Coach Aggressively Accusing Player Of Giving Lessons..

[Raul_SJ]

My partner and I walked into the public court.

One guy was coming off the court and we three started hitting. He was at the baseline and we two were volleying at the net. The guy turned out to be an ex college player and he occasionally was giving us a few tips as we rallied.

This obnoxious coach from the neighboring court comes over and tells the guy, "Hey! Lessons are not allowed!". The guy informs him that we don't know each other and are just hitting.

Also note that the guy is new to the area and has never been to these courts before, so the Coach does not know him.

The Coach takes up two courts with 8 players. He is employed or contracted by the city. Basically walks around and watches them hit and says "nice shot". Whatever. Don't have an issue with that.

But this Coach should not be aggressively accusing players of giving lessons. Granted there is a city rule prohibiting lessons but what gives this Coach authority to accuse people? It is not like our hitting partner was camped out on the court for hours with a parade of students coming in.

This Coach needs to back off unless he sees clear evidence of lessons. It is ridiculous.

And it is a grey area anyway. We have the court for an hour. Even if we decided to hire this guy, it is our business. No harm done.

 

[J B]

LOL sounds like an idiot lame coach looking to protect his cash cow of 8 players making him at least 240 for that hour.

 

[Creighton]

My partner and I walked into the public court.

One guy was coming off the court and we three started hitting. He was at the baseline and we two were volleying at the net. The guy turned out to be an ex college player and he occasionally was giving us a few tips as we rallied.

This obnoxious coach from the neighboring court comes over and tells the guy, "Hey! Lessons are not allowed!". The guy informs him that we don't know each other and are just hitting.

Also note that the guy is new to the area and has never been to these courts before, so the Coach does not know him.

The Coach takes up two courts with 8 players. He is employed or contracted by the city. Basically walks around and watches them hit and says "nice shot". Whatever. Don't have an issue with that.

But this Coach should not be aggressively accusing players of giving lessons. Granted there is a city rule prohibiting lessons but what gives this Coach authority to accuse people? It is not like our hitting partner was camped out on the court for hours with a parade of students coming in.

This Coach needs to back off unless he sees clear evidence of lessons. It is ridiculous.

And it is a grey area anyway. We have the court for an hour. Even if we decided to hire this guy, it is our business. No harm done.

You were fine until your last two lines. If coaching isn’t allowed, then yes harm was done. You guys broke the rules.

 

[J B]

You were fine until your last two lines. If coaching isn’t allowed, then yes harm was done. You guys broke the rules.

you cant be serious... so a dad cant take his own son out? The city doesnt care about that. They care about PAID coaching. If someone next to you helps out thats advice NOT coaching. Unless you consider your doubles partner telling you something coaching as well.
People like you ruin tennis.... like most of the 2.5 and 3.0 coaches i see trying to get some pocket money.

 

[LOBALOT]

It sounds like a city that has an exclusive contract with a tennis instructor to provide tennis instruction/classes on a set of public courts. We had that in the town near us.

The lady was super aggressive as she claimed she paid the city for that exclusive agreement and as such aggressively fended off any other instructors or even what she thought was instruction on those courts. As she had the contract she could do it. However, the way she did it and her mean/aggressive demeanor really ticked people off and eventually the city got tired of all the complaints and got rid of her.

She also did that for walk-up play when she was running classes so a few courts sat empty as she ran the worst drills seen by man. The citizens complained about this and it all got jumbled up with USTA tennis as the city thought USTA was keeping walk up players from playing tennis so they wouldn't sponsor USTA teams either even though there are plenty of courts to hold a USTA match with open courts for walk-up play.

 

[J B]

Most incorporated places are like that. They care about money, if you arent making money advise away. On your note I have seen a 3.0 at best coach using a ball machine to feed her clinic as she gave horrible stroke advice.

 

[Creighton]

you cant be serious... so a dad cant take his own son out? The city doesnt care about that. They care about PAID coaching. If someone next to you helps out thats advice NOT coaching. Unless you consider your doubles partner telling you something coaching as well.
People like you ruin tennis.... like most of the 2.5 and 3.0 coaches i see trying to get some pocket money.

Did you not read his last two lines? He clearly was talking about paid coaching.

 

[J B]

Did you not read his last two lines? He clearly was talking about paid coaching.

This Coach needs to back off unless he sees clear evidence of lessons. It is ridiculous.

And it is a grey area anyway. We have the court for an hour. Even if we decided to hire this guy, it is our business. No harm done.

