Leaving Lasting Impressions on the Court

Novak Djokovic wriggled around like a caterpillar on steroids. With apparent aggression and aggravation stemming from the far-from-tame Flushing Meadows fans that hold Andy Roddick close to their American Dream hearts, the Serbian unleashed tennis talent followed by regrettable words and a bewildered attitude after the intense match:

“Andy was saying I have 16 injuries in last match,” Djokovic told the Arthur Ashe crowd. “Obviously I don’t.” That elicited a round of boos that Djokovic acknowledged by saying: “Yeah, right. Like it or not, it’s like that.”

Referring to the crowd, he continued: “I know they’re already against me because they think I’m faking everything. That’s not nice, anyhow, to say I have 16 injuries and I’m faking it.”

These statements were in response to Roddick’s comments the night before:

“You know,” he said, “he’s either quick to call the trainer or he’s the most courageous guy of all time.”

Granted, Roddick added fuel to the already blazing fire – but what happened to winning with dignity? Better yet, a confident pride that peels off the underlying message of, “See, I told you so…now let’s move on to the next round.”

Djokovic obviously had his feelings hurt and, even during the match, let out the emotion with loud, low screams – from his mouth and from his racket. Djokovic held off the city favorite on his favorite court, in what appeared to be Roddick’s best overall effort in a while (Roddick has had nagging injuries himself but looked confident and performed impressively in this year’s U.S. Open).

16 injuries? Djokovic couldn’t let it go even though he himself is not always the most courteous. How many times has he mocked other players with his impersonations of them on the court? He is half-joking then, too, right?

Roddick understood what he proclaimed in the press conference. He is a competitor and a past champion in the Open. He doesn’t want to hear excuses – athletes who mention their injuries, even minor, are looking for an out, just in case they don’t perform well. Plus, in Djokovic’s case, he has previously been blamed for taking too much time between games in order to take care of his body – and possibly the opponent’s mind.

Congrats to Djokovic. He held off the Roddick run, the NY fans, and the supposed injuries. However, a typical tennis thank you to the fans was in order. Praise them anyway.

In the future, it will take more of an effort to change the impressionable minds of the spectators. Djokovic should think about the transformation of his image back to the butterfly that people thought we was when he came onto the tennis scene, as a composed, engaging challenger to the top seeds.

Scouting the Political Hardwood

Hyped for hoops season to begin, I'm ready to formulate the first scouting report of the season. So, why not start with the most popular competition occurring in the country?…

...The Presidential Race in a hypothetical 2-on-2.


The Donkeys

#23 Barack Obama - 6-2, guard/forward, 47 years old

Basketball Bio: Obama is a straight up baller. His jersey number causes one to recall images of another famous Chicago hoopster. He has been known to play pick-up just about anywhere: Brown U., UNC, with the military, and against Stuart Scott on SportsCenter.

What to Watch for: athletic ability…uses wiry body well…has a knack for slashing…wants to drive hard…prefers going to the left, but can finish to his right…solid mid-range game with hanging lefty pull-ups…very active off the ball…must box him out…will look to get teammate involved…known to have some perimeter touch…may reach and look for steals on D.

#33 Joe Biden - 6-0, forward, 65 years old

Basketball Bio: Not very experienced in hoops, but has a natural capacity to learn without extra substances. (In fact, he helped pass a bill outlawing androstenedione used for performance enhancement).

What to Watch for: team player…he’ll do the dirty work…strong on the boards…will try to convert some lay-ups.

The game plan: The Donkeys will look to utilize the pick-and-roll some of the time, but they will most likely go to a 1 out-1 in set, that puts the ball in Obama’s hands. He’ll look to create off the dribble while Biden establishes position down low. At times, look for the give-and-go with hi-low action.


The Elephants

#99 John McCain - 5-7, guard/power forward, 72 years old

Basketball Bio: No history, but his toughness and experience as a Navy captain and prisoner of war make up for lack of skills. Plus, he has a history in filling out brackets.

