Should I take lessons from a coach who teaches traditional strokes?

Discussion in 'Tennis Tips/Instruction' started by MikeyBigShot, Sep 22, 2012.

  1. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    So you think players should land on 2 feet when serving?
    How is "ANY Coach" going to teach the differences in modern and classic, when
    most know very little if any modern.

    You just likely think it's about the Fh because that is the only place you see most
    traditional coaches make an effort with modern and the area where most can see
    their needs to improve to keep up. Not having the experience to see the "lack" in
    other areas of their game does not make it correct.
     
    #51
  2. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    No I meant both feet leave the ground.

    There is nothing modern in any stroke other than the forehand and you know it. Open stance 2 handed and 1 handed BHs maybe, but they are not to be emphasized as they lead to lazy play, plus they are trivial to learn.

    All the hullabaloo is about adding a little topspin on the forehand which the player can pick up by watching any match on TV or from the 1000s of free videos.
     
    #52
  3. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    No,.. so wrong...what I know is this shows a pretty extreme lack on info on modern strokes.

    Modern strokes far more than "a little more topspin". lol
     
    #53
  4. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    They may add more topspin, but a little topspin will do for a beginner. Then he can work his way up on his own.

    No need to spend money on that.
     
    #54
  5. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    I would agree that the difference between an old school and modern topspin 1hb are minor, mostly grip and swing path (don't get me started on the 1hb slice), and that the technique for volleying, serving and smashing are virtually the same. But, the forehand is significantly different, as is the 2hb since it has evolved to be basically a left handed forehand with some assistance with eye-hand coordination from the right hand.
     
    #55
  6. Sumo

    Sumo Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2010
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Chapel Hill
    I can't comment on the "modern vs traditional" garbage you guys are arguing about, because it really will never matter to my game.

    But........isn't the thought process I've bolded the most important thing for a beginner? Especially an adult beginner?
     
    #56
  7. tennisfan69

    tennisfan69 New User

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Why do we call any thing "Modern Stroke". Is "Current Stroke" or "Current technique" more apt. because modern is a time dependent term and time changes and techniques changes. you cannot teach someone a techniques that will be played 10 years from now. because then they cannot play today's game with future technique. So what ever is played TODAY is always Modern.

    just wondering what this modern stands for?
     
    #57
  8. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    That is what I said. For a beginning 1 hander, there is nothing new except a little more topspin and open stance on the forehand.

    It is good you smashed the myth that volleys, serves and smashes and 1 handed BHs are different. That is just marketing nonsense.

    The 2 handed BH issue is really interesting. Many older coaches today are 1 handers, but their junior students are all 2 handers. I know some of them actually teach the 2 hander, while others seem to let the student pick it up by osmosis from other students and then fine tune it a bit.
     
    #58
  9. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    If you don't like the term, don't use it. I also call them tournament strokes if that
    suits you better, because they have been used thru the years by most of the
    best tournament players.
    Modern is the name of one of the 1st instructional methods to teach tournament
    strokes. Before Modern Instruction was developed, most taught a flawed classic
    stroke.
     
    #59
  10. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    He didn't smash anything, but just mainly agreed with your point, although
    I doubt that limpin goes along with the push/punch/bunt method used in classic
    volley instruction.
    While the difference on the 1hander viewed is subtle, the difference in result is
    quite dramatic...so don't expect many to get it.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
    #60
  11. tennisfan69

    tennisfan69 New User

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    Ok got it. so basically teaching what the current top players play. thanks
     
    #61
  12. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Sort of, but really the best tourny players have hit this way to one extent or
    another since the early years of the game.
    Just no one much TAUGHT this way.
    It was considered too hard, but turns out it is actually easier when taught well.
     
    #62
  13. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    No, the instruction that he is referring to does not teach what top players play, nor has any top pro been produced by that system who can be verified. It teaches things like count to 5 after the bounce before hitting the ball, a very short and late backward and forward swing which produces no power, pulling back at contact which is never done by the pros, etc. It also does not address the things they really do and the complexities in that, but instead has some vague phrases which are of no use like feeling the ball.

    Don't get taken in by any of this.
     
