Tennis Instruction Malpractice?

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
My sister is a 3.0, and she was in a 3.0 clinic. The topic was overheads. The pro was teaching overheads in the standard way -- telling the players they need to turn sideways. It was not going well -- lots of missed overheads and frustration.

After a while, he called them all together and said something like this (as relayed by my sister):

"OK. The correct way to hit an overhead is to be in Continental grip and turn sideways. You ladies are struggling because you are in your forehand grip instead of Continental grip. If you use a forehand grip and turn sideways, you will be directing your ball off the court.

"You have two solutions for your overheads. You can use Continental and turn sideways. Or you can stay in forehand grip, but you will need to remain facing the net and not turn sideways."

My sister reported that when the ladies began hitting their overheads while facing the net in forehand grip, they were able to hit stronger and more consistent overheads. My sister wanted to know what I thought of this.

I said I thought it was horrific advice and this pro should have his teaching certificate yanked. Better, I said, is to emphasize all of the reasons why these relative beginners should get in the habit of using the correct grip. I said that hitting overheads while spreadeagle to the net will prevent the ladies from moving backward for overheads safely and effectively. It will reinforce the idea that the forehand grip is appropriate when moving inside the court when the Continental is the better choice. If they later start volleying correctly in Continental, they will develop grip confusion when the ball starts moving faster at the higher levels and they don't have time to toggle between Continental and Eastern. And it will prevent them from learning all sorts of transition shots that use Continental -- transition volleys, half-volleys, low volleys, slices.

What do you think? Is the pro's advice a reasonable work-around for 3.0s who are struggling with overheads? Or should he have continued to urge Continental + sideways?
 

esgee48

G.O.A.T.
The pro presented the students with an option. Instruction should include the 'correct' way to hit an OH, but some students do not jell immediately. As long as the pro continues to push them to the right technique, 'no harm, no foul' since it allows the students to hit the OH. As the students progress, that's when he should become adamant about using the Continental grip and a sideways stance.
 

Startzel

Hall of Fame
You're absolutely right Cindy. But you better watch out because this forum is pretty pro pusher so you gotta be careful suggesting someone should do something the right way.
 

Clintspin

Professional
No matter how hard I try, my female students want to do it the wrong way. You can see bad overhead technique from 2.5 all the way up to 4.5. Not for a lack of trying on my end. Even if you get them to do it during lessons they will revert back in matches every single time.
 
The pro presented the students with an option.

I would ask for a refund, hire an attorney from the many on Tennis Channel's commercials--especially the "law firm" that is handling the Johnson Baby Powder cases--she is entitled to some money from the settlements to come. Really! A pro attempting to teach anything like grips in a clinic--what was he thinking?

He must be new and thought there was some hope for change. He'll learn in time and experience--don't try to teach them anything, just keep feeding them balls and say, "You'r doing great Deary." They came to socialize while waiting in line, catching up on the club gossip and working up a little dew.

This pro needs to be disciplined by the USPTA before he ruins it for the rest of the pros. BTW, let me know when the settlement occurs so I can file a claim--I took a clinic, once, and I used J&J Baby Powder in my Nike tights and Asics shoes.
 
Last edited:
You're absolutely right Cindy. But you better watch out because this forum is pretty pro pusher so you gotta be careful suggesting someone should do something the right way.

There comes a time when you just have to let it go. Really. Lol

Agreed, but you must admire his resolve and persistence--he will undoubtedly become the world authority on "PUSHING: Pro & Con"--and, we are there!
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
"You have two solutions for your overheads. You can use Continental and turn sideways. Or you can stay in forehand grip, but you will need to remain facing the net and not turn sideways."

In other words, you can do it the right way and just keep working at it until you get it [were the feeds difficult? Seems he could have fed easy stuff first just to get the motion down] or you can do it the wrong way and get quick results but you will limit yourself later on when you have to unlearn this [by which time the habit may be cemented in place].

Is that how the pro teaches how to serve also? Seems like this is a slippery slope leading to bad technique. Sounds like they got good short-term results but that might hurt them down the line.
 

newpball

Legend
My sister is a 3.0, and she was in a 3.0 clinic. The topic was overheads. The pro was teaching overheads in the standard way -- telling the players they need to turn sideways. It was not going well -- lots of missed overheads and frustration.
I know what you mean, I know this Serbian player, he is pretty good, no real weaknesses but he sucks at overheads!

