confused w/ the term "MTM"

[tennis_balla]

Free publicity, that's all it is. You could smell troll from the first sentence, the ball starts rolling and it's déjà vu all over again.

[5263]

Originally Posted by JW10S

Oh gee, look what I've missed, another obviously planted MTM thread. I'm not going to waste my time reading through all the posts but will answer the OP that MTM is just 1 of many, many, many, modern systems of teaching out there. MTMers will tell you anyone not teaching MTM is teaching traditonal, and anyone teaching modern tennis is using MTM, which is just not true. I'm a modern teacher ...

Interesting you think this is a planted thread, but yet the OP does not seemed
to be convinced about MTM, but then, you jumped to that conclusion without
reading as usual. And Balla feels he needs to chime in on this as well, after looking
to be unbaised. Disappointing, but guess you want to jump in with this unnamed
fellow who claims high credentials and never has tips for this section? He must be
better than Oscar for haters even though we Know nothing about him.

Then JW creates a straw man that a MTM person will say only MTM is modern
instruction, lol, but I have several post speaking of Dave Smiths modern system,
the advanced foundation, along with others. More demonstrated mis-info by you
as usual. I wonder if your instruction is just as mis-informed as your posts?

Now you finally admit what I suggested many months ago that you likely teach
modern yourself. Wonder if that is more mis-info though?
Do you teach to extend thru contact down the target line ball path?
None of MTM methods and your modern? lol, Ok, you have your own words to
describe what Oscar described while you were in kindergarten.

[tennis_balla]

I'm not getting involved in the discussion, staying away. We've been over all these things before, it's just not worth it. I do think the OP is sketchy but I'm stating that as only an opinion nothing more.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

Free publicity, that's all it is. You could smell troll from the first sentence, the ball starts rolling and it's déjà vu all over again.

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

I'm not getting involved in the discussion, staying away. We've been over all these things before, it's just not worth it. I do think the OP is sketchy but I'm stating that as only an opinion nothing more.

I don't see how you can come to any conclusive opinion about the OP's motives. It seems that he wasn't even able to distinguish MTM as a teaching method rather than a hitting method. How is he a troll in your view? Just a subterfuge to keep MTM at the top of the board? Because, he sure wasn't much of an effective advocate.

[5263]

Originally Posted by mr_fro2000

Wow lots of feedback here… thx! While I have not watched every video and read every thread in painstaking detail, I think I’m getting the idea/concepts of what has happened the past 10 yrs.

I think my conclusion from all this is that there is really no ‘new’ way to play tennis… the strokes that are being taught in the wenger videos have been around since I was a junior. Perhaps these kinds of strokes were not actively taught to stone-cold new players in the past… and maybe they are now.

In any case, many of the arguments seem silly and I personally don’t think 1 ‘methodology’ is really better than the other. Regarding forehand strokes, I think it might be best to figure out ‘naturally’ what works best for a new student and then build off of that. Some may find eastern grip forehands more natural, while others may find a semi-western strokes easier to hit. Both grips/strokes have advantages and disadvantages.
I’ll continue to explore the topic, but it seems like I’m not changing a thing about how I play nor will I be radically changing the way I will teach (my kids) when they are ready to learn the game. Thx again everyone!

Doesn't sound like a plant or even too convinced to me, but I won't jump to
conclusions like JW. I can say if this was a softball tossed in... I'm not aware
and given his posts, my guess is it's unlikely.

Looks like your smeller is off to me, balla, but just imo.

Also, if sureshs or JW want to say "imo" or "it seems to me" with their comments on MTM, I'm
inclined to leave it as it is...but when they try to post mis-info as facts, like "it has been shown" or, "XX has been debunked", I'm going to often call them on that mis-info.

[tennis_balla]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

I don't see how you can come to any conclusive opinion about the OP's motives. It seems that he wasn't even able to distinguish MTM as a teaching method rather than a hitting method. How is he a troll in your view? Just a subterfuge to keep MTM at the top of the board? Because, he sure wasn't much of an effective advocate.

That's true but he didn't have to be. The people against MTM give it more publicity then MTM'ers themselves. That's what I was getting at. On the one hand you got all these folks foaming at the mouth when they see the term MTM and hate it with a passion yet on the other they discuss it to no end and are actually helping in spreading it around for more to see. So you should be thanking them lol.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

That's true but he didn't have to be. The people against MTM give it more publicity then MTM'ers themselves. That's what I was getting at. On the one hand you got all these folks foaming at the mouth when they see the term MTM and hate it with a passion yet on the other they discuss it to no end and are actually helping in spreading it around for more to see. So you should be thanking them lol.

