Game Based Approach To Teaching

What do any of you out there know about the Game Based Approach? Any help here would be appreciated. My understanding is that you put players in situations that are more "live" ball oriented teaching? Something that can be translate to "Real" mach experiences so that your movement and strokes adapt well to the real matches we play? Is this correct?

If so does this mean that when starting out the little 10 year olds you let them play game and just instruct them as they learn to rally? No repetition drill feeding?

I'm curious...

Thanks!

Rambler124 said:

What do any of you out there know about the Game Based Approach? Any help here would be appreciated. My understanding is that you put players in situations that are more "live" ball oriented teaching? Something that can be translate to "Real" mach experiences so that your movement and strokes adapt well to the real matches we play? Is this correct?

If so does this mean that when starting out the little 10 year olds you let them play game and just instruct them as they learn to rally? No repetition drill feeding?

I'm curious...

Thanks!

Click to expand...

this should be helpful http://www.acecoach.com/main/spage/gamebased/

Thanks! I think I understand it a bit more. I get what they are saying on that website. Ultimately tennis is a game and tactics are married to technique in that whatever or however you are trying to manipulate the ball in certain situations will call on different types of technique. I assume that this ultimately allows the student to figure some things out on their own and/or allows the coach to support this process by adding different technical components.

I think my question is this. Does a coach ultimately start with tactics in the very first lesson? I always assumed that technique at least at a basic level needed to be understood first to a certain level of competency before you could achieve more of a game based approach. Am I wrong according to this approach?

I'm imagining in my head these tennis lessons with adults or kids with them trying to rally 10 balls in a row with all kinds of messed up disjointed swings that would produce "bad habits" over time if not corrected fairly quickly in the initial stages of learning?

Thoughts?

ignore the name of it and put it into a scientific explanation.

there are two types of basic learning
Process oriented
Task oriented (sometimes called Results oriented)

traditional coaching has been based around process oriented learning, teaching people the process of hitting a ball (technique), learning thru developmental and technical stages to build a stroke(s) then attempting to transplant that into a rally scenario.

GBA is results oriented learning as it challenges students to "teach themselves" (learn) by observing their results in a task and making the appropriate adjustments to improve at said task.

rallying does not need to be stage one but should the first goal of GBA in tennis coaching. To start with you may get students to throw and catch a ball to eachother to simulate a "rally", with young kids they can "rally" by using their racquets to push the ball along the ground to eachother. The goal of these tasks is to put the student into a situation where they need to use tracking, movement and racquet control to succeed at the simulated "rally" this will then positively transfer as learning when they have the racquet control to rally with a partner.

Techniques will hopefully develop to achieve the tasks, and as such tasks should be set to achieve the techniques required. So if you need your student to swing low to high then you set a task where they must hit over a higher net or they need to hit to their partner who must catch the ball above their head. This will allow the student to experiment various ways to achieve the goal, hopefully succeeding with the most appropriate technique.

Undoubtedly this theory is flawed, just go down to any tennis club and watch the huge variety of strokes happening. All these people CAN play a game of tennis but are probably not maximising their potential. Technical input could go a long way to improving these peoples enjoyment of the game.

On the other hand, the fact that they are playing the game means they have succeeded (to some level) in playing (and enjoying) the sport which in GBA reads as a completed goal.

I am living proof that GBA can work, I was not coached as a youth, I taught myself how to play by hitting against a wall until i found techniques that could keep the rally going. I learned topspin and a 2HBH by observing others and thru trial and error until I figured out what worked and what didn't. I serve with a conti grip not because someone taught me but because that was what worked the best.

HOWEVER I am a career tennis coach because I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age, if my technical flaws had been corrected by someone before they become ingrained. I want to give others the opportunity I didn't get.

the answer? find the best of every technique available, don't take one ideal as gospel, trial what works best for you and most importantly your students. Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just "hitting balls"

There is definitely benefits to drills that are applicable to actual game play. However - I think that it would be sales speak to claim that coaches have not been using game-based drills for 100 years. Watch any good player and/or coach, and you will see this, but it is definitely a trap for the casual player.

Good players practice with a purpose:

1) hit mostly crosscourt drills because that is the proper tactical decision; the casual player practices from from the middle of the court, behind the baseline 95% of the time

2) with your crosscourt drills, play out points and practice moving into the court and changing direction on weak/short balls

3) when you are hitting drills, you keep some type of score

4) practice serves and returns of serve more (boring to do!).

Solat said:

ignore the name of it and put it into a scientific explanation.

there are two types of basic learning
Process oriented
Task oriented (sometimes called Results oriented)

traditional coaching has been based around process oriented learning, teaching people the process of hitting a ball (technique), learning thru developmental and technical stages to build a stroke(s) then attempting to transplant that into a rally scenario.

GBA is results oriented learning as it challenges students to "teach themselves" (learn) by observing their results in a task and making the appropriate adjustments to improve at said task.

rallying does not need to be stage one but should the first goal of GBA in tennis coaching. To start with you may get students to throw and catch a ball to eachother to simulate a "rally", with young kids they can "rally" by using their racquets to push the ball along the ground to eachother. The goal of these tasks is to put the student into a situation where they need to use tracking, movement and racquet control to succeed at the simulated "rally" this will then positively transfer as learning when they have the racquet control to rally with a partner.

Techniques will hopefully develop to achieve the tasks, and as such tasks should be set to achieve the techniques required. So if you need your student to swing low to high then you set a task where they must hit over a higher net or they need to hit to their partner who must catch the ball above their head. This will allow the student to experiment various ways to achieve the goal, hopefully succeeding with the most appropriate technique.

Undoubtedly this theory is flawed, just go down to any tennis club and watch the huge variety of strokes happening. All these people CAN play a game of tennis but are probably not maximising their potential. Technical input could go a long way to improving these peoples enjoyment of the game.

On the other hand, the fact that they are playing the game means they have succeeded (to some level) in playing (and enjoying) the sport which in GBA reads as a completed goal.

I am living proof that GBA can work, I was not coached as a youth, I taught myself how to play by hitting against a wall until i found techniques that could keep the rally going. I learned topspin and a 2HBH by observing others and thru trial and error until I figured out what worked and what didn't. I serve with a conti grip not because someone taught me but because that was what worked the best.

HOWEVER I am a career tennis coach because I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age, if my technical flaws had been corrected by someone before they become ingrained. I want to give others the opportunity I didn't get.

the answer? find the best of every technique available, don't take one ideal as gospel, trial what works best for you and most importantly your students. Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just "hitting balls"

Click to expand...

EXCELENT POST. BRAVO!!

Solat said:

HOWEVER I am a career tennis coach because I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age, if my technical flaws had been corrected by someone before they become ingrained. I want to give others the opportunity I didn't get.

the answer? find the best of every technique available, don't take one ideal as gospel, trial what works best for you and most importantly your students. Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just "hitting balls"

Click to expand...

Very nice post!

Rambler124 said:

What do any of you out there know about the Game Based Approach? Any help here would be appreciated. My understanding is that you put players in situations that are more "live" ball oriented teaching? Something that can be translate to "Real" mach experiences so that your movement and strokes adapt well to the real matches we play? Is this correct?

If so does this mean that when starting out the little 10 year olds you let them play game and just instruct them as they learn to rally? No repetition drill feeding?

I'm curious...

Thanks!

Click to expand...

You have to have balance in your teaching. For players playing matches, definetly mix in game-like drills. However, during those times you are teaching tactics to improve their chances to win a point. You are also keeping an eye on technique and footwork for future drills and exercises. It is a combination to help improve a player in match-like situations.

Federer to this day works on his footwork, stroke fundamentals, and his conditioning. If younger players are ready for game-like drills, do it.

However the balance may be swayed towards developing their strength, coordination, and technique.

One of the best ways to use the game approach is to work on the weaknesses that you noted or tracked during a real match. That way you make the game approach style to instruction more specific and beneficial.

As I know of, GBA needs intensive guidance from the coach in order to shape up the technique, not just let the student figure out things all by themselves. An issue about technique will always have to be established so that in every playing (learning session), there is a technical improvement.

In fact, it's harder on the coach than the typical "technique-first" teaching. Coach has to try to maximize each individual student potential without presuming what's right or wrong for the student.
Tough work.

