Chris Lewit

[uspta9311799]

Kuznetsova

Kuznetsova is a good example of a WTA player with excellent technique, on par with ATP players.

Too often, WTA players have substandard technique, including lack of a decent kick serve.

Kuznetsova is a great example of a woman with a solid kick serve, and whoever trained her when she was young should be complimented.

Also, she trained a lot in Spain, which would bolster the argument that some posters have mentioned about clay courts promoting kick serve development

chris

[uspta9311799]

Eric--dinner in the city

You got it, buddy

My treat. Just email me to set it up.

Chris

[uspta146749877]

Dementieva

Unfortunately, she may end up like most female players, even on the tour, with a very poor topspin serve, if any at all. Think Dementieva.

At 12, she has already missed the most important developmental window, in my opinion. Try not to miss another.

Email me to discuss privately, chris@ccom.

It is really tough to convince a stubborn tennis dad. But that is our job...to be the expert guides in the process.

Good luck,
Chris

Dear Mr.Lewit,
just for the record:
Dementieva is a bit of a special case.
She started early enough ( before the age of 7) but
got injured somehow at some moment.
She was told to change a serve AFTER an injury.
She tried to come back to an original serve-it worked during
a practice but often failed during matches.
I agree however with your general observations
julian uspta 27873

[airforce1]

Stickman, forgot to respond to second part. Gotta make this one quick.

Important window is pre-adolescence for learning and assimilating new motor engrams. This is a widely studied phenomenon in movement science. Do a search.

Essentially the premotor cortex is becoming less able to dramatically change in the teen years, so the movement habits you go into puberty with are the ones you tend to come out with.

Second aspect of the "window" has to do with connective tissue becoming stronger due to hormonal changes (testosterone especially).

During puberty the accretion of protein causes tendon and ligament to become thicker and stronger which is a good thing.

However if the pre-adolescent has been used to moving in more limited ranges of motion then the bodies tissues will be "set" to accomidate those ranges.

Gymnasts, pitchers and tennis players rely on flexibility attained in pre-adolescence and maintained (thru practice) in the teen years.

As we age we tend to loose range of motion, especially if we don't actively pursue it.

I'm not going to take it as a fact, but am going to guess that the answers posted to stickman were intended to me, as I could find no questions frm stickman in this thread and the answers seem to be related to the questions I posed.

I won't take it as fact as I don't want to be guilty of the easy association of items that could be related but often are not. I leave room that there is a different reason. My point here is that-- my guess is that this discussion of the developmental window and importance of the Kick serve is a casualty of mistaken associations to some extent, as well.

No doubt that Edberg used the Kicker with great success, but I think he makes my point better than the one intended. The main thing it did for him was to give him time to get closer to net. Also granted, my replacement for the kick is very similar to what you call the slice kick, so we are not that far apart in the end.
I just don't see the evidence that a focusing on a kicker is very important. I don't see where Edberg would have near the success now, that he enjoyed with it during his good years. Despite all the talk of disguise, the kicker is pretty obvious to recognize and not hard to handle for most good players, especially those with the modern grips. If I remember right, this even covers that Pete even adjusted his toss for the kick.

Now I didn't say the Kick did not have a place in the game, but What I don't see is the Great importance cited here, or how it has been associated with the Greatness of any modern Champion.

[EricMatuszewski]

Yes Airforce, the response was to your comment. . .

Allow me to clarify that what's at controversy is the safety for young people to put a topspin component on a serve. Many of the establishment are saying no tosses to the left at all. Thus not even a slight component of topspin is to be allowed until the student is 18 yrs old.

Thus your favorite slice kick, because it would have a topspin component would be off limits for junior players.

I take issue with this for the reasons stated previously.

[uspta9311799]

Importance of kick

I'm not going to take it as a fact, but am going to guess that the answers posted to stickman were intended to me, as I could find no questions frm stickman in this thread and the answers seem to be related to the questions I posed.

I won't take it as fact as I don't want to be guilty of the easy association of items that could be related but often are not. I leave room that there is a different reason. My point here is that-- my guess is that this discussion of the developmental window and importance of the Kick serve is a casualty of mistaken associations to some extent, as well.

