Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Roger Federer told Dartmouth's graduating class the number he thinks explains his whole career: "In tennis, perfection is impossible. In the 1,526 singles matches I played in my career, I won almost 80% of those matches." Then he asked them to guess a second number: "Now, I have a...

521,637 Aufrufe • vor 2 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Roger Federer won almost 80% of the 1,526 singles matches he played in his career. But he only won 54% of the points. The greatest tennis player of his generation lost almost every second point he played. He spent 2 minutes explaining what that taught him about success: The best in the world are not the best because they win every point. They're the best because they know they'll lose again and again, and they've learned how to deal with it. Think about that. Even top-ranked tennis players win barely more than half the points they play. Federer's insight: when you lose every second point on average, you learn not to dwell on every shot. You teach yourself to think: "Okay, I double faulted. It's only a point." "Okay, I came to the net and I got passed again. It's only a point." Even a great shot, an overhead backhand smash that ends up on ESPN's top 10 playlist, that too is just a point. Here's the mindset shift that separates champions from everyone else: When you're playing a point, it has to be the most important thing in the world. And it is. But when it's behind you, it's behind you. This isn't detachment. It's freedom. It frees you to fully commit to the next point with intensity, clarity, and focus. No baggage from the last mistake. No anxiety about the scoreboard. Just the next shot. Federer's definition of a champion: "You want to become a master at overcoming hard moments. That is to me the sign of a champion." Not a master at avoiding hard moments. You can't avoid them. A master at overcoming them. Watch him in a post-match interview after losing to Djokovic. Reporter: "It was a tough day today. You threw everything at him." Federer: "Yeah, absolutely. Novak played great. Not only today but the whole two weeks. Plus the whole year. Plus last year. Plus the year before that. He deserves it. Well done, Novak." No bitterness or excuses. Reporter: "So close in that first set. It could have been so different." Federer: "Maybe. That's sports. That's why we come to watch it. Just because you don't know the outcome." He continues: "Of course I had my chances in the first set, being up a break. Second set I got lucky to win that. Had some chances early in the third. But it's how it goes." "He was tougher on the bigger points. At the end he was rock solid. I thought he played great. I didn't play bad myself. So I can be very happy as well." Read that last line again. He lost a major final. And he said he can be "very happy as well." He's separating his performance from the outcome. He didn't play badly. Novak was just better on the day. That's it. Move on. Most people do the opposite. They win and think they're geniuses. They lose and think they're failures. Champions know better. You can play great and lose. You can play terribly and win. The point is behind you. The match is behind you. What matters is: did you fully commit? Did you bring intensity, clarity, and focus? If yes, you can be happy regardless of the scoreboard. This applies far beyond tennis. In your career, you'll lose almost half the points you play. The pitch that doesn't land. The promotion that goes to someone else. The project that fails. The rejection email. You can dwell on every shot. Replay every mistake. Carry the baggage into the next opportunity. Or you can say: it's only a point. It's behind me now. And commit fully to the next one. The best in the world aren't the best because they never fail. They're the best because they've learned how to deal with failure. Again and again and again. This 2 minute speech will teach you more about handling setbacks than every motivational video you've ever saved.

Jaynit

40,649 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Roger Federer broke the internet with one statistic that will change how you see every setback in your life. 1,526 singles matches. Won almost 80% of them. 20 Grand Slams. 103 titles. Now answer honestly: What percentage of total points do you think he won across his entire career? 70%? 65%? 60%? Try … 54%. He lost literally almost EVERY SECOND POINT he ever played for 24 years. And still became one of the greatest of all time. Watch him explain it himself (2:07 of pure life-changing wisdom): “In tennis, perfection is impossible… When you lose every second point on average, you teach yourself to say: ‘Okay, I double-faulted — it’s only one point.’ ‘Okay I got passed at the net — it’s only one point.’ Even a screaming overhead smash that ends up on SportsCenter Top 10… still just one point. So when you’re playing your point, it has to be the most important thing in the world. The moment it’s over — it’s behind you. That mindset frees you to attack the next point, and the next, and the next with absolute intensity and clarity.” Then he looked at the crowd and said the line that hit a billion people in the soul: “The real sign of a champion is not that they win every point. It’s that they lose again and again and again… and have learned how to deal with it. Negative energy is wasted energy. Cry it out if you have to. Then force a smile. Move on. Be relentless. Adapt. Grow. Work harder — and work smarter.” Save this post. The next time you lose a deal, bomb a presentation, get ghosted, miss a deadline, or just have “one of those days” — come back here and read it again. You’re not falling behind. You’re just in the 46%. And the 46% is exactly where every single legend has spent most of their career. Keep playing the next point. (full 2:07 clip — sound on)

