My advice to young coaches is to recruit good kids who are good players
who can function academically and be happy in your school. Perhaps the
two biggest errors I see the young coaches make are first, they insist on
recruiting some borderline jerk who is talented. Eventually that kid throws
the team and the coach “under the bus.” Don’t bet on that person, Coach!
Get some good people. You’ll win your share and have a fair chance of
staying sane in the crazy world of athletics. Second, I see the young
coaches work the kids too much. Your players are not employees, or
machines, and you can run them into the ground. Perhaps the biggest
criticism I heard of my teams was that we didn’t work hard enough. But at

tournament time we were fresh, eager, and goal oriented. Often we waxed
the “hard workers” whose coach had worn them beyond caring much. I
never had a team that wasn’t ready to put away the racquet for a while at
the end of the season. It’s call “periodization.”

Answer: It takes a player as good as Serena but who also
has a great drop shot.
And how to beat that player?
Serena with a drop shot and
also very good defense against the drop shot.
Tennis evolves.

In The Little Green Book of Tennis, I have tried, as Mr. Penick stated he
tried, to give the best of the best information: what worked and was
time honored, helpful coaching. Mr. Leighton got me started. Practical
experience gathered through 40 years of coaching and observing college
tennis, and in particular small college tennis, was a strong influence. Jim Verdieck was a heck of a role model for me and many others.
I hope to keep learning and advise others to do the same.
From Play Is Where Life Is: Coach Verdieck told me that three times
he had lights approved for the university courts. Somehow the school
procrastinated every time they said yes. Later he found out that when he’d
tell his wife the lights were to be installed, she nixed the deal. She simply
went to the administrators said, “If you put lights up, he’ll stay there all
night, and I’ll leave him.”
His roster included 24 players—a very large team. Not only that, each week every player in the top eight had an hour private lesson with Verdi-
eck. Sixteen remaining players got a half hour per week with him. This, in addition to team responsibilities. Upon learning he’d retired at age 65, I
called to congratulate him. He was within 60 or so wins of 1,000 wins. No
one else is close. “Did you consider staying until you break that barrier,” was
one of my questions. “No, I promised my wife if I got to 65 I’d stop. A deal’s
a deal.” Though he quit coaching he couldn’t give up teaching. I asked
Coach Verdieck early on if he knew Dennis Van Der Meer? Not only is
Van Der Meer the world’s most prolific tennis teacher, he was close to my
mentor, Jim Leighton. Verdieck said, “Know Dennis”? I taught him ninety
percent of what he knows!”
When I asked Coach Leighton if he knew Coach Verdieck, he said no. I
told him of the Verdieck comment about Dennis Van Der Meer. Leighton
was appalled, and said he intended to ask Dennis about that! A couple of
years went by and I asked Leighton if he’d asked about Verdieck. Leighton
admitted that Dennis had responded, “Yes, that’s probably about right.”
In retirement Verdieck worked with Dennis at Sweet Briar College, in the
mountains of Virginia. I called Coach Verdieck and asked if I could hire him.
“What for?” he asked. I told him I wanted to know more about coaching,
and that he was one who knew more than I did. Still not convinced, he said
his knees had gotten so bad he couldn’t move enough to hit many balls.
I replied, “Coach, I just want to talk with you.” He contended he didn’t talk
much but to come on and we’d probably be done in 30 minutes. My wife
went with me and waited patiently for three-and-a-half hours. “Tom, we
have to set the babysitter free at 8:00 PM.
You’re never too old to learn, and I learned a lot that day.
When I became director of athletics the first thing I did was book an hour
with five different athletic directors I admired.This book draws on materials gathered over the past 40 years. The early writings came from pre-1984. The following are comments onchanges in the game, some written in 2007, some in 2015.
2007 Observations from Play Is Where Life Is:
Time moves on. What has changed from the 1980s up until now in the tennis world? Certainly some “physical” improvements have affected rac-
quets. So much power generated with such ease. There’s more night play. Lights are better, courts are better, and surfaces are improved. Television
continues to “spread the game.” Instruction is better. College coaches are
now better paid and better informed. Prize money, and more scholarships
for Americans and internationals, has recruited athletes who now “pick
tennis first.” These people are not people who “ couldn’t play anything
else.” And they are bigger, stronger, faster. They train, their diets are better,
weights commonly are used …There has been a positive change in the
governance of matches. The point penalty system cleaned up behavior
problems. College refereeing is better, and they use more refs. Still two
people can’t officiate six (or more contests). Pro players are less likely to
drink to excess now. “Rounders” or “tennis bums” have been “weeded out.” Indoor facilities have leveled the playing field. Now many people, particularly young people, can play year round, not just in the “weather-blessed”areas. When you don’t stop all year long, your “tennis education” grows exponentially (no “re-learning” time needed, or wasted.) One contrast with football and basketball is related to size. Soon there will be a 400-pound, 6’9” football left tackle who is also quick (read The Blind Side) or a basket-
ball player who can dunk himself. Tennis and golf professionals still haven’t produced a dominating 6’7” superstar. Perhaps height produces more
possibility for error in “lengthy shots.” Who knows, but “average-sized”
people still have a chance in championship tennis. (You do need a “big
heart.”) Another factor in American tennis can’t be overlooked: the role of
parents. Connors (mother), McEnroe (father), Evert (father), Agassi (fatherand brother), and the Williams’ sisters, are ample proof that the tremendous role of parents in the development of championship-level American players. Mr. Williams certainly gets the award for “out of the box” results. To train one child to be number one in the world is amazing but number one and number two at the same time is unprecedented. And done without normal routes of American junior play and USTA super support says a lot.
I was disappointed by the way the Williams sisters were often treated by
many in American tennis. They were extremely good sports, as evidenced
repeatedly. America was well served by Venus and Serena. Tennis too. The
effectiveness of western grip forehands, like two-handed backhands, has
been truly “certified” by numerous players. I would still encourage young players to add (“I didn’t change anything, I gave you a new one”—Jim Verdieck) a backhand underspin ball. It is a “tool” worthy of learning the grip change from western to continental, needed to hit this valuable shot. If there were one other obvious suggestion it would be to observe how many forehands are now hit with “open” stances. Many “purists” of
my day would straighten up that front lead foot. I think the racquets aid
young players here, but the “western gripped—open stance—sling-shot
forehand” stands on its own feet (one quite “open”). All players now have
access to what the great players of the later 20th century taught tennis.
Here are some examples (in addition to two-handed backhands and open
stance forehands): Bjorn Borg. I think long taught the world to “hit it as
hard as you can.” And he hit it in! It could be done. Topspin helped! (“I may
hit long, I may hit wide, but I won’t hit into the net.”) Pete Sampras: Serve
and volley with the same philosophy as Borg’s ground-stroke attitude. If
you hit it as hard as you can you eliminate a lot of judgment errors based
on “how hard to hit when?” (“Grip it and rip it”—John Daly.) Martina
Navratilova and Billie Jean King: Women can play the all-court game. All
things being equal ground stroke wise, those who can attack also will win.
There were at least two other contributions that are “must mentions.”
Andre Agassi: Took ground strokes and the value of conditioning to a
whole new level late in his career. Becoming extremely fit, Agassi had a
period of time he ruled tennis by running opponents into oblivion with
the simplest of strategies: Hit it hard as hell into alternate corners (with few
errors) until the other guy was “spent” physically. That truly was impressive.
No one had done this as well as Andre. All made contributions, but none
more so than the overall ability of Roger Federer and the ease with which
he executes all of it. Perhaps no other player has had more “total” ability
than Federer. His talent is staggering. Would he be the same were it not
for the lessons of Borg, Sampras, Laver, Agassi, Martina, and Evert? Is he
the best ever? I can’t say. What I suspect is there are youngsters watching,
learning, and practicing to take it all to a new, and perhaps unknown,
“new level.”
Watching tennis is going to continue to be exciting. Bet on it!