We've found the GBA very useful especially in teaching doubles play, since doubles is very much a position game in terms of both the position of the ball and the position of the players. Especially, the one-back one-front formation, since the two-up formation is more quick hands as compared. And GBA has worked for us well when coupled with some additional drills designed for certain patterns.

I wanted to revisit this and get any thoughts from anyone who teaches/plays/or is a parent of a player:

Please read and let me know what you think:

http://www.newengland.usta.com/Glob...6_Game_Based_Approach__An_OnCourt_Lesson.aspx

Rambler124 said:

I wanted to revisit this and get any thoughts from anyone who teaches/plays/or is a parent of a player:

Please read and let me know what you think:

http://www.newengland.usta.com/Glob...6_Game_Based_Approach__An_OnCourt_Lesson.aspx

Click to expand...

looks like a very standard GBA lesson plan to me

Drills work well with club teams. I know my wife's 3.0 senior team drilled with one of our club pros and it was excellant. She (the pro) was the catalyst for bringing them together to get to Sectionals.
I think drills are great but you have to have the right pro.
This pro was vocal and no nonsense.

There are a lot of misconceptions regarding the game based approach. Based on the comments above,
here are a few.

1) "GBA is results oriented learning as it challenges students to "teach themselves" (learn) by observing their results in a task and making the appropriate adjustments to improve at said task."

- The GBA does not allow people to teach themselves, the GBA uses all the technical fundamentals but applies them to tactics. Instead of teaching "strokes" the GBA teaches situations and uses technique as a tool to play better tennis.

2) "I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age"

- The GBA does not try and teach beginning players advanced technique. For example many "model" coaches teach the full swing to beginners which includes all the biomechanical principles. The GBA starts with sound technical fundamentals connected to tactics that beginners can master to feel success. As the the player improves the tactics become more challenging and more technical skills are added. A GBA coach does not feed regular balls to new players on a full court and expect them to have success.

3) "Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just hitting balls"

- The GBA does not have students feel paralysis from technical over-analysis. I think everyone wants to feel like they're playing tennis. Isn't that the point? Some people love to get into the nitty-gritty of technical details.. that's OK the GBA gives that to them, but it always reminds students that technique is just a means to make the ball do what they want.
A MODERN DEFINITION OF TECHNIQUE IS: Conformity AND Effectiveness : Conformity = what the players body,racquet,arm does AND Effectiveness= what the ball does: Height,Distance,Direction,Speed,Spin. They are not separate.

4) "Does a coach ultimately start with tactics in the very first lesson?"

- Yes of course... Many new players to sport watch it on TV and think that they are supposed to hit hard an inch over the net. In the GBA, a beginner tactic is to rally successfully back and forth with a partner over the net with an arc, trying to keep partner deep near the baseline... Is this not a tactic? With a both back situation it could move to pin opponent to a corner(BH) then another is move opponent side to side. Even tactics you see the pros using...

The GBA is here to stay and is growing in popularity. It's endorsed by the ITF and many countries are moving toward completely adopting a GBA approach.

More info can be found on my website: gbatennis.com

Cheers
thanks for reading

gba tennis said:

There are a lot of misconceptions regarding the game based approach. Based on the comments above,
here are a few.

1) "GBA is results oriented learning as it challenges students to "teach themselves" (learn) by observing their results in a task and making the appropriate adjustments to improve at said task."

- The GBA does not allow people to teach themselves, the GBA uses all the technical fundamentals but applies them to tactics. Instead of teaching "strokes" the GBA teaches situations and uses technique as a tool to play better tennis.

Click to expand...

I guess this would work for some people. Not everyone.

2) "I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age"

- The GBA does not try and teach beginning players advanced technique. For example many "model" coaches teach the full swing to beginners which includes all the biomechanical principles. The GBA starts with sound technical fundamentals connected to tactics that beginners can master to feel success. As the the player improves the tactics become more challenging and more technical skills are added. A GBA coach does not feed regular balls to new players on a full court and expect them to have success.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...a good coach is going to mix in many different ways to teach tennis or have players learn tennis.

3) "Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just hitting balls"

- The GBA does not have students feel paralysis from technical over-analysis. I think everyone wants to feel like they're playing tennis. Isn't that the point? Some people love to get into the nitty-gritty of technical details.. that's OK the GBA gives that to them, but it always reminds students that technique is just a means to make the ball do what they want.
A MODERN DEFINITION OF TECHNIQUE IS: Conformity AND Effectiveness : Conformity = what the players body,racquet,arm does AND Effectiveness= what the ball does: Height,Distance,Direction,Speed,Spin. They are not separate.

Click to expand...

Again, people are different. Some people want and feel it is a challenge to learn technique in a more specific way. Some people want to be told exactly what they need to do and that at times requires explanation that might overwhelm someone else.

What you want to control is not the amount of information but the anxiety levels of a player. Tennis is not the problem and neither is the amount of information. It is the player and their past experiences in learning. Chances are that same person who feels overwhellemed would also be overwhellemed in another subject. It depends on past learning issues, the ability to concentrate, associate, reconcile, and retain the information given.

And technique is not only about being the means of making a ball do what you want it to do. So much more goes into that such as conditioning, court sense, and talent. Further technique is also about helping a player reduce their chances fo injury as well.

4) "Does a coach ultimately start with tactics in the very first lesson?"

- Yes of course... Many new players to sport watch it on TV and think that they are supposed to hit hard an inch over the net. In the GBA, a beginner tactic is to rally successfully back and forth with a partner over the net with an arc, trying to keep partner deep near the baseline... Is this not a tactic? With a both back situation it could move to pin opponent to a corner(BH) then another is move opponent side to side. Even tactics you see the pros using...

Click to expand...

I don't know about the inch thingy. It is pretty easy to teach players to hit higher over the net. I can take two telescoping poles and teach how to rally over the rope that is across the net and teach them why they are doing it and why they are doing it crosscourt. You really got nothing special here.

Further, there are many ways to skin this cat. You could start with technique and once they mastered your mini-lesson, you can have them rally (or try to rally) the same way. Of course, not many true beginners can really "rally" back and forth to make it meaningful and if you say otherwise, I would say you're full of it.

And wow, really stretching the "tactic" thingy for us all aren't cha!! Geez, a tactic could also be hitting low over the net as you described above! A tactic could be me scratching my manhood to distract my opponent. A tactic could be me sneezing just at a precise time. If you are describing your example as a tactic, you can also describe anything as a tactic!

The GBA is here to stay and is growing in popularity. It's endorsed by the ITF and many countries are moving toward completely adopting a GBA approach.

Click to expand...

Once again, first MTM and now GBA. There is nothing new under the sun. Many coaches mix in tactic training in their lessons. They do it at the beginner level and the advanced level. Some do it without calling it "tactics". Some just call it "GOALS." I am glad you are doing this, however, many of us have been doing it for years. As a player advances, we also mix in physical conditioning to their "GBA" or "Goals" or "Lesson" to help them develop better match skills. We also use match results to build a lesson as well. Such as if a player has a high amount of double faults, we will work on the serve at practice. GBA can also be misleading. If you promote drills that does not work on a players weakness, you might miss the boat in practice. Again, nothing new under the sun.

Any coach worth their salt will do this.

gba tennis said:

More info can be found on my website: gbatennis.com

Cheers
thanks for reading

Click to expand...

Saw the videos.

How would you used game based teaching to teach/improve the serve?

It looks like GBA is a top down way of learning. One learns tactics first, and then one learns the skills needed for execution. Conventional teaching will emphasize execution skills (aka strokes) and then add tactics. Personally, I don't think tactics will be meaningful to someone who has no physical feel for the game. I feel the right way is to start bottom up learning execution skills first and getting a physical feel for the game - but tactics could be introduced earlier than coaches normally do, I suppose.

Ok a bit more intrigued by this as the comments are flowing. I completely hear what BB is saying here. Most coaches who are worth their salt will integrate these things. Maybe not in the order that GBA does, but they will integrate them and make them mesh.

The more I read about GBA the more my understanding is this. It is not a better way necessarily to teach tennis in terms of results (as opposed to traditional teaching) but perhaps it creates better retention ?

