Exploring 'Super Coaching' - Any Thoughts?

[tpatennis]

This is a link to a video I made: http://tpatennis.net/super-coaching-...nnis-coaching/

I am not posting this video for publicity but rather to share my ideas and learn from others. I am by no means an expert in 'super coaching' but it is something I am working towards.

What are your thoughts on this? I have already met 2 great people from this forum so I thought i'd post something else and read what everyone has to say.

I always want to learn!


My article that goes with the video:

This video demonstrates the art of ‘Super Coaching’. The video starts off slow but I believe it is worth watching in full. By the end I am able to get Emira to thoroughly understand her backhand slice. Asking questions rather than just giving instruction is extremely beneficial to both the player and coach. This style of coaching can really help with:


Training the player to think and be able to solve problems on their own. This will be important when they are playing points without a coach or time-outs to help them.

They understand how it FEELS when they hit the shot right and wrong rather than just judging their shot on the result. When they are fully aware of how it feels when they hit the shot well, they have a better chance of reproducing it.

I have wanted Emira to stay sideways on the slice for a while but my advice wasn’t ‘sticking’. By approaching it this way I got her to discover it for herself, which is ideal. In the future I can refer back to this moment by saying such things as “remember when you told me how great your backhand felt when you stayed sideways?” … “see if you can focus on it a little more”

Although a lot of the dialog is for the players benefit it can also really help the coach to understand what the player is feeling and thinking. As a coach you might see the ball as obviously being too close to them, they might see it as being late, knowing what the player feels and thinks and working as a team can be a massive help

Learning for the pupil becomes interesting and fulfilling now that they feel responsible for their improvements. Having them WANT to learn is extremely important and I think this style of coaching really helps.

[don_budge]

Super Coaching...and slice backhands

Hello tpatennis...welcome to the tennisplayer.net forum. Congratulations on your fine student...she looks like a very well coached young lady. The foundation has been laid, hopefully on sound fundamentals, and her future looks bright.

With regards to your concept of "Super Coaching"...it looks promising, it sounds interesting and if properly utilized why wouldn't you have great results with it. After all, rule number one in the coaching role is to elevate the student's interest above your own...by doing so, the coach's interests are also served. Good results with students should produce new students and the recognition should not be far behind. There is certainly nothing wrong with wanting recognition for a job well done.

It's always good to engage the student...sometimes we have to resort to different methods depending upon different individuals. If by posing a question and trying to engage a students mind you get the results that you are looking for, by all means...go for it. Being a bit older than you I may have some different ideas about the most effective methods of motivation for human beings, and that being said, adults and children are different animals in my experience. Having question and answer sessions with younger students seems a bit tedious to me. Although believe me, I will resort to anything to get their attention...and hold it.

I watched your video a number of times and I must admit that what really interested me is your student and her backhand. If you have been the primary force behind her development, then just continue what you have been successful with. The ambidextrous serving is maybe a product somehow connected with your friend Luke Jenson? Tilden wrote..."never change a winning game and always change a losing game"...from all appearances you have a very winning collaboration with your student.

I will say that one thing that I like about your method is that it is teaching the student to be a discoverer and it is teaching her to eventually be the captain of her own ship at some point in the future. That's my goal...to teach children or people in general, to think for themselves and to not follow blindly. Once you are out on the tennis court...you are all alone and left to your own devices. A very similar situation to the game of life. Tennis education should automatically make one a better human being.

But philosophy aside...let's just talk a bit about underspin here since that was the topic of the video. The issue that you were getting across to your student was the one of getting sideways and remaining sideways throughout the swing. I have been writing a bit about underspin lately here on the forum and I would like you to read a couple of things that I have written before I go any further on this topic...if you would.

The first thing that I recall writing is from the thread "Landsman Slice Thanks John" that is down at the bottom of the first page here on the forum. The second thing that I would like you to read was “John McEnroe and Ivan Lendl: Volleys”. There are a couple of videos that accompany my posts and I hope that you will have a look at them as well before I proceed with my comments, I have a couple of ideas about your student’s backhand...if you are interested, as you claimed to be.

