is it possible to drastically improve?

[mad dog1]

If the player isn't good then nobody will trust them lol. I think it's def possible for a great coach to not be great at tennis, but im pretty sure this is another unpopular opinion.

A good coach has to be a 4.5 level player at a minimum with very solid fundamentals and the ability to hit every type of shot. A good coach may not be able to play at the 4.5+ level due to age and past injuries which might affect speed and stamina. Not a hard and fast rule, but the coach needs to be able to properly execute every stroke with correct technique to be able to demonstrate for the student.

 

[Fintft]

Well, the thing is while athleticism goes down with age, the ability to translate motivation to action increases with maturity, so can increase with age.

True, but generally speaking, I still stand by my words.

 

[johnmccabe]

Well, the thing is while athleticism goes down with age, the ability to translate motivation to action increases with maturity, so can increase with age.

I've become more cognizant and effective learner. But I have to admit I'm much less motivated in learning new tricks as an old dog...

 

[socallefty]

Not a hard and fast rule, but the coach needs to be able to properly execute every stroke with correct technique to be able to demonstrate for the student.

I agree. Often the students will mimic what they see rather than what the coach talks about. So if the coach says the right things and then goes and hits the wrong way, the student can try to copy the wrong thing.

Apart from diagnosing issues and doing hand feeds, a lot of time during a lesson will be spent hitting with the coach working on specific things. If you are on a long- term development program, the coach has to be on par or better than the player to have proper learning happen during the hitting part of lessons. If the coach is not as good as an advanced player as can happen at the college and pro level, then the student needs hitting partners who are at their level or better rather than hitting with their coach.

Also I’ve found that coaches who were high-level aspiring pros in the past often have been through national or coaching academies as juniors and learned through structured programs and practices. They know what drills to do to improve specific problems that a student might have. They are less likely to do random unstructured hitting to try and improve students. They also can help students understand the strategic aspects of setting up point patterns in their favor, high percentage shot selection at different parts of the court and against different balls from their opponent etc.

 

[tennishabit]

I agree. Often the students will mimic what they see rather than what the coach talks about. So if the coach says the right things and then goes and hits the wrong way, the student can try to copy the wrong thing.

Apart from diagnosing issues and doing hand feeds, a lot of time during a lesson will be spent hitting with the coach working on specific things. If you are on a long- term development program, the coach has to be on par or better than the player to have proper learning happen during the hitting part of lessons. If the coach is not as good as an advanced player as can happen at the college and pro level, then the student needs hitting partners who are at their level or better rather than hitting with their coach.

Also I’ve found that coaches who were high-level aspiring pros in the past often have been through national or coaching academies as juniors and learned through structured programs and practices. They know what drills to do to improve specific problems that a student might have. They are less likely to do random unstructured hitting to try and improve students. They also can help students understand the strategic aspects of setting up point patterns in their favor, high percentage shot selection at different parts of the court and against different balls from their opponent etc.

absolutely true as heard often 'a pic worths 000s words' n while the kids/beginners'r focusing so much to copy/mimic the 'images' which 9/10'd b wrong at front of them, even mil words/shouts=0.

actually watava the 'coaches' yelling at them r kind of sound effect for parents or 3rd party outsiders showing the 'coaching effort' lololololol.............anyway watava happening on so called 'tennis coaching', it's miserably failed more n more ppl than dat decades ago n every1 can see the hard reality right at front of them incl the 'coaches' now 2025. it's gonna b worse in 2035 unless some 'revolutionary concepts' introduced.

so, more n more ppl went up-rising their tennis elbows/wrists then shoveled their love of tennis into pickle jars..........

 

[ProStaffFanatic]

Not trying to be closed minded but I'm kind of cynical atm.

Why does everyone believe in coaching so much? I'm more in the "talent matters waaaaay more than coaching" camp and that our mechanics w/ coaching wouldn't be that different compared to our mechanics w/o coaching.

For all the coaches here: Don't you think it's mostly about natural talent? When you work with certain players they are just obviously gonna be way better than your other players regardless of coaching?

Let's say you take a self taught (w/ high school tennis coaching) 3.5 player w/ 10 years experience. If they had a decent coach w/ them for 10 years what would their rating be on average?

Just what do you think 'natural talent' really is?