If people feel they are playing the game to begin with will they ultimately stick around to play longer? That very well could be in this case. Especially for kids? I mean I swear I hear an awful lot of kids say during drill sessions etc that they do want to play games right? So, perhaps GBA is a method to increase the rate at which people retain people/kids to play tennis than say the traditional method?

I was taught tennis the "traditional" way and didn't really play matches until well into a year or so of playing. Signed up for league basketball at like 11. Bam. Thrown right in to playing. So, it seems to make some logical sense to me on that side. It also could be a good approach if there is not much availability for beginner league play for adults or kids in a certain area so that the actual classes or lessons function as a way to "play". Am I on a logical track here?

bhupaes said:

It looks like GBA is a top down way of learning. One learns tactics first, and then one learns the skills needed for execution. Conventional teaching will emphasize execution skills (aka strokes) and then add tactics. Personally, I don't think tactics will be meaningful to someone who has no physical feel for the game. I feel the right way is to start bottom up learning execution skills first and getting a physical feel for the game - but tactics could be introduced earlier than coaches normally do, I suppose.

Click to expand...

Yes, however under GBA the word "tactics" could be two players at the service line hitting the ball back and forth in a mini-tennis sort of way. This could evolve in a netman rally.

It seems that GBA sort of projects these "tactics" into something it could become when the players are advanced.

I just don't see a difference from a good coach using these things. Again, more things known simply packaged a different way. And I am sorry, but there has to be a point where you have to explain things in their strokes and ball handling. So information still has to be transferred.

Here is a message to coaches. You are going to hear a lot of people tell you this stuff about this conventional vs. modern tennis. Us vs. them. Good vs. bad. God vs. the Devil. Angels vs. Demons. This is an old marketing trick to make someone look bad in order to look good. They do this in politics to gain mindshare and to entice people to "try something" new.

They will bring up information that may have been popular at a moment in time and use it to imply that this is what conventional tennis teaches - it is bad. They may even show the poor soul in a black and white mug shot photo. They will grab old manuals and other information that are not being used (or a few are using) and act like Pharisees pointing at Mary Magdellan to make it look false and to make it seem that this collective unit, a massive collective unit (the USPTA) believes and teaches doomed and out-dated instruction.

Maybe a coach does. However, many many coaches don't. What is not told is many coaches nowadays are out of universities with the latest and greatest strokes. Do you really think they are teaching out of an old manual? No, they are not.

They will also use a few tennis players that have not clearly defined their goals and ambitions or jus thad a bad lesson and use their frustration and hearsay to promote confusion, information overload and promote their product (of course for money) to you - the poor doomed one that received a bad lesson for $40 of your hard earned money.

When these peddlars come around to sell you the next elixir or magic to "why be you, when you can be new" is when you have to question the motives of these people. I am not saying these people are intentionally misleading you. What I am saying is maybe their marketing and desire to teach is conflicted a bit.

We saw MTM promoters teach nothing here but promote their product over and over again. None of them offered their time and none of them (even the stragglers) have used MTM to help a person here. And when they were challenged regarding this, they are no longer here. Why? Because they simply want to make money and worse case, promote something to you that if presented upfront, you would have walked away.

Now we have GBA and the words "come to my site and tell me what you think." However, when you go to the site, what do you see? Well, I saw advertisements and other things. If he can use this site with its natural and well established market and draw people away from here, he succeeds and most likely more advertisers will want to put their ads on his site.

Now, this GBA stuff. It is not new. Many coaches incorporate what this guy is doing. In fact, prio r to me leaving So. Cal to move to Idaho, I was doing this and I dont teach all the time!!!

We also have coaches that simply work you physically while working on your technique. Maybe we should call it WBA (Workout-Based Tennis). WBA is not a technique lesson, however, when your stroke breaks down, the coach will tell you things. The main goal is to learn to get better with your movement and footwork while you get better with your technique in hitting the ball. And guess what? Yup, you got it, "tactics" are part of the drills as well. They are naturally part of the drills because you are simulating the type of movement you will encounter in a match.

Now, I don't mind player using MTM or GBA, or CIA, or FBI, what I don't like is making things look like they are this new when they are not!

I wish they would just say it simply. This GBA simply uses what is known and teaches technique through playing drills. The drills are progressive and meet a player where they are at. GBA incorporate goals and helps a player develop and learn how to utilize tactics while they work on their technique.

And finally ball machines for goodness sakes can be programmed to put you in game like situations and you can work on your technique at the same time.

However, remember one thing, this BS about information overload is not a problem with the "conventional" tennis approach, it is a problem between teacher and student. Both are responsible for reducing the learning curve.

The human brain has the capability to recieve and understand a ton of information. We are also capable of struggling through things for that "ahhh, haaa." So this BS about information overload is not a problem with the amount of information but how it is delivered, managed, and received.

I have taught strokes for years. All strokes. It is very easy to teach tennis. The struggle is in learning will always be there.

If you think people have the Holy Grail to something, they really don't. Ask yourself if things worth their while are easy to learn. Ask yourself if becoming skilled in something is simple and a piece of cake.

Anything like tennis or obtaining a skill takes an investment on the players behalf. It takes committment and hard work.

i'm gonna reply to this since you are quoting me

gba tennis said:

There are a lot of misconceptions regarding the game based approach. Based on the comments above,
here are a few.

1) "GBA is results oriented learning as it challenges students to "teach themselves" (learn) by observing their results in a task and making the appropriate adjustments to improve at said task."

- The GBA does not allow people to teach themselves, the GBA uses all the technical fundamentals but applies them to tactics. Instead of teaching "strokes" the GBA teaches situations and uses technique as a tool to play better tennis.

Click to expand...

i think you have worded that very poorly, people should be encouraged to LEARN rather then being TAUGHT, memory is unreliable but feeling is optimal. Tennis is about problem solving and there is always more then one way to solve a problem. GBA is good for some things and not as good for others, the same as traditional has its strengths and weaknesses

2) "I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age"

- The GBA does not try and teach beginning players advanced technique. For example many "model" coaches teach the full swing to beginners which includes all the biomechanical principles. The GBA starts with sound technical fundamentals connected to tactics that beginners can master to feel success. As the the player improves the tactics become more challenging and more technical skills are added. A GBA coach does not feed regular balls to new players on a full court and expect them to have success.

Click to expand...

I don't know what you are getting at here, I have no doubt that I would have been a better player if I had received coaching as a kid. As it stands I wasn't, which is more similar to GBA, learning thru discovery, I am proud of what I have achieved thru my own learning and am a firm believer that others could achieve more if they put more input into their own tennis via trial and error and experimentation rather then just paying someone to correct their technical flaws

3) "Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just hitting balls"

- The GBA does not have students feel paralysis from technical over-analysis. I think everyone wants to feel like they're playing tennis. Isn't that the point? Some people love to get into the nitty-gritty of technical details.. that's OK the GBA gives that to them, but it always reminds students that technique is just a means to make the ball do what they want.
A MODERN DEFINITION OF TECHNIQUE IS: Conformity AND Effectiveness : Conformity = what the players body,racquet,arm does AND Effectiveness= what the ball does: Height,Distance,Direction,Speed,Spin. They are not separate.

Click to expand...

GBA does not give the level of technical details and traditional does not give the tactical application, this is why a mix of the two is ideal.

GBA should not be considered as the "best" approach to coaching, just another option for coaching. It is current and relevant but someone along the line somewhere will bring out something that is the new thing and then we will all become better coaches and hopefully produce better players

Solat and BB I really appreciate your perspective here. I am trying to better myself as a teacher and am curious about this approach. Thank you for your time to give your opinion

Another thing that someone touched on is that another factor is how many players are involved in the session. In my opinion, having solid stroke mechanics is probably the most important aspect of tennis. Drill sessions are not the place for developing stroke mechanics - too many players involved.

I think all aspects of the game have to be developed but first things first. When kids are young, like 10, their bodies are changing quickly and IMO again, the stoke mechanics should be the main goal. Keeping the kid interested however, is a major factor also.

Solat said:

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

the answer? find the best of every technique available, don't take one ideal as gospel, trial what works best for you and most importantly your students. Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just "hitting balls"

Click to expand...

Solat gets it. One of the most intelligent responses you will see here on the boards...

Rambler124 said:

Solat and BB I really appreciate your perspective here. I am trying to better myself as a teacher and am curious about this approach. Thank you for your time to give your opinion

Click to expand...

