The Myth of Teaching Tennis Technique

Dragy

Legend
Papa mango was demoing some sticks and he had some light weight Prince noodle strung at girly tensions. I will spare you the vid because it was horrible. Even the backhand was sailing. Can’t stand it when the strings give at contact
Like it hard, hug?
 

Dragy

Legend
Yep. Better players like to feel “ball pocketing” but to me its just trampolining that changes each shot and messes up my confidence
Stringwise, I agree, but 18x29 solves this quite a bit.

But frames with lower flex have less trampoline. I came back to Gravity Pros with ~340 SW, and they smoothly drive the ball if hit properly.

But I haven’t played with stiff frames for quite a bit, Speed MP and Ezone DR98 were the stiffest in several years now.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Papa mango was demoing some sticks and he had some light weight Prince noodle strung at girly tensions. I will spare you the vid because it was horrible. Even the backhand was sailing. Can’t stand it when the strings give at contact
Wilson Hyperhammer 5.3 stretch weighted to 387g. Extended to 28.75" with a 459sw (Briffidi SW1). 5.75" squarish grip Ashaway Kevlar 16g/Lux 4g 16g @ 86/86lbs.
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
Stringwise, I agree, but 18x29 solves this quite a bit.

But frames with lower flex have less trampoline. I came back to Gravity Pros with ~340 SW, and they smoothly drive the ball if hit properly.

But I haven’t played with stiff frames for quite a bit, Speed MP and Ezone DR98 were the stiffest in several years now.
wow, what stick is 18x29? Maybe lower flex has less trampoline but I typically add 30 plus grams at the hoop so flex is more than normal. Maybe flex and trampoline are two different things, but any way you call it, I am sensitive to any bending of the frame or the strings or both. For example, the RF97A is considered on the stiff side, but man when I fixed it with weight, it would flex in the hoop and drove me nuts...
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
Even though it may sound strange, after many years of coaching tennis, I have come to the conclusion that:




We don't need to teach technique; instead, we must develop it.




And the difference between teaching and developing is significant. All the skills required to play tennis are based on fundamental abilities such as throwing, catching, hitting (a combination of catching and throwing), and running. Therefore, there's no need to teach anything; it has all been there for hundred thousand of years. The only thing to do is to adjust these skills to the timing of the ball and monitor the evolution through the trial-and-error process: try, fail, try again, fail better.




For years, the focus of tennis coaching has been on providing children and players with technical tools to play. Personally, I was part of that large group of coaches concerned with "rotate, step, hit, followthrough."




Many players, regardless of age or level, come to my academy, attempting and succeeding in executing good technical movements but devoid of the basic tactical decision of placing the ball into the court limits. All of them have been taught the "ideal" technique, and the moment a slight variation in conditions occurs, their strokes fail to adapt, leading to collapse and loss of confidence.




On the contrary, developing strokes means nurturing them like an onion, layer by layer, going through all the necessary stages, and always adhering to four fundamental principles:




1. Vision


2. Timing


3. Touch


4. Tactics





T hese four items, although they may seem obvious, are not so in practice. Very few players master all four points. It is nearly impossible to consistently master timing if I don't watch the ball, nor can I have good touch without proper timing, and I can't make good tactical decisions without the preceding elements.




1. Vision:


Everything, absolutely everything, starts from vision. Very few players watch the ball correctly, neither when they hit nor when the opponent hits. How and where I look at the ball will determine the proper activation and organization of my legs to achieve the correct distance from the ball and establish the swing's rhythm. Some might argue that you can't see the ball at the contact point, and that's true, but you can predict when the ball will be in the ideal position. The more I try to see the ball before impact, the better the prediction, and the better the timing.




2. Timing:


It is doing something at the right moment. In tennis, it's about hitting the ball at the most opportune point for me, and that is achieved by watching the ball and choosing the moment of impact. Timing is 100% related to the quality of vision. If I look well, I choose well, and if I choose well, I have good "touch."




3. Touch:


Let's say that "touch" is the dialogue between my hand and the racket, the sensitivity to feel that I can decide to hit the ball hard or caress it gently. If I have a good touch, the ball will do what I command. Touch is the seed of technique; it just needs to grow and develop through tactics.