Did you read it? He never hired he said IF he hired the guy which he didnt. The guy was offering free advice. He might have been soliciting which is fine as long as he goes somewhere else.

 

[Creighton]

Did you read it? He never hired he said IF he hired the guy which he didnt. The guy was offering free advice. He might have been soliciting which is fine as long as he goes somewhere else.

Are you just being obstinate instead of admitting you were wrong?

 

[J B]

Are you just being obstinate instead of admitting you were wrong?

Are you really incapable of reading! he never hired anyone HE said even if he did who cares. So feel free to show me where the OP hired the coach and was being coached. Ill wait. Or you can just say you misread it which you did. "My partner and I walked into the public court. One guy was coming off the court and we three started hitting. He was at the baseline and we two were volleying at the net. The guy turned out to be an ex college player and he occasionally was giving us a few tips as we rallied. "

no paid or solicited coaching. No one was paid. The man could have been telling him to use the handle of the racquet. Offering your opinion or advise IS NOT coaching.

 

[Creighton]

Are you really incapable of reading! he never hired anyone HE said even if he did who cares. So feel free to show me where the OP hired the coach and was being coached. Ill wait. Or you can just say you misread it which you did. "My partner and I walked into the public court. One guy was coming off the court and we three started hitting. He was at the baseline and we two were volleying at the net. The guy turned out to be an ex college player and he occasionally was giving us a few tips as we rallied. "

no paid or solicited coaching. No one was paid. The man could have been telling him to use the handle of the racquet. Offering your opinion or advise IS NOT coaching.

We are discussing the if statement on the final two lines. Again, are you intentionally ignoring that?

 

[happyandbob]

There is enforcing the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. In our town, that rule is in place to keep a coach from setting up shop and teaching lessons there all day. If I (as a resident) want to book a court and hit with someone, it doesn't matter if that person is a coach or some stranger off the street. I have a right to that court because my tax dollars pay for that public court.

 

[J B]

We are discussing the if statement on the final two lines. Again, are you intentionally ignoring that?

Yes because " its in the future!!!!!" He can say he is gonna pay him 1000$ an hour and rent out the court if he wants. No one cares what he says about what he "MIGHT do" Nothing he did was wrong. You are saying he was, I can say " im so mad at the 75 year old and her 135 inch racquet Im gonna bomb 120mph body serves at her" Doesnt mean I am obligated to do it and should be held liable for it like I did it in the past.

HE BROKE ZERO rules zero. There wasnt one rule broken, and only an idiot would say so. Is he going to break them in the future? You seem to already know he is. But you said he CLEARLY broke the rules because he said he could pay in the future. Ok then wait till he does and you can accuse him of breaking the rules. He broke ZERO rules based on what happened that day.



Even if..... so lets define IF here. He said even IF I did choose to hire. He did not hire.



[if]

CONJUNCTION

1. (introducing a conditional clause) on the condition or supposition that; in the event that.
   "if you have a complaint, write to the director" ·
   [more]
   synonyms:
   on condition that · provided (that) · providing (that) · presuming (that) ·
   [more]
2. despite the possibility that; no matter whether.
   "if it takes me seven years, I shall do it"
3. (often used in indirect questions) whether.
   "he asked if we would like some coffee" ·
   [more]
   synonyms:
   whether · whether or not
4. expressing a polite request.
   "if you wouldn't mind giving him a message?" ·
   [more]

NOUN

1. a condition or supposition.
   "there are so many ifs and buts in the policy"

 

[atatu]

First time I've agreed with you !!

 

[Creighton]

Yes because " its in the future!!!!!" He can say he is gonna pay him 1000$ an hour and rent out the court if he wants. No one cares what he says about what he "MIGHT do" Nothing he did was wrong. You are saying he was, I can say " im so mad at the 75 year old and her 135 inch racquet Im gonna bomb 120mph body serves at her" Doesnt mean I am obligated to do it and should be held liable for it like I did it in the past.

HE BROKE ZERO rules zero. There wasnt one rule broken, and only an idiot would say so. Is he going to break them in the future? You seem to already know he is. But you said he CLEARLY broke the rules because he said he could pay in the future. Ok then wait till he does and you can accuse him of breaking the rules. He broke ZERO rules based on what happened that day.



Even if..... so lets define IF here. He said even IF I did choose to hire. He did not hire.



