To Tennismastery with love

[AndyFitzell]

I recently started a thread to comment on some posts made by alias "Tennismastery" concerning Vic Braden and his teaching staff. Apparently TW lost the last few days of posts so I am again starting the thread.

The purpose of my original letter was to comment on some things written about Vic Braden and his pros that were untrue and to clarify certain facts.  I didn’t join this message board to “slam” Tennismastery as someone replied.  I wanted to make it clear that he was never the head pro of the The Vic Braden Tennis College and show how as a former employee of our facility might have some bias.
 
I said that Tennismastery appeared “a bit disgruntled” because I have good reason, if he is not, then that is great.  I have never labeled anyone else as being so.
 
Tennismastery, I believe it is unfair to turn things around and call the attacked the attacker.  I’m only defending Vic Braden and his pros against things you have said that I don’t believe to be true.  I used the words “verbal garbage” because that is my opinion of it.  YOU, TENNISMASTERY, personally attacked us, I am simply defending myself and others that you unfairly label in your following comments….
 
“I can say that a great number of players have been misled by the very closed-minded, ‘must teach the Braden way or no way’ mentality.”-Tennismastery
 
“The problem I have is that those who follow Braden follow almost blindly.”-Tennis mastery
 
“The pros I have seen at the Braden College have no recourse than to teach his methodology.”-Tennismastery
 
“They often are closed minded and have answers such as ‘the pros are doing it wrong’ when asked why the pros do it differently than the way Braden proposes.”-Tennismastery  (That one made me laugh actually)
 
Are these personal attacks?  Are these comments “unpleasant”?  You all can decide, but I believe so because they are untrue.
 
You have also stated in other posts….
 
“Actually, Vic has not trained a top ranked junior or adult in the last twenty years.”-Tennismastery
 
Well, I was trained exclusively by Vic in So Cal and by his pros in Utah and I was top 20 in So Cal, had a national ranking, played Division I college tennis, and play in pro futures events.  So you have misrepresented Vic already! 
 
Vic has also trained some of the best coaches who continue to teach based on his research.  Steve Smith is one of the best coaches I know and was trained by Vic and continues to teach his ‘methods.’  Craig Tiley, who was trained by Steve has taken his players while at Illinois to Florida to work with both Steve and Vic together.  They turned out to be pretty good players if I remember correctly.
 
Tennismastery has also stated….
 
“Like so many other parts of high performance tennis, Braden is very wrong about the volley progression.”-Tennismastery
 
“You really gotta stop believing that Braden is the prophet of tennis! (I was the head pro at one of his facilities and have witnessed the blind following of people like yourself, without looking further for the facts.” -Tennismastery
 
“From the stand point of reaching your true potential and playing at higher levels of play, avoid the Braden tapes. You will find them full of techniques that counter that which most all top teaching pros teach and what almost all top playing pros do.” -Tennismastery
 
Are these statements pleasant or unpleasant?  Are they true? You decide.
 
I think I was justified in making the comments that I have made to defend Vic Braden and his staff.
 
I am pleased that Tennismastery has agreed to an open public debate.  I am eager to see what his trained eye has viewed after looking at over 4000 video clips and having worked with over 3000 players. I can say I have seen my fair share of video and work with many skilled players, but I don't keep a running tab as does Tennismastery. But again, the human eye is not able to quantify forces so video is not always the answer. Vic Braden will be in Utah in September and October as usual so we can plan a time.  I think it would be great to have a live camera feed to the internet so that others might be able to view and learn.  After reading various posts here I feel there is much misconception about Vic Braden and the “Modern Game,” and I think it would help others to see how Vic is still one of the top coaches at the forefront of new information. 
 
I must say I am guilty of promoting our Tennis College, but hey isn’t this forum about tennis tips etc?  I know Tennismastery has done the same.
 
When it comes down to it, playing tennis well at any level is a physics problem.  No coach can dictate stroke production, physical laws do.  The best players in the world are those who obey these laws.  Although the game is evolving and becoming faster, there are certain physical laws that must be obeyed to produce certain outcomes.
 
We have no problem with anyone expressing an opinion or challenging or changing anything we say.  It is just important that people have specific data to back up their rationale, that’s all.


 

 

[Tim Tennis]

Hi Andy,

Respect your passion, it is a shame that the orginal thread was lost. I am not to sure people will have the energy to respond all over again.

Is the link lost also, if not you need to put the link back up so people can see what you are talking about.

I think that both David and Vic have made tremendous contributions to tennis.

I think a lot of stuff from the modern tennis teachers that is presented as some great new insite is just some fancy repackaging of concepts from the past greats.

So is the debate going to be open to the public? Maybe we could get a group from TW to go and then play some tennis. We could meet at either Vic's or David's place. David's place would be nice because I think he has a nice pool and we could all "cool off."

 

[Tennismastery]

Dear Andy,

Whilest we probably shouldn't make a public forum a place to discuss such differences of opinion as it relates to personal differences, I will agree that it is certainly a place to express one's opinion on various tennis techniques and such subjects.

On that topic, you will note that each of my statements are based on my experience working with and around Vic Braden coaches. Thus, in my mind they are not attacks, only expressing my freedom of speech and based on actual observations and discussions.

Let's take each one that you quoted and discuss them based on actual historical occurances:

1. "Closed minded pros" This statement was confirmed to me when the director of tennis for the Vic Braden tennis college was asked this question: "If you had a player who could not hit a particular shot the way you were teaching it, would you teach it a different way if you KNEW it would help him?" His response was: "No, it would not be biomechanically effiecent." I asked this question twice to confirm that he understood the question...his answer was emphatically the same. If this isn't closed minded, I don't know what is.

2. Without exception, any Braden follower becomes almost antagonistic, (similar to you...but, I will say you seem to use a little more restraint than others I have met) when disagreed with. It is interesting that I have two pros who USED to be Braden Pros at the very facility you work at who both have recognized how wrong they were when they were taught the Braden methods to teach. I also have a number of players who USED to take lessons from the pros you also teach with. In both sets of pros and players, they have found not only the faulty aspects of what they had followed or learned, but have since become much better players since learning to use more commonly held teaching techniques. They all have expressed a previous sense of 'following blindly' the Braden philosophy they had previously been taught.

3. Braden pros have no recourse than to teach the Braden methodology. See #1. Ironically, if Braden ever admitted to teaching anything 'wrong' he would have to apologize to a lot of people for steering them wrong. So, Braden and his staff could never veer away from the philosophy Braden has taught them to teach.

4. "The pros are doing it wrong." This was an exact quote when I asked Vic why the pros don't do it the way he teaches. (This was a question about the toss on why so many pros toss one to two feet above apex and yet Braden teaches that the toss should only be as high as apex.) If you laughed, then you are laughing at your boss.

Are these 'personal' attacks? Hardly. They are a strong disagreement with a teaching philosophy. I have nothing personal against you or against Mr. Braden. I find it amazing that you condemn me for attacking your teaching philosophy but fail to recognize the number of times I have mentioned that Vic is truly a sincere, genuine and giving man to tennis and those involved in tennis. He is one of the nicest men I have ever met. While I don't have to agree with his teaching techniques, I have always held a high degree of respect and admiration for his generous donation of time and effort. Do I think some of his conclusions are wrong? Sure. (I think that is obvious!) Do I agree with some of his findings. Absolutely.

I have been told (privately) by two of your own pros they don't agree with a lot of what Vic believes but they value their jobs too much to publicly disagree.

I have no fear of disagreeing with Vic. Like I said, he is a great man. I just don't agree with a lot of what you pros are teaching. And, I know that you, yourself, are a fabulous player. I will be the first to admire your own abilities. (I wish I were in my twenties instead of nearly 50 so I could have enjoyed competing with you today!) However, I find it interesting that you possess very few of the laments that you yourself teach. I see you volley with a continental grip with your elbows in by your side, completely opposite of what Vic teaches. I see your toss well above apex. I see you serve landing on your front foot instead of your back. I see you swing with angular momentum and not the linear stroke that 'air the armpit' promotes.

And, there are issues that I agree with Vic on but not in the progression that he teaches. He teaches the loop from the start. I teach straight back...but I understand from teaching thousands of players that every player will develop a loop swing as a normal evolution of the stroke progression. I have laughed myself when I watched one of your pros teaching a group of beginners: two women could never get below the ball to hit topspin and constantly hit down on the ball. Instead of simply starting them with a low backswing and getting them to feel the brush up, the Braden pro kept telling them to use the loop. In three days of the camp, these two ladies did not hit one topspin forehand. And not once did the pros want to 'compromise' their teaching philosophy and told them to 'keep working at it'. I find that style of teaching rather closed minded, in my opinion. I also agree with the concept of pronation. Yet, I have seen Vic and you pros intentionally tell people they should pronate. Pronation is a natural component of the overhead swing. I have seldom used it in my teaching because when one tries to intentionally pronate, they will generally hit the wrong side of the ball and never learn to 'brush' the ball with proper spin. Again, I have actually seen Braden pros teach this concept and witness time after time students hitting the wrong side of the ball! You don't have to even mention the word! A slice serve will be hit with a pronating forearm as a player swings with more force. This is known among most pros who have studied the game.

If you can name one pro who trained exclusively with Vic, please tell me. I remember Vic constantly referred to Tracy Austin as if he trained her. I spoke with Robert Landsdorp a few years back when I was speaking at the California USPTA convention and asked him if Vic trained Tracy. He had a little laugh and said that he trained Tracy from the age of 5...that Vic did train her for about a year or so (so he thought) from the age of 4 to 5. I don't think Vic's influence from the age of 4 to 5 would be so significant. Please correct me if I am wrong about this, as it did come directly from Robert himself.

Well, as for your other quotes, I stand behind each one.