I said I thought it was horrific advice and this pro should have his teaching certificate yanked.
Perhaps it would be better to call the president and explain our national security is seriously at stake...... :p

What do you think?
Thank the Lord people are still at liberty to teach tennis the way they feel is best. Fortunately the tennis teacher police does not exist.

:D
 
Last edited:
Hi Cindy- some of our local pros have introduced the sponge balls so the adults can watch spin etc while they hit it back and forth to each other. (across the court sideways or else right up at the net as you can't get them that deep) One of our pros has a lot of 'wall drills' that he taught us. I put them up on my team website to give players ideas of how they can practice on their own. Use the sponge balls and practice Overheads against a wall, over and over, it's quite fun. Then later you can try different balls once you can control the height and placement. I also do serve and volley (regular ball) with a wall about 50 times each outing in nice weather. I use the wall a lot to work on touch shots. Just tell her to do 50 overheads with a sponge ball and make sure her arm is loose and relaxed. (shake your arm after a couple) A sponge ball makes it fun and you smile when you're doing it!

I had a friend from 2.5 days- the pro was teaching them a scissor kick OH and she blew out her knee doing that... It was awful. I think that shot can wait a bit.....
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
You can improve with out that kind of instruction though. There's a million ways to skin a cat, no?

Definitely. I didn't meant to imply that the route illustrated was the only one. I'm with you: everyone learns differently so cookie cutter approaches will work only if you want identical cookies.

I was responding to Fxaminator's implication that since it's rec-level tennis [ie not very good], nobody should take it seriously. But I define "rec" as "anyone not making a living off of winning tournaments", which likely means 99.99% of us on this forum. I think "rec" or "amateur" has gotten the negative connotation of "not very good", which I believe is false.
 

Clintspin

Professional
Even the "Serve Doctor" knows how tough it is to get rec players away from the forehand grip. He has adapted his teaching to accommodate instead of fighting it.

 

Fxanimator1

Hall of Fame
I was responding to Fxaminator's implication that since it's rec-level tennis [ie not very good], nobody should take it seriously. But I define "rec" as "anyone not making a living off of winning tournaments", which likely means 99.99% of us on this forum. I think "rec" or "amateur" has gotten the negative connotation of "not very good", which I believe is false.
They're 3.0 level and they can't hit overheads properly! So no, they're "not very good".
...And I was actually referring to the original poster and this "Malpractice" claim, not the the 3.0's that can't hit strokes properly.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
They're 3.0 level and they can't hit overheads properly! So no, they're "not very good".

I view it differently: I don't have an explicit dividing line between "very good" and "not very good". I look at it as a continuum of skill. And even the ex-Div I superstar is "not very good" relative to a pro.
 

Fxanimator1

Hall of Fame
I view it differently: I don't have an explicit dividing line between "very good" and "not very good". I look at it as a continuum of skill. And even the ex-Div I superstar is "not very good" relative to a pro.

Just to be clear. I never initiated the "not very good" status, you did!...I said, "taking it too seriously" see post #9.

Again, even though you chose to only quote what you're sensitive about, I was referring to the original posters claim of "Malpractice" in regards to instruction.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
Just to be clear. I never initiated the "not very good" status, you did!...I said, "taking it too seriously" see post #9.

You're right. In post #16, I inferred you meant "not very good" when you said, in post #9: "Is this thread a joke? Who takes tennis this seriously at the rec level?" If that's not what you meant, then I apologize. I thought it presumptuous of you to call the thread a joke just because it involved 3.0 level players. IMO, absolute level does not determine how serious one is about a pursuit; it's personal preference. As a contrast, there may be an ex-college 5.0 player who does not take his game as seriously because he already knows where he is in the tennis universe and has no desire to change that.

Again, even though you chose to only quote what you're sensitive about, I was referring to the original posters claim of "Malpractice" in regards to instruction.

I'm fine with that.
 
The correct grip for the service is the continental, it's the same grip one would use for volleying. The overhead is the same stroke as the serve therefore a continental grip. On an OH you can pronate the arm and use a "frying pan" grip to get a better angle to put the ball away to the ad court. The pro in the clinic had the right intention in teaching the continental grip for the OH. The "frying pan" grip "option" is used by many low-level rec players who have no desire to improve their games and are happy to live with it to their grave. They haven't learned a new stroke for decades, won't and don't care. They just want to have a little hit and some socializing. It was ambitious for the pro to attempt to teach grips in a clinic. The smart players will take some privates to learn stuff like that. Tennis clinics are good for a little exercise and to meet new people, probably healthier then hanging around bars. At least you get to observe potential dates athletic abilities and see them in short skirts.
 
