(3.5) I just improved more in one month than the rest of my LIFE combined.

[Moveforwardalways]

Yes he can.

You guys are underestimating how fast your body declines after 40. The hand eye coordination is still there, but the core strength, movement, flexibility, etc, just isn't there. If JMac could pulverize 6.0 D1 college players, he would still be playing because that's how he is. Watch Roddick and Mark Philippoussis hitting him soft balls on the Powershares tour. They aren't going to go at a legend like that any more than you are going after the 3.0 girl in mixed doubles. You all sound like these guys claiming Rod Laver can still beat D1 college guys when he walks out on the court with a cane practically.

 

[coupergear]

Not really. Roddick plays against JMac on the Powershares tour like you would play against the female opponent in mixed. Roddick would look like a total ****** blasting balls and running a 60 yo man to death out there. He's not going to do that.

Agree. All the stuff beyond the tour is just exhibition. You'll see young guys giving away sets all the time to the old timers.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

 

[zalive]

Open stance hitting is tough for a beginner though, and probably also unnecessary at <4.0 tennis. Neutral stance should be your bread and butter strokes.

It's unnecessary on a much higher level, if you ask me. But my opinion is that more open stance can naturally evolve from neutral stance hitting, so there's no need to boggle the mind while learning proper strokes.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Videos are very limited without live coaching to drill it into your body and mind.
You can watch the Yankees play baseball for 30 years and never become a better baseball player.

I do agree that at 3.5 there are such major mistakes and MASSIVE gaping holes in our game that there is so much room to improve.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Deleted.

 

[Limpinhitter]

You guys are underestimating how fast your body declines after 40. The hand eye coordination is still there, but the core strength, movement, flexibility, etc, just isn't there. If JMac could pulverize 6.0 D1 college players, he would still be playing because that's how he is. Watch Roddick and Mark Philippoussis hitting him soft balls on the Powershares tour. They aren't going to go at a legend like that any more than you are going after the 3.0 girl in mixed doubles. You all sound like these guys claiming Rod Laver can still beat D1 college guys when he walks out on the court with a cane practically.

In my view, you underestimate the difference in talent and skill between one of the greatest players of all time and a D1 player.

 

[TupeloDanger]

McEnroe might struggle against Mackie MacDonald. He might not. But either way, he's not having any trouble with the #4 guy from Iowa.

A lot of D1 players aren't nearly as good as people think.

 

[Moveforwardalways]

In my view, you underestimate the difference in talent and skill between one of the greatest players of all time and a D1 player.

McEnroe might struggle against Mackie MacDonald. He might not. But either way, he's not having any trouble with the #4 guy from Iowa.

A lot of D1 players aren't nearly as good as people think.

You all underestimate how difficult it is to win a tennis match when you can't move. Has nothing to do with hitting the ball, coordination, etc. This is why you don't see Roddick, et al, running him around.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

McEnroe might struggle against Mackie MacDonald. He might not. But either way, he's not having any trouble with the #4 guy from Iowa.

A lot of D1 players aren't nearly as good as people think.

there's definitely a huge difference between D1 players from unranked schools vs. ranked schools

The bottom man on a low level unranked D1 school could be a 5.0, whereas the top guy at a ranked school is like 6.0-6.5.
then there's the confusion of a student playing on a rec team at a top D1 school (ie. there are some 5.0+ players playing "rec", that weren't good enough to play on the school team) - but technically the description "played tennis at a D1 school" is true

 

[Limpinhitter]

You all underestimate how difficult it is to win a tennis match when you can't move. Has nothing to do with hitting the ball, coordination, etc. This is why you don't see Roddick, et al, running him around.

I think you have a misunderstanding of who would be doing most of the running in a match between Mac and D1 player.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

I think you have a misunderstanding of who would be doing most of the running in a match between Mac and D1 player.

BOOM. This. People with open stances basically do not know how to play tennis. They just know how to hit the ball. They have no awareness how everything is connected, and they do not see multiple shots are really one large unity.

Without someone to SHOW them, they simply don't even know what they don't know b/c you can;t miss something you don't have

 

[Bender]

What this thread shows is that there is a fine but clearly defined line between frugality and cheapness.

