Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by tennis_balla, Dec 8, 2009.
I do not count as I think it can create more margin for error, based on the different pace of the incoming balls. My rule of thumb has been (on hardcourts) when the ball bounce, my backswing should be almost done and ready to hit.
I prefer my own modern tennis system that I am developing (MTS), which integrates body, mind and soul.
And I have been advised by a Div 2 player that it should be even earlier (when the ball is at the net) and she actually demonstrated that by playing points with me. I think not doing such things is the basis of the problem that I listed in another thread yesterday (problem playing against a modern tennis junior player). I think the problem with modern tennis is that it encourages topspin on one side, and then handicaps you by making you count while returning on the other LOL. It will be fun to watch two modern tennis juniors practise their swings on either side of the drakulie dual-sided ironing topspin board.
Yes, many have gone around and around with Oscar regarding this area. People that are way more grounded in tennis instruction, analysis, fundamentals, etc...than I am have dumped a boat load of video evidence clearly supporting that early preparation is happening and should happen.
Oscar has taken many coaching aids or sayings and literalized them without much care about why a coach says "hit early". Often he manipulates things just enough to support his teaching methods and then turns around and blames coaches that don't use his method for teaching something that he has twsited the meaning on.
Hitting early, meet the ball in front, hit in front of you, are all concepts to help a player hit on-time. The majority of these concepts are geared for players that are often hitting late. They are also sayings that are used with grips that require the ball to be hit in front of the body plane, especially for strokes such as the onehanded backhand. However, Oscar won't mention that.
This ties into the concept of early preparation which is deinfed by the turning of the shoulder to bring the racquet back and situating the grip. After clear video evidence, Oscar will point to the exception to support his stubborness and admit that the "conventional" coaches are right and he is wrong.
Now, he is changing his tune or softening it. I am thinking he is waiting to let it settle before he rewords it and then claims it was a matter of a "play on words" between the conventional coaches and himself.
It is pretty obvious that a player should not execute his forward swing too soon or his timing will be off. I guess this is sort of a no-brainer to me and many other players. So, much so that I think Oscar is just trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill through word manipulation.
Meeting the ball in front, hitting early are simply concepts that help players that hit late to meet the ball on time better.
Also, to blame a "many" players off days on this on thing is just crazy jibberish. There could be a ton of reasons why a player has an off day. I would think that a player that swings too soon would realize after 50 whiffs that he is doing something wrong and make a minor adjustment to hit later. Duh?
The other thing that is contradictory is how Oscar promotes his "feel" thing. Oscar is more talking about using the human's ability to make the necessary discoveries and adjustments on their own without "a maze of details" (his own words). Well, the saying "hit early" is not a whole lot of detail.
Wouldn't you think that if the "many" players Oscar is talking about having off days would "discover" on their own when they should swing and meet the ball after so much failure? Wouldn't they learn to "feel" the ball - even when they flubbed it up?
I would think Oscar would applaud the lack of detail and the emphasis placed more on the player to discover for themselves when they should hit the ball wouldn't you?
Oscar is a hit-and-run operator. Now he will no longer post on this thread and reply to the challenges. Then he will suddenly show up on another thread with a long post, hoping that this thread is forgotten by then.
Yes you need to get to the trajectory line where the ball is coming. I think Oscar is not debating that. However he did say "don't take the racket back" until the ball bounce or something like that. which I think is not going to work on a hard court (fast).
Oscar would you say your teaching methods, DVD's, and instruction are based and influenced by Dianetics and Scientology? I find your information running parallel with its goals and ambitions. In particular, I find it interesting how you construct words and how they match this:
In Dianetics and Scientology, Clear is stated to be a condition in which a person is free of the unwanted influence of engrams, unwanted emotions or painful traumas which are not readily available to the awareness of present time. A person in this condition, then referred to as a "Clear", would be a person cleared of those negative influences. Such a person is said to be "at cause over" (in control of) their "mental energy" (their thoughts), and able to think clearly even when faced with the very situation which in earlier times caused them grave difficulty. Dianetics states that a person's awareness is influenced by the stimulus-response of the reative mind. Achieving the state of Clear means a person has overcome the reactive mind and is in complete control of his analytical mind. According to Hubbard:
A Clear is a being who no longer has his own reactive mind, and therefore suffers none of the ill effects the reactive mind can cause. The Clear has no engrams which, when restimulated, throw out the correctness of his computations by entering hidden and false data.