I read some of the comments that have been written on your youtube posts...a real potpourri. A real mixed bag.

It’s certainly nice to have such an ambitious young coach among us now. Welcome aboard...tpatennis.

[don_budge]

One more thing...or rather one more thought

With children it is all about having fun...up to a certain point. Where that point is exactly depends upon the maturity level of the children or little person. Your student looks to be ready to have a bit of dialogue but on the other hand I wonder if her level of maturity allows her to fully appreciate what has been exchanged in the dialogue process. She frankly looks to be a little bored with the process and when I see boredom...I see a child that is no longer having fun. It appears to me that she may be a year or two away from meaningful dialogue...but like everything else that you have done with her, it pays to lay the foundation.

Now, fun to me and fun to a child are two entirely different things. I think that the process that you are kicking around is fun. To have discourse and exchange ideas about why things work and why they don’t work with regard to tennis instruction is what good conversation is all about. To have a conversation with someone who asks good questions can be an especially rollicking good time, to me. On the other hand, kids want to laugh impulsively and do stupid things. They are somewhat predictable...it’s an easy thing to spot when a child has lost interest. Children, in the core of their reality, are more comfortable being told what to do if the person that is instructing them is someone that they trust, they like and feel secure with. The best way to gain their trust is to give them good instruction. The important thing here...is respect. Mutual respect between teacher and student.

In your exchange with your student it appears to me that the dialogue is too one sided in terms of interest. She is minimally interested and you are very interested. This is normal because she more or less does not fully understand, due to the level of her maturity, what it is that you are getting at through the process and you, on the other hand, are very interested in applying your version of “Super Coaching” to her education. At this point the logical conclusion would be to resort back to giving her instructions and save the conversation for afterwards. I am not totally convinced that she understands what you are trying to get at in attempting to get her to stay sideways through her slice backhand and this is evidenced in the inconsistencies in her shots.

Extremely interesting topic...tpatennis.

[tpatennis]

With children it is all about having fun...up to a certain point. Where that point is exactly depends upon the maturity level of the children or little person. Your student looks to be ready to have a bit of dialogue but on the other hand I wonder if her level of maturity allows her to fully appreciate what has been exchanged in the dialogue process. She frankly looks to be a little bored with the process and when I see boredom...I see a child that is no longer having fun. It appears to me that she may be a year or two away from meaningful dialogue...but like everything else that you have done with her, it pays to lay the foundation.

Now, fun to me and fun to a child are two entirely different things. I think that the process that you are kicking around is fun. To have discourse and exchange ideas about why things work and why they don’t work with regard to tennis instruction is what good conversation is all about. To have a conversation with someone who asks good questions can be an especially rollicking good time, to me. On the other hand, kids want to laugh impulsively and do stupid things. They are somewhat predictable...it’s an easy thing to spot when a child has lost interest. Children, in the core of their reality, are more comfortable being told what to do if the person that is instructing them is someone that they trust, they like and feel secure with. The best way to gain their trust is to give them good instruction. The important thing here...is respect. Mutual respect between teacher and student.

In your exchange with your student it appears to me that the dialogue is too one sided in terms of interest. She is minimally interested and you are very interested. This is normal because she more or less does not fully understand, due to the level of her maturity, what it is that you are getting at through the process and you, on the other hand, are very interested in applying your version of “Super Coaching” to her education. At this point the logical conclusion would be to resort back to giving her instructions and save the conversation for afterwards. I am not totally convinced that she understands what you are trying to get at in attempting to get her to stay sideways through her slice backhand and this is evidenced in the inconsistencies in her shots.

Extremely interesting topic...tpatennis.

Thanks for responding to my post, you guys blow me away with your long and detailed postings on this site. Very impressive!

Firstly, I think she is and was very engaged, I know her very well and coach her almost every day so this is almost like breathing to her. However, I thought she responded well to everything I did and said. She has an amazing desire to get better. She has fun but she really wanted to hit the slice well so I think she was happy with herself in the end.... and unlike other children she was LOUD and always called out a number and gave me feedback and smiled from time to time.

