Junior group clinic: Is there such thing as too much points play?

[giantschwinn]

My kid goes to a local group clinic. He is about mid pack in terms of playing ability. They spend the majority of time playing points, king of the hill type of format. They drill some but the majority of time is spend playing points. My kid loves playing points and I am happy with his progress.
Recently a parent said he is pulling his kid out of the clinic and said they play too many points and not enough drills.

What do you think? Is there such thing as too much points play?
I often hear that juniors should do group lessons 2-3 times a week. But what exactly are they doing in these group lessons? What does a well run junior group lesson look like? Student to coach ratio per court?

 

[jdawgg]

I've seen lazy coaches (I used to be a coach) have kids play mostly points. It's really easy on the teaching pros that way. That said playing points is great and can be mixed up in a way that provides different aspects of the game (approach shot points, net points, etc), depends how it's setup.

My experience as a junior was that I got too many drills and not enough match play. That was my fault in the end as I should've been arranging more matches outside of junior team. I learned skills quickly but took a lot more time to learn how to win matches.

Having been in well run junior programs myself I would say there's a lot of drills. They're great for sharpening skills in a way a match could never provide.

That said it could also depend where the student is at in their game. Price of lessons might also be a factor as well. So in the end my answer is... it depends.

 

[giantschwinn]

Great feedback.
Do you see a difference between match play and points play? My kid does points play, but almost no match play. Points play is instant gratification, but match play is more about enduring and finding your way out of a problem. Would you agree?

 

[jdawgg]

Yeah, there's definitely a difference. I didn't do a good job differentiating the two in my post. Drills can sharpen skills better than points and/or matches.

I'd agree with that on some levels.

 

[S&V-not_dead_yet]

My kid goes to a local group clinic. He is about mid pack in terms of playing ability. They spend the majority of time playing points, king of the hill type of format. They drill some but the majority of time is spend playing points. My kid loves playing points and I am happy with his progress.
Recently a parent said he is pulling his kid out of the clinic and said they play too many points and not enough drills.

What do you think? Is there such thing as too much points play?
I often hear that juniors should do group lessons 2-3 times a week. But what exactly are they doing in these group lessons? What does a well run junior group lesson look like? Student to coach ratio per court?

If all he does is the clinic then I think a balance would be more helpful.

But if he does other things like lessons and drills, then the clinic may be just perfect [a fun outlet].

 

[3loudboys]

The good coaches that my sons have had in the past have a lesson plan with specific teaching points that are developed through the lesson, culminating in point play in the latter part with emphasis on that which has been taught. I would be looking for something on those lines unless this is a purely point play session in addition to structured technical group work. It sounds like it has benefit though if you think your son is developing well. Maybe chat with the coach to see what his objectives for the players are.



Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk

 

[Happi]

I would add that perhaps the most important thing is that your kid is having fun and enjoying tennis, and finding good friends. Way too many juniors quit the game too early.

 

[3loudboys]

I would add that perhaps the most important thing is that your kid is having fun and enjoying tennis, and finding good friends. Way too many juniors quit the game too early.

100% - the kids have to enjoy the training and meeting up with their friends at squads.

Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk

 

[3loudboys]

Two of my boys and a friend went to my club tonight and played points between them, champion format and then a set without any coach involved and had an absolute ball. Whilst the usual groans emerged after a bad shot or an annoying miss, they all came off smiling, and from where I was stood played some great tennis. The motto being, sometimes they can organise themselves as well and get a lot from it, bonding as a team in an individual sport and quality point play. This maybe something that you can organise for your son?

 

[AlexSV]

As an outside observer, I think it may be age specific. The older groups seem to focus on points. The younger groups seem to have more time spent on developing skills.

I see a lot of the better kids getting one-on-one lessons outside the groups. Those are more focused drills.

Depending on your goals, you may have to consider the groups are for points and you need time outside the group lessons for focused development.

 

[giantschwinn]

This maybe something that you can organise for your son?

This is definitely something I want to do more of when my kid gets older. In the US, USTA suggests juniors to have 2-3 group lessons a week. I think that's a little excessive and potentially a waste of time if the group lessons are not well run (most are). I wonder what's your opinion on the 2-3 group lessons idea.

 

[Hansen]

you can´t focuse on technique with 3 or more players on the court if you want to avoid cohort training (which should be a goal). single lessons are a must for correct technique, there is no way around that, except the kid is a prodigy, which means he will get single training anyway.

 

[3loudboys]

This is definitely something I want to do more of when my kid gets older. In the US, USTA suggests juniors to have 2-3 group lessons a week. I think that's a little excessive and potentially a waste of time if the group lessons are not well run (most are). I wonder what's your opinion on the 2-3 group lessons idea.

My youngest has three 1.5 or 2 hour squads a week and he organises hits with friends as well. He's 13 and he can take himself there with his mates which is great as he takes on a lot more responsibility. He is lucky because all the players are either just above him age or toward 16/17 meaning hes getting a quality hit up with peers. I just spoke to him now after one session and he was really happy, in fact wanted to organise a hit with his friend this afternoon! Hes got a tiny niggle on his heel so suggested he just take it easy. Best thing is he has made friends and has options. So, long way round to answering your question, 2 to 3 squads is good so long as its purposeful with kids of similar or ability just above. They have to be enjoying it as well so not easy to get everything you want but worth the extra effort researching.

Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk

 

[dominikk1985]

Not coaching tennis but when I am coaching my baseball kids for about 90 minutes, I'm doing 10 minutes warm up stuff, then I'm doing 20 minutes of intense mechanics drilling and the final hour is mostly play. You need drilling to get better but kids will not love that. So basically the deal with them is they have to focus 20 minutes really hard on technique and then as a "reward" they get to play.

So if you have a one hour group lesson I would do 5 minutes warm up, about 10-15m intense mechanics drilling (with lots of reps and good focus) and then play. However try to create play in a way that reinforces what you have drilled.

 

[Ash_Smith]

The "format" of the session is lmost never the issue - what goes alongside the format is the key - environment, brief, feedback loop, review, reflection etc. Blocked practice can be perfectly worthless as can "just play some points", but both can be equally worthwhile when the purpose is clearly defined and the support mechanism around it is well thought through.

Personally, I tend towards keeping the format as close to competition format as possible becasue we know from skill acquisition research that that is optimal. Plus, tennis needs to get away from the idea that you go to coaching every week and that's your tennis. If you play football, you go to training on a wednesday night because you have match on Saturday. If you go to tennis coaching on a wednesday night, it's because you have coaching on a wednesday night. We needs kids to understand that you have tennis coaching because you want to get better at playing tennis, not get better at being coached tennis. Kids also don't seem to have "free-play" built into their training programmes either - which is also essential.

 

[Ash_Smith]

Having been in well run junior programs myself I would say there's a lot of drills. They're great for sharpening skills in a way a match could never provide.

Excdept of course if the "drills" bear no relation to situations which actually occur when playing tennis, in which case they are useless for sharpening skills and actually playing a match would do a much better job (providing you focus on the thing you want to sharpen).

 

[Ash_Smith]

you can´t focuse on technique with 3 or more players on the court if you want to avoid cohort training (which should be a goal). single lessons are a must for correct technique, there is no way around that, except the kid is a prodigy, which means he will get single training anyway.

1. Define "correct" technique
2. "single lessons are a must for correct technique, there is no way around that" - 100% not true

 

[Happi]

The "format" of the session is lmost never the issue - what goes alongside the format is the key - environment, brief, feedback loop, review, reflection etc. Blocked practice can be perfectly worthless as can "just play some points", but both can be equally worthwhile when the purpose is clearly defined and the support mechanism around it is well thought through.

