Unanswered questions about the ATP forehand.

[hockeyscout]

True but you slightly misunderstand my point. Let's leave aside beginners and club players from the discussion and assume we are dealing with promising juniors.

Few kids can imitate perfectly. Teaching an ATP forehand to a kid who is missing certain positions is tricky. The kid would have to try and understand the concept at this point. Explanations through words are tricky...and we don't want paralysis by analysis. What coaches need are skills and tricks to get kids to make those missing positions...the outside backswing is certainly one of them. This is what I mean when I allured teaching skills are lagging behind the high speed discoveries of Tennisplayer.

It's one thing coaches finally coming to grips with all this stuff, quite another to teach it. It really isn't easy.

What kind of kids are you coaching?

[hockeyscout]

Interesting thought about how to coach it.

Sampras started reversing his forehand when it skid on the line and he had little time. Nadal reverses to create topspin. Uncle Toni tried to get him to hit like Fed a few years ago. It didn't last. But yes it is difficult for coaches to teach what they don't know. Maybe that is why it is better to guide students to do certain things on the court and then let them innovate to a certain extent. Rather than teaching them specific things they should be allowed to explore with some guidance. It sounds a little hands off but if tennis coaching had mandated certain technical movements there would be no modern forehand. I often wonder how much I should let my son innovate and how much I should keep him contained. The ankle weights seem to do a pretty good job...

I like this guy!

Yes, if the kid loves the game, let him spend a lot of time experimenting. This site is great as well, let him read it if it interests him. My eight year old reads this site, it's basic, not hard to understand and very straightforward unlike the running, golf, MLB and NFL instruction sites which are a hell of a lot more technical.

She gets it because she's had free reign here, and has spent the time because she likes it.

The ideal thing developmentally wise for a young player is to know the game inside and out, and then they can sort out the BS from the truth, and develop to their maximum abilities over the long term.

Their are a million daddy's who have failed to coach their kids to the top, a million coaches who have failed to develop a top ten player in the world despite the fact they are certified and have done this for twenty five years as well. Associations and clubs as well have failed, so their is no certain path.

I kind of like an athletes chances better than a coach or daddy, and I believe making them accountable, not handing them the answers, creating dialogue and encouraging them to truly learn on their own are the key elements to developing a player who will achieve their end potential.

Self importance, a lot of people have it in sports (associations, clubs, coaches, managers, agents, advisers, moms and dads), and for me it's vital my young one see's herself as the one in charge, making end decisions, innovating and learning first.

Sports is athlete driven (even though all of us here might not like me saying this), and in the long term I believe my approach will allow my young one to have the knowledge necessary to surround herself with the best people, create a perfect storm for herself, and put her in a position to best master that missing 1 percent that is separating the #100 from the #1 in any field of life.

For me it's about empowering an athletes mind, and not teaching or having access to the best conventional coaching and teaching methods.

[hockeyscout]

Also, one very important thing, sports coaching is very complex, and being the athlete in real time is even more difficult.

Athletes need to be "bred" to be smarter than coaches.

If they aren't, then like in any industry it'll be all over for them sooner than later.

The key thing I will do with any athlete is I will have a long dialogue. I will see what the missing gaps in knowledge really are in terms of the bigger picture. I then proceed to ask them to sort out area A, B, C and D, and come back to me and discuss. Lots of questions like "what do you see, what do you think and how does what you are doing feel and why is another athlete getting a better result."

I like to even ask the kid to make a book report on a specific technique or skill set so they can work it all out in their head.

You can't rush the steps in proper athletic development.

One thing that really stuns me about this site because I think it is a great resource is,

- Where are all the Junior's and Professional players?

- Why aren't they posting here?

- How come they aren't on top of it?

- Why do I see so many coaches talking and players listening in tennis? Hell, I want my player talking non-stop, we listen, and then in this way we fill in gaps.

If a coach is not learning from an athlete, you'll go no where!

[hockeyscout]

This entire post is interesting and intelligent...thank you.

I've been there, especially the nit picking and making things worse. And yes it's a real conundrum where the dividing line is. I've come to the conclusion that trying to micro manage students' technique is a waste of time mostly. Better to teach the fundamentals and key positions and try not to feel too responsible for what players morph into. A lot must ultimately rest with the players themselves and their innate ability.It begs the question how useful is coaching? What percentage does it amount to in the development of a player? Maybe just 20%? It could be a very important 20% in some cases...decisive even. But when you consider how many factors are outside coaches' control: height, physique, natural ability, receptiveness, etc, etc., maybe coaching is a less of a factor than we think.My generation were mostly self taught. Today, in my locality, all the youngsters are coached. Ironically, many don't end up as good as players from my generation. Now this means either that the coaching is substandard or that maybe coaching isn't as big a contributing factor as perhaps we thought.

I usually agree with nothing Slotty says ever!

I like this!

He is kind of coming from where I can understand.

The kid will determine how good the kid becomes, and the kid will determine what he or she wants to learn. I tried tennis coaching with my young one early, however, she'd go on the court, and within 20 seconds the coach would be their modifying this and that, and trying to impress mom and dad by working hard, and showing everyone in the world they had great technical knowledge.

Often times I can see kids thinking, "Hey fuck off buddy, this is my game, I will play it, I will sort it out, get the hell out of my face, and your standing five feet above me, confusing me and intimidating me." They are often times doing the exact opposite of the fundamentals taught anyways, and it all disintegrates into mass chaos and the instructor says "the kid is just not serious."

When I first went to the facilities in Russia, I put my young one the court with an instructor, and the first four started teaching and teaching. I asked, "The kid is out their ten seconds, you watch one ball and you start teaching. Why?"

They answered, "Well that is what parents expect. Instruction."

I could not help but laugh.

It was funny, one guy had her on the court for twenty seconds, and I immediately pulled her off as this guy started to tinker and talk non-stop.

The dude was probably wondering, "What the hell?"

His lesson stopped after twenty seconds.

Those who are to quick with the process of instruction will never succeed in making tennis truly the kids thing first. It's better to make the kid think they invented it all!

It takes decades to build a great player, and it pains me sometimes to see coaches impatient with players making them try to learn in one year what took them twenty to figure out themselves!

I believe the fastest way to get results is to put the kid in charge of the process, and con them into believing they've done it all by themselves without the help of us old farts!

[bottle]

Great Discussion

The best defense for an old fart is SELF-INSTRUCTION. He can be as technical or not as much as he wants and he won't hurt anybody. (Liv Ullman: "Sex never hurt nobody.")

After that if he wants to teach, he will at least be teaching from substance-- from experience he has come to by himself (with a little help from his friends).

Same teaching history or literature.

Somewhere along the way he must have learned not to be a motormouth.

The converse is that command style is good for teaching Nazi tennis players their craft.