Coaches, do you actually play with your players?

[sureshs]

OK you have to distinguish between a true academy which is a live-in place from a tennis coaching center called some Academy or the other.

 

[maxxy777]

Exactly. Back when Nick B. started he could have several top players training together. Now tennis is global and great players come from all sorts of circumstances.

But I think if we were able to research it, most top 100 players come from the private coach/hitting partners plan then from academies and tennis federation programs combined.

Back in a day Nick.B was a legend so best players did flock to him.As well as the noobs hehe.
I remember one guy 25 years ago went there and came back with Bolletieri t- shirt.
We were all amazed, what kinds of things they teach there , we thought he was so lucky.
After few days he told me that he played with 6 people on court with some coach that cant hold the racket and that he never even saw Nick.
In these days if they sell you crap story like Nadals academy does its your bad tho.

 

[maxxy777]

OK you have to distinguish between a true academy which is a live-in place from a tennis coaching center called some Academy or the other.

Its all the same.
If i am being frank true academy has higher maintaining costs and its more expensive with lower value for the player.
So they cover the maintaining costs easier.

 

[TheCanadian]

Looking at the size of Nadal's place it seems like it's a vanity project or make-work scheme for his family, so they all have jobs. It will have the same low-pay South American feeders like other academies and only the very best will get any
attention. Sad.

Its very simple 30 years ago best kids in the world went to academys more often.
So it seemed that they produce more players.
It was general opinion that this was the best option.


Now best players have way more info and know they can get better bang for the buck.
Major sponsors rather provide private coaches for best players then send them to camps
You can get private ex top 200 atp guy for peanuts in many countries.
Only people who dont do their homework send kids to academys.

 

[maxxy777]

Looking at the size of Nadal's place it seems like it's a vanity project or make-work scheme for his family, so they all have jobs. It will have the same low-pay South American feeders like other academies and only the very best will get any
attention. Sad.

I did a count on Sanchez Casal academy.
From 24 coaches 21 never had a single atp point or any history of play in futures.
All young guys tho under 30.
There is 50 futures in spain per year.
This is not by chance and its not random since there are thousands of ex atp ranked players in spain.
If they picked coaches randomly half would have been ranked at least.
They just pick the cheapest guys.
Djokovic family done the same thing.
They rather let family , friends earn from their name then give them their money i guess.

 

[TheCanadian]

It all sounds like a royal rip off to me, but like I said, most parents don't know what they're doing.

I did a count on Sanchez Casal academy.
From 24 coaches 21 never had a single atp point or any history of play in futures.
All young guys tho under 30.
There is 50 futures in spain per year.
This is not by chance and its not random since there are thousands of ex atp ranked players in spain.
If they picked coaches randomly half would have been ranked at least.
They just pick the cheapest guys.
Djokovic family done the same thing.
They rather let family , friends earn from their name then give them their money i guess.

 

[TheCanadian]

Can they even serve or keep score at 5?

^^^ Unfortunately the issue arises when NGB's start to track results too early - over here it is possible to have your first rating/ranking from age 5, which is just ridiculous! Don't get me wrong, learning to compete is really important and lots of life lessons can be learned from it, but kids that young should not be subjected to a system which encourages them to judge their self-worth by their results as they are not psychologically or socially developed enough to cope.

And nor are the parents!

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[sureshs]

Its just an indication that an academy....

1. can't change reality, some junior tennis players are more talented than others.

2. law of diminished returns...at a certain point, too much practice is not productive. 6 hours a day is not required to maximize a juniors game.

3. pressure can hurt performance, parents paying $50000/year for a full time full service academy are like caged animals at tournaments and kids can sense them pacing.

4. having more coaches and hitting partners is not always an advantage. If many of the academy coaches are low level feeder coaches, that is not going to develop a player.

In our area there are tons of quality tournaments, quality private coaches, quality hitting partners. So for a parent that has time and/or money, a private coach/hitting partner scenario is superior. If an academy kid practices too much with not enough recovery time, is coached by feeder coaches, is homesick, and is under huge pressure while my equally talented kid has a great private coach, has plenty of recovery time, hits with hired D-1 level players, lives at home, and I am more chilled at tournaments because I do for $10000/year what you pay $50000-60000/year for.....my player will likely beat the academy player.