It's not that such players will naturally have technically correct strokes and grip. Talent just means good hand - eye coordination, natural ability to read ball trajectory well and the ability to quickly pick up on new things.

Almost no self taught player will do everything correct by themselves.

Likely, your biggest problem today is 10 years of incorrect muscle memory. And those are the hardest thing to unlearn. Even if you know what you are doing wrong, it's going to be hard work to turn that around.

A coach could help with that with specific drills and / or a staged progression to help you along that path to make the necessary changes.

Tbh, it sounds like you want to improve but aren't willing to do the hard work for it.
That's fine off course... As rec players the most important is to have fun.

The hard truth however is that there are no short cuts here... If you want to improve, say, your backhand then there is only one path forward... And that is identify what is wrong with it, make the change and then hit a couple thousand back hands to implement that new muscle memory.

 

[mad dog1]

Just what do you think 'natural talent' really is?

It's not that such players will naturally have technically correct strokes and grip. Talent just means good hand - eye coordination, natural ability to read ball trajectory well and the ability to quickly pick up on new things.

Almost no self taught player will do everything correct by themselves.

Likely, your biggest problem today is 10 years of incorrect muscle memory. And those are the hardest thing to unlearn. Even if you know what you are doing wrong, it's going to be hard work to turn that around.

A coach could help with that with specific drills and / or a staged progression to help you along that path to make the necessary changes.

Tbh, it sounds like you want to improve but aren't willing to do the hard work for it.
That's fine off course... As rec players the most important is to have fun.

The hard truth however is that there are no short cuts here... If you want to improve, say, your backhand then there is only one path forward... And that is identify what is wrong with it, make the change and then hit a couple thousand back hands to implement that new muscle memory.

Don’t forget about coordination, speed, agility and athleticism as natural talent, too. Some people just have more of these traits than others.

He’s like so many people I’ve seen. They talk the talk but aren’t willing to walk the walk.

 

[socallefty]

Natural talent + a lot of coaching/practice = Advanced player
Natural talent + no coaching = Low level player
No natural talent + a lot of coaching/practice = Low level player
No natural talent + no coaching = comedian on the tennis court good for laughs from spectators

 

[user92626]

Except that not too many of us (even the athletic type you mention) have the will and the discipline to really improve movement
Otherwise we'd all be on treadmills and trucks and so forth...Most of us picked tennis, b/c technique is more fun to learn, compared to improving athletic abilities (where we- at least speaking for myself here- we'd get more benefits from)...

Couldn't agree more!

Movements, athleticism go a looong way in improvement since it's really like ...the first thing about sports, the first thing you need before you can hit a ball. Movements.

But somehow footwork and athleticism just seems very boring on top of being very very tiring for rec players to learn, and worse, players think it's just obvious and rather skip.

Dissecting and obsessing over stroke details is more fun and probably the minimum that ones can do to make themselves feel like they care about tennis.

 

[buttman]

Don’t forget about coordination, speed, agility and athleticism as natural talent, too. Some people just have more of these traits than others.

He’s like so many people I’ve seen. They talk the talk but aren’t willing to walk the walk.

lmfaoooo how am i talking the talk? im literally saying i lack the talent to get past 3.5

 

[buttman]

Natural talent + a lot of coaching/practice = Advanced player
Natural talent + no coaching = Low level player
No natural talent + a lot of coaching/practice = Low level player
No natural talent + no coaching = comedian on the tennis court good for laughs from spectators

i agree with all of this except i think natural talent + a lot of practice(coaching not necessary) = advanced player

 

[mad dog1]

lmfaoooo how am i talking the talk? im literally saying i lack the talent to get past 3.5

You can get to 4.5 with average talent + good coaching + willingness to do the work. If you have average talent + no coaching, it’s difficult to make it past 3.5.

 

[mad dog1]

i agree with all of this except i think natural talent + a lot of practice(coaching not necessary) = advanced player

I have seen this, but it’s the exception rather than the norm

 

[socallefty]

i agree with all of this except i think natural talent + a lot of practice(coaching not necessary) = advanced player

What is your definition of advanced player? Mine starts at a minimum of about UTR 8.0 or high NTRP 4.5 - that is when spectators will stop to watch a player play and they will look like ‘real’ tennis players with fairly textbook movement and technique including good serves. I haven’t seen self-taught players above UTR 6-7 even though some might exist.

