Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Tennis Tips/Instruction (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   4 Performance Factors (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=497303)

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 09:29 AM

4 Performance Factors
 
If you had 200 points you could "spend" across the four performance factors (physical, technical, tactical, mental) where would you spend them and why to build your ideal player...

For example, you could balance out everything and go

Tec: 50
Tac: 50
Phys:50
Men: 50

(and be decidedly average), or would you weight up a particular category and if so, what is your thinking?

ramos 04-11-2014 09:40 AM

Men 60
Phys 50
Tec 50
Tac 40

sureshs 04-11-2014 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith (Post 8290836)
If you had 200 points you could "spend" across the four performance factors (physical, technical, tactical, mental) where would you spend them and why...

For example, you could balance out everything and go

Tec: 50
Tac: 50
Phys:50
Men: 50

(and be decidedly average), or would you weight up a particular category and if so, what is your thinking?

It would depend on the level of the player and his/her intentions. For a recreational player, technical would be high. Then would be physical, but if they are not going to get fitter, then it is better to focus on tactical and mental, which will help them win matches. For a pro with grooved strokes, technical might be less, and physical and tactical might be more.

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 09:46 AM

^^^ Ramos - why that split? The thought process is more interesting than the raw numbers

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sureshs (Post 8290873)
It would depend on the level of the player and his/her intentions. For a recreational player, technical would be high. Then would be physical, but if they are not going to get fitter, then it is better to focus on tactical and mental, which will help them win matches. For a pro with grooved strokes, technical might be less, and physical and tactical might be more.

Just play the game

sureshs 04-11-2014 09:53 AM

I am going by my observations of how high-level coaches teach. For an Annacone or Lendl, it would be more about strategy, and they might leave the physical aspects to the trainer. For club coaches of adults, they will encounter players with sucky grips or bad movement. If they really cared and the student cared, they would point out the technical issues, but most of the time the student isn't too serious. Some shrewd tactics may be what he is looking for.

For juniors, all-round emphasis is required. They can improve in every respect. If you look at the world-famous coaches at the IMG Academy, the typical day for a student outside of studies involves drills for technical skills and movement, match play for tactics and strategy, and gym work for the physical aspects.

red rook 04-11-2014 09:56 AM

70 mental
70 technical
30 physical
30 tactical

These numbers address my weaknesses. I'm in very good shape I would say, work out every day. Technically could use work on footwork and serve technique. I increased my mental number to acct for match play and associated nerves.

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 09:57 AM

OMG Sureshs! Seriously, play the game!

Thank you rook - what about if it wasn't based on you - but to build your player?

...............

sureshs 04-11-2014 09:59 AM

Might be easier to keep the total at 100 so that the numbers become a %tage.

sureshs 04-11-2014 10:05 AM

Are you sure that balancing them out leads to an average player? These factors have non-linear interactions and synergies. Once Djokovic got over his physical issues, he shined. Same for Murray with mental issues. Federer with a balanced emphasis has decidedly been a top player, not an average one, compared to a lopsided guy like Karlovic or Santoro.

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 10:07 AM

Aaaarrrgghhh!

BMC9670 04-11-2014 10:16 AM

IMO...

Pro level:
65 mental
45 technical
45 physical
45 tactical

Rec level:
65 mental
40 technical
40 physical
55 tactical

The mental aspect of the game, at any level, makes the other three that much better or that much worse. An example at the rec level are pushers and hackers - they win on being better mentally and making the opponent melt down. A recent example at the pro level is Stan - he has had a late career breakthrough because he says he now feels he belongs at the top and has the confidence to beat the best.

TCF 04-11-2014 10:18 AM

Ash, in regards to juniors trying to win in the ultracompetitive SE FL area:

Physical 33
Tactical 33
Technical 33
Mental 101

After watching weekend after weekend players performing one way in practice and a totally different way in tournaments, its mental, mental, mental.

user92626 04-11-2014 10:30 AM

Ash,

I'm confused about the point of your thread.

I thought sureshs brought up many interesting points and added to the discussion. Don't know why you appear to be frustrated with him. Also very perplexing when you asked if it wasn't about one's personal experience -- but to build an ideal player? I don't think anyone knows what an ideal player looks like and apart from his/her own experience? Do you mean you want the board members' opinions on how to build someone like Nadal, Djokovic?

Can you explain the point of your thread?

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 10:35 AM

^^^
a) a bit of fun

b) to get an insight into how people think in respect of the relative importance of the critical performance factors

Dimcorner 04-11-2014 10:38 AM

What are the units?
I mean is 50's all across going to make me into a super all court player?

Also do I get to roll 2D10's if I put 80 in one attribute? :)

What would Federer or Nadal or Isner be in these number term?
What about women players, do they get overall lower numbers?

If I put 110 in physical and and 90 in technical I should be able to overpower everyone without having to worry about tactics and mental since the points would be just so short?

Ash_Smith 04-11-2014 10:39 AM

^^^ yeah sure, why not (actually I literally have no idea what your last sentence means :D )

user92626 04-11-2014 10:41 AM

a is always a given in here. A bit redundant to reiterate it. :)

About b, base on our own experience, right?

I think we're all different and therefore have different needs. For me, I'd need 80% of resource spent on physical!

Avles 04-11-2014 10:45 AM

I think physical and technical ability are the sine qua non for a high-level player. So if we're trying to build a finished player from scratch here (as opposed to building a promising junior with the potential for further development), I think those aspects have to come first.

Mental may be what separates the truly great from the merely very good. But you need physical and technical excellence for that mental edge to even come into play. A rock-solid mental game combined with limited physical and technical ability will get you nowhere.

It's rare to see someone who has low-level strokes, motor skills, and fitness, but can win at a genuinely high level because they are so very strong mentally (or tactically).

On the other hand, someone with high-level strokes, motor skills and fitness will be a high level player even if their mental game is suspect.

So if I had to distribute, I'd say something like:

Physical 80
Technical 90
Mental 20
Tactical 10

sureshs 04-11-2014 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by user92626 (Post 8290942)
Ash,

I'm confused about the point of your thread.

I thought sureshs brought up many interesting points and added to the discussion. Don't know why you appear to be frustrated with him.

Ash is not frustrated. He has always been open to learning new insights into coaching from me. He just got a little hassled when I pointed out some of the subtler points.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse