
Play the Point, Not the Score - IsaacSchlueter
http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2009/02/play-the-point-not-the-score.html
======
boredguy8
This is a 'great' line because "the point" and "the score" can be anything you
want it to be, and you can change contexts whenever you want to, so nothing
ever really disproves it. But this analogy breaks down I would argue even
within tennis, but certainly amongst other games and absolutely in life.

Tennis is a game of endurance: if the score is 30-love and you can expend a
disproportionate amount of energy to get it to 40-love or hold back, store
that energy, and let it go 40-15, you should if you'll need that energy later.
On the other hand, if it's 40-love and you can clinch the game, there's a far
higher payoff for that effort.

Similarly in football, if there's 48 seconds left in the game, 4th down and 1
yard on the 20 yard line and you're behind with a score of 13 to 14, you
better be "playing the score" and kick a field goal, not go for a touchdown
pass.

Strategic concessions and strategic fights are the true key to success. If
you're in the battle, be in it to win it.

~~~
briancooley
I think a big part of Nadal's game is his incredible endurance. Thus, it is to
his advantage to contest every point, because the longer the match wears on,
the greater his edge over his opponent. You might think of it as though Nadal
has unlimited resources relative to his opponent. In that case, conservation
is a worse strategy than playing every point because it fails to exploit one
of his advantages.

~~~
boredguy8
I agree. In that case, he can fight for every point because he has 1000 units
of energy, everyone else has 500, and, well, there you have it...he can fight
for the "pointless" points.

But let me suggest that outclassing your opponents to such a degree in the
real world is far less likely. In golf, for instance, Tiger Woods' early
career exploited his far superior drive. As golfers altered their game /
exercise approach, Tiger upped his game elsewhere to stay on top. Similarly,
if Nadal faces an opponent with equal stamina, I think you'd see a far more
strategic game. Or, to phrase it differently: the strategy he employs now
(strategic use of endurance) will continue, but become more apparent as he is
forced to make tradeoffs. That is, he currently 'picks his battles', but his
superior reserves means he can pick each point. Against someone more equally
classed, he'll continue to 'pick his battles', but more equal reserves mean
we'd see different effects.

------
netcan
I think tennis can be a great place for analogies. But I dispute. Tennis has a
great scoring system. At any point in the match, you can win. You're chances
are never bad until it's over. All you need to do is play from now on at least
as well as your opponent has played up till now. The only thing required of
you, is known to be doable because it is exactly what has just been done _to_
you. Half-time never ends. Not till the last point. Couple that with being a
one on one game, & it's very psychological.

But the fact is that once a player establishes dominance, they can be very
hard to beat.

Nadal's strength, as any great player's is learning from the past but not
being influenced by it.

~~~
jhancock
I love tennis and agree this method is "the way" to win at tennis. Its a good
skill to leverage in other aspects of life as well.

However, I have seen this skill zealously applied to a startup and the person
that uses it so well alienates others (internal and external to his company)
by using it too religiously. It is just one skill and needs to be carefully
balanced with the simple fact that in life and startups the overall score is
many times more important than a particular point.

Be careful with applying a tennis stratagem to life. You will get burned.

------
wheels
I agree that this sounds great, but really is a bit short sighted. As an
entrepreneur one of the things it seems you need to be able to do rather often
is realize that something you're pushing is wrong, drop it, cut your losses
and refocus. There's a really delicate balance between not giving up and not
wasting time being bull-headed. (I certainly struggle with dropping things
sometimes even if it's counter productive for "the score".)

~~~
dejb
Hey man I agree with you and I said a similar thing. Doesn't seem to be what
people want to hear at the moment. Seems the gung ho crowd have this topic all
sown up. I'd like to play them in a 5 set match.

------
wallflower
There is a scene in 'The Legend of Bagger Vance' where the golfer is playing
an important championship hole and the camera strips away all of the
championship environment, the crowd, leaving Bagger Vance with himself, the
ball, and the hole.

~~~
ojbyrne
Golf is a different sport. And there's the great scene from "Tin Cup" that is
the counterpoint to the point of this article. That would be the scene where
Kevin Costner hits the ball into the water over and over trying to make the
perfect shot. Searching for perfection on that one shot cost him everything.

------
dejb
I think Nadal actually differs from most players in that he 'plays the point'.
Most of the great players are said to lift in important situations such as
service break opportunities or tie breaks. Perhaps if you have such amazing
stamina that you can go flat out all the time then this might be the best
strategy. But for most mortals (including many greats) prioritising is an
important skill that should be used.

------
lionhearted
I fenced epee in university. One match I was fencing to five points, and went
down 4-0 vs. someone I really should have beaten. This is particularly ugly in
epee, because if you strike simultaneously, you both get a point. So all he
has to do is hit me at the same time on one of the next four points to win. As
a fencer, this isn't a hard proposition.

But I said something along the lines of, "Fuck it, I'm _not_ losing here" and
focused more intensely than maybe I ever have. It's like I wasn't even looking
at my opponent any more, the world just kind of blurred and I just kind of
acted.

I got the next touch. 4-1... and I knew I had it. I put everything into
retreating and defense, never counterattacked into an attack (too high risk of
both connecting), bit and nibbled down to 4-4.

At 4-4 tied, I could feel the fear in the air. He was frustrated, angry,
violent - _this shouldn't be happening to me_ was his vibe. I'd been defensive
for the last four points because I couldn't afford for us to both hit - now I
could, and I fleshed (charged) straight at him. He was advancing as I charged,
I raised my epee, locked the blade against his, scored the touch, and he
actually got knocked entirely over onto the ground. I jumped in the air,
screaming and waving my arms and weapon. One of the biggest rushes of my life,
and a permanent lesson.

------
alparsla
Only if you're not constrained by time.

------
mhb
karma