Come to think of it, if memory serves me correctly, I first heard of MTM from one of your posts.

[sureshs]

I have always been curious why some people like MTM (and I don't mean people on the inside). I think I have an insight into this. A couple of us have been trying to teach a guy at the club to hit with topspin (case of the blind leading the blind probably but that is OK). He is my age, and a very tall and large person. He is a regular doubles player in USTA 4.0 leagues but sometimes plays singles 4.0 leagues as well. He has a hard flat first serve which is a product of brute force, and a dinky second serve, horrible backhand (first had 1 hander, then 2 hander, now both screwed).

He just cannot hit topspin. Then I realized he has always had only a forehand slice. Sometimes it is hit hard with a slight open face and not an obvious slice, but still open face it is. His basic problem is he has never hit with a closed face on the forehand.

Then the truth dawned on me. The guys who cannot play the modern tennis topspin game could never play the classical game either. They are basically hacks who survive at the 4.0 level with dinky strokes, craftiness, quick reflexes, and excellent court sense and mental strength (not choking).

I think a person who can play correct classical strokes (E grip, flatter forehand, mostly closed or neutral stance, finish till the left forehead, serve and volley) can easily incorporate more topspin, SW grip, open stance, across finish, baseline grind as he has the fundamentals down.

But those who never had the fundamentals right but have been hacking away for decades will think that "modern instruction" is great as compared to their "classical" style which was actually "no" style. And they will become fanatical about the improvement of the game due to the teaching.

[tennis_balla]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Come to think of it, if memory serves me correctly, I first heard of MTM from one of your posts.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by sureshs

I have always been curious why some people like MTM (and I don't mean people on the inside). I think I have an insight into this. A couple of us have been trying to teach a guy at the club to hit with topspin (case of the blind leading the blind probably but that is OK). He is my age, and a very tall and large person. He is a regular doubles player in USTA 4.0 leagues but sometimes plays singles 4.0 leagues as well. He has a hard flat first serve which is a product of brute force, and a dinky second serve, horrible backhand (first had 1 hander, then 2 hander, now both screwed).

He just cannot hit topspin. Then I realized he has always had only a forehand slice. Sometimes it is hit hard with a slight open face and not an obvious slice, but still open face it is. His basic problem is he has never hit with a closed face on the forehand.

Then the truth dawned on me. The guys who cannot play the modern tennis topspin game could never play the classical game either. They are basically hacks who survive at the 4.0 level with dinky strokes, craftiness, quick reflexes, and excellent court sense and mental strength (not choking).

I think a person who can play correct classical strokes (flatter forehand, mostly closed or neutral stance, finish till the left forehead, serve and volley) can easily incorporate more topspin, open stance, across finish, baseline grind as he has the fundamentals down.

But those who never had the fundamentals right but have been hacking away for decades will think that "modern instruction" is great as compared to their "classical" style which was actually "no" style. And they will become fanatical about the improvement of the game due to the teaching.

Nope, you still don't get it. But, you don't really want to, do you?

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Nope, you still don't get it. But, you don't really want to, do you?

Are you one of those people I mentioned?

[boramiNYC]

Originally Posted by sureshs

I think a person who can play correct classical strokes (flatter forehand, mostly closed or neutral stance, finish till the left forehead, serve and volley) can easily incorporate more topspin, open stance, across finish, baseline grind as he has the fundamentals down.

But those who never had the fundamentals right but have been hacking away for decades will think that "modern instruction" is great as compared to their "classical" style which was actually "no" style. And they will become fanatical about the improvement of the game due to the teaching.

pretty well said. and closed stance is not something biomechanically inferior or incorrect as some MTMers believe. any pro who uses E grip style can hit a fh in closed stance just as well as they do in open stance. fed and berdych are good examples. SW grip is good in generating lots of topspin but only in open stance and is quite limited to that.

It's actually the same principle how 2hbh is hit in closed stance.

[mr_fro2000]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

I'm not getting involved in the discussion, staying away. We've been over all these things before, it's just not worth it. I do think the OP is sketchy but I'm stating that as only an opinion nothing more.

um yeah, so im going to stop defending myself... i've already mentioned where i'm coming from multiple times. I literally heard the term for the first time in my life a few weeks ago, so I asked a simple question. I didn't even know it was so controversial, which is ******** considering people have been playing with this "methodology" (why the f is it a 'methodology' anyway) for like 20-30 years.

and i agree this discussion is getting ridiculous.

