Concept vs. Technique

I was watching a tennis match on youtube and really focusing on players preparation, contact point, and technique. While there are general similarities among all of the forehand/backhand techniques of an individual player, every shot is different and nuanced due to the different speed/spin/depth, etc of the incoming ball. This got me to thinking about my own game and some of the bad habits, physical and mental, I have fallen into over the years. After around 8 minutes of watching the tennis match and thinking about what connects all of the different forehands and backhands the players are hitting, I came to the idea that they have a general thought about what to do with the ball rather than how they were going to hit the ball. Every player hits the ball in a similar physical way, what separates them is what they are trying to achieve with the ball, and their physical bodies. Nadal wants to hit a spinny high forehand, so Nadal wanting to hit the ball that way, and his physical body stats determine what his 'technique' is going to look like. We all have the same physical body mechanics, but differences in body weight, height, muscle etc. will determine what our end, physically perfect technique will look like. 

With the idea of what I want to do with the ball, topspin into a can I set onto the table; I was able to hit the can at a percentage of > 50% with almost 100% of the balls coming into close contact of the can. I am going to play tomorrow without thinking of technique and instead thinking about what I want to do with the ball and where I want to put it. 

Does anyone else do something similar?

Yep.
As contextualised in 'The Inner game of tennis' and 'the inner game of golf'.

I constantly teach this, Technique is a fashion, If technique achieves the desired result at the top, its correct.

Perhaps the simple title promised too much.

Or perhaps this forum is an outlet for everyone that doesn't have the resources available to them to practice on a regular basis.

I see rubber and blade reviews as the singular driver of traffic on this forum. Personally I have been critiqued and given very specific, close to step by step instructions to me on my strokes. 

You know what worked the best? Taking some time off and coming back to the game. What this afforded me was the opportunity to understand that there is nothing specific to any sport in terms of how your physical body attempts to influence the ball, and that is the main topic of this conversation. 

Many people have agreed with me that the best thing that you can do is have an understanding of your physical body in space, and how you want to influence the ball. Yet the majority of the advice on this forum is what equipment you should be using and how you should be executing your shot in very specific terms that confuse the majority of people. 

My take-away is that we already know how to hit the ball properly, and what gets in our way is people that try to break down the obvious and simple mechanics that we are born with into very specific instructions.


Edited by zephyr - 12/11/2015 at 12:28am

geardaddy wrote: Well, I very much believe that stroke technique is extremely important.  In fact for amateur players I would say that it is inferior technique that holds them back from improving beyond their current level.  We all experience those matches against certain players that don't have "pretty" technique themselves, yet they give us all sorts of trouble.  The fact is that those opponents expose the worst aspects of our technique.  A higher level player with better all-around technique would simply not have any such trouble with these same players. As far as a general mental approach to the game, you need to "trust your training" and try to be relaxed when you play.  In other words, you can't force your technique to be better just by visualizing it in the middle of a match.  Instead, you need to clear your mind and play with your natural instincts, without predisposition of how you're going to hit every ball during the match.  Improving your technique happens during training, not during matches. It all becomes glaringly obvious when we play the opponent that is much higher rated than ourselves.  Suddenly, those serves, serve returns, loops, and blocks don't look so good anymore.  You realize that there is always room for improvement in all aspects of our game. The mark of very good player isn't the way they hit any one stroke, rather it's their ability to hit every stroke in different degrees, and in response to varying degrees of spin.  The distinguishing thing about high level players is their ability to adapt and change the way they are playing.  But they are only capable of doing that because their excellent technique allows them to stay in control under so many different circumstances.

Well said  

I don't think it's an either-or proposition. 

But I think from what I have seen, too many coaches spend too much time teaching their students technique and not enough teaching them how to win or at least do better with what they have.  Some of the coaches I have known who are very effective with adult players are much better at finding that balance.

In response to geardaddy, let me ask a few very important questions. 

You see player A with ugly technique beating player B with prettier technique.  Why would you conclude that making player B's technique even better will help him beat player A?  Is that really the limiting factor?  I would argue that your last post may draw the wrong conclusion.  Player A is getting more out of the technique he has.  Player A knows more about not beating himself.  Player A is probably not thinking about his technique and is just playing.  His technique limitations may set an upper limit that is lower than B's potential, but why is B not playing at his potential?

Of course, people should try to get technically better if they can, but not to the exclusion of all else, and maybe there are other things they need a lot more urgently.

geardaddy wrote: I am saying that most amateurs are in a place where their technique deficiencies are a bigger limiting factor than their mental strategy deficiencies.  As players become more skillful with their technique, then success in winning matches becomes more and more about the mental game.

I don't completely agree with these two things, especially the second.  I see a surprising number players who have such idiotic shot selection that it defies all logic (a tendency that continues as they improve) and I see some players who are newer to the game, with less refined technique, who intuitively are able to minimize those classes of errors.  I suspect I won't convince you, but that is very much my impression from watching this for a long time.

I am not saying technique is useless and people should not work on it.  You definitely need reliable and good tools.  But some technical issues players have are never going to get better, that is just reality, and if you are thinking too much about it while you play, you will be worse.  

No not disagreeing much but differing in a pretty significant way about the underlying psychology of it, and the most efficient way to get past a barrier.  A lot of this is age-dependent also.

What about the PushBlocker who has good technique on the few different shots he uses but his strategy is superior vs highly skilled opponents.

Baal wrote: I don't think it's an either-or proposition.  You see player A with ugly technique beating player B with prettier technique.  Why would you conclude that making player B's technique even better will help him beat player A?  Is that really the limiting factor?  I would argue that your last post may draw the wrong conclusion.  Player A is getting more out of the technique he has.  Player A knows more about not beating himself.  Player A is probably not thinking about his technique and is just playing.  His technique limitations may set an upper limit that is lower than B's potential, but why is B not playing at his potential?

rocketman222 wrote: Most interesting topic on here in a while

mjamja wrote: Baal, Could you expand on the "bad shot selection" idea you mentioned.  I would be very interested in hearing what kind of mistakes you see the most often, what mistakes are most prevalent at various levels, and what mistakes are most often made by particular styles. I try to help out a lot of 1000-1500 level players at our club and this would help me focus them in better directions in their matches.  I am pretty good with basic technique and drilling, but often end up being less certain of what they are doing wrong during a match. Mark

Mark, watch your students to see if they are trying to attack balls that are beyond their skill level to attack, or with balls they can attack, trying to win points outright with a single all out shot instead of a more measured higher percentage shot.  This is really common in the 1000-1500 range.  Impatience.

True but not everybody falls into that trap.

NextLevel wrote: You can hit the ball as hard as you want, but if you don't read the ball/play properly, you will usually be late to the ball,

Yep, this is very true, but there is something to add to it, maybe NL, you have noticed this too.  Something I notice a lot (also with myself), is that when you are late seeing the ball and getting to the ball, you end up rushing your shot!  You sometimes have to really force yourself to wait for the ball.  Another one of the paradoxes of racket sports. 

Eric Owens used to hammer this into me.  "You have more time than you think you do".  It may be the most useful thing he ever taught me.

Rushing tends to lead to a bad shot selection.