Re:Thinking with Adam GrantWhy Maria Sharapova rethought her rivalry with Serena Williams | ReThinking
CHAPTERS
- 0:00 – 2:24
Why Sharapova avoids playing tennis after retirement (and what might change her mind)
Maria Sharapova explains why she’s avoided playing racket sports with Adam Grant despite their long acquaintance: returning at a lower level feels frustrating when your body remembers elite performance. She also describes what she still loves about tennis as a workout and mental immersion.
- •Retirement makes it hard to revisit tennis at a slower, less elite pace
- •She prefers attending events where she knows there won’t be a court
- •Tennis is an intense workout that forces full mental focus
- •Being “all in” mentally/physically is part of why she stayed in the sport so long
- 2:24 – 3:17
Which racket sport she’d actually play—and her “cat and mouse” philosophy
Grant probes whether Sharapova would be more open to lower-stakes sports like ping pong, but she rejects them. She explains she needs more movement and prefers the strategic, intellectual chess match of tennis—shaped by her father’s coaching philosophy.
- •She’d say yes to tennis over pickleball/padel/ping pong
- •Ping pong has too little movement and is too quick/reaction-based
- •Her father emphasized a “cat and mouse” strategy during points
- •Smarts and point construction matter more than flashy winners
- 3:17 – 5:33
Resilience as a daily skill: composure, control, and injury recovery
Sharapova reframes resilience as something learned through constant errors and uncontrollable variables in sport. She connects emotional composure on court to parenting, and describes injury recovery as a humbling return to basics rather than chasing wins.
- •Resilience starts with focusing on what you can control
- •Composure and body language signal vulnerability to opponents
- •Parenting echoes competition: children respond to a parent’s energy
- •Injury forces a shift from winning to rebuilding the body and fundamentals
- 5:33 – 6:56
Winning with barely more than a coin flip: points, momentum, and instinct
Prompted by Roger Federer’s famous statistic about winning only ~54% of points, Sharapova explains that point-by-point losses are normal. What matters is timing, momentum, and being able to execute freely when the match tightens.
- •Elite players still lose many points; that’s built into tennis
- •She values key moments (early points, momentum shifts) over percentages
- •Stats can sharpen instinct but don’t run your mind in a tiebreak
- •In decisive moments you rely on experience, freedom, and will to win
- 6:56 – 9:58
Mastery vs victory: her evolving mindset about competing and winning
Grant contrasts mastery motivation with victory motivation, and Sharapova explains her mentality shifted over time. She shares how Jimmy Connors helped her see psychological wins inside lost games, while acknowledging she’d still choose winning in high-stakes matches.
- •Early career: primary goal was to beat whoever was across the net
- •Jimmy Connors lesson: pressure created by break points can win future games
- •Over time she valued quality and professionalism more, but outcome still matters
- •At Grand Slams she’d still rather play poorly and win than play great and lose
- 9:58 – 10:47
Love to win or hate to lose—and seeing tennis as a bigger ecosystem and business
Sharapova reflects on how she didn’t separate “loving to win” from “hating to lose,” focusing instead on the quality of her work. With experience, she gained respect for the grind of the tour and recognized the sport’s broader business realities.
- •She didn’t explicitly measure love-of-winning vs fear-of-losing
- •Growth happened publicly; she shifted focus toward work quality
- •Maturity brought respect for the weekly grind and shared tour experience
- •She came to see tennis as larger than individual rivalries—also a business
- 10:47 – 13:07
What great coaches (and teams) do: boundaries, honesty, and saying no
Asked about coaching moments that shaped her leadership lens, Sharapova emphasizes care for the person—not just the champion. She highlights the importance of advisors who can be the “bad guy,” set boundaries, and protect core goals amid distractions and glamour.