Would you say that the conventional tennis coaches such as me have negative control over players minds? Zapping their mental energy not allowing them to think clearly? Or what about this?
The State of Clear
In Dianetics, L. Ron Hubbard, founder of Scientology, states that becoming Clear strengthens a person's native individuality and creativity and a Clear is free with his emotions. In The State Of Clear a Clear is defined as "a being who no longer has his own reactive mind, and therefore suffers none of the ill effects the reactive mind can cause."
Hubbard states that merely knowing what the cognition is does not have a effect of realising it for oneself:Now, we've known for a long time that a thetan made up his own bank (reactive mind), but telling him so didn't get him over it. And we've just found out again that telling him so didn't get him over it, too. Even when he's almost Clear. We say, "Hey, you're mocking it up," and he'd say, "Hey, am I mocking it up? Yeah, I am mocking it up." And he'll go Clear — pshew! — and he goes off that bottom step that isn't there, you know? And he's got to go back on and finish it up the way he should. It's got to be his cognition.So if I clear my mind and become more of what you say I should become are you helping me reach this state?
Steps after Clear
After attaining the state of Clear, a person may go on to study the Operating Thetan levels, in which Scientology materials assert the ability to operate outside the body via "exteriorization" becomes commonplace.
Beyond that comes "Cleared Theta Clear", which Hubbard describes this way:"A thetan who is completely rehabilitated and can do everything a thetan should do, such as move MEST and control others from a distance, or create his own universe; a person who is able to create his own universe or, living in the MEST universe is able to create illusions perceivable by others at will, to handle MEST universe objects without mechanical means and to have and feel no need of bodies or even the MEST universe to keep himself and his friends interested in existence". Heavy stuff man!!! Reminds of the stuff used to like to read when I was wasted in my college days!!
Seriously, is it the MEST I am after? I want to be rehabilitated because I want to be able to mind control my wife. She has a decisive advantage over me and if this is the stuff I need, I am all in.
Nor on a clay court. Videos show Nadal's racquet way back before the ball bounces. So it is not true even for "Spanish tennis" with "modern topspin."
Oscar's advice is for a small window of skill levels where students are learning the game and tend to rush their shots, get frustrated, and quit. A coach who makes them relax, gets them to slow down and count, and deemphasizes footwork may be easier for these folks to make the transition. After that, there is no shortcut which can make tennis easier than what it is. Footwork does not come naturally, it is not the same as a child learning to walk as he claims. A child learning to walk is following in the tradition of millions of years of evolution, but no animal had to play tennis in order to survive and reproduce.
in all fairness, I would like to get to the bottom of this for my own information. Perhaps, we should ask the moderator to move some of these posts to another board. I would like to continue this and have Oscar answer my concerns and questions.
That was my intention. You are right that most of the stuff about this Spanish Model has been said, but that shouldn't be a justification for several users here (my post was not meant only in your direction!!) to talk about completely different stuff in this thread. You guys should have created a new thread to talk about all the other stuff there. That's how a forum usually works (if you have active mods).
PS: I always enjoy your posts, so don't understand my post as an attack in your direction!
It already was the largest font, so no I can't help you with your request for a bigger font! Sorry!
Btw, the big font helped to "clear one's mind".
That will certainly help. After half an hour of tennis, I am usually thinking about what's for dinner.
Many threads here take a life of its own. It is the nature of these boards, Some go in tangents, others digress into nothing. Still others expand on areas that people have had questions on but didn't know how to ask the question. Sometimes several conversations could be going on at the same time. Sort of like being at a party.
I posted something from my notebook on the slice backhand. I also qualified it and it went off into a life of its own.
Many times people post, get their question answered and in comes a post with a bent or a twist, and so long as the question has been answered, threads can dive deeper in another direction.
Don't know how you are going to manage every thread though and keep them on track to the orginal question. If you can't and you police only a few, then you can be viewed as singling people out which is not good as well. Your use of bold large letters was quite offensive and offtrack as well.
Post #68 started this other line of discussion. Several of us felt we needed to dig deeper and "find" out what it really said.
