

The only time the 7th game isn’t so vital is when it is the 1st of the next set, because you have just won the previous set 6-0!

So what to do?

The 5 Steps To Being Master Of The Vital 7th

• Before the match, visualise what the score might be, and see yourself reacting to it in a positive appropriate way. If the score is this, I do that, if the score is that, I do this…




• Use the changeover prior to the 7th game more profitably. Keep your monkey mind in check by using your Zen breathing, and updating your visualising.




• Check your speed. Are you moving too quickly? This is a sign of anxiety. Slow down. Take your time.




• Fix your brain only on the process of playing each shot as it comes. This will keep the monkey out of the what-ifs…




• Connect to the ‘sod it’ mode. Reverse psychology. Trick your monkey mind!

There is, of course, one game even more vital than the infamous 7th…..the last game of the whole match. How to close a match is an interesting mental challenge and a big test of your monkey mind control. More of this in another blog…:) In the meantime, please make sure you subscribe, follow and share bellow.

Don Macpherson is a UK based mind coach who has been involved with sports personalities for more than 22 years. He has appeared on television and radio several times for the BBC, and has been a regular contributor to various UK national newspapers such as the Sunday Times. Over the years Don has worked with all sorts of athletes including Tennis Grand Slam winners, Ryder Cup Golfers, Premier League soccer players and Formula One Champions. Visit his website to learn more.

If you have seen ever watched wheelchair tennis at the grand slams or Olympic Games you know they are amazing players and are as talented as able bodied players.

This is a really valuable resource so please show your support and go check them out and share the website with others.

Visit the Let’s Roll Wheelchair Tennis video series here: www.letsrollwheelchairtennis.com

Richard (Pancho) Gonzales

Pancho Gonzales was an American tennis player. He was the World No. 1 professional tennis player for an unequalled eight years in the 1950s and early 1960s. He won two Major titles and fifteen Pro Slam titles. In his professional career, Gonzales won the United States Professional Championship eight times, the Wembley professional title in London four times, and the Tournament of Champions three times. In pro matches Gonzales went on to beat Ken Rosewall (a huge rivalry) by a final score of 50 matches to 26. He swept the Australian Tour in November–December 1954 by beating Frank Sedgman 16-9, Ken McGregor 15-0, and Pancho Segura, 4-2.

If this isn’t impressive enough, he also beat in head-to-head pro tours, all of the best amateurs who turned pro. This included every Wimbledon champion for 10 years in a row!

Most of Gonzales’s career as a professional tennis player fell before the start of the open era of tennis in 1968, and he was therefore ineligible to compete at the Grand Slam events between 1949 (when he turned pro) and the start of the open era in 1968 (read more about this in Part 4). As has been observed about other great players such as Rod Laver, Gonzales almost certainly would have won a number of additional Grand Slam titles had he been permitted to compete in those tournaments during that 18-year period. Jack Kramer, the long time tennis promoter, has speculated that Gonzales would have won an additional 11 titles at the Forest Hill and Wimbledon tournaments alone.

Jack Kramer, writes that although Laver was “absolutely unbeatable for a year or two late in the 1960s”, a “careful comparison” could be made between Laver and the somewhat older Gonzales and that Kramer is “positive that Gonzales could have beaten Laver regularly. Kramer sees as evidence of Gonzales’s superiority over Laver the fact that Gonzales defeated Laver in a US$10,000 winner-take-all, five-set match before 15,000 spectators in New York City’s Madison Square Garden in February 1970, when Gonzales was 41 years old and Laver was still considered the World No. 1 player.

Gonzales was well known for his fiery will to win, his enormous serve, and his dominating net game. This combination was so powerful that the rules on the professional tour were briefly changed to prohibit him from advancing to the net immediately after serving. Under the new rules, the returned serve had to bounce before the server could make his own first shot, thereby keeping Gonzales from playing his usual serve-and-volley game. He won even so, and the rules were changed back.

Let me just say that again…the rules of the game were changed because he was too good. Truly Incredible! Watch the video bellow to hear what some other experts have to say about Pancho Gonzales.