1. Do I believe that Vic is wrong about many parts of high performance tennis, including the volley? Absolutely. Is that an 'unpleasant' remark? Hardly. It is a disagreement...unpleasant? Come on, Andy!

2. Blind following? I could agree that that is a subjective remark...however, it again is based on my witnessing of Braden pros who simply refuse to change their beliefs, or more importantly, tell that other pros are dispelling 'myths' because they don't agree with you.

3. Avoid the Braden tapes: This is my belief from my teaching experience. (I have been teaching longer than you have been alive, Andy.) Ironically, you can look locally at any of the top local juniors...and, not one of our top local players have been trained by the Braden College. (Oh, sure, there are a couple of SLC kids that come down to hit with you...which I don't blame them as I have said, you are a great player.) But, if you look at the top 16 boys this year, for example, 8 of them were trained by my Academy. The other 8 were from Salt Lake City areas. These numbers don't lie, Andy. If the Braden techniques were so great, why in all the 17 or so years the Braden College has been in St. George, that so few of the top players have ever came from that facilty? You would think with all the courts, especially having indoor courts, you guys would have at least a couple top players.

I have no problem having you or anyone else post tennis tips or disagreements with other tips. You have every right to do that and I encourage it. This, as most who have read any of my posts will attest, is what I have done for the past year. I also have learned things that I may not have thought of from such writers here as Bill, Tim Tennis, John Yandel, and so many others. Instead of trying to infer that I have been an attacker...look at my posts again...and tell me if they offer a difference of opinion. Have I made fun of you ever? Have I made a derrogatory statement about Vic ever? No. I have clearly refuted many of the teaching laments he and you and other Braden followers have promoted. Do I tell you not to post? No. You have every right to disagree with me. Interestingly, Bungalo Bill and I have disagreed in the past yet we hold a mutual respect for each other...sort of an agree to disagree or even a 'keep an open mind' element.

I have stated my position as clear as I can...perhaps with a world-record length post. Perhaps you can see the light.

Or, perhaps not.

 

[Tennis_Monk]

With Due respect to everyone (coaches, players), i am not so sure if having a few players in college or divisions etc, makes the Coaching/Academy as a premier tennis Coaching institute.

Having said that, I disagree with any coach, who changes his Pupils technique Not because it is faulty but because it isnt what academy teaches.

While i agree that Pronation is a natural component, It still has to be taught as part of coaching. Coaching isnt neccessarily about technique. It is also to help pupils understand whats really involved.


Not every Pro is right. Each Pro has his technique fine tuned to take advantage of his strengths and mask his weakness. So whats good for a Pro may not always be good for every one. (For someone of Sampras calibre , S&V would be cool. That may not be so easy to emulate).
That being said, All pro's have certain things right. Timing, Contact,footwork and their technique in general and certainly worth learning from.

My intention is only to say that , Every coaching methodology has merits and there is nothing called "Perfect". Having watched so many High speed clips from tennisplayer.net made me realize that , there are so many ways to solve the same puzzle.

 

[tennishack1]

With all due respect to the "Tennismastery" what kind of login name is tennismastery?

Are you the master of tennis?

Have you mastered the sport?

Can you help someone master the sport?
(Cause if you can I'll come find U and take lessons )

Going along with what Tennis Monk said: No coach can dictate what hapens to a tennis ball so we must learn a little from everyone. I believe Vic was the first to present a clear approach to the entire game based on physical laws.

SO TENNISMASTERY.... HIS CONCEPTS ARE TIMELESS!
DO YOU NOT GET THAT IT IS A NO BRAINER?!?!

Things such as:

If you toss lower there is more time for the ball to be struck in the window of the racket

If you use loop swings you will gain power from gravity

Using your legs for lift over the net by acting like your sitting in a chair(a simple teaching method to get peopleto bend the knees)

TO SAY TOP PROS DON'T DO THESE THINGS MEANS YOU HAVE A HEAD PROBLEM.

Everyone who looks at "Tennismastery"s" archived posts will see he has been disgruntled ( I did a little looking since the start of this thread). I respect AndyFitzell's passion and standing up for things. "Tennismastery" continued to dicredit the facility AndyFitzell works at here in this post saying they don't have players.

AndyFitzell is that True?

 

[Tennismastery]

With all due respect to the "Tennismastery" what kind of login name is tennismastery?

Are you the master of tennis?

Have you mastered the sport?

Can you help someone master the sport?
(Cause if you can I'll come find U and take lessons )

Going along with what Tennis Monk said: No coach can dictate what hapens to a tennis ball so we must learn a little from everyone. I believe Vic was the first to present a clear approach to the entire game based on physical laws.

SO TENNISMASTERY.... HIS CONCEPTS ARE TIMELESS!
DO YOU NOT GET THAT IT IS A NO BRAINER?!?!

Things such as:

If you toss lower there is more time for the ball to be struck in the window of the racket

If you use loop swings you will gain power from gravity

Using your legs for lift over the net by acting like your sitting in a chair(a simple teaching method to get peopleto bend the knees)

TO SAY TOP PROS DON'T DO THESE THINGS MEANS YOU HAVE A HEAD PROBLEM.

Everyone who looks at "Tennismastery"s" archived posts will see he has been disgruntled ( I did a little looking since the start of this thread). I respect AndyFitzell's passion and standing up for things. "Tennismastery" continued to dicredit the facility AndyFitzell works at here in this post saying they don't have players.

AndyFitzell is that True?

Yes, I have trained over 100 state and nationally ranked players. But, I guess that doesn't mean much.

I have never said I disagree with everything Vic says. I have said that many times. (However, like many Braden pros, you see what you want.) You confuse disgruntled with a passion for seeking the truth and expressing what one has found.

You attack my log in name...as if that contributes to this post? You don't seem to see all that is written. I have learned from so many pros. I speak at and attend many conventions and listen carefully to my fellow colleagues who have things to say too. I have even said I have learned a bit from Vic...but don't agree with all he teaches.

What is so terrible about that?

I have heard Landsdorp, Bolliterrei, Pfister, Waters, Hobden, Yandel, Wegner, Mclennen, and many others disagree with a number of Braden's techniques. And, I while agree with many of these, there are some aspects from my perspective that I may not fully agree with some of these guys too.

What is the big deal, guys?

I will let my success as a coach speak. I coached one of the most successful high school teams in the country in southern California and again in Arizona. In these two states my teams won over 900 team matches and lost fewer than 25. Such success isn't mentioned to impress...it is mentioned to give a perspective of what I have done in my 32 years of teaching tennis.

If I can't disagree with a particular teaching pro, then what is the point of me sharing my own information.

I guess only Mr. Fitzell is entitled to having 'passion and standing up for things'...hmmm. I kinda thought that was what I was doing...

If only those who believe that they are right are the only ones who can speak...then I guess tennis is in a real sad state.

Tennishack, you and the Fitzell's of the world can own these boards. Go ahead and share your wealth of information. It would appear that your information is the only information that is worthy.

Kind of fits the mold.

 

[tennishack1]

Yes, I have trained over 100 state and nationally ranked players. QUOTE]

So you have trained 100 nationally ranked tennis players and Vic's Tennis Academies that are world famous and (i'm gathering you live by one of them have not?)

Before Landsdorp took over the Jack Kramer club there were over a 125 ranked juniors that he inherited from Vic and that was in the 70's a lot of time has passed between then and now to allow Vic Braden and his pros affect a wide range of juniors and adults and now they have a world ranked academy in Utah. Is your academy world ranked online somewhere? (I saw in your bio you are an academy owner)

Please answer that one I am DIEING to know!

 

[tennishack1]

Oh and I forgot how come I have never heard of you "Tennismastery" if you are one of the most successful coaches in the U.S.? And you did not answer the question about your login name. What does it mean?

I think those answers will add to the thread

 

[Tennismastery]

Yes, I have trained over 100 state and nationally ranked players. QUOTE]

So you have trained 100 nationally ranked tennis players and Vic's Tennis Academies that are world famous and (i'm gathering you live by one of them have not?)

Before Landsdorp took over the Jack Kramer club there were over a 125 ranked juniors that he inherited from Vic and that was in the 70's a lot of time has passed between then and now to allow Vic Braden and his pros affect awiderange of students and adults and now they have a world ranked academy in Utah. Is your academy world ranked online somewhere? (I saw in your bio you are an academy owner)

Please answer that one I am DIEING to know!

Again, you seem to be fixated on some subjective level of success. No, my academy is not 'world ranked online somewhere.' I don't promote my academy on that level. I also know that there are many big name academies that are not listed in the top twenty on some online rating site...so what? Yes, I have taught a large number of ranked juniors and several adults. (I even teach one of the top 20 senior women in the country at my academy.) But, I am not interested in listing my academy in any online site.

If you want to look at what people really think about academies, you will notice in the travel section of these boards, the Braden camps are nearly never mentioned. You can go back dozens of pages and never see one remark about the Braden College camps. I guess there isn't a lot of interest out there about them at least on these boards.

The bottom line is this: Tennishack...you obviously have a love for the Braden ways. I can respect that. You are not alone. However, you seem to attack my 'worthiness' as if it were a badge of courage. I know what I have done, and there are a few others out there who also know. What you think you know is meaningless to me.

I have expressed my opinion which is based on many years of teaching...which to you is meaningless anyway, and have taught many successful individuals and teams...which to you is meaningless also.

I am really tired of this and will probably just excuse myself from this forum. It isn't worth the effort.

You can go on and berate me or anyone else for that matter. It won't effect me nor my students nor what I know.

Best wishes to you and those you follow. I, for one, like to lead.

 

[Tennismastery]

Oh and I forgot how come I have never heard of you "Tennismastery" if you are one of the most successful coaches in the U.S.? And you did not answer the question about your login name. What does it mean?

