A Bit Wordy...A Bit Wristy...the wrist is a hinge.
It is of course a great article. I read it one time. Nothing to dispute. The wrist is a hinge. There I said it. Five words. Do you agree with that statement Brian? We could quibble with words...perhaps technically it may be more correct to say that the wrist "performs" as a hinge.
Just teasing! Ok...I will go along with tennis_chiro. A little reluctantly. I hate the word "required"...it reminds me of school. I hate school. It is not the reading that I detest...it is compulsory activities. Compulsory reading. That is why I love tennis. It is recreational and the purpose of participating in it should be...fun in the long run.
Was reading this article fun? Hmmm...good question. Was it entertaining? Definitely not. But just to be clear on a couple of things here. I am not a technique freak on the level of some of the contributions in this website. Certainly I believe in teaching sound fundamentals. I believe that I teach basically what is in the contents of this long and wordy piece...if not word for word.
But this is only my opinion. People have different tastes. The article is actually very well written in a scholarly type way. I write research papers for American and English medical journals and I certainly use a different style and format for my writing about different gynecology and obstetrics topics than I do on the forum here. I translate Swedish research papers for a Phd midwife here in Sweden. By the way...a very interesting note about Swedish culture...all doctors including Phd's go by their informal names and nobody addresses a doctor here by saying Dr. don_budge...for instance. It is just plain don_budge to one and all. Isn't that interesting?
So it is a question of style, I think. Not that I cannot appreciate the style. It is only that it is a little high minded for the game of tennis in my opinion. Tennis is not rocket science...or is it? Certainly Red Cross thinks it is. I am not a fan of his...by the way. I am not all that interested in what he has to say. Hardly marginally curious. I can do the math by the way. Does that make me a bad tennis teacher? I don't think so. I believe in teaching with a metaphysical sort of twist...as a human experience. I believe in metaphor and art just as much as I do in physics. But that puts me in the minority in this thread... to which I say...ok. Did you think I was going to say "phooey"? Not in this thread...do you think I am nuts?
To judge this article it seems to me that you must leave it up to the readership and from all indications you have to give it two thumbs up. We/they like it. I certainly respect it. I respect it so much that I will of course read anything that Brian Gordon submits at tennisplayer.net. One thing that I really do admire about your work, Brian...is the amount of work and the thoroughness work that you put into it. It shows real dedication to...if not "love" of the game. No stone left unturned...where art and science collide. Words are play things...when teaching tennis.
Originally posted by johnyandell
View Post
Just teasing! Ok...I will go along with tennis_chiro. A little reluctantly. I hate the word "required"...it reminds me of school. I hate school. It is not the reading that I detest...it is compulsory activities. Compulsory reading. That is why I love tennis. It is recreational and the purpose of participating in it should be...fun in the long run.
Was reading this article fun? Hmmm...good question. Was it entertaining? Definitely not. But just to be clear on a couple of things here. I am not a technique freak on the level of some of the contributions in this website. Certainly I believe in teaching sound fundamentals. I believe that I teach basically what is in the contents of this long and wordy piece...if not word for word.
But this is only my opinion. People have different tastes. The article is actually very well written in a scholarly type way. I write research papers for American and English medical journals and I certainly use a different style and format for my writing about different gynecology and obstetrics topics than I do on the forum here. I translate Swedish research papers for a Phd midwife here in Sweden. By the way...a very interesting note about Swedish culture...all doctors including Phd's go by their informal names and nobody addresses a doctor here by saying Dr. don_budge...for instance. It is just plain don_budge to one and all. Isn't that interesting?
So it is a question of style, I think. Not that I cannot appreciate the style. It is only that it is a little high minded for the game of tennis in my opinion. Tennis is not rocket science...or is it? Certainly Red Cross thinks it is. I am not a fan of his...by the way. I am not all that interested in what he has to say. Hardly marginally curious. I can do the math by the way. Does that make me a bad tennis teacher? I don't think so. I believe in teaching with a metaphysical sort of twist...as a human experience. I believe in metaphor and art just as much as I do in physics. But that puts me in the minority in this thread... to which I say...ok. Did you think I was going to say "phooey"? Not in this thread...do you think I am nuts?
To judge this article it seems to me that you must leave it up to the readership and from all indications you have to give it two thumbs up. We/they like it. I certainly respect it. I respect it so much that I will of course read anything that Brian Gordon submits at tennisplayer.net. One thing that I really do admire about your work, Brian...is the amount of work and the thoroughness work that you put into it. It shows real dedication to...if not "love" of the game. No stone left unturned...where art and science collide. Words are play things...when teaching tennis.
Comment