Making a poor forehand better.

[johnyandell]

Uh, insulting people and then telling them to keep their mouths shut if they respond--this is what "interacting" means to you?

I also made an offer to to talk to your coach--that's raining on your parade, I'm just guessing, because, maybe he'd then read the things you've written here?

Don't worry I won't mention that--so if you're serious about trying to spread this new info, send me his contact info. I'll be in Cincy and if he has a player in the top 40, the two of them should be there too. Always looking for a new approach.

[tcuk]

I agree. Being a coach is similar to being a player in terms of proving worth.

Players often 'talk a great game', but at the end of the day they'll have to go on court and prove it. Coaches can bang on all day about systems to create good players, but at the end of their day they will be judged on the quality of players produced.

In tennis, you have to back up what you say, period.

[carrerakent]

coaches being proven

tcuk...you make a good point that my coach and i discuss often. take brad gilbert. he was paid 7 figures to help Murray and couldn't...but brad probably is not capable of taking someone from way down and making them anything anyway. he's not a true coach. just look at his wrist assist idea! LOL! he hasn't done it yet. his success with agassi...well, my granny could have done that with a self help book if agassi clicked with my granny, roddick was gonna do what he did with or without gilbert, and murray got worse...didn't he? i'm not sure on the facts on that. it took a real tennis coach to get murray to where he could go.

i realize that is all my opinion, but the argument that yandell wants to throw at someone is that unless someone has produced a grand slam winner, they aren't a great coach. there is nothing more useless. I can give specific examples of people that have come from people like Landsdorf, Macci, etc that were not taught so many basic things that could help them win. stuff that you all would be amazed that they weren't taught. People that are going to be winners with or without these coaches gravitate to where winner players are...not the coaches...i'd think. look at bolliterri. 100s of top players a year and has he ever produced someone from the ground up? (someone that knows answer that)

does anyone really believe that you could teach davenports or sharapovas forehand to anyone and them have success with it. i don't think so. i think all players can be better with better coaching...no, better vision in coaching.

the biggest challenge IS: people do not want to change. try to go to the USPTA with a new idea...ha ha...is all they have to say. Try the USTA, try telling a pro player, i can make your strokes so much better, but we are going to have to change your game from the foundation up...so for about 6 months you might see a little drop in your rankings but you will improve in the end. even if your name is Cahill you won't be listened to, primarily because of their fears and egos.

so, that poses the difficult question...how can one institute a truly ground breaking system when uspta, usta, and most all pro players are not open minded to change that isn't their own idea. you have to spend a decade or more with hundreds of gifted athletes until you find that one very rare bird that has what it takes to go to the top and get recognized.

or, you can do like me and make every one better that i come in contact with because i love tennis and i love to help people.

[tcuk]

I feel that most coaches are better suited to working with certain standards of players. I work with talented children aged 7 to 12 - sometimes to 14 if they are slower developers. I coach well at this level and kind of know this my station. Some coaches are very good a working with beginners, some with adults, some are good at working with national level students. Never is a coach good on all levels.

Brad Gilbert probably wouldn't be good at working with beginners or even talented 12 year-olds. But he has great tour experience, is full of life, is probably a good motivator, and knows the game at top level. His strength probably lies in working with top players.

This is what I think, anyway

[carrerakent]

tcuk, i am sure you are right, but is that because of
but my coaches new system seems to be working with all levels instantly. i seen him take a male or female pro in the top 200 or 300, 30 minutes in...if they are open-minded, and they are jaw dropping at how they've never heard of this stuff from anyone, and even more amazed at how their strokes became so much better almost instantly. my coach (i don't use his name because i haven't asked him yet if it is okay) has frequently taken a good state level junior player or total beginner and video'd their strokes...three hours later video them again and i swear we all would think the videos were taken a couple of years later after intense training/coaching.

so, with that said, maybe all levels of coaching can greatly improve since the top ten men and women, people ranked 500 and the ladies bloody mary league at my club are all making the same mistakes...but the method of getting it to the various levels so that it is accepted is the stumbling block.

[johnyandell]

This statement I never made, and actually, don't agree with:


"the argument that yandell wants to throw at someone is that unless someone has produced a grand slam winner, they aren't a great coach. there is nothing more useless."

[ccrood]

You are talking about this coach and how great he is. Instead of pontificating and trying to discredit other coaches, why don't you enlighten us and tell us what you coach showed you so we all can learn?

Maybe it'll teach Yandell something new.

[johnyandell]

I've seen a lot of people make a lot of claims and the quicker and more miraculous the claim, usually the less reality.

The facts are however that people in tennis that really have something can make their way. When you are on the outside there is a tendency to bash others and put them down, but this is usually coming from the frustration of not being heard. That's a mistake that will retard or prevent you from actually having a chance to make a contribution.