Conclusion

So after reading Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 or Part 4 and Part 5 of my Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time series what do you think? Well its probably best for each of us to make up our own minds.

Before I sign off I want to make one thing clear. It is easy to claim one player is the greatest because of the amount of titles and perhaps he or she is the greatest accumulator of titles but ‘the greatest’ is not the person with the most titles but as the dictionary says ‘the highest in quality or a distinguished person’ (above the rest).

In actual fact the word ‘great’ comes from both the German and Dutch words for big. So if we are guided by the true original meaning of the word, judging the greatest tennis player of all time should be simply a case of measurement. Players such a Karlovic and Isner and other big players are the greatest of all time. For a bit of fun we could always get Hawkeye involved to do the measuring with their high tech equipment. Then again what’s the true definition of big? is it size or weight? But seriously, wordplay aside, the dictionary says origin of big is ‘strong and mighty’ perhaps that’s the best description yet! Anyway I’m going a bit stir crazy now.

A recent quote from Federer is a sensible one. When asked if his era is the greatest he says “I’d say no, but I don’t know, because then you have Sampras Edberg Becker and Agassi those guys weren’t good or what? Further back Connors and Lendls, they weren’t good either? I mean I don’t know so for me that’s respectful.”

Perhaps its easier and more fun to create the ultimate player. Picking a serve from one player and a backhand from another. Like a PS3 video game we can create our best players to compete. But if I had to pick one player who I think is the best of all time, I’d say ME! Now get back to work! Someone’s watching you;)

If you enjoyed this article please Subscribe (on the right) or follow me on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook to get my next article sent straight to you.

If you have not read Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3 of this blog series please click on the links to check them out.

Titles

I have explained before (see Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time – Part 1) how statistics can be misleading and why I don’t fully rely on them to determine the G.O.A.T. But before I move on I want to give you another example.

Rod Laver is the only tennis player to have twice won all four Grand Slam tournaments in the same year and he “officially” has 11 Grand Slam titles under his belt. This is an incredible stat but is misleading? I believe so…

You see, when discussing G.O.A.T, titles and statistics we must consider the early era of pro and amateur status. Let me explain. To be selected for a pro career you had to win at least one Grand Slam and be a big draw card to the paying fans. Therefore most of the top players in the world at the time had moved across to the pro circuit and were excluded from playing the Grand Slam tournaments. This is not to belittle the official Grand Slam status, but for 20 years or so prior to the Grand Slams being fully professional in 1969, Grand Slam tournaments did not containing all the best players in the world.

So, Rod Laver joined the professional tour in 1963 and was therefore banned from Grand Slam tournaments during the peak of his career. During this time Rod Laver was ranked as the best professional player in the world. So judging from the Grand Slam results the year before and after his ban we must assume that he would have won a minimum of 1 Grand Slam title a year (probably more). Therefore, Rod Laver would have won a minimum of 16 Grand Slams during his career. This is a conservative estimate and I believe Laver would probably have won 20ish total.

Yet again you can see how quoting titles and statistics can be misleading when trying to determine the greatest tennis player of all time. We tend to have short memories and disregard past generations as being inferior. We quickly turn to stats and statements about how equipment, technology, fitness, etc make todays players better. I feel this is grossly ignorant. Past generations playing with poor equipment (by todays standards) only gives them more credibility in my mind.

All Round Player

To be the G.O.A.T one must be great and successful in all forms of the game of tennis. This includes singles, doubles and team competitions (Davis Cup/Olympics). Don’t for a second think this is not an important issue. Just because doubles is not as popular on TV or amongst the top singles players that is not to be regarded highly it is a different and skillful part of tennis.

The accuracy and reflex’s required for doubles are of the very highest quality. Doubles was regarded very highly until recent times when the top players decided it was too stressful to play both.