Camus

4,901,388 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Roger Federer: "Effortless is a myth. I worked very hard to make it look easy." "I left school at age 16 to play tennis full-time. So I never went to college. But I did graduate recently. I graduated tennis. I know the word is 'retire', but retired sounds awful. Like you, I finished one big thing and I'm moving on to the next. Like you, I'm figuring out what that is." Lesson 1: Effortless is a myth. "People would say my play was 'effortless.' Most of the time, they meant it as a compliment. But it frustrated me when they'd say, 'He barely broke a sweat' or 'Is he even trying?' The truth is, I had to work very hard to make it look easy." Roger shares the wake-up call: "An opponent at the Italian Open publicly questioned my mental discipline. He said, 'Roger will be the favorite for the first two hours. Then I'll be the favorite after that.' Everyone can play well the first two hours you're fit, you're fast, you're clear. After two hours, your legs get wobbly, your mind starts wandering, your discipline starts to fade. My parents, my coaches, even my rivals were calling me out. So I started to train harder. A lot harder." He explains the paradox: "I got the reputation for being 'effortless' because my warmups at tournaments were so casual that people didn't think I'd been training hard. But I had been working hard before the tournament when nobody was watching." Roger redefines talent: "Yes, talent matters. But talent has a broad definition. Most of the time, it's not about having a gift, it's about having grit. A great forehand can be called a talent. But discipline is also a talent. Patience is a talent. Trusting yourself is a talent. Embracing the process, loving the process, these are talents too. Some people are born with them. Everybody has to work at them." Lesson 2: It's only a point. "You can work harder than you thought possible and still lose. I have many times. Tennis is brutal. Every tournament ends the same way: one player gets a trophy. Every other player gets back on a plane, stares out the window, and thinks, 'How the hell did I miss that shot?'" Roger shares the statistic that changed his mindset: "In the 1,526 singles matches I played in my career, I won almost 80% of those matches. But what percentage of points do you think I won? Only 54%. Even top-ranked tennis players win barely more than half of the points they play." He explains what this teaches: "When you lose every second point on average, you learn not to dwell on every shot. You teach yourself to think: 'Okay, I double-faulted. It's only a point.' 'I came to the net and got passed again. It's only a point.' Even a great shot, an overhead backhand smash that ends up on ESPN's Top 10, that too is just a point." Roger shares the key mindset: "When you're playing a point, it has to be the most important thing in the world. And it is. But when it's behind you, it's behind you. This frees you to fully commit to the next point with intensity, clarity, and focus." He reflects on losing Wimbledon 2008: "Some call it the greatest match of all time. Okay, all respect to Rafa, but I think it would've been way better if I had won. Looking back, I feel like I lost at the very first point. I looked across the net and saw a guy who just a few weeks earlier crushed me in straight sets at the French Open. And I thought, 'This guy is maybe hungrier than I am.' It took me until the third set to remember 'Hey buddy, you're the five-time defending champion. You're on grass. You know how to do this.' But it came too late." Roger shares what champions understand: "The best in the world are not the best because they win every point. It's because they know they'll lose again and again, and have learned how to deal with it. You accept it. Cry it out if you need to. Then force a smile. Move on. Be relentless. Adapt and grow. Work harder, work smarter." Lesson 3: Life is bigger than the court. "A tennis court is 2,106 square feet. That's where singles matches happen. Not much bigger than a dorm room. I worked a lot, learned a lot, and ran a lot of miles in that small space. But the world is a whole lot bigger than that." Roger explains his philosophy: "Even when I was just starting out, I knew that tennis could show me the world, but tennis could never be the world. I knew that if I was lucky, I could play competitively until my late 30s, maybe even 41. But even when I was in the top five, it was important to me to have a life, a rewarding life full of travel, culture, friendships, and especially family. These are the reasons I never burned out." He shares what matters most: "Tennis has given me so many memories. But my off-court experiences are the ones I carry forward just as much. The places I've travelled, the platform that lets me give back, and most of all the people I've met along the way." Roger concludes: "Tennis, like life, is a team sport. Yes, you stand alone on your side of the net. But your success depends on your team, your coaches, your teammates, even your rivals. All these influences help make you who you are." His final words: "Whatever game you choose, give it your best. Go for your shots. Play free. Try everything. And most of all, be kind to one another, and have fun out there."