For parents who don't live in warmer climes like Georgia and to its south, Texas, or Southern California, or in warmer climes but not in tennis hotbeds, doesn't it make sense to send their kids to an academy in these places? Even many Europeans and Russians come to US academies for this reason.

 

[TheCanadian]

There's some talk about coaches having ATP points...I could give a list of coaches and parents who produced tennis stars without any points: Toni Nadal, Nick B. automatically spring to mind. With all the online resources and books available, a committed parent who is a student of the game and has the time, can produce a great player if he or she has a kid who shows potential. The ATP player could be hired to rally or play points at some stage. How many ATP players are crap coaches?

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[TheCanadian]

I agree but there are also other considerations to take into account when getting a child involved in sports at a competitive level: sports teach so much in terms of discipline, hard-work, dealing with stress and performing under pressure, etc. and a kid involved in sports is less likely to get into all sorts of trouble in adolescent years, so it's not all about turning pro or getting a scholarship; these should be viewed as icing on the cake. You invest in your child because you love him or her and it's good for them without having expectations beyond demanding that they apply themselves and work hard to reach their full potential.

Sure, I understand SEFL gives us advantages people in other places do not have. An academy may indeed be a better choice if the parent does not have the time or local resources such as coaches and hitting partners.

As long as the parents are realistic. $50000-60000 over 4-5 years will still likely result in a hobby player, perhaps in some cases a college scholarship. So the family must decide whether spending $200000-300000 and having kid away from home and family, in return for a hobby player or maybe a college scholarship, makes sense in their circumstances.

 

[sureshs]

I agree but there are also other considerations to take into account when getting a child involved in sports at a competitive level: sports teach so much in terms of discipline, hard-work, dealing with stress and performing under pressure, etc. and a kid involved in sports is less likely to get into all sorts of trouble in adolescent years, so it's not all about turning pro or getting a scholarship; these should be viewed as icing on the cake. You invest in your child because you love him or her and it's good for them without having expectations beyond demanding that they apply themselves and work hard to reach their full potential.

That is true but there are couple of other motives too that I have observed. One is the use of tennis to add to the life of a kid with mediocre academic performance/mediocre academic expectations in the family in general - tennis is something that the kid can become reasonably good at while the time spent on it can be used to justify the lesser time spent on academics. The other is the need for parents to do something meaningful in their own lives, like a mom working part-time using tennis driving as an excuse, or in general filling some void in their lives. So however much they complain about the driving and scheduling, it is usually a show, and they love doing it (and talking about it).

 

[maxxy777]

There's some talk about coaches having ATP points...I could give a list of coaches and parents who produced tennis stars without any points: Toni Nadal, Nick B. automatically spring to mind. With all the online resources and books available, a committed parent who is a student of the game and has the time, can produce a great player if he or she has a kid who shows potential. The ATP player could be hired to rally or play points at some stage. How many ATP players are crap coaches?

No one ever produced a top player in the world, not top 100 or even 200,300....
Not uncle Tony or Boris Becker.
Top and even good players are born with it and just need someone to follow their talent.
Almost anyone will do.
If Nick.B can produce 5 players in world top ten he could surely produce 50 in top 100 or countless in top 200,500 and so on.
Not even close.
The truth is 99% of his students cant reach decent college lvl and 99% of his students never improve 1% even.
He cant make top 100 player if his life depended on it, no more then uncle Toni,uncle Mark ,aunt Bibi or Ivan Lendl can.
Good coach is measured how well he works with average kids and how much he can imporove them without diminishing returns.And they all fail terribly in that situation.
Coaches without Atp points even more so generally looking.
Are ex atp point coaches good?
No they are not, but they are not bad either .In worst case they are decent.
While coaches without atp point can be really bad for the kids.Not generally bad but there are coaches that destroy kids.
For example if i give my kid to uncle Toni he would destroy him, but if i give him to ex top 300 atp he will reach his potential,not full potential but his average in most cases.
Uncle Toni worked 15 years as a coach , worked with hundreds of kids and couldnt make a player with one atp point or even semi decent junior, and then he produces Nadal, yeah right.

