Tangible instructions
Printed From: Alex Table Tennis - MyTableTennis.NET
Category: Coaching & Tips
Forum Name: Coaching & Tips
Forum Description: Learn more about TT from the experts. Feel free to share your knowledge & experience.
Moderator: yogi_bear
Assistant Moderators: APW46, smackman
URL: http://mytabletennis.net/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67375
Printed Date: 04/27/2024 at 11:58pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Tangible instructions
Posted By: racquetsforsale
Subject: Tangible instructions
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 2:24pm
|
When teaching stroke production, do you think it's realistic and useful to describe the characteristics of the incoming ball with only the following parameters? Speed, type of spin, rate of spin, trajectory, and depth. Likewise, do you think there's value to teaching the student how the paddle needs to contact the ball by describing the characteristics of the paddle's approach towards the ball using only the following parameters? Timing of contact, angle of swing, angle of paddle face, speed of swing, amount of hitting, and amount of brushing. I've seen students become frustrated or make improvements very slowly because their teachers use very abstract language in their instruction, e.g., "The ball needs to stay on your paddle a little longer." "You need to grip the ball more." I think it might be more productive to tell the student 1) what needs to happen, e.g., "You need to brush more and hit less by matching your paddle angle with your swing angle, or vice versa." "Your paddle is not moving fast enough at contact. You need to swing faster." "You're swinging at too steep an angle (too much towards vertical)." "You're hitting the ball too early (or too late)." and then 2) the body mechanics needed to make it happen. |
Replies:
Posted By: suds79
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 2:38pm
|
I'm a big proponent of coaching to show someone how to do with with less verbal instruction. Clear your mind of thoughts when hitting. It's a concept from the book I read not too long ago called in the inner game of tennis. Basically what he found was this. The more he coached people with "set your feet" "follow through ending up by your shoulder" etc... the more robotic and poor performance they gave trying to go through the 6 or 7 instructions to hit a simple backhand. Rather, he had the most success when he'd say to his students "just watch me for a moment and try to emulate what you see."... And voilà, they would automatically do the correct strokes. |
Posted By: racquetsforsale
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 3:03pm
|
I agree with you Suds. Too much information can also swing the student in the other direction. I speak from personal experience. When I started, my teacher used the vague phrases I mentioned to make corrections, telling me I'm not gripping the ball or I didn't have enough dwell time. I didn't know what the hell to do with that input. I eventually figured it out on my own: I was hitting too much and not brushing enough and I was not swinging fast enough through contact. |
Posted By: zeio
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 6:16pm
|
It depends at what stage the students are. Most are usually started off with one-shot multi-ball, and the pattern and qualities of the feed are pretty much fixed, so the students are relieved of the extra burden. Once they reach the rally stage, the returning ball becomes a factor and recovery plays an important role. Other than adjustments in stroke, a good deal of footwork is necessary to compensate for the nuances in every return. BTW, it's been a while. Good to have you back. ------------- Viscaria FL - 91g + Neo H3 2.15 Blk - 44.5g(55.3g uncut bare) + Hexer HD 2.1 Red - 49.3g(68.5g 〃 〃) = 184.8g |
Posted By: yogi_bear
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 7:02pm
|
shadow drill for a specific drill then multiball drill then single ball table drill for each stroke. this is the order that i use to teach and let the player learn and master the stroke. ------------- Independent online TT Product reviewer of XIOM, STIGA, JOOLA, SANWEI, GEWO, AIR, ITC, APEX, YASAKA and ABROS ITTF Level 1 Coaching Course Conductor, ITTF Level 1 Coach |
Posted By: racquetsforsale
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 7:02pm
|
Thanks, zeio. |
Posted By: hithithit
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 7:57pm
It depends on what level the students are on, and what you are trying to achieve - so that list can shrink / grow.
Same answer as previous. It depends on what level the students are on, and what you are trying to achieve - so that list can shrink / grow.
I don't think the problem here is the abstract language used in the instruction. I think it is to do with how the lesson is structured. Ideally, each lesson should focus on a small number of things. That way, the instructions are clear and there won't be too much to think about during that particular lesson - more effective way of learning and less frustration for everyone. For example, teaching students how to execute a basic top spin shot could perhaps be broken into a number of lessons: Lesson A: i) the racket angle, ii) the upward forehand movement, and iii) the brushing contact. Ignore everything else. So if a student cannot land the shot onto the opponent's side of the table, downplay it as this will be covered in an upcoming lesson. So, once the students are competent with lesson A, move to lesson B. Lesson B: i) the starting and ending positions, ii) racket speed and iii) trajectory. Ignore everything not covered in lessons A and B. Once the students are competent with lesson B, move to lesson C. Lesson C: i) getting the ball onto the opponents side of the table, ii) speed, iii) direction. Ignore everything not covered in lessons A, B and C. Once the students are competent with lesson C, move to lesson D. Lesson D: i) how to counter top spin with side spin. Ignore everything not covered in lessons A, B, C and D. Once the students are competent with lesson D, move to lesson E. And so forth.