The "frying pan" grip "option" is used by many low-level rec players who have no desire to improve their games and are happy to live with it to their grave. They haven't learned a new stroke for decades, won't and don't care. They just want to have a little hit and some socializing. It was ambitious for the pro to attempt to teach grips in a clinic. The smart players will take some privates to learn stuff like that. Tennis clinics are good for a little exercise and to meet new people, probably healthier then hanging around bars. At least you get to observe potential dates athletic abilities and see them in short skirts.

Could not agree more. When I first started teaching, I had the mentality that EVERYONE taking lessons/classes wanted to be the best they can be and a future pro player because that's how I felt/approached the game for myself haha.

The reality is that most people just want to go out, hit a couple balls, have fun, shoot the shiz. I do exactly what the OP's pro does. I teach the correct way, but then also emphasize learning the right way is a long process. Until you can get comfortable with the right way, its ok to hit around using the "wrong" way, as long as you know its the "wrong" way. As a beginner, if they can't serve, and want to hit with their friends the matches/games become: double fault, pick up ball. double fault pick up ball over and over. No fun, and new players will not want to continue to play. However with frying pan, they can get some basic beginner points going, have fun, want to play more, continue to work on their game and implement the proper way if they have the desire.

It's no different than teaching 5-6 year olds tennis. Its all about "fun." IMO you shouldn't be shoving down their throats technique over and over and over. They need to learn to enjoy the game first.
 

JBH

Rookie
IMO the problem here isn't the technique being thought, but that the pro is attempting to instruct a movement sequence that requires individual attention in a clinic setting. If he tries to provide adequate individual feedback, everyone else will be doing nothing the vast majority of the time.
Apparently realizing this,though too late, instead of suggesting individual instruction (savvy instructor) he gives up and tells them to revert to the more natural but non-optimal approach (lazy instructor).
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Could not agree more. When I first started teaching, I had the mentality that EVERYONE taking lessons/classes wanted to be the best they can be and a future pro player because that's how I felt/approached the game for myself haha.

The reality is that most people just want to go out, hit a couple balls, have fun, shoot the shiz. I do exactly what the OP's pro does. I teach the correct way, but then also emphasize learning the right way is a long process. Until you can get comfortable with the right way, its ok to hit around using the "wrong" way, as long as you know its the "wrong" way. As a beginner, if they can't serve, and want to hit with their friends the matches/games become: double fault, pick up ball. double fault pick up ball over and over. No fun, and new players will not want to continue to play. However with frying pan, they can get some basic beginner points going, have fun, want to play more, continue to work on their game and implement the proper way if they have the desire.
I am a person who learned tennis as an adult. I took many clinics early on. Let me give you some feedback on these ideas from someone who went from 2.5 to 4.0 over the years.

**I thank my lucky stars every day that my clinic pros taught me the right way to do things from the beginning.**

I remember one clinic where the pro was teaching us beginners the BH volley. I hit a 2HBH volley. He came up immediately and told me not to do that. He said to use a OHBH volley, in Continental grip. He said this was the best way to volley, that better players volley this way, I'll never be sorry if I do it the right way.

In another clinic (same club, different pro), they were teaching the serve. I hit with a frying pan grip. The pro said to use continental. I balked. He told me to use that grip for two weeks and report back to him. Sure enough, my serves were better and had spin and it felt good. I've served with Continental since.

I say this because it is very, very hard to change a wrong grip to a correct one once you get used to the wrong one. It is much easier just to do it right in the first place.

Now, I did switch from Eastern FH to SW in about my fifth year of play. Maybe that is OK -- Eastern FH is not "wrong," just different. On volleys and overheads and serves, however, there is no reasonable difference of opinion because Eastern FH is "wrong."