Avoiding wasting coaching time by practicing strokes you can practice alone is frugality. Avoiding coaching entirely when you have the means because you think you can coach yourself to a 5.0 with ATP looking strokes is being cheap as ****.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

I will say that most people can't even self-coach to a 4.5, unless they are pusher who really just wait for opponent to make a mistake. You will not self-teach how to correctly do an approach shot, or a proper volley. You may not understand that it's better to hit deep with less spin. How to hit defensively and turn that to offense. (At net, I just swat at the ball, all wrong) Certain things are not intuitive, and must be taught. I am a 3.5 self-taught, and one month and $750 of lessons taught me that I have almost no idea how to play tennis. I just knew how to hit the ball hard.

 

[Bender]

How do you know if you're doing it right? A huge part of a coach's job is to watch his student hitting so he can show yhe student what corrections need to be made. It's's almost impossible to do this yourself.
I know many recreational players have had the experience of seeing themselves on tape for the first time and being shocked at what they look like.. this is because they feel like they hit better than they do, but once they see themselves they realize something is way off.
If there isn't somebody there to watch you and to guide you and to coach you it's probably not going to be very productive.

That's why recording yourself is such a big part of self-coaching.

I should be more specific--you should practice on your own aspects of your game that does not require continuous feedback. This depends on the player. So, for eg, if you've got the hang of what a good ball toss for a serve is, you shouldn't be wasting your own time and your coach's by practicing ball tosses during training. If your coach says your need to work on being more light-footed, you should ideally be doing skipping or simple footwork drills alone, and not on the court. Things like grooving a new forehand, backhand, or any stroke for that matter should not be done on your own, lest you groove a tic into the stroke.

In my case, my toss was a bit off (I was throwing it too vertically, and not forward enough), so I try to groove my ball toss so I get the hang of it.

 

[lucky44]

Here are some of my notes. The points are simple. But breaking 30 years of habits will take at least a year. But, I have started the process.
I am a different player in just 15 lessons.

Congrats! You have inspired me to take lessons ,just a quick question , did you do any drills for footwork too? or any cardio exercises. I sometimes wonder I am a step behind better players and also get tired after a long point, so besides working on the technique,I need to work on my stamina and footwork too.

 

[Mongolmike]

Congrats! You have inspired me to take lessons ,just a quick question , did you do any drills for footwork too? or any cardio exercises. I sometimes wonder I am a step behind better players and also get tired after a long point, so besides working on the technique,I need to work on my stamina and footwork too.

IMO drills are good to get some shots in and maybe meet some people you might later play rec or league with. Basically little to no individual teaching in a drill class. I've never done a cardio class, but the name implies more aerobic than teaching, right?

The thing I like about 1 on 1 lessons is the subtle things a good coach identifies, and the visuals he offers to help you envision what you should be doing.

Friday I had a lesson, specific to working on my 1HBH return of serve from the AD side hitting crosscourt in doubles (solid crosscourt returns away from the front opponent who might poach). Like I said, pretty specific. As some imply, it wasn't just some stiff endlessly feeding balls telling me "good shot", or "keep your head down". We also worked a little bit on high volleys (not high enough for an overhead). In both instances he identified technique things I need to work on, and gave me visuals to keep in mind.

For example on the return of serve to my backhand, I often made contact with my right foot not planted yet. I attack the serve on an angle (good), but I was losing power and control because of footwork. So I worked on making sure my footwork was quicker to my spot to get my foot planted earlier (which after 20 minutes became quite exhausting!). Then later, to stay down on the ball longer he said to envision I am standing in a small tunnel and that if I stand up tall I will hit my head. Simple, but effective.

Now for me, both concepts I understood and were helpful. Other instructors might just be simple ball feeders, and I've occasionally had instructors who were not good at picking up small technique flaws or were not good at explaining things in a way that I could connect to. So, buyer beware. If one pro doesn't jive with you... it doesn't mean they are all bad. Find one who you can work with. And in any case, over time, things I have been taught in a lesson were things I probably would not be able to diagnose and correct on my own, or in a drill class. My 2 cents worth.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Conditioning is everything in tennis. Just like boxing. Once you lose your legs, you are always out of position. Even one step means the difference between hitting the ball in your strike zone vs. hitting it at eye level.

