Mens Tennis Forums banner

Good Delusion and Bad Delusion

1K views 42 replies 18 participants last post by  FlyingSaucer  
#1 · (Edited)
Image


Good Delusion

In order to be a tennis great, you have to be somewhat delusional. Once you start that delusion, it's hard to turn it off. Novak operates on a different mental level than the average top player or even most past tennis legends. He is something else. Is he just insane? Perhaps. He might be delusional, but it's that delusion and obsession that have created a mentality we have never seen before.

The type of dude who wants to find all possible solutions from within himself, even if that's delusional a lot of times. That's how he got here.

Image


Bad delusion

  • "Couldn't win because of Big 3"
  • Saw Federer comment on slow courts >>> Immediately goes and complains about it to make more excuses for his lack of progress. "They want Sincaraz to win." > Goes on to lose to someone outside the top 50 immediately after. Zero self-awareness. :rolleyes:

The type of dude to externalize all his issues (and be so delusional about it) so he doesn't bother to look within and actually work to improve. Complete opposite of Djokovic.

Conclusion: Talent without an elite mindset is Zverev or Tsitsipas at best. Talent and great fitness can only take you so far. Maybe you just can't build a mentality like Big 4 or Sampras. You either have it or not? I believe it's possible to build, however, but no chance of that happening with a massive ego that externalizes issues non-stop.

The next star has to have a true elite mindset and someone who takes accountability for their shortcomings. If that player has too much of an ego to and mostly externalize his issues, then it's all false hope (like it was with Z and Tsitsi).

Thiem had an elite mentality despite his shortcomings. Shame about the injuries.
 
#2 ·
There is also a far gap in talent from Zverev, Tsitsipas vs. Djokovic, Sinner Alcaraz

Even when Djokovic has poor mental his talent can carry him. Even if he has a poor talent day, his mental can carry him.

Zverev and Tsitsipas don't even have the mental and the talent. Even when they say they believe, they really don't.

Tsitsipas has been in a number of close slam finals. All of them forgettable same for Zverev.
 
#3 ·
There is also a far gap in talent from Zverev, Tsitsipas vs. Djokovic, Sinner Alcaraz

Even when Djokovic has poor mental his talent can carry him. Even if he has a poor talent day, his mental can carry him.

Zverev and Tsitsipas don't even have the mental and the talent. Even when they say they believe, they really don't.

Tsitsipas has been in a number of close slam finals. All of them forgettable same for Zverev.
My main point is that the likes of Tsitsi and, especially, Zverev (who has a massive serve and an all-time backhand but never truly takes full advantage of these weapons) had enough talent to win slams. Yes they are not as talented as Big 4 nor Sinncaraz but they had enough game to work with. Their mentalities suck, however. Courier wasn't exactly the most talented player out there, yet he won 4 slams with his elite work ethic and mentality. Zverev has no real excuses and deep down he knows it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaFed2005
#9 ·
  • kyrgios
Reactions: Nole Rules
#11 ·
With clay I always felt Federer was realistic from the start. He knew Nadal had the edge there and never really hid it. He once even called Rafa “a great clay-courter,” which at the time sounded a bit like a back-handed compliment, but it showed he accepted the reality. He also said that the year Rafa would lose early in Paris, that would be his chance. And that’s exactly what happened in 2009.

More broadly, Federer went through a transition period where he had to accept that he finally had true rivals. For years he dominated so completely (except for clay) that he probably didn’t believe anyone could push him consistently. Then Nadal came, and later Djokovic, and suddenly he wasn’t untouchable anymore. It must have been hard to adjust to that after so long at the top. In that sense, he could seem a bit delusional early on. Not out of arrogance, but because he was used to control. Accepting that others could match or even surpass him took time.
 
#16 ·
Good and bad delusion? As my friend Amanda eternally says....whut?

What Djokovic has is supreme ego and belief he can beat any mf put in front of him. Sascha doesn't. That happens when you win a lot. Its like anything else. Practice makes perfect. Theres no formula here.
 
#33 ·
yes, love wawrinka, but his matchup vs fed versus his matchup vs djokovic are two different things, but that is how tennis is. Similar to del potro and tsonga matching up better against federer and nadal than they did against djokovic
I am a Wawrinka fan too, but the Magnus Norman version of Wawrinka made no difference to the match-up v Fed off clay. He choked his ONE legit opportunity to beat Fed on hard.

It's not just that, though. I am confused by Djo fans (or Fed haters) who think Fed wouldn't break through on account of being "owned" by Djo/Murray generation when, one, he already did so against his own generation (point already made by Dinner Warrior) and two, Murray and Wawrinka broke through the Big 3 to win multiple slams.

The 5 consecutive US Opens, it's always hard to digest that 😅
Unimpressive CLEARLY. 😏
 
#42 ·
Fed struggled with young Nadal who was still in awe of him since he was older and far more accomplished - young Fed would otoh be in awe of Nadal/Novak etc, with zero experience or "multi-slam champ" advantage, good luck breaking out with that