    #63
  14. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    All from the guy who says all instruction is basiclly the same... but you don't need an instructor.
    Pretty good contradiction in above and his usual saying that modern is really almost nothing different, lol.:)
    Probably don't want to be taken in by a non-instructor 3.5 player.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
    #64
  15. tennisfan69

    tennisfan69 New User

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    Messages:
    67
    most of the instruction videos or coaches i have spent time and my kids have spent time learning always say :
    "you hit your forehand like this, you hit your serve like this, you play volley like this, you hit your backhand like this etc: because that is how the top pros hit and play"

    now the question is who teaches the top pros? it is kind of chicken first /egg first question right?
     
    #65
  16. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    likely its more like the pros hit so many balls that their body finds the way.

    Old master black belt told student who wanted to learn best "reverse punch",
    Hit bag with 1000 rev punches in the morning and then again 1000 in the evening.
    After 10 yr of doing this..come back and show ME proper reverse punch.

    we hope in tennis that good instruction can speed up the process some.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
    #66
  17. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    It is like everything else. The student learns from the master, and then he becomes the master. He comes up with his own variations on top of what he has learnt, and if they are good, the next generation learns from him.

    But to be frank, apart from the forehands of the top men, very little has changed stroke-wise. The changes have been more in fitness and focus on baseline play for slower surfaces. Even on the forehand, it is only the Federer and Nadal forehands which are given as examples of innovation, and the Nadal one had its big following among coaches and students till a year ago, but now people are questioning his whole style of play and what it does to the body.

    Watch some of the lower-level pros. They still lose because of UEs, lapse of concentration, or not trying hard enough. And they still can't hit forehands like Fed or Nadal.
     
    #67
  18. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Not IMO. A beginner should learn correct technique from the beginning. Good to see you have an interest in this "garbage."
     
    #68
  19. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Hahaha! Sureshs thinks that if he repeats the same nonesense often enough it will suddenly be magically transformed into the truth. This reminds me of BevilDevil's crusade to prove than a modern 2hb really isn't primarily a left handed forehand. He just can't let it go.
     
    #69
  20. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    and just think if he stays with the forum and playing, this guy will be on here
    telling everyone how to hit modern in 6 months:)
     
    #70
  21. NLBwell

    NLBwell Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2004
    Messages:
    7,176
    You finally gave a clear answer. I totally disagree with this, but at least it is an answer instead of an argument. I believe it is valuable to have someone knowledgeable look at your game and give advice, regardless of their style, you don't.


    OK, show me some part of the modern game that I don't have in my game (other than a young body). Nothing has to be unlearned. New shots just need to be added.
     
    #71
  22. treblings

    treblings Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    2,411
    sounds like an interesting place where you live. instruction cheap at 45,- and you start your lessons in autumn. does that mean you can play outdoors all year or are you adding indoor court time 2-3 time a week.

    and who told you that the coach is teaching traditional strokes? is he advertising that?
     
    #72
  23. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    All answers that contain any measure of explanation are argument. I believe it is detrimental to have a coach teach obsolete technique that limits upside potential.

    I know nothing about your game. Maybe you are so talented that you can master both at the same time.
     
    #73
  24. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    That is what is true most of the time. We need to constantly learn and improve. There is no need to buy into scare tactics and also no need to take any coach's words as the absolute truth and follow it blindly.
     
    #74
  25. 5263

    5263 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    10,447
    Likely you are the only one scared by new and better instruction, but I know
    change is tough for many:)
     
    #75
  26. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    Why don't say something concrete instead of resorting to insults when you are questioned? Most of the stuff taught by any tennis coach is enough for most club players, and anything extra can be learnt by the student as he progresses.
     
    #76
  27. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    I think your expectations of coaches and students is somewhat lower than it is for most others, sureshs.
     
    #77
  28. MikeyBigShot

    MikeyBigShot Rookie

    Joined:
    May 29, 2012
    Messages:
    100
    #78
  29. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    Never heard of coach Mauro before. But, other than the fact that modern angular momentum generates more power and spin than old school linear momentum, I disagree with everything he said. In particular, his assertion that an old school forehand is better for hitting dtl and a modner forehand better for hitting cross court is exactly 180 degrees wrong. It's just the opposite.
     
    #79
  30. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    Really it must be really weak then. What is your level 3.0? I only wish I lived closer to you so I could wipe your butt right off the court with my top spin.
     
    #80
  31. LeeD

    LeeD Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Messages:
    37,358
    Location:
    East side of San Francisco Bay
    I'd listen to a traditional strokes coach if he talks about net play.
     
