Very annoyed: Will Hamilton from FYB

AJB

New User
For me, the biggest question mark about this course is how much the conclusions from a statistical analysis solely of pro matches apply to recreational players between, say, 3.0-4.5 (which is the vast majority of players). They may...or they may not. But from what I've read of the course (yes, I've watched the 20-minute infomercial) I haven't seen that question addressed.
 

Flatballs

Banned
Books and movies are entertainment. Reading a summary of a book or movie won't give you the same experience. Online courses are information-based, so by posting the information, you're essentially giving away some of his value for free when it isn't yours to give. Coaching lessons are different because they're more specific to the student. That being said, for Will's sake, I hope there's more to his course than what you posted.
So coaching books are for entertainment? Righto.

How are online courses so different to coaching lessons, books, documentaries in terms of being "information based"?

I find your argument frankly **** weak.

A good course would be somewhat more immersive - give real world demonstrations and examples, with perhaps some 'homework' to take away, as well as an interactive discussion forum with the course creator . Like what Ian Westermann's courses do from my limited experience. I could convey the info from the couple of courses I've done with him (like others have done), but it wouldn't match the experience of undertaking the course.

Unfortunately this course was nothing more than a guy standing in front of a white board talking, and another guy nodding and flicking magnets.

I know in America with your messed up legal system you're probably thinking "you can sue this man", but c'mon this is the information age FFS.
 
Last edited:

Flatballs

Banned
For me, the biggest question mark about this course is how much the conclusions from a statistical analysis solely of pro matches apply to recreational players between, say, 3.0-4.5 (which is the vast majority of players). They may...or they may not. But from what I've read of the course (yes, I've watched the 20-minute infomercial) I haven't seen that question addressed.
Will suggests that apparently Craig has done a lot of analysis of rec level tennis, but he only refers to pro level tournaments and players and hawk-eye data in the course.
 

Raul_SJ

Legend
Who determines what is a "forced error" and an "unforced error"? Craig O'Shannesy just examines the video footage and uses his judgement?
 

Flatballs

Banned
Posting the material is not right
Ive deleted it now. No one wants to discuss the info, instead they prefer to be slanderous against me for wanting to raise discussion on it. So pay the $47/$94/$194 and get it yourself.

And youre the one who quoted it all. Its on your fat shoulders now. Its not right you were saying?
 
Last edited:

Raul_SJ

Legend
Ive deleted it now. No one wants to discuss the info, instead they prefer to be slanderous against me for wanting to raise discussion on it.
There was no need to delete it.

Most everything you posted was mentioned in the 25 minute free introduction video. It was your personal review and criticism and falls within the guidelines of fair use.
 

Raul_SJ

Legend
For me, the biggest question mark about this course is how much the conclusions from a statistical analysis solely of pro matches apply to recreational players between, say, 3.0-4.5 (which is the vast majority of players). They may...or they may not. But from what I've read of the course (yes, I've watched the 20-minute infomercial) I haven't seen that question addressed.
It mentions that more points are won off of forced errors than unforced errors. Perhaps it still does apply at 3.5, but I suspect the ratio of forced/unforced errors is much closer at 3.5 vs pro level...
 
Last edited:

Flatballs

Banned
There was no need to delete it.

Most everything you posted was mentioned in the 25 minute free introduction video. It was your personal review and criticism and falls within the guidelines of fair use.
Unfortunately only you and maybe one or two others wanted to discuss what I thought were some interesting points.
 

SFrazeur

Legend
Exactly. "Basic instruction" is not something to be disguised or harmful. That is why your usage was wrong.

The other poster was spot on when he asked whether you meant the player buying the product. That is how I also read it. Rec players are pigs and money spent on advanced instruction is a futile attempt to mask the underlying bad product.
One more time: The pig is basic instruction that FYB offers, but they "put lipstick" on it by using former or current pro players and catchy names, etc.

My usage is correct.
 

SFrazeur

Legend
I think I get you - I've always kind of interpreted the saying as though a pig is bad, but, actually thinking about it, buying a pig is something that on its own is neutral or positive. A lot of people might be looking to buy a pig (especially in whatever time period the phrase originated). The lipstick is an effort to make a pig appear better, when in fact it's still a pig.

