Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I have just read an article 'Narcissism' in a Serbian daily paper 'Danas', written by two psychologists, talking about modern day uprisal of narcissistic personality.
World of sport is also touched and three essential points are made:

1. Initially, sport is a useless game, interesting in itself, with an aim of strengthening the body and the spirit and producing positive feelings in people; players approach theirs game with love and experience satisfaction from the pleasure of playing itself. This is how sports were played until some time in the past. But today such sport almost doesn't exist anymore. A sportsman doesn't practice his skills for owns pleasure and from inner motivation, but regardless of that wants to impress the audiences and goes for sensation and ovations.

2. Genuine winning in sport is about overcoming imagined obstacles which is bringing personal satisfaction to a player. But in modern sport winning more and more doesn't seem to make sense, if the opponent is not destroyed. Players do not want only theirs victory but maybe more the defeat of the opponent. Victory is not so important anymore, but the competing itself and the destruction of the opponent.

3. Rather than towards players, modern sport is turned towards passive spectators who are growingly unaware of the rules of the game. More and more often rules are altered in a way to attract such audiences. Modern sport is subdued to its entertainment value. While people run away from everyday boredom towards sports, what they get is entertainment and sensation. The basic purpose of sport is trivialized, sporting game turned into a trivial act that is being sold as grave matter.


After this article, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic would come out as being excessively narcissistic sportsman. Nadal's and Djokovic's respective games, brutish and uninspiring on theirs own ground, show that the joy of playing is subdued (if existing at all) to some other aims. And that aim mostly seems to be fame and adulation. Both Nadal and Djokovic show extreme sensitiveness on every (perceived) lack of adulation they receive, while being very envious towards the adulation others get. At that, they don't seem to be fully conscious - if conscious at all - of how the adulation is deserved, it is as if they don't see the source of admiration important - the skill and creativity coming from innate gifts and living for the game - but the admiration itself. This is so much emphasized that they seem happy to steal success and admiration - so Nadal doesn't seem troubled by numerous indications that his success is also an outcome of many outside factors and not only his game, neither is Djokovic by lack of ground for his habitual cocky claims.
Also like true narcissistic sportsman they see winning more as a matter of destroying the opponent than overcoming some imagined obstacles of theirs own. They are turned towards marketability and happy to reach towards half-interested audiences - at the place of Nadal this is seen through his on-court antics and emphasis on physical looks, while at the place of Djokovic through his 'impersonations' and outward image selling.

As a contrast, older generation of current players such as Roger Federer are not fitting this narcissistic sportsman frame. From the way Federer plays you see that the love for the game is the main driving force; he is motivated more with his own set aims and imagined obstacles than with destroying opponents, and is not striving to put up a show and become "marketable" but to build and perfect his own playing style. And while many Federer's detractors point out his burgeoning Ego ("Ego King"), this is just a try of blinding with words, in accordance with that aphorism "the world likes to talk, but it's true wishes does not express through words; what's more, through words it tries to hide them". What they actually mind is exactly Fererer's lack of bulging Ego, and probably the main reason for Federer being somewhat unfashionable today is his non- narcissistic appearance - in the age that craves for a narcissistic champion that will reflect it's own nature.

Traits of narcissistic personality include grandiose feeling of over-blown self-importance, expectations of excessive admiration, unreasonable expectation of getting specially good treatment and unquestioned approval of owns wishes, tendencies towards abuse and exploitation of others, fierce envy towards success of others and belief that others feel the same towards owns success, arrogant, conceited behavior and attitudes, and reduced sense of empathy. Modern changes in society that are stimulating this type of personality include promoting bare competitiveness as an aim in itself, deterioration of family, growing ambiguity of sexes and all-present ness of mass-media.
Today, narcissistic personality is more wide-spread than ever and, unlike in recent past, is more common than neurotic problems such as hysteria or obsessive neurosis (that were coming from suppressed sexual drive).

Black and white picture of modern narcissistic and ex-non-narcissistic players can't be formed since every player who ever played has some narcissistic traits, especially in youth (ex. Agassi in his early stage), but newest generation - especially those the most successful until now - show these traits to a new degree. This is contrasted with the other extreme brought by previous generation - a completely ego-less, self-sufficient player such as Roger Federer. So you get almost black-and-white picture: the duel between Roger Federer and his younger rival becomes a duel between a non- narcissistic and narcissistic champion.

Maybe you could say at the end that we don't need these extremes but a balance.? Maybe champions from golden age of tennis, such as McEnroe, Borg, Edberg or Becker were close to that balance?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,424 Posts
I don't need to read a whole article to know Djokovic is arrogant. :zzz:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,456 Posts
I guess an article like this is worth having a think about, at least since it brings a psychological perspective.

I was going to write it off until I read the bit about 'expectation of adulation,' and 'jealousy of it in others.'

I think both Jokervic and Nadal do have expectation of adulation. I think Nole's is much worse, as evidenced by his scolding of the Aussie Open crowd, unlike Rafa who never disparages the French crowd because of a few people who still may not respect him.

Both Rafa and Nole dislike criticism and often get a little pissy when its thrown their way, I'm not sure this is total narcissism on Rafa's part, since he had genuinely humble moments.

