being coached - what do you like what don't you like? Group and private lessons

[dennis]

I'm looking to improve my tennis coaching and would like to hear opinions about people's experiences of being coached or trained, either in groups or in private sessions, as adults or as juniors. Or as coaches, where have you gone wrong in the past? What elements of the lessons did you like, helped you progress or annoyed you?

To get the ball rolling here are my thoughts (you can skip this part!) -
It's bad if:

The coach talks too much- You need some repetition to get a skill going and if they interrupt to make teaching points it stops you hitting balls and progression eg they tell you to work on a new footwork pattern, give you only 5 goes and then tell you the whole thing again for a minute or two when it would be better to just wait a bit and encourage.

Coaches give you or the group a load of teaching points before having seen you play, they are often wasting your time by telling you what you are already doing well rather than something that you want or should be improving.

Giving any more than the bare minimum of instruction to younger players who won't pay attention or learn in that way.

Poor rotation of players in groups - leaving the more advanced players separated so that they are never or rarely playing at their own level in pairs. Having long queues of people waiting to hit when it could be organized better.

Good:

The coach has slick delivery with really quick demos and set up of drills. Gets activites started quickly.

Challenges players so that it's rewarding and they progress. Offers individuals useful tailored tips as he goes around following observation.

 

[Limpinhitter]

My biggest concern with most coaches is that they don't understand modern technique and, therefore, can't teach it, even when they can execute proper modern technique themselves.

My opinion on group lessons is that a group of more than 3 or 4 is more profitable for a coach, but, not very efficient for the student, in most cases, depending on the playing level of the students and the purpose of the lesson.

 

[heninfan99]

Though group can be fun you don't get enough reps or personalized attention.

 

[RetroSpin]

I'm not a fan of group lessons. Exceptions might be for doubles team training, or if you have two good players who can rally, thus freeing the coach up to give individual advice. The hit three balls then go to the end of the line drills strike me as basically worthless, except for the opportunity to meet people you might want to play with.

 

[r2473]

I'm looking to improve my tennis coaching and would like to hear opinions about people's experiences of being coached or trained, either in groups or in private sessions, as adults or as juniors.

***I'm assuming a private lesson of a person that wants to improve fundamental aspects*****

When I first started playing, I self-coached using Pat Dougherty / Bollettieri videos (Sonic Serve, Killer Forehand, etc). To learn the serve, this is what I did:

1) I watched the entire video several times. I wanted to be sure I had an overview of what the goal was before I got bogged down in each aspect. Even as I worked on individual aspects, I continued to watch the entire video from time to time so I didn't forget how what I was working on contributed to the "whole serve". In other words, I didn't want to just have a pretty "trophy position" for it's own sake. It isn't a static position. I'm not posing for the camera. It's a fully dynamic position. I had to understand it as the snapshot in time that it is.

****Take home point**** Your students need have a good overview understanding of the entire stroke before they get bogged down in the details. They need to be constantly reminded how the individual aspect they are working on contributes to "the whole". They need to understand that common positions (trophy position for example) are just check points. In other words, you aren't "trying" to get into the trophy position. Your are trying to hit a serve in an efficient manner using the kinetic chain. It just so happens that, if you are doing this correctly, you will be in a "trophy position" for a brief moment in time in the process.

I can go on if anyone finds this approach interesting. I was quite methodical and insanely repetitive. The tools I used were a ball machine (or just a basket of balls for the serve) and a camera.

 

[dennis]

I'm not a fan of group lessons [...]The hit three balls then go to the end of the line drills strike me as basically worthless, except for the opportunity to meet people you might want to play with.

I know what you mean. I think the hit 3 and go to the end of the line drill can be an example of: unrealistic or unchallenging feed or situation; doesn't provide enjoyable competition; player cannot link it to their own matchplay in their head or they are unclear what they are working on; hitting for hitting's sake; the wait is too long between hitting and perhaps there is a social player and a really competitive player in the same group, both receiving the same feed and both being told to do the same thing with the ball. If these things were all fixed you might enjoy the group session.