 

[maxxy777]

Its just an indication that an academy....

1. can't change reality, some junior tennis players are more talented than others.

2. law of diminished returns...at a certain point, too much practice is not productive. 6 hours a day is not required to maximize a juniors game.

3. pressure can hurt performance, parents paying $50000/year for a full time full service academy are like caged animals at tournaments and kids can sense them pacing.

4. having more coaches and hitting partners is not always an advantage. If many of the academy coaches are low level feeder coaches, that is not going to develop a player.

In our area there are tons of quality tournaments, quality private coaches, quality hitting partners. So for a parent that has time and/or money, a private coach/hitting partner scenario is superior. If an academy kid practices too much with not enough recovery time, is coached by feeder coaches, is homesick, and is under huge pressure while my equally talented kid has a great private coach, has plenty of recovery time, hits with hired D-1 level players, lives at home, and I am more chilled at tournaments because I do for $10000/year what you pay $50000-60000/year for.....my player will likely beat the academy player.

One of the best posts in a long time .
Loved the diminishing returns part.

 

[TheCanadian]

Your focus on ATP points is a bit perplexing. I could give you a long list of tennis super stars that were coached by their parents or by folks who didn't play professional tennis. If a kid has good hitting partners and match-play, I fail to see what a guy with atp points adds to the equation.

No one ever produced a top player in the world, not top 100 or even 200,300....
Not uncle Tony or Boris Becker.
Top and even good players are born with it and just need someone to follow their talent.
Almost anyone will do.
If Nick.B can produce 5 players in world top ten he could surely produce 50 in top 100 or countless in top 200,500 and so on.
Not even close.
The truth is 99% of his students cant reach decent college lvl and 99% of his students never improve 1% even.
He cant make top 100 player if his life depended on it, no more then uncle Toni,uncle Mark ,aunt Bibi or Ivan Lendl can.
Good coach is measured how well he works with average kids and how much he can imporove them without diminishing returns.And they all fail terribly in that situation.
Coaches without Atp points even more so generally looking.
Are ex atp point coaches good?
No they are not, but they are not bad either .In worst case they are decent.
While coaches without atp point can be really bad for the kids.Not generally bad but there are coaches that destroy kids.
For example if i give my kid to uncle Toni he would destroy him, but if i give him to ex top 300 atp he will reach his potential,not full potential but his average in most cases.
Uncle Toni worked 15 years as a coach , worked with hundreds of kids and couldnt make a player with one atp point or even semi decent junior, and then he produces Nadal, yeah right.

 

[maxxy777]

Your focus on ATP points is a bit perplexing. I could give you a long list of tennis super stars that were coached by their parents or by folks who didn't play professional tennis. If a kid has good hitting partners and match-play, I fail to see what a guy with atp points adds to the equation.

No its all very clear mate

I could give you a long list of tennis super stars

How many superstars are there .They make 0,01% of tennis population at best.
Few in each corner of the world .
In average country one superstar per 10 years at most.
And in the same time thousands of kids.
What im trying to say is that in real world , in reality coaches coach below average to decent kids.
Maybe once in 30 years they get good kid and very few coaches get super star.

I dont fall to that silly story coaches sell.
They always count best players they coached and say they made them, even if they just hit with them 5 minutes.
I look worst player coach has and how much he improved in last year.
That is the real indicator of a good coach.
Not coaching a superstar which is only luck and nothing more.
Some parents are blessed with insane talented kids , nothing special about the parents coaching tho.
Or like uncle Toni he was just lucky to be Nadals uncle , if Nadal was not born he would still coach noobs as he was 15 years before Nadal.