I understand where you're coming from, but posting and talking about several topics in one thread makes it hard for everybody else, who is just interested in for example the Spanish model, to go through all new posts only to see that none of the (e.g.) 40 new posts contain any information about it. That's a waste of time and effort. And it happened to me many times now in this thread. Therefore, it would be much more efficient for everybody (you guys, who want to discuss another topic resulting from this one and the others, who are interested in the original idea of this thread) if you guys had started a new thread to talk about that other method. In that other thread you could have included a link to this thread so that all people know how your discussion started.
I apologize if you felt that my large-font post was offensive. It wasn't meant offensive. I did it to "encourage" you guys to start a new thread about the other topic.
Another problem of discussing several topics in one is that it takes way more time to find something via the board search than it would take if you had all topics separated neatly in different threads.
Please look at what I wrote my answer to BB in this post also. If the discussion started that means, there were almost 60 new posts, from which the vast majority was about the Wegner stuff. That could have easily been in a new thread, so that this one remains clean.
I'm not sure how familiar you guys are with forum moderations, but I've done the Mod/Admin job now on a couple large forums (20,000+ members each) and we always prevented thread-hijacking like it's going on here on TT all the time. The problem on TT simply is the amount of moderators, well the lack thereof. But that should be discussed somewhere else. Another problem I see here is that PMs are not allowed to discuss stuff like this.
I dont buy that. If that was the case, nearly every thread woudl be difficult to read. The answers were given, even links were provided for more research and learning. Threads will take a life of its own and I wish you luck in trying to control that.
To you maybe. However, are you perfect at it? Are all your posts on topic and actually answer the question?
hahaha, encourage?! Funny way to encourage. Why not just ask?
Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. People do have a scroll button and can use scanning to find the information they need. However, each one of these threads are equivalent to a conversation taking place. Conversations can go off in another direction. People can also be in the same thread talking about other things that posters brought up. Once the question has been answered I think it is a waste of time saying the same old thing over and over again. Why not talk about something else if the quesiton has been answered.
And? So I guess you are from now on going to set the exampe for all of us to only write to the first post in the thread and nothing else. Right? Good luck.
Glad you aren't the moderator. Thread hijacking is a weird term. It is like nobody in the confines can do anything else without someone like you micromanaging everything. Many times a post is put up and people want clarification. That is perfectly acceptable. There are no policies on thread-hijacking. Except from those that abuse their power and think they are here to save the internet world.
Hahaha, I was about to say that even this conversation jas nothing to do with the original topic. So you do it too.
As much as Wegner's system may or may not deserve criticism, I do agree about this being an RPT thread. Interesting stuff and deserves more attention/discussion. Probably better to stay on topic or start a new thread.
My two pence.
You're right and because of that this is my last post in this thread about thread-hijacking. If you like or don't like the term, that's the one that is used most of the time in internet forums. I'll therefore politely ask you to open a new thread about this and continue the discussion there. Maybe ask a moderator to move the posts from this thread to a new one. With vBulletin, it takes maybe a minute or so.
People, who seek clarification should open a new thread. I also don't want to have my way implemented here, because I rarely post here. That's an exception, you know, because usually I have 1,000+ posts in all forums where I'm active. But this forum here is moderated that badly (because there's only one moderator) that I don't bother with posting a lot because it takes too much time to actually have a conversation due to the ongoing thread-hijacking. This forum is also the only one I know where nothing is done against thread-hijacking! In the future, I'll just continue to read your and some other person's interesting posts, because then I can be assured that there is not a lot of trolling and spamming.
Hahaha, yeah okay. Maybe you ought to open a new thread on this topic.
All it means is that all that had to be said on one narrow topic is over, nobody had anything to say, and a new direction has started based on post #68, which to you seems to have nothing to do with Spanish tennis. But if you followed other threads, you will see that the author of #68 has claimed to have influenced Spanish tennis at one time. So even with a narrow view, we are still somewhat on topic.
Exactly the point. You can't just myopically just stay within a box. People say things in other threads that have a link to another thread. When the topic has been answered repeatedly, and a link has been established, as in Oscar somehow having an influence in RPT, then that is bound to start another conversation within a conversation.
I think this guy writes about how he wants the board to be rather than accepting how it works in reality.
