Food for thought: More Practice matches.

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by TCF

Love that approach. I find practice matches with subtle corrections as things progress are great development tools.

The less is more approach is good the higher level player you are dealing with. I look at the progression of a player's practice style as:

Beginner: coach ball feed, 1 ball at a time. This player need to learn how to strike a ball properly. They can't successfully rally, so give them one at a time and make adjustments to ingrain technique.

Intermediate: coach enters ball for rally with opponent. This player is getting used to footwork and needs to be put in some uncomfortable situations. The player can fight through mistakes, but still needs occasional corrections.

Advanced: coach stands to the side and 2 players rally. At this point, the players need to get used to high level of play. A coach can provide feedback during breaks, but ultimately an advanced player understands their mistakes and can correct them on their own.

It's the players at the intermediate and advanced (especially) that will benefit from playing lots of practice sets.

[Ash_Smith]

Originally Posted by TCF

Love that approach. I find practice matches with subtle corrections as things progress are great development tools.

Agree, but the essential part is that the corrections are made and the technical continuity is enforced. Too much harm done when the coaches send kids off to play matches with no basis for efficient, repeatable technique and allow the technique to erode in matches to the point where you end up starting again each technical lesson, or the player never develops beyond basic 'bunting' the ball over the net.

Cheers

[Tennishacker]

Originally Posted by Ash_Smith

Agree, but the essential part is that the corrections are made and the technical continuity is enforced. Too much harm done when the coaches send kids off to play matches with no basis for efficient, repeatable technique and allow the technique to erode in matches to the point where you end up starting again each technical lesson, or the player never develops beyond basic 'bunting' the ball over the net.

Cheers

Correct, know of kids that did well in USTA junior tournaments (high ranking) with basically flawed strokes, invited to USTA/High Performance, coaches tried to correct the flawed strokes, were not successful...

[tennisconsultcom]

I posted on my blog a very interesting comment on this article. It is too big to publish it here.

[barringer97]

Personally, I think it's kind of a weird balance.

I feel it's best to look at other sports. If you look at basketball, America's dominance has come from the inner city and pick up ball, not working on strokes, footwork, etc. But on the other hand, you need hours and hours of working on your shot (elbow in, rotation, free throws).

Soccer? Way too structured and we suck (compare to Brazil, etc.).

Baseball? Falling behind to small islands like the Dominican Republic, where they play ball in the "streets."

We don't see that in tennis, it's actually a lot closer to soccer then basketball.

[andfor]

Originally Posted by barringer97

Personally, I think it's kind of a weird balance.

I feel it's best to look at other sports. If you look at basketball, America's dominance has come from the inner city and pick up ball, not working on strokes, footwork, etc. But on the other hand, you need hours and hours of working on your shot (elbow in, rotation, free throws).

Soccer? Way too structured and we suck (compare to Brazil, etc.).

Baseball? Falling behind to small islands like the Dominican Republic, where they play ball in the "streets."

We don't see that in tennis, it's actually a lot closer to soccer then basketball.

Agreed that an unstructured play/practice balance needs to occurs during a kids tennis development. Many, many of the sets need to be played by the kids on their own without mommy, daddy or a coach watching. Understandably this needs to happen on a scaled up basis as they get older. It's difficult for 10 and unders to play unstructured compared to 16-18 year olds who should be playing more and more on their own in practice matches.

I know some kids parents that are at almost all their pracitces and matches. Evaluating every move. Kids need to have fun and have the game be their own. That's a little hard to do with someone watching over your shoulder every minute. Kids in the states rely to much on structured play.

[TCF]

================================================

[coaching32yrs]

Not convinced the way the foreign kids train is better. Maybe. In my limited view of the tennis world, foreign countries are getting bigger and better athletes into tennis. Just saw a D2 men's match. The team w/lot of Europeans and S. Americans had 4-5 inch per man height advantage over the team w/ all Americans. I agree that girls depth in USTA is very shallow. Boys much deeper. However, when I look at the top 30 boys in section, 18u, I don't see any elite athletes. All good tennis players but only a few good athletes. The starting 5 on my hs basketball team were better athletes.

[tennisconsultcom]

It is quote from latest article on my blog.
"...Every time you step on the court, there should be a purpose, whether it be with a coach, a ball machine or an opponent. One purpose has to be better strokes, and for this you need a coach. No one deliberately hits incorrect shots, so there’s no point in the player trying to make the correction on his own. It is easier to learn anything — a new stroke, or a new language, when you are young. Waiting until you are in college or on the tour is foolhardy, since without good strokes, you won’t get your college scholarship..."

[barringer97]

Originally Posted by TCF

I think the issue is not just the structure of American kid's sports, but also the very, very early emphasis on wins and losses.

This article originally posted by Protour630, is a good read on the topic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/06/ma...anted=all&_r=0

I don't know, look at Hoops, my nephew is a good player and, mainly because of AAU, plays at least 100 times a year.

I just believe that I think playing points (or sets), not tournaments, is vitally important.

Almost like pick up hoops.

[hhollines]

I believe we are way off base in the U.S. at least with how we train junior tennis players. The basketball model that someone mentioned is on cue. I played Div. I basketball (and started tennis when I was 5 yrs. old; dad played in the NBA) and if you look junior basketball development, we play a lot of pickup basketball and that's why so many kids come from the inner city. These are essentially simulated games.