It is a good approach, however, it isn't anything new. Many coaches incorporate this sooner or later in a players development or training. The GBA approach just happens to do it sooner and makes it the main emphasis.

Still in every approach there are strengths and weaknesses. A coach needs to really understand this and not be afraid to switch gears to another approach and use it as a bridge to get back into their main teaching approach. Sometimes that bridge is long and sometimes it is short. It largely depends on the students ability to learn, their talent, how quickly they develop skill, and the coaches ability to draw on his communication and experience to meet the student at where he/she is at.

Nothing wrong with the approach, it is just another way to teach tennis.

...AND THE WORLD IS FLAT.

Thanks for your comments on the GBA. Forums are designed for open debate. Here's my perspective:

I will have to correct "Bungalo Bill" on some of his many misconceptions around coaching and the GBA. It's too bad BB lists himself as a "former" coach. His passion for the game could transfer to his students.

I've been a Tennis Canada course facilitator for 9 years as well as a multimedia producer, specifically around tennis. I co-produced a DVD entitled "Half-court Progressive Tennis," which is rated by the ITF as the best DVD on the topic of developing young players, globally.

One of my favourite quotes from BB is how he compares me to a "peddler" trying to SELL you a magic "elixir". I may have a web site, but within the site everything is FREE, including the first interactive tennis lesson. It's easy to attack someone's site, however. Strangely, I don't see any links to BB site. Hmm.

I will respond to a couple of BB's arguments, and at the same time explain more about the GBA.

With anything new, there will always be resistance. Let's take progressive tennis, for example. Progressive tennis is called "QuickStart Tennis" in the US and known internationally as the ITF's "Play and Stay." There are still teaching pros who believe that you should put new players on the baseline, with a regular racquet, and a feed them new balls. There are also traditional pros who think progressive tennis is nonsense. However, top international coaches agree that progressive tennis is the best way for new players to learn the game. Do a simple youtube search for quickstart tennis. It will show everyone from Patrick McEnroe to leading educators on tennis around the world endorse it as the best way to learn... and where the game is headed. Ten years ago, soccer coaches began dividing a full pitch up into smaller fields and it was viewed as crazy... now you're crazy if you don't.

Here's my $2.99 pitch:

I've developed the first tennis instructional iPhone App. It's based on progressive tennis. You can check out my site itennispro.net
Don't listen to BB. He writes, "If he can use this site with its natural and well established market and draw people away from here, he succeeds and most likely more advertisers will want to put their ads on his site." Um, isn't that the point of forums -- to point people in new and interesting directions where they can learn more about the game. A TW hub of information?

BB writes, "The human brain has the capability to recieve and understand a ton of information." Uh, okay. What BB doesn't understand is the way people learn. Typically, people can only process one, maybe two pieces of information at a time. This is a huge problem for students who learn from coaches intent on barfing TONS of technical knowledge. Their information may be correct, but in the GBA, students learn one thing at a time. The skill is maintained as new skills are added.

BB writes, "I have taught strokes for years. All strokes. It is very easy to teach tennis. The struggle is in learning will always be there."

Actually, teaching tennis is very difficult, ask any good coach. The GBA uses a learner-centered philosophy. Meaning, without an understanding of how people learn, the student won't receive the information. Learner-centered also means systematic plans for learning. In other words, it's not about simply rallying with a student and providing "tennis tips". A learner-centered coach looks for "buy in" from the player while teaching and explains why they are learning things... as opposed to a teacher-centered coach who tells the student, the student accepts, with no questions asked. And if the student is having problems, it must be the student's fault, not the coach's...

Teaching only "strokes" as BB is proud to proclaim, is teaching a 'Closed' skill. Closed skills use models to convey technique. Models like "the double axle" for divers. But tennis is not diving. It's an 'Open' sport. In contrast to Closed skills, Open skilled sports must go through a 4 step process:

1. Perception
2. Execution
3. Decision
4. Feedback

Lastly, in my travels as both a player and a coach I've been exposed to many different teaching methods. I'm familiar with methods employed by companies such as PBI -- who BB probably thinks is also a peddler of "elixirs". I've used model-based coaching, for years, and now I know that the GBA is the best method for students. And I'm not the only one. Internationally, many countries are moving toward the adoption of GBA. It's only a matter of time before we're all peddlers of elixirs!

For more information on the GBA, check out my colleague's site: wwwacecoach.com

gba tennis said:

I will have to correct "Bungalo Bill" on some of his many misconceptions around coaching and the GBA. It's too bad BB lists himself as a "former" coach. His passion for the game could transfer to his students.

Click to expand...

LOL, really? So I decided to offer my opinion on GBA and you resort to a personal attack? Interesting. I would rather keep it to just business. Actually, you probably took the peddlar comment personally. Oh well, I can't apoligize for something I beleive to be true.

However, if you must know why I left the coaching world is because I was in a car accident. An accident that damaged my right knee, back and neck. In So. Cal, I tried to still teach on court but didn't last long on the court before pain increased in those areas, especially my back. I saw my court time shrinking and of course my ability to support my family also.

Got anymore stupid takes on why I offer free advice here? Or would just like to bring it back to GBA and your nonsense that it is something new?

I've been a Tennis Canada course facilitator for 9 years as well as a multimedia producer, specifically around tennis...

Click to expand...

Canada? LOL!!!! Well, they have great tennis up there! lol

Geee, a multimedia producer? Wow, I was involved in instructional design for several years and also developed multimedia CD's for training and development companies. WE ARE ALIKE!!! YUCK!

One of my favourite quotes from BB is how he compares me to a "peddler" trying to SELL you a magic "elixir". I may have a web site, but within the site everything is FREE, including the first interactive tennis lesson. It's easy to attack someone's site, however. Strangely, I don't see any links to BB site. Hmm.

Click to expand...

This is the site I frequent. I don't peddle products here. I offer my advice for free here. I point to products and services here when someone asks. I respect the fact that TW pays for this site.

What do you do?

If your idea is so great, why don't you offer it free here? I am sure a coach of your stature could support yourself just from your on-court instruction right?

I will respond to a couple of BB's arguments, and at the same time explain more about the GBA.

Click to expand...

Oh, please do.

With anything new, there will always be resistance. Let's take progressive tennis, for example. Progressive tennis is called "QuickStart Tennis" in the US and known internationally as the ITF's "Play and Stay." There are still teaching pros who believe that you should put new players on the baseline, with a regular racquet, and a feed them new balls. There are also traditional pros who think progressive tennis is nonsense. However, top international coaches agree that progressive tennis is the best way for new players to learn the game. Do a simple youtube search for quickstart tennis.

Click to expand...

Nobody is resisting GBA. Why? Because many coaches already incorporate it! Didn't we already say that?

I am simply questionning your marketing tactics. Is that wrong? Also, questionning your knowledge of tennis history and your so-called claims of "conventional tennis".

Here's my $2.99 pitch:

I've developed the first tennis instructional iPhone App. It's based on progressive tennis. You can check out my site itennispro.net
Don't listen to BB. He writes, "If he can use this site with its natural and well established market and draw people away from here, he succeeds and most likely more advertisers will want to put their ads on his site." Um, isn't that the point of forums -- to point people in new and interesting directions where they can learn more about the game. A TW hub of information?

Click to expand...

No, the point to this forum is to keep people here so they can buy or sell products according to Tenniswarehouse Policy.

Nobody is to draw away or entice anyone here at this site and steer them to another to potentially purchase a product.

READ THE FRICKING TENNISWAREHOUSE POLICY!!!

No promotion or advertising of Tennis Warehouse competitors allowed. This is our message board and we pay to maintain it. If you want to discuss a competitor, please be respectful of our request and do this privately, not on Talk Tennis. Violating this policy will result in an immediate two-week ban. Further violations will result in a permanent ban.

BB writes, "The human brain has the capability to recieve and understand a ton of information." Uh, okay. What BB doesn't understand is the way people learn. Typically, people can only process one, maybe two pieces of information at a time. This is a huge problem for students who learn from coaches intent on barfing TONS of technical knowledge. Their information may be correct, but in the GBA, students learn one thing at a time. The skill is maintained as new skills are added.

Click to expand...

