2 many tournaments 2 soon! (technique first!)

[EricMatuszewski]

I know one junior player whom is being encouraged to play frequent tournaments (19 sectional in addition to 9 districts in a very short season) before his technique is ready.

He’s relied on a two handed chip backhand, because his footwork was not good, so this way he could give himself more time to get back into the point (because the ball flight takes longer). He also “pushed” his serve with the wrong grip and major mechanical problems. He’s so addicted now to chipping he uses it frequently on the forehand.

These underspun shots have given the other players a lot of trouble simply because they are so different then the spin there used to getting in other rounds of the tournament.

Imagine Fabrice Santoro and you’ll get the idea of what I’m talking about.

Funny quote by “Marat Safin”..

“Being told I have to play Santoro is like being told I’m going to die”.


So, eventually he got good at “pushing” and plays so many tournaments that his ranking has gotten inflatedly high.

Unfortunately, even as coaches have tried to give him other skills, (this is apparent in warm up only) he will quickly revert to chipping whenever he’s under the slightest pressure.

He gets frustrated because his balls float out and he can’t hit any kind of aggressive shot in a pressure moment. He simply relies on the “junk” causing an error.

I feel bad for the kid, It’s not his fault.

It’s just bad planning of his development.

What should have happened is that the technique should have been established first, no question!

Then tournament play could have been increased while a coach monitored that he wasn’t resorting to these limiting habits in pressure situations.

This is a hard sell to parents however.

Parents usually don’t understand long term development and frequently put today’s ranking in the 12’s above anything else even if it kills their child’s chances in adult competition.

The reason I'm so upset about this, is that I actually coached him a few years ago and pushed for "skills first". The parents were seduced by a better sales job "I'm not much of a salesman" and now I see the hope I had for him being crushed before my eyes.

Hopefully, it’s not too late for him. I hope his parents will come around and realize that the skills must be trained and emphasised over 12's wins.

Does anyone have an alternative view on development or even the chipping strategy as a long term playing style? Anyone believe in tournaments first skills second?

Let’s talk about this.

[gzhpcu]

I have a feeling that the "tournaments first and skills afterward" attitutude seems to be showing up at all levels and all age groups.

At the pro level, I wonder if this attitude during the young development years isn't a reason why we don't have any good serve and volley players left: namely, harder to learn, doesn't pay dividends when you are a kid, so players are developed as baseliners.

At the club level, I feel this really prevails: hardly any players I know of are interested in improving their skills, they just want to push,hack and win (even it they stagnate and never improve). Seniors are particularly bad in this respect I find.

[EricMatuszewski]

To some extent, I feel like I'm preaching to the choir here.

I'd really like to hear someone with an opposite view point, especially a parent.

In the end it's the parents who make the decision.


So please, If your a parent, speak up, or if you can't afford to join this forum, please email me at ematuszewski@hotmail.com as I really do want to understand what you guys are thinking, so this trajedy doesn't happen again to any family I meet in the future.

[CraigC]

THe other side

Eric-

Obviously the development is primary. I'll give the other side only because I have so many damn parents clamoring to have the top rankings in the 10's and 12's. I preach the same as you, DEVELOP THE GAME and dominate after age 16. Develop the ranking and see it fall later on.

Having said that, here is the response.
1. The USTA gives out grant money to players that have high rankings. I am a parent spending 25K per year and I'd like a piece of that money. If my kid gets to top 10 in the US, I get paid.
2. I like to see other parents talk about my kid and I like to tell people that my child is a top national player
3. Racquet companies and clothing companies are giving players in the top 20 free stuff so it is important for my kid to be at that level as early as possible.
4. Colleges like to see a player that understands success on the court, even if it is at an early age.
5. My kid has fun if they are getting good results so I don't need to change their game, and as they get older, accepting some losses is easier than at age 10.
6. My kid is happy because he is getting good results, Y should I change that?
7. My kid is developing a reputation as a great player and it has an effect on the other kids, because they are scared to play him.

OK, please let me say one more time, these are bullshit reasons and I totally disagree. But those are the things I hear on a day to day basis.

Sucks looking long term eh? I feel like I give the same speech to parents each time I take on a young player. Is there a number that you reach, hen parents finally say, just let my kid be happy and develop his/her game? Cuz obviously I haven't hit it yet.

Keep fighting EM.

CC

[EricMatuszewski]

Craig,

Thanks for the feedback. I suspect that the most common one is #2 , (I like to show off that my kid is highly ranked and of course "If my child wins the match, that makes me a winner".

The whole "prodigy" culture is way out of control. Parent's frequently believe that a kid has to dominate the 10's and 12's or they should give up on pursuing tournament tennis. Because if your not a star by then, that it will never happen.

The problem is poor technical training at the younger ages.

Most kids I watch at tournaments have major technique problems that I don't see getting corrected, and are still being pushed to compete more frequently for the sake of points and 10's and 12's ranking.

I think alot of coaches just believe the kids will "play themselves better".

I disagree with this entirely. Technical skills are not going to magically appear because the child plays tournaments more frequently. The child will get more mentally tough but they will be reinforcing whatever technique they had when they came into the match.

Usually, this is poor technique that simply gets reinforced into unchangeable poor technique. And it is that unchangeable and limitting poor technique that leads to drop out.

[johnyandell]

A factoid: I believe Pete Sampras at age 16 was #60 nationally.

3 years later he won the Open.