 

[BMC9670]

One thing I have learned in working with juniors, is to word your praise carefully. People don't give a lot of thought to this, but it can make a difference in the focus and effort of the player. Not sure if it applies to adult players, but I don't see why not.

During a drill or when instructing, if the player does something correct or has a good outcome, I'll say "yes", or "that's what we're looking for", which motivates them to repeat the positive outcome. If they do it wrong or don't have a good outcome, I'll either give a correction or say "try again". I save "good job" or "good work" for the end of the drill or practice as it signals an end. Kids sometimes tend to relax and drop focus a little when they hear "good job" rather than dig in for more.

Basically, I use "yes" to praise a positive result and "good job" only at the end to praise good effort.

 

[Ash_Smith]

One thing I have learned in working with juniors, is to word your praise carefully.

This is true of every coaching situation, not just with juniors (actually it is true of every human interaction, but that is another post for another day). I was lucky enough to spend some time being mentored by a QC and the big thing I learned from him was that every single word must be considered for the impact it will have.

 

[Mecir'sBeard]

This is true of every coaching situation, not just with juniors (actually it is true of every human interaction, but that is another post for another day). I was lucky enough to spend some time being mentored by a QC and the big thing I learned from him was that every single word must be considered for the impact it will have.

You might have to translate QC for some of your transatlantic readership...

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ ah yes, good point...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen's_Counsel

 

[sureshs]

I don't like the money spent.

 

[slice bh compliment]

As a former player, former coach and head pro, and as a tennis parent, I have seen and experienced some good coaches and some weak ones.

Good coaches tell you honestly what your strengths and weaknesses are. They ask your opinion. Sometimes they agree and add to it. Other times, they redirect you to the more important elements. They believe in your hard work, and they encourage you.

Good coaches care, so they remember your name. They remember your game. They keep notes on your lessons, your goals, and your improvements....and your next thing to improve. They express how in detail and with action.

Good coaches demonstrate more than they talk. They can find different ways to be effective with their message. They are confident teaching how to hit,how to move, and also how to behave.

Good coaches teach you things that make you better under pressure, without getting hurt.

Their personal lives matter. They can mentor you on how to win, but also how to lose and learn.

Most good coaches love John Wooden most, but they also respect Nick Bolletieri.
They feel blessed to make a good living as they share their love of sport.

Weak coaches blow you off the court to show how good they used to be when they competed. They are not humble enough to keep learning. They teach what they want to teach, which is often the same material for almost all clients/students. Their lesson plans are arbitrary. They are interested in your money and your younger sister. They disparage other coaches and players. These coaches typically see themselves as "cool tennis pros". Many of these pros are poseurs and narcissists...weak in character. They coach because they are not good at other things.

 

[movdqa]

The best coach at my club (he's unofficial) only does private lessons. He's very good at working with what the student can do and he seems to know their potential and how to get there over time. He's efficient and he cleans up the court before his time is over (which I appreciate if I'm coming on the court after him). He is a very good player himself (looks like a former open player) and he can easily hang with the best of his students.

 

[BMC9670]

The best coach at my club (he's unofficial) only does private lessons. He's very good at working with what the student can do and he seems to know their potential and how to get there over time.

Can you elaborate? What makes him very good and able to bring out potential over time? Do you see his students results? Are you observing things he does on court that may be of some use to the discussion?

Not trying to bust on you - but some positive observations would help the OP rather than a general statement of how good the coach is.

 

[movdqa]

Can you elaborate? What makes him very good and able to bring out potential over time? Do you see his students results? Are you observing things he does on court that may be of some use to the discussion?

Not trying to bust on you - but some positive observations would help the OP rather than a general statement of how good the coach is.

Unfortunately I can't. I am really awful at coaching though I can explain a problem to someone if they can see it and understand how to correct it.