4. Tactics:


It is the intention, what I want the ball to do in that stroke: cross-court, down-the-line, deep, short, etc. If I change my tactical intention, then the movement will naturally be organized completely differently. If I want to hit a quick and flat shot, I will organize my movement differently from when I want to hit a topspin lob.




These four factors are, in my opinion, the most important, although there may be others.




So, how do I develop the shots technique based on these four factors? In reality, it is straightforward. If I look at the ball well, I achieve a good distance; if I achieve a good distance, I can choose/intuit (depending on the level) when to hit; if I can choose/intuit when to hit, the rhythm and swing of the arm will adjust to the tactical intention. And the followthrough? Believe me, if we do all of the above, there won't even be a need to mention the followthrough. The secret lies in having patience and giving the player a tactical challenge slightly above their current technical abilities, pushing them to find technical solutions within their reach to achieve it, guiding them to solve it but never telling them how.




The body is tremendously intelligent when it comes to organizing movements; it has been doing so for millions of years. We just need to give it a goal, and sooner or later, it will find the solution. By following this development system, the player will achieve a greater body awareness that will greatly facilitate any future adjustments that may be necessary if they reach a high level of performance.




Just as when you plant an apple seed, you don't expect to harvest tomorrow; you have to plant the seed of technique and take care of it, let it grow. Your best technique will happen when you are ready for it; the apple will simply fall when it is ripe.




Trying, failing, trying better, failing better—error as a teacher and not as a factor of incompetence. But that's a topic for another blog."
on the vision, if you are good at hitting the sweet spot, is that an indicator or is there more to it? How can one improve hitting the center. Also is the center the goal? Oscar Wagner said pros hit the bottom of the stringbed and not the center.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
on the vision, if you are good at hitting the sweet spot, is that an indicator or is there more to it? How can one improve hitting the center. Also is the center the goal? Oscar Wagner said pros hit the bottom of the stringbed and not the center.
Not at all. It was Oscar Wegner who said that.

BTW, you should also clarify what bottom means. In his usage, it meant the bottom with the racket horizontal.
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
Not at all. It was Oscar Wegner who said that.

BTW, you should also clarify what bottom means. In his usage, it meant the bottom with the racket horizontal.
yeah I thought it was Wegner but it comes up underlined and Wagner doesn't so I went with Wagner, but yes you are right. On the second point I am betting the OP knows exactly what Wegner meant but thanks for the clarification.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
yeah I thought it was Wegner but it comes up underlined and Wagner doesn't so I went with Wagner, but yes you are right. On the second point I am betting the OP knows exactly what Wegner meant but thanks for the clarification.
The clarification was needed due to a different reason. Sometimes, people say that pros hit the serve slightly above the sweetspot. Reviewers also say that the new model has a higher sweetspot. In that case, higher means with racket vertical.

I remember in the old days here when you were still a kid there were massive debates about this and invariably the two usages would get confused.
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
The clarification was needed due to a different reason. Sometimes, people say that pros hit the serve slightly above the sweetspot. Reviewers also say that the new model has a higher sweetspot. In that case, higher means with racket vertical.

I remember in the old days here when you were still a kid there were massive debates about this and invariably the two usages would get confused.
Thanks it makes sense. You must be taking your meds again.
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
We need to hit again too amigo. Someday!
Would love that though in case you haven't heard, I am not exactly the player I was but getting better:

BTW jump on that supposed kicker mango will try :)
 

Dragy

Legend
on the vision, if you are good at hitting the sweet spot, is that an indicator or is there more to it? How can one improve hitting the center. Also is the center the goal? Oscar Wagner said pros hit the bottom of the stringbed and not the center.
@JohnYandell said it’s not true based on footage he made over years.
 

peoplespeace

Professional
<We don't need to teach technique; instead, we must develop it.

Teaching - Organized sharing of knowledge, skill and experience.
Is it not true that the method used for developing technique is to teach it in the first place ?

>The only thing to do is to adjust these skills to the timing of the ball and monitor the evolution through the trial-and-error process
How much to adjust? What's the size of the error? Doesn't it require prior experience and knowledge? Isn't sharing of that prior experience and knowledge teaching? Study of previous research is the first principle of scientific discovery.

