It is commonly thought that in order to succeed in tennis, your mental strength has to be exceedingly high. In order to get to the top of the sport, it requires players to consistently come up with the goods time and time again when under pressure, whether it is to save break points or close out a match and deliver when it really counts. 

Some of the greatest champions in recent times, like Roger Federer and Pete Sampras, have been famous for continually finding that big serve on important points to dig themselves out of trouble.

The champions make it look simple, but it really isn't. This article analyses in-depth all of the mental issues that come with approaching big occasions, in terms of players being able to find the best tennis when it really matters.

How to play the big points

How should players approach big points, in order to find their best tennis when it is absolutely necessary? They can either choose to take the riskier approach and back themselves, to try to hit their biggest serves in, or go the safer route by trying to maximise the chance of getting a first serve in. Should players try to raise their game under pressure and is it better to aim big or high percentage?

If we look at how the champions have dealt with it in the past, they don't wilt under pressure; instead they relish the pressure. They buckle down, show just that extra bit of determination and simply refuse to lose. The very best players seem to have a knack of refusing to give away points under extreme pressure, when trailing in a match but also seize the opportunity to take the lead by taking matters in their own hands, but without being overly adventurous.

Then there’s that saying of 'sticking to a winning game'. Players should keep it simple, and play each and every single point the same, regardless of its magnitude. There are particular patterns of play that won them points, so the obvious solution would be to continue implementing those. Stick to your strengths, or keep relentlessly attacking your opponent’s weakness, whichever strategy was working earlier.

But then there are change-up tactics that can be employed, taking the art of playing big points to a whole new level. Take the opponent completely off-guard, by going against the typical pattern of play and doing the exact opposite to what the opponent was anticipating. We've all seen Rafael Nadal serve to the same spot, almost time and time again, then on break point, he swings it out the other way.

In the end, the mental side of tennis is a very simple issue, or at least ideally it should be kept simple. Even though there are some methods that might be better in theory, most importantly, the player has to believe in it to work for it to come off, and they have to feel comfortable with it.

What's the point in backing yourself if you missed the last three first serves serving for the set? I don't think it's any good trying to get a player too far away from their comfort zone, but by the same token, that shouldn't discourage players from trying to introduce new things into their game, as long as it is done in smaller steps.

How much of tennis is mental, and how much is confidence?

We’ve seen that a player's mental strength is significantly affected by their levels of confidence. Players tend to go through phases. Top stars have their moments where they can be incredibly clutch, but might go through particular phases where they are lacking in confidence. Andy Roddick went through a phase of losing almost every single tie-break, then winning almost every single tie-break, and even nearly broke the record of consecutive tie-breaks won, and now he's back to blowing opportunities again.

When players blow opportunities, often it becomes a habit, as they start to think about their previous matches more and more. But after feeling good about their game again and scoring some big wins again, all of that becomes history again, for some of them. Other players become emotionally scarred and never seem to get over that hurdle.

Based on how often players seem to fluctuate in their ability to play important points or matches, it is safe to say that mental side of tennis is a lot about confidence and belief, which can change drastically throughout a player's career. Confidence and belief can extend to many things, like the confidence to try to add variety in your game, or make major changes to your technique, then implement it in an actual match situation. I always admired Justine Henin's courage to tinker with her service motion on such a regular basis.

But on the other hand, confidence and belief almost stems completely from your own results and things that have happened previously, like whether you were able to close out matches successfully recently or whether you choked a couple away.

Some of it is really just a realistic estimation of your own abilities, like if you're playing well, then you're going to be feeling confident, with maybe only a 20% increase or decrease, depending on whether you're an optimistic or pessimistic person. If your second serve keeps getting attacked, then obviously you're going to believe that it's a big weakness.

The big variable is what you think your potential is, not how good you are, and that belief has just as much to do with what other people think, specifically those closest to the players.

The kind of nerves that affect the end of sets and end of matches seem to be more easily fixable, because players are able to replicate that situation more often to be able to replace those bad memories with good ones. But the bigger occasions, like Grand Slam semi-finals, are almost a completely different issue altogether, quite simply because there are much fewer opportunities to get over that hurdle and maybe it is the one thing that you can really say is dependent on natural mental ability or belief.

Some players handle it better with experience, others get better as they start to become better players and win more often while others remain equally poor with each experience. I'd say that this sort of choking is not necessarily about not believing in your abilities as a player, but having some sort of fear or doubts about whether they can finish off the match. Even a slight hesitation or over thinking about the match would be enough to do it. I'm sure there are many players who have done so in the past who know how good they are as players.

So in this case, would sports psychology be an effective solution? Sports psychology can teach you ways to deal with pressure situations, like how to manipulate your thoughts and stay positive. Seeing how many players use different approaches to make sure that they remain calm and ensure that they don’t rush points, like Maria Sharapova looking at her racquet strings or Novak Djokovic bouncing the ball, there have to be some advantages in this.

As a counterpoint, I've heard that turning to sports psychology is admitting to a problem, hence placing more focus on it. So next time that player finds himself or herself serving for the set in a match, they’re just going to think about it even more.