No doubt that Edberg used the Kicker with great success, but I think he makes my point better than the one intended. The main thing it did for him was to give him time to get closer to net. Also granted, my replacement for the kick is very similar to what you call the slice kick, so we are not that far apart in the end.
I just don't see the evidence that a focusing on a kicker is very important. I don't see where Edberg would have near the success now, that he enjoyed with it during his good years. Despite all the talk of disguise, the kicker is pretty obvious to recognize and not hard to handle for most good players, especially those with the modern grips. If I remember right, this even covers that Pete even adjusted his toss for the kick.

Now I didn't say the Kick did not have a place in the game, but What I don't see is the Great importance cited here, or how it has been associated with the Greatness of any modern Champion.

Hello airforce1,

To address some of your questions directly, the twist, as I called it in the article has been an important weapon in just about every champions'game I can think of, with some exceptions--from serve and volleyer like Edberg to clay court grinder like Bruguera.

For example, Agassi used this serve extensively on multiple surfaces to draw his opponent off the court. It was an incredible weapon for him, setting up his baseline game.

You asked why this serve is so critical. As I discussed in the article, coaches and players who value the twist want angles. They want their players to serve the opponent off the court, getting them out of position. That is the greatest value of a twist serve along with getting the ball above the shoulders, which is still difficult to handle ball on the backhand side, even with modern strokes.

The heavy twist serve is extremely hard to handle and will pull you outside the doubles alley with little recourse. This is one reason why so many champions utilize it.

From a developmental standpoint,a great second serve is, for me, one of the most important milestones for a player. And if the twist is hit properly, it can be a tremendous weapon.

If you only develop a tospin slice, as you mention, you lose a major tactical weapon: the ability to swing your opponent outside the doubles alley (off the ad court).

As I mentioned in the article, it's not so much about the disguise but about moving one's opponent off the court with angle.

Hope that helps answer your questions.

The other question we are trying to address in this thread is what stage in the development timeline is safest and most effective for introducing the kick action.

Should the kick be introduced at 6 or 16? This is the debate that I am most curious about.

Chris

[airforce1]

Yes Airforce, the response was to your comment. . .

Allow me to clarify that what's at controversy is the safety for young people to put a topspin component on a serve. Many of the establishment are saying no tosses to the left at all. Thus not even a slight component of topspin is to be allowed until the student is 18 yrs old.

Thus your favorite slice kick, because it would have a topspin component would be off limits for junior players.

I take issue with this for the reasons stated previously.

Good enough. I was probably splitting hairs to begin with, but I'm still interested in the development window and couldn't find anything w Google.. Maybe a link to a good article on it would work if you get a chance. I do know you are busy though, thanks,

[EricMatuszewski]

What isn't on google

Most of what has been written on the subject is likely in other languages and not readily available online. So I'll share some quotes from two German books.

Tennis Course Vol 2 Lessons and Training, German Tennis Association,Barrons, 1996 and Competitive tennis for young players, ITF, meyer & meyer sport 2001

"Coordination can best be trained in children and young teenagers. . .)"p 94

The following paragraph is concerned with selection of students for sponsored training (in many european countries talented children are selected and begin state sponsored tennis training at the 8-10yr old age).

"Second, in general movement theory, it is noted again and again that the prepuberty period represents a significant developmental period for acquiring motor skills. If we assume from this that the most important tennis techniques should be learned at this age, then the talent search must begin in the eighth to tenth year." p104.

The next paragraph again implies a "window" where movement learning can happen easily with a deadline where movement learning becomes more difficult.

"During the very favorable age for learning and skillfulness, roughly between 8 and 12, talented children learn the whole stroke repertory very fast. Therefore, the curriculum should be broad and not limited to the basic types of strokes (at this time).p 133

Rather than "window" I like the analogy of a closing door. As the child is 8 yrs old the door is wide open and new movement patterns are easily moved into the "room" that is the child's learned behaviors which include engrams (movement programs). As the child approaches 12 yrs old, the door is gradually closing until it takes much more intense effort to pull the door open and get something else in.

Neurologically this may be related to the ending of brain mass growth, and relative myelnation of the premotor cortex.