I don't do conditioning with my coach, but it's integral to the game. I do CrossFit a few times a week. You literally can never be in good enough shape for tennis, played correctly

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Yes, footwork. Stepping with the correct foot. Cross over running closed vs running straight at the ball with chest facing the net. Stuff I had no idea existed.

This needs to be drilled. This will be the hardest unintuitive habit to correct and will take a year, I expect.

Being on the wing foot for a shot totally compromises the entire shot.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Excellent post by mongol. That's what lessons are all about. I also have drilled specific weakness shots that would never even be identified in a group session. One on one is a different UNIVERSE.

I am very worried I will never find this level of instruction again, and can totally see how many are country club babysitter ball feeders who just give a few recycled general tips. My guy is pointing out every flaw, over and over. Here critiquing the ENTIRE hour.

 

[heninfan99]

10-15 lessons is simply the start. To get a TASTE of a new level of play. To see a glimmer of light. To realize you can look like those players you envy.

And 100 lessons to realize you'll never look like those players you envy.

 

[Bender]

I agree to an extent but even footwork isn't as simple as it seems. For instance when you have a deep moon ball going over your head there are specif footwork patterns that will get you to that ball quicker and in a much better position to hit it than simply trying to backup as fast as you can and you would never figure it out on your own. It's that type of knowledge that you'll be missing out on. The little things that can make a big difference.

Depending on your expectations I have varying degrees of confidence in your approach. If you are trying to advance to a significantly higher level You need real time feedback from someone who knows more than you do. If you just want to get a little more consistent than yes I think you can do that without a coach

Well I think the point is that you should combine both approaches for maximum improvement in the shortest frame of time. Ideally you should discuss with your coach what you can do at home without his guidance. Simple drills that do not require extensive oversight, that are best drilled into muscle memory tend to be those things that you can practice at home. Alternatively, you are particularly good at observing yourself in the mirror and have a knack for self-coaching, then shadow swings in front of a mirror could work too. But most people don't qualify for that sort of thing.

 

[tlm]

Yes, footwork. Stepping with the correct foot. Cross over running closed vs running straight at the ball with chest facing the net. Stuff I had no idea existed.

This needs to be drilled. This will be the hardest unintuitive habit to correct and will take a year, I expect.

Being on the wing foot for a shot totally compromises the entire shot.

It's good your working with a good coach and that should improve your game. But until you can bring it to match play it does not mean much. I have watched a lot of players that can look really good with a coach feeding them and hitting easy shots in rally's but look nothing like that once in a real match.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

No problem, I agree. Not being able to produce in a match setting simply means it's not yet automatic. It takes lot of drilling to not have to think

It's takes YEARS for people to become 5.0 Only an fool would expect to replicate that in a few dozen lessons. This is a multi year process. There is a reason why this is a rich man's game..

 

[GBplayer]

I started one to one lessons a couple of years ago having been self taught . My game is now well above the starting point, it is a long process don't expect results over night, although you will have eureka moments along the way. When you play matches, do not return to your old ways , although it can be tempting. Enjoy the journey . For the first year it was tough breaking old habits, it then becomes fun as you see the results.

 

[tlm]

Lol... Give the guy a chance. So the alternative is to what? Not take any lessons?
There is a sequence to these things. First you learn the fundamentals and then you practice and practice and practice and practice them and then you practice them in a match situation.

This guy took a handful of lessons and already you're telling him they're useless unless he could use what he's learned in a match situation. You have no idea how long this process takes. Even after years of this most players still don't play as well in a match as they do in practice but they will play well enough to beat a player that hasn't taken any lessons

So it will take years and years and thousands of dollars to be a little better than the player that has not had lessons? Wow sounds like a great deal especially for his coach speaking of lol's.

 

[GBplayer]

So it will take years and years and thousands of dollars to be a little better than the player that has not had lessons? Wow sounds like a great deal especially for his coach speaking of lol's.