I think Nole shows jealousy in his remarks about Federer and his dislike of Tsonga's popularity.

So yeah, Nole's a narcissist, Rafa, not so much so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,035 Posts
Watch Roger BEFORE won his first slam and tell me with a straight face that he's not arrogant. After you dominate the game, obliterating everything that comes in your way, win 12 slams, there is no need for arrogance...once he starts losing more often...well...I always like to refer to his Wimbledon final girlie hissy fit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,194 Posts
I have just read an article 'Narcissism' in a Serbian daily paper 'Danas', written by two psychologists, talking about modern day uprisal of narcissistic personality.
World of sport is also touched and three essential points are made:

1. Initially, sport is a useless game, interesting in itself, with an aim of strengthening the body and the spirit and producing positive feelings in people; players approach theirs game with love and experience satisfaction from the pleasure of playing itself. This is how sports were played until some time in the past. But today such sport almost doesn't exist anymore. A sportsman doesn't practice his skills for owns pleasure and from inner motivation, but regardless of that wants to impress the audiences and goes for sensation and ovations.

2. Genuine winning in sport is about overcoming imagined obstacles which is bringing personal satisfaction to a player. But in modern sport winning more and more doesn't seem to make sense, if the opponent is not destroyed. Players do not want only theirs victory but maybe more the defeat of the opponent. Victory is not so important anymore, but the competing itself and the destruction of the opponent.

3. Rather than towards players, modern sport is turned towards passive spectators who are growingly unaware of the rules of the game. More and more often rules are altered in a way to attract such audiences. Modern sport is subdued to its entertainment value. While people run away from everyday boredom towards sports, what they get is entertainment and sensation. The basic purpose of sport is trivialized, sporting game turned into a trivial act that is being sold as grave matter.


After this article, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic would come out as being excessively narcissistic sportsman. Nadal's and Djokovic's respective games, brutish and uninspiring on theirs own ground, show that the joy of playing is subdued (if existing at all) to some other aims. And that aim mostly seems to be fame and adulation. Both Nadal and Djokovic show extreme sensitiveness on every (perceived) lack of adulation they receive, while being very envious towards the adulation others get. At that, they don't seem to be fully conscious - if conscious at all - of how the adulation is deserved, it is as if they don't see the source of admiration important - the skill and creativity coming from innate gifts and living for the game - but the admiration itself. This is so much emphasized that they seem happy to steal success and admiration - so Nadal doesn't seem troubled by numerous indications that his success is also an outcome of many outside factors and not only his game, neither is Djokovic by lack of ground for his habitual cocky claims.
Also like true narcissistic sportsman they see winning more as a matter of destroying the opponent than overcoming some imagined obstacles of theirs own. They are turned towards marketability and happy to reach towards half-interested audiences - at the place of Nadal this is seen through his on-court antics and emphasis on physical looks, while at the place of Djokovic through his 'impersonations' and outward image selling.

As a contrast, older generation of current players such as Roger Federer are not fitting this narcissistic sportsman frame. From the way Federer plays you see that the love for the game is the main driving force; he is motivated more with his own set aims and imagined obstacles than with destroying opponents, and is not striving to put up a show and become "marketable" but to build and perfect his own playing style. And while many Federer's detractors point out his burgeoning Ego ("Ego King"), this is just a try of blinding with words, in accordance with that aphorism "the world likes to talk, but it's true wishes does not express through words; what's more, through words it tries to hide them". What they actually mind is exactly Fererer's lack of bulging Ego, and probably the main reason for Federer being somewhat unfashionable today is his non- narcissistic appearance - in the age that craves for a narcissistic champion that will reflect it's own nature.

Traits of narcissistic personality include grandiose feeling of over-blown self-importance, expectations of excessive admiration, unreasonable expectation of getting specially good treatment and unquestioned approval of owns wishes, tendencies towards abuse and exploitation of others, fierce envy towards success of others and belief that others feel the same towards owns success, arrogant, conceited behavior and attitudes, and reduced sense of empathy. Modern changes in society that are stimulating this type of personality include promoting bare competitiveness as an aim in itself, deterioration of family, growing ambiguity of sexes and all-present ness of mass-media.
Today, narcissistic personality is more wide-spread than ever and, unlike in recent past, is more common than neurotic problems such as hysteria or obsessive neurosis (that were coming from suppressed sexual drive).

Black and white picture of modern narcissistic and ex-non-narcissistic players can't be formed since every player who ever played has some narcissistic traits, especially in youth (ex. Agassi in his early stage), but newest generation - especially those the most successful until now - show these traits to a new degree. This is contrasted with the other extreme brought by previous generation - a completely ego-less, self-sufficient player such as Roger Federer. So you get almost black-and-white picture: the duel between Roger Federer and his younger rival becomes a duel between a non- narcissistic and narcissistic champion.