What you're saying is that FYB is trying to dress up basic instruction as something more than it is?
Pigs are good people. :D

That is correct. No matter how you fancy something up, it's still what it is.
 
So coaching books are for entertainment? Righto.

How are online courses so different to coaching lessons, books, documentaries in terms of being "information based"?

I find your argument frankly **** weak.

A good course would be somewhat more immersive - give real world demonstrations and examples, with perhaps some 'homework' to take away, as well as an interactive discussion forum with the course creator . Like what Ian Westermann's courses do from my limited experience. I could convey the info from the couple of courses I've done with him (like others have done), but it wouldn't match the experience of undertaking the course.

Unfortunately this course was nothing more than a guy standing in front of a white board talking, and another guy nodding and flicking magnets.

I know in America with your messed up legal system you're probably thinking "you can sue this man", but c'mon this is the information age FFS.
I'm assuming you wouldn't be copying sections from the coaching book on here. The way you wrote the post seemed like you were spoiling significant portions of the course. That being said, I hope there was a lot more to the course than what you posted because there was nothing great there. And nobody would sue you; they would just take down your post.
 

Flatballs

Banned
I'm assuming you wouldn't be copying sections from the coaching book on here. The way you wrote the post seemed like you were spoiling significant portions of the course. That being said, I hope there was a lot more to the course than what you posted because there was nothing great there. And nobody would sue you; they would just take down your post.
People literally copy sections of books, articles and abstracts from journals here all the time.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Ive deleted it now. No one wants to discuss the info, instead they prefer to be slanderous against me for wanting to raise discussion on it. So pay the $47/$94/$194 and get it yourself.

And youre the one who quoted it all. Its on your fat shoulders now. Its not right you were saying?
I have deleted it now.

Why don't you understand that it is simply a matter of two different issues? One has no bearing on the other.
 

AJB

New User
There was nothing wrong with flatballs posting his summary of the course. It was his own summary or interpretation, not actual FYB content. Same as if you bought a recording of a song and then sang or played it on the piano.
 

shindemac

Hall of Fame
One more time: The pig is basic instruction that FYB offers, but they "put lipstick" on it by using former or current pro players and catchy names, etc.

My usage is correct.
True, but no one wants to hear your advice if you aren't a pro. If it comes out of a pro's mouth, it's 10x more legit.
 

LakeSnake

Professional
There was nothing wrong with flatballs posting his summary of the course. It was his own summary or interpretation, not actual FYB content. Same as if you bought a recording of a song and then sang or played it on the piano.
It wasn't illegal, but it might have been unethical/wrong.
 

villis

New User
Apart from dishonest advertising, this program itself is based on misconception.

Statistics is correct. For example, no doubt that winner is more likely to be inside the court and loser far back. However, this is a consequence not cause, and all course is quite absurd.
 

Raul_SJ

Legend
You would think that the server always has the advantage.

But one interesting stat was that some players actually have a higher winning percentage receiving a second serve than hitting a second serve.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
You would think that the server always has the advantage.

But one interesting stat was that some players actually have a higher winning percentage receiving a second serve than hitting a second serve.
You see that frequently on the women's side
 

tennis_ocd

Hall of Fame
Guys on the internet complaining over the sharing of material... really? lol

My guess is that WH doesn't/didn't really focus on the money collection aspect of his material -- transferring that to another trusted entity that may have let him down this time....
 

julian

Hall of Fame
WH is responsible

Guys on the internet complaining over the sharing of material... really? lol

My guess is that WH doesn't/didn't really focus on the money collection aspect of his material -- transferring that to another trusted entity that may have let him down this time....
WH is responsible for everything what carries his name.
There is no excuse for changing prices on fly
Being greedy is good but only to some extent.
 

tennis_ocd

Hall of Fame
WH is responsible for everything what carries his name.

There is no excuse for changing prices on fly

Being greedy is good but only to some extent.