He was teaching next to us this afternoon - this is with the kid that isn't in very good shape. He wasn't hitting well from the start so they spent most of the session with him hitting serves. He explained to him that he's out of shape and that his parents are spending quite a bit of money for the lessons and that he wouldn't get as much out of them unless he improved his conditioning. I thought that was a reasonable way to go if he wasn't in good enough shape or he didn't get enough sleep or food or whatever the reason he wasn't playing as well as he usually did.

It's one of those things where you know it's good when you see it as I see far more of bad coaching.

 

[BMC9670]

Unfortunately I can't. I am really awful at coaching though I can explain a problem to someone if they can see it and understand how to correct it.

He was teaching next to us this afternoon - this is with the kid that isn't in very good shape. He wasn't hitting well from the start so they spent most of the session with him hitting serves. He explained to him that he's out of shape and that his parents are spending quite a bit of money for the lessons and that he wouldn't get as much out of them unless he improved his conditioning. I thought that was a reasonable way to go if he wasn't in good enough shape or he didn't get enough sleep or food or whatever the reason he wasn't playing as well as he usually did.

It's one of those things where you know it's good when you see it as I see far more of bad coaching.

Hmm, that doesn't sound like good coaching to me. How about: "let's work on your fitness so you can do _______", instead of using their parent's money as a threat. Also, if he was hitting poorly, why just default to something he can do better for most of the lesson instead of working on it? There are plenty of ways to work on hitting mechanics without a lot of running.

 

[movdqa]

Hmm, that doesn't sound like good coaching to me. How about: "let's work on your fitness so you can do _______", instead of using their parent's money as a threat. Also, if he was hitting poorly, why just default to something he can do better for most of the lesson instead of working on it? There are plenty of ways to work on hitting mechanics without a lot of running.

He wasn't threatening the kid - he was trying to motivate him. You can't threaten kids these days - you can try to reason with them and that's about it. The kid actually has good mechanics - it looks like he's had some good training. I saw him hitting really well a few weeks ago - for about ten minutes. Then his hitting went downhill fast. He tried hitting down the line with the kid and that worked but today he wasn't moving his feet and it resulted in a lot of framed shots and other bad timing problems. I've seen him with a few more students that aren't as advanced (and fit) as his previous students and he seems like your usual patient teacher.

 

[GuyClinch]

If we are talking about group classes (something a lot of people don't like) - I want to see careful planning of the drills executed in a prompt manner. None of this 'seat of the pants' stuff.. Little talking - prompt and useful verbal input about one problem only - and during the drill.
Even if you move on to 'game based' drills - those should be planned carefully as skill gaps in players can make these less then useful..

 

[M Pillai]

Here are my coaching tips based on what I had seen on local coaches.......

1. Don't do your boasting about how good player you were, or your past with the top-10 players, using students money/time. They don't care....and it gets boring except for you.
2. Don't be that guy with only one view point. There are multiple ways to make that down the line fore-hand. Understand what suits best for the student and then help with that mechanics. Too many coaches has only one good way to make a specific shot, and every other way is bad.
3. Understand the motive of the student. Not everyone is trying to reach 6.0 level.

 

[shindemac]

It depends. What works for some, might not be good for others. I don't like doing group drills, because i had to wait my turn to hit again. I've had friends run drills like this, and the people enjoy it a lot and leave nice comments online. They enjoy the slower pace, socializing, and occasional hit.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

Hmm... I'll use this as an opportunity to self diagnose
Good:
* up front understanding of student's goals - not enough to hear "I just want to get better"... it's gotta be SMART (specific, measureable, etc..), so then I and they can also see if I'm even worth the time/money they're paying
* transparent - will share my approach, and how/why a change will improve your game (even if it makes it worse in the short term)... will let them choose if they want a short vs. long term improvement plan (ie.keeping a continent fh grip, or frying pan serve grip is a short term improvement choice)
* take notes on every lesson - I meet with some students monthly.... having notes jumps starts me the next time we meet (we always cover all strokes: serve, volley, groundies, etc...)
* share notes as homework - lets my students know I have specific expectations for the next time we meet