 

[ProStaffFanatic]

No natural talent + a lot of coaching/practice = Low level player

I'd rather say 'good player'.
A 'lot' of coaching and practice will always yield results if done with the right attitude

No natural talent + no coaching = comedian on the tennis court good for laughs from spectators

 

[ProStaffFanatic]

i agree with all of this except i think natural talent + a lot of practice(coaching not necessary) = advanced player

No

He's going to pick up bad habits and end up with a level cap as a result

Don't be fooled by the likes of kyrgios who gets by without a coach. Before he went pro, he went through academies etc and received TONS of coaching

 

[pjv]

Here’s a personal story. I’m in my early 60’s and I’ve been playing tennis self-taught most of my life. When I was a kid I just played a lot with whoever would play with me. Then I had a long period of focus on other athletics (high school basketball, university volleyball) where I stopped playing tennis altogether. In my mid-40’s, I came back to tennis and have been playing more and more seriously since. Maybe 8 or 10 years ago or so, I was in the 3.5 range and I decided to get some formal coaching for the first time. I spent about 3 months doing 1 or 2 lessons a week and working pretty consistently on what I was learning from my coach which was a mix of groundstroke and volley technique and some tactics. I’m still working on stuff I learned during those 3 months.

All of that work paid off in improving my game enough that people who were better than me started being willing to play with me and that — regularly playing with people better than me — massively accelerated my improvement. Working with a good coach in my experience was very helpful. Playing with people who are better than me has been even more helpful. My level now is around 4.0 on average. Parts of my game are better (I probably serve ~ 4.5) and parts are worse (my volleys are woefully inconsistent, and I habitually go for too much with my groundies). But my improvement can be seen objectively in that I now routinely beat players who used to stomp me (I was lucky to get 2 games in a set).

 

[PKorda]

What is your definition of advanced player? Mine starts at a minimum of about UTR 8.0 or high NTRP 4.5 - that is when spectators will stop to watch a player play and they will look like ‘real’ tennis players with fairly textbook movement and technique including good serves. I haven’t seen self-taught players above UTR 6-7 even though some might exist.

Just curious what is your definition of self-taught vs. coached. There seems to be a wide range, no? For example someone who maybe went to some local tennis camps as a kid but never got private instruction where would they fall? But that level of instruction will be vastly different from someone who grew up with lots of private lessons, playing in jr. tournaments, etc.

 

[socallefty]

Just curious what is your definition of self-taught vs. coached. There seems to be a wide range, no? For example someone who maybe went to some local tennis camps as a kid but never got private instruction where would they fall? But that level of instruction will be vastly different from someone who grew up with lots of private lessons, playing in jr. tournaments, etc.

If an instructor or coach taught them in real life proper technique and footwork whether it was 1-1 or group drills, they’ve been coached. It could have been lessons they paid for or a mentor who did it for free, but knew their tennis. At least they have a model of the right way to do it that was drilled into them. Self-taught means that they learned just to hit the ball on their own and maybe had the benefit of only books and online tips.

 

[tennishabit]

What is your definition of advanced player? Mine starts at a minimum of about UTR 8.0 or high NTRP 4.5 - that is when spectators will stop to watch a player play and they will look like ‘real’ tennis players with fairly textbook movement and technique including good serves. I haven’t seen self-taught players above UTR 6-7 even though some might exist.

an over 40 yro guy i hit w/ all the time is self-tought n had utr 9.xx 8-9 yrs ago when he's playing club comp etc n he's now still playing dubs sub sometimes so the utrsport.net website still keeps his ranking. actually i met a few like him even 1 younger columbian guy who's ex-basketball player now working as a tennis coach said he's self-tought 4-5 yrs ago but didn't mention his utr ranking though surely >utr 9.

find a wall in a tennis club n u'll meet/hit some good players if u'r good enough urself n 'the wall's the best n never miss' which joker said in a youtube vid n it's absolutely true..........

 

[PKorda]

If an instructor or coach taught them in real life proper technique and footwork whether it was 1-1 or group drills, they’ve been coached. It could have been lessons they paid for or a mentor who did it for free, but knew their tennis. At least they have a model of the right way to do it that was drilled into them. Self-taught means that they learned just to hit the ball on their own and maybe had the benefit of only books and online tips.

In some ways is a catch 22 because the better you get the better people you play with who can offer tips just in chatting when you play.