>The body is tremendously intelligent when it comes to organizing movements.
What evidence supports this assertion? Every champion in every skill has had great teachers early on to put the student on the right path. What explains why 99.99% of the folks who didn't hire someone to teach them are stuck at near beginner level for eternity?
Most pro players have been part of the assembly line method for several years until they became much better than 99.99 % of the other kids. So u cant claim thst the coach way great. A great piano teacher or table tennis coach develop one pro but the rest will be very high level, not stuck at a very low level like in tennis. There are no great tennis coaches becus a succesful system to teach TECHNIQUE has not been developped yet, contrary to All other sports and eg piano. OPs attempt at something is too simplistic and basically goes in the wrong direction.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
i CAN hit without the chicken wing but it takes a conscious effort. But in a match I am sure I revert because that is the natural thing...said another way I don't think the racquet weight has anything to do with it.

But who knows? I can't seem to play light racquets without the ball sailing.
He was not referring to you.

Heavier racquet allows the racquet to win the collision with the ball.

Fusing elbow with torso makes it easier to manipulate the heavier racquet in a controlled manner.

When constantly challenging the body to play points against players with far superior technique, the body naturally finds a way to compete.
 

ChaelAZ

G.O.A.T.
Would love that though in case you haven't heard, I am not exactly the player I was but getting better:


Dang, I hadn't seen that! Well keep getting better man!
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
He was not referring to you.

Heavier racquet allows the racquet to win the collision with the ball.

Fusing elbow with torso makes it easier to manipulate the heavier racquet in a controlled manner.

When constantly challenging the body to play points against players with far superior technique, the body naturally finds a way to compete.
Everything going over my head :(
 

Shroud

Talk Tennis Guru
Heavy = racquet has more inertia = racquet deflects less through contact, esp on off center hits

Fusing elbow with torso = stabilize shoulder joint = reduce degrees of freedom
Thanks though I was talking about Dragy's joke and the chicken wing comment not being a reference to me, being what was going over my head.
 

JohnYandell

Hall of Fame
Suresh,
Na. The ball embedded deeply in the strings where ever it impacted. Despite the claims of a few it never rolled on the string bed.
 

Digital Atheist

Hall of Fame
Would love that though in case you haven't heard, I am not exactly the player I was but getting better:

BTW jump on that supposed kicker mango will try :)
Man,so sorry to hear bout that. Good to hear you are on the mend.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Suresh,
Na. The ball embedded deeply in the strings where ever it impacted. Despite the claims of a few it never rolled on the string bed.

Could this principle have been confused with the snapback that happens with poly strings?

I think a maximum of only 2 mm downwards slide during dwell time was seen in some study (maybe TWU).

The claim about snapback is that the poly snaps back and adds further spin to the ball. But others claim that the ball is long gone by then.
 

Dragy

Legend
The claim about snapback is that the poly snaps back and adds further spin to the ball. But others claim that the ball is long gone by then.
I believe that it’s established that between strings, frame and the ball itself which deform and then regain their shape, it’s strings which have shortest cycle, so strings actually have effect, both recoiling from pocketing the ball and moving laterally. Everything else only regains it’s shape after the ball is gone.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
I believe that it’s established that between strings, frame and the ball itself which deform and then regain their shape, it’s strings which have shortest cycle, so strings actually have effect, both recoiling from pocketing the ball and moving laterally. Everything else only regains it’s shape after the ball is gone.
But if you look at strings after a couple of hours of play, they have generally been displaced in some way. Mine are arched towards the tip of the head. If they snapped back, why do players have to keep adjusting their strings all the time to make them parallel in a straight line?
 

Dragy

Legend
But if you look at strings after a couple of hours of play, they have generally been displaced in some way. Mine are arched towards the tip of the head. If they snapped back, why do players have to keep adjusting their strings all the time to make them parallel in a straight line?
My poly strings are usually perfectly in place unless I play like 20 hours with same stringjob.

As for other strings, they get displaced much more significantly during ball impact, then snap back, but just not always all the way to perfect alignment, when they are not poly = less slick.
 

onehandbh

G.O.A.T.
Even though it may sound strange, after many years of coaching tennis, I have come to the conclusion that:

We don't need to teach technique; instead, we must develop it.

And the difference between teaching and developing is significant. All the skills required to play tennis are based on fundamental abilities such as throwing, catching, hitting (a combination of catching and throwing), and running. Therefore, there's no need to teach anything; it has all been there for hundred thousand of years. The only thing to do is to adjust these skills to the timing of the ball and monitor the evolution through the trial-and-error process: try, fail, try again, fail better.