In two years I am now better than after thirty years of self taught playing. I got worse for the first years coaching. But then most university players take a good ten years to get to their level. I will not attain this level , but it is worth every hour spent to hit consistently clean balls .

 

[tlm]

L

In two years I am now better than after thirty years of self taught playing. I got worse for the first years coaching. But then most university players take a good ten years to get to their level. I will not attain this level , but it is worth every hour spent to hit consistently clean balls .

Well that's good you put in that kind of work and dedication. I'm not saying that it can't pay off because I have watched a high school kid I play with make a big change in his game from good coaching.

But his parents pay the coaching costs and he does not work so he has the time and most importantly he is young.

I think an older player that is 3.5 level and thinks that after a year of lessons he will become a 5.0 level player is dreaming.

 

[Powderwombat]

If your coach is getting you to hit closed stance with a semi-western forehand demand a refund...he has no idea. The only people who hit closed stance are like 60 year old guys that learned to play in the 70s and 80s. They also have really mild eastern forehand grips which makes it OK...but if you have a modern semi-western forehand, you should not be hitting closed stance. The swing path is different so if you hit with a closed stance you won't get as much power and spin as if you hit open.

 

[tlm]

If your coach is getting you to hit closed stance with a semi-western forehand demand a refund...he has no idea. The only people who hit closed stance are like 60 year old guys that learned to play in the 70s and 80s. They also have really mild eastern forehand grips which makes it OK...but if you have a modern semi-western forehand, you should not be hitting closed stance. The swing path is different so if you hit with a closed stance you won't get as much power and spin as if you hit open.

I think he is using an eastern grip with closed stance, he claims depth is everything. Kind of old school style I don't see many coaches teaching that style anymore. The older guys at my club play that way and some are very good with it. But they grew up learning that technique.

 

[Powderwombat]

BOOM. This. People with open stances basically do not know how to play tennis. They just know how to hit the ball. They have no awareness how everything is connected, and they do not see multiple shots are really one large unity.

Without someone to SHOW them, they simply don't even know what they don't know b/c you can;t miss something you don't have

Wow, just saw this and I can't believe noone commented on it. In this message, you are saying that every single top player in the world for the past 20+ years does not know how to play tennis. Federer, Djokovic, Nadal...they ALL hit with open stances the majority of the time, because it is CORRECT. Is this the attitude your "coach" is giving you? He sounds like a complete and utter dinosaur.

This is a fact - open stance is the superior way to hit forehands unless you're using a dinosaur continental or really mild eastern forehand grip. When you close your body off with a semi-western grip as 99% of players use now, you have to hit around your own body and you lose a lot of upper body rotation which powers the shot. The only reason people used to hit with a closed stance is because they all hit flat shots with an old fashioned forehand grip, and you can't do that with an open stance because the grip didn't allow it due to minimal topspin. With a semi-western forehand the racquet path has changed and people realised that when you open up you generate a lot more power in the stroke by coiling the upper body, turning the hips and shoulders, and then uncoiling into the stroke. Hitting closed stance you're basically just arming the ball and not using your body. Your coach is laughably inept, to say the least if this is what you take away from your lessons.

 

[Powderwombat]

I think he is using an eastern grip with closed stance, he claims depth is everything. Kind of old school style I don't see many coaches teaching that style anymore. The older guys at my club play that way and some are very good with it. But they grew up learning that technique.

Yea but the fact that his coach is actively saying open stance is the incorrect way is a huge red flag for me. It's one thing to teach a particular style, but this coach sounds like it's his awful way or the highway. My coach (ex ATP professional, now full time coach) told me that he sometimes teaches closed stance to tall, lanky players because they can generate more power due to their long levers, but for the average player - open stance. A good example of knowing the whole spectrum and not forcing one narrow view down everybody's throat.

 

[movdqa]

I've also validated something I've felt my whole life. Equipment is meaningless without the right technique and conditioning.
Now that I've seen how the game is MEANT to be played, not just smashing groundstrokes as hard as you can,.
I see that the racket is absolutely irrelevant. My coach would beat my ass 6-0 6-0 using a T2000 from the 1970s.

