HN Books @HNBooksMonth

>>What else could it be?

At that level, it's generally known to be the mental preparation for the given day (along with a bit of luck, as you mentioned).

Indeed, everyone at that level has already been filtered and selected for similar top levels of skill, knowledge, conditioning, equipment, diet, coaches, etc., etc., etc. It comes down to the mental game both internally and between competitors on that particular day.

A classic book to understand some of this is The Inner Game of Tennis by Timothy Gallwey [0]

Source: I formerly competed at international levels for several years in alpine ski racing (mostly DH/Super-G), and studied neuroscience in college as a result of the many fascinating mental phenomena I found in training and competing.

One very interesting fact I came across in neuroscience is that perceptual thresholds for relevant senses, e.g., touch sensitivity for a musician, are about 10X finer than normal people (i.e., they can detect physical differences only 10% the size of that detectable by normal population), and that this is trainable. So yes, this is definitely on the skill/ training side, agreeing with the author.

OTOH, I know some top level musicians who quickly point out that the people with insane levels of desire, motivation, and hard work who will never get to the level to pass a professional audition. But I haven't further data to see what is the issue (does it come to talent, or some genetic shortcoming in their sensory-motor systems, or have they self-sabotaged, or what 20 other factors?)

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Inner-Game-Tennis-Classic-Performance...

⬐ Syntonicles

I have a very deep interest in this topic and nearly went into neuroscience for similar reasons but instead ended up blazing my own trail at the intersection of machine learning and sports training. I am very cognizant of my own strong bias toward these conclusions and want to avoid confirmation seeking. Have you encountered any research, literature or reputable programs that I could investigate further?

⬐ toss1

You ask a really good question, and it seems there is a deficit there, at least in my current knowledge

What comes closest is some studies on extreme forms of Buddhist meditation. One of the interesting discoveries is that during normal meditation, the parasympathetic system (homeostasis, breathing, etc.) is very dominant, but during the peak enlighentment experiences of the advanced meditators, the sympathetic system (fight-or-flight) system associated with athletic performance also runs at very high levels. Normally, the sympathetic & parasympathetic systems are in opposition, when the sympathetic system is active, parasympathetic is suppressed, and vice-versa. The other situation where both systems activate is during sex (arousal needs paracympathetic, orgasm sympathetic). The interesting connection I made is that I'd noticed these intense flow states sometimes occurring in the most intense times, where everything in my mind was absolute calm - I called it "fast meditation", as in meditating at 85mph. I know others also experience this. I conjecture that this is some of the same phenomenon seen in advanced meditation, just form the opposite end (here, maxing out the sympathetic system and the parasympathetic maybe kicks in, but I have no measurements other than my mental state).

There's also some research on the "flow state" related to accelerated perception, where people feel that they can see insane levels of detail and time slows down, as in accidents. They were trying to recreate it to understand it, and I found the efforts entirely lame and a waste of time. I can tell all kinds of stories about seeing very clearly both important and trivial things at high speed, and having entire trains of thought which I can verify happened in fractions of a second by noting the beginning and end points of the chain of thought and calculating in the distance and speed. These studies catch none of it, and I can say that even with years of training and effort, it is still extremely elusive (which is why I can't really fault the researchers, I don't yet have any great ideas on how to capture it).

I wish I could point you to specific references, but these were all readings from a while back.

BTW, ML and sports training seems like a potentially very fruitful area! I'd love to hear more about it. I found that much of the most interesting areas are at the intersections of different fields, so I wish you good luck in your pursuit!

⬐ Syntonicles

We have had similar experiences. I discovered meditation and flow state accidentally - at first I thought it required intensity, and so I would ride my motorcycle in increasingly dangerous situations and down mountain trails in order to trigger it. This led me to take up skydiving (angle tracking, wing-suiting) and BASE jumping as I believed it was merely adrenaline that I was seeking.

I discovered I could trigger the state reliably without risk during high-level matched competitive video-game play. (Smash Bros) I had nearly 10 years of low-skilled competitive practice but with infinite online matched games I found I could reach a flow-like state on a nightly basis, so long as I played long enough. (I played for approximately 4 hours per night over a two-year period). I was also able to achieve a flow-like state with near certainty using a very simple piano tile tapping game, given long enough sessions. I had simply been using the game to train my thumbs for speed.

Eventually I left my career in software to pursue flow in Skydiving, which I now consider to be a mistake. After studying meditation and Yoga, it has become clear to me that the state is not triggered by external factors at all, and that it is itself a skill.

Admittedly far fewer of these states stand out as truly peak, quasi-religious experiences. I suspect there is a continuum and the binary classification is a judgement we place on the experience "retroactively". It comes from having enough space in your attention to notice the contrasting state of the body and the mind, the level of current performance, and then to notice the noticing itself. The rush of pleasure and excitement is not pre-existing, it is the result of a positive judgement you place on the situation. Despite its appeal this is undesirable, and tends toward interrupting flow in the precisely the same way as one loses control of a lucid dream after just having reached it. IMHO focusing on the subjective threshold for isolated study is misguided.

My current work focuses on creating an abstract framework which adapts to the athlete in order to create the external conditions which allow the athlete to most easily find the flow state. Rather than teach them how directly I hope to trigger it unexpectedly and allow for it to be sustained indefinitely during training. Of course, I'm not foolish enough to admit this to my benefactors.

Do you suppose I might be able to get a grant for this sort of work?

⬐ toss1

Wow - totally cool - you've definitely gone wild with this! Reminds me of a quote I read from the great weight-lifter Vasily Alekseyev, who talked about what he called the "white zone", and how amazing it was, and how you would work for years to get into it again.

