Why Djoker Will Win the 2023 Aussie Open
I just finished watching Novak Djokovic's 4th-round, post-game, on-court interview, and I can just tell he will win. On top of all the other incredible things he has going for him, there is about his confident swagger and playful demeanor cinched it for me.
Here's what he said in the interview:
Djoker: 'Because I wanted to,' Djoker calmly replied with a grin on his face. *Mic drop*
Did you catch it? Did you sense Djokovic's X-factor in the interview? It resides somewhere in the mental/emotional domain. This elusive element, combined with his physical preparation will make him unstoppable. I'm still unsure how to exactly define this X-factor. So, the rest of this post will be my exploration of it.
What the X-factor Is NOT
Though it hurts my Federer-loving heart to admit it, Novak Djokovic is THE GREATEST MEN'S SINGLES TENNIS PLAYER OF ALL TIME (in nearly every meaningful category of the game). The following traits contribute to his general greatest:
- Mental toughness that allows him to elevate his game when losing or when the crowd is against him. There are many other facets to mental toughness as well. (At this level of competition, the mental game of tennis is what makes the difference between winning and losing. The X-factor is definitely adjacent to this aspect.)
- Extensive tournament experience playing in big matches frees him to hit with power, accuracy, and ease.
- Diet and training. While his dedication and intensity to his physique are noteworthy and likely contribute to his longevity and on-court endurance, it's not enough to make him a champion.
- Confidence and ability to harness fear in the face of devastating odds.
- This is indirectly related to his X-factor. “If your goal in life is to become fearless, then I believe you’re already on the wrong path, because the only truly fearless people I’ve ever met were straight-up sociopaths and a few exceptionally reckless three-year-olds—and those aren’t good role models for anyone. The truth is, you need your fear, for obvious reasons of basic survival. Evolution did well to install a fear reflex within you, because if you didn’t have any fear, you would lead a short, crazy, stupid life.” ― Elizabeth Gilbert, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
- “It seems to me that the less I fight my fear, the less it fights back. If I can relax, fear relaxes, too.” ― Elizabeth Gilbert, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
- His vampire-like ability to draw energy from his opponent and from the crowd.
- This is also related to his X-factor, but not exactly it. “Recognizing that people's reactions don't belong to you is the only sane way to create. If people enjoy what you've created, terrific. If people ignore what you've created, too bad. If people misunderstand what you've created, don't sweat it. And what if people absolutely hate what you've created? What if people attack you with savage vitriol, insult your intelligence, malign your motives, and drag your good name through the mud? Just smile sweetly and suggest - as politely as you possibly can - that they go make their own f*cking art. Then stubbornly continue making yours.”― Elizabeth Gilbert, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
- The intense ability to focus on the moment and avoid distraction.
- The unwavering commitment to be the best he can be.
- Genetics. This is unrelated to his X-factor, but it facilitates it. “Genetic randomness had already determined how much talent I’d been allotted, and destiny’s randomness would account for my share of luck. The only piece I had any control over was my discipline. Recognizing that, it seemed like the best plan would be to work my ass off. That was the only card I had to play, so I played it hard.” ― Elizabeth Gilbert, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
Clearly, all these Australian Open tennis players are outstanding athletes. So, what is it that makes the difference? What does Djoker have that other players don't in this tournament do not?
What the X-Factor Looks Like in Creative Writing
Elizabeth Gilbert might have the answer. After writing her international bestseller, Eat Pray Love, she felt immense pressure to "do it again." Surely, Djokovic must deal with similar pressure, having won this particular Grand Slam tournament eight times.
Passages from her book Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear (2015), a self-help guide for struggling creatives, swam around in my head while I watched the on-court interview. So, I began comparing her advice to what I am seeing on TV.
It occurred to me that what truly sets Djokovic apart from his competitors is not his passion for the game, but that he knows deep down that the game loves him. Let me illustrate this idea by relating a story that Gilbert actually facilitated in a classroom full of burgeoning writers in her chapter on Trust.
Imagine that you've gathered the world's best tennis players in a room. If you were to ask them, "How many of you are passionate about the game of tennis?" I'm positive they would unanimously and emphatically raise their hands. Nick Kyrgios would probably whoop and throw in a few expletives. However, if you then asked the same individuals, "How many of you believe that the game of tennis loves you," I imagine that―like Gilbert's classroom of writers―the majority of the tennis players would tragically lower their hands.
Like writers and all artists, professional tennis players frequently see their connection with Tennis personified as being quite one-sided. In the beginning, each tennis star felt blessed by Tennis's favor. They discovered they had an aptitude for the sport, and they flamed their passion with tireless practice and sacrifice. However, after Hardship, Injury, and Defeat had their way with them over the months and years, they began to question whether Tennis was their muse or whether Hard work, Suffering, and Luck made them great.
