confused w/ the term "MTM"

[mr_fro2000]

Hi everyone... 1st time poster here. So i've gotten back into tennis in the past few months from over a 12 year hiatus, and obviously a lot has changed.

So reading forums, internet postings, etc. I realize that people are now doing this thing called MTM... and I find the term confusing. My understanding is that it has a lot to do how forehands are hit but still it seems to relate to how the overall game of tennis is approached.

So my question is where is the line drawn on MTM and who are some examples of old school vs MTM? and do I play MTM?

Is agassi MTM? Jim courier? I feel that they do play MTM, so is the term now even outdated? Is Sampras MTM? Federer? Is there anyone on the tour who is NOT MTM?

Do I play MTM (I used to play competitively… does it even matter?)? I deploy an eastern forehand… hit wide shots w/ open stance, but for short shots I step into it with a closed stance (how could you not?!?!). I have a 1 handed backhand and play an all-round game. Frequently deploy slice approach shots. I love hitting shots on the rise and taking the net whenever possible.

Can someone explain all this? I frequently find people here arguing about this topic and I get the sense that they don’t all have the same definition of MTM to begin with which leads to pointless arguments. Clarification would be appreciated. Thanks!

[WildVolley]

Assuming that your first post isn't trolling, I'll give you a brief answer.

MTM I believe stands for Oscar Wegner's Modern Tennis Methodology. It is the way Wegner teaches tennis and supposedly is based on his observations of how pros play.

It doesn't make sense to ask if Agassi or Courier play MTM, as neither were Wegner's students as far as I know. If anything, you'll need to ask Wegner if he is basing the technique he is teaching on the model of some pro player.

There are plenty of other tennis professionals who teach what they'll claim to be "modern" pro technique and many of these same people disagree with Wegner. So, unless you are just looking to start a fight, it is best to look at what Wegner teaches and then compare it to what you do. If you really want to know for certain, I advise taking some classes from Wegner or one of his coaches and ask them.

[mr_fro2000]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

Assuming that your first post isn't trolling, I'll give you a brief answer.

MTM I believe stands for Oscar Wegner's Modern Tennis Methodology. It is the way Wegner teaches tennis and supposedly is based on his observations of how pros play.

It doesn't make sense to ask if Agassi or Courier play MTM, as neither were Wegner's students as far as I know. If anything, you'll need to ask Wegner if he is basing the technique he is teaching on the model of some pro player.

There are plenty of other tennis professionals who teach what they'll claim to be "modern" pro technique and many of these same people disagree with Wegner. So, unless you are just looking to start a fight, it is best to look at what Wegner teaches and then compare it to what you do. If you really want to know for certain, I advise taking some classes from Wegner or one of his coaches and ask them.

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

Neither have the pros it seems as I have not come across one mentioning it

[Larrysümmers]

its all about getting the most top spin and power. MTM is Oscars approach to coaching

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

It doesn't make sense to ask if Agassi or Courier play MTM, as neither were Wegner's students as far as I know.

That would be right. Once we nail down one student, things will be clear.

[WildVolley]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

No troll here... like i said, i've been away for a while and am surprised/fascinated to find that there's this "new way to play tennis" that I had never heard of before.

OK, I believe you. It is just that people here like to fight about it.

I'm sure Wegner can speak for himself if he sees this thread, as he sometimes posts here, but my understanding is that he claims MTM is a way to quickly learn how to play like the modern pros. Take that as you will. I don't think he's claiming that he's developed a new way to play tennis, but I don't know his stuff so I won't speak for him.

[mr_fro2000]

thx wildvolley... its just that when i read some postings, im wondering if I missed something in the past 10 years that would cause me to become less competitive (if i choose to go down that path).

For example, this is one quote from another thread:

"You don't have to take it on faith. In addition to World class "elite" players, there are tens of thousands of non elite pros, college players, high school players, and tournament juniors, all over the World, none of whom are being taught old school methods, except for those unfortunate few whose coaches don't know how to teach modern technique, just as there are numerous levels of skiing skill between you and Bode Miller. And for those few, a bad beating or two in match play will usually encourage them to seek competent modern coaching as well.

The rationale behind my point has been expressed at least a half dozen times on this thread if you had read it. Modern technique works better with modern racquets, and you will be a better player if you learn modern technique rather than obsolete technique."

[WildVolley]

I have my own understanding of "modern" technique and that mostly just means things like more "western" grips (semi-western probably being the most common), heavy topspin, open stances on the forehand, 2hbh, etc.

I think that Wegner wants to distinguish himself from those who teach hitting "through" the ball, eastern forehand grips, closed stance, etc, for beginners.

Wegner does a good job of marketing and you'll find his defenders and detractors both posting here. A lot of people teach based on what they see today's pros do (I consider myself someone heavily influenced by video), and they never took a lesson from Wegner.

[5263]

Originally Posted by WildVolley

OK, I believe you. It is just that people here like to fight about it.

I'm sure Wegner can speak for himself if he sees this thread, as he sometimes posts here, but my understanding is that he claims MTM is a way to quickly learn how to play like the modern pros. Take that as you will. I don't think he's claiming that he's developed a new way to play tennis, but I don't know his stuff so I won't speak for him.

WildVolley has done a nice job of answering the question and I'll just add that
MTM is an "Instructional Method" designed to help players learn to swing the
racket more like most of the top players do.

As you can see where sureshs is already made several attempts to get his trolling
2 cents in (and likely to continue trying to push some unknown agenda),
but really there is little need for controversy.
MTM is a name of a teaching system more than a type of play, although it
would make sense that a type of play will result to some extent. THe intent
is that students of MTM will have strokes that work more like the pros than
the old classic method of teaching provides.
Even the instructors and proponents of Classic admit the strokes must morph
over or be relearned for transition to high performance, tournament tennis.