Also, remember that serious tennis prospects are competing regularly by 12 years of age in this country and that competition seriously solidifies technique, whatever that technique may be. Competition thus also makes the "door" harder to pull open.

Secondly, pubertal changes in both boys and girls also usher in increasing social demands while most school systems also increase academic demands. These events make learning new and difficult tennis skills even less likely unless learning the skill is directly linked to raising a childs status in a peer group ie. the school tennis team. Keep in mind spending an 2 hours after school tying to learn to serve won't do much for your practicing algebra, memorizing dates for a history class, learning verb conjugation for Spanish class or practicing writing skills.

Shonborn further refers to the period between 6-13 as being the "the best motor learning ages" in Competetive Tennis for Young Players. ITF pg 26

"The ages between 6 and 13 are considered the best "motor learning ages" and here, coordination, speed of reaction action and frequency plus tennis technique should be given absolute priority in the training program because the formation of new neuronal connections (motor programs or engrams) are established. Therefore the training of all basic techniques should be completed between the ages of 11-13."

Shonborn adresses flexibility changes on pg 65

At the end of the early school age (approx 10-12 years) . . . Now, flexibility exercises, in order to maintain the players flexibility are necessary.

Finally Shonborn highlights on pg 29 the importance of "core" strength training for injury prevention of the young tennis player or what he calls building a "muscle corset". by citation of Grosser, M./Starischka, S.: Das neue Konditionstraining. Munchen 1998, 7. Aufl.

To stop possible injuries before they happen it is absolutely necessary to develop as early as possible, a so-called "muscle-corset". Therefore, using the proper dosage "functional muscle training with children, starting approx at age of 8 years, is an absolute must" Grosser/Starischka 1998,179.

The quotes: in summary, support the idea that all important tennis techniques should be learned before the age of 13, and that flexibility training as well as strength training should complement technique training for the purpose of achieving high performance movement as well as providing protection from injury.

The biggest danger and most likely cause of injury to young tennis players in my mind is not topspin serving or hitting topspin open stance forehands. In my mind injuries are much more frequently caused by overtraining, over-specialization and the over-scheduling of competition. Unfortunately, over-competing at young ages is enforced by the business fact that the more tournaments you have, the more money the clubs and the USTA take in. Combine this with our junior ranking and promotion rules and it's no wonder the kids are pushed in to injuries. But all that is for another time. . .

[airforce1]

[QUOTE=EricMatuszewski;6462]
"During the very favorable age for learning and skillfulness, roughly between 8 and 12, talented children learn the whole stroke repertory very fast. Therefore, the curriculum should be broad and not limited to the basic types of strokes (at this time).p 133

Shonborn further refers to the period between 6-13 as being the "the best motor learning ages" in Competetive Tennis for Young Players. ITF pg 26

"The ages between 6 and 13 are considered the best "motor learning ages" and here, coordination, speed of reaction action and frequency plus tennis technique should be given absolute priority in the training program because the formation of new neuronal connections (motor programs or engrams) are established. Therefore the training of all basic techniques should be completed between the ages of 11-13."

QUOTE]

I can see an approach that works with this data. Intro strokes 9-12, then start some tourneys 12-14, then work hard in tourneys from 14-18, then college for 2-4 yrs and ready to go pro for those who show something special in those last 4 yrs. With this schedule, we would be more likely to have the right kids in place when it counts. Let the other countries go off half cocked with their 11 yr olds already picked out. If we do it right, ours will be better when it counts.

[uspta146749877]

14 year old juniors

Most of what has been written on the subject is likely in other languages and not readily available online. So I'll share some quotes from two German books.

Tennis Course Vol 2 Lessons and Training, German Tennis Association,Barrons, 1996 and Competitive tennis for young players, ITF, meyer & meyer sport 2001

"Coordination can best be trained in children and young teenagers. . .)"p 94

The following paragraph is concerned with selection of students for sponsored training (in many european countries talented children are selected and begin state sponsored tennis training at the 8-10yr old age).

"Second, in general movement theory, it is noted again and again that the prepuberty period represents a significant developmental period for acquiring motor skills. If we assume from this that the most important tennis techniques should be learned at this age, then the talent search must begin in the eighth to tenth year." p104.