Mods should let things evolve naturally, without imposing themselves. That is why the current mod(s) are good. They should step in only when things are completely off-topic or some seriously bad stuff is going on. This is not a reviewed forum like Wikipedia and I feel some of the best stuff comes up in the challenges here. That is why other tennis boards have died out. It is easy to have only posts about how great Federer or Nadal is, but the real info comes out only when some guy posts something he does not like about their technique and people jump on him.
This particular case is unique and several threads questioning certain claims have been deleted, so we had no option but to post here again. But it is getting tiring dealing with hit-and-run operators who don't respond. I don't have the energy to go thru it again.
I said this in another thread and got a warning for my trouble from a mod - topics, like conversations, meander through and around the ideas presented within them - each idea leading to a new one and so on. Thats's how conversation works.
However, I think perhaps this thread has now go so far off topic it may need to be 'pruned' somewhat! The last two pages are mostly about this discussion about staying on topic (which I am aware I am now adding to ) and some slagging of MTM.
In terms of Oscar influencing RPT thinking, there's not much of a link - certainly not an intentional one anyway. The RPT system is much fuller in detail and progression to simply find the balll and hit it - as you'll have seen in the vids Balla posted at the beginning.
Good post. I noticed when a post has a lot of responses and answers to the orginal question from the OP, at some point it loses steam. Then it sort of fragments into another conversation all together that stemmed from a disagreement or a comment that people want to either learn more about or debate.
I don't anything wrong with that so long as the question was answered as thorough as possible which it has here. Personally, I don't think there is much to add here since a lot of information is available.
You are absolutely right, VaBeachTennis; what I contend is only that some techniques are more effficient ways of playing and others are more difficult to master. Of course someone who has perfected their own preferred way becomes a master at it with enough practice, at least in his own estimation. To be a top pro, though, you need to have a master's efficiency. And anyone can benefit of copying how, in this regard, the top pros play. In essence, the more you simplify things, the better you can become.
BB, I see you like to post some quotes by L. Ron Hubbard, even though those were very far from the subject of the Sanchez/Casal RPT Spanish Training Model. Here is something Hubbard said too: "constructive ideas are individual and seldom get broad agreement in a human group". Could that apply to me and the very subject of tennis? Could it be that you are trying to destroy something constructive because it differs from your own viewpoint? Please write your response when you are in a good state of mind, not like in college.
Best regards and wishes, and a very Merry Christmas and New Year.
Oscar Wegner, TennisTeacher.com
ps. I use my own name in these threads. Could you disclose who you are as well? This way I can send you a Christmas card.
Sounds good and is repeated by many people, but it is wrong. As Einstein said, "Keep it simple. As simple as possible but no simpler." Some problems have a simple solution. Some don't. Some don't have a solution at all, within the capacity of someone to understand them. The idea that there is a simple solution to economic, social, scientific, and political issues is wrong. It is a way to brainwash people and to promote escapism.
With all due respect Sureshs I think Wegner is talking about tennis. In which case his comments make more sense.
It might be a good idea if you and some others here took a somewhat less captious approach to discussion regarding Wegner's ideas or this thread will get out of control and off topic again (i.e not about RPT.)
Perhaps start a new thread?.
Called 'Ask Oscar?'.
Great idea, Xenakis. Could you be so kind as to start such a thread?
I dont think that will ever happen. If Oscar and his followers are allowed to freely make claims that are questionable, promote their product against TW policy either directly or indirectly, provide examples that make other coaches that don't use their system as old, out-dated, or "conventional", and is allowed to take credit for things I know is not true, or spin things in such a way where he always looks favorable in any discussion, people here can respond whether they agree or not.
I read too. I also provide a lot of instruction and tips on these boards. If I don't agree with something I am not going to create new thread for it. You don't and neither does anyone else.
Had Oscar stuck with the emphasis of this thread and did not bring in his exaggerated example and compared his methods to "conventional" methods probably none of this would have happened. However, that is not to say it wouldn't happen anywhere else.
Currently, it seems every thread I read or am involved with is tainted somehow and in someway with MTM or that Oscar had something to do with it. I not only find it insulting but I also find it false and misleading.
Since I am well versed in tennis and desire that good information is shared on these boards, and because I have been here for years, I can provide my opinion whether it turns into a debate or not.