Jaynit

250,537 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Bam Adebayo GOES IN on the critics that says his 83 point game performance is unethical: "For the couch coaches, I mean, if you're in my shoes and you have, first of all, y'all are blaming me. You should be blaming the head coach. Get that first. I was not the one letting me go one-on-one the whole game until I had 70, and then you started to send a double. At that point, I got 70 with, like, what? nine minutes left to go in the game you think i'm not going for it like like and that's the thing that's crazy when they talk about the unethical part of the basketball i'm like if i have 70 points with 9 minutes to go Who would just be like, you know, coach, just take me out. Yeah, right. Anybody in my shoes with nine minutes left? Okay. A minute? All right. Nine? Yeah, I'm going for it. You can't be mad at that. If you are mad, I don't care because a lot of people, they're upset because if they did play, they never had a chance to get that close to chasing greatness. And then if you get that close to chasing greatness, that's the point of chasing it so you can surpass it. And some of the people have never played basketball. So like if you've been in the backyard and you and a couple of your homies have been playing 21 and you got 19. You're not going to get an easy look off. And four, they're going to talk about the free throws. It's not like I shoot 15 free throws a game. It's not like I average 10 free throws a game. You can watch the film. I was legitimately getting fouled every time. So I went to the free throw line."

Ahmed/The Ears/IG: BigBizTheGod 🇸🇴

373,876 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Alan Watts on why meditation has no purpose: Alan Watts begins by explaining the first basic reason for meditation. It interrupts our constant internal monologue: "Now, obviously, if I talk all the time, I don't hear what anyone else has to say. And so in exactly the same way, if I think all the time, that is to say, if I talk to myself all the time, I don't have anything to think about except thoughts. And therefore, I'm living entirely in the world of symbols and am never in relationship with reality." But then Watts pivots to a deeper, more counterintuitive point: meditation, properly understood, has no purpose at all. He compares it to music and dancing: "When we make music, we don't do it in order to reach a certain point, such as the end of the composition. If that were the purpose of music, to get to the end of the piece then obviously the fastest players would be the best." The same applies to dance: "When we dance, we are not aiming to arrive at a particular place on the floor, as we would be if we were taking a journey. When we dance, the journey itself is the point. When we play music, the playing itself is the point." This is where Watts delivers his core insight about meditation: "Meditation is the discovery that the point of life is always arrived at in the immediate moment. And therefore, if you meditate for an ulterior motive, that is to say, to improve your mind, to improve your character, to be more efficient in life, you've got your eye on the future and you are not meditating." Watts argues the future is an illusion we chase at our own expense: "Because the future is a concept. It doesn't exist. As the proverb says, 'tomorrow never comes.' There is no such thing as tomorrow. There never will be. Because time is always now." He pushes back against how religion has framed contemplative practice: "Meditation is supposed to be fun. It's not something you do as a grim duty. The trouble with religion as we know it is that it is so mixed up with grim duties. We do it because it's good for you; it's a kind of self-punishment." Watts closes with what he calls the real essence of the practice: "It's a kind of digging the present. It's a kind of grooving with the eternal now and brings us into a state of peace where we can understand that the point of life. The place where it's at is simply here and now."

Mateus — eu/acc 🇪🇺

13,102 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

"You know, I don't, I have not changed. I really make the movies for myself. I really, really do." Q: "For no one else, or just sort of like what you ultimately want to see in them?" "Yeah, I think so." Q: "As a fan yourself, too? "What I want to see, yeah, like as a, like, you only have the benchmark of yourself. Like, if you ever try and make a movie for someone other than yourself... I feel like you're going to blow it. "Because you can't, you don't know how anyone else is going to feel. So like, you know, you go, 'okay, do I find that emotionally real? Do I find that interesting? Is that the Krypton I want to go to? Is that the Superman I want to see fight?' "You know, those are the questions you ask yourself constantly. And I think once you, if you're constantly answering yes to that, then you'll end up the more, the film will end up being more interesting to you. "And ultimately, the film being interesting to you allows you to make the movie better because you're interested. "If you make it for someone else over a two-year period, you're just going to not give a sh*t at some point because you're just like, 'I don't care. This is not my movie. I don't care about this movie because I made it for someone else.'" Q: "I imagine that's a very hard thing to do in Hollywood, though, is to keep your vision clear with so much collaboration, with so much going on, with so many other people in the mix." "It really depends on the project. For instance, it was hard on Guardians, you know, where I feel like what ended up happening on that movie was people, we did end up, they did end up asking me like, 'this is for kids, right?' "And I got to honestly say that I knew it was for kids, but I didn't want to make it for kids. You know what I mean? And I think that's what happened to that movie. It did get like second guessed at the end and turned more into a movie for kids. "My point of view is I can think like a child if I want. I have that enthusiasm for movies and what I think is cool. You, the collective you, don't need to try and second guess me and go, 'this is what we think a kid would like.' "And then it's like, 'oh, a song' or whatever. Then you're just like, 'okay, whatever.'"