The comments on Brad for example. Those are ridiculous. Murray has repeatedly acknowledged his contribution. And as for Agassi if you ever saw them together or heard them talk in person or read the things Andre said, you would know that Brad had a tremendous, sustained positive influence that was pivotal at a critical time and actually changed the way Andre thought. Winning Ugly is a great book. Personally I was never a fan of Brad when he was young and had a couple of extremely unpleasant encounters with him--but you have to give him his due.

Again, I find it curious that you are quick to say you can't get a hearing with the USPTA, the USTA etc--although I'd be more curious to know who you talked to, if anyone, and what you said. If you took the approach you have so far in this forum, you shouldn't be too surprised to be rebuffed.

Again instead of just making claims and ridiculous criticisms, why don't you put up? Every coach you criticize has a voice and following here. I'm offering you the same type of opportunity.

[carrerakent]

sharing

You are talking about this coach and how great he is. Instead of pontificating and trying to discredit other coaches, why don't you enlighten us and tell us what you coach showed you so we all can learn?

Maybe it'll teach Yandell something new.

I mentioned in an earlier post that I would be glad to help someone if they want to contact me elsewhere. I'm not interested in making money at it, just like when I offered to Yandell to let me edit his and others articles before posting because I did that for a living...I wasn't taken up on that offer either.

(But, I am also not going to take credit for my coaches genius. He has read most of the articles on this website and separately came up with the same opinions that I have and many others that are speaking out here over time.)

My coach helped me long distance for awhile before we were able to get together at one of his trips to Key Biscayne. I had a 5.5 hour lesson with him and came away mentally exhausted because he challenged and reformed my understanding of so many things tennis related. My immense excitement at the success I have had with my students and that I have seen with his players and students is why one reason for my ire on this site. I shouldn't, but my frustration over so much BUNK makes me want to lash out.

I learned tennis from tennis magazine in a rural town in Arkansas as a junior in high school. i trusted all of the experts, some thought of here as sages, to only later realize how much what they taught was so much the cause for holding me back from my potential.

So, with that said, I cannot teach "his" system because it cannot be taught via text and it will be rejected by most on here because of the same reasons that the wrong stuff is over analyzed on this site. I would love to have someone send me a video and let me give them some pointers...see for yourself if it works for you. I'll tell you now...you ARE too close to the ball if you are not happy with your forehand!

CCROOD, that one bit of advice is worth more than you might imagine. There's really no reason to go further until that is understood and experienced.

[holyhobo]

carrerakent

you are being way to mystical.(perfect Coach perfect System) You sound like a Con.
The captain and yourself should post at the rants and raves at t.w. a great destination for the disillusioned but beautiful souls.

ps. dont reply cause i dont like reading your posts etc etc !

[ccrood]

so all I have to do is create more space from my point of contact from my body?

[carrerakent]

nope

so all I have to do is create more space from my point of contact from my body?

nope, that is just where you will likely look first for change.

see, everyone, except maybe a couple of people on this forum take everything said and put some kind of criticism and absolute against in an effort to find fault.

ccrood, i haven't seen a single player in two years that is not too close to the ball. so i think i'm pretty safe in stating that as a good starting point. the problem resides in noone that i know of teaches players how to properly watch the ball and so they don't know in advance where the ball will and should be for them personally at contact. without knowing that people move in too close and use forearm herky jerky upward and intended arm rotation and wrist movement to make up for their bad position. nothing is as simple as one fix, but it truly is amazing how much that one fix changes so many variables making the other necessary fixes fall right into place.

[carrerakent]

carrerakent

you are being way to mystical.(perfect Coach perfect System) You sound like a Con.
The captain and yourself should post at the rants and raves at t.w. a great destination for the disillusioned but beautiful souls.

ps. dont reply cause i dont like reading your posts etc etc !

hollyhobo...who cares. i'm obviously not talking to you anyway.

[carrerakent]

carrerakent

you are being way to mystical.(perfect Coach perfect System) You sound like a Con.
The captain and yourself should post at the rants and raves at t.w. a great destination for the disillusioned but beautiful souls.

ps. dont reply cause i dont like reading your posts etc etc !

this guys response and yandell's are the perfect explanation that teaching systems/methods, whatever you want to call it, get so caught up in a rut. closed minded people. there is nothing perfect, but there is always room for improvement and i think that is what many of us are on here for...to find improvement through dialog.

[johnyandell]

Yeah I'm so closed minded that even after all the nasty attacks I still offer you guys a forum. Apparently you two are the only ones in the world that know how to hit a forehand, so far you just can't explain it.

Seriously though, you are a student of the stroke archives, find a couple of links you like of players doing some of the things you believe and paste them in here.