Like you said, this can get vary tedious with children sometimes, its like pulling teeth and to be quite honest I generally don't bother because I am forever asking questions because they never say anything or I can't hear them mumbling the answers..... On the other hand I feel like I should because after 20 lessons their self awareness and understanding of their game would improve. We might be able to build up a stronger relationship where we can communicate better. Plus I can help the child develop life skills.

This was my dilemma and my reason for posting the video, I think time can be wasted doing this but many good things can come from it as you pointed out in your responses.

So.... I have another kid who is shy and therefor this style of 'super coaching' doesn't fully work. However, we sat down last lesson and watched his forehand and I asked him to give me a rating out of 10 for the rhythm and smoothness of the swing and as he said, 7,8,3,9 etc I agreed with all his ratings, this is awesome. He is not just listening to what I say he is understanding what I want and realizes when he has done it right and wrong..... surely this is 'super coaching also!?

Oh... Luke Jensen became a friend because he saw Emira serving with both hands on youtube and contacted me...rather than her doing it because of him.

Sorry my writing was terrible, I am so tired but wanted to reply. Talk soon,

Thanks

Tom Allsopp

[tpatennis]

Also....

I am open to advice or your thoughts on what I do or who I coach. However, with this video of Emira slicing your advice might be wasted as this was a long time ago and her slice has changed and improved, as you can imagine. But please feel free to give your ideas on the slice backhand.

I might post some videos on here in the future so we can discuss things that I am currently working on. .

Thanks

Tom

[worldsbestcoach]

it was the opposite of super coaching

Tom (tpatennis): I have worked with and studied under the greatest educators in the world. I have a Ph.D. in effective instruction. I have trained future teachers and future professors about the elements in successful educational programming and teaching. I have consulted with school district in hands-on fashion about how to improve classroom instruction. My main focus in life has been education and business, but on the side, I have coached tennis since 1968, at all levels, including beginners, the very very top high school level, head tennis club pro level, the top conference in NCAA Div. I, and the ATP circuit.

Remember my reactions to your "super teaching" are only my opinion, but you asked for honest impressions, I think. Sorry to have some criticism for you, but I do not think that your Super Teaching is effective. Late in my life, I am starting to dedicate to improve the standard of tennis coaching at all levels. Here are my reactions after watching you teach student:

I do not think you know what a really good slice backhand is.

The student certainly did not know, either, and was making similar mistakes at the start of the video, as at the end of the video. She has a very sloppy slice, with major flaws that will never hold up consistently in a high level match. She is practices wrong habits.

Expecting students to discover for themselves is often a recipe for disaster.

Trying to indirectly lead the student to make discoveries on her own is almost the same recipe for disaster.

I feel sorry for that student. How much did her parents pay for that lesson?

That lesson was an example of the uninformed leading the uninformed. You have misanalyzed the backhand slice, and your teaching techniques are ineffective.

Today the level of slice backhands on the pro circuits is at a low level, so it is unwise to teach a student to hit a slice backhand the way pro players do.

For my analysis of Federer's slice backhand (which most analysts say is good, but it is really mediocre), see my post in the thread labeled Yanell's Backhand Slice. I do not share all my knowledge here in this site, because it is apparent to me that my knowledge is rare, therefore valuable. (I do not think I am special. I just have had some lucky experiences and opportunites.)

You seem like a good guy, with a sincere heart. Good luck.

[stotty]

Tom, I like a coach who is prepared to put his work on the line. I've done it numerous times on Tennisplayer and been blown out the water by the odd critic. I don't care. I do it anyway. The benefits outweigh the cons. Don_Budge and Tennis_Chiro always chip in and have superb knowledge of the game...far more than most coaches.

I like "question and answer" coaching because it helps kids fathom the game for themselves. Your student lets you down because her movement is minimal and she doesn't fully engage in the process. But then she is just typical of most kids, isn't she?....the type of kid coaches have to work with everyday.

Some of the balls she hits around the crest of the bounce, she "knife's" really well...on balls she lets drop too low, the ball tends to "hover". Not sure the type of follow through she has is advantageous to a junior at his level. I prefer the head of the racket to finish pointing up...like Rosewall. It's only at the very highest level where the follow through seems to have changed...out of necessity...and the head of the racket often stays lowered.