Needs improvement:
* Identifying/adapting to a students learning style... personally I'm visual, and I'm an engineer, so the way i learn is often see, then understand the concept(s)... other students are
* Larger metnal library of isolation drills
* More ways to express the same concept - related to my first improvement point, people learn in different ways,... sometimes I might have to express "how to visualize/feel/analyze a fh" 10 different ways for 10 different students... but then the 11th comes along that doesn't "get it"...
* Definitely sometimes fall into the over teaching trap (talk to much)... but again that's because that's how I learn best (ie. I can tinker with the concept on my own if I understand it)... but some people fall in the "just tell me what to do, I don't want to think about it.
* Socializer - some students are really about the social part of "taking a tennis lesson"... I'm terrible... I'm not an entertainer, not funny, not a psychologist... I presume everyone wants to reach 5.0+... some people just want hang out and say they took a tennis lesson to see if it was fun (and here I'll fail, because to me the "fun" is the hard work of improvement - but this is not the case with everyone).

I'm sure there's more in the "improvement section"... but gotta work

 

[M Pillai]

Why do u assume that if the student don't want to reach 5.0+ he is there just to socialize? Some spend money to get improvement to the point of making the game a bit more interesting with their usual hitting partner, but no intention to do hard work/dedication to go more competitive than that (maybe because of other priorities). I thought you understood that concept, when you talked about "short term vs long term" improvement. But maybe not...

I don't do coaching. But I sometimes do meet folks who have real intention to improve with their hitting partner, but have a busy enough life to not have tennis in their top priorities.

Socializer - some students are really about the social part of "taking a tennis lesson"... I'm terrible... I'm not an entertainer, not funny, not a psychologist... I presume everyone wants to reach 5.0+

 

[Deleted member 23235]

Why do u assume that if the student don't want to reach 5.0+ he is there just to socialize? Some spend money to get improvement to the point of making the game a bit more interesting with their usual hitting partner, but no intention to do hard work/dedication to go more competitive than that (maybe because of other priorities). I thought you understood that concept, when you talked about "short term vs long term" improvement. But maybe not...

I don't do coaching. But I sometimes do meet folks who have real intention to improve with their hitting partner, but have a busy enough life to not have tennis in their top priorities.

there literally people I've taught, who take a lesson,... and want to hang out with a friend who was also taking a lesson - and just wanted to hang out with their friend and try out tennis.... with no real goal of improving but just wondering if tennis might be fun.

for those types of people, to give them their money's worth, and achieve their short term goal, i do need to make tennis more fun, even if the fun isn't just about achieving hitting 10 fhs in a row.

So IMO, I think my definition of short versus long term goals is actually broader than yours.

 

[slice bh compliment]

^So, like, two-way communication is important?^
This is good. We are adding positive elements to our list, e.g.,
A good coach is good at reading a student.
Students and coaches identify goals and purposes. They work together to be on the same page and make progress.

 

[M Pillai]

with no real goal of improving

My point is there are folks who have genuine interest to improve, but maybe only a 0.5 level ... or may even be at same level just fine tuning some stuff, without any real interest to be a 5.0+/6.0+

So if you "presume everyone wants to reach 5.0+", that is just wrong in my opinion.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

My point is there are folks who have genuine interest to improve, but maybe only a 0.5 level ... or may even be at same level just fine tuning some stuff, without any real interest to be a 5.0+/6.0+

So if you "presume everyone wants to reach 5.0+", that is just wrong in my opinion.

did you not read my post? my presumption that everyone wants to be 5.0+ is an "area to improve".

 

[M Pillai]

deleting the message since it may lead to more unnecessary replies.