Actually, before you begin to challenge me on human learning, you best have a background on it because I DO.

What you fail to understand is while a person is processing information, millions of connections are trying to made to make the information relevant to some past experience. Also, the feelings of anxiety when a person struggles with this information rises. Especially if they can not draw on past experience or similar experience. Therefore, it isn't the amount of information but how it is received and communicated. A good instructor does not need GBA to develop a student if they understand how to manage anxiety levels in the student.

And further, the human is capable of receiving and doing several things at once and working on them. It processes a ton of information and you can put players under stress and manage both positive and negative stress levels. It is the ignorant coach that ignores the fact that players can receive several inputs and process them simulataenously while learning. Defining those inputs is another matter.

However, I also mentioned that learning is enhanced when the instructor is aware of several approaches or methods to helping a student learn. In other words, if a player is not receiving multiple inputs well and is struglling, then the coach should step back and introduce concepts or informaiton more in a linear fashion until the brain is able to process both or all the information it received simultaneously.

Are you sure you want to go here with me?

When a player in GBA is moving and hitting the ball at the same time, aren't they doing and learning multiple things at the same time? Students do learn in a variety of ways and there are a variety of ways to present information. You can take different approaches and ebb and flow between them.

BB writes, "I have taught strokes for years. All strokes. It is very easy to teach tennis. The struggle is in learning will always be there."

Actually, teaching tennis is very difficult. Ask any good coach. The GBA uses a learner-centered philosophy. Meaning, without an understanding of how people learn, the student won't receive the information. Learner-centered also means systematic plans for learning. In other words, it's not about simply rallying with a student and providing "tennis tips". A learner-centered coach looks for "buy in" from the player while teaching and explains why they are learning things... as opposed to a teacher-centered coach who tells the student, the student accepts, with no questions asked. And if the student is having problems, it must be the student's fault, not the coach's...

Click to expand...

Whatever Peddler. Tennis is difficult to become skilled at and play at an davanced level. For many it takes years no matter what approach they use to learn. GBA, MTM, or anything else. Skill development takes time and nobody has the Holy Grail.

Many coaches provide meaning, purpose, goals, knowledge and experience in helping develop players.

Your little program is nothing new. It is just repackaged known information shared a different way. Why don't you admit that? All you are using is borrowed already known drills, instruction, research, efforts, information, and repackaging it as new!

Teaching only "strokes" as BB is proud to proclaim, is teaching a 'Closed' skill. Closed skills use models to convey technique. Models like "the double axle" for divers. But tennis is not diving. It's an 'Open' sport. In contrast to Closed skills, Open skilled sports must go through a 4 step process:

1. Perception
2. Execution
3. Decision
4. Feedback

Lastly, in my travels as both a player and a coach I've been exposed to many different teaching methods. I'm familiar with methods employed by companies such as PBI -- who BB probably thinks is also a peddler of "elixirs". I've used model-based coaching, for years, and now I know that the GBA is the best method for students. And I'm not the only one. Internationally, many countries are moving toward the adoption of GBA. It's only a matter of time before we're all peddlers of elixirs!

For more information on the GBA, check out my colleague's site: wwwacecoach.com

Click to expand...

More PROMOTION?

And did I really say that? Did I proudly claim that "I TEACH ONLY STROKES????" Funny, I don't remember that. I thought I pointed out the opposite. Actually, I teach physical conditioning while a student learns strokes. In other words, they are using live drills, simulated tactics, and learning their strokes at the same time.

This is why I can honestly say, your program is nothing new.

What your post sounds like is a bunch of desparate BS similar to what 5263's was trying to peddle around here. "MTM, MTM, MTM, it is the solution to all the conventional tennis crusty coaches. Oscar is the Savior!!"

However, I have yet to see MTM in action here nor can 5263 explain himself out of a paperbag. The people here that haven't got a clue about instruction promote MTM but can't teach it.

gba tennis said:

...AND THE WORLD IS FLAT.

Thanks for your comments on the GBA. Forums are designed for open debate. Here's my perspective:

I will have to correct "Bungalo Bill" on some of his many misconceptions around coaching and the GBA. It's too bad BB lists himself as a "former" coach. His passion for the game could transfer to his students.

I've been a Tennis Canada course facilitator for 9 years as well as a multimedia producer, specifically around tennis. I co-produced a DVD entitled "Half-court Progressive Tennis," which is rated by the ITF as the best DVD on the topic of developing young players, globally.

One of my favourite quotes from BB is how he compares me to a "peddler" trying to SELL you a magic "elixir". I may have a web site, but within the site everything is FREE, including the first interactive tennis lesson. It's easy to attack someone's site, however. Strangely, I don't see any links to BB site. Hmm.

I will respond to a couple of BB's arguments, and at the same time explain more about the GBA.

With anything new, there will always be resistance. Let's take progressive tennis, for example. Progressive tennis is called "QuickStart Tennis" in the US and known internationally as the ITF's "Play and Stay." There are still teaching pros who believe that you should put new players on the baseline, with a regular racquet, and a feed them new balls. There are also traditional pros who think progressive tennis is nonsense. However, top international coaches agree that progressive tennis is the best way for new players to learn the game. Do a simple youtube search for quickstart tennis. It will show everyone from Patrick McEnroe to leading educators on tennis around the world endorse it as the best way to learn... and where the game is headed. Ten years ago, soccer coaches began dividing a full pitch up into smaller fields and it was viewed as crazy... now you're crazy if you don't.

Here's my $2.99 pitch:

I've developed the first tennis instructional iPhone App. It's based on progressive tennis. You can check out my site itennispro.net
Don't listen to BB. He writes, "If he can use this site with its natural and well established market and draw people away from here, he succeeds and most likely more advertisers will want to put their ads on his site." Um, isn't that the point of forums -- to point people in new and interesting directions where they can learn more about the game. A TW hub of information?

BB writes, "The human brain has the capability to recieve and understand a ton of information." Uh, okay. What BB doesn't understand is the way people learn. Typically, people can only process one, maybe two pieces of information at a time. This is a huge problem for students who learn from coaches intent on barfing TONS of technical knowledge. Their information may be correct, but in the GBA, students learn one thing at a time. The skill is maintained as new skills are added.

BB writes, "I have taught strokes for years. All strokes. It is very easy to teach tennis. The struggle is in learning will always be there."

Actually, teaching tennis is very difficult, ask any good coach. The GBA uses a learner-centered philosophy. Meaning, without an understanding of how people learn, the student won't receive the information. Learner-centered also means systematic plans for learning. In other words, it's not about simply rallying with a student and providing "tennis tips". A learner-centered coach looks for "buy in" from the player while teaching and explains why they are learning things... as opposed to a teacher-centered coach who tells the student, the student accepts, with no questions asked. And if the student is having problems, it must be the student's fault, not the coach's...

Teaching only "strokes" as BB is proud to proclaim, is teaching a 'Closed' skill. Closed skills use models to convey technique. Models like "the double axle" for divers. But tennis is not diving. It's an 'Open' sport. In contrast to Closed skills, Open skilled sports must go through a 4 step process:

1. Perception
2. Execution
3. Decision
4. Feedback

Lastly, in my travels as both a player and a coach I've been exposed to many different teaching methods. I'm familiar with methods employed by companies such as PBI -- who BB probably thinks is also a peddler of "elixirs". I've used model-based coaching, for years, and now I know that the GBA is the best method for students. And I'm not the only one. Internationally, many countries are moving toward the adoption of GBA. It's only a matter of time before we're all peddlers of elixirs!

For more information on the GBA, check out my colleague's site: wwwacecoach.com

Click to expand...

Thanks for putting out these corrections.

Solat said:

ignore the name of it and put it into a scientific explanation.

there are two types of basic learning
Process oriented
Task oriented (sometimes called Results oriented)

traditional coaching has been based around process oriented learning, teaching people the process of hitting a ball (technique), learning thru developmental and technical stages to build a stroke(s) then attempting to transplant that into a rally scenario.

GBA is results oriented learning as it challenges students to "teach themselves" (learn) by observing their results in a task and making the appropriate adjustments to improve at said task.

rallying does not need to be stage one but should the first goal of GBA in tennis coaching. To start with you may get students to throw and catch a ball to eachother to simulate a "rally", with young kids they can "rally" by using their racquets to push the ball along the ground to eachother. The goal of these tasks is to put the student into a situation where they need to use tracking, movement and racquet control to succeed at the simulated "rally" this will then positively transfer as learning when they have the racquet control to rally with a partner.