 

[mad dog1]

Just curious what is your definition of self-taught vs. coached. There seems to be a wide range, no? For example someone who maybe went to some local tennis camps as a kid but never got private instruction where would they fall? But that level of instruction will be vastly different from someone who grew up with lots of private lessons, playing in jr. tournaments, etc.

There really is no wide range between self taught vs coached. Clinics and group lessons aren’t very useful and don’t really count as coached. The group instructor can’t possibly spend time with everyone in the group addressing their specific issues. Most of the time the group instructor is just feeding balls from a hopper offering no instructions or correction. Coached is private instruction.

 

[PKorda]

There really is no wide range between self taught vs coached. Clinics and group lessons aren’t very useful and don’t really count as coached. The group instructor can’t possibly spend time with everyone in the group addressing their specific issues. Most of the time the group instructor is just feeding balls from a hopper offering no instructions or correction. Coached is private instruction.

--

 

[Connor35]

Improve your serve. You can practice that by yourself. Most 3.5 players don't have a strong serve. That could get you closer to 4.0.

And 2nd serve return. A return is the 2nd most controlled shot you're going to see with the least amount of running.
And 3.5s don't get that many first serves in -- or if they do it's because its almost a "2nd serve" anyway.
Learning an aggresive but reliable return, especially on a easy 2nd serve, in 3.5 is going to win LOTS of games.
And it's going to apply pressure to your opponent and probably get you more double faults and free points too.

 

[socallefty]

And 2nd serve return. A return is the 2nd most controlled shot you're going to see with the least amount of running.
And 3.5s don't get that many first serves in -- or if they do it's because its almost a "2nd serve" anyway.
Learning an aggresive but reliable return, especially on a easy 2nd serve, in 3.5 is going to win LOTS of games.
And it's going to apply pressure to your opponent and probably get you more double faults and free points too.

How do you develop a good return in isolation if you don’t have good footwork and strokes on both wings? Many serves at that level are slow/shallow and you need to step up and get to the ball before it drops low, you have to generate your own pace, hit with control into a short court and have accuracy on FH and BH. If a player has good movement and strokes to do all that, they will be good from the baseline for their level.

 

[mad dog1]

How do you develop a good return in isolation if you don’t have good footwork and strokes on both wings? Many serves at that level are slow/shallow and you need to step up and get to the ball before it drops low, you have to generate your own pace, hit with control into a short court and have accuracy on FH and BH. If a player has good movement and strokes to do all that, they will be good from the baseline for their level.

3.0-low 4.0s tend to think tennis is just a matter of ball striking. High 4.0s on up begin to realize there’s more to tennis than ball striking. To improve at tennis, players need to work on 4 equally important disciplines that are completely unrelated to each other.

1. Stroke technique
2. Movement - speed, agility and footwork
3. Conditioning - balance, body control, strength, stamina
4. Ability to read the ball - brain and eyes need to be able to process what they see and determine how fast, how much spin, the trajectory, depth, direction and resulting bounce

Add to this, the racquet/hand to eye coordination and ball spacing…

To your point, service returns can not be worked on in a vacuum.

 

[FailBetter]

A good coach has to be a 4.5 level player at a minimum with very solid fundamentals and the ability to hit every type of shot. A good coach may not be able to play at the 4.5+ level due to age and past injuries which might affect speed and stamina. Not a hard and fast rule, but the coach needs to be able to properly execute every stroke with correct technique to be able to demonstrate for the student.

how do you define correct technique? like medvedev? or federer?

 

[mad dog1]

how do you define correct technique? like medvedev? or federer?

Every pro stroke contains the same fundamental elements. For one, they all derive their power from weight transfer and core rotation (hip & shoulder coil). This is correct technique. Low level rec players generate power by arming the ball and trying to swing as fast as possible. There are many other fundamental elements they all have.

 

[ProStaffFanatic]

Every pro stroke contains the same fundamental elements. For one, they all derive their power from weight transfer and core rotation (hip & shoulder coil). This is correct technique. Low level rec players generate power by arming the ball and trying to swing as fast as possible. There are many other fundamental elements they all have.

This. Exactly.
No two random pro serves, forehand, backhand,... will look the same. There is always that personal element of style. But all of them, no matter how different they might look, will pass through the exact same fundamental 'stages'.

