Exploring 'Super Coaching' - Any Thoughts?

[lobndropshot]

I learned a lot from the posting

Dear Tom,

Thank you for putting you work out there I learned a lot and I hope that you put more on here in the future. I have no idea why someone would come to this website if they have a predetermined notion on how this game is supposed to be played.

Thank you for sharing you work,

best wishes

Patrick

[stotty]

Coaches who post their work

You have admire Tom for posting his work up in the forum. I have done the same and suffered a barrage of insults in the process. Truth be known if all the coaches in the form posted clips of their young students you can rest assured other coaches will find technical faults in all of them. Theory is one thing, the hands-on, practical side of building a player quite another.

Coaching is a very difficult job to be good at. Tom is definitely a good coach and worth his weight in gold any day. Many coaches are just earning a living and have very little interest in developing players in kind a caring way or thoughtful way. Tom cares...and from his Youtube clips, knows what he is talking about.

What I will say to all coaches who attack another for his work is to do so in a helpful way and not an insulting one. There is simply no need to insult anyone - period! Show by example. If you have a magic formula for developing players, then share it. Post clips...let's see your work...step up to the plate, as Agassi would say. Don't criticize or explain things thru written text. A video clip can say what 3000 words never can...unless, of course, you can write as well as Don_Budge

[10splayer]

You have admire Tom for posting his work up in the forum. I have done the same and suffered a barrage of insults in the process. Truth be known if all the coaches in the form posted clips of their young students you can rest assured other coaches will find technical faults in all of them. Theory is one thing, the hands-on, practical side of building a player quite another.

Coaching is a very difficult job to be good at. Tom is definitely a good coach and worth his weight in gold any day. Many coaches are just earning a living and have very little interest in developing players in kind a caring way or thoughtful way. Tom cares...and from his Youtube clips, knows what he is talking about.

What I will say to all coaches who attack another for his work is to do so in a helpful way and not an insulting one. There is simply no need to insult anyone - period! Show by example. If you have a magic formula for developing players, then share it. Post clips...let's see your work...step up to the plate, as Agassi would say. Don't criticize or explain things thru written text. A video clip can say what 3000 words never can...unless, of course, you can write as well as Don_Budge

Right on!!!!!

[johnyandell]

Well, well, I missed this little dust up. As someone who has engaged in his fair share of message board "debate" in other venues, I appreciate where everyone is coming from. Based on that I am not in any position to throw bricks I assure you.

However, I think there is a level of respect we need to observe with people who have the courage to post video of their students. It's very easy to criticize and find fault, but without posting video showing alternatives, there is less credibility to the criticisms and more to the posters. Not that the critical points might not be valid.

But really there isn't much accountability unless the criticisms are backed up with evidence. I can say this since I post video of my own work with players all the time.

I think we've come a pretty good distance on this board in improving our mutal communication skills and showing respect even in disagreement. Let's keep heading in that direction.

Let's try to stay away from the name calling, and also, from the type of provocative comments that we all recognize when we hear them that tend to generate strong negative reactions.

[johnyandell]

Yeah well after the pounding Tom took and the disinclination to post it created he can have his one shot back.

[tpatennis]

conehead and massive pimple?

But what about the words "dickhead" and "massive twat" in post #30. These are both rather juvenile references to human genitalia...is this acceptable verbiage? Not in my book...certainly not on a tennis forum where "tennis etiquette" is in play.

Perhaps an apology is in order...and a deletion of these two words, or a simple substitution using the Edit function...then I delete this post. It would be like this never happened. Perhaps "conehead" and "massive pimple". That's all. It was a great discussion and I am certain that Tom Allsopp and worldsbestcoach could contribute to more...if they cared to.

If I called people conehead and massive pimple I wouldn't be able take myself serious. ****head is definitely one of my favorite words but i'll try not to use it again unless someone continues to be a massive pimple.

cheers

Tom

https://www.tpatennis.net

[worldsbestcoach]

?

I must have missesd some of the posts in this thread. Even if I disagree with particular coaching, I know that the coaching I evaluate is done honestly with good intent. If I was not impressed with tpa Tom's instruction in slice backhands, I realize that I am in the minority. And I made sure to mention that Tom is a positive person with positive intent. I did not criticize him personally -- I only gave an honest evaluation of "super" coaching, for which he asked. I am only trying to improve the low level of tennis coaching that is omnipresent. If I did not quite treat Tom enough with kid gloves, I am sorry. I tried to be somewhat gentle.