What to Watch for: Won’t move that quickly…slow lateral movement…will try to set-up his teammate, but will mostly stay in the paint…tires quickly…attempts to hit the boards...not much of a shot…experience with physical therapy may come in handy.

#22 Sarah Palin - 5-10 point guard, 44 years old

Basketball Bio: Experienced player who was very rugged and resilient in high school. She was nicknamed “Sarah Barracuda” because of her intensity and passion on the court. Understands the game of basketball and other sports (she is a former sportscaster). Known for hitting game winning free throw in state championship game with a stress fracture.

What to Watch for: clutch player and wants to take the winning shot…very strong and aggressive…she is the go-to…good handles…can hit the mid-range shot…wants to come off of picks.


The Game Plan

Offensively, the Donkeys shouldn’t have any trouble scoring, especially if they share the ball. Obama’s knowledge of the game and understanding of his team’s strengths and limitations will help them succeed. He’ll look to involve Biden, but Obama’s activity all over the court will prove to be his team's key. With Obama's first step and Biden’s positioning, they have the capacity to jump out to an early and insurmountable lead.

Defensively, the Donkeys may try to trap the Elephant pick-and-rolls early in order to minimize any good looks at the basket. If McCain can get open, Barracuda may just have enough in her to dump it down for a couple shot opportunities. Time-outs will be critical.

Interestingly, Obama will be guarding Barracuda for much of the game, rather than facing his direct running foe -- but this is a team game. Remember, it wasn’t Michael versus Magic in 1991. Rather, MJ’s running mate, Scottie Pippen, was the one assigned to Johnson.

Biden should be able to wear down McCain quickly, so Barracuda will have to keep her spirits high and her defensive stance low and long.

If Barracuda can keep Obama in front of her when he has the ball, and work some clock on offense, her team will have more of a chance. And if she somehow can get open and nail a couple of shots, the Elephants may gain some confidence and momentum.

Look for Joe Lieberman to provide a special half-time analysis on both teams.

Check out Obama's basketball clips

Catching up to Steve, at Nashspeed

The recent SLAM post on Steve Nash and Musselman's reminder about great point guards caused me to recall an unforgettable performance. I happened to be at the playoff game in 2005 when Steve Nash put on a dazzling display, willing his Phoenix Suns to an overtime thriller against the Mavericks in Dallas. He was one rebound shy of a triple-double and dropped 39 points on his old team. He also dished out a dozen dimes and drilled five 3-pointers (see official box score).

What was, and is, most impressive about the former league M.V.P. is his mental and physical conditioning. He consistently plays at an exciting pace, from a fan's perspective and a teammate's point of view. His capacity to perform at Nashspeed, both on the court and in his mind, is what makes him special. He can anticipate action as good as anyone -- and better than most -- and possesses uncanny instincts, characteristics that allow him to create and finish plays with impeccable timing and draw-dropping reactions.

It is important to note that he was not born with Nashspeed; rather, he became a student of the game. Nash understands that in his role of team leader and point guard, it is crucial to be able to relate to other people:

At Santa Clara University, Nash studied sociology, which - at first - was a way to avoid classes he thought he would dislike. However, Nash says he grew to enjoy his studies because the subject fueled his interests in psychology and people. "I thought sociology was very educational, if not practical in a career sense."

Further, to be able to play fast, his mind has to tick with extraordinary kick. His mental imagery abilities are most likely higher than other players', as previous studies have shown. Nash understands that his mental work was as significant as his physical practice:

Nash spent many hours perfecting his talent. He videotaped college and NBA basketball games so he could "watch the players' moves over and over, and then try to do them myself." Nash thinks the visualization techniques and mental agility so useful in sports will soon be more recognized as crucial skills for all aspects of life.