On serves for example, they will all go through that racket drop phase, the loading, the pronation,..

Federer strikes might look more elegant then a medvedev. But that's just aesthetics. Nothing medvedev does is 'wrong'

 

[LuckyR]

I've become more cognizant and effective learner. But I have to admit I'm much less motivated in learning new tricks as an old dog...

When I was a junior I was a big fish in a small pond who was somewhat resistant to advice. Now I actively seek out advice (especially if the advisor can explain why the advice is valid).

 

[tennishabit]

When I was a junior I was a big fish in a small pond who was somewhat resistant to advice. Now I actively seek out advice (especially if the advisor can explain why the advice is valid).

.........(especially if the advisor can do it him/her-self ie at least sucessfully applied it on him/her-self, 'talk the talk; walk the walk')...........

 

[Connor35]

How do you develop a good return in isolation if you don’t have good footwork and strokes on both wings? Many serves at that level are slow/shallow and you need to step up and get to the ball before it drops low, you have to generate your own pace, hit with control into a short court and have accuracy on FH and BH. If a player has good movement and strokes to do all that, they will be good from the baseline for their level.

I agree -- if they were that good, they wouldn't be 3/3.5s.
But you can always improve, and I thikn this answers the OPs question about how most easily to improve. Where is the best ROI.

And I think when people work with a teaching pro. they just hit forehands and backhands all the time -- how often do they specifically work on returns? The ROI would be huge.

Even simple things like moving up on the 2nd serve -- playing very close to the service line -- is huge. Most 3.5s aren't aiming toward the edges on 2nd serves. Or frankly learning a good drop shot you can hit left or right. It looks like a jerk move, but a simple drop shot toward the sidelines vs. a weak 2nd serve can win ALOT of points and generate DFs. We all know those annoying old guys who do this.

 

[mad dog1]

I agree -- if they were that good, they wouldn't be 3/3.5s.
But you can always improve, and I thikn this answers the OPs question about how most easily to improve. Where is the best ROI.

And I think when people work with a teaching pro. they just hit forehands and backhands all the time -- how often do they specifically work on returns? The ROI would be huge.

Even simple things like moving up on the 2nd serve -- playing very close to the service line -- is huge. Most 3.5s aren't aiming toward the edges on 2nd serves. Or frankly learning a good drop shot you can hit left or right. It looks like a jerk move, but a simple drop shot toward the sidelines vs. a weak 2nd serve can win ALOT of points and generate DFs. We all know those annoying old guys who do this.

OP doesn't take lessons from an instructor so his best ROI is to find a good instructor and learn the fundamentals.

 

[user92626]

Rec players often don't have a clear idea on the return of investment from having a coach;

and coaches, whether they are good or not, don't sort of "guarantee" a level of ROI. Maybe a better FH or BH or a 0.5 increase.

 

[user92626]

This. Exactly.
No two random pro serves, forehand, backhand,... will look the same. There is always that personal element of style. But all of them, no matter how different they might look, will pass through the exact same fundamental 'stages'.

On serves for example, they will all go through that racket drop phase, the loading, the pronation,..

Federer strikes might look more elegant then a medvedev. But that's just aesthetics. Nothing medvedev does is 'wrong'

Do you think a big part of the problem is coaches can't communicate well how they could fix the FH, BH, etc for a player?

Say, I don't mind paying hundreds of dollars to a coach if by 6 months I can get a fundamentally decent, low-power serve.

 

[socallefty]

Even the rec players who take occasional lessons don’t go and practice with purposeful drills in between the lessons. They either play only matches where they are not going to implement what they just learned under match stress or they randomly hit playing points off baseline feeds and call it practice. That is why coaches can’t guarantee improvement until a student takes lessons often enough where the purposeful drills can be done during the lesson multiple times a week. A coach can show how to do it right, but the student has to practice and make it muscle memory where they do it unconsciously during matches.

 

[ChaelAZ]

I've played for 11 years and I am still 3.5. I have been playing a lot the past year and most of my improvement has come from strategy/shot percentage awareness rather than technique. In terms of technique it seems impossible for me to change. Have you met people who stagnated for a long time and then drastically improved their technique? I am in my thirties.

Honestly, that is pretty typical of rec as most either bounce or stay in the 3.5 to 4.0 range. And as you mention, it seems impossible to change as 11 years of habits aren't something that can easily be undone or reprogrammed. But you also hit on what causes those habits, which is stagnant routines. Most rec players aren't getting out to do drills and practice, and even for many that do their drills are nothing more than reinforcing habits themselves.

