Lightning in a bottle is still lightning

Some fans like to say that a particular upset or a particular victory is a "fluke," but to call an achievement a fluke is to make something negative of it, and--unless cheating is involved--a victory isn't a negative thing. By the same token, so many commentators, fans and even players say of a player: "She deserved to win." Who, I ask--unless there is cheating involved--doesn't "deserve" to win? But the implication is clear: If one deserves to win at a given time, then sometimes one does not. That is simply incorrect.

Sometimes a player has an especially good season, and then the next season comes around, and she's in a slump. Fans and the tennis media tend to focus on the slump, and not the achievements. Given the human brain's anthropological need to focus on negative factors, there is little doubt that the player, also, focuses on the slump. And to some degree, this is necessary, if she is to overcome it. But it can also prevent the very outcome the player seeks.

This is a tricky balancing act for all of us--working to overcome our deficiencies while not becoming so focused on them that they dictate our future. For a professional athlete, learning to work that balance is crucial. If it doesn't come natural to a player to do that (or if she doesn't have the kind of epiphany that Kiki Bertens did), a coach can help. And if a coach cannot help, then a sports psychologist or other mental health clinician can.

Sometimes, however, try as she might, a player cannot get back the magic, or she gets it back, then loses it again. This is when belief and positive memory can make a difference.

Regardless, a player's accomplishments--whether transient or consistent--are still accomplishments, and should be celebrated. Kiki Bertens overcame some major demons by realizing that she didn't enjoy her victories--she saw them as merely finished products that paved the way to the next hard grind. This realization caused her to start relishing her accomplishments, which led to increased enjoyment, which led to--well, we all know where it led.

"But she never won a major" is a phrase we sometimes hear. And that is indeed disappointing to fans and, undoubtedly, to the player, but it does not invalidate her career. And that brings to mind a phrase I especially dislike: "one-slam wonder." (First of all, I dislike it because a major is not a "slam" or a "grand slam"--it's a major.) Calling someone a one-major wonder immediately invalidates both the player and her amazing accomplishment.

Gabriela Sabatini, Iva Majoli, Conchita Martinez, Ana Ivanovic, Francesca Schiavone, Marion Bartoli, and Flavia Pennetta each did something that very few athletes will ever do: They reached a pinnacle of achievement in their sport. To not give them full credit for their victories because they reached this pinnacle only once is both inaccurate and mean-spirited.

Professional tennis is a brutal career, filled with grueling court and gym training, successive injuries, jet lag, separation from the home environment, psychological stress, long hours, and chronic--sometimes obscene--attacks from so-called fans. One player's personal best will never be another player's.

And that brings me to another phrase I don't like--"over-achieve." To say that a player over-achieves is to automatically place a limit on her potential. One day she might be a reliable German journeywoman, and the next day, she might become Angie Kerber. But even if she doesn't become a major champion (and very, very few players will), every match and every tournament she wins is a thing to be celebrated, not a thing to be minimized, dismissed, or compared with the achievements of another player.