Golf_ The Mind Game - Marlin M. Mackenzie [60]
I strongly believe that the better my opponent plays, the more opportunity I have to challenge myself and dig deeper into my resources. In this way I really challenge my opponent. The better each of us plays, the better each of us can become. When a golf match is approached with this perspective, opponents become fellow players who appreciate each other; they aren’t simply objects to be defeated.
In my associations with fine athletes in many sports, nearly all of them say that when they play their best against topflight opponents, victory becomes a highly prized bonus—a bonus because of the satisfaction of reaching a personal-best performance goal. Even if they lose under the same circumstances, they have a bittersweet feeling—disappointment with the loss coupled with the satisfaction of playing well. In contrast they say that a victory that comes after playing poorly, irrespective of the opponent’s quality of play, provides very little satisfaction.
The saving grace of golf is its handicap system. We can truly challenge our opponents to play well despite our differences in ability. At the same time we can challenge ourselves to play equal to or better than our own handicap.
If you find that you’re pressuring yourself to win, it might be important to ask yourself what would happen if you didn’t win. What would you lose besides the match? Would you feel as if you were letting someone else down—your pro, your playing partner, your family or friends? Would you feel bad by letting them down?
If the answer is yes, it’s quite likely that you’re taking unrealistic responsibility for how others feel, and getting your own sense of satisfaction from them instead of from yourself. This means that you’re unnecessarily dependent upon others for feeling good about how you play. You’re playing a dependent “mind game” instead of taking full responsibility for your own actions and feelings. In other words you’re operating in your mind as if you were out there for someone else.
You don’t play golf, or do anything else for that matter, for another person. Everything you do is for yourself. Even when you do something to please someone else, you do it because you get something in return—enjoyment from playing the game, love, recognition, money, whatever—or you do what you do to avoid something such as criticism or punishment.
What else might happen if you didn’t win? Would you feel embarrassed? Would you feel inadequate as a person? Would you feel dissatisfied with yourself? If your answer to these questions is yes, then your chances of feeling good about yourself are dim, since only one player wins a tournament; the rest lose. Unfortunately, the we’re-number-one mania in the sports world is another “mind game” that feeds an irrational sense of the value of a scoreboard victory.
The true measure of the worth of your golf game and yourself is how you feel about your own efforts. If you believe you really applied yourself, irrespective of your score, that’s all that anyone can ask. It’s natural to feel disappointment with poor play. Embarrassment, however, implies a low sense of self-esteem, because you allow those who watch you to determine your self-worth.
So striving to win creates a paradox. If you try too hard, if you’re compelled to win, you’ll generate pressure that results in poor play; if you leave winning aside and tell yourself to just enjoy playing, as Peter Jacobsen did, it’s highly likely that you’ll play well. It also means you have a better chance to win. When you enjoy yourself and incidentally win, it feeds your sense of accomplishment, satisfaction, and self-worth.
“Shouldniks”
It’s easy to spot dependent, compulsive people who put tremendous pressure on themselves to win or play perfectly. Just listen to their language. They use phrases containing “need to,” “must,” “got to,” “have to,” or “should”—“I’ve got to practice my long irons”; “I should be on the green in two”; “I should have made a par”; “I need to make that putt”; or “I’ve got to follow through on my sand shots.” When examined carefully I’d bet