TennisOne Lessons

Tactics - The Secret to Great Technique

Wayne Elderton

Technique is the favorite topic of most people involved in tennis. Players talk about it (just listen to any post match conversation), coaches talk about it, parents, TV commentators, the list goes on. The majority of lessons people take emphasize technique. Just look at tennis videos, magazines, and websites and see what they talk about most? Technique seems to be the, ‘big fixation'.

The reason is that tennis is a complex motor sport. The coordination, agility and balance required is challenging even for the best athlete. You could take an athletic phenom who has exceptional mental toughness (like Michael Jordan for example) and, if he had no previous tennis training, most club players would take him apart on the court. Their technical superiority would win the day.

Learning technique is a critical aspect of tennis. Any way to improve and speed up the process of learning technique would be invaluable for every player and coach. That process is now here.

Which one of James Blake's follow-throughs is the right one?

A New World Order

The Game-based approach (GBA) is a new trend in learning tennis that is gaining prominence world wide (see my July 15, 2004 TennisOne article). The premise for the GBA is simple: Tennis is a game. Every game needs to be played and playing is a tactical endeavor. In regards to technique, tennis is not figure skating. No judges are at the side saying, “Your follow-through was much better than your opponent's, 15-0 for you!”

Technique is second (behind tactics) but not secondary. Don't misread this! I am not saying technique is not important. It is critical for tennis success. However, if you really want to set the stage for meaningful technical stroke development, the key is tactics (no, this is not a typo).

Most players and coaches are unaware of the debate going on in coaching circles surrounding the GBA. Detractors mistakenly think that technique is mishandled or ignored in a GBA. That is only true if a GBA is applied incorrectly. If we understand what the current motor learning research is telling us, the Game-based approach is the best and most effective way to learn technique.

The Two Become One

For many, technique and tactics are two distinct and separate categories. Nothing could be further from the truth. In today's world of biomechanical analysis and high-speed digital imaging, the tactical/technical connection gets lost all too often. This false separation causes players to spend thousands of dollars on technical lessons that don't improve their play much at all. If you ask a group of players at any park or club, “How many of you lose to opponent's who are technically worse than you?” almost everyone will raise their hand. Everybody can tell you about the latest techniques but few know how to play well. This shouldn't be the case.

Fig. 1: Follow-through down and around the left hip.

The tactical/technical connection is simple. Technique is only a means to perform a tactic. Technical skill by itself is useless in a game if it is not used in the right way, at the right time and in the right location. The fact is, without tactics, good technical strokes are simply an exercise in looking stylish. Imagine a soccer player who kicks the ball with impeccable skill. His shot on net beat the goalie easily. Although he kicked with great technique, his team was furious. Why, under pressure he put the ball in his own net. Good technique, wrong tactic. This may be an extreme example yet in tennis, players execute really bad ideas with nice strokes all the time.

Learning a stroke without a tactical intention is deficient. How many players have had a coach feed them baskets of balls to ‘groove' their approach shot and yet, never actually approached the net when they played a match? If the coach doesn't spend a lot of time integrating the skill into tactical play, the likelihood of the player using it in real match play is little to none.

The reason? The stroke was learned ‘isolated' from reality. In real match play, every stroke requires decision-making. Tactics are decision-making. It is the choice a player makes of what technique to use, when, where, and against who. No one can play well without tactics. No tactics can be executed without decision-making.

The Tactic Determines What Technique Is ‘Proper'

As an example, let's look at up and coming American James Blake. Look at his follow-through in the four photos at the beginning of this article. Remember, all are forehands, and in all of them he is on the baseline and is moving laterally. Which one is ‘proper'?

Fig. 2: Follow-through over the left shoulder.

Let's now look at each of these forehands and see the tactics behind the technique. In the first clip (Fig. 1), James' follow-through is down and around his left hip. This would be considered ‘wrong' by many coaches. However, it is excellent technique when the tactic is a penetrating topspin crosscourt rally that will keep his opponent neutral. His follow-through was the natural result of his racquet accelerating upwards on the outside of the ball through impact with a full body rotation. Any other follow-through wouldn't have allowed his body and racquet to do what it needed to accomplish the tactic.