[if]

CONJUNCTION

1. (introducing a conditional clause) on the condition or supposition that; in the event that.
   "if you have a complaint, write to the director" ·
   [more]
   synonyms:
   on condition that · provided (that) · providing (that) · presuming (that) ·
   [more]
2. despite the possibility that; no matter whether.
   "if it takes me seven years, I shall do it"
3. (often used in indirect questions) whether.
   "he asked if we would like some coffee" ·
   [more]
   synonyms:
   whether · whether or not
4. expressing a polite request.
   "if you wouldn't mind giving him a message?" ·
   [more]

NOUN

1. a condition or supposition.
   "there are so many ifs and buts in the policy"

This is a lot of work instead of just admitting you are wrong. I can’t even imagine how you respond when someone calls you out for hooking them.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

There is enforcing the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. In our town, that rule is in place to keep a coach from setting up shop and teaching lessons there all day.

Is the coach allowed to buy a license from the city giving him that right?

 

[sureshs]

you cant be serious... so a dad cant take his own son out? The city doesnt care about that. They care about PAID coaching. If someone next to you helps out thats advice NOT coaching. Unless you consider your doubles partner telling you something coaching as well.
People like you ruin tennis.... like most of the 2.5 and 3.0 coaches i see trying to get some pocket money.

It is not as simple as you make it out to be. Because it can become difficult to prove if a person is being paid, some clubs restrict coaching only to relatives of the player (who is typically mom or dad of a junior).

 

[sureshs]

The coach maybe cranky, but there is a reason. I will give you an example. A junior girl at my club (who I used to hit with when she was younger at her mother's request) has since graduated and is now a sophomore in a local University and on their team. She has been serving as hitting partner for a variety of juniors since her senior year in high school and is often paid in cash by the parents literally by a furtive slipping of notes into the hand in the patio or in the parking lot. She and the parents are very discreet and she never shouts out any tips, and the parents take care to not show much interest in the hitting session. Taking money for such things is not allowed at my club since there are pros who have a contract. But this has been going on for 3 years now.

 

[tlsmikey]

Keep in mind that the coach on the other court is paying for that court as well. In our area that can be upwards of $60/hour to use a public court at a university. If it looks like you are getting coaching and using the court for free, that's not fair to him and his business either.

 

[happyandbob]

Is the coach allowed to buy a license from the city giving him that right?

Not to my knowledge, no. There are coaches who run clinics organized by the town, but those are advertised by the town and signups happen through the town website.

 

[darkhorse]

I guess there are advantages to living in a place like Minnesota, people here are way too passive-aggressive to do something like this. They would just shoot dirty looks towards the "illegal" lesson and perhaps make comments to their hitting partner loud enough so the offender could hear it.

Of course, living in Minnesota also means this would only be possible for about 6 weeks out of the year anyway

 

[OnTheLine]

I guess there are advantages to living in a place like Minnesota, people here are way too passive-aggressive to do something like this. They would just shoot dirty looks towards the "illegal" lesson and perhaps make comments to their hitting partner loud enough so the offender could hear it.

Of course, living in Minnesota also means this would only be possible for about 6 weeks out of the year anyway

Oh boy. Having lived in MN (TC) for over 10 years .... this is spot on. "Minnesota Nice" is code word for passive-aggressive behavior.

And those 6 weeks started about 2 weeks ago and go through end of Sept/early Oct. Rest of the summer either too wet, too humid or too many mosquitos. Right now is the best weather of entire year there.

 

[nyta2]

You were fine until your last two lines. If coaching isn’t allowed, then yes harm was done. You guys broke the rules.

you'd be correct if you had worded it as "if you had hired him, you would have broken the rules".
but as it stands, OP did NOT hire anyone, therefore they did NOT break the rules.

that said, if i did hire someone to coach me, where coaching was not allowed, but we didn't have a million balls on the court, as far as i'm concerned, that "coach" is my brother, so eff off

 

[Creighton]

that said, if i did hire someone to coach me, where coaching was not allowed, but we didn't have a million balls on the court, as far as i'm concerned, that "coach" is my brother, so eff off

This is likely what happened with the OP. Two players go to a tennis court to hit with each other and suddenly just start hitting with a third guy giving them "tips"? Seems fishy.

 

[tennis tom]

Under the strictest definition of "coaching" if you told your doubles partner to watch his alley you would be "breaking the rules."

Coaches teaching on public courts is not the biggest threat to the sport of tennis, they are "growing the game" as the saying goes--the repurposing of tennis courts into pickleball courts is the much greater threat to tennis. Tennis may become an anachronism within a generation--if that happens what a shame it would be.

