We know immediately: "He's been called the best in the world at the mental game of tennis." Super directly read on. On the next page on the same. Also good - but I knew already. Two pages later again the same message. OK when it finally starts. Until then I become nervous from the middle of the book: Enough Selbsbeiweihräucherung and nice anecdotes where finally, the content! But in vain, only Shallow ... I would have expected much more here. In fact, it is a very simplistic approach: Beobachten- Bewerten- exploitation. That is the entire message? Without analytical evaluations? Without deeper approach? Without further breakdown how best to proceed? I was amazed how such a primitive representation retract such a reputation. "My strengths use - weaknesses of the enemy to exploit" a further rush to but then nothing more is done. Zugegeben- the examples from his career are entertaining and funny. But with regard to the mental attitude I refer again to the above said. In the game against B.Becker the message is so simple that it mentally while reading funny but would not deserve to be tied. Playing on forehand, hoping for failure, otherwise deep expect to backhand and volley on the longline line. Great - what is this? This is surely too narrow kept its approach to it in principle, to capitalize on the reader. Be adjusted before 10 min mentally for the game is another important point. But that's basically about it. The full-page passage are then nothing more than anecdotes that structure to contribute mental approach to nothing. Moreover, the mental abilities of B. Gilbert are overrated in my opinion. He was just a counter-players. The always try to destroy the opponent's play. This is basically not a circumstance which suggests a greater psychological insight. Comparable an "Out-Boxer", which looks first times smarter than the "Slugger", but it is not necessarily. Is halt only his style. To remain times when usage of Tennis - Gilbert was referred to as "pusher". He has the balls simply pushed over the net and taken out pace. If Becker was in a good mood, he has given the swatter Gilbert regularly. Only when Becker showed weaknesses in their game, Gilbert was able to wear down. Gilbert can with his passive play, the game does not dictate, but is primarily dependent on the shape of its opposite. But that no tactical masterstroke connected per se. Elsewhere I have doubts whether Gilbert was mentally in a bad mood. For example. Gilbert mentioned quite funny as McEnroe in insults: "Gilbert You are the worst!" In the book, one is left in the faith this refers to his style of play. McEnroe referred this but mainly to the negative attitude of Gilbert. He directed for 3 hours continuously with itself at odds how bad he was, "I can not", "do not have a backhand", "Ohh no ..." This went on continuously so, which he nevertheless was always extremely tough in the game. This constant and ongoing around Mosern is what many players noticed unpleasant. A How do I find dubious mental attitude.
Conclusion: On the surface, and thus falls far short of our own high expectations. Cute and fun to read - but contributes virtually nothing to the knowledge gained in terms of mental attitude. The complete "message" of the book could be summed up in a half-page and scratched the surface if necessary.