Zack Snyder Film

334,960 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

Jonathan Demme on what attracted him to make 'The Silence of the Lambs' (1991): "Interviewer: You said you liked films with themes and psychological complexities. Is this what attracted you to 'Silence of the Lambs' (1991)? Demme: I saw the story of a woman in it. That was what appealed to me more than anything else. The idea of doing a violent picture, per se didn't hold any particular appeal for me- especially violence with women as the subjects. Certainly, that is the background of the film, but the film itself is very much the heroic struggle on the part of Clarice Starling to try to save a life, and that gripped me right away. We tried hard to swing the story very much from Clarice's point of view in order to force the audience into an even stronger identification with her than might ordinarily be the case. My cameraman, Tak Fujimoto, and I recognized that point-of-view shots are used in films often, but usually either for a particular point of emphasis, or for an extraordinary visual gag. What we decided to do here was to capitalize on the ability- of subjective camera to, once again, force identification with the character. We decided to use it, not just for a particular emphasis, but to bring that kind of emphasis to everything Clarice saw: operating on the premise that every scene she's in is a scene of great importance, let's show exactly what she sees in every single scene. Aside from the 1940s film 'The Lady in the Lake' (1947), we probably made the most use of point-of-view, in recent years anyway. We wondered if audiences might find it distracting, but we decided to commit to it anyway, because the potential was there to up the emotional ante quite a bit. The funny thing is, it's an easy shot to set up because all you have to do is watch what Jodie Foster does in the rehearsal and what she looks at; the cameraman watches that, and then it's his turn to duplicate what she saw. It's the easiest shot to dream up because you don't actually dream it up. You just copy what the actress is doing. When you get to the editing stage, theoretically certain kinds of shots need to precede a point-of-view shot for it to flow seamlessly into the montage- usually a shot of whoever's point-of-view it is, looking very, very close to the camera so it's not at all jarring when we turn around and see what they're seeing. It's quite easy to edit in as long as you have good close-ups of whoever it is whose point-of-view you're seeing." (Jonathan Demme's interview with Saskia Baron, the BBC's Late Show, 1991)

DepressedBergman

21,191 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Rory McIlroy has never minced his words when it comes to his views on LIV Golf. He was asked about it again yesterday, and in typical Rory fashion, after saying he was “too judgemental” with players that went, he then said “if you want to be the most competitive golfer you can be, this (PGA Tour) is the place to be. And if you don't want to play here, I think that says something about you.” Speaking after a 5 under par 67 to climb inside the top 10 of the Truist Championship, Rory spoke about his thoughts on the news that the Saudi Arabian PIF was pulling funding to the league: “Yeah, look, I think everyone sort of knows my views on LIV and where it stands in the game of golf. I don't think I need to rehash any of that. It's never been for me and, look, it doesn't mean that LIV is going to go away. They're going to go and try and find alternative investment, whatever that may look like. But when one of the wealthiest sovereign wealth funds in the world thinks that you're too expensive for them, that sort of says something (laughing).” He then was asked what a possible route back for players to the PGA Tour would look like: “It's a question if they do want to come back. Obviously we have seen the quotes over the last few days. And, you know, it seems like some of the guys, if -- again, it all depends on what happens to LIV. But if it is a scenario where they have the option to come back and play on the traditional tours, you know, I think Brian Rolapp has said anything that makes this Tour stronger, anything that makes the DP World Tour stronger, I think everyone should be open to that. That's just good business practice. “So, but again I think there's going to be a lot of sort of bridges to cross to get there, just because, you know, obviously the guys over there are under contract and if they are able to keep it going and get a schedule together next year, it seems like those guys are still going to play the majority of their golf on LIV, in whatever form it takes.” That was followed up with a question about whether he was surprised that LIV Golf players have been outspoken about not wanting to return to the PGA Tour: “Yeah, which is totally fine. Like, again, I think I've said at the start, I was probably too judgmental with the guys that went because I was seeing it from my point of view and maybe not seeing it from other points of view. But again, I'm not going to judge anyone for not wanting to play on the PGA Tour. “I don't know, you know, does that mean that they go play DP World Tour maybe; if that's a pathway, that would make the DP World Tour stronger, and I would be delighted with that, because that's my home Tour, at the end of the day. “But this is, if you want to be the most competitive golfer you can be, this (PGA Tour) is the place to be. And if you don't want to play here, I think that says something about you.” Rory is 4 shots behind Sungjae Im heading to the weekend at Quail Hollow. Rory McIlroy PGA TOUR Truist Championship

Flushing It

33,565 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten