this is psychological personal account that i'd want people to consider and give their own opinions. (ALL recommendations will be taken into thought.): i once argued with my private trainer about the issue of: (me) - being consistent VS. (what she calls) "controlled aggression" consistency: isn't being consistent in keeping all the balls in the court, what really matters? yes and no. yes, as in it's good to keep the ball in. no, as in you cant win with consistency alone? "controlled aggression": this is the idea and raw-core base fundamental of what i was taught in tennis. learning how to hit the ball at relative fast pace, but having the ability to control the ball. (and yes, this playing style will at first hit everything into the net or long/over the fence; when you first start this, you have to practice.. ALOT.) ~~~ at the time i argued about this i was blinded by self ignorance.. (i have reformed myself quite a bit in one year. lol.) but these are completely different aspects now, aren't they? i beleive so now, even though i argued that consistency was more important at the time and the both was the same. it's clearly not. with the latter your able to be bolder and confident in taking what would seem a "winner" or "fast shot" from a opponents perspective. when i had emerged from my first two months of training and went back to school, my coach always complained to me that i was hitting the ball WAY too hard during practices. which if i recall, occasionaly i would. but wouldnt most people agree that, if you had too stoop down to another person(s) level, it would appear just as so if you were trying to hit winners all the time? it appeared that way to my team and coach, cause i had been playing with people who was twice/thrice and qaudruple as good as me when under my trainer. now isnt this arguable? to keep up with the way more experienced, you have to be more aggressive (most of the time playing at your hardest level to keep up). my coach beleived in plain "consistency" as in getting the ball in (hitting it soft if needed, which delivered our team no justice most of the time in matches) while my trainer beleived in "controlled aggression" which my coach literally denied me my training style; most of the time cause i was trying to hit the ball so hard, when i was practicing with people under my level. now wouldn't i have the right to be overpowering if i beleived in "controlled aggression"? because my playing style, it's mindset demands that i must play aggressive but be able to control it? my coach never really liked how i would normally throw away points (and matches) because of my reckless playing, but he hardly ever gave me the chance to try to perfect my flaws in practice. am i wrong or my coach? he was most of the time dissapointed in me for losing the majority of my season matches (in my senior year i lost all my singles, and was stuck with a VERY inexperienced doubles partner majority of the season. i also went from #1 at my school to #6 for my losing record, and i was psychologically depressed from a losing streak), and which my trainer dissapointedly saw me lose some and lectured me. but my trainer also knew i wasn't getting the same quality practices that i should be getting when wit her. one thing that bothered me though was that my coach was always marveled at when i made my winning shots (which he never let me practice) and aces cause compared to my team it was quite un-paralleled. why? simply because i was the aggressor, and had a different mindset than my team. to win in tennis, you have to be aggressive. right? Now, i need anyone's opinions on if they beleive in which is better?: "Consistency" or "Controlled Aggression" because i do plan on going back to my high school and help volunteer on improving and teaching basic fundamentals in tennis to students on the team; and need your people's opinions on how to approach the matter of which mindset may be better to start out with when freshly starting out tennis?