Techniques will hopefully develop to achieve the tasks, and as such tasks should be set to achieve the techniques required. So if you need your student to swing low to high then you set a task where they must hit over a higher net or they need to hit to their partner who must catch the ball above their head. This will allow the student to experiment various ways to achieve the goal, hopefully succeeding with the most appropriate technique.

Undoubtedly this theory is flawed, just go down to any tennis club and watch the huge variety of strokes happening. All these people CAN play a game of tennis but are probably not maximising their potential. Technical input could go a long way to improving these peoples enjoyment of the game.

On the other hand, the fact that they are playing the game means they have succeeded (to some level) in playing (and enjoying) the sport which in GBA reads as a completed goal.

I am living proof that GBA can work, I was not coached as a youth, I taught myself how to play by hitting against a wall until i found techniques that could keep the rally going. I learned topspin and a 2HBH by observing others and thru trial and error until I figured out what worked and what didn't. I serve with a conti grip not because someone taught me but because that was what worked the best.

HOWEVER I am a career tennis coach because I feel I could have been such a better player if I had learned these advanced techniques at an earlier age, if my technical flaws had been corrected by someone before they become ingrained. I want to give others the opportunity I didn't get.

the answer? find the best of every technique available, don't take one ideal as gospel, trial what works best for you and most importantly your students. Some will respond to technical instruction whilst others are overwhelmed, some just really want to feel like they are "playing tennis" not just "hitting balls"

Click to expand...

Living proof that a good tennis coach will mix in several approaches not favoring one over the other. It is important to learn proper technique. It is also important to use your skills in hitting a ball to win points and play a match, especially if competitive tennis is your goal.

Players learn in a variety of ways and not one way is non-existant in a player. All learning can happen no matter what a student prefers. A good coach senses this and knows how to present information in an expedient fashion. A good coach is not afraid to overload the brain and then back off and move forward a different direction. A good coach is not afraid to focus only on technique and then move a student towards simulated play using what they have learned. A good coach is not afraid to use simulated play and then stop and work on specific technical things a student needs to master before bad habits develop.

A good coach is not afraid to increase anxiety levels through drills and tough mental conditioning. All aspects of tennis are based on building blocks in cognitive and psychomotor development.

The fact that GBA and MTM imply that they are the "Holy Grail" by making others look bad is a bunch of hogwash.

^^^ I don't see how a "GBA" is any different from playing pratice points with my pro - or getting advice in a group class while playing doubles.

It seems like pretty bog-standard stuff unless I am missing something..

LoL @ the attacks.

Anyways, GBA is it a way to Retain more students? That is all I am seeing at this point in all honesty. GBA I would love a response to this. I'm curious if it is seen as a method to jumpstart "beginners" or individuals just coming to the game to keep them more engaged? (Especially kids?) I don't quite see how GBA would necessarily accelerate learning but could definitely see huge benefits in keeping more people who are coming to the game staying there.

Is it just a different initial approach? (especially for kids) or do you view it as a method to play better tennis period?

Would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks.

Edit: Ok I do see somewhat how it could initially accelerate learning but it wouldn't necessarily create better players than what is labeled "traditional" teaching but perhaps just keep more people playing the game?

Bungalo Bill said:

The fact that GBA and MTM imply that they are the "Holy Grail" by making others look bad is a bunch of hogwash.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is all one big scam! And you know who is behind this? The ITF. There website is full with this GBA stuff (http://www.tennisicoach.com). Who are they? I bet they are paid by Oscar Wegner or the Scientology movement. Or both. Or the mob? Anyhow it is all about money, money, money! New methods? New views? BS! Money is what they want.

P.S.: The only thing I can not figure out is why in all of Europe and in lots of countries outside Europe coaches are obliged to learn the GBA approach? That means for all coaching levels. I hear it takes 6-12 months to learn.

I bet it is a kind of brainwashing, if you ask me. So I warned you before you go to Europe.

Rambler124 said:

LoL @ the attacks.

Anyways, GBA is it a way to Retain more students? That is all I am seeing at this point in all honesty. GBA I would love a response to this. I'm curious if it is seen as a method to jumpstart "beginners" or individuals just coming to the game to keep them more engaged? (Especially kids?) I don't quite see how GBA would necessarily accelerate learning but could definitely see huge benefits in keeping more people who are coming to the game staying there.

Is it just a different initial approach? (especially for kids) or do you view it as a method to play better tennis period?

Would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks.

Edit: Ok I do see somewhat how it could initially accelerate learning but it wouldn't necessarily create better players than what is labeled "traditional" teaching but perhaps just keep more people playing the game?

Click to expand...

As you fully know, every program has its strengths and weaknesses. Some programs of instruction require a coach to have a certain set of skills to make it more effective. Some target a certain level of player better than others. While some are more suited for specific types of people.

If a coach can incorporate and is able to alter or modify his approach in real-time or even lesson by lesson, they are ahead of the game.

Also, a lot of people are jumping on this "conventional" bandwagon thing. However, I have yet to see any evidence of the massive amounts of coaches that are stuck in these old crusty "conventional" ways.

What some people also fail to realize is ninety-nine percent of these "new" ways to teach were rooted or grew from so-called conventional research, teaching, and instruction. However, what is conventional anyway? A lot of these new flavors of instruction are rooted in timeless principles! Can we consider that conventional?

GBA is no different I am afraid. Swing low to high, head still, rallying crosscourt, hitting with good net clearance, etc..., however you package it, it is based on known timeless principles.

If all a coach does is tell a student to stand in one spot and shout out explicit statements equivalent to pages and pages of information, then you bet this coach needs to change his ways. Nobody endorses this kind of teaching, yet people like this GBA guy wants players to think there are lots of coaches like this.

I actually find this:

1. I find coaches that don't say enough.

2. I find coaches that say too much.

3. I find coaches that demonstrate too much.

4. I find coaches that blow smoke up players butts and are way too soft.

5. I find coaches that are way too tough.

6. I find coaches that have good balance in their instruction.

7. I find coaches that care.

8. I find coaches that don't care.

9. I find coaches that are interested in finding the next Pete Sampras.

10. I find coaches wanting to just teach kids.

11. I find coaches of all walks of life, shapes, and sizes.

12. I find coaches that are technicians, researchers, mentors, students of the game, communicators, promoters, event planners, and who have stengths and weaknesses in a variety of skills and knowledge.

13. I find coaches are human with a certain level of trying to learn what is not known to them.

Coaches are no different than us at play, at work, and at home.

What I wish is people that are into MTM or GBA would just drop the crap. Quit making it look like their program is unique, discovered, the Holy Grail, and it supercedes all previous and current ways to teach tennis.

I wish GBA would simply say is,

"GBA uses sound and proven tennis principles and incorporates these principles in a game-like instructional setting that is normally reserved for more skilled players. We help players develop their technique while they learn strategy and tactics based on real play. We believe we can increase enjoyment for many tennis players by having them play tennis while they learn fundamental priniciples and develop their strokes. We set goals, critique, and monitor progress just like many tennis coaches do today.

Our main emphasis is on improving the tennis player by playing tennis first and foremost as it is played in a match. We do not replace instruction that emphasizes technique first because that is a fundamental principle to playing tennis. Instead we compliment it and at certain times in a players development enhance it. We recognize our approach to teaching tennis isn't for everyone, and at times, students will need to take the time to concentrate on their form and technique to further enjoy our approach and style of learning tennis. We respect all coaches that focus on technique first and coaches that use the game-like approach. All approaches are geared to improve a players satisfaction of the game of tennis and help a player acheive their goals."

Or whatever. Bottom-line, it isn't about any one type of instruction. It is about the player and the coach needs to adjust and meet the player at where they are at with a boatload of tools and techniques to get the player moving towards their goals. It isn't about a method.

Bungalo Bill said:

I wish they would simply say

"GBA uses sound and proven tennis principles and incorporates these principles in a game-like instructional setting that is normally reserved for more skilled players. We help players develop their technique while they learn strategy and tactics based on real play. We believe we can increase enojoyment for many tennis players by having them play tennis while they learn fundamental priniciples and develop their strokes. We set goals, critique, and monitor progress just like many tennis coaches do today.

