The Super Mental Training Book (37 page)

Long jumper V. (best performance, 7.08 meters) does not always relate conscientiously to training, is insufficiently motivated (does not always "burn with desire" to participate in competition), is distinguished by emotional stability, is composed, calm, even somewhat phlegmatic, is disciplined, but has a fairly low level of self-regulation in sports activity. He utilizes a mixed warm-up.

Considering this athlete's individual characteristics, it was recommended that he develop a "steady" style with an "internal" orientation. It was suggested that he increase his behavioral self-control and self-regulation in sports activity. The coach was advised to control his protege more outside of training sessions and to set definite, clear goals before him. The warm-up remained the same.

The recommendations were put into practice over the course of nine competitions. The athlete was taught methods of autogenic training. Special breathing exercises, psychological methods (self-commands, self-encouragement, etc.) and voluntary changes in content of thoughts were utilized. A personal record of 7.47 meters was set.[23]

Though Blumenstein and Hudanov found top-class jumpers to be mainly "explosive-internal" types, observe that they did not advise this particular style for Long jumper V. Instead, based on V's personality, the two scientists felt he would perform best if he developed a "steady-internal" individual style (and V came through with a personal record). So, what Blumenstein and Hudanov want us to realize is that the athlete's personality needs to be clearly understood by the coach

before work is initiated on developing the athlete's individual style; no one style works for all jumpers, let alone for all athletes.

We also see in V's experience that he was taught autogenic training, and employed "psychological methods," which is another name for autosuggestions. Based on his apparent thorough involvement in the project, the coach presumably guided the athlete in all this.

Three major points emerge from the two scientists' experiment:

1) Each athlete possesses a unique personality which the coach needs to understand.

2) Developing and perfecting an appropriate individual style for the athlete will result in improved performances.

3) Mental training can help in developing a suitable style for the athlete; application of "psychological methods" during workouts and competition is strongly advised.

Too often mental training is conducted on athletes in a "blanket" fashion, meaning that the individuality of each athlete is not taken into consideration by the coach or sports psychologist. This "blanket" approach is resorted to all the time because it is "convenient" and "cost-effective." When the whole team can be led through a visualization exercise at once, or can be hypnotized all at once, having someone work with each athlete on an individual basis is regarded by many coaches and upper management (in the case of professional teams) as a waste of time and money. The misconception that when a mental rehearsal technique works for one athlete, it will work for another, arises frequently; we see this whenever an athlete is brought in and subjected, "blanket" fashion, to the same mental training a teammate underwent. When the latter's future performances show no improvement, however, it only illustrates the point that a chosen or favored mental training strategy does not work equally well, nor is applicable, for all people. This is the message Blu-menstein and Hudanov stress in their conclusion when they call for "an individual plan of action," tailored to the personality of the athlete. They continue:

This is possible only by engaging in systematic psychological training. The characteristics of individual style (mental self-regulation) must be considered. A harmonious combination of individual personality characteristics and individual style of activity is important for effective and consistent performances. [24]

Our second example of an advanced Soviet work in the area of sports psychology which made itself known during the late 1970s is found in the paper, "Contemporary Psychological Preparation of Athletes," by G. D. Gorbunov; revealing thinking of the highest order, this paper was first published in 1979 in the journal, Teoriya i Praktika Fizicheskoi Kultury, 12:5-7. In this work Gorbunov attempts, as he describes it, "to provide an understanding (based on theory) of the practical experiences associated with the psychological preparation of an athlete."[25] Preparing the athlete psychologically involves much more than meets the eye, notes the scientist. For starters he says that "one can distinguish three forms of psychological preparation." They are:

1) Psychological preparation of the athlete for an extended period of strenuous training;

2) The overall psychological preparation of an athlete for competition in general;

3) Psychological preparation for a specific competition. [26]