Pete Sampras was one such player and he readily admits to struggling with doubles when he did play. Sampras found that the ball was speeding around him too quickly. This is not to say players like Borg, Sampras or any of the modern players such as Agassi, Nadal (who has won several titles) Djokovic, or Federer wouldn’t be top players if they played more often. However, they haven’t challenged themselves as previous generations did in this department.

So in light of this should they even be considered for the G.O.A.T list? Wouldn’t the Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time need to be great at all forms of tennis? Below is a list of singles champions with substantial doubles titles.

Physical Attributes

Well it goes without saying that players are bigger and perhaps stronger each generation or two. From time to time I hear a player from this generation say how the game is more physically demanding than it was. Well lets just have a little look back.

We have to remember players in the early pro era trained very hard, practicing as much or more than the players do now. 4 – 6 hours a day in the same heat but with poor shoe wear, heavier rackets and no special energy drinks to rehydrate. This takes a great determination! Stretching and gym work was also done, though not using the machines we have now. Push ups, sit ups, jumps, medicine ball, etc were the methods of the day. There is actually now a trend going back to these forms of training instead of weights.

Players in the 40’s -70’s regularly played best of 5 sets in tournaments and particularly finals (not just Grand Slams). A 5 set match was not a one off but a regular occurrence. Players from that era also played singles, doubles and mixed doubles at Grand Slams. This is much tougher than playing only one event. It means they never had a day off to recover during the tournament!

This is simply amazing! I know first hand how tough the Grand Slams can be when playing more than 1 event. In 1984 at Wimbledon I played two events, singles and doubles. Every one of my doubles matches went to 5 sets with the exception of the first round which went to 4 sets. (I made the semi final in the singles and final of the doubles.) At the time I was only a few games away from being the player who played the most games ever in a championship. The player with the most had played 3 events.

And what about Davis Cup?

Davis Cup matches, singles and doubles, are one of the greatest challenges a player can face. They are regarded by some, like myself, as the hardest competition in tennis. Davis Cup has a long history so you can do some research yourself but in my day matches were played without tiebreaks and with a 10 minute break after set 3.

Lets have a look at the longest Davis Cup matches in the open era:

McEnroe v. Wilander is the longest in Davis Cup history and lasted 6 hours and 20 minutes with a score 9–7, 6–2, 15–17, 3–6, 8–6. We’ll never know how much of that was McEnroe stalling and arguing but I’m guessing it was quite a bit as he features in the top two longest matches. Having said that Davis Cup matches tend to take longer as crowds get heavily involved and cheer longer than tournament play…. in general.

Conclusion

So is tennis today more physical than it used to be? It’s possible but I’m not convinced. I would argue that saying the modern game is more physical is not a valid argument when attempting to determine G.O.A.T. I would also argue that we need to consider, like I did above, the complexities of the “amateur” and “pro” eras and how that has affected titles and statistics.

Thank you for reading Part 4 of the Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time. In Part 5, the final conclusion, I will cover the last few things to consider before determining the G.O.A.T. I’ll also tell you about the little known tennis legend who many consider the greatest tennis player of all time.

If you enjoyed this article please Subscribe (on the right) or follow me on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook to get my next article sent straight to you.

If you have not read Part 1 and Part 2 of this blog series please click on the links and check them out. Among other things I talk about the complexities of this G.O.A.T topic and the role statistics play when determining who is the greatest player of all time.

Equipment and Surfaces

This is perhaps one of the most valid and important discussions of all. The sport of tennis has undergone many changes over the years. To determine the G.O.A.T maybe we should have categories like boxing has for weight divisions. Wooden racket era, post wooden racket era, pre/post polyester strings, etc.

Players from all eras can only play with the equipment that is available to them like Plimsoll shoes, wooden rackets, polyester strings, etc. Below you’ll find brief comparisons between the equipment and surfaces of previous eras and today. There is so much to cover so I won’t go into much detail but you’ll surprised at the big difference even small changes can make. Most people who discussing the G.O.A.T topic overlook or ignore what I’m about to tell you.