[5263]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

So you should be thanking them lol.

Why should Limpin be thankful? While he acknowledges MTM has some good attributes,
he has never thought of himself as a MTM'er that I know of. I appreciate his
willingness to admit our good points and also to challenge the ideas he differs on.
Limpin, of course correct me If I'm wrong on this.

I on the other hand, have thanked the guys like sureshs many times, as he and
others make many comments that allow me to illustrate how it works and can
help player's games to improve. I like that they keep up the conversation, not
because of any financial reasons, but that I get the chance to share better tennis
with others that come here to look for tips and instruction. That is what this forum
is for, right? If someone buys a book from Nick, Vic, Oscar, or Dave because of
the discussion,...good for the seller whoever that is. I just like to hear about
those enjoying and playing better tennis.

[5263]

Originally Posted by boramiNYC

pretty well said. and closed stance is not something biomechanically inferior or incorrect as some MTMers believe.

It would be better if you don't try to speak on what MTMers believe unless
you have it right. Otherwise you are just sharing mis-info like this post ^^.
MTM is NOT stance dependent and if a comment was correctly made about
something wrong with closed stance, it was context dependent. I may have
made some comments that you took that way related to how traditional uses
that stance, but have stated many more times that MTM is NOT stance dependent.
SW grip is not limited to open stance even in MTM and I use that quite a bit in
some situations.

[tennis_balla]

I actually thought I was responding to you 5263, cause I was responding on my phone and didn't notice the name on the small screen. I just noticed now I responded to Limp.....d'oh! My bad

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

I actually thought I was responding to you 5263, cause I was responding on my phone and didn't notice the name on the small screen. I just noticed now I responded to Limp.....d'oh! My bad

Impossibru? I don't know what that means, but, the pic is kinda creepy.

PS: But, I still credit you with introducing me to MTM. Hahaha!

[5263]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Nope, you still don't get it. But, you don't really want to, do you?

You are likely right that he doesn't get it,....but
Hey, I think he inadvertently got a lot right in the quotes from him below.

**They are basically hacks who survive at the 4.0 level with dinky strokes, craftiness, quick reflexes, and excellent court sense and mental strength (not choking).**
Yes, basically hacks that tried to make classic work as actually taught and often
too disciplined to make the adjustments required to make it work. I mean, the
crafty player, with quick reflexes and excellent court sense/mental strength is
clearly quite an athlete who does more than survive. Me for example, played
several undefeated seasons at 4.0 & A level ALTA before getting bumped to
4.5 and then playing 2 for 2 undefeated seasons at 4.5 in one of the toughest
regions of the country. All this was done before getting USTPA certified or
hearing of MTM...where my game really took off...well into my 40s!
He goes on to say
*I think a person who can play correct classical strokes can easily incorporate more topspin, SW grip, open stance, across finish, baseline grind *
Yes, maybe because this is a person who has shown the ability to make the required
adjustments over time playing as a Jr or maybe just more of a visual learner vs
the actual instruction of classic.
and says-
*will think that "modern instruction" is great as compared to their "classical" style . And they will become fans about the improvement of the game due to the teaching.*
Yes, this group can now actually have instruction that can be followed to
successful result without contradicting itself, gross adjustment and is quite impressed
the simplicity of it all; especially after years of frustration with poor instruction. Yes, I shortened his comments to remove the worse mistakes and
shorten.

All in all, as sureshs tried to insult MTMers as hard learners, but he illustrates that
even hard learners can do well in MTM! so just think how it can help those he
considers more talented or that learn differently.

[5263]

Originally Posted by tennis_balla

I actually thought I was responding to you 5263, cause I was responding on my phone and didn't notice the name on the small screen. I just noticed now I responded to Limp.....d'oh! My bad

Well I have thanked sureshs and others several times for the chance to contrast modern teaching
with what he posts.

[5263]

Now I do credit the traditional strokes as forcing me to learn soooo much about
strategy, position, and tactics, as winning with classic instruction took a ton
of effort in every other aspect of my game. With classic instruction, I was only
a slightly above avg hitter, but thanks to Modern tennis, that really changed and
I became able to hit people off the courts at times. Yes, that impressed me in
my 40's after I figured to be on the down hill slide in that area, so I have become
quite a Fan!

Maybe when sureshs has some break out years at 4.0 and then
has some great 4.5 seasons he will be a fan of something as well. Think that
will happen as he fights to prove he knows more and better??