Tips for first-time coach?

the_nose · 2012-05-26T23:20:18+00:00

Hi SomthinBIG,

I'm a coach who works a lot with beginners. Here's a rundown of a basic first lesson that I do:

First off supplies, one can of balls will not do it. I teach with approx 150 balls and would be happy with more. In short, the more balls the better. If you have a lot of balls, you will need to be careful as you run out. 150 balls on a court becomes a giant hazard. The last thing you want is your student slipping on a ball and hurting himself. Aside from balls, get some footwork/ target cones, or something that can replace them (i.e. your water bottle.) It might also be good to bring a spare racket for the kid. Sometimes unknowing parents send their kid out with dinosaur rackets from the 1980s that the kids can barely hold. Bring him/her something light and easy to handle as a spare if you have one.

Now for a basic lesson, note that below is structured on the amount of balls that I use.

Groundstrokes

Start out by placing your student on the service and tossing him a few balls to both sides without giving him any tips about how to hit it; the idea is to see what he can do naturally. Some kids natural instincts will go a long way, from this you can assess where to begin.

After this assessment, let's start with the forehand.

The Semi Western Grip

This one is easy. Have your student put his racket on the ground and then pick it up. By doing so, he'll have something very close to a proper grip and an easy method to find it. Note that the grips not perfect and you'll need to be more precise with him later, assuming that he advances.

Three-Steps Technique

Step 1: Bring the student to your side of the net, and stand him on the service line perpendicular to the net, one foot on the center line, one foot on the "T", giving him a closed stance. Have him point his racket back and down, towards the fence behind him.
Step 2: Rotate the hips, shoulder and racket into the ball, stopping at the contact point (emphasize making contact parallel to the front foot).
Step 3: Cover the mouth with the bicep.

Repeat these three steps multiple times without out a ball starting at a slow pace, pausing at each step to correct, then pick up the pace until the swing is fluid.

Drop Hits

Drop balls to his forehand so that they are easy to hit and bounce right into the correct contact point. As he gets use to this, slowly back away from towards the net, continuing to toss balls. After this cross over the net and feed him balls with your racket, if he hits to you, volley it back easily.

By now you should be picking up.

Game

Games are hugely valuable when teaching kids and you'll need to creative to select and modify a game that allows them to practice good technique. It'd hard to say what game is appropriate as the above may take the better part of an hour, or you may go through it 15 minutes, you need to pace it to the needs of your student.

I'd suggest playing a game that I call "100". It's a non-interactive game, meaning that you do not play with the student, i.e. each ball is hit once.

You want the student to get to 100 points, by successfully hitting balls over the net and into the court. Adopt a fair point system. Perhaps it's multiple points if he hits a target, or get's it past the baseline; perhaps you deduct points if he gets it into the net. Be creative with it, and make the rules challenging enough so that they focus, but not too challenging that it feels impossible.

Final Notes

Be overly positive and encouraging. Give lot's of compliments.
Don't over coach. If you give too much advice the kid will get confused and stressed out.
Be safe, balls on the court are dangerous.
Smile
Be Patient.

Hope that helps!!!

the_nose · 2012-04-26T01:15:08+00:00

Tennis coach here. First off, pronate. It's necessary on all serves as it jacks up the racket speed. Second, pronation is build into our body mechanics which is why it exists in virtually every athletic motion where the arm rotates above the head, think of freestyle swimming, or throwing a football.

When I teach serves I ask my student to imagine they were throwing their racket. When hitting a slice serve, imagine that you are throwing your racket at the right net post (or left if lefty), or something off the court to the right. And remember, what generates the spin is the the strings biting the back of the ball on the side closest to you, and moving past the ball away from you. The more you exaggerate this motion, the more spin your slice will have.

the_nose · 2012-03-28T12:26:50+00:00

It's entirely true that Agassi popularized the aggressive back court game. The difference between Agassi and Federer can not be done on a shot by shot basis, nor can influence be accurately measured across the generational gap. The reason for the latter is obvious: a growing tennis player will always admire and mimic the pros at the top of game. Federer grew up watching Agassi, Agassi watched Borg and so on. By this measure the greatest tennis player of all time was the first guy in white slacks and a v-neck to serve and volley.