Anyway, yes you can improve, and even drastically. I've had friends get with the right people/coaches, prioritize fitness and movement, and video/review matches for more strategy and corrections. Some of them the transformation was fairly quick going away for a season and coming back much better. Most I see the changes happen gradually over a year or so.

I think a good first move is to find a solid, respected pro you might have reivew where you are and make suggestions of which improvements would give you the biggest progress. Have them help design very focused drills and practice scenarios you can do with a trusted hitting partner and go for ir.

 

[user92626]

@socallefty

I totally understand and accept that if students don't practice there won't be progress and that's on the students.

What Im getting at is are coaches usually confident that they could get students to implement correct strokes? It seems pretty hard. There’s always something fundamentally wrong and coaches cannot get to it, cannot convey it.

 

[user92626]

I've played for 11 years and I am still 3.5. I have been playing a lot the past year and most of my improvement has come from strategy/shot percentage awareness rather than technique. In terms of technique it seems impossible for me to change. Have you met people who stagnated for a long time and then drastically improved their technique? I am in my thirties.

Im wondering. In a control environment can you learn and perform a dozen shot with near perfect, fundamentally correct strokes?

 

[socallefty]

What Im getting at is are coaches usually confident that they could get students to implement correct strokes? It seems pretty hard

Once a self-learned adult has plateaued at a level for many years, it is very hard to improve them as you have to deconstruct their game entirely to get rid of all the bad habits and rebuild a good foundation. Many coaches would rather coach juniors or complete beginners as they know the adults who’ve played for years will not practice properly in between lessons also. So it is sometimes tough even to find a good coach willing to take that challenge and coaches will not feel confident they can improve adults like that who have plateaued at a low level for a long time.

it is also more common for adults to take occasional lessons and those don’t help at all - problems get diagnosed, but don’t get fixed. If you’ve stagnated for a while, you have to put yourself on a long-term program of regular lessons and practice sessions to improve and again another problem is in addition to finding a good coach, you have to find good hitting partners willing to do drills who are also trying to improve.

 

[LuckyR]

.........(especially if the advisor can do it him/her-self ie at least sucessfully applied it on him/her-self, 'talk the talk; walk the walk')...........

Not so much. Rivalries are for the simple. Good advoce is good advice, regardless of the source.

 

[tennishabit]

Not so much. Rivalries are for the simple. Good advoce is good advice, regardless of the source.

'especially'≈'comparatively' in the context abv. it means no matter watava the advice sounds/looks like, it's helpful/successful to at least 1 person ie him/herself which's >0.

ofc watava works who cares abt the source..............as 99.99% of those failed n only 0.001% worked out into the 'atp/wta' fantacy which those 99.99% r chasing blindly, so not much time/effort left for them or any1else to worry abt 'source'...........

 

[ProStaffFanatic]

Do you think a big part of the problem is coaches can't communicate well how they could fix the FH, BH, etc for a player?

I think a much bigger problem is students not properly practicing what they have learned. Especially players like the OP who have "wrong" muscle memory to unlearn which they have been building up for years and years.

I have been "unofficially" coaching a few friends over the winter, mostly with some general tips etc.
One of them has 2 main problems: bad grip on his backhand and a "waiter tray" serve.
Neither are easy fixes. But I'm certain the backhand is easier to fix then his serve.

To "unlearn" the bad grip and "relearn" the good grip, I bet he could do it in 10 to 20 hours of practice. His footwork is ok, his forehand is ok and his body movement is ok. It's really just the grip.
His serve however... that thing needs to be deconstructed completely and rebuild from scratch. 10 hours will not suffice. We're looking more at 50 to 100.

The reason I mention this, is because it doesn't require 10 to 20 hours to explain him proper backhand grip. Nor does it take 50 to 100 hours to explain proper serve technique.
Showing / explaining him proper backhand grip takes just 5 minutes. It takes 10 to 20 hours of focused practice to implement it. Same for the serve.

I think that in general, the problem is not so much the coach who isn't communicating well but rather the students not putting in the required practice outside of the lesson court to put into practice what they've learned.