I guess that is a long way of saying that there are some, maybe even many, newbies who go to clinics to learn the game. Some are willing to learn it correctly, and some may be won over with some coaxing. I think a pro owes it to students to try to get as many as possible to be willing to do the thing properly. In other words, I disagree with you that it is not OK for the student to do it the wrong way so long as they know it is the wrong way. They can never internalize that it is the wrong way and there is value in the right way if the pro is drilling them on how to do it wrong.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
Could not agree more. When I first started teaching, I had the mentality that EVERYONE taking lessons/classes wanted to be the best they can be and a future pro player because that's how I felt/approached the game for myself haha.

The reality is that most people just want to go out, hit a couple balls, have fun, shoot the shiz. I do exactly what the OP's pro does. I teach the correct way, but then also emphasize learning the right way is a long process. Until you can get comfortable with the right way, its ok to hit around using the "wrong" way, as long as you know its the "wrong" way. As a beginner, if they can't serve, and want to hit with their friends the matches/games become: double fault, pick up ball. double fault pick up ball over and over. No fun, and new players will not want to continue to play. However with frying pan, they can get some basic beginner points going, have fun, want to play more, continue to work on their game and implement the proper way if they have the desire.

It's no different than teaching 5-6 year olds tennis. Its all about "fun." IMO you shouldn't be shoving down their throats technique over and over and over. They need to learn to enjoy the game first.

I see your point and I have a slightly different analogy. Edwin Thorp wrote a book called *Beat the Dealer*, in which he outlined a system to play Blackjack [21] to stack the odds in your favor. At first, casinos were afraid this would lead to a drop in revenue. What they found was actually a rise in revenue: the book was popular and everyone viewed themselves as a master card counter so they went out and gambled and lost more.

The system is straightforward but not at all easy to master. Since then, modified systems have been published that only account for a subset of what Thorp created. They aren't as efficient but they are much easier to learn and thus are more successful.

A purist would argue that the modified system is trash since it isn't as efficient. The pragmatist would argue that he's getting comp rooms, shows, and food, while the purist goes home broke.
 
I guess that is a long way of saying that there are some, maybe even many, newbies who go to clinics to learn the game. Some are willing to learn it correctly, and some may be won over with some coaxing. I think a pro owes it to students to try to get as many as possible to be willing to do the thing properly. In other words, I disagree with you that it is not OK for the student to do it the wrong way so long as they know it is the wrong way. They can never internalize that it is the wrong way and there is value in the right way if the pro is drilling them on how to do it wrong.


So basically your answer is to teach them the right way no matter what... I strongly disagree. Again from my experience (8 years with players from 2.5-4.0) you cannot have that mentality as it pushes weaker players away or discourages them. I have met/taught easily over 500 different students in those years predominately those who just started (All adults, NTRP 2.5). When I first started I had the same mentality as I mentioned. Technique, technique, technique... Everyone needs perfect technique. Just because YOU want to learn and be the best you can be doesn't mean the majority does. The athletic, coordinated, determined players will learn the continental very quickly and succeed. HOWEVER, the other portion who have never participated in sports in their life, have no eye hand coordination, have no athletic ability will STRUGGLE immensely and will become frustrated.

Rule #1 is all about getting them out and playing the sport. If they get discouraged and don't ever step on the court why does it matter if they have "proper" technique or not? Once they spend more time on the court, enjoy themselves, you can incorporate more and more ways to help them learn the continental grip. Seeing them struggle, get discouraged and never play the sport because they can't do a continental serve/overhead isn't going to help anything.

Again, I had the same mentality years back until I saw how it affected the students and how ultimately they didn't find the sport "fun." You have to understand the population you are working with. Not everyone wants to be a 4.0+ player, and while there are plenty of people who do, majority do not. They want to be able to rally, have a good time, play some games, and call it day. If you are working at a fancy junior development program, agree, enforce technique. For a generalized clinic in which its adult beginners who just want some basic instruction? Let them learn something new, and then let them enjoy themselves.
 
I remember one clinic where the pro was teaching us beginners the BH volley. I hit a 2HBH volley. He came up immediately and told me not to do that. He said to use a OHBH volley, in Continental grip. He said this was the best way to volley, that better players volley this way, I'll never be sorry if I do it the right way.