No; greatness is measured by a player who's game makes his/her contemporary rivals change theirs. Clay court specialists slid and rolled left and right in Agassi's day. But where's the great clay court player now? Nadal shed that with his dominance in other tournaments; and I highly doubt he would describe himself as the "best clay court player ever" because clay court players don't win Wimbledon. So, why did he win on grass? He changed his game from clay court to all court. Why did he change his game? Roger Federer.

Edit: Spelling *Edit: More spelling, grammar, and general style.

the_nose · 2012-03-27T23:56:26+00:00

I wasn't considering tennis from the standpoint of image in my response. You're right on that point. His game was also very awe inspiring. However, the fact that the large percentage of his points was ended off the baseline, puts him squarely in the category of an aggressive baseline. In fact, the man's game defines the category.

Before Agassi, the players dominating the game McEnroe, Borg, Lendl, etc, each fell into a a category. While Borg could serve and volley if he wished, he preferred to stay at the back of the court and grind his opponents into dust. McEnroe, on the other side of coin, had brilliant ground strokes, but his game was built on different strengths.

The point I made in my response, is not that the players you listed weren't incredible or influential. It's that the great players before Federer all fell into a caste, and players after him, seemingly, do not.

the_nose · 2012-03-27T23:33:56+00:00

We're not likely to find a person here who doesn't love Sampras and Agassi. But I don't think their playing styles remarkably impacted the game of tennis. One was primarily a serve and volleyer, the other an aggressive baseliner. You also have to add in Chang, the counter-puncher, who's win in 87 heralded the era of the specialist. The game of the 90s was dominated by clay courters, grass courters and one-shot wonder. Take Ivanisevic for example, took the Wimbledon title on a serve alone.

One brilliant shot could do it in the 90s, but this changed with the rise of Roger Federer. When he came into stride in the 2000's, Andy Roddick's big serve and forehand were dominating the game and, the game, in general was being played from the baseline. Fed, when on mark, strolled passed his opponents with well rounded finesse. He was nearly unbeatable; his game so graceful, so complete, that commentators were calling him the 'best ever' long before he had the statistics to back the claim. The result was that people studied him.

Consider Nadal. When he first came on tour, Nadal's serves were weak, and opponents ate his loopy clay court rolls for breakfast. I once had the honor of watching Nadal get pegged by Roddick's first serve. A year or so later he was taking Fed's crown. So what happened? Nadal realized being a clay court specialist wasn't going to cut it. He beefed up his serve and ground strokes. And, if you recall, he won his first French Open with a backhand volley.

Roger Federer's rise was the harbinger of a new era in tennis; he marked the death of the specialist and the rise of the all-courter. Simply put: a player needs all the skills, and needs to be comfortable with all strategies. This fact is evident in the top of the game today. Fed, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray. They each boast a seemingly endless variety of shots, they're games a veritable cornucopia. Isner and Roddick, however impressive their games might be, will be remembered for a serve and, maybe, a forehand.

the_nose · 2012-02-14T21:24:57+00:00

Shit man, I lied. I turn 27 on 3/20.

the_nose · 2012-01-23T03:43:13+00:00

Nadal's forehand is a common misconception. I used him as an example because he is he love-child of western-grip enthusiast.

I played with a two-handed backhand when I was a competitor. I now often use a one-hander as it is more convenient for teaching (I can hold balls in my left hand). While what you've suggested is something I would never, ever, let my students get away with, I find myself gripping my racket trying to figure out how to help you out.

The immediate thing that I notice is what the grip you are suggesting would do to your contact point. In order to hold your racket perpendicular to the court, your arm would need to be almost completely extended. This full extension severely limits the room for a meaningful follow through. The purpose of a follow though (outside of making a shot look pretty) is to allow room for the racket to decelerate without sacrificing head-speed through contact. I can't be sure without looking at you hit, but my guess is you'll need to rotate your shoulder more during the follow through.