Nash's conditioning gives him an advantage, but more importantly, supplies him with steadfast confidence. In the past, he has not had to worry about staying in shape because he works on his fitness levels year-round. His love for soccer helps him maintain his form and his understanding of how to develop has helped him get to the top. Perhaps even more impressive is his ability to communicate and speak about his mindset. The 2007 Charlie Rose interview demonstrates Nash's excellence, as an athlete and an analyst.

To Throw, or Not to Throw?

Andy Roddick's recent racket hurls at the U.S. Open beckon the question: release the rage or hold it in? The exploration involves both moral and psychological issues. For Roddick, his moments of mayhem have helped him defeat his opponent. As a model of composure, he has been as unsure as the the levees in New Orleans.

His second round recap from ESPN:

Andy Roddick smashed his racket not once but twice, leaving it a mangled mess that matched the state of his game at that point.

Facing a big deficit, staring at what would have been a big upset, Roddick suddenly changed everything against a younger, less-experienced, less-accomplished version of himself at the U.S. Open.

And his actions from Sunday in the New York Times:

It was sometime during the third set that Andy Roddick's racket met its demise. As he whipped it to the ground, little blue shards splintered onto the blue hardcourt, the latest victims of Roddick’s frustration. It was not quite the twisting, mangling punishment he had given the tools of his trade earlier in the United States Open, but on Sunday, he did not have as much to be upset about...

...Less than 30 minutes after he littered the court with racket crumbs, he completed a straight-sets victory over the 31st seed...

I had a chance to observe a current pro as he trained at MIT two days before heading to New York for the U.S. Open. His practice was focused and intense, every drill, every point played as if it were the last in a championship match. As I watched, I was impressed with his concentration. He meticulously practiced his serve with his hitting coach

Then he proceeded to fault, I suppose a very unsatisfactory one in his mind. With that miss, in a shocking show of frustration, he grabbed another ball and took an controlled, yet uncontrolled, swing and blasted the ball over the MIT dorm that overlooked the tennis courts. He smacked the ball as if the target was the Harvard boat house that sits on the Charles River.

And then, as if he had released every ounce of energy that evoked tantrum times as a toddler, he was calm again. He drove the next serve right by his partner for an ace.

The incident made me think about the frustration-aggression theory, in that once provoked, an emotion can build to the point of such aggravation that it can drive an athlete to change his persona, if only for a brief bit. However, in that 60 seconds, a violent phase can ensue and cause even the tamest human to display anger, by the whack of a ball with brutalizing force or the hammering of a racket into the ground…a matter that toys with one’s mental toughness and a situation that beckons one to "shape up or ship out".

Roger Federer was once asked about the controversial behavior that may seem minimal, yet is quite long lasting in memory:

Federer used to love that kind of show but is now campaigning to stamp the practice out. He said: "For kids watching, I want them to have a proper example. I enjoyed watching Goran, McEnroe and those guys throwing racquets. I thought it was funny. But at the same time, I don't think a tennis player needs to act this way.

"I think there are different ways and I hope that kids get inspired by this more than throwing racquets. But then again, I think it's okay, too, to throw a racquet here and there. It's not a problem."

What is interesting from a developmental perspective is that Federer was not always in control of his emotions; he discovered how to control and motivate himself in other ways. He even took a Michael Jordan stance, and would tell himself that he is in front of thousands of people who have never seen him play before:

I was very emotional. I was never the angry person, more the sad and disappointed person. I would cry a lot after losing matches; I would throw my racket in disappointment. It was very hard for me to accept missing three, four points in a row. The first one I could sort of accept. The second one would be like, well, now you better not miss the next one, but if I did, then the racket went flying. I'd have to scream or something, because it just wasn't acceptable. But as time went by, I started to relax. You get on center courts around the world, people are watching, and you're like, "Well, now I can't throw my racket," because it's embarrassing. Today I'm much more in control of myself, whereas before it was a weak point of my tennis. People would say, "If you can get to him mentally, you've got it." And now it's become a strong point in my game.

