This past week, I shared an Instagram post that garnered a fair amount of attention:
Follow Mattspoint Tennis on Instagram (and you’ll find out why ladder drills are, well, kind of useless).
And in this post, I wanted to expand on these topics in more detail to add clarity to each.
First, here’s a bit of context. It’s been nearly 10 years since I began my master’s degree in sport science at the University of Edinburgh. It was 2010 and I was an eager young lad (as the scot’s would say).
Before then, I had a lot of ‘in the trenches’ experience - as a player and a coach. But going through a masters programme got me on the research train, and I’ve been on it ever since.
All that to say, I’ve immersed myself in sport science for a long time now; and I’ve been around the game of tennis for an even longer time. So I’ve seen a thing or two.
From academies to federations, local clubs to private settings, gyms to online coaching and a lot more - it’s been a diverse range of environments. Which has included a diverse range of players/clients. Ones I’ve been fortunate enough to work with. Not to mention coaches & researchers I’ve worked alongside, and learned from.
That being said, I must admit that I have my own personal biases (we all do). So realize - yes I’m coming at this with a large educational background, along with several years of experience - but nevertheless, take the info with a grain of salt.
Here we go...
1. You don’t need a private tennis lesson every day to get better.
Do you know how many parents have asked me to give their kid a daily private? I wouldn’t be able to count them on both hands (or even both hands & feet combined, for that matter!). Some players do need a lot of attention, others need very little, there’s a large range. But given what we know about feedback frequency (the amount of time between providing feedback to students, and letting them practice those instructions), more is not better...not by a long shot.
The literature (Schmidt and Lee 2014) on this topic tells us that, on a micro level - during a drill for example - giving feedback after every shot has just as much benefit as giving feedback after every 50 shots. Meaning, if we give feedback too often, we likely aren’t going to see a whole lot of improvement/change and, the same is true if we give feedback too infrequently. So there’s usually a sweet spot, and it’s different for everyone, where giving the appropriate amount of feedback will accelerate learning.
Some of the literature points to every 10 attempts or so, but a lot of that stems from research on beginners (where they probably do need a bit more instruction). What about players that need to continue learning but who’ve already been around the game for a number of years? From what I’ve seen, they don’t need even close to as much instruction as one might think.
Just as an example, Marc Polmans (Mattspoint athlete currently ranked #119 ATP), will often go weeks without seeing his head tennis coach (that’s not me, I’m the performance/physical coach). With technology, we can now exchange videos, analyses and commentary; which we do quite regularly. It’s not nearly as much feedback as most juniors get on a weekly basis and the stakes are much higher for players of Marc’s calibre.
You might be saying, “but he’s a developed pro player”. Well I have a response to that. Actually, two responses. First, he still needs to get better if he wants to crack the top 100. So learning isn’t over, not by a long shot. And second, I’ve had the luxury of spending a fair amount of time with Marc, asking questions, digging into his history. And you know what, while he had coaches that helped him (and those same coaches continue to help from time to time), he didn’t really have a ton of one-on-one coaching growing up.
There were some periods where he had a private on a weekly basis. Other times he would go months without any formal coaching. It just goes to show that there isn’t one clear path to improvement, many paths exist.
Note - when I refer to private lessons (in points #1 + #2) I’m talking about the type of lesson a player would normally receive from a tennis coach on a one-to-one basis. A lot of it being technique driven (although with good coaches that won’t always be the case), and a lot closed-skill drilling (i.e. basket/hand fed).
2. And you probably don’t need a private tennis lesson every week either.
Again, I would argue that this holds true on a macro level too. Do you really need a private lesson every week? Some might, others won’t. I’ve had experiences with players who didn’t respond well to regular private lessons. They wanted to play, to compete.
On top of that, seeing players too regularly on a one-to-one basis might interfere with things they’re working on and attempting to master.