Great work, Tom. Like I said, I like a dedicated coach who is prepared to put his work on the line for all to see. I admire that.

[bottle]

Tennis Education

I'll just say that # 6 enraged me, and if World's Best Yogurt was looking for a rise, he got it. Additionally, he needs a more inclusive view on slice. I totally distrust his ideas about Roger's, which we've all seen help Roger win match after match after match. Yes, the slice did! Roger's did! Or doesn't Yogurt trust his own eyes! Which advances the notion he just advanced that he is a professional educator. Too much idea, too much concept, and much too pinched a view of teaching and stroke mechanics at far too lofty or detached a remove. A person can cross the ball or hit through it or chop down it, which apparently is what Yogurt thinks Roger does, and I see NO reason why ANYBODY should not learn all three.

But Yogurt needs to re-evaluate the part of Roger's swing where his racket comes to the ball...it goes down, but only slightly, is rather flat, actually, and he makes contact way out in front. Now how he comes off of the ball is a different question. Chop-like, I'd say, but sideways and BACKWARDS. Here's a question for which I don't have an answer, and I'd like to see Yogurt ask some questions too in lieu of thrusting out pedantic opinions all the time: Does the chop in Roger's stroke have ANYTHING to do with the spin or pace or lack of pace he just imparted to the ball? Remember, the racket's going backwards. Is that my answer?

You've implied, TWBY, that your knowledge is very valuable, and I'll draw from that that your time is very valuable, too. But if you actually want to have a discussion, tell me, please, if you don't believe in eliciting anything from tennis students, then are you entirely in the camp of command-style instruction? Seems like a good place to start any talk we might have.

Incidentally, although I've played with your name here, I'm hoping this won't mark a return to the times when people wanted to change my name from "Bottle" to "Bong" etc. But I do think that your name is the most extreme of any self-administered tennis moniker ever. Could you please tell us your original thought in coming up with such an arrogant name? And if, perhaps, for just one minute, you ever regretted your choice?

I think that arrogance is very much at the heart of this topic. Nobody, e.g. has a Ph.D in "effective instruction," which doesn't exist. And the second that anybody calls himself a good teacher, he isn't, even if he was before he made his rueful mistake. To think you are a good teacher is the kiss of death, demonstrating as it does a pronounced inability to frame the challenge of teaching with sufficient respect.

Doesn't teaching have something to do with humility? Just my opinion.

[worldsbestcoach]

you all are proving

You all are proving that coaching in tennis is at a low level. You all are proving that you misanlyze the game, and teach very poorly. I feel sorry for all the students who are led to believe that they have received good coaching, but that the student must be a head case or not be a naturally good player. I feel sorry for all the parents who waste good, big money on tennis coaching today.

I have been exposed in real life and on video to so many of the supposed very best coaches. The level I see is not good.

Yes, Tom, keep your videos coming. They are shocking wake up calls. The coach is expecting the girl student to figure out things on her own, to figure out how to make adjustments on her own, but her coach does not even know a bad slice backhand when he sees one.

In educational research, it is clear that the discovery, less direct teaching methods are least effective. They are bad at teaching basic skills, at teaching higher-order concepts, at instilling position self-concept and image. The discovery approaches produce a relatively large percentage of students who perform poorly or fail.

In tennis, almost every serious student can learn to be great, if taught well. But tennis coaches tend to blame the student. An example is Nicole Vaidisova. She was a great girl with great attitude and work ethic. But she had such abhorrent technique that she was another walking mistake factory, as is so common on the pro tours today. She finally could not take beating her head against the wall so much. She was trying her heart out, but she was receiving such bad coaching. She probably thought her failures were her own fault. Everyone -- coaches, the public -- was saying she was a head case, and unfortunately she came to believe it.

Tennis students have the right to good instruction when they pay money. The students are not receiving good instruction.

In Tom's video, when his girl's slice backhand does not hold up against top level competition, she will think that the coaching she received is fine, and it is somehow her fault that she is performing poorly. However, really she was never taught well on the slice backhand.