It was never easy for me. Because people were constantly saying I was talented and that I was going to make it, I always had that burden. It was like, if I make it, then I'm only doing what's expected of me, and if I don't, then I'm a disaster because I missed on a great career or wasted my talent. I also had a hard time working out. I would ask, "Why do I have to do this? I'll just be tired tomorrow." But I think by asking a lot of questions, I was able to learn. And then over the years, through hard work, my game started to become really fluid. I never really thought it was that way naturally, because I always felt I had to make a great effort. My technique was always sort of nice, but I was shanking a lot of balls, and I really had a tough time keeping the ball in the court. But by getting stronger mentally and physically, my game started to evolve, and all of a sudden I found myself where I am right now, dominating the game.

Now, just a year before the interview with Billie Jean King, Federer faced a youthful Rafael Nadal and the former showed off his heaving ability (yes, you can see the ordinarily centered Roger unravel in the video below).

Normally known for his serene presence on court, Federer did not turn the match in his favor until he became angry.

At the end of the ninth game of the third set, after missing a break-point opportunity, Federer uncharacteristically slammed his racket to the ground.

"I was really angry, so I threw it out," Federer said. "I was very disappointed. I was missing one opportunity after the other. I really felt like I'm climbing uphill all the time, and I had an opportunity and I missed it again, and I just had enough.

"Who knows, maybe it did me good, and I kind of woke up."

Nadal, ranked No. 31 in the world, felt that he was getting under Federer's skin.

"It's surprising to see Federer throw his racket, but it makes you think you're closer to victory because he's frustrated," said Nadal, who plays left-handed but does everything else right-handed.

In his own words, Federer admits to his tossing of strings, although a Gladwell Blink second (a fleeting, yet significant feeling) reminds the tennis star that certain actions are not the brightest, particularly as they relate to his own behavior and his pocket (not that he has to worry about affording new equipment):

I’ve broken a few rackets over my career, but only very few intentionally. It mostly happened out of anger and not because I wanted to break it, which I think is a big difference. When I throw it I try not to break it. Rackets are expensive, after all – somehow that always crossed my mind before it left my hand!

Considering these examples, it is safe to assume that more rackets will be committed to the air and the ground. Amateurs, however, need to consider the consequences, perhaps from a "Don't try this at home" perspective. Roddick and Federer have managed to use aggression releases to their advantages, though a perfect, positive correlation between racket tossing and winning is doubtful. The pros have demonstrated their resiliency, their capacity to quickly recover from a negative thought and its resulting behavior. By no means, though, do they advocate for their volatile actions. Competitiveness can get the best of them, at least for a few seconds.

It seems best to continue on the track of regulated intensity without obtrusive eruption. Unless, of course, society alters its views and racket throwing becomes categorized as some sort of art form.

Phelps Wins Again

Michael Phelps' latest victory did not result in a gold medal, but it did demonstrate the main reason for his eight Olympic wins. He smashed the competition on this site's latest poll, claiming just under 60 percent of the total, or 92 of the 157 votes. D-Wade finished in a far away second with 15 percent of the count, while Nastia and Yao tied for third. Every athlete tallied one vote except the two-sport star Rebecca Romero.

It is safe to assume that Phelps does indeed possess that tough of a mind, although the prediction did not entail this much of a massacre. The votes come from people around the world, so it is interesting to note that humans everywhere are equally impressed with the swimmer's mental game and accomplishments. (It would have been insightful to have been able to read a reason for each selection).

The outcome may have something to do with his popularity and the number of times we were able to watch him race, hear him talk, and read about his training (psychologically, the more we witness or vicariously spend time with a person, we come to think that we know the individual -- even if we never meet him -- hence, the obsessed sports fanatic).

As discussed previously, it is very difficult to measure greatness, especially remarkable endeavors across various sports. Phelps' mental ability to maintain his level of perfection throughout competition is unquestionably the reason he was the most favored answer of the proposed question.