Just as you want to read your things, I want to read mine.
I think it is unrealistic to tell others they can't say anything unless it is specific to this thread. It just doesn't happen that way for the last 6 years I have been here. It is unreasonable and unrealistic.
Now, I do agree that people can ask that it be split into another thread but to say that a thread shouldn't dicsuss anything else but what the #1 post indicates is farfetched.
Everyone here on these boards takes a thread off topic including you by posting your comment above. If you have a question on RPT, then ask it. That is the best way to get the thread back on topic.
Or you could practice hard and learn to rally with the 10 yr old.
I looked through this thread and there is absolutely nothing unusual. Everyone had something to say and everyone provided an angle to something or wanted clarification.
The trouble is we have people on these boards with different levels of experience and knowledge in tennis instruction, playing, coaching, technical analysis, and other things. When people that already have a high level of knowledge in a certain area find a nugget of something to question or ask for more clarification, it is usually the people who don't have the knowledge that get upset because it appears or seems things are getting off topic. When the reality is it is just going deeper into a certain area.
We have thousands of people that visit these boards and many provide their opinions on things. It is totally unrealistic to think that threads are always going to stay on topic. We all can disagree and agree all we want and by the looks of many people here, they care about tennis and have a passion for the game. That is healthy and I for one want that here.
Further, this thread is pretty much dead, you would be hard pressed not the find the information you need for this RPT system. The bottom-line, is people provided links for you to do your research. Quit being lazy and go learn.
Could you provide an example of a revolutionary/modern way one teaches a volley thru the use of MTM methods?
Thanks in advance.
drakulie, here is an example, for better direction, more ball speed and control, volley down and firmly across the line of the ball, not towards the intended target. The direction of your shot depends on the racquet angle, not the direction of your movement. If you like this one, I can tell you more.
Oscar Wegner, TennisTeacher.com
Here is a novel idea. Volley is pretty simple, so you should be able to handle this. Tell me what you think is standard or conventional instruction for the for the volley, and maybe I'll show you how MTM departs from standard and improves it.
This would give you a chance at getting your answer (if you really are interested, which I doubt)
AND it would be something other posters could see, so when Oscar or I show you the improvements, You can't say you and your brother invented it in the backyard when you were 10 or some other nonsense about how everybody does it that way. I expect you will still try to say these things anyway, but I will have your version on record just the same, so that any reasonable person can see how you play.
And as always, I repeat that Oscar never claims to have invented this or any of it, but he recognized, recorded and teaches important aspects to highlight and teach; that other instructors were not on record as teaching.
Great post Oscar, you have to understand that bb thinks he is the king of this site.Also he is so jealous of you that he cannot control himself.
I have always thought how crazy it is for a tennis discussion site that does recognize how beneficial your methods of teaching are.
Please explain how this is in any way "revolutionary", or "modern".
Hello Oscar, thanks for reading my post. And yes, I did. However, did you see my questions? I would be glad to take it to another board and thread. I had some specific questions. Would you like to answer them somewhere else?
There are a lot of things people say that can be viewed as profound. However, I have some deeper questions for you based on the wording in your posts and your approach to tennis instruction.
Oh Oscar, you haven't been on these boards much have you. When I started on these boards, my goal is to give free instructional advice the best way I can anonymously. I dont want to sell product or associate myself other than the advice I provide.
Hey, at least I posted my picture as my avatar!!! That is me surfing in front of the house I lived in Hawaii. Do you like the shot? Ever surf yourself Oscar?
And that is great you are using your own name. I would too if I had something to sell. However, just as many others that contribute on these boards have nicknames, I do too. I am also surprised with your sudden aggresivness? Did I strike a nerve? Expose a hidden agenda?
Thanks though for your offer but wishing me a very Merry Christmas is just fine. Merry Christmas to you to Oscar and a Happy New Year!
Good idea. Might do it myself.
Bungalo Bill, I think you are promoting yourself unreasonably here as being well versed; I would characterize a pro as well versed if he knows all aspects of the game, including all tenets about modern tennis.
You may know these, but your dismissal of such in such irresponsible manner in regards to readers, not just posters, makes me question your science knowledge, from gravity, friction and air resistance, impact force, acceleration vs momentum, muscle groups, kinetic chains, and the like.