If my friend gets a private coaching lesson to fix his backhand grip and goes to court with friends the next day and just returns to his usual bad grip... that's not the coach's fault.

Whenever I see people take lessons and not progress, that's usually my observation... the students not putting into practice what the coaches have taught them... And just returning to their bad habits.

Say, I don't mind paying hundreds of dollars to a coach if by 6 months I can get a fundamentally decent, low-power serve.

Sure. But as said, the coach doesn't have a magic wand. It's still you that's going to have to put it into practice. And 90% of that practice, will not be during lessons.

Back in the day I took private lessons to play drums. It was rather expensive at 75 bucks per lesson. That drummer had a busy life also and was not at all interested in people who took lessons "as a hobby". He wanted to see that his lessons were put into practice. So his attitude was to bombard me with exercises (sticking patterns) and techniques during 30 minutes and then told me to not come back until I could comfortably do everything he just taught me.
His idea was that the lesson was for theory, tips and technique. Not for practice. Practice was for on my own time.

Tennis coaching at the club player level shouldn't be much different imo. Not necessarily with the "don't come back until...", but the overall idea I think is very healthy. Why pay a coach to just do drills to implement what you have learned? You can - and SHOULD - do those drills on your own time.

 

[user92626]

I think a much bigger problem is students not properly practicing what they have learned.


The reason I mention this, is because it doesn't require 10 to 20 hours to explain him proper backhand grip. Nor does it take 50 to 100 hours to explain proper serve technique.
Showing / explaining him proper backhand grip takes just 5 minutes. It takes 10 to 20 hours of focused practice to implement it. Same for the serve.

I think that in general, the problem is not so much the coach who isn't communicating well but rather the students not putting in the required practice outside of the lesson court to put into practice what they've learned.

BEFORE a student can properly practice, they have to be taught and able to perform a task, in this case for example a serve, correctly.

If a coach could show me that after an hour with him I could perform a serve fundamentally correct, even weakly -- or I understand the path, the potential from there, then I would agree that it's a good coach and if I fail it's on me.

However, one time a self claim coach attempted to show me the first serve. I really listened but somehow we couldn't get a proper looking serve going, and he couldn't say more or elaborate or use analogies to progress. It was just the same wordings that failed us.

I see quite a few students taking lessons at the site I play. Day in and day out they still perform non-properly looking stuff under their coaches' watchful eyes. What are they going to practice on their own?

 

[mad dog1]

BEFORE a student can properly practice, they have to be taught and able to perform a task, in this case for example a serve, correctly.

If a coach could show me that after an hour with him I could perform a serve fundamentally correct, even weakly -- or I understand the path, the potential from there, then I would agree that it's a good coach and if I fail it's on me.

However, one time a self claim coach attempted to show me the first serve. I really listened but somehow we couldn't get a proper looking serve going, and he couldn't say more or elaborate or use analogies to progress. It was just the same wordings that failed us.

I see quite a few students taking lessons at the site I play. Day in and day out they still perform non-properly looking stuff under their coaches' watchful eyes. What are they going to practice on their own?

Sometimes the coach isn't very good, but often rec players lack the athleticism and coordination required for tennis. And they refuse to put in the time outside of lessons and work on improving their athleticism on their own time.

 

[mad dog1]

I think a much bigger problem is students not properly practicing what they have learned. Especially players like the OP who have "wrong" muscle memory to unlearn which they have been building up for years and years.

I have been "unofficially" coaching a few friends over the winter, mostly with some general tips etc.
One of them has 2 main problems: bad grip on his backhand and a "waiter tray" serve.
Neither are easy fixes. But I'm certain the backhand is easier to fix then his serve.

To "unlearn" the bad grip and "relearn" the good grip, I bet he could do it in 10 to 20 hours of practice. His footwork is ok, his forehand is ok and his body movement is ok. It's really just the grip.
His serve however... that thing needs to be deconstructed completely and rebuild from scratch. 10 hours will not suffice. We're looking more at 50 to 100.

The reason I mention this, is because it doesn't require 10 to 20 hours to explain him proper backhand grip. Nor does it take 50 to 100 hours to explain proper serve technique.
Showing / explaining him proper backhand grip takes just 5 minutes. It takes 10 to 20 hours of focused practice to implement it. Same for the serve.

I think that in general, the problem is not so much the coach who isn't communicating well but rather the students not putting in the required practice outside of the lesson court to put into practice what they've learned.

