Tweet
I wish to discuss the same subject a bit more. Clearly, we must believe in the value of tennis conversation, here in the Tennis Player forum, and this was a good one, not only because of Tom's discourse on a variety of subjects including when a tennis parent should and shouldn't stay out of the coach's way. Lisa Stone's own contribution and that of a person who has used Tom's method also lift things beyond gee whiz interview to valuable resource.
Lisa Stone tells about accompanying her son to his tournaments, and after a match saying stuff like "Why did you do that? Wouldn't it be better to...?" but over the years coming to realize that immediately after the match was the WORST time for post mortem, that she as tennis parent should always wait for her son to initiate such possibly positive critique himself.
Tennis conversation at every level is a vastly underrated subject, and of course the kid is lucky to have a mom who knows a lot about the game-- as any tennis player is lucky to have a mentor or mentors who are knowledgeable, forthcoming and articulate.
There is a point in the interview-- listen to it, I dare you-- where Tom says something and Lisa replies to the effect that, "But most coaches couldn't articulate that the way you just did."
The fact is, some coaches are more articulate than others, too many of whom don't do much more than scream. Except for the ones who bleat.
Invoking logic, Tom says that to take a point you can hit a winner, wait for an unforced error, or force the opponent to hit a tough shot.
Which of these three alternatives is most reliable? Logic provides an answer which at some level we all know or should know.
Lisa Stone tells about accompanying her son to his tournaments, and after a match saying stuff like "Why did you do that? Wouldn't it be better to...?" but over the years coming to realize that immediately after the match was the WORST time for post mortem, that she as tennis parent should always wait for her son to initiate such possibly positive critique himself.
Tennis conversation at every level is a vastly underrated subject, and of course the kid is lucky to have a mom who knows a lot about the game-- as any tennis player is lucky to have a mentor or mentors who are knowledgeable, forthcoming and articulate.
There is a point in the interview-- listen to it, I dare you-- where Tom says something and Lisa replies to the effect that, "But most coaches couldn't articulate that the way you just did."
The fact is, some coaches are more articulate than others, too many of whom don't do much more than scream. Except for the ones who bleat.
Invoking logic, Tom says that to take a point you can hit a winner, wait for an unforced error, or force the opponent to hit a tough shot.
Which of these three alternatives is most reliable? Logic provides an answer which at some level we all know or should know.
Comment