Personally, I tend towards keeping the format as close to competition format as possible becasue we know from skill acquisition research that that is optimal. Plus, tennis needs to get away from the idea that you go to coaching every week and that's your tennis. If you play football, you go to training on a wednesday night because you have match on Saturday. If you go to tennis coaching on a wednesday night, it's because you have coaching on a wednesday night. We needs kids to understand that you have tennis coaching because you want to get better at playing tennis, not get better at being coached tennis. Kids also don't seem to have "free-play" built into their training programmes either - which is also essential.

@Ash_Smith while I understand your viewpoints, allow me to be in the other camp here.

In another sport I played at the highest level, playing teamsport for big crowds. When I look back at my career, and talk to my former teammates (we are still very good friends, and ofte meet up), we never talk about the wins or losses, the big matches for the national championsship - what we talk about has little to do with the competitions. Looking back and using your example: Wednesday was just as important as Saturday (training was actually much more fun than competition).

Now reflecting on my new sport, I would emphasis that tennis is so much more than competing. Forget about all that focus on competition, it's really not that important. I have seen many talented juniors who really love the game, but cand handle all the pressure of competition. My advice is forget about all that focus on winning and focus getting better at the sport, look at your teammates as friends (not as competitors). Enjoying a sport should be the driving force not the ambition of winning (ie parents).

Reading zen in the Art of Archery changed my perspective on sports.

Cheers, H

 

[Happi]

Excdept of course if the "drills" bear no relation to situations which actually occur when playing tennis, in which case they are useless for sharpening skills and actually playing a match would do a much better job (providing you focus on the thing you want to sharpen).

A good coach would do drills that simulate playing patterns, that can easily be adapted in tennis matches. Kind of like knowing pattern in chess.

 

[3loudboys]

@Ash_Smith while I understand your viewpoints, allow me to be in the other camp here.

In another sport I played at the highest level, playing teamsport for big crowds. When I look back at my career, and talk to my former teammates (we are still very good friends, and ofte meet up), we never talk about the wins or losses, the big matches for the national championsship - what we talk about has little to do with the competitions. Looking back and using your example: Wednesday was just as important as Saturday (training was actually much more fun than competition).

Now reflecting on my new sport, I would emphasis that tennis is so much more than competing. Forget about all that focus on competition, it's really not that important. I have seen many talented juniors who really love the game, but cand handle all the pressure of competition. My advice is forget about all that focus on winning and focus getting better at the sport, look at your teammates as friends (not as competitors). Enjoying a sport should be the driving force not the ambition of winning (ie parents).

Reading zen in the Art of Archery changed my perspective on sports.

Cheers, H

Completely agree H, enjoy training, focus on improving your game and the results will come. A Happi player is a good player [emoji846]. My son did the last U12 national and it was sad to see so many young athletes prowling and scowling around the facilities.

What sport did you compete in - sounds like you were right up there.

Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk

 

[Hansen]

1. Define "correct" technique
2. "single lessons are a must for correct technique, there is no way around that" - 100% not true

1. technical flaws that are a performance bottleneck are eleminated completely (like raonics backhand, gulbis forehand etc.)
2. its really hard if not impossible to adress individual technical flaws in a group setting, especially if you want to keep the training close to competition

 

[giantschwinn]

dvice is forget about all that focus on winning and focus getting better at the sport, look at your teammates as friends (not as competitors). Enjoying a sport should be the driving force not the ambition of winning (ie parents).

This is such a good advice. Parents of junior tennis players are often very protectively of information. I'm sometimes guilty of this.

 

[giantschwinn]

3loudboys said it best. If the group lesson offered aren't up to par, make your own group.

 

[Paul Y]

We also create our own group away from the major group lessons. The group lessons where I'm at are 3 kids to 1 coach on court so I guess its a little different from what giantschwinn has. They focus on playing points mostly like king of the hill but there is an improvement court focus on skills. Self feed ins so the coaches can watch the players play out points to help them between points. The coaches at our club will focus on helping two kids on the 3rd court on things they see need improving. Always 3 coaches on 3 courts with 9 kids total but its more like 4 on 1, 3 on another and 2 on the last court. Its an interesting format they have but the kids really like it.