You sure can express your opinion, but don't sell yourself as an expert if you are not. Otherwise you muddle the debate of so many people interested in learning and trying different things to see which work and which don't, deciding what to adopt on their own determinism.
By presenting your viewpoint in a responsible and intelligent manner you'll contribute to the debate, rather than your present actions to destroy. I hold you responsible for having several interesting and educational threads erased from this Forum. Your personal attacks on myself show that you take the debate into other arenas to make small of others and look yourself bigger. What you have done is make yourself look smaller than you probably are.
Prove your technical points, like I have proven mine half the way (or more) around the world, something that you can't disprove no matter what you say.
Furthermore, prove that you are a valuable member of these discussions and this Forum by sticking to the subject at hand, and I will forgive the damage you have anonymously done.
^^^ A new thread "Ask Oscar" has been created.
Where? Probably need to move the thread to Rants and Raves or Odds and Ends or something like that where we are more allowed to fire away (without profanity of course). If you posted it here, maybe the moderator can move it for us. I know Kaptain Karl used to do that instead of deleting them.
Oh, I don't think so Oscar. A pro may or may not be well versed in a topic. They may not understand learning theory or other aspects of coaching. You should know that because if that were true, then you should be listening to instructors that are your peers or have provided you evidence which you continue to deny.
Case in point, your "modern forehand" which you claimed was your discovery or something like that. I showed you pictures from 1926 showing players hitting with the exact forehand you describe.
Further, your farfetched example on hitting early, I provided information that you might have taken that out of context. However, we could also take your "hitting across the ball" out of context as well.
Whether you like it or not Oscar, I have proven that I am well versed by even you and your past compliments on what I have provided in a variety of areas. Even your John Carpenter has complimented the knowledge I have in tennis instruction, fundamentals, tennis history, and tennis insight. He even has personally emailed me for input and advice.
Oscar, this is nonsense and you know it.
Yup, I sure can. I guess the years and years of auditing has paid off! Being well-versed in something does make me a subject-matter expert. However, being well-versed does not mean I know everything but have enough knowledge and experience to provide guidance, instruction, and an opinion on the topic at hand. It means my opinion, diagnosis, or insight can be considered reasonable and reliable or most importantly - valid. It also means I can cut to the chase quicker than those that are growing in stroke analysis, instruction, and other aspect of tennis and provide a reasonable and reliable opinion on the subject.
Isn't that how you believe people learn Oscar? I believe I have grown to the point where I can feel, sense, use my intuition, and draw on past experience concerning the subject at hand. I can sense when something smells fishy and pursue it until my curiosity is satisfied. I am also more aware when I am being sold a bill of goods and can help others avoid a big mistake. At the very least, I can provide an opinion and a warning of sorts to help a tennis player become more aware of what they are getting into.
No matter how you slice it Oscar, I am well versed.
Oscar I don't mind views being presented in an honest and responsible light. However, I didn't experience that from your followers and you. I thought you were sneaky, had a hidden agenda, where more interested in using this site to sell your product, etc...I think you need to look in the mirror.
And if my hard questions bother you, all you are telling me is you really are hiding something.
Come on, Oscar, you haven't proven jack. Others have for you. The only thing you have proven is you are not the Father of Modern Tennis. My advice and instruction comes from years and years of research. I do not claim I created the instruction or performed the research. I am a coach, I use the honest hardwork of others (just as you do) to help players improve.
I would take half these players here, free of charge, and give them an excellent lesson and instruction just as I do now in my area. I don't need fanfare, getting in the limelight or anything else. When a player offers me money or at least to buy me dinner, I turn it down and tell them that my service is free of charge - period.
I want tennis to grow. I want players to learn. I want players to respect the establishments that have helped this young sport continue on. I don't want players to put their hard earned money into my pockets. I want their hard earned money to go into their families, the things they love to do, and the charities they support.
Give me a break Oscar, the only thing I see about you is you have a hidden agenda that you aren't being truthful about, and you have taken claim for things that aren't yours to claim. How can I respect that.
Good, I will be there.
It says invalid thread specified???
New TW rule: Anything about MTM and Oscar Wegner will be deleted without mercy.
Separate names with a comma.