I've made changes over the years:

- Continental to Eastern FH
- Eastern FH to Semiwestern
- Modern Forehand
- More relaxed and spinnier backhand (haven't gone to the modern BH yet)
- Open stance forehand

These things took six-months to transition to the point where I didn't think about what I was doing and I lost a lot of matches during the transitions but it's one of those things where I believed that the investment would be worth it. I know that there are many that could make sizable changes to their game in far less time but I have a lot of non-tennis commitments.

It appears that you did a bunch of these things all at the same time which is far more efficient than doing them one at a time.

I agree that equipment isn't really that important. However, after really improving your game, finding the best racquet and configuration can be beneficial. But getting the racquet right is secondary (at least in terms of match performance from what I've found) to getting the best technique possible given your limitations (my main limitation is time).

Congrats on a job well done.

 

[tlm]

No. It will take years and years for you to comprehend what you read.

I totally understand and like most here I understand that you are just another bigmouth self proclaimed expert that is all talk.

You claim that you could beat me with your off hand so you must be really good with your dominant hand. Instead of all this talk let's see some video then we can see if your game is anywhere near as big as your mouth is.

 

[tlm]

Yea but the fact that his coach is actively saying open stance is the incorrect way is a huge red flag for me. It's one thing to teach a particular style, but this coach sounds like it's his awful way or the highway. My coach (ex ATP professional, now full time coach) told me that he sometimes teaches closed stance to tall, lanky players because they can generate more power due to their long levers, but for the average player - open stance. A good example of knowing the whole spectrum and not forcing one narrow view down everybody's throat.

Maybe his coach is donnybrook.

 

[BlueB]

Neutral stance (let's not call it closed as it is not), is the right way to start learning proper mechanics. From there, once comfortable, you learn open, semi and closed stances. Even if you look at the atp pros, they would align into neutral when given enough time, especially for approach down the line. In reality, most of the forehand shots are hit with semi open of varying degree.
"Open for all" TT dogma is just ruining so many players.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

 

[Noveson]

McEnroe might struggle against Mackie MacDonald. He might not. But either way, he's not having any trouble with the #4 guy from Iowa.

A lot of D1 players aren't nearly as good as people think.

Mostly I think it's that people are forgetting how big the range of players is. I'm pretty confident McEnroe would've whooped my ass, but I was a walk on at the bottom of the ladder. Our #1 guy had to play against UCLA, Stanford, etc, and I think he could take him. THere's a bigggg gap between the bottom and top of a power conference team, let alone between a school like UCLA compared to Iowa.

 

[tlm]

You know what's really funny Tim? When you're put on somebody's ignore list but you keep on responding anyway. I love when that happens.

Still waiting for you to back up all the talk. But of course it won't happen because you are just another keyboard warrior that is nothing but talk.

 

[Tennisanity]

So it will take years and years and thousands of dollars to be a little better than the player that has not had lessons? Wow sounds like a great deal especially for his coach speaking of lol's.

Therein lies the essence. People gotta eat and not everyone had the capacity to go to college.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

So it will take years and years and thousands of dollars to be a little better than the player that has not had lessons? Wow sounds like a great deal especially for his coach speaking of lol's.

No, a lot better. You enjoy watching YouTube videos, but don't think for a second you'll ever get past 4.0

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

think an older player that is 3.5 level and thinks that after a year of lessons he will become a 5.0 level player is dreaming.

No such delusions, straw man. However I will get significantly better, and look like a while different player. One who has a net game and can win points without pushing

 

[Ash_Smith]

Hitting stances 101 (wish I had a £ for overtime I have posted this!).

On the forehand you have 3 options - to hit off the front foot, to hit off the outside foot or to hit off the back foot. Each requires you to use a different "engine" to efficiently generate racquet head speed. Hitting off the front foot requires linear momentum, hitting off the outside foot requires angular momentum and hitting off the back foot requires vertical momentum. In order to be an "elite" player you need mastery of 2 out of 3 (or to be really damn good at all of them).