The next paragraph again implies a "window" where movement learning can happen easily with a deadline where movement learning becomes more difficult.

"During the very favorable age for learning and skillfulness, roughly between 8 and 12, talented children learn the whole stroke repertory very fast. Therefore, the curriculum should be broad and not limited to the basic types of strokes (at this time).p 133

Rather than "window" I like the analogy of a closing door. As the child is 8 yrs old the door is wide open and new movement patterns are easily moved into the "room" that is the child's learned behaviors which include engrams (movement programs). As the child approaches 12 yrs old, the door is gradually closing until it takes much more intense effort to pull the door open and get something else in.

Neurologically this may be related to the ending of brain mass growth, and relative myelnation of the premotor cortex.

Also, remember that serious tennis prospects are competing regularly by 12 years of age in this country and that competition seriously solidifies technique, whatever that technique may be. Competition thus also makes the "door" harder to pull open.

Secondly, pubertal changes in both boys and girls also usher in increasing social demands while most school systems also increase academic demands. These events make learning new and difficult tennis skills even less likely unless learning the skill is directly linked to raising a childs status in a peer group ie. the school tennis team. Keep in mind spending an 2 hours after school tying to learn to serve won't do much for your practicing algebra, memorizing dates for a history class, learning verb conjugation for Spanish class or practicing writing skills.

Shonborn further refers to the period between 6-13 as being the "the best motor learning ages" in Competetive Tennis for Young Players. ITF pg 26

"The ages between 6 and 13 are considered the best "motor learning ages" and here, coordination, speed of reaction action and frequency plus tennis technique should be given absolute priority in the training program because the formation of new neuronal connections (motor programs or engrams) are established. Therefore the training of all basic techniques should be completed between the ages of 11-13."

Shonborn adresses flexibility changes on pg 65

At the end of the early school age (approx 10-12 years) . . . Now, flexibility exercises, in order to maintain the players flexibility are necessary.

Finally Shonborn highlights on pg 29 the importance of "core" strength training for injury prevention of the young tennis player or what he calls building a "muscle corset". by citation of Grosser, M./Starischka, S.: Das neue Konditionstraining. Munchen 1998, 7. Aufl.

To stop possible injuries before they happen it is absolutely necessary to develop as early as possible, a so-called "muscle-corset". Therefore, using the proper dosage "functional muscle training with children, starting approx at age of 8 years, is an absolute must" Grosser/Starischka 1998,179.

The quotes: in summary, support the idea that all important tennis techniques should be learned before the age of 13, and that flexibility training as well as strength training should complement technique training for the purpose of achieving high performance movement as well as providing protection from injury.

The biggest danger and most likely cause of injury to young tennis players in my mind is not topspin serving or hitting topspin open stance forehands. In my mind injuries are much more frequently caused by overtraining, over-specialization and the over-scheduling of competition. Unfortunately, over-competing at young ages is enforced by the business fact that the more tournaments you have, the more money the clubs and the USTA take in. Combine this with our junior ranking and promotion rules and it's no wonder the kids are pushed in to injuries. But all that is for another time. . .

Hi,
how much time PER week a 14 year old junior should spend at a tennis
court plus in a gym?

[EricMatuszewski]

No magic number

Sorry, but I don't believe there is a "magic number" of hours that is appropriate for every 14 yr old.

Many factor need to be considered and thus the best person to make the decision of what is too little and what is too much should be a private coach who works closely with the player.

One thing people should think about though is the idea of quality practice hours vs quantity of hours.

I suspect that alot of kids a 14 yrs old are wasting 50% of their time while they are on the court just not "getting down to business".

With so many demands on a 14 yr old's time tennis practice should be kept short and focused.

You can use the court as a "hang out" after retirement.

[uspta146749877]

A cross reference about serve

Thanks for the response Chris, I'm glad things are working out for your business. I'll be in touch, I'm busy right now with a class but I have a short break coming up where I'd like to take you to dinner in the city if you'd be up for it and talk a little tennis.

Stickman,

Just replace the term kick serve with the term heavy serve and you may recall that it pretty much defined the careers of history's greatest players, especially the serve and volley specialists.

