Are most folks pretending to play and learn?

[Tennismastery]

I agree to what everybody is saying here, I know Im guilty of it also. But I would like to add one thing. Sometimes a bad coach can teach the wrong things also. What I am talking about is "some" non-USPTA certified instructors. There is one at my small city recreational program. That's where I started playing tennis to begin with. All he said was "low to high" and whenever he fed us balls, we could do any certain technique (tapping since we were all beginners) and he would be "nice shot nice shot." He, however, constantly bragged about how he beat another person with a wood racquet since his racquet broke during match. Despite having good touch at net, his forehand is basically an eastern swinging slowly until the point of contact and then flipping his wrist downward. Now, he is our tennis coach for HS because of a lack of tennis coaches in our area. What upsets me more is while Im trying to develop proper technique, he encourages winning over that. Instead of teaching me what is wrong with my topspin forehand, he encourages me to continue slicing (as long as its deep) the whole game.

This is indeed one of the downfalls of tennis teaching: there are many 'pros' (yes, even USPTA and PTR pros) who really are not qualified to help players actually reach their potential. I have coached 28 seasons of boys and girls tennis in addition to being a head pro and director of tennis at several clubs in three states (and currently own my own academy) and I have been appalled at the number of P-1 pros who are teaching much the same way this poster mentioned. They don't understand that winning early at the cost of gaining form and thus helping players reach their potential...(and have a lifetime of skilled tennis enjoyment!), is failing their student...and their team in the long run.

I had a player who was so bad that he couldn't drop-hit a tennis ball. He couldn't literally hit the ball. He was number 52 on my team and since I never cut players I kept him. Make a long story short, by the time he was a sophmore, he became the top-ranked doubles player in Southern Califronia and ended up winning 160 matches and only lost 3 times in three years on varsity. He learned proper technique and had a terrific work ethic...all of which proved to me that even the less-gifted could indeed become skilled players.

I hope that all juniors and adults who read these posts will understand that they all can attain prolific levels of advanced play. BUT, they have to learn what such methods are, and, learn to execute them until you can do them without conscious thought to the general specifics of the swing or grip, and employ them in competition.

Yes, it will work.

 

[JCo872]

Someone wrote that 'there is not a right way or wrong way' to hit a tennis ball. This sentiment is only true if you don't care if you reach your potential as it applies to skilled tennis. While there are a variety of ways to hit a tennis ball, there are 'more effective' ways and there are 'rudementary' ways to hit a tennis ball. The more rudementary or elementary ways are typically the ways that self-taught players (those who have not studied more skilled tennis or tried to mimic skilled tennis). That is, since most grips and swing patterns among advanced players feel quite uncomfortable to novice players, (continental grip on serves and volleys, semi-western or full wester forehand grips for topspin forehand, eastern backhand or two-handed swings for backhands, etc.) few will spontaneously integrate such grips and swings when wanting to hit a backhand. And who can blame them. Why would anyone hold a racquet in an uncomfortable grip and play a game to try to beat someone else in competition with it? (Unless they understand that BECOMING comfortable with such grips takes time and will equate into more prolific play.) Doing anything skillfully takes such an understanding and commitment. Playing the piano, golf, typing, learning the violin, etc., all have uncomfortable swing elements that pros or instructors teach how to overcome the uncomfortable elements until they are mastered. Unfortunately, tennis and golf both have a competitive element that pits you against someone else (or against the course, as in golf) and players will always feel more comfortable with the less unfamiliar elements...making them revert to such patterns to try and 'win'...at a cost of their ever mastering the more advanced patterns that are necessary for them to reach higher skill levels and thus reaching their true potential.

Interestingly, athleticism has little to do with this advancement. Of the several thousand junior players I have taught, a great many who went on to reach very high levels of advanced play were not gifted. But, those who did reach such levels were dedicated to the prinicples I mentioned above. I also have some very 'senior' adults, those in their late 60's and 70's, who are enjoying a new found sense in reaching their true potential. That is, they are learning to overcome their old habits and pursuing tennis with the view of becoming a better tennis player than they ever were. Some will reach such goals, others probably not. But, the human nature of KNOWING they are doing things that are recognizable as more prolific and the gaining mastery of such elements is very rewarding. Far more rewarding than a 'hit and giggle' mentality.

Wonderfully written post. You describe my philosophy perfectly. And it's great to hear about your experience and conclusions as a teaching pro.

 

[North]

Can't imagine what singles players do in a group lesson, assuming 4 on a court...

We try group lessons with 2 or 3 different pros, realize the group format is a frustrating total waste of time for us, and only take private lessons - lol!. At least, that's what I (and a few friends I know) did. I am aware that some pros and some players feel they have had good luck with the group format, but I have not personally ever found it helpful.