I think those answers will add to the thread

There are many successful coaches who not many people know. Do you know who trains Young, Nadal, Blake, Hewitt, Safin, Maursimo, Henin-Hardinne? Most people don't. (I know it isn't Braden!)

My log in name? Is this something you ask everyone? What does Tennishack mean?

My log in name is the same as my book. Oh, it is one of the top selling books here at Tenniswarehouse. But, you would not be interested in it, I suspect. You already know everything from Braden.

 

[deluxe]

Anyone else get the impression that tennishack has joined this forum for the sole reason of attacking tennismastery?

 

[Bungalo Bill]

1. "Closed minded pros" This statement was confirmed to me when the director of tennis for the Vic Braden tennis college was asked this question: "If you had a player who could not hit a particular shot the way you were teaching it, would you teach it a different way if you KNEW it would help him?" His response was: "No, it would not be biomechanically effiecent." I asked this question twice to confirm that he understood the question...his answer was emphatically the same. If this isn't closed minded, I don't know what is.

Well each of us have our things in being closed-minded. Case in point, the Eastern volley grip. Although you claim your thousands of taught players can not make the switch, my itty-bitty amounts of players can. Although you claim that if you use the Eastern grip the voley motion will be comprimised, how many players using the Continental grip have lousey volley motion? It sounds like Vic's coaches have their way of teaching as do you. There is a lot of instruction that you give that is based on Vic's findings.

2. Without exception, any Braden follower becomes almost antagonistic, (similar to you...but, I will say you seem to use a little more restraint than others I have met) when disagreed with.

I have coached, played, and know coaches from the Vic Braden Tennis college. They are good people, excellent coaches (at least most of them), and do not always take a bullet for Vic's stubborness at times. I do not hold on to all of Vic's stuff, but a ton of his stuff is relevant, timeless, and priceless in today's game. The only thing today's coahces are doing is repackaging and improving on most of the things he has founded.

I think you simply offended the poster. Dave, even though you have your own views on things (as we all do), Vic Braden and his coaches did a lot of good things. Maybe we oought to focus on that. What things did Vic contribute to tennis.

It is interesting that I have two pros who USED to be Braden Pros at the very facility you work at who both have recognized how wrong they were when they were taught the Braden methods to teach.

Tell me what is wrong and I will give you the things that are right. Why is a person like you failing to see the contributions Vic has made? I to this day use many of Vic's timeless instruction, are you saying that I am an idiot? That I don't know what I am talking about? That I can't help a player become a better tennis player? Do you know where I learned the wrist release? Do you know where I learned the lifting into the shot? Do you know where I learned that it doesn't take a whole lot of angle change to hit crosscourt? Is this all wrong?????

I also have a number of players who USED to take lessons from the pros you also teach with. In both sets of pros and players, they have found not only the faulty aspects of what they had followed or learned, but have since become much better players since learning to use more commonly held teaching techniques. They all have expressed a previous sense of 'following blindly' the Braden philosophy they had previously been taught.

Yeah, and there is probably a bunch players from your camp that probably didn't get anything as well. No coach is perfect and not every student will take on the coaches philosophy and instruction. This is not right to say.

3. Braden pros have no recourse than to teach the Braden methodology. See #1. Ironically, if Braden ever admitted to teaching anything 'wrong' he would have to apologize to a lot of people for steering them wrong. So, Braden and his staff could never veer away from the philosophy Braden has taught them to teach.

This is true and I can agree with this. But it doesn't mean that they beleive in everything he says. It also doesn't mean they are bad coaches either. Again, most of your book has fundamental principles that are based on Braden's convictions and findings.

4. "The pros are doing it wrong." This was an exact quote when I asked Vic why the pros don't do it the way he teaches. (This was a question about the toss on why so many pros toss one to two feet above apex and yet Braden teaches that the toss should only be as high as apex.) If you laughed, then you are laughing at your boss.

Yes, Vic can be one stubborn Welsh. No doubt that it takes time for him to accept something.

Are these 'personal' attacks? Hardly. They are a strong disagreement with a teaching philosophy. I have nothing personal against you or against Mr. Braden. I find it amazing that you condemn me for attacking your teaching philosophy but fail to recognize the number of times I have mentioned that Vic is truly a sincere, genuine and giving man to tennis and those involved in tennis. He is one of the nicest men I have ever met. While I don't have to agree with his teaching techniques, I have always held a high degree of respect and admiration for his generous donation of time and effort. Do I think some of his conclusions are wrong? Sure. (I think that is obvious!) Do I agree with some of his findings. Absolutely.

Well just because you disagree with Vic on things, does not mean he is an idiot or has not contributed great things to tennis. I think we need to simply focus on his accomplishements and his contributions to tennis.

I have been told (privately) by two of your own pros they don't agree with a lot of what Vic believes but they value their jobs too much to publicly disagree.

Maybe so, but it still does not remove the contributions that Vic made to tennis and how much of this game is based on these contributions.

I have no fear of disagreeing with Vic. Like I said, he is a great man. I just don't agree with a lot of what you pros are teaching.

Well I am not anyone's man either when it comes to coaching philosophies. I think all coaching philosophies have value and ALL COACHING PHILOSOPHIES ARE FLAWED. I also know that my coaching philosophy is learned and evolved. I take the good from all coahces. I take the good from Vic (which is a lot), from you, from Yandell, from Mahboob, and others and mix it all in.

The contributions and sacrifices made by the old-time coaches are priceless. They have helped move this game forward. Some of the tips were only good for an era, but many of them are timeless.

 

[tennishack1]

Anyone else get the impression that tennishack has joined this forum for the sole reason of attacking tennismastery?

No. I love forums and used to frequent this one a long time ago.

But when I found the "Tennismastery" saying some things that were difenitely out of place, i found the need to say something about it.

Great post Bungalo Bill. The "Tennismastery" wants to present things in a manner that make it seem that he is a little ahead of where he used to be employed. But I would like to make an assertion: Maybe he doesn't work at a premier teaching facility anymore for a reason?

Therefore he feels compelled to take the avenue of helping others to see that even though Vic and his pros have done some good things as whole they are to be avoided! Which is the general message i'm getting from the "Tennismastery".

 

[Bungalo Bill]

No. I love forums and used to frequent this one a long time ago.

But when I found the "Tennismastery" saying some things that were difenitely out of place, i found the need to say something about it.

Great post Bungalo Bill. The "Tennismastery" wants to present things in a manner that make it seem that he is a little ahead of where he used to be employed. But I would like to make an assertion: Maybe he doesn't work at a premier teaching facility anymore for a reason?

Therefore he feels compelled to take the avenue of helping others to see that even though Vic and his pros have done some good things as whole they are to be avoided! Which is the general message i'm getting from the "Tennismastery".

TM is a good guy and certainly knows his stuff. There is no question that Vic is holding on to things that were only good for an era. What I think is happening is we are throwing out his timeless tips with the bath water of what was only good in an era.


For example, one of Vic's stubborn tips is to go through the ball. Last year I was with him and had him film me for the hell of it. He said, "coach, your forehand looks great, you are extending and moving right through the contact zone, wrist is fixed and elastic and your balance is near perfect. But your backhand is a bit of a concern, when did you stop going through the ball?"

Without getting into a long story as to why, he was right. Is this bad?

 

[tennishack1]

Absolutely not! Federer on one shot in a 3D study had 61" where he kept the racket online to the target. Go through the ball is a great tip.
I even might believe that "Tennismastery" would maybe tell you to do the same thing.

But you know what, so would any good teacher it's just as you said, pros just repackage what Vic has already proven true through physics and sports science. "Tennismastery" is guilty of it too.

 

[Tennismastery]

I will end my contribution to this thread by simply saying I don't agree with a lot of what Vic promotes...yet agree with some of his principles. I have passion for what I teach and have success. I know that many pros are successful with differing opinions and philosophies than mine. I promote my philosophies based on a level of experience that includes working directly with Braden pros as well as many others.

If my approach came off as offending, I apologize to Andy, Vic and anyone else.

However, my own experience working with players has shown me what works well, what prohibits advanced progressions, what causes player frustrations, and how certain stroke patterns help the most. I also have an arsenal of teaching techniques that I draw from which don't prohibit me from using any one specific technique if, indeed, my own methods are not producing the advancement I expect. I have used some Braden tips, as well those I have procured from a plethera of pros. Every player is different and some methods just don't always work. I have twenty notebooks of notes taken from years of listening to pros speak at various conferences. I often like to revisit them to see if I have missed something or forgotten something that might work better.

I agree with Bill that most certainly, every program has its own successes and failures. I would be lying if I didn't agree with this. Yet, I stand by my overall teaching philosophy, no different than Andy standing by his.

I will also say that even some philosophies sound good from one perspective while if you look deeper they have faults.

The bottom line is, we can find exceptions to any given philosophy even among the pros.

So, I will raise my white flag and say I'm just too busy to get into this any further.

Best wishes to all.

Dave Smith

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Great post Bungalo Bill. The "Tennismastery" wants to present things in a manner that make it seem that he is a little ahead of where he used to be employed. But I would like to make an assertion: Maybe he doesn't work at a premier teaching facility anymore for a reason?

Therefore he feels compelled to take the avenue of helping others to see that even though Vic and his pros have done some good things as whole they are to be avoided! Which is the general message i'm getting from the "Tennismastery".

One of the weaknesses (at least to me) is Vic's own convictions and ethics. Vic was the type of person that if a sunglass company came to him and asked for his endorsement while Vic knew he would never wear the product, he wouldn't endorse it. I can mention many coaches that would endorse it even though they would never touch the product. It wasn't just about money to Vic. If Vic endorsed the products he had a chance to endorse, he would be a millionaire a million times over. But he didn't and that is Vic.

