Originally posted by don_budge
View Post
The Teaching Paradigm...the development and education of a tennis player (creating a tennis player from scratch)
The development and education of a tennis player. You know the paradigm. The book is William Tilden. Richard Gonzalez is the model with the Don Budge backhand. Harry Hopman is the coach. Roger Federer is the Living Proof.
Reading through the posts from licensedcoach (Stotty), John Yandell and hockeyscout I become more and more content and satisfied with my teaching paradigm. John is a derivative of Tilden in that his analysis has only verified the teachings of Tilden. Everything that I have ever read by John Yandell or watched on his video analysis only confirms that fundamentals are fundamentals. Whether they are viewed at high speed definition or with the naked eye. Stotty brings many, many years of watching the greatest tennis tournament in the world up close at Wimbledon and he has seen all of the great ones come and go. Watching a tennis player live in competition is one of the best ways to learn and appreciate what it takes to hit a tennis ball and what is more how to play the game. hockeyscout now brings in an element of my paradigm that falls under the "Harry Hopman is the coach" heading. Hopman worked his players hard to insure that physical conditioning was not going to be a factor that they were going to buckle under.
What is more...hockeyscout brings up the subject about what comes first. The horse or the cart. Laying down the athletic foundation of a tennis player is going to pay huge dividends down the road. The current rage is to take mere infants from the cradle and try to get them to look like professional tennis players. I have yet to see one of these "wonderkins" make the big time. It takes one year to learn how to play the game of tennis, five years to be a tennis player and ten years to be a champion. These numbers haven't changed since they were written in the 1920's. The smartest thing a tennis coach could ever do with an eight year old is to get them to participate in as many sports as they can for three or four years along with some fundamental tennis training. Just rudimentary. Let the magic of a diverse athletic education take shape in the young one and then when their minds are ready for the game of tennis around 12 years old begin to get serious...if the student chooses to. Remember the ten years to be a champion. If the student has the proper foundation such as the one that hockeyscout advocates this number is reduce to eight. Eight years. When the 12 year old becomes 20 years old with the proper foundation and the wise tutelage of a Hopmanesque tennis mind this is the ticket.
All of these posters have some valuable intrinsic contributions. But in the end...I realize from my own background that it is the foundation that enables the game to come to you. I played several game pretty seriously before I ever touched a tennis racquet at 14 years old and very quickly I was playing with the 16 and under competition. Playing with mind you...not necessarily winning. But in the 18's there was some light at the end of the tunnel and it wasn't until I was in my 20's that I began to realize my potential. This was with sporadic training and without being religious about the sport spiritually. This happened later on in life.
This is an interesting thread at face value but I believe that there is much beneath the surface that is yet to mined. But in the beginning...this business of "playing around" in the inside of a ball in a pool is the stuff that children can sink their teeth into and therefore it will only pay dividends in the future when it comes to the education of the tennis player. Call in Hopman...or don_budge at this point. Engineer, sculptor...philosopher. It's a science. It's an art. In the end it is a philosophy. Most of all...it is only a game. A wonderful game however. God's gift to mankind in terms of recreation. Along with golf.
The development and education of a tennis player. You know the paradigm. The book is William Tilden. Richard Gonzalez is the model with the Don Budge backhand. Harry Hopman is the coach. Roger Federer is the Living Proof.
Reading through the posts from licensedcoach (Stotty), John Yandell and hockeyscout I become more and more content and satisfied with my teaching paradigm. John is a derivative of Tilden in that his analysis has only verified the teachings of Tilden. Everything that I have ever read by John Yandell or watched on his video analysis only confirms that fundamentals are fundamentals. Whether they are viewed at high speed definition or with the naked eye. Stotty brings many, many years of watching the greatest tennis tournament in the world up close at Wimbledon and he has seen all of the great ones come and go. Watching a tennis player live in competition is one of the best ways to learn and appreciate what it takes to hit a tennis ball and what is more how to play the game. hockeyscout now brings in an element of my paradigm that falls under the "Harry Hopman is the coach" heading. Hopman worked his players hard to insure that physical conditioning was not going to be a factor that they were going to buckle under.
What is more...hockeyscout brings up the subject about what comes first. The horse or the cart. Laying down the athletic foundation of a tennis player is going to pay huge dividends down the road. The current rage is to take mere infants from the cradle and try to get them to look like professional tennis players. I have yet to see one of these "wonderkins" make the big time. It takes one year to learn how to play the game of tennis, five years to be a tennis player and ten years to be a champion. These numbers haven't changed since they were written in the 1920's. The smartest thing a tennis coach could ever do with an eight year old is to get them to participate in as many sports as they can for three or four years along with some fundamental tennis training. Just rudimentary. Let the magic of a diverse athletic education take shape in the young one and then when their minds are ready for the game of tennis around 12 years old begin to get serious...if the student chooses to. Remember the ten years to be a champion. If the student has the proper foundation such as the one that hockeyscout advocates this number is reduce to eight. Eight years. When the 12 year old becomes 20 years old with the proper foundation and the wise tutelage of a Hopmanesque tennis mind this is the ticket.
All of these posters have some valuable intrinsic contributions. But in the end...I realize from my own background that it is the foundation that enables the game to come to you. I played several game pretty seriously before I ever touched a tennis racquet at 14 years old and very quickly I was playing with the 16 and under competition. Playing with mind you...not necessarily winning. But in the 18's there was some light at the end of the tunnel and it wasn't until I was in my 20's that I began to realize my potential. This was with sporadic training and without being religious about the sport spiritually. This happened later on in life.
This is an interesting thread at face value but I believe that there is much beneath the surface that is yet to mined. But in the beginning...this business of "playing around" in the inside of a ball in a pool is the stuff that children can sink their teeth into and therefore it will only pay dividends in the future when it comes to the education of the tennis player. Call in Hopman...or don_budge at this point. Engineer, sculptor...philosopher. It's a science. It's an art. In the end it is a philosophy. Most of all...it is only a game. A wonderful game however. God's gift to mankind in terms of recreation. Along with golf.
Comment