 

[slewisoh]

We try group lessons with 2 or 3 different pros, realize the group format is a frustrating total waste of time for us, and only take private lessons - lol!. At least, that's what I (and a few friends I know) did. I am aware that some pros and some players feel they have had good luck with the group format, but I have not personally ever found it helpful.

I've seen singles players take lessons in 2+pro format and that seemed to work pretty well. Pro seemed to feed a ton of balls so that they could work on cross court groundies and various approach shots. Seems like a budget friendly way to work a singles lesson.

 

[sureshs]

I have taken two 1 on 1 lessons recently with one more to go. Got a deal of $115 for 3 1 hr lessons and the coach travels out here. I find that you have to take just 1 or 2 things from each lesson and keep practising it in your regular matches or hitting session. For me, first lesson was: take the racquet back early for the 1 H BH, and take an extra step on the BH for wide balls. Second lesson was: bring you weight forward and take the ball early on the BH if you can, and for serves: go 7 to 1 for kick serve, and for any serve, start with feet apart, then bring them together while bending your knees, and then you will be using your legs.

One more lesson to go.

Now I have to do these 5 or 6 things over and over again for months. Most people take a lesson for the fun or exercise, and if it is a group lesson, it is a social thing, and they like to go out for a drink later. I used to be a member of a private upscale club before, and there were groups of "girls" (as they used to call each other though they were "slightly" older) and they took lessons purely for the socializing.

 

[Mahboob Khan]

Group lessons are economical and equally effective provided they are conducted by a coach experienced enough to understand and address the needs of the group as well as that of an individual. Lessons alone will not make you a good tennis player. An intelligent student will take what he needs to take from a group and then put that into practice through another practice partner. Once the technical/tactical part is taken care of then it boils down to physical conditioning (speed, strength, stamina). Running, sprinting, sit ups, push ups, medicine ball throws, and going to gym once in a while, will take care of that. So, let's be realistic, let's not blame our laziness on the coach!

 

[North]

I've seen singles players take lessons in 2+pro format and that seemed to work pretty well. Pro seemed to feed a ton of balls so that they could work on cross court groundies and various approach shots. Seems like a budget friendly way to work a singles lesson.

I'm very grateful I can afford individual lessons. Lessons with one other singles player might be OK, provided the other person is as physically fit and fast to keep things moving, is at the same level of play, the pro only gears the lessons to singles, and it is strictly business (no socializing). Someone mentioned learning styles. I find verbal instruction to be more of a hindrance than anything (this may sound weird, but I actually get very confused by even clear verbal explanations that are more than just a few words), so the pro I take lessons from has gotten to know me and knows I need to see and feel shots and patterns of play to learn them. Her verbal explanations are brief, at best. I've never gotten this in group lessons. For doubles, the group lessons seem to be great. Likewise for people who value the social aspects of learning in a group. As this seems to encompass most players (except the statistical anomalies like me - lol!), the group lessons often work well for many people.

 

[lauren]

if your not getting any better
you can keep playing for the fun of it and keep having fun
but its obvious that your not going to do anything with tennis
it just depends if you've got the talent of not.

 

[peter]

It's just not possible to "make up" for that in short order. Blowing money helps but only so much. Why bother when you can have alot of fun playing at the 3.0 level?

A related issue is that as you move up in the levels you'll have fewer and fewer people at the same level to play with (and that will want to play with you if the difference gets too big).

 

[GuyClinch]

Group lessons are economical and equally effective provided they are conducted by a coach experienced enough to understand and address the needs of the group as well as that of an individual. Lessons alone will not make you a good tennis player. An intelligent student will take what he needs to take from a group and then put that into practice through another practice partner. Once the technical/tactical part is taken care of then it boils down to physical conditioning (speed, strength, stamina). Running, sprinting, sit ups, push ups, medicine ball throws, and going to gym once in a while, will take care of that. So, let's be realistic, let's not blame our laziness on the coach!

FWIW - I don't think group lessons are terribly useful and private lessons are not quite the rip-off they seem.

1) With Private lessons you get to hit with the pro instead of getting those lame feeds. This stresses movement more and can enable you to work on specific things.

2) Private lessons will actually give you more of a workout. Assuming your pro is in good shape and a good player (and almost all are) you will get to hit a ton more balls. So the cost/ball hit is actually quite reasonable.

3) In a private lesson you can work on whatever needs work in your game rather then hitting upteen backhands - when your backhand is your best shot.

4) and of course the big thing.. A good pro will see exactly what you are doing wrong and work with you to correct this.

The only problem I see with pros is that people like me have difficult in holding onto that knowledge if you take alot of time off from the game. I have to learn to self coach better.

Pete

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I have been appalled at the number of P-1 pros who are teaching much the same way this poster mentioned. They don't understand that winning early at the cost of gaining form and thus helping players reach their potential...(and have a lifetime of skilled tennis enjoyment!), is failing their student...and their team in the long run.