The second clip (Fig. 2) shows a more ‘classical' over-the-shoulder finish. This was the result of James leveling off the racquet path and driving the ball down-the line. The tactic here was to re-direct a crosscourt sent by his opponent and get them on the run.

In the third clip (Fig. 3), James' follow-through ends up circling the back of his head. Strange as it looks, this is a common shot for all pros. It is the result of an impact being on the side with a steep low-to-high path (an ‘out-front' impact would not allow the required vertical path), and a quick, face-the-opponent recovery. The tactic is that the opponent has moved him to the side. To respond, he sends the ball defensively with a high arcing topspin to the middle of the opponent's court. If he can get his opponent behind the baseline in the middle of the court, they have less angles and chance to hurt him. You will often see this technique to hit an arcing crosscourt as well.

Fig. 3: The "Lasso" Follow-through around the head.

In the fourth clip (Fig. 4), the follow-through finishes extended in front of his face (this was actually the one I was taught growing up). It is the result of the racquet traveling along a very stable path forward and slightly upward through the impact (to time taking the opponent's power like one does on a half-volley). The tactic here is that James is trying to counter an opponent who has got him on the run. He is taking the ball's pace and directing it down the line. This may allow him to get the opponent running and turn the tables. He has further to recover than if he sent a crosscourt (you can see how fast he takes off to recover to the open court) however, if he gets the opponent running, it could be worth it (kids, don't try this at home).

These are not ‘one off' cases. Just look at any player in TennisOne's Pro Stroke Gallery and you can find the same things. Are they all wrong? If so, they really should give those millions of dollars back! Obviously, they are all ‘proper,' perfectly fit to the situation encountered.

Technically, it is not only the follow-through that varies when the tactic changes but the body rotation, impact point, and footwork as well. These are not the expression of players ‘styles' but the application of situation specific technique.

Learning ‘Proper' Technique

So which technique are you being taught? There is no such thing as a ‘basic' one that every one should learn since, even for a beginner, as soon as the situation changes, the technique must change as well. Every shot in tennis is like a move in chess. The player sees what's going on with the opponent, their location, and the ball received, decides what tactic to use, and applies situation specific technique. If the technique doesn't fit the situation, a poor shot will result. Trying to use the ‘one size fits all' forehand you paid hundreds of dollars for won't work. No adaptation = no effectiveness.

Fig. 4: Follow-through out in front of the head.

For example, you see you opponent wide on his forehand side and he sends a mediocre rally ball crosscourt to your forehand. Which forehand technique do you apply? The sharp angled crosscourt topspin ‘dip?' The looping arc deep topspin? Or, do you re-direct the ball with a drive down-the line? Every shot in tennis presents these choices and each one requires very different technique. Your selection is every bit as important as your form. Is it obvious now why learning strokes in isolated repetition doesn't fully equip you to play successfully?

Hopefully, this article has piqued your curiosity. Maybe, you are wondering, “If not the standard strokes I've learned, then what and how am I supposed to practice?” We will attempt to help you out in future installments with a Game-based approach system I like to call, Situation Training. Stay tuned!

Your comments are welcome. If this article rings true for you, it would be especially interesting if you sent a short email telling us your personal ‘tale of woe' regarding how your technical stroke lessons didn't impact your game as they should have.

For more information on the Game-based approach, you can visit Wayne Elderton's website at www.acecoach.com

Wayne Elderton

Wayne is the Head Course Conductor for Tennis Canada Coaching Certification in British Columbia. He is a certified Canadian national level 4 coach and a PTR Professional. For two consecutive years he was runner-up for Canadian national development coach-of-the-year out of nominated coaches from every sport. Wayne has also been selected as Tennis BC High Performance Coach-of-the-year.

Wayne is currently Tennis Director at the Grant Connell Tennis Centre in North Vancouver. He has written coaching articles and materials for Tennis Canada, the PTR, Tennis Australia , and the ITF. He is a national expert on the Game-based Approach.