If my friend gets a private coaching lesson to fix his backhand grip and goes to court with friends the next day and just returns to his usual bad grip... that's not the coach's fault.

Whenever I see people take lessons and not progress, that's usually my observation... the students not putting into practice what the coaches have taught them... And just returning to their bad habits.




Sure. But as said, the coach doesn't have a magic wand. It's still you that's going to have to put it into practice. And 90% of that practice, will not be during lessons.

Back in the day I took private lessons to play drums. It was rather expensive at 75 bucks per lesson. That drummer had a busy life also and was not at all interested in people who took lessons "as a hobby". He wanted to see that his lessons were put into practice. So his attitude was to bombard me with exercises (sticking patterns) and techniques during 30 minutes and then told me to not come back until I could comfortably do everything he just taught me.
His idea was that the lesson was for theory, tips and technique. Not for practice. Practice was for on my own time.

Tennis coaching at the club player level shouldn't be much different imo. Not necessarily with the "don't come back until...", but the overall idea I think is very healthy. Why pay a coach to just do drills to implement what you have learned? You can - and SHOULD - do those drills on your own time.

great post. absolutely what i've experienced.

 

[user92626]

Sometimes the coach isn't very good, but often rec players lack the athleticism and coordination required for tennis. And they refuse to put in the time outside of lessons and work on improving their athleticism on their own time.

I guess in the end it's a joint effort and therefore joint success or failure.

Maybe one can't learn/perform, like a sort of handicap, and/or the coach can't teach.

 

[socallefty]

If a coach could show me that after an hour with him I could perform a serve fundamentally correct, even weakly -- or I understand the path, the potential from there, then I would agree that it's a good coach and if I fail it's on me.

Likely your serve has a lot of non-textbook aspects to it. Since the serve is the most complicated shot in tennis, no coach is going to be able to teach you how to hit a correct serve in one hour. That is a totally unrealistic expectation. The coach will diagnose the problems and start working on certain aspects of the serve to improve in one lesson based on what they think is highest priority or lowest hanging fruit. It will take multiple lessons and many hours of practice in between the lessons to work out all the kinks and develop a somewhat textbook serve.

You have the grip, the stance including body alignment on deuce/ad, the foot weight transfer, the toss, the leg drive, the hip/chest rotations, the body weight transfer forward/up, the takeback till trophy, the forward swing path including ISR/pronation, the followthrough, the different spins etc., etc. How are you going to fix an adult’s issues on all these points in one hour?

 

[ProStaffFanatic]

Likely your serve has a lot of non-textbook aspects to it. Since the serve is the most complicated shot in tennis, no coach is going to be able to teach you how to hit a correct serve in one hour. That is a totally unrealistic expectation. The coach will diagnose the problems and start working on certain aspects of the serve to improve in one lesson based on what they think is highest priority or lowest hanging fruit. It will take multiple lessons and many hours of practice in between the lessons to work out all the kinks and develop a somewhat textbook serve.

You have the grip, the stance including body alignment on deuce/ad, the foot weight transfer, the toss, the leg drive, the hip/chest rotations, the body weight transfer forward/up, the takeback till trophy, the forward swing path including ISR/pronation, the followthrough, the different spins etc., etc. How are you going to fix an adult’s issues on all these points in one hour?

Exactly. It is always going to be a phased approach.
Even with a blank slate that never touched a racket and thus hasn't developed any bad habits yet.

Consider how much time it takes a blank slate to develop a textbook serve, even assuming a super talent with awesome coordination and body control and what-not. Now add in the additional aspect of someone having to also unlearn bad habits.

Fixing a bad serve is easily one of the hardest things to do imo.

 

[mad dog1]

Exactly. It is always going to be a phased approach.
Even with a blank slate that never touched a racket and thus hasn't developed any bad habits yet.

Consider how much time it takes a blank slate to develop a textbook serve, even assuming a super talent with awesome coordination and body control and what-not. Now add in the additional aspect of someone having to also unlearn bad habits.

Fixing a bad serve is easily one of the hardest things to do imo.

Teaching someone to serve is very difficult. It helps if the person has good throwing mechanics for starters. It’s always painful to teach players to serve. Even with advanced high school players who have a solid serving motion already, getting them to change the swing path and keep the body more closed to hit the kick serve isn’t easy.