Maybe you could say at the end that we don't need these extremes but a balance.? Maybe champions from golden age of tennis, such as McEnroe, Borg, Edberg or Becker were close to that balance?
Can anybody actually be fucked reading this post? :scratch: :rolls:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,954 Posts
Just to be clear, you read this article written by two psychologists about narcissism in sports, summarized like this:
1. Initially, sport is a useless game, interesting in itself, with an aim of strengthening the body and the spirit and producing positive feelings in people; players approach theirs game with love and experience satisfaction from the pleasure of playing itself. This is how sports were played until some time in the past. But today such sport almost doesn't exist anymore. A sportsman doesn't practice his skills for owns pleasure and from inner motivation, but regardless of that wants to impress the audiences and goes for sensation and ovations.

2. Genuine winning in sport is about overcoming imagined obstacles which is bringing personal satisfaction to a player. But in modern sport winning more and more doesn't seem to make sense, if the opponent is not destroyed. Players do not want only theirs victory but maybe more the defeat of the opponent. Victory is not so important anymore, but the competing itself and the destruction of the opponent.

3. Rather than towards players, modern sport is turned towards passive spectators who are growingly unaware of the rules of the game. More and more often rules are altered in a way to attract such audiences. Modern sport is subdued to its entertainment value. While people run away from everyday boredom towards sports, what they get is entertainment and sensation. The basic purpose of sport is trivialized, sporting game turned into a trivial act that is being sold as grave matter.
The rest, the bit about Djokovic, Nadal featuring as the excessively narcissistic sportsmen and Federer as the a completely ego-less, self-sufficient player is your own special touch, right? Whatever you're smoking, it's good stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,035 Posts
marijuana's baaadddd for you
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27,276 Posts
I have just read an article 'Narcissism' in a Serbian daily paper 'Danas', written by two psychologists, talking about modern day uprisal of narcissistic personality.
World of sport is also touched and three essential points are made:

1. Initially, sport is a useless game, interesting in itself, with an aim of strengthening the body and the spirit and producing positive feelings in people; players approach theirs game with love and experience satisfaction from the pleasure of playing itself. This is how sports were played until some time in the past. But today such sport almost doesn't exist anymore. A sportsman doesn't practice his skills for owns pleasure and from inner motivation, but regardless of that wants to impress the audiences and goes for sensation and ovations.

2. Genuine winning in sport is about overcoming imagined obstacles which is bringing personal satisfaction to a player. But in modern sport winning more and more doesn't seem to make sense, if the opponent is not destroyed. Players do not want only theirs victory but maybe more the defeat of the opponent. Victory is not so important anymore, but the competing itself and the destruction of the opponent.

3. Rather than towards players, modern sport is turned towards passive spectators who are growingly unaware of the rules of the game. More and more often rules are altered in a way to attract such audiences. Modern sport is subdued to its entertainment value. While people run away from everyday boredom towards sports, what they get is entertainment and sensation. The basic purpose of sport is trivialized, sporting game turned into a trivial act that is being sold as grave matter.
Like Castafiore said, stop writing BS. It isn't even funny
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,712 Posts
Watch Roger BEFORE won his first slam and tell me with a straight face that he's not arrogant. After you dominate the game, obliterating everything that comes in your way, win 12 slams, there is no need for arrogance...once he starts losing more often...well...I always like to refer to his Wimbledon final girlie hissy fit.
Roger's not arrogant, he's just SPOILED. :angel: :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Just to be clear, you read this article written by two psychologists about narcissism in sports, summarized like this:


The rest, the bit about Djokovic, Nadal featuring as the excessively narcissistic sportsmen and Federer as the a completely ego-less, self-sufficient player is your own special touch, right?
Right. Tennis-related parts are mine, the rest not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Watch Roger BEFORE won his first slam and tell me with a straight face that he's not arrogant.
I didn't watch him then, but he comes across as the being contrary of arrogant
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,091 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Watch Roger BEFORE won his first slam and tell me with a straight face that he's not arrogant.
I didn't watch him then, but he comes across as the contrary of arrogant
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,712 Posts
Also, those talking about Novak or Rafa's expectant adulation seem to be suggesting this is unreasonable. If anything, I think the mass praise of Roger has caused them to have a little bit of an overinflated sense of "What the hell, people?" when they don't get the same kind of respect he does, or fanfare for challenging him.
 

·
Blown Out On the Trail
Joined
·
62,739 Posts
Nadal's and Djokovic's respective games, brutish and uninspiring on theirs own ground, show that the joy of playing is subdued (if existing at all) to some other aims.
I only had to read this far to be laughing to hard to read more. What a load. :lol:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
95,412 Posts
I really agree with some points in that article, nail on the head and i've thought some of those things myself
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
375 Posts
I don't need to read a whole article to know Djokovic is arrogant. :zzz:
omg, djokovic is arrogant. i can't stand arrogant player cause i'm such a pussy. cause my parent taught me how to be a classy pussy person that i am today. i want to thank my parent for making me the world class pussy that i dream of when i was i kid, thanks:tears:
 

·
Blown Out On the Trail
Joined
·
62,739 Posts
I really agree with some points in that article, nail on the head and i've thought some of those things myself
You do realize that it wasn't an article, don't you?

The numbered points were the poster's summary of an article and the rest was his own rant -- uh -- opinion. :)
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top