Responsible yes. But there may be "excuses" as to possible glitches with a third party collection site. Just my guess as to what happened. Seriously doubt wh is knowingly making such marketing approaches.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Responsible yes. But there may be "excuses" as to possible glitches with a third party collection site. Just my guess as to what happened. Seriously doubt wh is knowingly making such marketing approaches.
Yup it is stupid to accuse him of cheating when it is clearly some kind of goof-up. It happens even to the biggest companies.
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
Ask him for your money back to buy you a round at the Heineken bar at the next US Open then post about it.

It will be promotion of his biz/customer service.
 

julian

Hall of Fame
WH is not above rules of the market

Responsible yes. But there may be "excuses" as to possible glitches with a third party collection site. Just my guess as to what happened. Seriously doubt wh is knowingly making such marketing approaches.
WH is not above rules of the market
BTW: US is NOT India
 

Flatballs

Banned
You would think that the server always has the advantage.

But one interesting stat was that some players actually have a higher winning percentage receiving a second serve than hitting a second serve.
Yeah many players do - people say Rafa has '3 serves'
 

Raul_SJ

Legend
Yeah many players do - people say Rafa has '3 serves'
That's usually not a good thing.

If you have a lower winning percentage hitting a second serve vs returning a second serve, that usually an indication of a weak second serve.

Not familiar with Rafa's game in particular and whether this applies to him.
Maybe his attacking return is better than his second serve.

At the club level, I think most players would prefer hitting a second serve vs
returning a second serve.
 

Flatballs

Banned
That's usually not a good thing.

If you have a lower winning percentage hitting a second serve vs returning a second serve, that usually an indication of a weak second serve.

Not familiar with Rafa's game in particular and whether this applies to him.
Maybe his attacking return is better than his second serve.

At the club level, I think most players would prefer hitting a second serve vs
returning a second serve.
Yep thats what I meant, his points won % is higher on return of second serve (about 63%) than on his own second serve (about 55%).

Good numbers across the board.

Murray the differential is greater - which has probably cost him grandslams.
 

darthpanda

New User
Will's style of writing emails is annoying :)


"Hey have you seen my new offer

It's something you have never seen before

It's a once in a lifetime opportunity

A chance to lift your game to the next level

And leave your opponents behind in the dust

While being astounded at your new-found spectacular game

That would leave even the best players in awe

I garantee that you have never seen this before

When you buy this you'll think, why didn't I buy this earlier?

Your game will rise to new dimensions

Opponents will now truly fear you

You'll be able to hit with far more confidence and accuracy than ever before

You won't believe how good you have become

All because of this one small secret

That you didn't know till now

But makes such a big change to your game

You'll be surprised at how easy it is

And opponents will be surprised at how easy you smash them off the court

They will look dumbfounded

Wonder why they suddenly are losing against you

So this is why I offer this to you

So you can become the player you always wanted

And reach a level you couldn't even dream of in your wildest dreams

To finally be able to play the way you want it

And it is all in this one small secret

Never released, until now

For you, not because I want money

But because I want YOU to improve YOUR game"


(half an hour later)

"Normally this product is worth 500 dollars

But because it's for you, I sell it for ONLY 100 dollars

To become the player you deserve to be

But be quick, cause this offer is only on for a limited amount of time

A one-time action that offers this product at this very cheap price

Chat soon
Will"
dude, this was extremely funny
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
That's hilarious. Clearly he grew up watching Don Lapre infomercials ". "I made $50,000 a week from my one bedroom apartment placing tiny classified ads"

The "once in a lifetime" bit was my favorite line.
Truth: if he threw in a set of Ginsu knives I would go for it. I need some cutlery for my kitchen.




dude, this was extremely funny
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
i dont get why people waste money on these online videos. better to pay a real life coach.
or get this book and read it cover to cover
http://www.amazon.com/Tennis-Tactics-Winning-Patterns-Play/dp/0880114991

finally, go play and practice as much as you can.
Because, you know, they are all mutually exclusive. No one has ever taken a real life lesson or read a tennis book and also watched an Internet video, and played tennis too. These things just cannot happen in one person's life.
 
Top