The slice technique that Tom teaches is the same technique that is used by the pros today. I am not impressed with pro one-handed slice backhands. There was a thread about slice backhands in which I listed many different situations and purposes for which a slice backhand can be used. I mentioned that a good slice backhand should meet the purposes in each of those situations. The current pro slice backhands meet a couple of those purposes, but very far from all of those purposes.

I am all for producing a tennis pupil who can solve problems and challenges on her or his own. In fact, I like to produce players who keep their mind and eyes on the court, instead of looking at me or at a support team in the stands.

Of course, a player should learn to evaluate oneself, and make necessary adjustments. On the other hand, if the player is expected to re-discover the wheel, not much tennis progress will be made. A good coach oftentimes should offer guidance, especially to students who are relatively naive with respect to the particular skill being taught in the lesson. If the discovery appraoch that is "super teaching" is used, then it should be reserved for relatively sophisticated learners with respect to that skill.

There is much truth in Inner Tennis, in that the pupil should have in mind a particular "ball-flight" picture, and a "ball-action-on-the-court" picture in her or his mind, before the stroke is made. After each and every stroke, there should be an evaluation as to how close the actual shot was to that picture. As as the great coach Peter Burwash says, making adjustments is one of the most important aspects of playing good tennis. I have a saying, right or wrong, that you are only as good as your last shot. If you hit a bad shot, you should figure out why. I also like the comment by Rod Laver. He was asked who his coach was. He was nonplussed but answered, "I am."

Some respondent in this thread brought up the great coach John Wooden. John Wooden was very much a product of his father, his high school coach, his college coach, in his teaching, his coaching, and his moral wisdom. Wooden certainly did not expect his players to discover eveything for themselves -- to "rediscover the wheel." He told his players exactly how to put on their socks, exactly how to tie their shoes, how to tuck in their shirt, exactly how and when to throw a bounce pass, exactly how to apply pressure defense, and why. It was not similar to "super coaching."

Even the very best players and coaches should not be above criticism. I saw the great Rafa Nadal think that he could not reach a drop shot (hit by that German player who beat Rafa) in the recent Shanghai Masters. The ball almost hit Rafa on the foot. Rafa had given up and had already hung his head. So even the greatest players can mistakenly give up on a ball and make a mistake similar to ones made by everyday players. As Harry Hopman (& John McEnroe) say: "Stick your racket out. Good things will happen.

John Wooden himself blew a national championship in the final against NC State, because a stall late in the game with a huge lead (before the era of shot clocks) surely would have led to yet one more championship for the Bruins. But because Wooden did not direct UCLA to stall, the great David Thompson and the Wolfpack were allowed to come back from the dead.

I am all for research in tennis. Where is the research evidence that shows today's slice backhands by today's pros are so great? Where is the research that shows that the topspin forehand technique used by Tomas Berdych (very similar to the technique used my a majority of pros today) is better than other techniques?

I am happy to participate in research. With evenly matched groups and teaching time, I will lead one group, and a cerified instructor can lead the other group. We will see which group does better on any dependent measure, immediately after the instruction is completed, or for any long-term follow-up period. (When I interject very reasonable input, persons here become defensive and say "prove it," yet they offer no strong proof for thier own contentions.)

I maintain that professional tennis coaching still has a long way to go. Players learn as they have been taught, even when the teaching is done to pro players by "expert" coaches." Often such teaching leads to actual huge holes in the players' tennis games, because tennis has been misanlyzed and poorly taught by professional instructors and coaches.

If I try here to show some skepticism about tennis instruction, I often get my head chewed off. (Skepticism is possibly the most important principle in good science.) For instance, I saw a video of Federer's topspin backhand, but the video started when Roger was already at the back of his backswing. I think that the player's very first split-second reaction to the incoming ball sets up the entire stroke, for better or worse. When I privately, reasonably, politely made the suggestion of showing the entire stroke on video (starting from the ready position), the person who shared the video chewed my head off and switched to trying to slam me about something else.

If the field of tennis coaching truly wants to become professional or scientific, it should not act defensively, but rather welcome open inspection, and reasonable skepticism and inquiry.