When describing a stroke, it is best done by showing. |
racquetsforsale wrote:Posted By: kenneyy88
Date Posted: 07/03/2014 at 9:06pm
| Use whatever gets through to a student, if they don't understand something, explain it in different words. |
Posted By: V-Griper
Date Posted: 07/04/2014 at 1:38pm
|
It's difficult to hold allot of variables in one's head at any given time so the fewer things they have to hold in their working memory at one time the better. I usually try identify 3 or 4 major problems that a player has and try not to add more in any given session. Even better is to come up with some kind of drill or game that forces the correct thing with little or no verbal instruction at all. For example there was the post by tt4me about lifting the ball as it rolls off the edge of the table. When I had other people try it they all made good adjustments to their stroke mechanics, touch and timing with few or no verbal cues. Also, coming up with mental images that "stick' with the person, such as having a big pat of butter on the blade and you are trying to smear or spread the butter on the ball like you would on toast. It's why we use the term "brush" in the first place. Things like that can convey the feel without having to go into too much particulate detail. The thing is to come up with different visualizations that will connect with the player. Obviously it depends on the person as well. Some people respond well to a technical description and model of what they are trying to do. IME the one thing that seems to work consistently in teaching people to loop the ball well, initially, is focusing on where the ball is when contact is made. I usually ask them to wait until the ball is falling before ball contact is made. I try to get them to wait as long as possible in the beginning so that the shot has a high spin to speed ratio. ------------- DHS 301 Xiom Vega 7pro FH/BH |
Posted By: tt4me
Date Posted: 07/04/2014 at 3:04pm
I agree saying this too students is useless. I have always objected to the imprecise language and TT myths The fact that it is allowed to continue makes things worse for those trying to learn. However, most students will probably not be physics majors so I think it is best to keep things simple and show more by example. I think it is easy to explain most shots using a robot. Sometimes a white board will work too. Nothing is really that difficult to explain or show. It is the execution that is difficult. ------------- Samsonov Alpha+H3 Neo+802 1.5mm, the Ball Whacker is revived!<br />Samsonov Alpha+H3 Neo+802-40 1.8mm my back up<br />BCX5+H3+802-1 1.8mm New but promising.<br /> |
Posted By: hookumsnivy
Date Posted: 07/04/2014 at 10:55pm
|
I'm someone who likes to hear a lot of the details. Watching someone do the stroke is not nearly enough for me. Unless I know what I'm looking for in the stroke, I find it difficult to put it all together. I find timing is a critical component that is often missing in explanations. It's very important to know the best time to hit a certain shot - right off the bounce, still on the way up, at the peak, just after the peak, or even later.
Another important aspect is where in relation to your body should you be making contact. |
Posted By: NextLevel
Date Posted: 07/04/2014 at 11:14pm
|
Richard McAfee does it in three parts: 1. Where to contact the ball (top, back, side, bottom etc.) 2. When to contact the ball (rise or before top, fall or after top, top of the bounce or peak) 3. How to contact the ball (friction or force contact) Once you know these three things, the rest is all racket head speed. ------------- https://youtu.be/jhO4K_yFhh8?t=115" rel="nofollow - I like putting heavy topspin on the ball... Cybershape Carbon FH/BH: H3P 41D. Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train... |
Posted By: racquetsforsale
Date Posted: 07/07/2014 at 12:43am
I like this breakdown a lot.
|
Posted By: benfb
Date Posted: 07/07/2014 at 1:56am
| I was trying to relate this discussion to the training at our Stellan camps. I think the points about ball contact, such as brushing and hitting late or early, are always covered. But I also think there's a lot more on how you make the stroke: the footwork to get there and the body mechanics to make the stroke. For example, there are many ways of increasing racket speed but most of them also decrease consistency. Do it with the right footwork and stroke, and you don't lose consistency. |
Posted By: hithithit
Date Posted: 07/07/2014 at 2:05am
Agreed. |
Posted By: NextLevel
Date Posted: 07/07/2014 at 8:58am
This is true, but the "right" footwork and the "right" stroke are sometimes things that most of us in adulthood have long passed the window where we can acquire these things smoothly (some of us even have physical limitations that make it virtually impossible). I think it is as important if not more so to understand the principles and see what you can incorporate when you put in the hours rather than looking at the "right" way, which you may never be able to mimic. I see many people putting in time on footwork drills when they don't even have a quality stroke that would cause the opponent problems when they execute it. Unless they are young and aspiring players, where these drills instill habits that are required to stay in place as a player gets better, that makes no sense to me and is an inversion of priorities for most amateur players. ------------- https://youtu.be/jhO4K_yFhh8?t=115" rel="nofollow - I like putting heavy topspin on the ball... Cybershape Carbon FH/BH: H3P 41D. Lumberjack TT, not for lovers of beautiful strokes. No time to train... |