Rackets and Strings

Players now have more powerful rackets and strings. There is no doubt about that. Rafael Nadal could not play or would not be nearly as effective a player with wooden rackets or non polyester strings. This is not to say that he wouldn’t be a great player in previous eras, I’m saying that his technique and spin has probably benefitted more that anyone else in tennis history from new technology.

Racket and string technology today has also benefitted the retrieving or counter punching player. Players such as Hewitt, Murray, Djokovic, Nadal, Ferrer, etc. are able to generate power from minimal connection on the ball which in turn helps them remain in the point and even to hit winners when way out of position.

The equal opposite is true for the wooden racket and faster court eras leading up to the present era. You could not be completely successful unless you attacked at some stage. Even small players with incredible back court shots such as Rosewall were attacking players who serve volleyed.

Other Equipment

Tennis equipment has also changed dramatically over the years. Bjorn Borg was the first top player to bring specialist grass shoes in to Wimbledon. These shoes were an advantage . Borg who was the most incredible athlete, had a secret weapon that helped his grip, move and recover better than other players. Gone were the plimsoll supportless shoes and in were the high tech ones (well high tech of the day anyway).

I was playing in Dunlop Volleys (as they are called in Australia), I believe they are called Green Flash in the UK and the US equivalent was something like Converse All Stars. Try playing a five set tennis match in Converse All Stars and see how your movement and knees feel. I should sue the manufacturer for all the knee injuries I incurred later on in my career. Half of my peers are now long term sufferers of knee pain and I think hard courts and those type of shoes have something to do with it. My teeth rattle just thinking about the shock through my body every step caused.

Court Surfaces

I have heard the argument that players competing before 1977 such as Rod Laver had it easier as he won 3 out of 4 slams on grass. An equally fair argument is saying the players today play all 4 slams on similar paced courts. One just happens to be a little slower and slippery while another is a little faster and green. Both arguments are valid.

In my era (the 1980′s) two were on grass, one on very slow clay and the other on a medium, fast hard court. Indoor tournament courts varied from slow to lightning fast. Because of this there was a great variety of successful styles. Different types of players had different chances of success from week to week.

But does court surface pace make that big of a difference? The answer is yes. It takes extreme skill and ability to adjust from one week to the next. Adjusting for this was always tough for me because my game was quite specialised and focused on attacking the net. However, some players like Ivan Lendl could somehow comfortably adjust from lightning fast courts to very slow courts.

In my time it was not uncommon to lose the top seeds early as many came from the previous tournament that had very different court conditions and balls. Overall this was not great for the tournament as TV would lose interest and the public would be disappointed not to see the stars in the finals. So changes were made throughout the 90’s to have a uniformed court surface.

Because of this almost all ATP indoor tournament today are played on one type of medium/ slow paced surface. Wooden boarding linked together and painted with hard court paint. The intention of the ATP was to enable the top seeds to transition more easily therefore boosting the chances of the top seeds victory in the early rounds.

Is this an unfair advantage to the players who preferred slow to medium paced courts? Damn right it is!! It’s incredibly unfair to the attacking player. This is clearly one of the reasons we don’t see many attacking and volley players on the circuit.

Conclusion

I don’t want to sound like an old grandfather (I consider myself a young grandfather;) talking about how thing were back in the day. What I’m trying to demonstrate is how technology, equipment, court surfaces, etc. have had a huge impact on tennis and has dramatically changed the game. This is one of the reasons comparing players across eras to determine the G.O.A.T is so difficult.

Are Djokovic or Federer better players than Borg or McEnroe because they can hit the ball harder, get more spin and move better? Or is that a result of improved string, racket and equipment technology? What would happen if Borg and McEnroe grew up playing on modern similar paced court surfaces with todays technology? Or how would todays players fare with wooden rackets and Converse shoes? These are intriguing questions that we’ll unfortunately never know the answer to. However, they are important things to consider if you want to determine who the G.O.A.T is for you.

Thank you for reading part 3 this blog series. You can read Part 4 here: Greatest Tennis Player Of All Time – Part 4. Subscribe (on the right) or follow me on Twitter, Google+ or Facebook to get all my articles sent straight to you.