Also, perhaps coaches should subject themselves to the questioning of their methods of teaching and coaching, just as tpatennis Tom was attempting to guide his pupil to discover about and question her own slice backhand. Tennis coaching is locked into a particular schema at the moment that must be improved. If tennis coaches teach their students to question themselves, I certainly hope that at least modern tennis coaches can learn to questions themselves in the same way -- more than I see coaches do in in general, and possibly at this site.

Sorry that I disagree with the majority here, but in science, the majority is not always right. Science should be open to new possibilies. I stand by my comments that the pupil being taught by tpa tennis Tom is being taught slice-bakhand habits that will not hold up well under pressure, and that will not meet most of the requirements of a good slice backhand, which I listed in a slice backhad thread. If the tennis pupil has been accidentally misled by a reputable, well-intentioned coach, it can lead to the pupil eventually becoming somewhat of a head case. (Of course, Dinara Safina and Nicole Vaidisova are good examples of such.)

Too many players at all levels today, including NCAA Div. I, the ATP, and the WTA, throw little fits when they miss a shot. They might think they know why the missed the shot, but they usually do not. (The coaches usually do not know, either.) I believe that when a player is paying a lot of money for a lesson, the player should get better information and instruction that most players receive today.

I was watching Li Na miss some short forehand approach shots in Istanbul. It is because of flaws in her topspin forehand technique that coaches and experts do not notice. She is so worried about getting sideways (too much), getting her racket back (too) early, with too big of a backswing loop towards the backdrop, that she is letting the ball come to her too much, letting the ball drop too much, and her stroke has to fight against her rigid sideways position. Li Na does many things well in her forehand, but she has some flaws that need correction. I am sorry that I do not think that today's coaches analyze tennis well.

[worldsbestcoach]

Also

I will go back through all the posts, but if anyone casts personal aspersions (especially using foul language) against Tom tpatennis, I totally support Tom. Although Democrats and Republicans might not agree, although Tom and I might have differences of opinion about tennis instruction, I am sure that I would admire Tom in person, and that we would get along well. (If the foul language is being used against me, I can take it, and it shows the some persons here at this site are defensive and not open to honest debate.)

[julian1]

A slice backhad thread

Your quote
--->
I stand by my comments that the pupil being taught by tpa tennis Tom is being taught slice-bakhand habits that will not hold up well under pressure, and that will not meet most of the requirements of a good slice backhand, which I listed in a slice backhad thread.
--->
Could specify a link for a "slice backhand thread" in your quote above?
Thank you

julian mielniczuk
uspta certified pro juliantennis@comcast.net Ph.D
www.julianmielniczuk.usptapro.com Courtside Tennis Club,Bedford,MA

[worldsbestcoach]

ok

I see Tom's foul personal attack on me now. I never attacked Tom personally. If someone asks for feedback on their coaching technique here, is the only permissible reply to say "that was great!" -- even when it wasn't? I was thinking that this forum was serious about improving the quality of tennis playing and tennis coaching. But I must have been mistaken. I'm sorry. I should have realized that only polite social chit chat was welcome here.

Another respondent was probably implying that I am a nut case, and another that I am not open to learn. Both respondents are wrong. I am always open, always learning, seeking new insights and knowledge. I listen to everyone from experts to laypersons. My input is reasonable, and could actually benefit many players, even at the highest levels.

The creator of this site is an apologist for Tom's foul attack. This creator has been unfair to me before. Free inquiry is not welcome at this site, I see. Woe be to anyone who challenges the standard viewpoint here at this site. I make reasonable comments, some coaches here attack me personally, and then the creator of this site protects the personal attacks and the foul language directed at me.

[johnyandell]

The only thing I am going to say is that I disagree with the above assesment.

[don_budge]

The Truth...

I must have missesd some of the posts in this thread. Even if I disagree with particular coaching, I know that the coaching I evaluate is done honestly with good intent. If I was not impressed with tpa Tom's instruction in slice backhands, I realize that I am in the minority. And I made sure to mention that Tom is a positive person with positive intent. I did not criticize him personally -- I only gave an honest evaluation of "super" coaching, for which he asked. I am only trying to improve the low level of tennis coaching that is omnipresent. If I did not quite treat Tom enough with kid gloves, I am sorry. I tried to be somewhat gentle.