    #81
  32. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    The more I read your posts the more I agree with you limpin, you are very knowledgeable about the game of tennis.
     
    #82
  33. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    Exactly where do these guys come up with this BS.
     
    #83
  34. Avles

    Avles Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,505
    Location:
    The Peak of Good Living
    For the record here's that awesome topspin in action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=el9IyqMZ5yQ&feature=plcp

    Seriously tlm, good on you for posting videos, but I don't think you're in a position to be trash talking about anybody.

    And I wouldn't call your strokes "modern." They may be effective for you, but to me they look nothing like the strokes of today's players. Any success you're having with those strokes is just proof that good technique is not all that important at our level.
     
    #84
  35. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    San Diego
    How so?
    .......
     
    #85
  36. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    I never said anything about my strokes being modern, also never claimed they were like the strokes of todays players. Where did you come up with that?
    And what exactly is your level? Lets see you post some of your strokes or are you to afraid to let everyone see them?

    I just finished my outdoor season and I play in the 4.5 division and ended up with a 15-5. record. This league is rated a little high because this 4.5 division I am in is what I would classify as 4.0 level.

    Because of my record I will have to play in their highest division next year, which again is classified as 5.0 but is really a 4.5. So just because my strokes don't look good to you does not mean that they are not pretty effective.

    Plus there is a lot more to winning tennis matches than just having perfect strokes. And I know that I am not real good but am very confident that I could beat sureshs. That is the only reason i am talking trash because this guy is nothing but annoying and I would just love to put a smackdown on this clown.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
    #86
  37. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    Come on Cheetah do you really have to ask this question. The modern stroke uses much more top spin and net clearance, were the old school strokes are much flatter with less spin.

    So obviously the flatter strokes would be much better for going cross court over the lower part of the net. But when going down the line more spin and net clearance is much more important.
     
    #87
  38. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    San Diego
    I thought limp meant it in a different way as in "if you're going to go cc then use traditional strokes because traditional strokes are better for going cc than modern strokes". which would be wrong.

    Any way it's a dumb point to be arguing. How could anyone say 'modern strokes are better for going dtl'? better than what? bettan than itself? that doesn't make sense. better than traditional? no kidding. so why make a point of it? we all know modern is better than traditional for cc, dtl as well as i/o. I don't get the point he's trying to make.
    which is why asked.
     
    #88
  39. Limpinhitter

    Limpinhitter Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    9,277
    It was a dumb point for "coach Mauro" (whoever he is), to say that hitting dtl is easier with a traditional stroke and hitting cc was easier with a modern stroke, which is plainly wrong. To the contrary, it's easier to go dtl and inside out than it is to go cc with modern strokes, and, it's easier to go cross court with a more traditional stroke than a modern stroke because it takes much earlier preparation to go cc with a modern stroke. I attribute these attributes primarily to the more extreme grip of a modern stroke.
     
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
    #89
  40. Cheetah

    Cheetah Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2011
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    San Diego
    oh.

    anyway he's a good coach. ive been watching his vids for a couple of years now. he goes all over the world to teach. brazil, u.s, europe, asia etc. teaches sort of a 90's style brand of tennis.
     
    #90
  41. Avles

    Avles Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,505
    Location:
    The Peak of Good Living
    Don't know my level because I don't play USTA, but I guess it's around 3.5, maybe a bit worse. Haven't posted a video because I still feel weird about putting my face on an internet forum. Plus, I don't know if TT needs to see one more set of wonky rec-level strokes, and I'm pretty sure that what I need is more practice rather than tips from the forum.

    So yeah, I suck. But notice-- I'm not talking about how I'd thrash other posters, I'm not labeling things as BS left and right. I'm not pretending to have anything remotely valuable to say about whether "traditional" or "modern" strokes are better.

    That's because I know what I am, a rec-level hack. I know that it would be absurd for me to say that somebody like Mauro Marcos is just all full of BS when it's blatantly obvious that he knows more about tennis than I ever will.

    Of course I'm not saying take everything coaches say as gospel. I'm just saying, know who you are. It's frustrating that the real coaches and skilled players and teachers on this forum (and there are some here) get drowned out by people who have little of value to say.

    I have no idea if you could beat sureshs (in the past he's said he does fine at 4.0, so it sounds to me like you two would be competitive).

    But seriously, who cares? Are we in middle school here?