What a shame.

 

[Ace]

I agree to what everybody is saying here, I know Im guilty of it also. But I would like to add one thing. Sometimes a bad coach can teach the wrong things also. What I am talking about is "some" non-USPTA certified instructors. There is one at my small city recreational program. That's where I started playing tennis to begin with. All he said was "low to high" and whenever he fed us balls, we could do any certain technique (tapping since we were all beginners) and he would be "nice shot nice shot." He, however, constantly bragged about how he beat another person with a wood racquet since his racquet broke during match. Despite having good touch at net, his forehand is basically an eastern swinging slowly until the point of contact and then flipping his wrist downward. Now, he is our tennis coach for HS because of a lack of tennis coaches in our area. What upsets me more is while Im trying to develop proper technique, he encourages winning over that. Instead of teaching me what is wrong with my topspin forehand, he encourages me to continue slicing (as long as its deep) the whole game.

Don't be discouraged...I know who you are talking about, he's a moron. He's also about a 3.0 and shouldn't be teaching, as he has no knowledge of technique or strategy.
I hope you can find a better coach.

 

[kevhen]

People get stuck at 3.0-3.5 because they don't question themselves and really think about what it would take to improve. They want to improve but don't think deeply enough about what it would really involve. To improve you need to work on fitness, you need to work on developing strokes from all places on the court as well as dealing with different spins and creating different spins as well. You have to practice your serve and become more precise as you go along. You have to play matches and think about why you lost or what you can improve. Most people just go out and hit and take lessons and hit and don't really think about if monotonous hitting is really helping or hurting their games but just keep on doing it and get stuck in their ways. You have to force yourself to evolve and push the envelope a bit if you want to keep improving.

 

[Owfred]

Don't be discouraged...I know who you are talking about, he's a moron. He's also about a 3.0 and shouldn't be teaching, as he has no knowledge of technique or strategy.
I hope you can find a better coach.

Hey Ace, do you really know who I am talking about? or are you just using him as an example? It would be weird if you did though...

 

[Ace]

Hey Ace, do you really know who I am talking about? or are you just using him as an example? It would be weird if you did though...

Yes, I actually do know who you are talking about. You mentioned his book in another post. I played with him once, he wasn't very good, low-3.5 level at best. Then he got set up for an easy volley, and when he put it away, he shouted "And THATS the way tennis is PLAYED, Ladies and Gentlemen!!" Which was kind of silly, because he didn't do anything great, just put away a sitter volley that one of the weaker players hit, he wasn't the best player there, and nobody was trash-talking during the game anyway, so the comment seemed out of place. We all just kind of looked at him.

But, I recently heard of another school that is looking for a coach, and was told that the school might have to cancel their tennis program if they don't find a coach......so I guess a bad coach is better than cancelling the tennis program....

 

[Owfred]

Yes, I actually do know who you are talking about. You mentioned his book in another post. I played with him once, he wasn't very good, low-3.5 level at best. Then he got set up for an easy volley, and when he put it away, he shouted "And THATS the way tennis is PLAYED, Ladies and Gentlemen!!" Which was kind of silly, because he didn't do anything great, just put away a sitter volley that one of the weaker players hit, he wasn't the best player there, and nobody was trash-talking during the game anyway, so the comment seemed out of place. We all just kind of looked at him.

But, I recently heard of another school that is looking for a coach, and was told that the school might have to cancel their tennis program if they don't find a coach......so I guess a bad coach is better than cancelling the tennis program....

Ah, so you do know him! True, having no tennis program is the worse thing that could happen to a high school tennis team. I am glad you understand what I have to deal with when I was playing for him and I could sit here all day telling horrible stories, but in the end, its my own fault that I am not where I want to be. I'll keep working on it though.

 

[Caswell]

...Then when I reach 4.5 I would have even less hitting partners to play competitively with...

All the other reasons fly out of my head when I remember this point. The sweet spot on the curve in my area is 4.0. A tournament last weekend was a great microcosm - 3 guys in the 3.0's, 8 in the 3.5's, 18 in the 4.0's, and back down to 6 in the 4.5's. The 4.5's at my club have to play up into the 5.0's and 5.5's to get a decent number of competitive matches.

Once I get to be a strong 4.0, I think my motivation to make dramatic improvements will wane.

 

[kevhen]

It gets harder to improve as you move up as well, since you do most things well and have to do them even better to continue improving and your body isn't getting any younger.

 

[Kathy]

Most folks seem to improve a bit, then stagnate. It's not a question of them reaching their physical limits for the most part. It seems to be a certain acceptance of mediocrity. Am I expecting too much of folks, maybe engaging in some unwarranted transferrance? Are most people simply dilletantes when it comes to tennis?

I just edited an article on tennis that addressed this issue at a tangent and really impressed me. As a result of what I learned in it, I think you're onto something about mediocrity. There's a good deal of safety in it.