With respect to psychological preparation for extended, strenuous training, Gorbunov discusses at length the importance of motivating the athlete, and how to accomplish this. He next talks about instilling in the athlete "attitudes favorable to sports training." This can turn into a real battle, states Gorbunov, because "while an athlete may be functionally ready to take on a heavy training schedule, he is often not psychologically ready for it." How do we know when an athlete is not psychologically ready for his workout? Informs Gorbunov:

The specific psychological rejection of the physical load is expressed in the athlete's fear that he cannot endure the loads or will not be able to recuperate for the regular training sessions or compete after the additional load. [27]

Later on, in his section on psychological preparation for competition in general, Gorbunov reveals how the coach or sports psychologist can deal with the athlete's various hang-ups:

In practice, educational work with athletes has shown that it is both valid and effective to use the many tools of a neurosis clinic to probe smoothly and correctly into the subconscious levels which control an individual's attitudes and behavior. Standardized, oft-repeated suggestion, supplemented by organized instruction in autosuggestion techniques, permits corrections to be made in an athlete's attitudes about competition, about competitive results (both planned and unconsciously desired results), about the social value of activities during competitions, about the possible consequences of one's performance in competition, and so on. This type of preparatory effort has a controlling effect on the conscious in the emotional, precompetitive environment which is even more effective because it reduces the negative counteractivity of the subconscious. [28]

Hopefully, rapport will be sufficiently established between the athlete and coach or sports psychologist so that the athlete feels no inhibition in allowing "tools of a neurosis clinic" to be used on him. The alternative—well, according to Gorbunov, there really is no good alternative to mental training. Athletes possessing counterproductive attitudes are unlikely to be helped by typical coaching approaches, he contends:

The traditional methods of sports education, oriented toward just the athlete's consciousness, are either partially or totally ineffective when dealing with his individual or typological peculiarities. Even a complete understanding of the harm that comes from precompetition anxieties will not enable an athlete to handle a bad prestart state. [29]

Traditional methods of coaching (sports education), because they only address the athlete's conscious state, are unlikely to evoke opposition from the athlete or controversy in general. Unfortunately, such old-time methods are less likely to produce results than ones that work on both the subconscious and conscious levels of the athlete's mind. The decision to employ "tools of a neurosis clinic" will require the coach and sports psychologist to expend extra effort in educating the athlete and gaining his trust. The athlete may refuse to partake in mental training, in which case the coach only finds himself back to where he would have been had he never promoted the idea. However, if the athlete gives the go-ahead to mental training—to such things as "organized instruction in autosuggestion techniques"—substantial improvements in performance will be the likely outcome.

One other comment by Gorbunov warrants our consideration. In his section on psychological preparation for a specific competition, he discusses the ideal make-up of precompetition goals, and when the athlete should "actualize" these goals:

The most important goal in the precompetition period is not the result of the event, but rather the process by which the result is achieved. It includes the goals of good effort, of what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. It is best to actualize the goals only in the last few minutes and, in some cases, seconds before the start. [30]

Gorbunov's suggestion for athletes "to actualize the goals only in the last few minutes and, in some cases, seconds before the start" mirrors the actions taken by athletes reported on elsewhere in this book. For example, Dr. Suinn's remark that Nordic skier Bill Koch "visualized his forthcoming race in less than a minute, while waiting near the starting gate" comes to mind (Koch won the silver medal in this race). Also, the "it's your time now" autosuggestion—Blumenstein and Hudanov would call this self-encouragement—figure skater David Santee gave himself while

skating onto the ice just before a performance falls under this same category. Certainly it is possible—and perhaps the best time, as Gorbunov contends—to wait until the last minute or last second to "actualize" goals; but, one must be careful about the logistics of the operation. One must be sure to allocate enough time to carry out the plan; distractions should be avoided or compensated for as well. If these pitfalls—lack of time, and distractions—are surmounted, an athlete following Gorbunov's strategy should perform quite well, because he has also been regularly engaging in hypnosis sessions during training.