The slice technique that Tom teaches is the same technique that is used by the pros today. I am not impressed with pro one-handed slice backhands. There was a thread about slice backhands in which I listed many different situations and purposes for which a slice backhand can be used. I mentioned that a good slice backhand should meet the purposes in each of those situations. The current pro slice backhands meet a couple of those purposes, but very far from all of those purposes.

I am all for producing a tennis pupil who can solve problems and challenges on her or his own. In fact, I like to produce players who keep their mind and eyes on the court, instead of looking at me or at a support team in the stands.

Of course, a player should learn to evaluate oneself, and make necessary adjustments. On the other hand, if the player is expected to re-discover the wheel, not much tennis progress will be made. A good coach oftentimes should offer guidance, especially to students who are relatively naive with respect to the particular skill being taught in the lesson. If the discovery appraoch that is "super teaching" is used, then it should be reserved for relatively sophisticated learners with respect to that skill.

There is much truth in Inner Tennis, in that the pupil should have in mind a particular "ball-flight" picture, and a "ball-action-on-the-court" picture in her or his mind, before the stroke is made. After each and every stroke, there should be an evaluation as to how close the actual shot was to that picture. As as the great coach Peter Burwash says, making adjustments is one of the most important aspects of playing good tennis. I have a saying, right or wrong, that you are only as good as your last shot. If you hit a bad shot, you should figure out why. I also like the comment by Rod Laver. He was asked who his coach was. He was nonplussed but answered, "I am."

Some respondent in this thread brought up the great coach John Wooden. John Wooden was very much a product of his father, his high school coach, his college coach, in his teaching, his coaching, and his moral wisdom. Wooden certainly did not expect his players to discover eveything for themselves -- to "rediscover the wheel." He told his players exactly how to put on their socks, exactly how to tie their shoes, how to tuck in their shirt, exactly how and when to throw a bounce pass, exactly how to apply pressure defense, and why. It was not similar to "super coaching."

Even the very best players and coaches should not be above criticism. I saw the great Rafa Nadal think that he could not reach a drop shot (hit by that German player who beat Rafa) in the recent Shanghai Masters. The ball almost hit Rafa on the foot. Rafa had given up and had already hung his head. So even the greatest players can mistakenly give up on a ball and make a mistake similar to ones made by everyday players. As Harry Hopman (& John McEnroe) say: "Stick your racket out. Good things will happen.

John Wooden himself blew a national championship in the final against NC State, because a stall late in the game with a huge lead (before the era of shot clocks) surely would have led to yet one more championship for the Bruins. But because Wooden did not direct UCLA to stall, the great David Thompson and the Wolfpack were allowed to come back from the dead.

I am all for research in tennis. Where is the research evidence that shows today's slice backhands by today's pros are so great? Where is the research that shows that the topspin forehand technique used by Tomas Berdych (very similar to the technique used my a majority of pros today) is better than other techniques?

I am happy to participate in research. With evenly matched groups and teaching time, I will lead one group, and a cerified instructor can lead the other group. We will see which group does better on any dependent measure, immediately after the instruction is completed, or for any long-term follow-up period. (When I interject very reasonable input, persons here become defensive and say "prove it," yet they offer no strong proof for thier own contentions.)

I maintain that professional tennis coaching still has a long way to go. Players learn as they have been taught, even when the teaching is done to pro players by "expert" coaches." Often such teaching leads to actual huge holes in the players' tennis games, because tennis has been misanlyzed and poorly taught by professional instructors and coaches.

If I try here to show some skepticism about tennis instruction, I often get my head chewed off. (Skepticism is possibly the most important principle in good science.) For instance, I saw a video of Federer's topspin backhand, but the video started when Roger was already at the back of his backswing. I think that the player's very first split-second reaction to the incoming ball sets up the entire stroke, for better or worse. When I privately, reasonably, politely made the suggestion of showing the entire stroke on video (starting from the ready position), the person who shared the video chewed my head off and switched to trying to slam me about something else.

If the field of tennis coaching truly wants to become professional or scientific, it should not act defensively, but rather welcome open inspection, and reasonable skepticism and inquiry.

Also, perhaps coaches should subject themselves to the questioning of their methods of teaching and coaching, just as tpatennis Tom was attempting to guide his pupil to discover about and question her own slice backhand. Tennis coaching is locked into a particular schema at the moment that must be improved. If tennis coaches teach their students to question themselves, I certainly hope that at least modern tennis coaches can learn to questions themselves in the same way -- more than I see coaches do in in general, and possibly at this site.

