PDA

View Full Version : Key Criterium for a Good Tennis Coach


jonolau
01-01-2006, 02:49 AM
I have been mulling over this for a while and several of my tennis buddies have differing views. Is it imperative that a tennis coach has to be a high level player?

In my view, the most key criteria is that this person has the ability and talent to spot faults immediately, come up with an appropriate training routine to rectify it, and also act as a counsellor to work on individual psychological techniques.

SteveI
01-01-2006, 03:11 AM
I have been mulling over this for a while and several of my tennis buddies have differing views. Is it imperative that a tennis coach has to be a high level player?

In my view, the most key criteria is that this person has the ability and talent to spot faults immediately, come up with an appropriate training routine to rectify it, and also act as a counsellor to work on individual psychological techniques.

jonolau,

All great criteria. I would add that your coach should be able to be a great asset onor before match days. Breaking down the games of others and designing a game plan to help you maximize your strong points and attack the weaknesses of others. Happy New Year!

Steve

Ljubicic for number1
01-01-2006, 03:23 AM
Translation is key.

goober
01-01-2006, 03:57 AM
I have been mulling over this for a while and several of my tennis buddies have differing views. Is it imperative that a tennis coach has to be a high level player?

In my view, the most key criteria is that this person has the ability and talent to spot faults immediately, come up with an appropriate training routine to rectify it, and also act as a counsellor to work on individual psychological techniques.


I would agree with you in general. I do think that a coach should at least be a 5.0 level player though. It would be very hard to take a coach seriously that I know I could beat with the exception of elderly coaches.

Some guy in his late 20s offered to coach me for $50/hr saying he was an ex-college player. He had a very unusual name so I looked him up and turns out he played in several USTA tournaments. He lost in the first round of two tournaments one at the 4.5 level and the other at the 4.0 level. The guy he lost to at the 4.0 level tourney was somebody I had beaten multiple times. So I turned him down.

OnyxZ28
01-01-2006, 05:33 AM
Pete Fischer was a 3.5 player wasn't he?


... and wrong forum, by a long shot.

NoBadMojo
01-01-2006, 07:07 AM
Aye, stick this in the proper forum and you will get lots of responses <some good and some less than good>

erik-the-red
01-01-2006, 08:11 AM
I think a good tennis coach should be truly knowledgeable about tennis and be able to teach the student clearly, effectively, and honestly.

The coach should understand tennis, but if he is unable to execute the shots, it could still be OK. For example, I was taught how to do side and front splits from a person who can't split!

The coach should be able to communicate well. But, he's got to be honest. He can't always say, "That's good, that's good, yeah." If it's not good, then he should say it's not.

gurj_v
01-01-2006, 09:43 AM
I find that if you have someone who you get along with well (like me) then you will enjoy training and yield better results.

LoveThisGame
01-01-2006, 12:04 PM
Several points come to mind:

Your comment about spotting faults is good. Expanding on this, communication skills are important so you understand how the problem exists and what will correct it. Talks, then acts. Finds more than one way to communicate something if the first attempt doesn't result in the student producing a good/better result. This also means two-way communication and BOTH coach and student listening. Provides communication in digestible chunks; doesn't spew non-stop on a bunch of topics.

Sincerity. As indicated elsewhere, offers praise only to results which merit praise, rather than trying to be Salesman Sam. Offers corrections selectively, not dumping on you, not trying for absolute perfection to the nth degree, while showing he cares about you improving.

Provides instruction on both mechanics and tactics/strategy, tying both together so that the student understands the why of mechanics.

Understands how to motivate you and how to get you to control your emotions effectively

I don't completely agree with the comment about the coach breaking down an opponent's game and providing a strategy. I think the coach needs to address opponent observation and strategy, but with the goal of teaching the student how to perform the analyses themselves. Spoon-feeding or dependence on the coach is not the goal

The coach needs to understand fairly high levels of competition and the nuances. Also realize that top players may be so because of natural athleticism and instincts, which may not lead to abilities to teach. Conversely, because a coach has not been ranked in the top 10 of the district, state, region, country, or world is not sufficient reason to be unable to coach at a high level.

oscar_2424
01-01-2006, 12:07 PM
I have been mulling over this for a while and several of my tennis buddies have differing views. Is it imperative that a tennis coach has to be a high level player?

