Three or four times each year, Paul Goldstein’s phone blows up.

It’s during the first round of one of the major tennis tournaments when a trivia question inevitably appears on TV:

“When was the last time Novak Djokovic lost in the opening round of a Grand Slam?”

The answer is 2006, and his opponent that day at the Australian Open was Goldstein, now the men’s tennis coach at Stanford.

“I’ve gotten more mileage out of that win than any one person deserves,” Goldstein said.

Goldstein is a former top-60 pro and has competed against many of the biggest names in the sport. He’s also worked in corporate America and has served as the Stanford men’s tennis coach since 2014.

The Daily Coach spoke to him about the difference between the one-hit wonders and those who sustain, cultivating mental fortitude, and controlling nerves in pressure moments.

This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Coach, thank you for doing this. I know you grew up in the Washington, D.C., area. Tell us about your childhood and how it shaped you.

My mom was a school teacher. My dad was in the mortgage business. I grew up playing a lot of sports. I picked up tennis when I was 8, but the summer I turned 10 is when I started playing a lot.

A lot of my peers playing tennis were going to academies. I went to regular schools where we got out at 3 p.m. every day. I just tried to balance school with tennis. I had less time on court, but I tried to make the most of it. It was a good perspective — in terms of the holistic experience — in developing myself on and off the court.

You played for a coaching legend at Stanford in Dick Gould, who won 17 National Championships. Do you have a favorite story from your time with him?

There was one time we won the indoors at Kentucky. We were very happy and excited and were celebrating on the airplane ride home, just enjoying each others’ company. We get back to campus, and about four or five days later, it’s practice time. Coach sits us all down, doesn’t say a word, and pulls out a letter written to our A.D., his boss, that says, “Mr. Leland, Just want to congratulate you on your tennis program. They competed with integrity. They performed extraordinarily well. Just want to let you know how proud you should be of the team.” We’re feeling good about ourselves.

Then, he pulls out another letter. “Mr. Leland, just want to let you know I traveled back to the Bay Area with your men’s tennis team. They were celebrating and really quite rude and not controlling themselves. There was an older man who they kept referring to as ‘Coach’ who did nothing to curb their behavior.”

It was a good lesson. He built us up and chopped us right back down.

Is there one piece of advice he gave you when you took the job that you still try to apply?

He’s the best communicator I’ve ever been around, in or out of sports. He was unabashedly himself. He struck a balance between having fun, working hard, being classy, competing with integrity and being competitive. The biggest thing with Coach was he won 17 NCAA national championships, but I think he was probably working harder on No. 15 than anyone else was on their first.

He was very humble, willing to learn, willing to try different things. When I took the job, he said, “Paul, no two years are the same. No year is the same as the next. You’ve got to be yourself and adapt every year depending on the situation.”

What do you remember from that Djokovic win?

He was young at the time. He was the better player, but ironically, I think I just outlasted him. He got a little tired physically. I say ironically because a couple of years later, he played (Rafael) Nadal, six hours on the stadium court, way more physical of a match. He clearly addressed that challenge.

I played him again two more times after that and lost both, but his level of improvement was so drastic and impressive. It was kind of extraordinary.

Some tennis players seem to win one title, and their careers take off. Others win one and never get back to that level. What’s the difference between a one-hit wonder and someone who sustains?

What Roger (Federer), Rafa and Djokovic have done is unprecedented and has never been done in the history of our sport. When I was playing, (Pete) Sampras set the record of 14 Grand Slams, which was remarkable. All three of those guys have come along and gone well past that.

All three of those guys are always looking to improve, always looking to get better, are never satisfied, never content. The experience of being in that situation and being successful goes so far — believing in yourself in that moment.

Roger gave the commencement address at Dartmouth and said he won 80 percent of the matches he played on tour but only 54 percent of the points. It’s those 5-all, 30-all type points where the experience shows itself the most. It’s that belief in yourself in that moment.

How did you control nerves in pressure situations?

You work on staying present, staying in the moment. Those guys who have been there before are able to do it. Getting through those experiences is so critical. No matter how much you talk about it, it’s a lot of experiential learning until you’re in there yourself. It’s really hard to replicate.

I (finished) one year winning 10 matches in a row, 17 out of 19, playing great tennis. I start the next year — I’m playing great. I play Carlos Moya in the next round, who’s No. 6 at the time. I had a match point and lost. I was so disappointed, being so close and not being able to overcome it. It really had a significant impact on me.

The next week, I had five match points against a guy who at the time was probably 40 in the world. I just really struggled with the ability to finish. When I put myself in position to win was when I would experience the doubt, not when I was down or felt I had nothing to lose.

That experience really had an impact on me. For the next eight months, I didn’t win back-to-back matches on tour. I was playing great tennis, but I really doubted myself in that moment when I put myself in a position to win.

Then, I was able to come through in a tough situation, and I was off and running. It took that one experience of being able to get over the hump. I followed that by getting to my (career-best) ranking.

You went to work for an energy company after your playing career finished. What that a difficult adjustment?

It certainly was not a natural transition at all. I was always interested in trying something outside of the sport and giving it a shot. I had been to Stanford for four years and had an interest in other things outside of tennis. I wanted to explore that.

I said, “I don’t know what your product is. I’m not an expert in it, but I’m going to use the same characteristics that helped me compete with the best players in the world in tennis: Good work ethic, good communication skills. You’ll teach me the product.”

That was the approach I took. That seemed to work.

College tennis coaching is unique in that you have individual players competing, but the larger team is also matched up against the opponent. How do you cater messages to the player while not neglecting the team aspect?

It’s difficult, especially in tennis where they’re coming in with no experience other than playing as individuals. Getting them to understand you’re playing for something bigger than just yourself is part of it. We talk about what it looks like to be a good teammate and sit down at the beginning of the year… and identify examples of what that looks like. We try to go back to those examples throughout the year when we see it.

But it’s hard because once the dual-match season gets going, you have to put a one, two, three, four, five, six next to everybody’s name, and some guys aren’t playing. It’s really, really challenging.

You’ve got to treat everyone fairly, if not the same. Different motivational strategies will work with different people, but I think being as clear as possible in communication is the most important thing.

When you’re evaluating prospects, what do you look for besides talent?

The baseline for Stanford is finding those who are playing tennis who can compete at the highest level, but are also viable admissions candidates from an academic standpoint. That’s a smaller net.

I really look for people who love to learn. You ask, “Do you love to win or do you hate to lose?” I’ve historically been much more of a hate to lose person. But I heard an interview with Kobe Bryant where he said, “Neither. I love to learn. I love to figure it out.” That, to me, is the ultimate motivator. That’s what I look for the most.

A lot of the people we work with here are Type A and want it really badly. The people who want it really badly get exposed to a lot of wonderful things at Stanford. You want to make sure they’re still motivated by tennis even if they’re not going to pursue it after school. Here, I do think we find people who are pretty driven to be successful and pursue excellence.

The college landscape is obviously so different now than when you took over even 10 years ago. How do you adapt to the times instead of lamenting what was?

Collegiate tennis is certainly a lot different, and there’s more change coming. Any time you’re beginning a sentence, “Well, in my day, we…,” what good does that do? That’s the past. You want to meet these players where they are. They grew up in a different environment than you grew up in. Comparing that to when you were their age isn’t all that productive.

There are values that can be consistent across generations, and you want to stick to those values, even if what it looks like may be different.

Having empathy is the best way.

Q&A Resources

Coach Paul Goldstein ― Bio | LinkedIn | Stanford’s Men’s Tennis

Let us know what you think...

Want to Advertise with us? Click here.