 

[maxxy777]

I know so many local coaches which worked for peanuts and no one was interested.
THen by luck or pure chance they got a sparring with awsome junior and he hired them for few weeks.
Based alone on that he became 5x better coach and people wanted to work for him way more.
This guy will walk around until he is dead saying that he coached and made this top junior.
Based on that alone chances he get another big name is way higher.
In the end he is the same mediocre coach he always was but he has way better players.
Same time non of his regular players he coached for years ever improved.

In reality players make coaches not other way around.
I guess people will never understand this.

 

[maxxy777]

I know hundreds on top of hundreds deluded parents coaches who ruined kids with their coaching.Those kids were average and would never make it but still, they could have been a lot better.
They coach as they are reinventing the whole sport.Like they are the first one who have this ideas.
They dont learn the sport but reinvent it.
I even saw number of super talents ruined by parents craziness, and to ruin such kid is really hard btw.
Its just from all of this hundreds players someone will still make it because of insane quality and talent.
Its just the rule of big numbers not good coaching.

Good coach improves average kid with very moderate number of hours.And i mean every kid no exeptions.
Not coach one or few big players and live on old glory days for the rest of his life.
I saw one good coach in 30 years of tennis who can coach anyone and make him better.
A lot of decent ones tho,not all but most of them had points.

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[TheCanadian]

A kid doesn't need lessons every day or even every week; he needs to practice every day (depending on the his age) and play matches. I see parents giving a local pro $120/hour for everyday private lessons and I think they're wasting their money. The coach knows it but he's in a conflict of interest, so he doesn't say anything. I think it's unethical.

No its all very clear mate


How many superstars are there .They make 0,01% of tennis population at best.
Few in each corner of the world .
In average country one superstar per 10 years at most.
And in the same time thousands of kids.
What im trying to say is that in real world , in reality coaches coach below average to decent kids.
Maybe once in 30 years they get good kid and very few coaches get super star.

I dont fall to that silly story coaches sell.
They always count best players they coached and say they made them, even if they just hit with them 5 minutes.
I look worst player coach has and how much he improved in last year.
That is the real indicator of a good coach.
Not coaching a superstar which is only luck and nothing more.
Some parents are blessed with insane talented kids , nothing special about the parents coaching tho.
Or like uncle Toni he was just lucky to be Nadals uncle , if Nadal was not born he would still coach noobs as he was 15 years before Nadal.

 

[maxxy777]

A kid doesn't need lessons every day or even every week; he needs to practice every day (depending on the his age) and play matches. I see parents giving a local pro $120/hour for everyday private lessons and I think they're wasting their money. The coach knows it but he's in a conflict of interest, so he doesn't say anything. I think it's unethical.

If i dont take the money someone else will.
thats what coaches say in that situation.

 

[TheCanadian]

So you talk to the parents and you explain it.

If i dont take the money someone else will.
thats what coaches say in that situation.

 

[maxxy777]

So you talk to the parents and you explain it.

It doesnt work like that.
Its like destroying their dream.
If they dont pay all they can they will feel their kid is not going to make it .
Basically they would have to admit their kid is average and cant become a pro if they pay less then what they can afford.
And they cant do that, its their dream that they will be called tennis experts and their kid a pro with lots of money.
Even if the kid is really bad the dream is still alive if they pay all they can ,until it all breaks of course.

You cant change someone who doesnt want to change.
Btw its parents fault if they get scammed, coaches just abuse that to the max.
In tennis parents dictate everything since they pay.

If coach says his opinion and parents dont like it he will get fired in a sec.
If parent steps in on the court and coach says get out-gets fired
If parent coaches kid in mid practice and coach reacts-gets fired
If kid loses and coach doesnt supports parents claims of the problem no matter how insane the reason is -gets fired
If kid loses a sparring while practicing new game plan-fired
If coach shouts for any reason-fired
if coach coaches-fired
So coaches know this and share experience among each other and how to avoid the problems and get paid as much as they can for longest as possible
, they suck up to parents in the most downgrading way, which they become experts at.
I know many coaches that are so slick in talking they could easily invent new religion and people would follow.
They are nothing short of swamis,sai babas tv preachers and can make parents believe anything while smiling behind their back the whole time.
Again parents will never take honest coach, they believe he is destroying their dream, doesnt matter that dream was never realistic one.