I totally agree about the continuum - for the most part it is so strange from ordinary experience that it seems like a binary shift, but yes, I think it is important to see it as a continuum (perhaps a bit stepped/quantized, but not sure).

Fascinating that you managed to get there with the tapping game doing speed drills. I often had ideas but it was before common MRIs and other technology that we had for examining brain functions at high resolution. That is something you could get into an MRI, and/or an intense electrode-sensor grid and measure! So, yes, I'd think some funding might be possible. I know academic funding is it's own labrynthine nightmare, so probably best to be in a program supported by an experienced professor/primary researcher who knows the ropes. OTOH, if you can get to show some results that improve performance, perhaps approaching some top pro sports team owners for funding? (I know if I were a billionaire with a team, I'd be interested in something that could give us an edge!) The question is whether you can generate useful results soon, and in what sport. You seem to have made a lot of progress in eSports, there might be some money there... Let me know if you're interested in chatting offline (is there a DM function here to exchange contact info w/o publishing?)

⬐ Syntonicles

Hacker news is pretty bare bones - I don't even seen reply notifications. I've temporarily added some contact info to my "bio" if you'd like to discuss in more depth.

> Federer's tennis is an unkind learning environment; the rules aren't as clear, the feedback isn't as quick, and the skills are more murky. A lot of tennis is the mind-game aspect and in elite tennis, you don't get the same person very often.

The Inner Game of Tennis [0] for folks interested in learning more about this.

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Inner-Game-Tennis-Classic-Performance...

PS Novak's probably more clutch than Rog.

⬐ suyash

Anyone who has played some tennis can attest that it's more mental than physical specially when you're playing against opponents of the same level. No magic about that.

⬐ Austin_Conlon

Novak also has to deal with hostile crowds a lot more, who are in denial that he’s on track to surpass Roger and Rafa. He’s possibly under-appreciated because he doesn’t have the flair of the other two, but rather a robotically consistent, precise, and relatively low risk style.

I second this comment.

"A guide to a good life" was the first book on stoicism I read, that link was posted before and led me to it, and it really helped me a lot. I would also recommend the "Tao of Seneca" 3 PDFs that Tim Ferriss put together, the audiobooks are great because you can easily listen to a letter a day which helps me to build the habit of following stoicism.

Another book that really helped me was "The Inner Game of Tennis" https://www.amazon.com/Inner-Game-Tennis-Classic-Performance...

Theres a great mental toughness book/concept called Mindset[1], and the concepts are definitely all over the sports world. The book is considered by some to be the Inner Game Of Tennis[2] of today. But one of the concepts in Mindset that they say even the top guys can mess up is that if you are in a negative state of mind, you must give yourself a trigger word, or some sort of positivity before restarting your concentration. In other words, if you are telling yourself, "I am playing like crap. Wah Wah.. Ok, now concentrate!" You are likely to fail. However, if you are able to stop yourself, or correct yourself and say, "run run run." Then start concentrating, you are more likely to succeed. In relation to the article, quiet eyes are only as good as the mindset behind them. (I hope that made some sort of sense). But it basically means you need to have the right mindset before you start concentrating.

The run run run is from an example in the book. I noticed when the Detroit Red Wings were on a losing skid this year players had "skate skate skate" written on the tape of their stick. Also, Roberta Vinci quoted Mindset after taking down Serena Williams at the US Open. And Roger Federer has talked about using a lot of tactics in Mindset.

[1].http://www.amazon.com/Mindset-Mental-Guide-Jackie-Reardon/dp...

[2]http://www.amazon.com/Inner-Game-Tennis-Classic-Performance/...

⬐ leoc

Obligatory Inner Game of Tennis TV feature: https://youtu.be/ieb1lmm9xHk

and specifically related to keeping the eyes on the ball: https://youtu.be/ieb1lmm9xHk?t=255

His advice to me: Don't be in so much of a rush. Be easier on yourself.

If you connect with this idea, you may want to check out the book The Inner Game of Tennis: http://www.amazon.com/The-Inner-Game-Tennis-Performance/dp/0...

⬐ hakkasan

Thanks! I'll look into that. I've been trying to explore this topic in other domains recently. I find sports coaches have done a great deal of exploration into the effects of personal attitude especially in managing one's emotional reactions to outcomes.

I'm surprised by this article since I have not found the "Fake It Until You Make It" strategy to be very effective, especially with regards to faking courage. If it works for the author, great, but I wouldn't recommend this and here's why: False confidence might make you seem brave in the short-term, but long-term it's not going to fool most people and will make you look like even more of a weakling.

"Exaggerating Courage" usually works much better than faking it, at least for me, because it's based on a kernel of truth instead of a lie. For example I've never had a tennis lesson but I used to be good at basketball and other sports. So when I'm on the tennis court, even though my technique is poor, I remind myself that I have good hand-eye coordination and agility. So I focus on the fact that "I'm quick!" instead of "My backhand is lame!"

Focus on your strengths, not your perceived weaknesses. Of course when I'm really "in the zone" I'm in a state of Relaxed Confidence where I'm not talking to myself, either positive or negative, and I'm merely reacting to what's required at the moment. It's the ideal mind-body-state to be in when you're trying to return a serve, sink a free throw, hit a fast ball, or in many other non-sports situations. For more on this, check out...

The Inner Game of Tennis: The Classic Guide to the Mental Side of Peak Performance by Timothy Gallwey. http://www.amazon.com/The-Inner-Game-Tennis-Performance/dp/0...