On privates though, our coach has an action plan and gives homework to the players to work on. He also engages the parent if possible if they would like to help keep an eye with video that they would send to the coach after groups or private hits. This allows the coach to review some of the video and see how the player is improving before the next lesson. He does it on his own time and doesn't charge for the video review which is a relief since lessons are expensive. All and all it all depends on how much the parent is engaged with our coach.

 

[jdawgg]

Excdept of course if the "drills" bear no relation to situations which actually occur when playing tennis, in which case they are useless for sharpening skills and actually playing a match would do a much better job (providing you focus on the thing you want to sharpen).

It's an interesting situation to try to get a very competitive player to focus on improving a skill during a match. Especially for the first time. Does a "drill" encompass isolating a shot in a student/coach situation?

What's your thoughts on this quote from ITF Biomechanics of Advanced Tennis by Bruce Elliot, Machar Reid and Miguel Crespo?

GBA = game based approach:

"In investigating the effect the teaching approach used (technique versus GBA approach) had on tactical decision-making and stroke execution during game play, McPherson and French (1991) found that players taught with the former approach improved their tennis skills and cognitive decision-making, while players taught with the GBA planned a greater number of tactical responses but did not improve their tennis skills until they were taught directly. In a similarly equivocal finding, Turner (2003) reported that at the very least the GBA offers a viable alternative for tennis instruction to the technique approach."

 

[socallefty]

The better your tennis technique and skills, the more tactical and strategic options you have in a match and so, kids need to do a lot of drills to get good technique. On the other hand, winning points and matches requires new skills (problem-solving, making adjustments to different styles, shot tolerance under pressure, handling stress, staying at optimal stimulation/relaxation, taking calculated risks at big moments etc.) and match play is also needed to learn how to win and also learn how to lose without getting disheartened and how to learn/recover from losses quickly. So, you need a combination of drills/lessons and point/match play to keep improving as a tennis player. Hopefully, a good coach also learns to do both in a fun way that kids enjoy so that they learn to love tennis and make it a lifelong hobby which is more important than anything else.

Most points in tennis at all levels in a match end within four shots and the serve and the return are the two most important shots in tennis. I don’t see coaches doing enough drills on serves, returns and serve+1, return+1 shot patterns - there is always too much focus on groundstroke technique and not enough on using serves and returns to set up favorable point patterns. Coaches seem to just use point play/matches without much coaching to teach this and this can be done better.

 

[3loudboys]

The better your tennis technique and skills, the more tactical and strategic options you have in a match and so, kids need to do a lot of drills to get good technique. On the other hand, winning points and matches requires new skills (problem-solving, making adjustments to different styles, shot tolerance under pressure, handling stress, staying at optimal stimulation/relaxation, taking calculated risks at big moments etc.) and match play is also needed to learn how to win and also learn how to lose without getting disheartened and how to learn/recover from losses quickly. So, you need a combination of drills/lessons and point/match play to keep improving as a tennis player. Hopefully, a good coach also learns to do both in a fun way that kids enjoy so that they learn to love tennis and make it a lifelong hobby which is more important than anything else.

Most points in tennis at all levels in a match end within four shots and the serve and the return are the two most important shots in tennis. I don’t see coaches doing enough drills on serves, returns and serve+1, return+1 shot patterns - there is always too much focus on groundstroke technique and not enough on using serves and returns to set up favorable point patterns. Coaches seem to just use point play/matches without much coaching to teach this and this can be done better.

Agree with lack of emphasis on serve and return. These shots definitely need more attention as they are arguably more important than groundies. A very good serve or return can negate the need for a groundstroke or at least set you up in a favourable position at the start of a point.

Sent from my SM-A705FN using Tapatalk