PS what is wrong with a 2hbh volley? Sure 1 handed is more popular but there are pros using a 2HBV. The mechanics are exactly the same except you let go of the 2nd hand for a 1 handed.... If a player is using a 2 handed with great success, I don't see necessarily to tell them to change or they "will regret it." I would mention OHBH is more popular but they should do what works for them.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
PS what is wrong with a 2hbh volley? Sure 1 handed is more popular but there are pros using a 2HBV. The mechanics are exactly the same except you let go of the 2nd hand for a 1 handed.... If a player is using a 2 handed with great success, I don't see necessarily to tell them to change or they "will regret it." I would mention OHBH is more popular but they should do what works for them.

I disagree that the mechanics are the same.

The 1HBH volley is better of high volleys because of the extra reach, which is mighty useful given how much women league players lob. It is also way, way, way better for the approach volley below the net, and also for shots right to the body.

Yes, it is possible to compensate for a 2HBH volley with better and faster footwork, but that doesn't seem to happen at 3.0-4.0. Instead, 2HBH players tend to shovel and pop up their volleys. Also, the main reason my female friends do not want to use a 1HBH volley is that they worry that their wrists are not strong enough, but that is nonsense. If you could see my baby bird wrists, you would see that wrist strength has nothing to do with it.

This bias I am displaying comes from about four years of a doubles clinic where only a couple of the ladies use 2HBH volley. When we do approach volley drills, the vulnerability of that stroke is exposed. They really struggle mightily in taking a low ball from no-man's land as a 2HBH approach volley. Very messy, that.

Yes, there are pros using 2HBH volley, but even some of those will use 1HBH volley on a low volley (e.g. Radwanska has developed this over the years).
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
So basically your answer is to teach them the right way no matter what...

Mmmm, I never said that, actually. Or if I did, I didn't mean it that way.

I would say it is the job of the pro to teach things the right way and then use a variety of techniques to subtly reinforce that the right way is right for a reason. So praising the wrong way, for instance, is counterproductive. Saying that there is no wrong or right is counterproductive.

I guess I also disagree that having a new player use the correct grip will cause them to abandon the sport. Correct grips are not inherently more difficult to use, IMHO. Wrong grips are quite difficult to change, wouldn't you agree? You have to break down all that bad muscle memory and replace it with good muscle memory, right? Well, one reason people don't change is because we all have day jobs and do not have time to hit 1000 balls and change muscle memory.

Better, I think, is to just build the right muscle memory from the beginning.

Now, I understand that as a teaching pro you have to eat, and if people quit the lessons you won't earn a living. I get it. Even my pro, who is all about grips and muscle memory and technique, knows when he is beaten and when someone is not interested in improving.

So what he does is he runs the drills or the lessons. He praises people who do something the correct way -- even if the particular shot went out. You will never see him praising someone for a frying pan grip, let alone telling them pointers on how to be better at being wrong.
 
I disagree that the mechanics are the same.

The 1HBH volley is better of high volleys because of the extra reach, which is mighty useful given how much women league players lob. It is also way, way, way better for the approach volley below the net, and also for shots right to the body.

Yes, it is possible to compensate for a 2HBH volley with better and faster footwork, but that doesn't seem to happen at 3.0-4.0. Instead, 2HBH players tend to shovel and pop up their volleys. Also, the main reason my female friends do not want to use a 1HBH volley is that they worry that their wrists are not strong enough, but that is nonsense. If you could see my baby bird wrists, you would see that wrist strength has nothing to do with it.

This bias I am displaying comes from about four years of a doubles clinic where only a couple of the ladies use 2HBH volley. When we do approach volley drills, the vulnerability of that stroke is exposed. They really struggle mightily in taking a low ball from no-man's land as a 2HBH approach volley. Very messy, that.

I don't mean to attack in this comment by any means; however, you mention YOU many times and what worked for YOU. Again YOU can easily be an exception. What about the other people who aren't like "YOU?" You can't apply your experience and what you expected out of lessons to the mass population because their goals are NOT the same. In a group setting, clinic you teach to the masses not just the athletic or the good players.

By your analogy of the "benefits" of a 1HBH volley, I could say why would anyone want to learn a 1 handed backhand (groundstroke)? 2 handed backhand groundstroke gives more easy power, easier for high bouncing shots, more stability, less footwork needed, etc etc.

You can use either successfully, and in my teaching experience it is very easy to transition from a 2hbh volley to a 1 hbh. If they are comfortable with it, let them use it, and when its time they can transition out of it. Telling them "oh you HAVE to change" is a terrible approach especially at the 3.0 level. 3.0 Level is pretty low/beginner level.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Yes, I take your point. I thought it might be interesting for you to hear about this from a student's perspective, especially one who has taken a lot of clinics from a lot of pros with a lot of different teammates at a lot of different levels over a decade.