 

[happyandbob]

This is likely what happened with the OP. Two players go to a tennis court to hit with each other and suddenly just start hitting with a third guy giving them "tips"? Seems fishy.

Do you also like to drive in the left lane at the speed limit to keep others from speeding?

 

[LOBALOT]

Under the strictest definition of "coaching" if you told your doubles partner to watch his alley you would be "breaking the rules."

Coaches teaching on public courts is not the biggest threat to the sport of tennis, they are "growing the game" as the saying goes--the repurposing of tennis courts into pickleball courts is the much greater threat to tennis. Tennis may become an anachronism within a generation--if that happens what a shame it would be.

Those same courts are my son's high school courts as for some reason the school my son played for has not built their own courts. That caused a lot of problems including limited (I mean like 2) home matches per season as "that coach" would not let the school use them for their matches as she was running her lessons (Talk about limiting the growth of tennis).

Anyway, my son played first singles all 4 years and during tryouts prior to his Junior season he went out with a basket of balls and was helping a kid on the team with a few things. She cam running out and started yelling at my 15 year old son about lessons on her court, etc. Mind you, these were also his home courts for high school. The season was underway and these were their home courts and the ones they practiced on.

She was out of control.

 

[sureshs]

Those same courts are my son's high school courts as for some reason the school my son played for has not built their own courts. That caused a lot of problems including limited (I mean like 2) home matches per season as "that coach" would not let the school use them for their matches as she was running her lessons (Talk about limiting the growth of tennis).

Anyway, my son played first singles all 4 years and during tryouts prior to his Junior season he went out with a basket of balls and was helping a kid on the team with a few things. She cam running out and started yelling at my 15 year old son about lessons on her court, etc. Mind you, these were also his home courts for high school. The season was underway and these were their home courts and the ones they practiced on.

She was out of control.

The school should have made official arrangements with the city for guaranteed time, just like many high schools with courts offer time to the public only after school practice hours.

 

[tennis tom]

She was out of control.

Her permit to use the courts should be revoked by Park & Rec! I know many coaches who teach on public or community courts and they are ALL very respectful of the players they share the courts with--never seen a conflict!

 

[nyta2]

This is likely what happened with the OP. Two players go to a tennis court to hit with each other and suddenly just start hitting with a third guy giving them "tips"? Seems fishy.

while possible, didn't seem fishy to me at all... but i've been on a court dishing out advice (as asked) to folks that i'm just friends with, many times, for free.
and in the end, i'm not going to presume anything other than what the OP wrote...

 

[ryushen21]

My partner and I walked into the public court.

One guy was coming off the court and we three started hitting. He was at the baseline and we two were volleying at the net. The guy turned out to be an ex college player and he occasionally was giving us a few tips as we rallied.

This obnoxious coach from the neighboring court comes over and tells the guy, "Hey! Lessons are not allowed!". The guy informs him that we don't know each other and are just hitting.

Also note that the guy is new to the area and has never been to these courts before, so the Coach does not know him.

The Coach takes up two courts with 8 players. He is employed or contracted by the city. Basically walks around and watches them hit and says "nice shot". Whatever. Don't have an issue with that.

But this Coach should not be aggressively accusing players of giving lessons. Granted there is a city rule prohibiting lessons but what gives this Coach authority to accuse people? It is not like our hitting partner was camped out on the court for hours with a parade of students coming in.

This Coach needs to back off unless he sees clear evidence of lessons. It is ridiculous.

And it is a grey area anyway. We have the court for an hour. Even if we decided to hire this guy, it is our business. No harm done.

Sounds like what happened to me at a local court a while back. A lot of public courts are managed by companies that have acquired exclusive rights to instruction, drills, and leagues and they come down hard if anything that looks like a lesson is happening. One of my hitting partners was giving me some guidance on my backhand and the guy came over and told us that only their instructors were allowed to give lessons on those courts.

It's stupid and overreaching but it still happens.

 

[Raul_SJ]

It sounds like a city that has an exclusive contract with a tennis instructor to provide tennis instruction/classes on a set of public courts. We had that in the town near us.

The Coach has some arrangement with the City. Do not know the details and whether it is exclusive. Guessing he is an independent contractor

A sign is posted on two of the courts:

"These two courts reserved for classes with Mr Coach , every Wednesday, 7:00 - 8:00...".

Got no problem with this.
There are no "reserved" postings on the other courts.

The lady was super aggressive as she claimed she paid the city for that exclusive agreement and as such aggressively fended off any other instructors or even what she thought was instruction on those courts. As she had the contract she could do it.