In my view, the most key criteria is that this person has the ability and talent to spot faults immediately, come up with an appropriate training routine to rectify it, and also act as a counsellor to work on individual psychological techniques.

what is this has to do with racquets?//:confused:

NoBadMojo
01-01-2006, 02:05 PM
Assuming we are talking about a Tennis Teaching Professional as opposed to a team coach or something, and also assuming the TP will work with you for more than one lesson, I think what is the first and best thing a good TP can do is ask enough questions to find out what the lessons wishes to accomplish in tennis. People play tennis for various reasons and have different priorities. Once on court and knowing what the plan is, a good TP can get their lessons to make a correct and repeating move on the ball by dropping appropriate cues at the apropriate times and in the apropriate manner. if one cue doesnt work, then I move onto another , as people process things differently from one another and what may click for one, may not for another. I would avoid TP's who talk alot <especially if about themselves> ;) and those who get very technical as that most usually tends to confuse. There are only certain points in the swing where things have to be done a certain way, and I teach in a natural way (by that I mean I teach so that people learn to play with their natural tendencies rather than having to conform to some sort of cookie cutter way of playing..There is more than one effective way to hit any given stroke. I also think it good to teach what I call 'self correcting tennis' which clues them as to what they are likely doing wrong when they do it wrong during the course of regular play so they can make adjustments on the fly. Lastly, it is important the lesson be structured to suit the player rather than the other way around.
Disclaimer: No personal attacks please.

jonolau
01-02-2006, 05:06 AM
what is this has to do with racquets?//:confused:
Sorry, Oscar, only realised that I have posted it in the wrong section. But at the same time, I rather than post this question in a section that is trawled by Tennis Teaching Pros, I want an unbiaed view. Thanks for your patience.

jonolau
01-02-2006, 05:12 AM
Assuming we are talking about a Tennis Teaching Professional as opposed to a team coach or something, and also assuming the TP will work with you for more than one lesson, I think what is the first and best thing a good TP can do is ask enough questions to find out what the lessons wishes to accomplish in tennis. People play tennis for various reasons and have different priorities. Once on court and knowing what the plan is, a good TP can get their lessons to make a correct and repeating move on the ball by dropping appropriate cues at the apropriate times and in the apropriate manner. if one cue doesnt work, then I move onto another , as people process things differently from one another and what may click for one, may not for another. I would avoid TP's who talk alot <especially if about themselves> ;) and those who get very technical as that most usually tends to confuse. There are only certain points in the swing where things have to be done a certain way, and I teach in a natural way (by that I mean I teach so that people learn to play with their natural tendencies rather than having to conform to some sort of cookie cutter way of playing..There is more than one effective way to hit any given stroke. I also think it good to teach what I call 'self correcting tennis' which clues them as to what they are likely doing wrong when they do it wrong during the course of regular play so they can make adjustments on the fly. Lastly, it is important the lesson be structured to suit the player rather than the other way around.
Disclaimer: No personal attacks please.
NBM, thanks for your reply and your descriptions are in line with what my current TP is. I go to him every quarter for about 4 hours to fill in the gaps. My game seems to go through a quantum leap each time, and is immediately noticed by my playing group. I have observed too many cookie cutter coaches who try to shove their subjective mantra down students' throats and is extremely demoralising. My TP sounds almost like you ...

jonolau
01-02-2006, 05:17 AM
Pete Fischer was a 3.5 player wasn't he?


... and wrong forum, by a long shot.
Yeah, I know. When I submitted this I was prepared for an onslaught ... :D

However, I also do not want to post this in an area which is trawled by teaching professionals/coaches. I want to get an unbiased view from the general playing public ... thanks for your patience!

jonolau
01-02-2006, 05:19 AM
Hi LoveThisGame,

Great detailed response. You brought great poitns about communication and sincerity. Have a Happy New Year.

LoveThisGame
01-02-2006, 06:23 PM
Sorry jonolau :), but you did get a response from a coach/pro. (I rather inter-mix the two terms unfortunately.) I've coached a strong DIII men's team awhile back and a strong HS girls team, give private lessons and work some clinics, play a lot (although no longer directed somewhat towards ranking), have strung since 1984, and am a MRT. So you got a real mix ;) .

jonolau
01-02-2006, 07:19 PM
Sorry jonolau :), but you did get a response from a coach/pro. (I rather inter-mix the two terms unfortunately.) I've coached a strong DIII men's team awhile back and a strong HS girls team, give private lessons and work some clinics, play a lot (although no longer directed somewhat towards ranking), have strung since 1984, and am a MRT. So you got a real mix ;) .
On the contrary, I like your honesty and frankness, albeit in a soft and humourous approach!

This forum really does need more sincere people like you and NBM who get straight to the point in a balanced, stating both pros and cons.

Thanks!

N.B. I do realise that this thread is in the wrong section and I PROMISE those who have kindly highlighted this that I won't do it again ... now you can rap me on the knuckles ;)

Keiltimall
01-02-2006, 07:24 PM
I have been mulling over this for a while and several of my tennis buddies have differing views. Is it imperative that a tennis coach has to be a high level player?

In my view, the most key criteria is that this person has the ability and talent to spot faults immediately, come up with an appropriate training routine to rectify it, and also act as a counsellor to work on individual psychological techniques.

FYI (not to be an *** but) : A criterium is a type of race. I think you meant to say "criterion" the singular form of the word "criteria".

jonolau
01-02-2006, 07:32 PM
FYI (not to be an *** but) : A criterium is a type of race. I think you meant to say "criterion" the singular form of the word "criteria".
Thank you for pointing this out ... I feel more the *** than you now ... ;) I need to invest in a better dictionary.

OKAY, LET THIS THREAD REST IN PEACE AND DIE A NATURAL DEATH ...