[worldsbestcoach]

i am humble, but I understand that I do not look humble when I'm striving to

Sorry i seem arrogant. I was only describing some of my background because I knew my words would rub readers the wrong way. Any good ideas I have do not make me special. I am bad at many things. But tennis coaching needs some shaking up. Tennis coaching needs some waking up. I knew that my words would shake some readers up, so I wanted readers to know that I am not a novice in tennis and in teaching. Of course, as I make suggestions that seem radical to you, I will experience some resentment.

Also, I know the ridicule that the very best educators in the world sometimes endure, about their better ways to teach academics. Their ideas scare other teachers, because their ideas hold educational programs and teachers and admininstrators responsible and accountable for all students achieving success. That is scary for the great majority of educators. And it is easy to see that accountability is scary also for the coaches in this modern tennis community. But I understand your reactions. I understand where you are coming from.

Tom of tpatennis not only proferred a video asking for feedback, but he also pushed his reasoning for why his super teaching is so great. Sorry that I do not agree with Tom that his super teaching is so super. I probably would not have so honestly judged Tom's teaching had he not linked the video to his reasoning about why his "super teaching" is so good. I cringe when I see his teaching. There is such a thing as the educational hall of fame. I know some of its members. I am sure that they would agree with my analysis of his "super teaching."

In person, you would meet me and see I am humble in nature. You would see I never blame the student. I take more accountability and responsibility for the performance of my students than any coach I know does.

Here are some examples of how the current tennis community does not take accountability for its teaching, but rather attributes the success or failure of players to their natural ability.

I had a friend who was high school district champion for a couple of years. He was invited to play on a good NCAA Div. I team in the best conference in the country. I also knew the coach of that team, who was telling me that with the great incoming recruits, my friend would probably be cut from the team for the ensuing year. I had never coached my friend, ever...but for one solid summer, 4 hours every day, I changed EVERY aspect of his game. My friend had never heard of coaching that was so detailed, so systematic. I made sure that my friend learned to mastery.

The next season, the coach noticed how much my friend improved, and how much another guy trying out for the university team had improved (whom I had also similarly coached), so the university coached asked me to be assistant coach. I did not even seek the nice position. Anyway, both players became starters on a great team, with the best record in recent years. My friend actually set the school record for best individual singles win-loss record in university history,

Another friend had been high school district champion for 4 consecutive years. The only reason he did not win the state championhip is because another scholastic player was great during the same time, and that other player became good enough to play Davis Cup and win a grand slam title.

Anyway, my friend got a scholarship at one of the best university tennis programs in the country. He won the conference title of the best conference in the country. He was an All-American.

But as my friend tried his hand at the minor levels of the men's professional circuit, he seemed to always lose close matches. He asked me why. I told him that the other players were better than he was, and that he needed to improve. I had never coached him, but he put himself in my hands. I changed everything about his game. He had a great double-hand topspin backhand, but I even changed that a little, so that he had more margin of safety. But I was not afraid to take one of the best NCAA players in the country and completely change significant details in all aspects of his game. He became much better, and at least made it onto the main atp circuit some, and won some matches and points there.That friend will tell you that I have a good eye for the game.

That guy's father had been a legendary 3-sport athlete in high school and at the university level. The father told me that his son had played at the best tennis high school in the state, had received instruction from one of the best coaches in the region, had received some coaching from a European coach who had been named by the old World Tennis magazine as one of the 10 best coaches of all time, and been coached at the university by a guy named to the hall of fame as coach. But the father told me that he appreciated me because I was the only person who felt capable of teaching and actually made a good effort at teaching his son

He said all those other coaches considered his son to be so great that they did not bother to teach him much. That is an example of how coaches nowadays ascribe to the talent theory, as opposed noticing flaws in players' games that must be overcome via teaching.

It is ok to teach everyone, from beginners to Roger Federer. But today's coaches have been unconsciously indoctrinated so much into following the group thinking in tennis, much of which is wrong, that they have difficulty is breaking away and seeing things with fresh eyes.