 

[maxxy777]

Here is a very simple trick coaches use.
I deleted it , i dont want coaches to know this one hehe

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[maxxy777]

I think it depends on the circumstances and the kid. If a kid has non tennis playing parents who are busy with work, how can he compete without lots of coaching? Not sure how many kids can practice on their own and keep things tight.

Also depends on the goals. If you would have asked me 6 months ago, I would have said the same thing you did. But since we returned to S. FL. 6 months ago, I see the level of junior tennis getting crazy better as time passes. Skills that used to win local 6 and 7s 2 years ago can not get out of the first round. Kids come from all over the world and the level needed to win just keeps exploding.

Used to be a great athlete could win, or a solid technique player could win, or a fighter could win. Now it has to be the entire package just to compete.

A kid needs to be super fit, solid athlete, great technique that holds up under pressure, efficient footwork, mental toughness, high level strategy, everything.

Maybe years ago a kid could take a lesson here and there, practice on their own, play matches and do very well. But these days they may be competing with kids who have fitness trainers, message therapists, nutrition consultants, top level hitting partners, a movement coach, a strategy coach. Between matches they review video, make corrections, like little pros.

Seriously, parents down here can list the people on their payroll. In many cases its a waste of money. But in others these kids are amazing. If a kid can compete with that taking a lesson a week or every other week, and practicing on their own, wow, they would have overcome overwhelming advantages these other kids have.

But going forward it would seem to me most college scholarships and future pros would come from the pool of kids with these huge advantages. Since this is relatively new trend among the more affluent parents, too early to tell if this arms race of expert advisors for juniors produces results.

Number of pro places are limited to 100 more or less.
There are at least 15 generations of players in that number.
So each generation gets 6 places in top 100 average.
That is the number for the whole world tho.
So even in best possible case USA gets 1 spot in each generation.
Right now its only 1 spot in 2,5 generations for USA players in top 100.
So significant raise is not even mathematically possible,not for usa not for any country.
And if its good for college it only depends how much parents spend.
If they spend way more on tennis practices then total cost of possible free college scholarship then its not so profitable.
So were is the point in all of that i dont know.
Sure its cool that your kid beats other kids , but that last only for a while until 16 -17 at most.
and after they are thrown to the lions, not so much fun then.

 

[TCF]

[
content not found

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[maxxy777]

maxxy777, could you explain this more. I am not understanding the math. There are currently something like 20 US players in the top 125 WTA and like 12 US players in the top 125 ATP.



I am not sure what you mean the US gets 1 spot in the top 100 for every 2.5 generations? A generation in US terms is 25 years. So I am confused as to what you are saying.

I count every year as a generation

I just looked top 100.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/rankings/singles?rankDate=2016-10-17&countryCode=USA

Now i see in top 200 there a quite a few players.
12 players exact in top 125.
Why you mention wta i dont really understand kids cant compete in boys and girls tournaments, wta and atp might as well be different sports.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/en/rank...=2016-10-17&rankRange=101-200&countryCode=USA

End even then those top 150 to 100 players make 100k average per year neto at best after tax and expenses.
Does this make you a pro, well only until you play.
If they are from the rich family that is not big money i think.
After they retire they can coach, nothing special about that .
And its still just 15 players so one player per generation.

Which part you dont understand ,even if i TRIPLE that number in top 125 to 36 us players its still 2.4 players per generation who can earn money as pros.
Now does this 1,4 player more per year make any difference in total numbers, not really.
But imagine the cannon fodder just to get this 1,4 player more per year.
If there is going to be TRIPLE raise of players in top 125 then this is not possible without 10-20x raise in player numbers in top 1000 to 200 lvl.
And 100x raise in lower lvl numbers of players.
All of that cannon fodder for one more spot per generation more or less.
Not to mention it would be way harder to get that spot since there would be major
competition for it.
So this is something parents should worry about coz they will pay for it.