How does this impact coaching - none of the above are easier or harder than the other, but people tend to get into trouble when they combine a stance with the "wrong engine". Throw someone a ball and ask them to go and catch it after a bounce and they will probably move and catch it on the front foot, ask someone to catch the same ball but quickly comeback to where they started and they will probably catch it with their weight on the outside foot. Both are relatively natural movements to a human being and so can be taught efficiently if you create the right situations.

 

[heninfan99]

Stance is situational. This is the most sensible advice on forehand stances, I've posted it before:

 

[tlm]

No such delusions, straw man. However I will get significantly better, and look like a while different player. One who has a net game and can win points without pushing

That's good if you put in the work you should improve. But time will tell not talk. You know that you will be a high level player and I will never improve? That's good just show the evidence of proof when this happens not just talk.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Hitting stances 101 (wish I had a £ for overtime I have posted this!).

On the forehand you have 3 options - to hit off the front foot, to hit off the outside foot or to hit off the back foot. Each requires you to use a different "engine" to efficiently generate racquet head speed. Hitting off the front foot requires linear momentum, hitting off the outside foot requires angular momentum and hitting off the back foot requires vertical momentum. In order to be an "elite" player you need mastery of 2 out of 3 (or to be really damn good at all of them).

How does this impact coaching - none of the above are easier or harder than the other, but people tend to get into trouble when they combine a stance with the "wrong engine". Throw someone a ball and ask them to go and catch it after a bounce and they will probably move and catch it on the front foot, ask someone to catch the same ball but quickly comeback to where they started and they will probably catch it with their weight on the outside foot. Both are relatively natural movements to a human being and so can be taught efficiently if you create the right situations.

I actually did the ball catching drill to learn how to load my back leg on a running forehand. Changes the entire swing

This is an example of something that is impossible to learn without a coach.

 

[tlm]

I'm taking a lesson tonight. I will ask my coach if he can teach me to hit with eastern grip and closed stance. Then see if I can learn to go to the net and finish points like a real tennis player.

 

[tlm]

No, a lot better. You enjoy watching YouTube videos, but don't think for a second you'll ever get past 4.0

I enjoy watching YouTube videos? Really I did not know that I rarely watch any YouTube videos. Pretty amazing how you know these things. So let me get this straight you are a 3.5 hacker that has no limits to how high you may reach because you have found the Magic coach that teaches eastern grip and closed stance forehand. Plus you also know that I will never get past 4.0.

Okay I may never exceed 4.0 level which is fine I enjoy playing the game now and have plenty of solid guys to hit with. Which more than a few are 4.5 level and I can at least give them a good battle and they continue to ask me to hit. So when all this magic net attacking game of yours comes together post some video so we can all see just how much you improved.

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

I love how people are bashing eastern grip. Spin kings with zero depth, most likely.

I hold on bevel 3.

Semi western grip is a joke unless you have the condoning of an iron man, or teen, or professional.

 

[tlm]

I love how people are bashing eastern grip. Spin kings with zero depth, most likely.

I hold on bevel 3.

Semi western grip is a joke unless you have the condoning of an iron man, or teen, or professional.

I'm not bashing eastern grip some of the top guys at my club use eastern grip and are very good with it. If it works for you that's good then go with it. You may be surprised but I just got home from a lesson with the local college coach that I will be working with the next few months and had a very productive practice.

When you say semi western grip is a joke you show that you don't know much, it is by far the most common grip taught today. But if you prefer eastern that's fine but just because you use it and your coach teaches it does not make it is the best by any means.

One of the best players in my area played at University of Illinois in the 80's and he pretty much uses a continental grip for everything and he can still play at a strong 4.5 level even though he only hits a couple of times a week. I use a full western grip and I am in pretty good shape but not anywhere near iron man or teenage level. But can still play 3 competitive sets using that grip and hitting a lot of spin. Which is tiring no doubt but not near as bad as you make it.

 

[mad dog1]

Semi western grip is a joke unless you have the condoning of an iron man, or teen, or professional.

Why would one need the conditioning of an iron man to hit with a semi western grip?

 

[TimeToPlaySets]

Why would one need the conditioning of an iron man to hit with a semi western grip?

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/516368/