 

[M Pillai]

did you not read my post? my presumption that everyone wants to be 5.0+ is an "area to improve".

got it. thanks.

 

[Bender]

I actually don't mind group lessons at all--it's what I have been getting for a while now:

Pros:

1. You get to play with / against people at your level AND with / against people far above or below your level, from time to time. This means you get to practice your strokes against players of types, which you wouldn't get unless you sign up to play some tournaments.
2. You also get to try out different tactics, and have various tactics tried on you, giving you opportunities to identify weaknesses in your game.
3. (If desired) You can get feedback from all these people to see what your own strengths / weaknesses are, and not just from your coach, who may not share the same perspective because he's by definition much better than the class he is teaching.
4. You spend less time picking up balls.
5. It's much cheaper, so you can fit in more sessions during the week.
6. If you hit a good shot, a bunch of people will go "woah" LOL

Cons:

1. More students = less time to do drills yourself = fewer repetitions = more sessions required (not always true, since if there are only one or two other students, it works as a mini breather of sorts)
2. If you're the best player in the class, you will need to find a way to switch to a more advanced class, which may cause scheduling conflicts or simply might not be available due to the low standards of play in your region or popularity
3. You may not necessarily get the time / attention you need, especially where technical deficiencies are in the details or if the coach can't be bothered

 

[Ash_Smith]

I'm kind of with @nytennisaddict on this - When I worked in club tennis, I coached on the proviso that everyone who took a lesson wanted to be as good as they could be, so that meant they treated as such. If you want to have a "lesson" to just hit some balls, have a bit of a chat and not really make any changes to behaviours then I'm not the coach for you. I did have coaches working for me who were quite happy to do those, so i used to refer people on.

 

[Bender]

I'm kind of with @nytennisaddict on this - When I worked in club tennis, I coached on the proviso that everyone who took a lesson wanted to be as good as they could be, so that meant they treated as such. If you want to have a "lesson" to just hit some balls, have a bit of a chat and not really make any changes to behaviours then I'm not the coach for you. I did have coaches working for me who were quite happy to do those, so i used to refer people on.

Many of the cheaper coaches where I live do exactly this--act as a glorified ball machine that occasionally gives you tips. Works for those who just want to get their exercise for the week. Me on the other hand, my money's too precious to not at least try for big improvements in my technique / game...

 

[Deleted member 23235]

My point is there are folks who have genuine interest to improve, but maybe only a 0.5 level ... or may even be at same level just fine tuning some stuff, without any real interest to be a 5.0+/6.0+

So if you "presume everyone wants to reach 5.0+", that is just wrong in my opinion.

Just realized that if you read my comment in the browser... it's well formatted, and clearly delineates the Good list and the Bad list...
but if you read my comment in something like tapatalk app on the iphone, the formatting is less clear (lose the the spacing and line skipping).
I'll be more of aware of that when I make any future comments
Anywho, cool that we're on the same page.

 

[Deleted member 23235]

I'm kind of with @nytennisaddict on this - When I worked in club tennis, I coached on the proviso that everyone who took a lesson wanted to be as good as they could be, so that meant they treated as such. If you want to have a "lesson" to just hit some balls, have a bit of a chat and not really make any changes to behaviours then I'm not the coach for you. I did have coaches working for me who were quite happy to do those, so i used to refer people on.