I will try to offer video of me teaching, but you have to buy it in future. Sorry that I cannot give away all of my insights for free right now. Maybe I will in the future. When the video comes out, it will be your turn to laugh at me. I will understand.

[worldsbestcoach]

sorry to say, but

It is easy to see that many of Roger Federer's slices sit up for the opponent to blast for a winner. To my eyes, Roger hits his slice to his side. I do not like Roger's angle between racket and forearms as he prepares for and later as he makes contact for his slice. He has a weak backhand grip, so that is why his strings are too open to hit his slice hard, except for sometimes when the ball is coming to him low. But the weak grip makes his drop shots and drop volleys easier sometimes. I stand by my comments about the weaknesses in Roger's slice backhand. But Rog's slice backhand is not close to being in the same league's as Rosewall's, or close to Conners' 2-handed slice.

I am also lucky to have had a new high school teacher my senior year in high school. He became our tennis coach, and turned our team from a joke into a regional and state power. He was ahead of his time. He had ideas that were revolutionary, even by today's standards. He was not afraid to disagree with the statur quo of coaching. He went on to coach national championship teams and individuals at the college level, coach the American team in the Pan Am games. and become USPTA coach of year in one of America's most important tennis regions.

He took me under his wing. I am grateful to him for inspiring me about tennis and teaching, and for showing me that it is sometimes wise to go against the grain.

So I not great. I was just smart enough to listen and keep my eyes open, and to learn to think for myself. The great Bjorn Borg, in his autobiography, essentially says that whatever you do, don't listen to coaches. Although he had flaws in his game, also, I agree with his view about not going along with the consensus line without question. Skepticism is often good.

For instance, who came up with the idea of hopping up from ready position? I see all the time players are still in the air as the ball is already coming at them, the ball already crossing the net. There is no way that players can react quickly to the ball. It is almost impossible to time that hop perfectly everytime. Outfielders and linebackers do not utilize that unwise, esaggerated hop. But some tennis coach originated that idea, and most other tennis coaches followed the leader like sheep.

[bottle]

~

There’s a miniscule amount of good stuff here. But when you say, “To my eyes, Roger hits his slice to his side,” I won’t reproduce video, but will refer you to # 782, “Three-Slice Review,” A New Year’s Serve, which contains video at the bottom that caused me to say that Roger hits his slice way out front.

That video, along with three others on the Roger Federer HD Stroke Page under “Backhand Slice Arm Action” shows where contact occurs in relation to, say, Roger’s front knee.

Also, I think that tennis has a very objective way of measuring performance similar to chess, and that Roger has done moderately well according to this standard thanks partially to his particular brand of backhand slice.

But sure, hooray for Ken Rosewall’s slice. Teach it or even better use it. It will make you a good player in addition to being the world’s greatest coach.

More serious is your disparagement of Tom Allsopp’s teaching abilities and knowledge of the sport. What is the matter? Turotte’s? Asperger’s? Or this just a left brain thing that happens to those who spend too much time in the presence of professional educators?

I repeat—if hitting slice, you can cross the ball, hit through it, or chop down it, and all three separately or in combination are good. I think you should start a personal campaign to take your educator friends out into a meadow. Start by showing them milkweed. Then have a small workshop where you all build hand tools. Proceed to tennis rackets. And if they’re still with you at this point, see if you can build a consensus in which the participants agree forever to steer their educational concepts away from the abstract toward feel and hand.

I know, you’ve been on a kick, the “Roger Federer’s slice is lousy” kick. But would you even be saying that if Djoker hadn’t just conned him out of two match points?

I’ve been around and around on stuff like this, in similar fashion, with Dave Smith over at Tennis One, who turned out to be a wonderful man. But when ever challenged, he used to cite his resume. This didn’t work for me since I used to ghost-write professional resumes for a living and know just how thin resume material is, and how, by now, in 2011 Detroit, the resume has a sole function: “Dismiss the candidate from further consideration.”

You can’t say you’re great, World’s Best Coach, other people have to say that. Incidentally, Tom Allsopp may actually be the world’s greatest coach, so I’m not surprised that you attacked him.

[don_budge]

From "What is true in Tennis" by John Yandel

"Conflicts and debates over the "right" way to play and teach are endemic. They drag on endlessly and often become personal and acrimonious."