When Vic ran the Coto de Caza facility it was state-of-the-art. It still would be if someone would renovate the place which I think is happening by a good friend of mine along with Vic.

You should not avoid coaches that have learned under Braden. You should avoid a coach that is stuck on Bradens "ERA" related instruction or take them with a huge grain of salt. Not all of Braden's instruction is bad. Most of it can still kick a player's ars using today's methods.

Vic was mainly about simplicity and developing consistency.

A good friend of mine Frank Giampaolo is an excellent juniors coach in So. Cal. with strong fundamental principles based in Braden's methods. Low to high, swing through the ball, lift from your legs, inside-out, wrist release for advanced players, fixed wrist for all that like it this way, the toss distance on a serve, etc, etc. are timeless tips that anyone can build a game on. However, he is a hybrid as I am too. He mixes in current methods with Vic's timeless techniques which helps him build a solid tennis player with an all-court game.

My take on Vic is he doesn't really have the money nor the time to run a facility. I think once he lost the contrract with Disney and others that the Coto de Caza was too much for him to keep up. Plus, Coto de Caza as nice of a place it is, did not have too many accomodations for people to fly in and stay in hotels, etc...

 

[Trinity TC]

I will end my contribution to this thread by simply saying I don't agree with a lot of what Vic promotes...yet agree with some of his principles. I have passion for what I teach and have success. I know that many pros are successful with differing opinions and philosophies than mine. I promote my philosophies based on a level of experience that includes working directly with Braden pros as well as many others.

If my approach came off as offending, I apologize to Andy, Vic and anyone else.

Best wishes to all.

Dave Smith

No need to apologize and I'm certainly not offended. I know we are only scratching the surface with regards to figuring out how to teach this game. One thing for sure, it's about the students and not the method.

Breaking the rules sometimes and testing known methodology continues to push this game forward...I mean who would have ever taught a two-handed backhand forty years ago?

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I will end my contribution to this thread by simply saying I don't agree with a lot of what Vic promotes...yet agree with some of his principles. I have passion for what I teach and have success. I know that many pros are successful with differing opinions and philosophies than mine. I promote my philosophies based on a level of experience that includes working directly with Braden pros as well as many others.

If my approach came off as offending, I apologize to Andy, Vic and anyone else.

However, my own experience working with players has shown me what works well, what prohibits advanced progressions, what causes player frustrations, and how certain stroke patterns help the most. I also have an arsenal of teaching techniques that I draw from which don't prohibit me from using any one specific technique if, indeed, my own methods are not producing the advancement I expect. I have used some Braden tips, as well those I have procured from a plethera of pros. Every player is different and some methods just don't always work. I have twenty notebooks of notes taken from years of listening to pros speak at various conferences. I often like to revisit them to see if I have missed something or forgotten something that might work better.

I agree with Bill that most certainly, every program has its own successes and failures. I would be lying if I didn't agree with this. Yet, I stand by my overall teaching philosophy, no different than Andy standing by his.

I will also say that even some philosophies sound good from one perspective while if you look deeper they have faults.

The bottom line is, we can find exceptions to any given philosophy even among the pros.

So, I will raise my white flag and say I'm just too busy to get into this any further.

Best wishes to all.

Dave Smith

TM,

You of all people do not need to apoligize. We had a debate and the debate is over. You certainly are in a position to see what you believe. I think maybe this medium just doesn't allow us all to express ourselves properly. In the end, I know you like Vic and do not agree with a lot of his stuff, I agree with you on this. I think some things Vic does is a little "kooky". Some of his other stuff is "era" based. I think

 

[tennishack1]

Again, you seem to be fixated on some subjective level of success. QUOTE]


I have read tons of your posts and about 2/3 of them have mention of your coaching sucesses. 100 ranked juniors and adults, one of the most sucessful high school records in history of U.S., and now a Top Selling book.

The only reason I mentioned success is because that is the first thing you dicredit Vic and his pros for.... Their lack of success.

That is why I'm still waiting for AndyFitzell to answer if they have some players or not. Because if he comes up with players, than you will have misrepresented them and there program and this whole defense for Vic and his pros will have been justified and I think that you would owe an apologie that is public to this entire forum.

Bungalow Bill and his friend Frank apparently are a couple Vic Pros that have already shown that Vic's techniques are timeless.

To Bungalow Bill I think you are right about Vic and his teachings but I will say this, Vic has always changed his teaching as new information was found. I.E. Dropping the racket head below the wrist on the forehand was not promoted in Tennis for The Future but Vic later corrected himself and showed that it was much better for the arm and for developing racket head speed to let the racket fall below the hand. That is just one example. The other thing is that he is very current, still present at the ATP tournaments and researching and asking questions and filming. It is to bad he doesn't write another book as I guess all that people remember from Vic are his old books!

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Again, you seem to be fixated on some subjective level of success.

Bungalow Bill and his friend Frank apparently are a couple Vic Pros that have already shown that Vic's techniques are timeless.

A lot of things VIc has taught are timeless not everything though. That is why it is easy to see TM's perspective on things and his position.

To Bungalow Bill I think you are right about Vic and his teachings but I will say this, Vic has always changed his teaching as new information was found. I.E. Dropping the racket head below the wrist on the forehand was not promoted in Tennis for The Future but Vic later corrected himself and showed that it was much better for the arm and for developing racket head speed to let the racket fall below the hand.

Yes, Vic does correct himself as time goes on but on some things he doesn't. For example, it wasn't too long ago that a fellow coach and I got to see Vic's session in Palm Springs. He had a drill in which both of us scratched our heads on. Without going into a long story, we approached Vic and said "are you sure about this drill?" Vic insisted he was right and we knew he wasn't. It was not a good drill and the poor coaches out there also knew it wasn't a good drill. But like TM indicated they were afraid to speak up because it wasn't Vic's way. Just something to think about.

 

[TacoBellBorderBowl1946]

tennisshack you noob lets see why you don't teach at a premier tennis academy then ? Tennismastery has done a lot more for tennis than you will ever do in your entire life such as tennisone.com. I bet you are just some fat teenaged boy that just wishes he could play tennis.

 

[AndyFitzell]

Allow me to respond to some of the recent comments expressed to me by Tennismastery. I think others have already been answered by the likes of BB & others.

Let me follow the same format used by Tennismastery and look at each point one by one.

1. (“Closed minded”) After speaking to Dave Nostrant who was director at the time and is now my business partner, he has stated that the question you presented to him was about a specific tip, not a generalization as you said “teaching it a different way.”
He did not believe in the tip and therefore would choose not to use it. You have to believe in the tip or technique that you will use for it to be taught clearly and for the student to understand it and be successful. It is absurd to point a finger suggesting that he would teach without regard to the students enjoyment and progress. Successful teachers use a variety of techniques and styles to fit the students learning style. Just because he would not use YOUR TIP, not as you said “teach it a different way” does not make them “Close Minded”

2. Again you are making absurd generalized statements when you talk about two of our former employees “who both have recognized how wrong they were when they were taught the Braden methods to teach.” This is the very reason why an open public debate would be so beneficial so you can actually SHOW how “wrong” we are with SPECIFIC DATA and not just make a general statement.

3. (no recourse but the Braden) All of our pros except one who is a recent hire are certified by the USPTA and/or USTPR. We attend conferences, seminars, and continue to do research to find new and useful information to help our students to become better players and to become better coaches. I have also been through the USA/USTA High-Performance coaching program and having played at the pro level I can say I have plenty of tricks up my sleeve. So to say we have “no recourse” is not a fair statement by any means.

4. (pros do it wrong) I don’t know if Vic actually said these words or not, I will have to take you on your word. But if he did, the underlying meaning is just to say that there are some pros who do some things inefficiently and have weaknesses. That is clear and simple. Players have forehands, backhands, volleys, serves, etc. break down all the time. And why is that? Usually this happens when the player violates certain physical laws that result in error or injury. Vic has been studying the cause and effects of these laws along with people such as Howard Brody for years. So I believe he is justified in commenting when a player may or may not be efficient or “doing it wrong.”

Tennismastery, you later have the arrogance to pretend to be an EXPERT on MY own game and the way I hit the ball! Have you ever filmed me? Have you seen my strokes in slow motion? I don’t believe so, but I on the other hand have and know what I do because I use video to analyze my game on a consistent basis. I don’t use a continental grip on my volley I use a composite Eastern and move my grip. I don’t “keep my elbows in” as you suggested. And I hit my serve very near the peak of my toss because I don’t want a hitch in my swing nor have to worry about a ball that is dropping at the rate of gravity. “Air the armpit” is a cue given for the one handed backhand to help a person swing low to high and have the racket go towards the intended target. Well, I have a 2-handed backhand! You have some nerve Tennismastery. I’m glad you are using the “modern tennis” thesaurus when using the term “angular momentum” it sounds fancy. I am aware, as is Vic and all his research, that both angular as well as linear momentum are used in various tennis strokes.

You also stated
“Ironically, you can look locally at any of the top local juniors...and, not one of our top local players have been trained by the Braden College.”

This is an absurd statement and not true which I will show.

“ But, if you look at the top 16 boys this year, for example, 8 of them were trained by my Academy. The other 8 were from Salt Lake City areas”

Top 8 out of 16 boys in what? Highschool, juniors? What age division? What rankings are you referring to? I’m not sure what you are even talking about. Could you be a bit more specific? If you are working some top boys then congradulations to you on your students success, that’s’ fantastic.

I feel to defend myself and other pros against your first statement will take the liberty of being a bit more specific and give you some examples of players we are currently working with from a local, State, Intermountain, National, and World view.

Locally here in St. George, I am the primary coach for John Nelson who has a current Intermountain ranking of #56 in the boy’s 12’s.
I have also been the primary coach for Jessica Carter for the last year. She is currently #3 in Utah and 300 nationally and has just left to play tennis for the University of Utah.