Although, as the papers by Blumenstein, Hudanov, and Gorbunov show, Soviet scientists during the 1970s researched in detail certain facets of mental training for athletes, that is a far cry from demonstrating conclusively that all Soviet Olympic team members at the time were taught and used hypnosis. It is a long road from research to widespread application.

To try to shed more light on this possible anomaly between experimentation and use, I interviewed two top Soviet athletes. The first I managed to track down was Alex Metreveli, the top-ranked tennis player in the Soviet Union during the 1970s, and who still competes actively in senior tennis tournaments. I talked to him July 17, 1977. Obviously a fine player, Metreveli lost in the finals at Wimbledon in 1973, and is a four-time European amateur champion as well as ten-time Soviet champion. Metreveli's been around, and if hypnosis is used by athletes in his country, one thinks he might know about it.

I first asked Metreveli what type of mental preparation he engages in before a big match. He answered, "I like to have a good practice the day before. And I like to maybe, you know, to see a good movie or just read a good book." Metreveli admitted that the mental side of tennis has become increasingly important:

Now, especially in the men's tennis, we have very hard competition. Too many good players we have in tennis. Everybody knows how to play tennis, and everybody's playing well. So, you have to special prepare for the matches.

I wondered if Metreveli's special preparation incorporated hypnosis, so I inquired along these lines. "I was wondering," I said, "have you ever tried self-hypnosis?" to which Metreveli laughingly replied, "I never tried, and I never heard about it." I persisted in my attempt to find some trace of Soviet athletes using hypnosis:

Stevenson: How about other Soviet athletes, like in track and field? Do you know anything about them?

Metreveli: No. I just told you. I told you I didn't hear anything about hypnosis in the sport—especially in our country. Because, just as I was talking before. You need to prepare yourself for the game. Maybe it's a couple of different ways; but, still I don't think it's hypnosis. You have to concentrate; you have to prepare yourself. It's probably your own way.

Stevenson: So, your coaches have never encouraged its use?

Metreveli: No. No.

As I have learned that most tennis players know very little about hypnosis, the response by Metreveli was not surprising. From the nature of his answers, typical of a tennis player, I seriously doubt he was "covering up" anything.

On the other hand, is hypnosis a "forbidden subject" for Soviet athletes to discuss? The evidence is hardly convincing that it is. Soviet athletes, we recall, spoke freely on the subject to Russ Knipp, telling him about their use of hypnosis. Nonetheless, it is a good question, and leads us straight to the central issue—the Soviet athletes' "tight-lipped" reputation. One American expert in U.S.-Soviet sports exchanges is Dr. Michael Yessis, editor of the excellent quarterly journal,

the Soviet Sports Review. ,[31] Dr. Yessis considers this "tight-lipped" reputation of Soviet athletes very ill-deserved. His insights on this subject are contained in an illuminating article, penned by Leslie Maslakov, appearing in the February 22, 1979 Santa Ana Register, We particularly note this segment of Maslakov's report:

Soviet athletes are reputed to be tight-lipped when it comes to discussing the training techniques that have made them the world leaders in many sports.

Cal State Fullerton professor, Dr. Michael Yessis, however, claims their silence is not orchestrated—on the contrary, they are eager to tell what they've learned and learn our techniques as well. A lack of knowledgeable interpreters is the problem, he says. [32]

Dr. Yessis speaks fluent Russian, and serves, whenever he can, as an interpreter for Soviet athletes when they compete in the United States. According to Dr. Yessis, Soviet coaches expertly apply principles of biomechanics (the study of physical movement) in the training of their athletes. "The Russians," Dr. Yessis told Maslakov, "are very much ahead of us in terms of knowledge of how to really train athletes. We turn out good athletes not because of our coaches but in spite of them." This fact could in part explain why a Soviet athlete might appear to be "tight-lipped": American training techniques are too backward to provide him any benefit. So, the Soviet athlete might simply keep to himself and just concentrate on performing well while competing in the U.S. As Dr. Yessis pointed out, "The Russians would like to know what we're doing, they don't come here to learn too much, because through the years they've found we don't know too much."[33]