[jlkm2219]

Ethics

I think this is all about ethics. My 16 y/o son finally is advancing in the rankings. He started with tenis at 10 and I tried to emphasize technicque instead pushing. Unfortunately many tennis professors want a winner at 12 so they could say that they make champions, and that is money. There are parents that never played competitive tennis and they are easily manipulated by these professors. They offer to these parents tours (South American circuit: COSAT, and/or European circuit) with their kid and, of course, hiring them as a full time coach. It means $$$$, and that's not ethics.
Is a pity watching professors that despise 12, 13, 14 y/o kids just because they are not winners.

[EricMatuszewski]

jlkm2219,

You bring up a sad truth about some of the coaching community.

The irony with this coaching philosopy is that that it will rarely produce a player whom is successfull in adult competition (this is really what you should be preparing for, isn't it).

I think alot of coaches simply put too much faith in what they call "natural talents". They discount entirely what training and development they have the chance to invest in the child and when the child fails they just chalk it up to "well he/she just isn't a natural talent".

Good coaching can make a huge difference, I've seen too many examples of this to believe otherwise.

Even kids with serious disabilities can make great improvements if you take your job as a coach seriously. I've seen a girl born without hearing, a boy with a glass eye and even multiple kids with Tourette's syndrome all become great players thru dedicated and thoughtfull coaching.

Pete Sampras was born with Thalasemia otherwise known as "sea blood" (low blood iron). Which makes it alot harder to exert yourself during physical activity (blood doping, which is illegal in most sports, has the opposite effect).

Iron bonds oxygen.

The disease has the effect of limiting your ability to get oxygen where it needs to go (muscles, your brain, etc.), especially during physical activity.

Imagine the loss to the whole world if his coaches would have just given up on him?

[10isDad]

I wouldn't necessarily disagree w/ the concept of technique first, but there has to be a balance in building in strategy and other basic concepts. My own son originally worked for 3 years beginning at age 10 w/ a USPTA Master Professional whose philosophy was technique first. He hit hundreds upon hundreds of balls several times each week. His technique is pretty danged good. Unfortunately, being able to hit a forehand or a backhand doesn't matter one bit if you haven't learned footwork, strategy, directionals, mental toughness, etc.

At age 13 he started playing some tournaments and basically got blown out because he knew how to hit shots, not how to play tennis. He was terribly behind players w/ inferior technique.

His new coach is teaching a good mix of technique, theory, sound strategy, etc. This coach encourages tournament play because the other thing the technique first doesn't teach is the mental mindset of learning how to win, especially when you're not playing your best. I'm sure it'll be a fairly long process but in the long run I feel this balanced approach is best for my child.

[EricMatuszewski]

There is a difference between "Technique first" and "Stationary strokes only" coaching methods. Sounds like your child had a "Stationary strokes only" coach.

There should be a progression.

Footwork and hitting while moving unexpectedly should be integrated into stroke training as soon as the child starts to get a basic ability to hit the shot. I consider this to be part of technique, a very fundamental part for that matter.

As for competition, I think there are fundamentals that should be there before tournament competition should be considered.

If the kids serving semi-western he or she really shouldn't be playing a tournament.


If a player is allowed to compete with this technique it becomes progressively harder to change it once it's been reinforced by the reward mechanism of "I won matches in a tournament with this".

As we know, achieving a high ranking in later age groups is impossible with a semi-western serve.

But in your case it sounds like your kid had all of the technique and was ready to move to the next stage of learning (tournament play should be seen as a stage of learning).

Also that doesn't mean tournaments every week right away. Increasing tournament frequency should be a gradual thing, when the child is ready and really is begging to increase them.

Also, people forget that you don't have to play tournaments to get match play experience. Setting up "match plays" with other kids is valuable experience and should be done more than actual tournaments, especially in the early stages. It's especially helpfull to do this with coaching as there can be real time feedback on directionals, strategy etc. that can't be done during official tournaments.

Eric

[10isDad]

Thanks Eric, I agree wholeheartedly. His previous coach wasn't totally "stationary-based" and did utilize cones to move to between feeds. This coach, however, used a ball machine to feed almost exclusively so the feeds tended to be almost too consistent.

His new coach incorporates match play into clinic at least once each week and all of the match play is supervised with frequent interruptions related to the strategical errors as well as commending players when they perform well.

[EricMatuszewski]

It sounds like your son's where he needs to be for now.

Just to be clear,a ball machine, if used as a part of a larger scheeme is a great tool (one of the best investments you can make), especially for beginners and just "grooving" the basic mechanics of the strokes.

There does need to be a progression obviously from basic feeding (what ball machines are great for) to progressively getting more and more into live points and match play.

Just so people can see what level we're talking here

I have some questions about your son.

At what point in his development did he start being able to serve w/a continental and some spin?

How long has he been able to hit a topspin forehand?

What is his tournament record?

Eric

[10isDad]

He has always hit a topspin forehand, having been taught a low-to-high swing motion from day 1. He holds a grip that is just east of semi-western.

As for serving, he actually started serving w/ an eastern backhand grip and has only recently moved to continental.

Ranking: top 30 sectionally and around 500 nationally. The issue is that coach after coach and player after player look at him, his strokes, his serve, his size and expect that he'd be top 10. Mentally, he's not ready for that yet. He plays well in practice matches, but not so well in tournament play.

[EricMatuszewski]

How old is he now?

Put up some pics or some video of him if you feel alright with it.

He sounds like he'd make a great case study for discussion.

Eric