I coached Matt Glendenning and Isaac Nelson during the last year and they were two of the top local high school players and both hold rankings.

My co-Director Tyler Weekes is the primary coach for Jordan Lyden who is currently #19 in Intermountain endorsement list in the boys 12’s having just moved up to the 14’s.

That is to name a few kids locally here in St. George that we are developing.

I spend much of my time as the primary and traveling coach for Jonathan Ribaste and Shauna Morgan who are from close by Las Vegas were I now spend half my time. Jonathan is currently #7 in Intermountain and 189 nationally in the boys 18’s in his first year. Shauna Morgan is currently #2 in Intermountain 85 nationally in the girls 18’s as a 16 year old. She is also competing in pro events. I am also the primary and traveling coach for Nicholas Perez who is currently ranked #4 in Intermountain 188 nationally and is going to play tennis for LMU in So. Cal this fall. I just returned from Kallamazoo with both Nick and Jonathan and am pleased about there success there. Nick was also a Utah State champion 4 years in a row and never lost a match. I have coached him for the last 4 years and will continue to coach him in the future.

I also coached WTA player Julia Vakulenko at the Pac Life Open this year and recently spent a week with her and another touring pro Marek Czerwinski (who was the top junior in the country in the 18’s at one point) in So Cal training and helping them make great strides and hopefully more money. By the way, Julia reached the 3rd round of the French this year.

If anyone out there has ever been a coach, especially a traveling coach, with a high performance or pro player you would understand what a tough job that can be. You have to take care of players in many aspects from diet to nutrition to strokes and strategy, mental game, etc. etc.

These are just a few of the players that I am CURRENTLY coaching not to mention the many in the last couple years.

So for you Tennismastery to belittle me and my facility by saying “Oh, sure, there are a couple of SLC kids that come down to hit with you...which I don't blame them as I have said, you are a great player”-Tennismastery is a complete insult to me as a coach. I know my skills as a coach go beyond just being a good sparring partner. Those are a dime a dozen. I have worked very hard to be the best coach as can be to help my players progress in all aspects of the game.

That is fine if you want to end the thread Tennismastery, but please note Vic and his staff wish to again extend the invitation for an open public debate this will enable both you and Vic Braden the opportunity to actually SHOW and not just tell. I believe you have agreed to such, but I just want to make sure.

Again Vic Himself has stated in an article “It’s arrogant for anyone to think they have a unique and effective system for stroking a tennis ball. Physical laws dictate what happens to a ball when struck, not a coach. There may be strategic, tactical and lesson plan systems developed by a coach, but that’s where it ends. There is no “Braden System.”


-Andy

 

[tennishack1]

tennisshack you noob lets see why you don't teach at a premier tennis academy then ? Tennismastery has done a lot more for tennis than you will ever do in your entire life such as tennisone.com. I bet you are just some fat teenaged boy that just wishes he could play tennis.

Sorry to disappoint, I'm not fat. Just so you know this sight is semi-anonymous so you have no idea either way. but I bet you could figure out whether or not I have contributed to tennis or not in time.:mrgreen:

But now that AndyFitzell has put up some data on top players he and his facility and other pros are working with, "Tennismastery" was grossly misrepresenting those he was speaking about( namely, Vic Braden and Vic Braden trained pros) if this is doing something to build tennis up let me know. I think it tore it down and self promoted the "Tennismastery" book, himself as a teacher his program, and so on and so forth.

I believe in opinion and freedom of speech. I do not believe in someone discrediting someone else to make himself look better. That is called bullying. Now its internet bullying LOL:mrgreen:

Bungalow Bill, I'm not sure what drill you are talking about but I'm curious as Vic rarely does drills besides demos. What drill was it?

 

[Tennis_Monk]

In my Opinion (however ridiculous it may sound) coaching some players at State level / Division level isnt that much of a deal. To me a coaching resume should look like that of Brad Gilberts\Nick Bolletieri\BAT\Peter lundgren etc etc.....Basically have a World class Athlete that is the product of that academy. While most kids show great potential at division/college/State level, there is no guarantee that it translates into World Class.

My intention is not to criticize or undervalue any coach. But there are so many coaches with various methodologies that havent seen great success.

 

[JohnYandell]

There are some really interesting issues here irrespective of who is who and who may have what interpretation of what, and who has what players, etc.

I consider Dave a friend, and I also have known Vic afor may years and have met Andy and had some interesting, positive conversations with him as well. I've seen the data collection and the process Vic and Andy use in action firsthand at Indian Wells and Los Angeles. They have been filming on center court with 5 cameras and, if I understand correctly, doing 3D recontructions of live professional strokes. This has been done before but (again as far as I know) only a very limited basis, by Bruce Elliot at the Olympics and possibly a few other occasions.

I've seen one of Vic's recontructions of an Agassi forehand. It was very cool to look at but there weren't any numbers attached to it--at least at the time in the version I saw. But it must be an incredible data base. Personally I wish there was a way to access the data and see the actual measurements, for example on a website--that's a site I would pay myself to join.

I'm sure Vic has learned more over the years than just about anyone. And I'm sure that he feels that the work he continues to do supports his approach or he would have changed and evolved it beyond how he has.

But what I am not so sure of is that we can simply say--I have the data and therefore my system is right or more correct or whatever.

There is such a thing as the tyranny of expertise. If I am not an expert in 3D (and I am definitely not), then my conclusions, not based on similar data, cannot be valid. I don't buy that.

When we use terms like "data" and "forces" it sounds like we have arrived at final answers that are clear and indisputable.

But I have done enough research into the field to know that this isn't the case even in the world of experts in 3 dimensional analysis of sports.

There are respected scientists who, for example, would say that you simply can't calculate forces from 3D data--it's still too soft because of the human element in digitizing the points on the body.

And there are yet others who would say, yes you can, but not from 60 frame data shot in the relatively uncontrolled conditions of center court with wide views and no body markers. Which is the way Vic was doing it--and that's certainly not a criticism. It the only way it could be done in those conditions.

People with this last view want 250 frame footage shot in the lab with little balls attached to all the joints. And then the objection going back the other way is that this isn't realistic. And that's valid too.

And then there are other guys that want to strap wires to you and attach them to computers but you get to hit live balls on the court and they say that's the best way to get real data that is accurate enough to be useful. I've actually done that with Brian Gordon.


I've seen studies of the serve that measured ball speeds that were virtually the same, and yet found substantial differences in the racket head speeds that allegedly produced them.

These are all respected scientists who have had grants with the USTA, been published in the recognized journals etc. It's just not a hard science at this point.

So I don't think it's quite as cut and dried as we have one kind of data and that settles the issue, or I have looked at another type of data--say high speed video--and that settles it in my favor.

What would be great is if we all had the opportunity to understand in English and in tennis terms what all the various studies show. Raw data about the speed and position of the body segments and the racket--not just how it is tied to the validation of a particular teaching system.

We have done some limited studies along those lines we will be releasing, as has Brian Gordon. Some of Bruce Elliot's stuff is pretty accessible too.

Vic was one of the true pioneers in this work, along with a guy no one remembers named Stanley Plagenhoef.

From what I've seen even when you quantify things the results are complex and ambiguous enough that human interpretation is often going to be the final determinate of what it all means.

So I don't think Vic or anyone else is holding all the cards. But I sure like to ask about 100 questions of his data. (OK make that 1000 questions.)

I've been as guilty as anyone of getting into harisplitting fights at times on this board and there is a place for that too. But if there was more access to data and better understanding of it--well at least maybe the fights would be more informed.

 

[maverick1]

There are respected scientists who, for example, would say that you simply can't calculate forces from 3D data
....

I've seen studies of the serve that measured ball speeds that were virtually the same, and yet found substantial differences in the racket head speeds that allegedly produced them.

I am not a Tennis expert, but the statements above make make perfect sense. It is taught is the first physics course in high school or college.
When two objects such as the ball and racket collide their respective speeds after the collision depend not only on their velocities before impact, but also on their respective masses.

For example, being rear-ended by a truck at 10 mph is a lot worse than being rear-ended by a small subcompact at the same speed. The former will cause more damage to the car in front send it forward at a greater velocity.

That is a pretty good analogy for what happens in the serve. A heavier racket will produce a faster serve for the same racket speed. It gets more complicated to analyze the effect of the mass of the player, but I think it will matter if the wrist is not completely loose.

"The Physics and Technology of Tennis" by Howard Brody, Rod Cross & Crawford is a fantastically informative book if you are not the kind of person who is turned off by the title. If you have ever taken freshman physics, this book is an absolute gem. I have read only parts of it, but I learn more about tennis from a page of this book than an entire volume or a set of videos of tennis coaching material majority of which is subjective and is debated by the experts themselves, as we see in this thread.

 

[Tennismastery]

I really didn't intend to step back into this discussion. However, Andy Fitzell has mentioned several things that I must respond to. I won't get into details but it is important to know where my perspective comes from:

1. Regarding the conversation I had with your Mr. Nostrant, then director of the Vic Braden Tennis College at the Green Valley Spa which I was the Head Pro for the tennis club there at the time: I specifically asked him if he KNEW MY Tennis tip would help someone would he teach it. He said no. I asked him this twice if HE KNEW the tip would help someone that couldn't do it his way. His answer was exactly the same. This is when I offered my two week notice to quit teaching at his facility and I told him, "There is no way I can teach within such close-minded leadership." My Assistant coach, Scott Adams also quit on that day with me.

2. The 'no recourse' statement was from the aspect that in the two and 1/2 years I worked as Head Pro for the club at the Spa, I never once saw any Braden pro deviate from the teaching patterns that were established. If I didn't see it in those years, my only conclusion is to identify this as standard fare.

