I recently read If I’m the Better Player, Why Can’t I Win? by Allen Fox. The copy used for this review is the original hardcover edition published in 1979. A slightly updated version was released on Amazon in 2016, and it is currently included with a Kindle+ subscription.
I thoroughly enjoyed this book, even though it is somewhat of a time capsule. It offers a look at professional tennis and the psychological thinking of another era. Some of the ideas in the book haven’t aged particularly well, but I was surprised by how much of Fox’s practical advice remains relevant nearly fifty years later.
For anyone unfamiliar with his resume, Fox was an accomplished tennis player, coach, and psychologist, and he brought those perspectives together to examine why superior tennis skills don’t always translate into winning matches. This book deserves recognition as one of the foundational works in competitive tennis psychology. Revisiting it this week helped establish some of the early reference points for understanding the mental aspects of competition. Fox essentially created a foundation that subsequent generations of coaches, players, and researchers eventually built upon.
The book opens with Fox characterizing tennis as a violent psychological struggle in which players are fighting to protect their egos and enhance their self-image. That’s a rather provocative way to describe a sport with such a strong tradition of etiquette and sportsmanship, but I think there’s considerable truth in it. Fox recognizes that the behavioral expectations governing tennis create a civilized exterior that can conceal some fairly ruthless competitive realities.
I particularly liked Fox’s treatment of the paradox that winning gives us confidence, but we first need confidence to win. Additionally, he observes how the scoring system of tennis contributes to psychological pressure. A player can compete freely for most of a match, then suddenly become tentative when victory is within reach. These observations remain as relevant today as they were when Fox wrote them.
A lot of his practical advice has also stood the test of time. Fox emphasizes the importance of prematch routines, believing in a game plan, and gaining enough competitive experience to become comfortable under pressure. His point that players need to compete frequently to learn how to handle important matches is particularly sound. There are aspects of competition that simply cannot be replicated in practice.
His discussion of psychological gamesmanship was another highlight for me. Fox doesn’t merely describe how players attempt to unsettle their opponents. He actively advocates using psychological tactics as part of competitive tennis and provides examples involving the professional players of his era.
One of his observations is that the essence of a successful psych is making your opponent think. Once a player starts wondering about an opponent’s behavior, some of the attention that should be directed toward playing tennis has been diverted elsewhere. Fox clearly considers that a legitimate competitive advantage, provided the behavior remains within the boundaries of the game.
That philosophy may make some readers uncomfortable, but it is consistent with his opening description of tennis as a psychological struggle. It also offers an interesting glimpse into the competitive culture of professional tennis during the 1970s. I can personally attest that the attitudes he describes were very much in place in junior tennis during the timeframe when this book was published.
Given the evolution of psychology since 1979, it should come as no surprise that not everything in the book has aged so gracefully. Fox discusses personality testing he conducted with professional players in an attempt to connect their achievement motivation with insecurity and a desire for recognition. He also spends considerable time exploring how children’s personalities supposedly develop differently depending on whether they have a domineering mother or father.
Those discussions reflect psychological theories and assumptions that would face considerably more scrutiny today. Thus, it is important to distinguish between Fox’s observations about competitive behavior and his attempts to explain where those behaviors originate. He could recognize a psychological phenomenon accurately without necessarily understanding its underlying causes.
The professional players used as examples in the book also add to its historical value. These were the prominent competitors of his day, and their experiences provide a fascinating window into the tennis world of the late 1970s. Readers familiar with the history of professional tennis will probably appreciate those references more than someone without any memory of that era.
The most appropriate way to evaluate If I’m the Better Player, Why Can’t I Win? is in the context of when it was written. Fox was helping establish a foundation for understanding the psychological dimensions of competitive tennis. We shouldn’t expect every theory or conclusion from 1979 to remain unchallenged nearly fifty years later.
What impressed me the most was how much of his understanding of competitive behavior has survived. It offers an entertaining look at tennis in another era, along with a considerable amount of practical wisdom that has stood the test of time. Some of the psychology may be dated, but Fox’s understanding of competitive tennis remains well worth exploring.
If I’m the Better Player, Why Can’t I Win? (<- Sponsored Link)
Fiend At Court participates in the Amazon Associates program and receives a paid commission on any purchases made via the links in this article. Details on the disposition of proceeds are available on the “About Fiend at Court” page.