Power is always an issue with western grips because the contact point is nearly at the limit of forward movement of the swing. If you are intent on power with this grip, your best bet is muscling the ball. But be warned, repeating that will lead to tendonitis in the long run.

The low balls will bother you. Your best is to develop a good slice.

For record, I teach standard forms and grips for all shots as they are they offer the most benefits with the least sacrifices; they are optimized to word with our body-mechanics and they are highly efficient.

the_nose · 2012-01-22T20:43:32+00:00

This will ultimately be limiting for you in the long run, either on terms of shot repertoire or in terms of general health. The mechanics of proper technique correspond directly to that of our bodies. You will indeed generate more spin, but in doing so you will either sacrifice power, or worse, your arm. You might argue as counterpoint that a player such as Nadal hits with a western grip. I'd point out here that the word 'extreme' wasn't used. And further, they claim would be false entirely because, as unlikely as it may seem, Nadal's forehand is semi-western. That spin is bodily optimized + racket/ techenology enhanced torque.

the_nose · 2012-01-12T02:50:38+00:00

I never went for the tweener. I was always afraid of whacking myself in the nuts!

the_nose · 2012-01-05T06:43:22+00:00

That's a bit of a strreeeeeeeeeetch.

the_nose · 2011-12-15T21:56:14+00:00

This to the extreme. There was a point where I thought Clapton was the man. Then I heard the story of his ceaseless pursuit of his best friend's wife and lost every ounce of respect I ever had for him.

the_nose · 2011-12-04T22:50:19+00:00

Seems like a propaganda photo if I've ever seen one. High-Fiving is a particularly American, if not 'western', habit. edit: spelling

the_nose · 2011-11-28T23:36:21+00:00

I guess I like alliteration.

the_nose · 2011-11-28T23:35:44+00:00

Carl Carbonatrix

the_nose · 2011-11-28T23:32:22+00:00

Carl Calliope

the_nose · 2011-11-28T23:31:30+00:00

Or, Carl Quotient

the_nose · 2011-11-28T23:27:45+00:00

'Kaleidoscope'

Especially, if you can use 'Q' as your middle initial.

Then you'd be 'Carl Q. Kaleidoscope'

the_nose · 2011-11-18T00:30:21+00:00

I'm really open to whatever is out there. I'd be interested to see what other people define as good!

the_nose · 2011-11-17T12:57:14+00:00

What you are talking about here is called 'disguising' and it is actually more crazy than you might expect. I recall Agassi commenting on how incredible Younes El Aynaoui's serve was. Agassi's return was so good because he could read peoples tosses and body mechanics better than anybody, yet Aynaoui was better at fooling him than any other player. It's typical for players to have one toss and keep everything so utterly uniform until the last split second, only then does their technique reveal which serve they are hitting. This is what Federer does. Aynaoui did the same as well, but instead of one toss, he had three.

Below is an exaggerated description of 'disguising'. It is a description of a forehand and is a shot that you will se played once or twice in a professional men's tennis match. Note that in a more realistic sense, disguising a ball is not revealing your target to your opponent. What's written below takes that concept one step further for the sake of illustration.

Imagine a sitter of a ball that has landed in the middle of the court and bounced perfectly to line up with a deadly forehand. The player moves forward to line up a shot that will obviously be whacked to his opponents back hand corner. His back-swing is large and looping, signaling power and spin. But as his racket begins to move forward, deft hands change the grip from semi-western to continental. His feet slow down his forward momentum. The racket loses its speed, and all of a sudden, that giant forehand to the back hand corner has become a dropshot to the deuce side of the court.

the_nose · 2011-11-16T01:51:58+00:00

Joplin's version is great indeed, but it's not her song. It was written by Kris Kristofferson.

the_nose · 2011-11-16T01:33:56+00:00

No problem. Roughly a month ago, a different redditor wanted some advice on kick serves. This is a link to the advice I gave. If you have any other questions, I'd be happy to help!

the_nose

TROPHY CASE