- •Her father coached her for years; later she needed coaches who cared about her as a human
- •The best coaches protect athlete health, mindset, and growth beyond results
- •Coaches must sometimes say no to tempting events that derail goals
- •Support can come from multiple roles: coach, manager, mental coach, friends
- 13:07 – 14:54
Proudest accomplishment: consistency amid relentless travel and tournaments
Sharapova identifies consistency—sustaining elite performance over many seasons—as her proudest achievement. She describes how quickly the sport moves from one peak moment to the next, leaving little time to celebrate or reflect.
- •Early breakthrough at 17 (Wimbledon) created pressure to keep delivering
- •Tennis demands near year-round competition with constant events and majors
- •The schedule forces immediate resets (Olympics to Canada in days)
- •The pace can be emotionally costly: limited time to appreciate success
- 14:54 – 17:18
Rethinking the Serena Williams rivalry: from icy distance to public respect
Grant turns to the headline shift: Sharapova’s changed relationship with Serena Williams. Sharapova explains why she asked Serena to introduce her at the Hall of Fame—turning a long rivalry into a visible moment of mutual respect and closure.
- •They competed from Sharapova’s age 16 through the end; Serena won most matches
- •They weren’t friends—polite but distant—for many years
- •Sharapova chose Serena to introduce her to create an impactful statement
- •Shared the stage to acknowledge success, set aside negativity, and honor the journey
- 17:18 – 22:25
Why similarities can divide rivals: boundaries in a zero-sum individual sport
They unpack Serena’s view that they were alike and how that may have prevented bonding. Sharapova explains that for her, friendship with opponents risked softening competitiveness, so she kept boundaries and built friendships outside tennis for normalcy.
- •They shared foundational similarities: involved fathers, humble beginnings, skepticism from others
- •In individual sports, closeness can create ambivalence about beating someone
- •Sharapova set boundaries to compete without emotional conflict
- •She relied on non-tennis friends for grounding and normal life perspective
- 22:25 – 23:37
Do rivalries fuel motivation? Sharapova’s take vs rivalry research
Grant cites research that rivalries heighten motivation and intensify both victory joy and defeat agony. Sharapova pushes back: her motivation came less from anger or comparison and more from personal, family, and team meaning.
- •Research: rivalry boosts effort and intensifies emotional highs/lows
- •Sharapova didn’t use dislike or contract competition as motivation
- •Winning carried deeper purpose: self, family, team, lifelong commitment
- •She framed competition as staying in her lane rather than being “against” a person
- 23:37 – 26:24
Lightning round: youth sports focus and dream doubles match picks
In a rapid-fire segment, Sharapova critiques over-scheduling kids across too many activities and argues for focused commitment when true passion emerges. She also imagines a playful doubles match lineup featuring artist David Hockney and opponents Madonna and Michael Jordan.
- •Worst advice: parents creating a frantic multi-activity maze for kids
- •If talent/passion exists, reduce distractions and align activities to support it
- •Dream partner: David Hockney for fun and spirit
- •Dream opponents: Madonna with Michael Jordan—peak competitiveness and mystique
- 26:24 – 34:21
Why people won’t let athletes be ‘more than one thing’—and the Li Na lesson
Sharapova asks why the public resisted her interest in business beyond tennis. Grant explains typecasting, misconceptions about excellence being all-consuming, and threat responses—especially gendered insecurity—before Sharapova shares how Li Na’s rise expanded tennis and benefited everyone.
- •Typecasting: people assume world-class excellence requires total sacrifice
- •Threat response: others feel insecure if someone excels in multiple domains
- •Gender dynamics: “precarious manhood” research and discomfort with capable women
- •Sharapova’s story: manager signing Li Na felt threatening, but Li Na’s success globalized the sport and increased opportunities for all
- 34:21 – 35:57
No comeback plans: a healthy exit and excitement for new life chapters
Grant asks if Sharapova might return like other athletes aiming for future Olympics; she says there’s no desire to reengage that mental or physical grind. She reframes it as a healthy departure and a confident transition into new chapters of life.
- •She has zero interest in returning to elite competition
- •No “fire in the belly” to rebuild the mental/physical muscle
- •She views retirement as a difficult but gut-confirmed right decision
- •She’s energized by exploring new life chapters beyond sport