The point Coach Nott is making is there's no substitution for actual points and sets. You can toss balls all you want and drill all you want but nothing mimics actual tournament play, like a practice match. Additionally, if you are a competitor, even in a practice match, you'll deal with some pressure (not the same level as a real tournament) but nevertheless it's good to deal with.

The real issue is parents and coach who won't let their kids play practice matches, and furthermore, if they do, they sit against the fence and watch their every movement. This is so damaging b/c it teaches the kid to rely on the parent who, by the way, can't help them on the court, but importantly, it doesn't provide an environment where the kid feels comfortable enough to try new stuff and add to their games.

During pickup basketball, that's when we expanded our game and added new dimensions, moves and shots.

With that said, a great coach is a necessity as tennis is about fundamentals and technique. You can go quite far with just a great coach, practice matches and tournament play but, of course, that approach is damaging financially to the private clubs and academies. The only caveat is if you are in a poor section, it may be difficult to find adequate practice matches as you can only go so far playing the same 5-10 folks over and over . . . you need variety of type styles to play.

Coach Nott was referring to practice matches (not 500 sets of tournament play for a junior but a combination of both).

[TCF]

================================================

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by TCF

A few posters have cited basketball. The dynamics are different, many, many more kids play so the pool of from which the cream rises is much deeper.

Also....for every one of the 100 games played every year by busy players, the best ones also spend countless hours shooting ball after ball after ball, all by themselves. Its so easy to practice basketball dribbling and shooting all by yourself.

Lastly, the best players have great fundamentals. Somewhere along the line, despite all the pick up games they played, they learned great fundamentals. Since the pool is so much deeper all along the way, the kids that do not put in the countless hours of practice by themselves or who do not develop fundamentals, fall away as the levels increase.

Shawn Marion has the worst jumper to ever make it to the NBA, but he can ball.

I think you proved Coach Notts point.... practice like crazy, compete like crazy. I think that's the whole gist. Too many pretty strokes with no game behind them.

[TCF]

================================================

[floridatennisdude]

Originally Posted by TCF

Ha, in the past I always used the Shawn Marion example. Once again, the exception never proves the point, quite the opposite. Pull out the greatest shooters in history, college and pros......99.999999% shoot closer to Ray Allen technique then Marion's.

Fact is a kid can win in tennis using terrible technique in the 12s and 14s. Our kids compete too early.

If Nott was talking about later teens, fine. If talking about little tennis kids, wrong.

Yea, we agreed on the age thing before. In the 13-18 bracket I like more competition than ball feeding. And those are the parents Nott is likely talking to.

[TCF]

================================================

[Number1Coach]

"Ajax puts young players into a competitive caldron, a culture of constant improvement in which they either survive and advance or are discarded. It is not what most would regard as a child-friendly environment, but it is one that sorts out the real prodigies — those capable of playing at an elite international level — from the merely gifted."

"He was particularly useful in translating a culture that was nothing like I had ever seen in many years of reporting on American sports. When I observed that for all the seriousness of purpose at De Toekomst, I was surprised that the players did not practice more hours or play more games, Rooi said: “Of course, because they do not want to do anything to injure them or wear them out. They’re capital. And what is the first thing a businessman does? He protects his capital.”

Wow they are basicly teaching these kids in the 1st quote that they are not their to have fun "not a child friendly environment"

And in the 2nd quote they dont have nothing to prove early on but to protect the investment ,,,NOW i ask where have we heard that from for the last 4 or 5 years ???

Great article on how to build a tennis player OOPS I meant soccer player !!

Man I should have went to college to learn what those soccer guys are doing ,I could have done that with DB wait I have been !

[TCF]

================================================

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by TCF

But had one of their kids lost at the Zoo and then lost in straight sets to Peliwo they would have put him immediately into the class of the 'merely gifted' and out of the class of the 'elite'. Sorry, thats the way it would work. Its a brutal selection process.

Soccer has many times the players overall than youth tennis. So if you want to compare your situation to the elite soccer selection....only maybe the top 10 ITFs in the world would be kept on the elite track.

My point was the same as theirs, your in the sport "not" for fun but business, my belief is the same as theirs ,dont play all the tourney like you say and wait till the player is older and you have protected the investment from burn out and injurys from overuse.

So your telling me had a player gone from well over 400 nationally to no.7 in the nation in less then a year they would get rid of him? What are you
smoking ? This is the kinda player they are looking for , Now I have to see a video of your daughter got to see what your bosting of , this will be interesting HAHA PLEASE PUT THE VIDEO UP FOR US ALL ,QUIT BLOWING ALL THAT HOT AIR.,,,,LETS SEE THE PROOF.

[Number1Coach]

Originally Posted by TCF

But had one of their kids lost at the Zoo and then lost in straight sets to Peliwo they would have put him immediately into the class of the 'merely gifted' and out of the class of the 'elite'. Sorry, thats the way it would work. Its a brutal selection process.

Soccer has many times the players overall than youth tennis. So if you want to compare your situation to the elite soccer selection....only maybe the top 10 ITFs in the world would be kept on the elite track.

BTW the article says they "do not" look for the kids with "results or the fastest" ect. comrehension is trouble for some .