03-23-2018, 04:58 AM
(03-23-2018, 04:38 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:That's true Paulp. No sporting organisation can afford to think about games not being losable. Actually they shouldn't be thinking about the result at all.
A coach once told me that the ladder is simply where you end up relative to the rest of the competition and the ladder will look after itself provided you focus on the next contest (note not even match, but contest). You win more contests than your opponent, you win more games. The more games you win the better chance of finishing higher you have. If you don't win a contest the best way to make up for it is win the next contest. The point being that if you contest wisely you will win mire of them and win mire games. He then steered this onto tactics stating that contests are important to win in critical areas. You can lose the battle but win the war. Then put that in context of types of play and game situation.
Moral of the story is, focus on what you have to do next, otherwise you lose sight of the now.
I guess my point was this : if one starts with the concept that there exists such a thing as a danger game, then simple logic dictates that there also exist games that are not danger games. And the minute you think that, you drop your guard, however slightly, and that's not a good performance mindset. I think that's what Bolts was getting at, and I agree. Which is why I stated that IMO, every match is a danger game.