The Coach has a right to kick players off his two courts on Wednesday nights during his reserved time.

But do not see where he gets off snooping into other courts. His arrangement does not give him blanket authority to obnoxiously question and enforce the general "No lesson" policy on every other court.

Doubtful the city has given him that authority to enforce other courts.
Wouldn't he just be an ordinary citizen in that regard.

 

[sureshs]

Report him to the city and the USPTA/USPTR if he is a member. If he is not, ask the city why they are allowing uncertified people to teach.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

This is likely what happened with the OP. Two players go to a tennis court to hit with each other and suddenly just start hitting with a third guy giving them "tips"? Seems fishy.

I've had plenty of times where I "suddenly" started hitting with a stranger and tips were exchanged. Either the other guy was practicing serves and I asked if I could return [or vice versa] or one or both of us were hitting against the wall and we agreed to hit.

Very non-fishy and not uncommon.

 

[Raul_SJ]

There is enforcing the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. In our town, that rule is in place to keep a coach from setting up shop and teaching lessons there all day. If I (as a resident) want to book a court and hit with someone, it doesn't matter if that person is a coach or some stranger off the street. I have a right to that court because my tax dollars pay for that public court.

will give you an example. A junior girl at my club (who I used to hit with when she was younger at her mother's request) has since graduated and is now a sophomore in a local University and on their team. She has been serving as hitting partner for a variety of juniors since her senior year in high school and is often paid in cash by the parents literally by a furtive slipping of notes into the hand in the patio or in the parking lot. She and the parents are very discreet and she never shouts out any tips, and the parents take care to not show much interest in the hitting session.

This sounds okay. She is not camping out for hours on a court with a parade of clients.
Each citizen is booking their one hour court and choosing to invite her. The arrangements are their own business. How does this harm anyone?

I've had plenty of times where I "suddenly" started hitting with a stranger and tips were exchanged. Either the other guy was practicing serves and I asked if I could return [or vice versa] or one or both of us were hitting against the wall and we agreed to hit.

Very non-fishy and not uncommon.

The guy was hitting alone and packing up his PlayMate ball machine. We struck up a conversation about the machine...

 

[sureshs]

This sounds okay. She is not camping out for hours on a court with a parade of clients.
Each citizen is booking their one hour court and choosing to invite her. The arrangements are their own business. How does this harm anyone?

A member could well object that he could not get a court due to someone booking one and paying her to hit. Harm depends on the perspective. A teaching pro on contract with the club can claim that the hours she hits are potential lost pay for him. That is why the rules are there. Otherwise everyone would break the rules and ask "how does this harm anyone?"

 

[Raul_SJ]

A member could well object that he could not get a court due to someone booking one and paying her to hit. Harm depends on the perspective. A teaching pro on contract with the club can claim that the hours she hits are potential lost pay for him. That is why the rules are there. Otherwise everyone would break the rules and ask "how does this harm anyone?"

You are pre-supposing. These citizens could be rallying on the court regardless of whether or not the hitting partner was available. It is their choice as to whom they choose to invite onto their booked court.

It is arguably a grey area but if a few people are inviting her to hit on their booked court, there is no harm done. The arrangements are their own business.

What is really offensive is the notion that the hitting partner is stealing clients from the incompetent coach. Let the free marketplace decide.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

What is really offensive is the notion that the hitting partner is stealing clients from the incompetent coach. Let the free marketplace decide.

Incompetent coaches have a harder time in the free market; much better for them is a monopoly.

 

[sureshs]

You are pre-supposing. These citizens could be rallying on the court regardless of whether or not the hitting partner was available. It is their choice as to whom they choose to invite onto their booked court.

It is arguably a grey area but if a few people are inviting her to hit on their booked court, there is no harm done. The arrangements are their own business.

What is really offensive is the notion that the hitting partner is stealing clients from the incompetent coach. Let the free marketplace decide.

There is no free market here as these courts are owned by Parks and Rec and the club only operates them and because the pros have to pay a share to the club while she pays nothing.

The gray area here is that she just hits and if she gives tips, it is very discreetly. Moreover, she is a college student. Difficult to classify her as a competing pro. But nevertheless the club/city rules do not allow this and that is why parents pay her under the table.

 

[Raul_SJ]

Incompetent coaches have a harder time in the free market; much better for them is a monopoly.