3. I am amazed that of the players you claim to have trained, you mention players who my academy has trained for years. Glendenning, Isaac Nelson (and Jon, his brother as well as Emma and Dan other Nelsons who train with us), have trained with me and my staff for over 4 years. We also trained each of the top boys in every school in St. George. Jon, who you so prominantly mentioned, trained three days a week with us this past summer. Isaac also trained an average of three days a week with us this past year and we developed him completely from his start.

Ironically, we tell our students to explore other areas to hit with pros and other competitors. We encourage all our students to play in tournaments at your club as well as others in our area. This builds their understanding of what we teach and how they stand with others in their peer group.

As to other statements, for example 'air the armpit', you should read Vic Braden's book. In Tennis 2000, he states that the two-handed backhand should be hit with the same linear swing pattern as the way he teaches the one handed backhand. I know you hit a two-handed backhand. It would seem you must not teach the two-handed backhand the way Vic recommends.

Congratulations on traveling and working with some good players. If I were single and in my twenties or thirties without a family as I have, I would be traveling a lot myself. Good for you. But, my emphasis now is to train the 200 or so kids we have in our program to reach their potential. I find value in that as much as traveling with a few.

Maybe the opportunity to discuss these issues with Vic will arrise. I don't think it will solve anything, however. I have worked watching Vic teach a lot, and read all his books, watched his videos, and seen his pros work. It would come down to a 'he said, she said.' I have videos of pros doing everything that Vic denounces. He has videos too, that I'm sure promotes his take. So, what would we solve?

I have recommended your facility to anyone who wants to learn more about the way Vic teaches. I mean there are few other places that Vic teaches, but the College is the only full-time Braden institute that I know of.

If I am accused of denouncing anything specific about the way Braden teaches, it comes NOT from a distaste for him or anyone that teaches for him. It comes from my own philosophy that has been cultivated by a very broad base of experience and study.

Obviously, you have a strong belief that what you are teaching is the best. As well you should. One should not teach if there is doubt in what they are going to provide for their student. But, be careful: like a cult following, sometimes you can convince yourself that no matter what, everyone else is wrong.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Bungalow Bill, I'm not sure what drill you are talking about but I'm curious as Vic rarely does drills besides demos. What drill was it?

Well I should clarify. Vic did not do the drill but he did demonstrate what he wanted and the coaches implemented.

The drill in question was a lob drill. A lob went up over the players head and as soon as the player saw the ball go up, the player is suppose to turn (taking his eye off the ball) and run toward the back fence or in the direction the player thinks the ball will land for positioning while supposedly visualizing the ball high in the air. The player with his back turned, not being able to see the flight of the ball, was suppose to somehow know how to position himself appropriately, turn around, and hit an overhead. All of the players were hitting out of balance or lost their bearings in relation to where they should be.

Basically, Vic felt this is how a person should run down a lob. Our feeling was a player needs to turn like a center fielder while keeping at least "one eye" on the ball to maintain their bearings.

It is very difficult to "guess" where the ball is going to bounce, spin around, and hit an overhead. Not one student performed the drill correctly. It was not a good drill. When questioned vic on this drill and he really didn't budge.

I happen to like a lot of Vic's stuff. There are things that I have dismissed. The one thing I don't like is when other coaches who clearly use Vic's stuff do not give credit where credit is due. Even the "Father of Tennis" Oscar, uses Vic's stuff and largely does not realize it. Or they hear one thing from Vic and don't allow him to adjust his position when he learns and finds new information.

All coaches have their "things" they hold on to. All coaches have things I discard. But to say or indicate that Vic Braden has not contributed to this great game of tennis or that he had no influence on their own instruction is down right foolish. All we need to do is breakout the tapes and books to prove that wrong. For example, the syncing of the wrist and the elbow on the Eastern forehand. Do you know how many Eastern forehand players I have helped with this information? Too many to count. The point is, I learned this information by stumbling on one of Vic Braden's old tennis instruction tapes. Do you know how many coaches today know about this? Not many.

Instruction will evolve as the game evolves. There are core things that will always remain that lie in the area of pure physics. The pioneer instructors like Braden have uncovered a lot of it. Now, coaches like Yandell, Dave Smith, and others are simply improving on things and in a lot of ways creating myths from era related reality. Once upon a time certain things were valid, but these "modern" coaches are in a different era and have rendered some of the older instruction a myth for today's tennis or obsolete. We must be careful we do not hold on to those things and consider Dave's, John's, and others new findings and truths.

I personally beleive that if a player followed Braden's advice on how to stroke a ball at the club level, they would develop into a fine player and would win a lot of matches.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

I am a Mod on TT and I've been learily (Is that a new word?) watching this discussion ... in fear it would become a Flaming Train Wreck. For the most part I've been pleased at the mature and (largely) even-handed responses to some fairly intense contributions from you all. Kudos to most of you.

(I was going to admonish two people to "ease up." I've changed my mind. I'd rather commend those who are "maintaining an even strain....")

Thanks to Dave (TennisMastery), Andy, Tim Tennis, BB, Monk, Trinity, JohnYandell and maverick1 for *not* causing me to zap this thread. Your contributions -- while sometimes somewhat pointed -- have been pretty good examples of how to "disagree agreeably." Thank you!

(If you were NOT named in the above Thank You, it does not necessarily mean I believe you to be a negative influence on here. But you *may* want to do a bit of introspection....)
_____________

From what I've seen even when you quantify things the results are complex and ambiguous enough that human interpretation is often going to be the final determinate of what it all means.

I am in the business of quantifying human behavior. (I help employers select and develop top performing people for particular occupations; these are not at all physical or athletic, but purely Occupational assessments.)

Yandell's paragraph above applies in spades to my field, too. We have oodles of "experts" in this field ... and the "factions" which develop saying "He" is right, or "She" is wrong will make your head spin. (People who are allies in one particular area are just as likely to be opponents in the next.)

Interpretation of the "hard data" will always have an element of ... subjectivity. John, you certainly nailed this one....

- KK

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Thanks to Dave (TennisMastery), Andy, Tim Tennis, BB, Monk, Trinity, JohnYandell and maverick1 for *not* causing me to zap this thread. Your contributions -- while sometimes somewhat pointed -- have been pretty good examples of how to "disagree agreeably." Thank you!

Thanks KK for letting people express their opinions with some emotion in it!

I am of firm belief that we should commend those instructors of the past with their limited technology and available information. Even if they were not right about everything and can be bit stubborn, they still have provided this great sport with a lot of quality stuff.

I would also be the first to say that not all of it was that great. For example, I wouldn't necessarily go run off and buy Braden's book on tennis strategy and tactics. But everyone is entitled to some duds.

 

[Tennis_Monk]

Well I should clarify. Vic did not do the drill but he did demonstrate what he wanted and the coaches implemented.

The drill in question was a lob drill. A lob went up over the players head and as soon as the player saw the ball go up, the player is suppose to turn (taking his eye off the ball) and run toward the back fence or in the direction the player thinks the ball will land for positioning while supposedly visualizing the ball high in the air. The player with his back turned, not being able to see the flight of the ball, was suppose to somehow know how to position himself appropriately, turn around, and hit an overhead. All of the players were hitting out of balance or lost their bearings in relation to where they should be.

Basically, Vic felt this is how a person should run down a lob. Our feeling was a player needs to turn like a center fielder while keeping at least "one eye" on the ball to maintain their bearings.

I (no chequered resume to go with me) find both as solid approaches at lower levels of play and in certain scenarios. At a higher level, one should have an eye on the ball.
Keeping an Eye on the ball is fundamental Tennis philosophy and should never be ignored. Unless trained very aptly, it is very hard to have an eye on the ball during a lob and also run aggressively and hit a quality shot.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I (no chequered resume to go with me) find both as solid approaches at lower levels of play and in certain scenarios. At a higher level, one should have an eye on the ball.

At higher and lower levels especially when you are practicing, a drill should be done properly and allow the player to develop proper hand/eye coordination with proper movement. This was not a good drill no matter how anyone slices it. It was a drill that was unecessary and had little skill transfer to real play.

 

[tennishack1]

Not to be missed in this thread, though, is the fact that a teaching pro had to join this site to defend not just his teaching techniques, but the fact of whether or not their entire facility was contributing to growing the game and helping people get better at playing tennis.

The "Tennismastery" not only discredited Vic, but than Pros associated with Vic, namely the facility that AndyFitzell works at and the pros associated with it, by making personal comments toward there abilities and saying that former pros that worked there realized how "wrong" they were. Saying Vic is very "wrong" about the volley progression so on and so forth, we don't need to quote anymore.

In my opinion that should not have had to happen. It was wrong. AndyFitzell put up some names of top players and besides that, I'm sure their facility has helped hundreds of others to play better and have more fun. Everyone knows that Vic himself is held in high esteem for growing the game and even helped blind children hit a tennis ball. To say anything negative about him or those following in his foot steps with scientific data is not right!

No one said anything poor about the tennis academy that the "Tennismastery" is associated with. He did not have to defend. I don't think that should be overlooked here by anyone.

If my remarks have sounded pointed I apologize!
I think as "Tennismastery" does, that all top coaches have contributed to the game in a variety of ways. But, none of them should be discredited for their accomplishments especially if the person doing the discrediting is not even sure what they are currently doing too help the sport. John Yandell had an excellent post showing that Vic is very active and has Data that none of us even know about! What if that data blew our minds!