For years, the focus of tennis coaching has been on providing children and players with technical tools to play. Personally, I was part of that large group of coaches concerned with "rotate, step, hit, followthrough."

Many players, regardless of age or level, come to my academy, attempting and succeeding in executing good technical movements but devoid of the basic tactical decision of placing the ball into the court limits. All of them have been taught the "ideal" technique, and the moment a slight variation in conditions occurs, their strokes fail to adapt, leading to collapse and loss of confidence.

On the contrary, developing strokes means nurturing them like an onion, layer by layer, going through all the necessary stages, and always adhering to four fundamental principles:

1. Vision

2. Timing

3. Touch

4. Tactics


T hese four items, although they may seem obvious, are not so in practice. Very few players master all four points. It is nearly impossible to consistently master timing if I don't watch the ball, nor can I have good touch without proper timing, and I can't make good tactical decisions without the preceding elements.

1. Vision:

Everything, absolutely everything, starts from vision. Very few players watch the ball correctly, neither when they hit nor when the opponent hits. How and where I look at the ball will determine the proper activation and organization of my legs to achieve the correct distance from the ball and establish the swing's rhythm. Some might argue that you can't see the ball at the contact point, and that's true, but you can predict when the ball will be in the ideal position. The more I try to see the ball before impact, the better the prediction, and the better the timing.

2. Timing:

It is doing something at the right moment. In tennis, it's about hitting the ball at the most opportune point for me, and that is achieved by watching the ball and choosing the moment of impact. Timing is 100% related to the quality of vision. If I look well, I choose well, and if I choose well, I have good "touch."

3. Touch:

Let's say that "touch" is the dialogue between my hand and the racket, the sensitivity to feel that I can decide to hit the ball hard or caress it gently. If I have a good touch, the ball will do what I command. Touch is the seed of technique; it just needs to grow and develop through tactics.

4. Tactics:

It is the intention, what I want the ball to do in that stroke: cross-court, down-the-line, deep, short, etc. If I change my tactical intention, then the movement will naturally be organized completely differently. If I want to hit a quick and flat shot, I will organize my movement differently from when I want to hit a topspin lob.

These four factors are, in my opinion, the most important, although there may be others.

So, how do I develop the shots technique based on these four factors? In reality, it is straightforward. If I look at the ball well, I achieve a good distance; if I achieve a good distance, I can choose/intuit (depending on the level) when to hit; if I can choose/intuit when to hit, the rhythm and swing of the arm will adjust to the tactical intention. And the followthrough? Believe me, if we do all of the above, there won't even be a need to mention the followthrough. The secret lies in having patience and giving the player a tactical challenge slightly above their current technical abilities, pushing them to find technical solutions within their reach to achieve it, guiding them to solve it but never telling them how.

The body is tremendously intelligent when it comes to organizing movements; it has been doing so for millions of years. We just need to give it a goal, and sooner or later, it will find the solution. By following this development system, the player will achieve a greater body awareness that will greatly facilitate any future adjustments that may be necessary if they reach a high level of performance.

Just as when you plant an apple seed, you don't expect to harvest tomorrow; you have to plant the seed of technique and take care of it, let it grow. Your best technique will happen when you are ready for it; the apple will simply fall when it is ripe.

Trying, failing, trying better, failing better—error as a teacher and not as a factor of incompetence. But that's a topic for another blog."
I love your approach to learning tennis. I'll try it out with my kid who is just starting. I'll think of some games to get him to instinctively learn these things on his own.

Reminds me of my high school calculus teacher. We did use a book at all for the 1st semester. Instead we had discussions and he presented problems to us to solve. We broke up into groups of 2-3 people and then would work on solutions. Every few days or a week, each group would present their solution to the class and the class would discuss whether it would work or not. It was one of the best math classes I have ever had. We derived many of basic foundations of calculus from a real-world point of view and it stuck in all our minds.

How can this be applied to an adult? For example, my spacing on my forehand tends to be too cramped, and sometimes my contact is a little late and my wrist/hands gets too far ahead of my elbow. I'd also like to improve my footwork so that I can take more balls in my comfort zone. (waist to shoulder height).
 
Top