Gentlemen...I suggest that we keep this type of discourse to a minimum. Yandel himself often says "we can agree to disagree". Let's declare this forum a "freedom of speech" zone. Anything goes and we all have the right...as long as it doesn't get personal. A person has the right to use "worldsbestcoach" just as a person has the right to use "bottle" or "don_budge". What's in a name?

We are lucky to have our little "cyber" community here on the forum. It's a place where we can go and "escape" the reality of the situation which is that things are not all that healthy in the real world. Let's try to appreciate the other guy for all that he is...including his dysfunction. Let's face the truth gentlemen...we all have our dysfunction. But on the other hand we all have at least one thing in common...we all love our sport deep down inside. Participating on the forum is a lot of fun...let's not muck it up. Don't let it bring out the worst in you. Let's try to exercise "tennis etiquette". Now there's an old fashioned concept.

My first thoughts when I saw "Super Coaching" was..."wow, who does this guy think he is introducing an idea that purports to be better than the rest?", so I read what he had to say, watched the video and wrote what I honestly felt about it. I made some criticisms about what I thought was lacking in the method but at the same time I tried not to be overly critical and caustic because I did not want this new guy to go away. I also tried to see the merit in what he had to say. Obviously this young man can be a worthy contributor to our community...and at the same time he has a lot to learn. Great coaches and teachers go through a long seasoning or marinating process. It takes time and experience to become saturated with the wisdom and to develop the patience that is needed to become a great teacher. I wasn't overwhelmed by his students technique either and I was going to offer my criticism of that as well but it did not appear to me that he wanted to hear it...so I did not.

When I first saw that a person was using "worldsbestcoach" as a user name I knew that we were in for a "special" treat. Bill is not your run of the mill guy, he is older than most of us and he has a great deal of experience in different facets of life. This much I gather. I, for one, am willing to accept him for who he is as a cyber personality and I will read him with great interest just as I read every other contributor to our community. If what he says offends you...ignore it, or better yet, write a rebuttal based on your take on the "truth". Use your intelligence. We all see the same thing...but from different points of you...I mean view. Perspective. When the ball is very close to the line traveling at the speed of light different people will either see it in or out depending upon their perspective...or their ability to see clearly. Nobody here has a monopoly on the truth.

Tennis is an extremely competitive endeavor. Most coaches and teachers tend to be ex-players and ex-athletes and therefore have that old competitive instinct. I know that deep inside myself that this can bring out the best in me but on the other hand sometimes I have these irrational impulses to go "McEnroe" or to go "Nastase" and to be honest when I was young I gave into those impulses sometimes. Those were the good old days and I had the legs of a stallion...but now that I am a bit older and "wiser" I try to resist...I try my best.

[worldsbestcoach]

I see ...

I see important details in Fed's slices that other people do not see.

I feel the state of tennis coaching is very low, and much be improved, so that money and effort and time are not wasted. It is also bad for the psychological well-being of today's tennis students.

Sorry if I stop on others' toes. If my words are too shocking to you, I somewhat apologize, but why not try to make the field of tennis coaching better? I think I have singular insights and fresh ideas that contribute. I am not saying that any player or coach is stupid or evil. I understand why tennis coaches think the way they do. I understand why they resist what I say.

I could give other examples of an entire field of study being misguided, but I will save that for future discussion.

In starting this thead, Tom shared a video from a for-pay internet site. Tom of tpatennis.com restated here at tennisplayer.net the exact words for super teaching that are used to promote that same "super teaching" at the tpatennis site. Why sell super teaching at this site with the exact same words used to sell it at Tom's site?

If Tom had just shared the video and asked, "What do you think?", I might have ignored the thread or politely held back my true assessment. However, Tom was promoting tpatennis and his biases in education to such a degree that I honestly evaluated his instruction. I think that is what Tom wanted. I never cast aspersions on Tom's intentions. I never cast aspersions on Tom's character. I understand where Tom is coming from. I tried to say nice things about Tom. Sorry that I do not think his teaching in that video was effective.

don budge: not all teaching philosophies and methods are equal. To me, teaching is a very important, crucial matter. Although tennis generally is not the most important subject matter, teaching coaching can also have an element of consumer rights, or pupil rights, about it. It is ok to discuss it. I do not think it is good that tennis coaches misanalyze the slice backhand and teach it poorly. Why is a discussion of it off-limits?