This DOES NOT mean players aren’t being coached regularly, but there’s a lot more to coaching than simply going from one drill to the next, feeding ball after ball - i.e. the typical ‘private lesson’.
You can watch a practice, or a practice match. Or even better, their tournament match. With our tennis players and clients, we look at their development holistically. How’s their lifestyle? Their nutrition? Their joint health? Support system?
What about things like teaching them about habit formation? In other words, the science of ‘change psychology’. Oftentimes, the coach-athlete relationship is a deep one, where a coach may be the only - or one of the only - person(s) to actually ‘get through’ to a player. So if the player has a habit of scrolling through their phone every night - and performs sluggishly on the court the next day - is it really a fitness, motivation or laziness issue? Or do we need to help this player break that habit so they can get a better, and more restful, night of sleep?
That’s just one example, there are thousands of others that exist. But the point remains the same, traditional private lessons can be important, but they are not everything. And more is not necessarily better.
3. A lot of the training you’re doing is probably a waste of time.
Here’s the thing, most of what you see on Instagram might look cool (fancy ladder drills, juggling with your eyes closed etc), but doesn’t actually help you get better as a tennis player. You see, there are real qualities that we need to improve. And there’s a systematic way of improving them, one that relies on scientific principles. Copying drills on a whim doesn’t actually take into account the progressions needed to improve unilateral force expression, for instance. Or your unique movement capabilities, and inadequacies, for that matter.
You might be saying to yourself, ‘“well, we’re doing those ladder drills to improve footwork and coordination”. Ok, I hear you, but when have you seen Federer take 15 small steps, moving in and out of the baseline, while running down a 95 mph forehand?? Yes, these drills can be fun, they can act as a warm-up drill, or a low-level coordinative and/or progressive plyometric activity. But please don’t tell me you’re improving footwork.
Footwork does matter. More so, footwork patterns matter. A split-step can be considered a footwork pattern. So is a jab step. A crossover recovery step. Or a shuffle. Not to mention that there are nuances within each of these footwork patterns. Ones that are based on technical, tactical and physical dimensions of actual matchplay.
So if you want to improve your footwork (and movement in general), you must practice these various patterns in many ways. That might mean breaking the pattern into smaller, more digestible ‘chunks’. And progressing from simple, closed drills, to more complex, open drills.
A more open and realistic footwork drill here.
Ultimately, the most important condition that must be fulfilled when improving footwork, is working on the patterns during actual live ball drilling and playing. If we go back to our 95mph forehand ‘run-down’ example - the only way to truly improve our ability to coordinate our movements, and racquet preparations, timing and so on, is to practice this in a real environment. This is how the scientific principle of specificity works - we adapt to the specific conditions that are imposed on us.
But you don’t have to stop the ladder drill (if you like it), just realize what it’s purpose is - and more importantly, what it’s purpose isn’t.
4. On-court tennis sessions aren’t intense enough.
In ‘Swimming Energy Training in the 21st Century” (Rushal 2013), the author proposes a ‘radical change’ to the way swimmers ought to train, effectively challenging tradition and ‘how things have always been done’. If you’ve ever been involved in competitive swimming, you know that it includes early morning wake ups, lots of repetitions and in general, a whole lot of volume in the pool!
But Rushal supports a totally opposing view, arguing that ultra-short (and ultra-intense) training sessions should be the acceptable norm, rather than the reverse. So instead of work bouts of longer than 30 seconds (and up to a minute, or even longer), training should consist of work bouts that are less than 30 seconds.
In tennis, I would argue that even less than that is ideal. And that these bouts of effort are aimed to push a player past their current capabilities (from a physical perspective), but again, performed in very short time frames.
The majority of my time on-court with Marc during his off-season training was monitoring work intervals (and rest; which we’ll get to below). Stepping in and cutting the rally short whenever we reached a certain work interval - never letting it get beyond 30 seconds - was my principal duty.
Here we’re working on moving up and back (perception + movement) while respecting work:rest ratios.