My main question is with regard to the enforcement of the "no lesson" rule.
This Coach seems to think that just because he has an arrangement at a certain time it gives him some special authority to hound other courts 24/7. He should be no different than any other citizen in that regard.

 

[Raul_SJ]

The gray area here is that she just hits and if she gives tips, it is very discreetly. Moreover, she is a college student. Difficult to classify her as a competing pro

Being paid for any type of service while on the court is a violation. It does not particularly matter if she strictly hits and does not utter a word. That is how we interpret the "No paid lessons/coaching " rule.

A good hitting partner can be just as popular as a good coach.

 

[sureshs]

Isn't the violation being paid for any type of service while on the court? It does not particularly matter if she hits and does not utter a word. That is how we interpret the "No paid lessons" rule.

A good hitting partner can be just as popular as a good coach.

Yes that is why it is against club rules. A public court where pros have to pay money but someone else can teach without payment is not a place for free market.

 

[puppybutts]

sounds like that couch is paying more attention to other courts than to his own paying students. shame.

 

[nyta2]

Incompetent coaches have a harder time in the free market; much better for them is a monopoly.

hehe, was going to say something similar... why be intimidated by competition, just be better than the competition (sounds like the coach sucks - eg. "a nice shot" recording)

 

[nyta2]

Yes that is why it is against club rules. A public court where pros have to pay money but someone else can teach without payment is not a place for free market.

a pro(s) paying money to teach on public courts is paying for the right to reserve specific or quantity of courts for/at a certain time...
i, as a non teacher, can reserve a court in the regular rotation, then choose to do or play with who i want, and they are free to teach or talk, or whatever
now you can argue that you can't have more than X balls on the court, that's fine, as that's potentially a nuisance to other courts...

imagine if you were friends with fedal, and invited him to your club,... but he wasn't allowed to give you tips... lol. probably would still need to pay for fedal's guest fee.

 

[Creighton]

I've had plenty of times where I "suddenly" started hitting with a stranger and tips were exchanged. Either the other guy was practicing serves and I asked if I could return [or vice versa] or one or both of us were hitting against the wall and we agreed to hit.

Very non-fishy and not uncommon.

I’m going to give you a second to re look at his story and the examples. Come back when you notice the key difference between your example and his story.

 

[happyandbob]

I’m going to give you a second to re look at his story and the examples. Come back when you notice the key difference between your example and his story.

Just curious, are you a native English speaker? His original scenario closes with:

“And it is a grey area anyway. We have the court for an hour. Even if we decided to hire this guy, it is our business. No harm done.”

The “even if” there communicates that they did NOT hire the guy, but that it would be irrelevant even if they did hire him.

There are TWO pieces of information there.

One is factual — they did not hire the guy.

Two is opinion — it wouldn’t have mattered anyway even if they hypothetically hired him.

Factually, there is no difference between the two stories.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

I’m going to give you a second to re look at his story and the examples. Come back when you notice the key difference between your example and his story.

I thought about the fact that there were 3 people and concluded it wasn't the main objection of Coach.

I'm going to give you a second: come back when you notice what Coach was objecting to.

Here's my take: Coach didn't appear to be objecting to the # of people [3] but rather the interaction [supposed lessons]. By my read, Coach would have been equally upset if it had been 1:1 [edit: or if everyone knew everyone else], in which case the key difference isn't so key anymore and my counter-example still applies.

[edit] Coach was defending his monopoly against perceived interlopers.

 

[Creighton]

I thought about the fact that there were 3 people and concluded it wasn't the main objection of Coach.

I'm going to give you a second: come back when you notice what Coach was objecting to.

Here's my take: Coach didn't appear to be objecting to the # of people [3] but rather the interaction [supposed lessons]. By my read, Coach would have been equally upset if it had been 1:1 [edit: or if everyone knew everyone else], in which case the key difference isn't so key anymore and my counter-example still applies.

[edit] Coach was defending his monopoly against perceived interlopers.

If it had been 1 v 1 it very well could have just been two people practicing together. As is the case when you’ve joined one other party to the court.

But I seriously doubt you and a partner ever go to the court to play singles, then just start hitting with a random guy instead of playing with each other.

 

[Raul_SJ]

If it had been 1 v 1 it very well could have just been two people practicing together. As is the case when you’ve joined one other party to the court.

But I seriously doubt you and a partner ever go to the court to play singles, then just start hitting with a random guy instead of playing with each other.

It was a group meetup. We play singles, doubles or triples depending on how many happen to show up and availability of courts. Did not know who I would be hitting with till I showed up... Did know my partner from previous events.