 

[heninfan99]

coaches should never, ever play with their students

 

[maxxy777]

coaches should never, ever play with their students

You have a good point here.
Its exactly the same thing my sons coach told me.
He plays with him tho, if he cant find good sparring.
But only because he rather have my son play with him then have a bad sparring.
And this guy is meticulous.
He knows all of the players, their strengthts ,weaknesses and how to combine that with various exercises to produce the best possible practice.

If kids are guided well they will improve way better with playing each other then with the coach.
Its simple psychology and one of the basic principals of lower lvl tennis called Mirroring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroring_(psychology)

So if the coach plays and he is tired the kid will mirror that and move slower.
If one kid is pumped up other will follow him.
Can a coach be pumped up fo 6 hours , not really but each kid can for hour or 2.
If one kid doesnt want to play he is sent home and other kid or coach replaces him.
If there is 4 kids in a group on 2 courts with a coach that is the best possible practice.
No one will ever tank practice again out of fear that they will be left out.
If there is one bad apple you need to remove him so he doesnt corrupt others.
Now Is this enough for pro tennis.
Not really but average kids improve way better in such conditions.
Mirroring happens subconscious and the better the player the less they mirror the opponent since they are fully conscious of what they play at all times.
That is why pro players make it in almost any conditions you give them , with
private coach, academy, crazy dad , crazy mom , uncle, bad coach, good coach.
It doesnt matter as long as it doesnt go to extremes.

 

[heninfan99]

LOL. Nice one.

You have a good point here.
Its exactly the same thing my sons coach told me.
He plays with him tho, if he cant find good sparring.
But only because he rather have my son play with him then have a bad sparring.
And this guy is meticulous.
He knows all of the players, their strengthts ,weaknesses and how to combine that with various exercises to produce the best possible practice.

If kids are guided well they will improve way better with playing each other then with the coach.
Its simple psychology and one of the basic principals of lower lvl tennis called Mirroring.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroring_(psychology)

So if the coach plays and he is tired the kid will mirror that and move slower.
If one kid is pumped up other will follow him.
Can a coach be pumped up fo 6 hours , not really but each kid can for hour or 2.
If one kid doesnt want to play he is sent home and other kid or coach replaces him.
If there is 4 kids in a group on 2 courts with a coach that is the best possible practice.
No one will ever tank practice again out of fear that they will be left out.
If there is one bad apple you need to remove him so he doesnt corrupt others.
Now Is this enough for pro tennis.
Not really but average kids improve way better in such conditions.
Mirroring happens subconscious and the better the player the less they mirror opponent, since they are fully conscious of what they do.
That is why pro players make it in almost any conditions you give them.

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[sureshs]

Now I understand. I was thinking the US definition of generation of 25 years. You are using it in the context of each birth year being a generation. Thanks for the explanation.

I thought it was 30

 

[TCF]

content not found

 

[heninfan99]

Valid point. Seen it too many times to count, pretty much every kid looks amazing when hitting with their coach. The kid and parents all brag how their kid is crazy good and battle their coach who was a former great player.

Then the kid plays a tournament and looks totally different and gets crushed. When the person on the other side of the net has one goal, to beat you any way possible, and if at all possible to make you look like the worst player ever.....its totally different than hitting with coach.

The coach has the players best interests in mind, even when hitting with them. An opponent in a real match has the players worst interests in mind. Completely different atmosphere and most times very different results.

depends on the coach but I see what you mean

 

[Coolio]

Just finished a 1hr lesson with a nationally ranked u12 girl.
1)We did some physical warm up and some agility and reaction exercises.
2)Some slice touch exercises working on her playing with continental grip and using one hand on the racquet the whole time for her slices.
3)We worked on various short court basket fed drills to get her reps on the backhand, and working on balance and feeling the ball with spin open and closed stance.
4)We did a little smashing and worked that into her serve focusing on pronation.
5)We got in a number of sets of 20 reps on Defensive V and Attack V, exiting and entering the court on forehand and backhand and we finished with her looking to get sets of 10 in a row, back to the coach where I volleyed and moved her around the court and she had to play with spin and balance returning every ball to me.