Sorry that I disagree with the majority here, but in science, the majority is not always right. Science should be open to new possibilies. I stand by my comments that the pupil being taught by tpa tennis Tom is being taught slice-bakhand habits that will not hold up well under pressure, and that will not meet most of the requirements of a good slice backhand, which I listed in a slice backhad thread. If the tennis pupil has been accidentally misled by a reputable, well-intentioned coach, it can lead to the pupil eventually becoming somewhat of a head case. (Of course, Dinara Safina and Nicole Vaidisova are good examples of such.)

Too many players at all levels today, including NCAA Div. I, the ATP, and the WTA, throw little fits when they miss a shot. They might think they know why the missed the shot, but they usually do not. (The coaches usually do not know, either.) I believe that when a player is paying a lot of money for a lesson, the player should get better information and instruction that most players receive today.

Yeah...I don't have much to say either. I tried. I saw a train wreck coming down the line. Good old don_budge was right again...I tell my students that I am always right. They tend to believe me after a while...when they get to know me.

It's not about me being happy...btw. That has nothing to do with it.

worldsbestcoach...there is a lot of truth in your post. A whole lot of it. But you know what they say about the truth these days. They say it is open for interpretation...that is why there are so many news channels these days. That's why there are guidelines. They are only guidelines...there has to be some wiggle room for guys that won't fit in the box. Refusing to go along with the dog and pony show...generally speaking by the way. I am not referring to the forum only or even specifically. It's a fact of life. Not in my book, though! Speak your mind! Tell the truth as you see it! All of you! But what did you expect? Something different? It's the same beast...different clothes maybe.

"Speaking the truth in times of great deceit is a revolutionary act."-George Orwell.

"Of all human pursuits, the pursuit of wisdom is the most perfect, the most sublime, the most delightful. The proper operation of man is to understand."-Aquinas

"Forgive me my nonsense as I also forgive the nonsense of those who think they talk sense."-Robert Frost

"If you can't answer the other person's argument all is not lost. You can still call him vile names."-Hubbard Elbert

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored."-Aldous Huxley

"Telling the truth will get you killed!"-Scarface (I made this one up)

Tennis has a bit of an identity crisis these days. The young and uninitiated are not aware of the past, which is a dangerous thing and a recipe for trouble. If one dares to cite something from the past then the onslaught of being old, old-fashioned, whimsical, out of touch, living in the past, nostalgic come raining down out of the heavens...I mean cyberspace.

They have reinvented the game...which gives the chance to reinvent the coaching. Let's face it...you may be right about the state of coaching. It may not be all that good. Look at the state of American tennis today.

By the way...I have a coffee mug that says "World's Best Tennis Player" on it.

[worldsbestcoach]

the head man

The creator, the head guy here, said that it was kinda ok for tpa Tom to use foul language in reference to me. Also, if the head guy wants to discuss my polite, private request to share video that starts from the ready position as opposed to somewhere in the backswing, I will be happy to discuss that situation here in the open.

don_budge, have you had any of your writing published? I would be interested in purchasing some of it. Thanks!

[johnyandell]

wbc,

There are over 50,000 videos in the various Archives that all start from the ready position. So not sure what you are asking.

John Yandell

[worldsbestcoach]

thank you

Thank you for all your videos. I was just speaking about the Federer video about which I messaged you. But you are right. There are so many videos here to view.....and of course, it is also so easy to view Federer frame-by-frame on recordings of his TV matches. So you are probably correct. There was no need for my request from you. Thank you for all the videos here.

I enjoy seeing strokes from the ready position onwards, because I believe that the immediate, split-second reaction to the incoming ball sets up the entire stroke, and determines the likelihood of success for the stroke.

My new pet peeve is some of the far away cameras or poor camera angles for the professional tennis matches that are shown on TV so much theses days. Sometimes the player on the far side of the court appears so far away that it is difficult for me to see well, & thus difficult for me to analyze the strokes and the point. HAHAHA. Perhaps I should send an email to the Tennis Channel about this matter. Even the year-end WTA Championships in Istabul had poor camera work.

Again, thank you for all the resources here at this site.