I did not start the discussion. We were asked to share what we think. Sorry that I do not fall in line with current thinking, and thereby upset coaches. I criticized the teaching. Weak teaching is common; good teaching is hard to find. Common, weak teaching does not mean the teacher is a bad person at all. I did not criticize anyone's intent, or heart, or intelligence. I see goodness in people. I believe there is greatness in every tennis pupil and coach, if that is what pupil or coach wants. We can always improve.

I believe students in school have a right to good education, but teachers are not trained how to teach effectively, and educational programs are poorly designed. That is why a good proportion of students perform relatively poorly. That is what I believe, and know. Why not try to also better teaching principles and analyses in the field of tennis? Why not instill more accountability in the field of tennis coaching? As any field changes, as a current schema is evolving, it will be hard to accept by many people -- especially during the early stages of change. I understand why the majority of coaches disagree with many of my comments right now. I try to share insights, but if there is resistance, that is ok.

I am hoping for more video from Tom. Tom says he might share more video, and that his pupil has improved her slice backhand. I thought his first video was interesting, and I hope for more.

[bottle]

~

Right, just I am not supposed to discuss slice. "Let's deny Bottle's personal experience, because our experience is higher and more professional and better." A great educational philosophy (NOT).

Denying the other person's experience might work in a tennis or chess match but not in education, where truth matters, and where both teachers and students always respond to whatever is going on.

Here's a video. Roger is hitting the ball out in front:

http://www.tennisplayer.net/members/high_speed_archive/phantom/Roger_Federer_HD_HS/Backhand_Slice/RF_BH_Slice_Arm_Action/RF_BH_Slice_Arm_Action.html?RF%20BHSlice%20ArmAction%20Side3%20250fps%20.mov

Has Bill responded to that? With evidence at least trying to refute my assertion? Do facts matter in a discussion like this or is it all just blather? Has Bill been to a court and actually tried the shot? Did the ball go fast? And did Bill actually go to the website tpatennis.net before he decided it was "for-pay?" Tennis Player is for pay. tpatennis is not. Facts establish credibility, of which I don't find much here.

I'm especially shocked by Bill's statements about how much he values the individuality of the student-player. How can that be true if he doesn't value self-discovery? Because he saw a study purportedly proving that Socratic method doesn't work and never did?

What were the controls in that experiment? Did its teacher-participants actually know what they were doing? Was Socrates expelled from the class before the study began? Am I supposed to think now that the one huge lecture I attended at Brown University was better than all the small conversation classes with people who are tops in their field?

"Oh no, these guys are arguing, and it hurts my ears! Make it stop, mummy! Can't people just be polite? Whatever happened to civil discourse?"

This is how Tea Party types start to whine as soon as they know they're losing some debate.

I'll be ready soon to "agree to disagree" but not quite yet. Because there are still matters of substance to be considered here, the premature abandonment of which would be criminal in my view.

And Bill somehow equates Tom Allsopp's approach to teaching tennis with the talent worshippers that infect our sport? Shouldn't that matter be addressed? Has Bill actually read anything at the tpatennis site? Does he educate himself about Tom Allsopp or anybody else before he spouts off like Jeremiah with hugely pejorative judgments?

Clearly, if somebody asks for honest evaluation, he'll be slammed. And it will be mean. And not educational. Will Tom submit a new film? I wouldn't.

And is Bill really as unique as he himself trumpets, so out of the mainstream?
Everybody's been dumping on Roger's slice lately. MOO!

"Sorry to say, but..." to borrow Bill's phrase. Listen-- this guy is fair game. I won't nominate him for a Quentin Tarantino film starring Uma Thurman, but if I'm president of the Eastman-Kodak Johnson & Johnson Johns Hopkins Columbia School of Nursing School of Education he's out the door.