But think about what you said. You said that in clinic you "teach to the masses." That's true. I agree. Given that you cannot tailor the clinic to the individual (either athletic or klutzy), why would you drag down everyone by teaching the wrong technique?

In other words, if you are going to address the subject of grips in a group setting, why would you teach it wrong? Either teach it right or don't cover it at all. Just feed those balls, praise the good shots, collect your fee.
 
Mmmm, I never said that, actually. Or if I did, I didn't mean it that way.

I would say it is the job of the pro to teach things the right way and then use a variety of techniques to subtly reinforce that the right way is right for a reason. So praising the wrong way, for instance, is counterproductive. Saying that there is no wrong or right is counterproductive.

I guess I also disagree that having a new player use the correct grip will cause them to abandon the sport. Correct grips are not inherently more difficult to use, IMHO. Wrong grips are quite difficult to change, wouldn't you agree? You have to break down all that bad muscle memory and replace it with good muscle memory, right? Well, one reason people don't change is because we all have day jobs and do not have time to hit 1000 balls and change muscle memory.

Disagree once again. You don't praise them to use the wrong way, but you don't shove down technique down their throats. You teach them the correct, run drills the right, but when its time to play, tell them its a long learning process, and you want them to have fun. If they are going to be miserable and not have fun using the "correct" grip, use what they are comfortable until they learn the right way. I ONLY find this applicable to continental grip as all the other shots are VERY easy to learn for beginners and easy to teach if they follow the right progressions. The contact point for continental grip on serves is very strange for many beginners. The progressions I have help a lot, but you still get those occasional super uncordinated who cannot figure it out.

Many times at this level, there is no right or wrong. It's all teaching philosophy. I don't like teachers who tell their students there is only 1 way to do something. Look at how vastly different all the pros are.

I think its hardest teaching 3.5 players to change as they have already made up their mind. However 2.5/3.0 players are much easier to mold because they so new to the game they have not built that poor muscle memory yet. A good athletic player can be taught to switch to continental from frying pan very easily imo. A uncoordinated, non-athletic will struggle with continental whether they currently use frying pan or not.
 

Big_Dangerous

Talk Tennis Guru
They're 3.0 level and they can't hit overheads properly! So no, they're "not very good".
...And I was actually referring to the original poster and this "Malpractice" claim, not the the 3.0's that can't hit strokes properly.

Even the pros miss overheads, so it's not like it's easy to hit a great overhead every time.
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
I don't mean to attack in this comment by any means; however, you mention YOU many times and what worked for YOU. Again YOU can easily be an exception. What about the other people who aren't like "YOU?" You can't apply your experience and what you expected out of lessons to the mass population because their goals are NOT the same. In a group setting, clinic you teach to the masses not just the athletic or the good players.

FedEx has a point, Cindy: by your own admission, you are an above-average player when it comes to drive to improve and ability to take in instruction. And of course the fact that you have 15,000+ posts on the forum. :) That means you're also more likely to stick with the correct technique even if, at first, it "doesn't feel right". You're not the type of player FedEx is worried about abandoning the sport.
 
Yes, I take your point. I thought it might be interesting for you to hear about this from a student's perspective, especially one who has taken a lot of clinics from a lot of pros with a lot of different teammates at a lot of different levels over a decade.

But think about what you said. You said that in clinic you "teach to the masses." That's true. I agree. Given that you cannot tailor the clinic to the individual (either athletic or klutzy), why would you drag down everyone by teaching the wrong technique?

In other words, if you are going to address the subject of grips in a group setting, why would you teach it wrong? Either teach it right or don't cover it at all. Just feed those balls, praise the good shots, collect your fee.

But it sounds like your OP pro did teach the proper grip... He then realized how many were struggling and basically said, use what works best for you (understanding that he wasn't going to be changing any of them in 1 hour). I'm ok with that as long as he says "i want you, or we will continue to work on it so that you will ALL learn continental by the end of the month, week etc. He didn't FORCE anyone to use the frying pan grip so, he is hardly dragging anyone down.

And as for the feedback from students: I get feed back from all my students (I teach classes for 4 months) and all the students write feed back at the end of the 4 month rotation. My more experiences bosses agree with the letting them hit mentality as well.
 