Our main emphasis is on improving the tennis player by playing tennis first and foremost as it is played in a match. We do not replace instruction that emphasizes technique first because that is a fundamental principle to playing tennis. Instead we compliment it and at certain times in a players development enhance it. We recognize our approach to teaching tennis isn't for everyone, and at times, students will need to take the time to concentrate on their form and technique to further enjoy our approach and style of learning tennis. We respect all coaches that focus on technique first and coaches that use the game-like approach. All approaches are geared to improve a players satisfaction of the game of tennis and help a player acheive their goals."

Click to expand...

very well said

Now that, my friends, is what I would call well thought out and written. I think I now know why I became an engineer.

Bungalo Bill said:

What I wish is people that are into MTM or GBA would just drop the crap. Quit making it look like their program is unique, discovered, the Holy Grail, and it supercedes all previous and current ways to teach tennis.

Click to expand...

Yes. Drop the crap! Why should doctors improve methods and read their literature. You know that is the same thing! We cured patients for decades. So why all the new ****? You know they can perform a lot of surgery now by making two small incisions? But you know, why did they invent this? It is ridiculous. Better for the patient, they say. BS. It is the money. Do you think Oscar is behind this? Last time I saw him he was wearing a white coat?!

Love it BB. Would love to hear GBA's side.

nabrug said:

Yes. Drop the crap! Why should doctors improve methods and read their literature. You know that is the same thing! We cured patients for decades. So why all the new ****? You know they can perform a lot of surgery now by making two small incisions? But you know, why did they invent this? It is ridiculous. Better for the patient, they say. BS. It is the money. Do you think Oscar is behind this? Last time I saw him he was wearing a white coat?!

Click to expand...

Funny.

I don't know if Oscar is behind this or if he is now wearing a white coat. Found some freaky stuff on him wth the help of other posters here. Trying to separate the instruction from the developer but having an eery time with it.

Maybe I should just drop this stuff and get off my butt and develop my own instruction. I would not get into acronyms though. Too boring. No, I would want to make a big splash on the scene with something like:

BB's Sexy and Crazy Ball Bustin' Tennis Method

Featuring: Snoop Dog, Osama Bin Laden (dead or alive), Shaq, The Red Hot Chili Peppers, Bono, the ever so sexy Christina Aguilerra, and many more.

Prepare to get punk'd like nobody's business.

Bungalo Bill said:

Funny.

I

BB's Sexy and Crazy Ball Bustin' Tennis Method

Click to expand...

Hey, that would work - sign me up.

Bungalo Bill said:

When these peddlars come around to sell you the next elixir or magic to "why be you, when you can be new" is when you have to question the motives of these people. I am not saying these people are intentionally misleading you. What I am saying is maybe their marketing and desire to teach is conflicted a bit.

We saw MTM promoters teach nothing here but promote their product over and over again. None of them offered their time and none of them (even the stragglers) have used MTM to help a person here. And when they were challenged regarding this, they are no longer here. Why? Because they simply want to make money and worse case, promote something to you that if presented upfront, you would have walked away.

Click to expand...

Great examples of the lies he said he would tell to push his agenda.
Just a week or so ago he was admitting to never having heard of GBA, now he's an expert dismissing it as nothing of note.
He did the same after admitting no exposure to MTM, but then discussing it's merits as though he had knowledge. Talking like an expert, while being thin by his own admission on a subjects, seems very common for him.

I prefer MTM over conventional mix and have not gone anywhere. I have attempted not to mention MTM directly because of the childish fits and lies that follow just the mention of it. It was an attempt to keep things more civil, but as you can see, He won't have that. I have never tried to make any money or profit on it with this forum, so that is a another clear lie.
The fact that I post here most days with advice based on the MTM perspective, points out the lie where he says they are no longer here.
I know his fanboys won't care to notice the truth of these words and that is fine, but for those who care more about truth, this post is here.

nabrug said:

Yes. Drop the crap! Why should doctors improve methods and read their literature. You know that is the same thing! We cured patients for decades. So why all the new ****? You know they can perform a lot of surgery now by making two small incisions? But you know, why did they invent this? It is ridiculous. Better for the patient, they say. BS. It is the money. Do you think Oscar is behind this? Last time I saw him he was wearing a white coat?!

Click to expand...

Your analogy fails. Doctors are constantly changing because sadly diseases do as well. There are new strains or new diseases popping up all the time. Plus the technology in medicine is constantly changing as ell. There is way to many things every year in medicine that change for a doctor to sit on his ass and not change.

As for the game based approach it doesn't work. You need a skill set in order to play the game. You cant just play the game and improve at it. It doesn't work that way at all. You need a solid foundation of technique before you are able to play at any form of decent level. I get what they are saying but its never going to build a solid player from it.

nabrug said:

Yes. Drop the crap! Why should doctors improve methods and read their literature. You know that is the same thing! We cured patients for decades. So why all the new ****? You know they can perform a lot of surgery now by making two small incisions? But you know, why did they invent this? It is ridiculous. Better for the patient, they say. BS. It is the money. Do you think Oscar is behind this? Last time I saw him he was wearing a white coat?!

Click to expand...

Come to think of it, there's nothing revolutionary about the iPod or Facebook! Those charlatans are just parading repackaged technology! Google is just really one big dictionary - why are people fussing over that, for heaven's sake? And sending rockets to the moon, what's the big deal? A rocket is just a big firecracker! We've had that technology since 100 BC. It's all Oscar's fault, of course. LOL!

why dont the gba and mtm people stay on there own forums. Instead you come here try to pass your crap off as something great. When its challenged you get mad and try to ridicule the poster who questioned you. Stay on your own forums if you want people to think your great because those of us on here that have played or have been or worked with high level coaches know your nothing good or new.

maverick66 said:

why dont the gba and mtm people stay on there own forums. Instead you come here try to pass your crap off as something great. When its challenged you get mad and try to ridicule the poster who questioned you. Stay on your own forums if you want people to think your great because those of us on here that have played or have been or worked with high level coaches know your nothing good or new.

Click to expand...

Fair enough but in all honesty I would like to have as much information a possible personally. I find these forums to be informative. Even if there is bickering people are choosing to do that and I can dig through that information or fighting back and forth to get an educated idea at what is at the heart of each principle of teaching. By reading these forums I've gotten some good ideas from MTM. Sure I use it - but I wouldn't consider myself an MTM person. I was hoping to do the same with GBA.

I consider myself a teacher. Not an MTM only or GBA only etc etc. I think each has its own benefit and the more I learn - the more I can discern for myself what works with me and the myraid of different personalities I teach. So, in essence I would rather them not stick to their own forums. I like them here

Rambler124 said:

Fair enough but in all honesty I would like to have as much information a possible personally. I find these forums to be informative. Even if there is bickering people are choosing to do that and I can dig through that information or fighting back and forth to get an educated idea at what is at the heart of each principle of teaching. By reading these forums I've gotten some good ideas from MTM. Sure I use it - but I wouldn't consider myself an MTM person. I was hoping to do the same with GBA.

I consider myself a teacher. Not an MTM only or GBA only etc etc. I think each has its own benefit and the more I learn - the more I can discern for myself what works with me and the myraid of different personalities I teach. So, in essence I would rather them not stick to their own forums. I like them here

Click to expand...

Well said. I think the bottom line (or one of them anyway) is that TW owns and manages this website. Although I also like to hear the different opinions/techniques, sometimes thats not whats going on or at least what I seem to read. At times it does seem like an attempt to either lure people away or sell a product independent of TW.

Don't you think it somewhat akin to a Chevy salesman parking himself in a Honda salesroom and claiming that the GMC product is much better, first to introduce various features, costs less and so forth. If the Chevy guy (I have absolutely nothing against Chevy or GMC) wants to make these claims in his own showroom or in neutral territory, fine but it seems out of place to try and capitalize on someone elses buck.

Rambler124 said:

I consider myself a teacher.

Click to expand...

If you are taking them serious I question how long or how good of one you have been. Did you just decide you like tennis and its a nifty sport to teach?