Still, I can't quite understand taking lessons if you don't want to improve. But, if that's an avenue to socializing, what do we care if people pay for the opportunity?

It IS about the score, not how pretty your strokes are. But if you're unafflicted with fear of rising above mediocrity, I should think you'd want to improve them so you can beat better opponents.

But strokes aren't everything either. Many people obsess about their strokes, blaming everything on them, when the problem is that they know two or three things only about strategy and tactics. It's amazing how people who can expound on the finer points of pronation for hours know next to nothing about strategy and tactics. That's where the GAME is.

Kathy K
www.operationdoubles.com

 

[chess9]

I just edited an article on tennis that addressed this issue at a tangent and really impressed me. As a result of what I learned in it, I think you're onto something about mediocrity. There's a good deal of safety in it.

Still, I can't quite understand taking lessons if you don't want to improve. But, if that's an avenue to socializing, what do we care if people pay for the opportunity?

It IS about the score, not how pretty your strokes are. But if you're unafflicted with fear of rising above mediocrity, I should think you'd want to improve them so you can beat better opponents.

But strokes aren't everything either. Many people obsess about their strokes, blaming everything on them, when the problem is that they know two or three things only about strategy and tactics. It's amazing how people who can expound on the finer points of pronation for hours know next to nothing about strategy and tactics. That's where the GAME is.

Kathy K
www.operationdoubles.com

I heartily agree.

Strategic and tactical considerations are sometimes learned in the heat of battle, but often not at all. I played a fellow yesterday and he kept hitting all his serves to my forehand, nothwithstanding that my forehand was ON yesterday (the local knowledge is to play against my forehand, so....). I drubbed him 6-1, 6-0 and told him after that my forehand is very streaky, not weak and he should have mixed it up more and given me more short balls and off pace balls and slices. This sort of thing is very common among club players-many aren't saying to themselves: "This is a chess match too! I have to keep thinking!" Today I watched 4 players I know well play doubles and they were all making exactly the same mistakes they've been making for a very long time. One guy thought he had the solution-he bought a new Head racquet. It got him stoked up to play but now he's trying to cream all his terrible strokes, so.....

I don't know. I taught for two years in the '60's and really couldn't accept the acceptance of mediocrity. It was driving me crazy when I was a kid, but now I find it more amusing. I guess I've become much more philosophical about people's motivations to play the game. Today, just getting them out there to get some exercise is 90% of the battle, or so it seems.

-Robert

 

[nickybol]

This was even a part of my coaching education back in the days. If I remember correctly:

Motives for playing tennis:
- the desire to achieve something
- a need for socializing
- looking for sensation (being fit, feeling a need to exercise, work hard, hit great shots, etc.)
- the feeling of being ones own boss

 

[TENNIS_99]

why are so many people playing at 3.0-3.5?
-Robert

Playing at 3.0-3.5 almost guarantee to have fun if you really like tennis. Playing 4.5+ you need to sweat your gut out to have fun.

 

[Narcissist]

The reason I took up tennis again after 3 years away from it was mostly social. I moved to a new area knowing no one and I figured it would be a good way of meeting people.

 

[Mahboob Khan]

Well done Kathy. That's why in the modern game-based approach the emphasis is on tactics (obviously without technique you cannot implement tactics). In the old times you learned first and played later, in the game based approach you play and learn. You learn by playing. With more play, you learn more about tactics and obviously are eager to learn your hitting technique. If something is at stake, you tend to learn more from technical session with the coach. In the old approach the emphasis was on basket feeding (dead ball), in the modern game based approach emphasis is on live ball. In the old approach, the players played or drilled with the coach, in the new approach the coach manages/supervises play between the players and he is stand by to provide any quick fixes to technique or tactics. To me the best coach is the one who places the players in the best learning situations .. best technical, tactical, physical, and mental learning situations. For example, if I want to teach topspin strokes to a group of players, all I have to do to take them to some dead red slow clay courts. This is the best "topspin" learning situation for them. It is likely they might ask you how to, and you provide quick but timely help such as just prior to contact you drop your racket head about a foot and brush low to high on the ball! They will tend to follow your advice more, if they don't, without topspin, they will lose .. fast!

 

[nickybol]

Hi Mahboob, I think the game-based approach is fine, but you should not overhype it. It really depends on the teaching situation whether to use it or not. When I`m working one-on-one I tend not to use it, but remember I only work one-on-one when they need technical instruction. When working with more than one player it is a perfect approach although you should keep in mind I only work with high-performance players. It might be something different when you work with beginners. I think you should not neglect the technical aspect and still emphasise it much. I often find myself oncourt with four or 8 players, then it is a perfect approach.

Remember: dead-ball drilling is just a phase.
1. dropfeed
2. deadball
3. liveball

Liveball is the goal!