    The point of the thread, originally, was not who could beat up who, but whether it's worth taking lessons from a coach who teaches traditional strokes.
     
    #91
  42. Timbo's hopeless slice

    Timbo's hopeless slice Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    4,097
    ^^^^^^
    great post
     
    #92
  43. slowfox

    slowfox Professional

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,110
    What kind of string pattern do you want?
     
    #93
  44. BevelDevil

    BevelDevil Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,545
    Wow, someone's still upset about the Agassi 2hbh revelations... Just accept it and move on. That thread's about to move to page 2, anyway. Perhaps find a new 2hbh idol that better fits your recommendations.


    Anyway, to repeat the obvious, the closed-stance 2hbh isn't a modern left-handed forehand due to stance alone! When you account for the forward weight transfer, then it's even less of a modern lh forehand.

    If you can address (for the first time) how these key differences of stance and weight transfer somehow don't matter, I'd like to hear it.

    In the meanwhile, perhaps you should suspend your crusade to convince people that there are no differences between the 2hbh backhand and the modern forehand.


    ^^^ you're beginning to concede a role of the right hand. That's nice to see.

    Perhaps in the future you'll concede the role of the closed/neutral stance and forward weight transfer, as well.
     
    #94
  45. FrisbeeFool

    FrisbeeFool Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    377
    A good coach should be able to work with a variety of students, and help those students with their individual goals.

    It's so silly that posters on here try to label strokes as either modern or traditional, as if there's 2 opposing camps of tennis strokes, like 2 political parties or something.

    Every student has their own individual problems, and a good coach should be able to give advice that helps that individual.

    When I'm watching a tennis match, the last thing I'm worried about is categorizing a person's strokes as modern or traditional. I don't know of any coaches in my area who are training their students with wood racquets and continental grips on their groundstrokes on grass courts. Its just not something you see.

    Take Tony Roche, for example. He wasn't out there, advising federer to switch to a wood racquet and travel back in time. He was catering his advice to Federer's individual needs.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
    #95
  46. FrisbeeFool

    FrisbeeFool Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    377
    Is Albert Costa modern or traditional?

    I'm a fan of Albert Costa. I want to hit groundstrokes like him. Are his groundstrokes modern or traditional? Should I go to a modern or traditional coach?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLV300o9ywM

    Recently I've gone to 2 different coaches in my area. Both are well respected. One is in his sixties. They other, his late 20's. I took lessons from both of them and they both had similar advice about groundstrokes. Many of the fundamentals of the game haven't changed. True students of the game keep up with the changes that have happened and incorporate them into their teaching. No one has a monopoly on modern technique.

    I would stop worrying about partitioning people into 2 camps. Just look at the individual coach and what they can offer. Talk to some of their students. See what the students thought.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
    #96
  47. FrisbeeFool

    FrisbeeFool Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    377
    Quite possibly one of the most nonsensical and crazy posts I've seen on talk tennis. I attribute these attributes primarily to your lack of understanding of the game of tennis. Why is it harder to go crosscourt with a modern stroke??? I really do question if you even play tennis in real life.
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
    #97
  48. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    There is only one poster that I would like to play and I have already stated that. You know the one that disrupts so many posts with relentless controversy.

    I also know that I am a hacker, but that does not mean I don't understand the game. I really don't care what some coaches name is, but if he makes the claim stated above then he is dead wrong regardless of what level me or you are at.

    Anyone that says that traditional is better for down the line + modern is better for cross court really makes you wonder. As limpin says which should be obvious it is exactly the opposite of what this super coach is saying.
     
    #98
  49. tlm

    tlm Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,526
    I believe that it is easier with modern technique to make both shots. But how can traditional be better for going down the line?
     
    #99
  50. sureshs

    sureshs Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2005
    Messages:
    35,781
    That is correct. That is why I mentioned in another thread that replying to a CC FH topspin with CC counter topspin is quite difficult, and that is why I was not sold on Wardlaw's directionals. Going DTL on those shots with a high net clearance seems easier, even though it would be considered changing the direction of the ball. In table tennis, the default return direction for a spin serve is actually along with the spin. Going DTL on a CC topspin with a little side-spin is also like that. There are risks, but it can be done and many pros are doing that.

    I don't know if the difficulty is due to a more "modern" stroke as you say, but that would be in line with what Peter Burwash and George Pappas said.
     

Share This Page