Edberg without his heavy serve might have made it to 500 in the world. . .

With his heavy serve he dominated the late 80's early 90's until another kid with a heavy serve dominated . . . a kid name Pete.

Pete without the heavy serve might have cracked top 100? Instead he became the greatest player of all time battling with Agassi who hit predominately kick serves, admittedly with less pace than Pete.

Even Bill Tilden refers to the topspin serve as hit "main" serve. Check tennis players tennis history section for that story.

My point again is that it is a critical developmental milestone that enough U.S. kids are not getting through because of politics. We have enough other challenges to growing the sport, do we really need this one?

Back to hitting the books,
Eric

You may find interesting to see

http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_437_1400.pdf?6/2/2008%202:29:49%20PM

[uspta9311799]

training hours

Hi,
how much time PER week a 14 year old junior should spend at a tennis
court plus in a gym?

Hello,

Depends, as Eric said, on the level and goals etc.

Most high sectional rank and good national rank are playing minimum 2 hour per day on court--10 per week plus regular tournaments.

Believe it or not, kids in the Eastern (New York and surrounding region) section do very little ancillary fitness, mainly because they have too much homework, but also because they are very lazy, too. My students do a lot of fitness--but they are the exception.

Many still can get to 30-60 in country, if they are very talented. That is an indication of how bad our top national players really are compared to other countries' nationally ranked kids. When a player can get to top 30 in country playing 10 hours a week and no fitness, that tells you something about the American standard...

But to move higher, I want my part-time (afterschool) players to average 2 hours tennis and 1 hour fitness daily plus tournaments--that is about 10-12 hours on court and 5 hours fitness a week not including tournaments.

Full-time players who are trying to go top D1 or pro should play twice daily--doubling the numbers I just mentioned: 20-25 hours on court plus 5-10 hours fitness. This will necessitate online or alternate schooling. Most of these types of players live at an academy, but not all.

So it depends on the ambition and the goals.

Hope that helps.

For the average sectional player in regular school, if you are getting 10 hours a week of good intensity training, a private or two, and some fitness sessions, you are doing a good job.

For those more ambitious players, the standard is much higher and the training volume increases significantly.

Good luck

Chris

[uspta9311799]

Post #23--Eric, Great Post again

Great post.

Schonborn is a very well respected coach, and he is right about the window, or door.

I would like to add that for ambitious, mature young players (probably those most likely to become world champions someday), the time window he outlines can be pushed forward a year or two.

For me, with the most talented and precocious players, technical training really can begin around 5 or 6 and should be completed by 10, rather than 12. By 10, the player can start competing and working more on tactical and other game components. There will always be some technical maintenance, but ideally the complete technical game is formed by 10--though this rarely happens because most players start training only around 8 or 9, if they are lucky, and most coaches are not purely technical at the onset.


I think an important point that Eric makes is that, when competition becomes a large part of a junior's training regiman (usually between ages 10-14), technique becomes solidified and it is more difficult to change or add new skills to the repertoire. So it is a combination of a physiological/neurological window (motor engrams, flexibility, etc) and also the pressures of competition and other real world pressures of early adolescence (school, social, etc) that buttress the case for teaching the whole panoply of technical skills at young ages--including the kick serve.

In our quick gratification society, parents are pushing their kids to compete very early on to get a high 10s and 12s ranking--their egos override a smart development plan. I believe young kids (10 and under) should be competing less and training more technique--the ranking will come later. Because once these kids have a high sectional or national rank, it will be very difficult to convince them to change their technical games--almost impossible.

5-10 years old should be technical, technical, technical, in my opinion, and I think the great developmental coaches in the world would agree. The games based phenomenon has really hurt junior development in the US, at least for high performance kids.

Thanks for the quotations Eric.

Chris

[airforce1]

Quote
"In our quick gratification society, parents are pushing their kids to compete very early on to get a high 10s and 12s ranking--their egos override a smart development plan. I believe young kids (10 and under) should be competing less and training more technique--the ranking will come later. Because once these kids have a high sectional or national rank, it will be very difficult to convince them to change their technical games--almost impossible."

At least we agree on this.