The Greeks and the Romans believed in the idea of an external daemon of creativity—a sort of house elf who lived within the walls of your home and who sometimes aided you in your labors. The Romans had a specific term for that helpful house elf. They called it your genius—your guardian deity, the conduit of your inspiration. Which is to say, the Romans didn’t believe that an exceptionally gifted person was a genius; they believed that an exceptionally gifted person had a genius. It’s a subtle but important distinction (being vs. having), and I think it’s a wise psychological construct. The idea of an external genius helps to keep the artist’s ego in check, distancing him somewhat from the burden of taking either full credit or full blame for the outcome of his work. If your work is successful, in other words, you are obliged to thank your external genius for the help, thus holding you back from total narcissism. And if your work fails, it’s not entirely your fault. You can say, “Hey, don’t look at me—my genius didn’t show up today!” Either way, the vulnerable human ego is protected. Protected from the corrupting influence of praise. Protected from the corrosive effects of shame.
― Elizabeth Gilbert, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
"Having" a Genius vs. "Being" a Genius
In her 2009 TED talk, titled “Your Elusive Genius,” Elizabeth Gilbert delves into the challenges faced by creative individuals. She proposes a radical perspective: rather than considering genius as an inherent trait possessed by a select few, we should recognize that everyone has access to their own genius. This shift in mindset can alleviate the crippling fear associated with performing at one’s best, especially in high-stakes situations like elite competitions.
Gilbert draws inspiration from ancient Greek and Roman beliefs. These cultures viewed creativity as a divine gift bestowed by a mysterious external source (a muse or daemon) rather than a personal attribute. By engaging in a playful and respectful dialogue with this creative force, artists can navigate the unpredictable and sometimes otherworldly nature of their work. This approach encourages humility, gratitude, and a commitment to showing up for creative endeavors, regardless of the outcome.
In essence, Gilbert’s talk invites us to embrace our creative genius, recognizing that it is not solely our burden but a collaborative dance with something greater than ourselves. My favorite example of hers is the Tom Waite story that begins around 12;30.
In contrast, tennis players who take a more humanistic view of their game (who feel that they are solely responsible for their performance) will show up to interviews very seriously. They talk about preparing as best they can, and sticking to their game plan.
Those players with trickster energy (X-factor) are much more playful. They say weird stuff like, "My next opponent is playing great tennis! I'll be just as excited as you to see who will win." This implies that they are there to win, but they don't take full responsibility for the outcome. They will show up with their A-game, but they recognize that their tennis "daemon" will need to play its role too. It almost seems like the more Romantic and playful creatives are, the more receptive they are to help from their muses.
Trickster Energy
I think Djokovic's X-factor is his playfulness, or as Gilbert puts it, his trickster energy. (I mean come on. It's in his name, "Djoker." Not to forget his classic tennis impersonations.
Gilbert explains why it's better for artists (and tennis players) to be tricksters rather than martyrs.
'Better a trickster than a martyr be.'What's the difference between a martyr and a trickster, you ask?
Here's a quick primer.
Martyr energy is dark, solemn, macho, hierarchical, fundamentalist, austere, unforgiving, and profoundly rigid.
Trickster energy is light, sly, transgender, transgressive, animist, seditious, primal, and endlessly shape-shifting.
Two Tennis Tricksters In The Final
I'll do you one better than predict the winner. I'll predict the final match: Djokovic vs Tsitsipas.
Tsitsipas still has some fear in him, but he's approaching Djoker's level of trickster energy. Although he attributes his own ability to dig himself out of holes to "experience" and a "Spartan Attitude" (he's Greek, btw), Tsitsipas shares the same kind of relationship with Tennis that Djokovic does. Neither one pretends to be fearless. They accept their fear and play anyway, which are textbook traits of heroic champions. Notice how playful and re-directing Tsitsipas is in his on-court interview. He barely talks about tennis. He is much more curious about other things, like seeing his favorite Aussie actress courtside and hopefully donating the champion's purse to the State of Victoria to build a school.
Conclusion
My sense of the current tennis scene is that all these next-generation players are taking their shot at a title too seriously. They should all read Elizabeth Gilbert's Big Magic and relearn how to play at tennis.
Creativity is sacred, and it is not sacred. What we make matters enormously, and it doesn’t matter at all. We toil alone, and we are accompanied by spirits. We are terrified, and we are brave. Art is a crushing chore and a wonderful privilege. Only when we are at our most playful can divinity finally get serious with us. Make space for all these paradoxes to be equally true inside your soul, and I promise—you can make anything. So please calm down now and get back to work, okay? The treasures that are hidden inside you are hoping you will say yes. ― Elizabeth Gilbert, Big Magic: Creative Living Beyond Fear
Post-tournament edit: Novak Djokovic defeated Stefanos Tsitsipas in the final, 6–3, 7–6, 7–6 to win the men's singles tennis title at the 2023 Australian Open. It was his record-extending tenth Australian Open title and 22nd major title overall, tying Rafael Nadal for the all-time record of most Grand Slam men's singles titles won. (Wikipedia)
Edit June 2024: I just found this interview clip of Djokovic's current coach making the same thing I did in a pre-game locker room.
Comments
Post a Comment
Please share your thoughts.