Anyway, I like all of you guys because most of what has been said springs from a love of the game! I think that is wonderful!:mrgreen:

 

[NoBadMojo]

To me a good TP is one who knows a bit about all the teaching styles and realizes there is more than one way to be effecctive at teaching tennis. Good TP's study the game and adopt what they feel are the best things from several recognized coaches and develop their own teaching ways which isnt the same for everyone as each of my lessons is unique. Elements from Braden are good and elements from Wegener are good. etc...a good pro can find the simple cues needed to get the lesson to get things in the right position in the impact zone..if one cue doesnt work, they know if they say the cue in another manner it may register. that comes from experience and being open minded and having a good feel for the lesson, being able to read their abilities and potential quickly, and patterning the progression accordingly based upon the lessons' potential and how much time they will devote to the game. there are multiple ways to get the job done, and to try and stick someone into one 'mass production' way is wrong and very ineffective i think.
Obviously if we are talking clinics, those need to be much more structured.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

If my remarks have sounded pointed I apologize!
I think as "Tennismastery" does, that all top coaches have contributed to the game in a variety of ways. But, none of them should be discredited for their accomplishments especially if the person doing the discrediting is not even sure what they are currently doing too help the sport. John Yandell had an excellent post showing that Vic is very active and has Data that none of us even know about! What if that data blew our minds!

Anyway, I like all of you guys because most of what has been said springs from a love of the game! I think that is wonderful!:mrgreen:

Yes, I agree with you that there is no perfect coach. Every coach has their experiences, talent, insight, and vision as they see the game should be played.

All popular coaches from Wegner to Braden to Yandel to Smith have contributed great things. What I dont like is when coaches take credit for their predecessors work.

I think TM would agree that Braden has done a lot for the sport of tennis. I really do. However, I can see his perspective that some of Braden's "stuff" was not so great.

Also, on certain issues Vic doesn't really budge even though there is enough evidence to suggest otherwise.

In case you did not read all of TM's remarks, he does value Vic and his contributions. I value Vic as well. Many things that Vic is accused of he has either changed his tune on or is simply bad rumors of his beliefs.

It is much like spreading the rumor that TM thinks everything Vic has said and done is wrong. This is not true as well.

Keep in mind TennisShack, Vic does still hold on to some "era" related things. Not that they wouldn't work for today's club level player (in fact I wish more people would take a look at some of Vic's stuff to help them play better tennis), but they aren't that relevant anymore in professional tennis.

All of us must remember that even though we may disagree with some of Vic's stuff, he was still about fundamental tennis. Fundamental tennis is timeless.

 

[Tennismastery]

Remember the original post

I believe that Bill summed up this conceptual thread very well. I have indeed expressed my opinion that Vic--and so many others--have contributed to our game. I, like so many others, don't necessarily agree with each and every pro. I know that not everyone has agreed with me, and I think that such disagreement is actually good. It allows for dialogue to be generated and ideas to be disseminated. And, the winners are those who read such forums...for they get the best from each knowlegable writer and can experiment to see what works best for themselves.

However, this all stemmed from an original post that asked to rate or compare four distinctive pros. Braden, Van de Meer, Boliterei and Landsdorp. My response was a personal opinion and backed by some personal experience with these pros. (I have met each one of them and have discussed tennis issues with each...certainly not to the degree I wish I could, however!) I expressed my opinion within the context of my experience. I didn't embelish one thing. However, when Andy came on to express his own narrative, it set up some additional perspective anaylsis.

I have expressed many many times, how I think some of Vic's work, and thus his followers, are correct in some principles and theory. I have had the advantage of seeing Vic and his followers work for quite some time. My response to the differences between the pros in question is an OPINION based on these observations and conclusions. Perhaps I am wrong. It would not be the first time someone's opinion was wrong. Or, I could be right. Or, with some issues, we might be both right.

My opinions on the 'right and wrong' issues are formulated through my own experience, no less than Andy's opinions. I believe this is a public forum and as such is open to providing such opinions. And, as Andy has done, he has defended his position too.

All good.

 

[tennishack1]

"Tennismastery" I Do Remember It Was My Poll!

I believe that Bill summed up this conceptual thread very well. I have indeed expressed my opinion that Vic--and so many others--have contributed to our game. I, like so many others, don't necessarily agree with each and every pro.

All good.

But you did more than disagree. On the thread you said that "actually Vic has not trained a top ranked junior or adult in the last twenty years." That is totally untrue! AndyFitzell in his remarks already proved that your statement was not true as AndyFitzell said he was coached by Vic and was a ranked junior, a college player, and pro player. Now obviously a discerning individual would not come to the conclusion that there was only one person (AndyFitzell) Vic trained in the last twenty years! When you post it has tones of factual information (more than just opinion) that you think everyone should know. In this instance the truth was not told.

What is the explanation for what you said "Tennismastery"?

To Bungalow Bill: Can you be more specific with what Vic teaches that is not applicable to the pro game and only ok for club players? As you said fundementals are timeless so if they are, what are the "ERA" based things that you are talking about?:mrgreen:

 

[Tennismastery]

But you did more than disagree. On the thread you said that "actually Vic has not trained a top ranked junior or adult in the last twenty years." That is totally untrue! AndyFitzell in his remarks already proved that your statement was not true as AndyFitzell said he was coached by Vic and was a ranked junior, a college player, and pro player. Now obviously a discerning individual would not come to the conclusion that there was only one person (AndyFitzell) Vic trained in the last twenty years! When you post it has tones of factual information (more than just opinion) that you think everyone should know. In this instance the truth was not told.

What is the explanation for what you said "Tennismastery"?

To Bungalow Bill: Can you be more specific with what Vic teaches that is not applicable to the pro game and only ok for club players? As you said fundementals are timeless so if they are, what are the "ERA" based things that you are talking about?:mrgreen:

My comment regarding that Vic has not trained a top ranked junior or adult in the last twenty years refers to the fact that Vic teaches players for 3 to 5 days. Nothing more. I find it impossible for Vic to have trained an individual himself, from beginner to a ranked individual, since he travels throughout the year visiting a few tennis clubs and speaking at various sites. I am pretty sure that Vic did not train Andy himself from start to his current level. I would suspect that Andy's college coach had something to do with his development as well as many others along the way.

If a pro on tour or a ranked individual can name Vic as the coach who has taught him exclusively, then shame on me. However, if not one ranked player can do this, then my statement is not only fact, but very accurate.

 

[Tennis_Monk]

I may be asking the same question in a different form again,

While a little beyond my understanding\qualification, May i ask which World class Athelete came out of your academy/Prinicples Tennis Mastery?. I know Vic Braden "Arguably" did some work with Pros besides having dedicated followers.

For a Tennis coach, i would assume that Mt.Everest would be his pupil winning a Grandslam (besides the obvious stuff like having his pupils enjoy their game and demonstrate true gamesmanship). That to me is a proof of validating the principles Coach putforward. Short of that arguing on principles and proof (albeit with some scientific merit) is fruitless.

[ I am not a vic braden follower or for that matter any coaching principles and methodologies other than basics.I frankly dont believe in "Arm being straighter", "wrist being rigid" etc kinda coaching/arguments.As is already established there is no documented reference for playing perfect Tennis yet. ]

 

[AndyFitzell]

Dear Tennismastery

Tennismastery,

I have appreciated your comments and have enjoyed having a little communication with you even if it is in cyber space. Here are the last things (hopefully) that I will comment on your most recent remarks to me.

1. As far as Mr. Nostrants response to you about your tip if he KNEW it would work, I feel he probably should have said yes and ended the conversation. But, he must have felt strongly enough about it not being efficient to agree to your tip.


2. I’m sorry you weren’t able to witness any of our pros using any different recourse than
what Vic promotes.

3. I didn’t mean to take anything away from you. I just wanted to make it clear that we were also working with these local players because you said we weren’t training any of them. I was giving private lessons using Dartfish etc. (not just hitting) to all those players, and in the case of Isaac and Matt, multiple times per week as well.

As far as you telling your students to explore other facilities, especially ours, I don’t believe such a statement to be true only because of what I have experienced, heard, and heard others say. But, if it IS true, then I think that is WONDERFUL and would help me to believe in miracles!

Another way to help your students understand what you teach in relation to other facilities in our town would be to do an open public showing of our differences, as well as similarities, and rationale for what we teach. It may not “prove” anything like you said, but at least it will be an honest, open look at what we are all saying. So since you said you would welcome the opportunity, and Vic has already committed, I think we should give it the green light.

As to the 2-handed backhand issue, the ball does not know if someone has a one or two handed backhand. So Vic is just saying that the basic SWING PATH is the same (loop swing, get below the ball, swing low to high, and try to take the racket towards the target to achieve a safety zone etc.).

Hope to communicate again sometime.

Thanks,

Andy Fitzell

 

[AndyFitzell]

Vic does still hold on to some "era" related things. Not that they wouldn't work for today's club level player (in fact I wish more people would take a look at some of Vic's stuff to help them play better tennis), but they aren't that relevant anymore in professional tennis.

Bungalo Bill,

I have never thanked you for all your remarks, so thank you, they are appriciated.

Your statement above however, I feel might need some revision. In my experience working with top Touring Pros on technique, there inefficencies usually come down to them violating a physical law or not performing BASIC fundamentals properly (getting the racket low, lifting with the legs, backswing might be too long behind the body, coming across the hitting zone too fast, not tossing the ball in front on the serve, etc.)

I believe sound fundamentals will always be the root to playing good tennis no matter what LEVEL it is being played on. Don't you think?

-Andy

 

[nickybol]

Don`t agree with that. Example. Fundamentals teach us that one wants to have a large hitting zone. That`s one of the reasons why I still teach beginning players to hit with a square stance on most of their shots: because they need that large hitting zone because their timing isn`t perfect. But if you have perfect timing, why would you want to have a large hitting zone, when there is no need for one?

 

[Tennismastery]

I may be asking the same question in a different form again,

While a little beyond my understanding\qualification, May i ask which World class Athelete came out of your academy/Prinicples Tennis Mastery?. I know Vic Braden "Arguably" did some work with Pros besides having dedicated followers.