So I added "Socializer" as one of my areas to improve..
Historically I just didn't want to teach tennis to folks that wanted to hit and giggle... I was a bit of a soup **** when it came to my approach to teaching tennis.
But then I realized, while I may be able to help folks with their tennis games,.. can I help them in other ways?
So imagine the "hit and giggle" student is some kid that is being forced to play by their parents, and they are grudgingly taking lessons because they don't want mom and dad to take away their iphone/ipad/etc...
Mom and dad of course, probably don't really care about whether they get good at tennis or <fill in the sport>, they just want their kid to be passionate about something that is physcial (because they realize that physical well being leads to mental well being, educates one on the universal laws of success (hardwork, focus, visualization, planning, etc...), leads to better chance at a succeeding at life, etc...). They just chose tennis because it's an individual sport, and soccer, football, basketball, etc... didn't pan out (group sports where learning-at-your-own-pace might be harder).
So in this scenario, I ask myself, what if I could get this kid just interested in tennis by making it fun... which plants a seed of "I want to get better at tennis"...
It's a fuzzy road, because the parents are paying for tennis lessons (grip, stance, rotation, eg. technical skills), but I'm offering something else (better, I think?)

Thoughts?

Other areas in my life that I "coach" currently:
martial arts instructor, software team(s) leader, fitness club owner, etc...

 

[movdqa]

So I added "Socializer" as one of my areas to improve..
Historically I just didn't want to teach tennis to folks that wanted to hit and giggle... I was a bit of a soup **** when it came to my approach to teaching tennis.
But then I realized, while I may be able to help folks with their tennis games,.. can I help them in other ways?
So imagine the "hit and giggle" student is some kid that is being forced to play by their parents, and they are grudgingly taking lessons because they don't want mom and dad to take away their iphone/ipad/etc...
Mom and dad of course, probably don't really care about whether they get good at tennis or <fill in the sport>, they just want their kid to be passionate about something that is physcial (because they realize that physical well being leads to mental well being, educates one on the universal laws of success (hardwork, focus, visualization, planning, etc...), leads to better chance at a succeeding at life, etc...). They just chose tennis because it's an individual sport, and soccer, football, basketball, etc... didn't pan out (group sports where learning-at-your-own-pace might be harder).
So in this scenario, I ask myself, what if I could get this kid just interested in tennis by making it fun... which plants a seed of "I want to get better at tennis"...
It's a fuzzy road, because the parents are paying for tennis lessons (grip, stance, rotation, eg. technical skills), but I'm offering something else (better, I think?)

Thoughts?

Other areas in my life that I "coach" currently:
martial arts instructor, software team(s) leader, fitness club owner, etc...

This is how all teachers should approach teaching and I'm talking math, science and other stuff besides tennis.

 

[meltphace 6]

Many of the cheaper coaches where I live do exactly this--act as a glorified ball machine that occasionally gives you tips. Works for those who just want to get their exercise for the week. Me on the other hand, my money's too precious to not at least try for big improvements in my technique / game...

That's good. On the other hand there are people that don't understand that it takes time and effort to become half decent at tennis. The worst thing is when their coach doesn't confront them with that.

 

[meltphace 6]

I don't do coaching. But I sometimes do meet folks who have real intention to improve with their hitting partner, but have a busy enough life to not have tennis in their top priorities.

I have real intention to improve my knowledge about quantum physics but have a busy enough life to not have physics in my top priorities.

 

[meltphace 6]

If you want to have a "lesson" to just hit some balls, have a bit of a chat and not really make any changes to behaviours then I'm not the coach for you. I did have coaches working for me who were quite happy to do those, so i used to refer people on.

You're the champ of hot air.

 

[Ash_Smith]

^^^ Thanks man - appreciate your support

 

[Moveforwardalways]

To echo what was posted above... I often see coaches who do not teach "modern" technique, either because they think students don't want it or they don't understand it, not sure which. So often I see adult players trying to make the 3.5-4.0 jump, and take a lesson from a pro who won't teach a SW forehand or shorten take back, etc. This is less of an issue with juniors, but why do pros always assume that adults don't want modern strokes too?

 

[PittsburghDad]

Bad tennis is so hard to watch. I cant even imagine how coaches do it. 99% of what you see out there could make your eyes bleed. Not to mention the absolute self delusion of most people. Its rough.