A few of the benefits of this type of training, from a physiological standpoint include:
Alactic sources of energy are being used primarily
Type 2a fibers maintain their contractile function (explosive) while becoming more oxidative (some converting to type 2b in the process)
Insignificant amounts of lactate accumulation (which allows for more ATP-PC contribution, rather than relying on glycolysis for energy, and accelerating recovery between bouts)
Still stimulates and allows for aerobic adaptation via repeated maximal efforts (i.e. the more times you repeat the efforts, the greater the aerobic stimulus)
I also like to use a pyramid scheme for the implementation of work:rest ratios. For instance, we’ll do one set of 10secs of work, the next set will be 15secs, then 20secs, then back to 15secs and so on. It’s a nice way to keep quality and intensity high at the same time. Alternatively, we’ll use a ‘variable’ scheme where I’ll randomly assign (or cut) the work ratios. It might look something like this - 15s, 5s, 25s, 18s, 9s, 30s, 12s etc. This is a nice way to start getting more specific, like a tennis match - as every point duration will differ slightly from one to the other.
When training like this, just make sure that each work interval is performed at a player’s maximum intensity level (we use the phrase ‘ultra-intense’ often to drive this home).
5. On the flip side, on-court tennis sessions don’t provide enough rest between periods of work.
Here’s the typical tennis practice sequence:
hit up the middle (ball after ball for 10-15min with no rest between rallies)
hit crosscourt (ball after ball for 10-15min with no rest between rallies)
hit volleys/overheads (hit 5min of volleys and 5 total overheads)
take 3-4min to hydrate/rest
play baseline points (starting with a ball up the middle of the court and no rest between points)
take 3-4min to hydrate/rest
take some warm-up serves (and haphazard, unfocused returns)
Play some tiebreakers
Finish practice and check your phone/scroll through Instagram
Does this seem about right? Ok, I’m probably exaggerating a bit. Some players do practice well. But this is NOT an uncommon tennis practice scenario. Beyond the structure (which obviously should include some individualized elements), the main problem I see with this type of practice is that it doesn’t include any dynamics of an actual tennis match. Warming-up by hitting for a few minutes up the middle with no rest is one thing, but increasing ball speed (which adds intensity), hitting into and out of various targets (which adds movement), should be a mandate to allow for adequate rest intervals.
Even with the practice structure outlined above, we can make it work for a player; not only by adding specific cues and aims within each hitting scenario (ex: make sure to recover after every crosscourt forehand and aim to hit the target on the other side of the court), but by prescribing appropriate work to rest ratios….and then sticking to them!
This is something I still battle with on a regular basis, because here’s the reality - a rally usually stops because a player has made an error. And what does that player want to do right away? Hit another ball. But that’s the exact moment that as a player, you need to take the time to rest (and reflect) before getting into the next rally. This type of practice isn’t just physiologically advantageous, it’s more purposeful.
And coaches, here’s a little tip. When I want a player to take some time to rest between hits, I don’t stand behind or to the side of them (like we as coaches usually do), I get right in front of them. Unless they want to swing right at me (at times, perhaps they do), it forces them to take a moment, maybe even a breath or two. And it’s in that moment that the player reflects, we reiterate a teaching point, or we ask them to take a little walk to the back of the fence and back.
There’s a dogma associated with many sports - tennis included. And Rushal says it best, “if hard work leads to good performances, harder work (and more of it) will lead to better performances”. And similar to swimming, how many tennis players have been put off because of this? Careers left hanging in the balance. Unfulfilled. Unrealized. It’s a shame, but all too true.
I do advocate hard work. But that work needs to be follow some sort of structure and plan. Grinding doesn’t lead to improvement. You won’t get to your goal faster by rushing to hit ball after ball, rally after rally, day after day. Give it your all. Give it your best. But don’t forget to take adequate rest.
More to come in next week’s post…