For a Tennis coach, i would assume that Mt.Everest would be his pupil winning a Grandslam (besides the obvious stuff like having his pupils enjoy their game and demonstrate true gamesmanship). That to me is a proof of validating the principles Coach putforward. Short of that arguing on principles and proof (albeit with some scientific merit) is fruitless.

[ I am not a vic braden follower or for that matter any coaching principles and methodologies other than basics.I frankly dont believe in "Arm being straighter", "wrist being rigid" etc kinda coaching/arguments.As is already established there is no documented reference for playing perfect Tennis yet. ]

A fair question: In addition to several players who are both top players at the school they play for in our area, we have around a dozen players who are ranked in the USTA Intermountain. I also trained such players as Jessica Watts (She was a product of several pros, I will say) who trained with me for about a year and was nationally ranked her highest under me at about 100 in the country; A.J. Bartlet, who I trained for nearly 3 years and did some traveling with; he is 18 years old, has about 20 ATP points and is ranked around 900 in the world. I worked with him when he was the hitting partner for Kim Clijsters for 9 days at Indian Wells a year ago. (There was a TennisOne newsletter on him and several pros like Safin and Santoro who were on the same court as we were the day we did the newsletter.) In addition to several others, I have worked extensively with state and nationally ranked players such as Justin Pitch, Katie Lankford, J.D. Mcdonald, and Max Gingg all in Arizona about 10 to 12 years ago; In California, from 1979to 1991, I coached Debbie Graham (#1 in the U.S.), Suzzana Lee, (#1 in Korea at the time), Chris Jochem, Steve Schultz, Paul Robinson, Cong Tran, Bac Nguyen, and many many more who were ranked both in So. Cal. as well as some holding national rankings too. I also trained and currently train many players who didn't or don't play enough sanctioned tournaments to be ranked but, are top players in their region and county.

As I mentioned before, we have always encouraged our students to attend other camps, including those locally as well as those further away. Thus, many of my students attend Nike Tennis Camps, several have been to Boleterie's (three of my top players and one of my pros just got back from spending 3 weeks there), as well as camps in Mexico, France and other more faraway camps.

We have had one of the top high-performance coaches from Holland spend a week with our camp after reading several of my articles in the Dutch tennis magazine called "Tennis and Coach".

Up until about a month ago, I had been training one of the top senior adults, Jerry Golding, who was ranked in the U.S. in the top 5 and is still considered one of the best in her 80's and over division...with wins over DoDo Channey as well as winning several USTA Gold Balls and inducted into the Utah Tennis Hall of Fame. I have worked with her for about 5 years.

I hope this helps you understand the depth of my own personal teaching, if that is what you were trying to asertain.

 

[Tennis_Monk]

A fair question: In addition to several players who are both top players at the school they play for in our area, we have around a dozen players who are ranked in the USTA Intermountain. I also trained such players as Jessica Watts (She was a product of several pros, I will say) who trained with me for about a year and was nationally ranked her highest under me at about 100 in the country; A.J. Bartlet, who I trained for nearly 3 years and did some traveling with; he is 18 years old, has about 20 ATP points and is ranked around 900 in the world. I worked with him when he was the hitting partner for Kim Clijsters for 9 days at Indian Wells a year ago. (There was a TennisOne newsletter on him and several pros like Safin and Santoro who were on the same court as we were the day we did the newsletter.) In addition to several others, I have worked extensively with state and nationally ranked players such as Justin Pitch, Katie Lankford, J.D. Mcdonald, and Max Gingg all in Arizona about 10 to 12 years ago; In California, from 1979to 1991, I coached Debbie Graham (#1 in the U.S.), Suzzana Lee, (#1 in Korea at the time), Chris Jochem, Steve Schultz, Paul Robinson, Cong Tran, Bac Nguyen, and many many more who were ranked both in So. Cal. as well as some holding national rankings too. I also trained and currently train many players who didn't or don't play enough sanctioned tournaments to be ranked but, are top players in their region and county.

As I mentioned before, we have always encouraged our students to attend other camps, including those locally as well as those further away. Thus, many of my students attend Nike Tennis Camps, several have been to Boleterie's (three of my top players and one of my pros just got back from spending 3 weeks there), as well as camps in Mexico, France and other more faraway camps.

We have had one of the top high-performance coaches from Holland spend a week with our camp after reading several of my articles in the Dutch tennis magazine called "Tennis and Coach".

Up until about a month ago, I had been training one of the top senior adults, Jerry Golding, who was ranked in the U.S. in the top 5 and is still considered one of the best in her 80's and over division...with wins over DoDo Channey as well as winning several USTA Gold Balls and inducted into the Utah Tennis Hall of Fame. I have worked with her for about 5 years.

I hope this helps you understand the depth of my own personal teaching, if that is what you were trying to asertain.

Thank You so much. Please let me clarify that I never doubted your/Vic understanding/Love/contributions for the game {except for the love part, rest is all something, not many can dream of achieving} . I have done enough Googling ,been playing Tennis for a few years and understand the respect Tennis community has for you and Vic.

As they say "Proof is in the pudding" and thats all i was trying to get to.Ie proof of some top class athletes that adhere to the coaching methodology.

As a member of this forum and Tennisplayer.net, I have greatly benefitted (and hopefully more ) from BB and JohnYandell's Tips and Videos ...and have some idea about their stance.

 

[nickybol]

We have had one of the top high-performance coaches from Holland spend a week with our camp after reading several of my articles in the Dutch tennis magazine called "Tennis and Coach".

What was his name?

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Bungalo Bill,

I have never thanked you for all your remarks, so thank you, they are appriciated.

Your statement above however, I feel might need some revision. In my experience working with top Touring Pros on technique, there inefficencies usually come down to them violating a physical law or not performing BASIC fundamentals properly (getting the racket low, lifting with the legs, backswing might be too long behind the body, coming across the hitting zone too fast, not tossing the ball in front on the serve, etc.)

I believe sound fundamentals will always be the root to playing good tennis no matter what LEVEL it is being played on don't you think?

-Andy

Yes, I agree, you have no argument from me. That is the beauty of Braden's instruction it is largely based on fundamentals. I have found very little from Braden to be inaccruate or I should say questionable.

For example, practice. I believe practice should simulate real play as much as possible. This is why I disagreed with him and his lob drill that I saw. First, the players attending the college were not going to practice this drill. Second, it did not simulate what you would do in real match play. It also seemed to contridict what Braden believes.

=========================================================================
PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT
by Vic Braden

The old adage that “PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT” could well be changed to, “THE WAY YOU’RE PRACTICING MAY BE WHAT’S KILLING YOU.”

Over the years, I’ve watched most of the world’s best players and have observed a series of different practice drills. But, there’s always one thing in common, THE BEST PLAYERS FIND TIME TO PRACTICE IN THE SAME MANNER AS THEY’RE EXPECTED TO PERFORM”. Rod Laver use to say, “I get in shape physically and mentally for competitive tennis by playing tennis." It almost sounds silly, but it’s really smart.
=========================================================================

I really think that if someone where to really sit down and review what he believes and says, they would agree with him 95% of the time.

 

[AndyFitzell]

lob recovery drill

Although this lob recovery drill may not have seemed beneficial but awkward to you, I have seen numbers of players do it successfully and it has helped them recover lobs, especially underspin lobs, much faster.

When someone tracks or tries to keep there eye on the ball while trying to retrieve a lob they don't run as quickly as they could if they just turn and run back towards the fence. Pros do this all the time. I watched Agassi do it yesterday on TV. I don't believe a person has to look at the ball the whole time when retrieving a lob. The people I do see track the ball many times end up doing the two handed shovel shot over their head (digging their own grave) or they are reaching high off the back foot and look like they are auditioning for the Juilliard school of dance. The point of the drill is to get a read FIRST on which direction the ball is heading (to the forehand or backhand) and if it is not possible to hit an overhead, to turn and run without tracking the ball and get behind the ball so the player can come forward and hit a drive. It does take some getting used to I admit, but I've seen it done many times correctly and easily. Students can then practice this drill with a partner or when they play. When a lob goes up they turn and run, get behind the ball, listen for the bounce, then turn and come forward to hit a drive. Again, I've seen it done many times correctly and effectively.

You obviously have a different opinion, but having done this drill many times with both beginner and pro players, I have seen it done successfully much more often than not.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Although this lob recovery drill may not have seemed beneficial but awkward to you, I have seen numbers of players do it successfully and it has helped them recover lobs, especially underspin lobs, much faster.

Sorry Andy. I will disagree with you on this one. There is no transfer of skill performing this drill when every single person we saw failed the drill. There is no purpose in teaching skills that will not be used on the court.

Further, if a person pays for a weeks worth of lessons and travels for it, don't you think it is most beneficial to work on things that can be practiced and they can use right away? I mean why perform a drill that would take weeks to perform and is not really skill related to what you would do in a "real" lob situation.

A player needs to be able to see the ball and make reference to it in order for them to poisition themselves. Even the x-Braden coach I spoke about above, when I told him about the drill disagreed.

Sorry, although you dont have to glue your eyes on the ball, your brain needs to have a good reference and be able to use the eyes to calculate the adjustments steps in order to decide to hit a forehand or an overhead.

Turning around and losing your sense of bearing and direction is not good. Often these players would be lost and spin around off balance only to see they entirely misjudged where the ball was to bounce.

Although I will agree with you that Vic has a lot of things to consider in how to play tennis, I can not get there with you on this subject.

 

[onehandbh]

I tried this once. As soon as I saw the lobbing coming I just sprinted back.
I turned around when I got back and it bonked me in the head. Actually I only
do this when it is a heavy topspin lob I can't reach and the trajectory is directly
over my head and I know I'll have to make an all out sprint to have any
hope of getting to it and trying a desperation lob or b/w the legs shot.