Was a very intense session, there was some serious reps in there, she hit a lot of balls with good balance and technique.

I did not rally with her or play any points. Whether that is good or bad, I don't have the answer. I know Emilio Sanchez said that doing lot's of Spanish drills, gives a player tremendous benefits in physical fitness, movement, and builds confidence in footwork and the shots.

She will have a group session tomorrow which will include 90 mins hitting and pointplay. If she plays one or two matches a week, does a few hours group hitting sessions, then 1 hr of closed skill work on balance, technique, and racquet speed is fine right?

Or maybe it's not....

You could argue if I am basket feeding, how is that realistic? She won't get nice feeds in a match.

If optimal skill development is in the format being as close to the game as possible, then shouldn't I have rallied with her instead and have her play off my shots. This situation would be closer to the the "format" of the game as @Ash_Smith talked about earlier.

Should we have done closed skill work on the serve technique, or instead should every serve be followed by a groundie (preferably forehand) to mimic real tennis?

 

[treblings]

Just finished a 1hr lesson with a nationally ranked u12 girl.
1)We did some physical warm up and some agility and reaction exercises.
2)Some slice touch exercises working on her playing with continental grip and using one hand on the racquet the whole time for her slices.
3)We worked on various short court basket fed drills to get her reps on the backhand, and working on balance and feeling the ball with spin open and closed stance.
4)We did a little smashing and worked that into her serve focusing on pronation.
5)We got in a number of sets of 20 reps on Defensive V and Attack V, exiting and entering the court on forehand and backhand and we finished with her looking to get sets of 10 in a row, back to the coach where I volleyed and moved her around the court and she had to play with spin and balance returning every ball to me.

Was a very intense session, there was some serious reps in there, she hit a lot of balls with good balance and technique.

I did not rally with her or play any points. Whether that is good or bad, I don't have the answer. I know Emilio Sanchez said that doing lot's of Spanish drills, gives a player tremendous benefits in physical fitness, movement, and builds confidence in footwork and the shots.

She will have a group session tomorrow which will include 90 mins hitting and pointplay. If she plays one or two matches a week, does a few hours group hitting sessions, then 1 hr of closed skill work on balance, technique, and racquet speed is fine right?

Or maybe it's not....

You could argue if I am basket feeding, how is that realistic? She won't get nice feeds in a match.

If optimal skill development is in the format being as close to the game as possible, then shouldn't I have rallied with her instead and have her play off my shots. This situation would be closer to the the "format" of the game as @Ash_Smith talked about earlier.

Should we have done closed skill work on the serve technique, or instead should every serve be followed by a groundie (preferably forehand) to mimic real tennis?

@Coolio - sounds like an hour well spent

i am working/have worked with nationally ranked girls and boys for about 30 years now.
there is not one perfect way imo.

one of the best tips that i got from an elder colleague was, that you should always look for what it is your player needs, and then develop the drill that fits the demand.
for that reason i make sure i see the kids play in matches. gives me a better idea what they need and where they stand.
we talk about what happened in the match and usually do some non-basket hitting to adress tactical or technical issues.

Serves followed by a groundie is something i regularly incorporate in my training. Depends on what aspect of the serve i want to concentrate.

 

[chip and charge]

I respect maxxy 777's knowledge of the game. I do feel here on this aspect of the game he is to one dimensional in regard to development of top players, let's say the top 30. I Believe there has to be special thing about a special player but Also a special situation. There are difficult to discern and measure. For an example one many people know of, nick b at the start of his academy
There were a group of to us players going toe to toe every day. Compare that situation with what occurs there these days on a regular basis. Uncle Toni yes he's probably not a great coach bit how much influence did Carlos moya have on Rafa's development, a no. 1 player in the world who came from the small small island. Not just an influence on Rafa's game but desire and motivation. These aspects are difficult to measure but in a sense very rare.

 

[TCF]

deleted