Rambler124 said:

I think each has its own benefit and the more I learn - the more I can discern for myself what works with me and the myraid of different personalities I teach. So, in essence I would rather them not stick to their own forums. I like them here

Click to expand...

GBa has little value. You need a solid base to start or you cant play. Its a mistake we make thinkiong if we just play we will get better but its not the case. Your improvement would be much better and overall you will become a better player if you learn technique first.

papa said:

Don't you think it somewhat akin to a Chevy salesman parking himself in a Honda salesroom and claiming that the GMC product is much better, first to introduce various features, costs less and so forth. If the Chevy guy (I have absolutely nothing against Chevy or GMC) wants to make these claims in his own showroom or in neutral territory, fine but it seems out of place to try and capitalize on someone elses buck.

Click to expand...

good anology. Its almost worse than this but good one.

I ruffled a few feathers. But, I'm not surprised. It's good to shake things up.

There seems to be a lot of fear around from some of the posts regarding the GBA. I get it. It is unsettling to read that there is a different way, a better way to develop tennis players than the traditional approach. As I mentioned in my earlier post, I've used model-based coaching and have changed my thinking to a more global approach. The GBA is superior.

It's difficult for most traditional coaches to understand the GBA because there is no quick pill to take in order to understand it. Nor is there a book of GBA 101 drills to pull out before going on court. There's no quickie course to master it. It takes time and practice.

I've never been a fan of the name "game-based approach" simply because people such as Solat wrongly deduce that the technique element is weak in the GBA, and tactics (games) are strong -- without experiencing the GBA. I often refer to the GBA as the Performance Based Approach. If it's technical knowledge that you crave, then in my experience the GBA is vastly superior. To individualize coaching, you need a sound foundation in the principles of biomechanics. Will what you propose work for every player? If you don't know all the possibilities, it's easier to propose a model. I've asked coaches what is your method, strategy, system for technical corrections? Many coaches do not have a system to correct technique. Performance coaching uses the PAS principles as a way to determine ball control problems of students. It does not focus on the follow through, for example, as a cause of errors nor is the follow through a determiner of direction. Path, Angle, Speed is a great tool in a coach's toolkit for a quick and effective impact on students.

I've heard coaches say that they use both model and mix in some Game based...

You are either a performance based coach, or you are not.
You either look at tennis globally: Tactical, Technical, Physical, Mental, or you are constantly seduced by technique.
You either know how to incorporate decision making into your coaching, or you don't.
You train players to anticipate and disguise, or you don't.
You individualize your coaching, or you don't.
You have a system for measuring performance, or you don't.

The GBA is not a trend/fad that will come and soon go. It's been around for 30 years. The concepts the GBA are in the business world (e.g. a holistic approach). Tennis is not the only sport using the GBA because its concepts apply to Open skilled sports. I'm not familiar with the MTM, but I will not assume to know it, as I have not experienced it. I know that it's not endorsed by the ITF like the GBA.

The four pillars of Performance Coaching are as follows:
1. Tennis is an open skill.
2. GBA uses a holistic approach: Technical, Tactical, Mental , Physical
3. The approach is learner centered
4. Tennis is game based. It's not diving or Javelin.


I'm curious about learning new things about the greatest game in the world. (I think we all can agree it's tennis.) But I don't need to convince you. I'm simply putting the information out there for those with an open mind.

maverick66 said:

If you are taking them serious I question how long or how good of one you have been. Did you just decide you like tennis and its a nifty sport to teach?.

Click to expand...

Am I taking them serious. Yes. It is what they believe. Lets be real. I have an open mind. Who am I to say one is wrong or right? Do we have one coach out there or style that works for everyone? No, absolutely not.

This statement is pretty unfortunate in my opinion Maverick. Teachers are students as well. The minute they do not become one is the minute that they are passed up by the rest of the crowd. Essentially what it could come down to is that I may teach the same thing as another, but the way it is communicated could be different based on a number of differet factors. The more ways I learn to do that the better a teache I become no?

Just like others have said. There is no teaching Gospel but a variety of ways to implement and teach things.

If you are asking if I am a phenomenal tennis player? No I'm not. Am a former ATP pro. No I'm not. Do I love tennis and do I love to communicate my passion to others. Yes I do. I am capable of playing the game at a solid level.

I understand your initial snap judgement about taking "them" serious. However, if you dig under some of the "salesmanship" there is an enormous amount of merit to what these guys are talking about. The biggest issue that I see that most individuals have like Bungalo Bill with these individuals is how it is PACKAGED OR PRESENTED. He has agreed in previous threads that he agrees with the methods etc, but does not agree with how people present that they are "inventors" or perhaps even how it is sold or packaged. Make sense?

gba tennis said:

I ruffled a few feathers. But, I'm not surprised. It's good to shake things up.

There seems to be a lot of fear around from some of the posts regarding the GBA. I get it. It is unsettling to read that there is a different way, a better way to develop tennis players than the traditional approach. As I mentioned in my earlier post, I've used model-based coaching and have changed my thinking to a more global approach. The GBA is superior.

It's difficult for most traditional coaches to understand the GBA because there is no quick pill to take in order to understand it. Nor is there a book of GBA 101 drills to pull out before going on court. There's no quickie course to master it. It takes time and practice.

I've never been a fan of the name "game-based approach" simply because people such as Solat wrongly deduce that the technique element is weak in the GBA, and tactics (games) are strong -- without experiencing the GBA. I often refer to the GBA as the Performance Based Approach. If it's technical knowledge that you crave, then in my experience the GBA is vastly superior. To individualize coaching, you need a sound foundation in the principles of biomechanics. Will what you propose work for every player? If you don't know all the possibilities, it's easier to propose a model. I've asked coaches what is your method, strategy, system for technical corrections? Many coaches do not have a system to correct technique. Performance coaching uses the PAS principles as a way to determine ball control problems of students. It does not focus on the follow through, for example, as a cause of errors nor is the follow through a determiner of direction. Path, Angle, Speed is a great tool in a coach's toolkit for a quick and effective impact on students.

I've heard coaches say that they use both model and mix in some Game based...

You are either a performance based coach, or you are not.
You either look at tennis globally: Tactical, Technical, Physical, Mental, or you are constantly seduced by technique.
You either know how to incorporate decision making into your coaching, or you don't.
You train players to anticipate and disguise, or you don't.
You individualize your coaching, or you don't.
You have a system for measuring performance, or you don't.

The GBA is not a trend/fad that will come and soon go. It's been around for 30 years. The concepts the GBA are in the business world (e.g. a holistic approach). Tennis is not the only sport using the GBA because its concepts apply to Open skilled sports. I'm not familiar with the MTM, but I will not assume to know it, as I have not experienced it. I know that it's not endorsed by the ITF like the GBA.

The four pillars of Performance Coaching are as follows:
1. Tennis is an open skill.
2. GBA uses a holistic approach: Technical, Tactical, Mental , Physical
3. The approach is learner centered
4. Tennis is game based. It's not diving or Javelin.


I'm curious about learning new things about the greatest game in the world. (I think we all can agree it's tennis.) But I don't need to convince you. I'm simply putting the information out there for those with an open mind.

Click to expand...

This was well written in general. Minus the first few sentences. Here's my challenge, Maverick. I as an invidual am looking to improve my methods of teaching. I will always do so. If you think looking through posts written by Bungalo Bill, GBA, MTM, Oscar or whoever will supply no knowledge. Then you are correct, you are right. I'm bad at coaching and just think tennis is nifty to teach. Honestly though I can look through their posts and intelligently decipher what makes sense versus what does not based on my own principles and ideas in teaching and what I have learned that works and doesn't work.

maverick66 said:

GBa has little value. You need a solid base to start or you cant play. Its a mistake we make thinkiong if we just play we will get better but its not the case. Your improvement would be much better and overall you will become a better player if you learn technique first.

Click to expand...

I agree with you in the sense that you need some sort of technical base. However, if you truly look at this guy's approach it does not say in the least bit whatsoever "Just go start playing and then we teach you technique". It teaches ways in a manner that I can only decipher as "mini-games" in some ways that influence certain principles and reinforce different mechanics.

My initial reaction was the same. "How can one learn how to play properly by handing them a ball and stick and say well Go Play!". The idea I think is that its essentially relates that tactics are influenced by technique so it lets the student do some self learning in essence.