MTM intends to avoid the steps of learning classic and morphing by beginning
with instruction intended
to work more like the best Pro players, right from the start. Even if one needs
to claim they are not exactly like the pros, most would have to honestly admit
that any adjustment would be small.
The idea before was that classic/traditional strokes were easier, but MTM
instructors find that tournament strokes are even easier than classic, so no
reason not to start with the high performance based technique from the start.

[5263]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

The rationale behind my point has been expressed at least a half dozen times on this thread if you had read it. Modern technique works better with modern racquets, and you will be a better player if you learn modern technique rather than obsolete technique."

This above is somewhat of a flawed logic that confuses many on the subject, but
is still a true statement overall.

Actually pretty much anything works better with modern rackets and MTM
instruction was developed when players where using wood rackets....so there
is not quite the connection that is implied, although I'm happy to agree that
modern rackets make the need greater to use more modern strokes and modern
rackets tend to highlight the weaknesses of traditional instruction.

[5263]

Originally Posted by Larrysümmers

its all about getting the most top spin and power. MTM is Oscars approach to coaching

Not quite....it is also about slices, volleys, and serves, along with many good
techniques for relating info to the students.

[5263]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

Is there anyone on the tour who is NOT MTM?

but for short shots I step into it with a closed stance (how could you not?!?!).

Can someone explain all this? I frequently find people here arguing about this topic and I get the sense that they don’t all have the same definition of MTM to begin with which leads to pointless arguments. Clarification would be appreciated. Thanks!

Last question above first. I'm glad to explain,... and my background was playing/instructing
over 20yrs of traditional, before moving on to MTM instruction, so you might
want to consider that when looking for answers. Posters like sureshs have a
limited experience even in classic, but don't even have a beginners grasp of
MTM. Not sure how he feels that makes him helpful to anyone with questions
on this subject.

MTM players on tour-
Most players on tour are good examples of what MTM teaches, but each player
may have an area or 2 that is out of line with most of the rest of the best players.
Several tour players parents have reported that they used Oscar's
books to coach their kids.

"but for short shots I step into it with a closed stance (how could you not?!?!)."
Well that is something you could learn about with MTM. Yes, many players
must take a step at times to create a good contact point, but the best players
normally lift more than move forward into the shot for TS (modern slice you do
continue forward) shots.

Hope this helps.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

Is there anyone on the tour who is NOT MTM?

That is impossible. They may not know it, but they are.

[5263]

Originally Posted by sureshs

That is impossible. They may not know it, but they are.

One of the better post you have made on the subject, although many pros
have a stroke or even 2 that depart from the normal fundamentals.

[dominikk1985]

wegener seems to be a good coach but also seems to have a totally wrong understanding of the physics of the swing (some rather absurd statements).

but as long he gets the results everything is fine.

[Hi I'm Ray]

Originally Posted by 5263

Not quite....it is also about slices, volleys, and serves, along with many good
techniques for relating info to the students.

Can you say a bit more about these modern slices, volleys, and serves? I wasn't aware that there was a "modern" version of those.

[davo81]

After having taken a look at his website and watched a few of the Youtube videos, my main understanding is that Wegner believes that traditional tennis instruction is too complicated, that it doesn't make sense to teach beginners differently than pros, and that the focus should be on the racquet rather than taking away attention by focusing on footwork, early setup, etc. I ordered his DVDs yesterday night (late-night retail therapy) and will soon be able to find out more

[TennisCJC]

Originally Posted by davo81

After having taken a look at his website and watched a few of the Youtube videos, my main understanding is that Wegner believes that traditional tennis instruction is too complicated, that it doesn't make sense to teach beginners differently than pros, and that the focus should be on the racquet rather than taking away attention by focusing on footwork, early setup, etc. I ordered his DVDs yesterday night (late-night retail therapy) and will soon be able to find out more

I have been playing about 35 years. Studied Vic Braden's book Tennis for the Future 35 years ago and bought the Oscar's MTM book about 5 years ago. Both are good and there are really a lot of similarities. I like Oscar's simple approach but there are a few things lacking. Most pros have very good shoulder turn/prep even when hitting open stance FH - Oscar does not stress shoulder turn/prep. His sections on the serve, volley, and 2HBH also seem a bit brief - they provide a basic approach but not advanced level instruction. But, maybe that's Oscar's philosphy - "keep it simple stupid" and a lot of the things will happen naturally.

By the way, if you play like Jimmy Connors or Chris Evertt, you are a classic or traditional type player. If you play like David Ferrer or Roger Federer, you are a modern player.

[5263]

Originally Posted by TennisCJC

I like Oscar's simple approach but there are a few things lacking. Most pros have very good shoulder turn/prep even when hitting open stance FH - Oscar does not stress shoulder turn/prep. His sections on the serve, volley, and 2HBH also seem a bit brief - they provide a basic approach but not advanced level instruction. But, maybe that's Oscar's philosphy - "keep it simple stupid" and a lot of the things will happen naturally..

I don't quite agree that it's lacking, but think you got it right overall and summed
it up well in the end. I think there is a reasonable assumption that as you start
becoming a more advanced, the basics do lead to many things happening normally
or naturally with just a little guidance. Mostly take any little league player and
ask him to throw farther or harder and he will use more shoulder turn without
even thinking about it. When Oscar works with a higher level player, things like this
will be mentioned if needed, but with MTM strokes, power is never a issue in my
experience teaching it, as it just comes on as they learn. Amazing how much talk
about creating power there is on here, but my experience is more in having to
teach players to control power rather than generate it. My players are always
powerful and just need guidance to control the power.
Nice post on your experience.