ARKustom93

Professional
@Cindysphinx: Did your sister mention whether the pro actually explained/demonstrated all components involved in proper execution, and addressed relevant questions before going into the first drill?
 
Even the pros miss overheads, so it's not like it's easy to hit a great overhead every time.

Very rarely, it's the same exact motion as the serve, the ball is floating, footwork is critical but then again you have the whole court to hit into, not just the service box.
 

ARKustom93

Professional
Could not agree more. When I first started teaching, I had the mentality that EVERYONE taking lessons/classes wanted to be the best they can be and a future pro player because that's how I felt/approached the game for myself haha.

The reality is that most people just want to go out, hit a couple balls, have fun, shoot the shiz. I do exactly what the OP's pro does. I teach the correct way, but then also emphasize learning the right way is a long process. Until you can get comfortable with the right way, its ok to hit around using the "wrong" way, as long as you know its the "wrong" way. As a beginner, if they can't serve, and want to hit with their friends the matches/games become: double fault, pick up ball. double fault pick up ball over and over. No fun, and new players will not want to continue to play. However with frying pan, they can get some basic beginner points going, have fun, want to play more, continue to work on their game and implement the proper way if they have the desire.

It's no different than teaching 5-6 year olds tennis. Its all about "fun." IMO you shouldn't be shoving down their throats technique over and over and over. They need to learn to enjoy the game first.

You haven't been teaching for very long, have you?
 

NLBwell

Legend
It depends on whether the students want to be better 3.0 players or become much better players (good 4.0 or up).
The teacher must know the students' goals.
 

floydcouncil

Professional
My sister is a 3.0, and she was in a 3.0 clinic. The topic was overheads. The pro was teaching overheads in the standard way -- telling the players they need to turn sideways. It was not going well -- lots of missed overheads and frustration.

After a while, he called them all together and said something like this (as relayed by my sister):

"OK. The correct way to hit an overhead is to be in Continental grip and turn sideways. You ladies are struggling because you are in your forehand grip instead of Continental grip. If you use a forehand grip and turn sideways, you will be directing your ball off the court.

"You have two solutions for your overheads. You can use Continental and turn sideways. Or you can stay in forehand grip, but you will need to remain facing the net and not turn sideways."

My sister reported that when the ladies began hitting their overheads while facing the net in forehand grip, they were able to hit stronger and more consistent overheads. My sister wanted to know what I thought of this.

I said I thought it was horrific advice and this pro should have his teaching certificate yanked. Better, I said, is to emphasize all of the reasons why these relative beginners should get in the habit of using the correct grip. I said that hitting overheads while spreadeagle to the net will prevent the ladies from moving backward for overheads safely and effectively. It will reinforce the idea that the forehand grip is appropriate when moving inside the court when the Continental is the better choice. If they later start volleying correctly in Continental, they will develop grip confusion when the ball starts moving faster at the higher levels and they don't have time to toggle between Continental and Eastern. And it will prevent them from learning all sorts of transition shots that use Continental -- transition volleys, half-volleys, low volleys, slices.

What do you think? Is the pro's advice a reasonable work-around for 3.0s who are struggling with overheads? Or should he have continued to urge Continental + sideways?

IMO, he did the right thing by giving the ladies a choice as previously stated.

I know PLENTY of older women players who play well NOT using a continental grip for OH, volleys, etc. Their method is etched in stone and NO pro isn't going to change their grip. However, a smart pro will use what they have and IMPROVE their shots.
 

GatorTennis

Rookie
Youre-The-One-Who-Creates-Drama-In-Your-Life.png
 

ARKustom93

Professional
7-8 years. I'm no pro by any means. Just what I have noticed, and what some of my teaching bosses has emphasized. Do you also think rigorous emphasis on technique is the way to approach casual rec players who will probably never get past 3.5 in a group setting (15-25 players)?

My question had nothing to do with that ... A 'good' lesson has to be designed on a group by group/player by player basis, regardless of level or setting.
 
well the pro told them what the correct way is. correctly you use Conti, turn sideways and then pronate to hit. he was also right that sideways stance and frying pan grip does not work, if you frying pan you Need to face the net.

I think he wanted to motivate them to do it right but also give them an Option for some immediate success because he saw they could not excecute.
 
Top