 

[RetroSpin]

To echo what was posted above... I often see coaches who do not teach "modern" technique, either because they think students don't want it or they don't understand it, not sure which. So often I see adult players trying to make the 3.5-4.0 jump, and take a lesson from a pro who won't teach a SW forehand or shorten take back, etc. This is less of an issue with juniors, but why do pros always assume that adults don't want modern strokes too?

This is my pet peeve. I see it a lot in florida. The older pros have old school strokes and that is what they teach.

This is also a huge problem in golf instruction. Actually in tennis it's simpler because the student can say, " I want to learn a Fed FH" and everyone understands what he means. The distinctions are not quite as clear in golf, and there is a lot of debate over what constitutes proper technique.

 

[392Hemi]

The absolute best instructor I have worked with is the head coach of a local lower level D1 womens team and works part time at our tennis center. Here is how he approaches a lesson:

What do you want to work on today?
<I'll reply with the skills I want to focus on>
What do you think are your issues with this?
Ok, lets have a look
<we go through some reps>
Ok, i see you are doing x,y,z well, but you can improve a,b,c by trying this
<he explains In greater detail and demos if needed, then we repeat reps>
As we are working on it, he gives positive and negative feedback to help me develop the skill
As we do more reps he always has me finish a set with a good few in a row to build confidence and finish with good examples for muscle memory

Then later we go into some game sim or point play. He will add some strategic tips and go back to what we did earlier to apply to a game situation, not just drills. This helps to build the big picture and a more wholesome approach

 

[LanceyPants]

Groups should always be fun and high intensity. Get me dying across the net! Drills and competition all day. The only teaching should be quick quips like bend your knees, swing up on the ball, move your feet, etc.

If you notice pretty serious flaws discreetly tell them, "Hey lets fix that stroke. I'll see you at 11 tomorrow morning."

I'm the type of person that if I'm shelling out $30-$50 bucks I want constant instruction, long term goals, homework to work on, pretty much I want my money well spent for my game.

 

[Dolgopolov85]

I think a lot depends on the level of the student. The coach I had when I started learning tennis is somebody who I would probably beat in singles today. Yeah...his serve is pretty weak and not a great forehand either. But he is the most patient coach in our club; no matter how bad a pupil is, he will go on encouraging him/her and keep feeding balls. He fed balls like none of the other coaches. I mean, the others liked to wade in once the students had reached some decent level so they could do more vigorous drills but this coach would stand not far from me near the baseline and go on feeding balls for the forehand. That extreme repetition was, in hindsight, invaluable because a student figures out his stroke sooner or later as he strives to get the ball across the net (at first) and in court with every shot. He is almost specialised in this; nearly all the beginners are assigned to him. The ones who have some self-motivation will 'graduate' sooner or later; the rest will criticise his coaching because they feel they have outgrown him when they haven't.

Once a student is good to go, though, you need coaches who can motivate you and keep pushing you. Mind that I come from a totally different culture where a bit of admonishment and mock threats to make us do 10 rounds of the park if we hit the next ball long will NOT be regarded poorly. So what my current coach is good at is in putting us through the paces in vigorous drills. Like, 20 balls in a row that could be anywhere, any pace, any length etc on the court and you have to get them no matter what. He's also very good at the game himself so overall he makes the sessions enjoyable. So for an intermediate student, making the sessions interesting, something that we would eagerly look forward to, is more important because learning is now more about finer aspects. This coach encourages us to pose questions, consult him if we feel we are not hitting a particular shot right (that's apart from him giving his inputs as and when he observes something). He is observant and will put us back on track if, on that particular day, we are neglecting the basics, like he will tell me if I am not using enough takeback etc.

Lastly, while I do want coaches to teach us the right technique, too much dogma is a no-no. My current coach wants me to maintain an SW grip (I start with an extreme eastern and adjust the grip depending on what shot I want to play) and tries to persuade me to do so. But it's only persuasion; it's not "if you want to learn under me, you have to use this grip". As long as it's not something terribly bad like always hitting volleys with a topspin grip, it's ok.