One policy I had was to never say anything to a player who had just lost
for one hour. Then I let them initiate the conversation. My most frequent
question was “If you had it to do over, what would you do differently?”
One kid I coached against wrote an analysis of his match immediately
after playing. “I may have to play him again. Or, my teammate may.”
Pretty smart.

Every player and team needs two allies: Funding and publicity. Most
communities have people who, for whatever reason, want to help. One
help you’ll need is money, and there are people who are good at raising
and donating money, services, and equipment. While there are guidelines
for proper fundraising, once you know the right way to find and accept
help, some extra effort on you and your team’s part will yield the aid you
may be missing.
You and your players and teams will also benefit from good public
relations. Often the key is the media. Schools have sports information
directors (the S.I.D.). A good working relationship here often results in the
public being aware of your team and its efforts. Youngsters like publicity.

Most people do. Publicity encourages and inspires the very young to select
tennis as a worthy pursuit. You have to do your part. Make rosters, team,
and individual information available in a timely fashion. Scores reported,
win or lose, are fundamental. The two men below are personal examples
of two friends who were of immense help to our teams.

Challenge match policies are also extremely important. My essential
guidelines:
• Challenge matches earn you a spot in the lineup, match play
preserves the spot. These are perhaps the grimmest matches in
college tennis. (One of my players always lost.)
• The two most important challenge matches were between number
six and number seven (determines if you start) and number eight
and number nine (determines if you travel with the team). The coach
should always witness these matches.

I had several rules about my on-court conversations, or advice, during
a match:

1. I’m not going to tell you anything unless I feel pretty darned sure
   about it. You can take it or leave it, but I think it’s true.
2. I didn’t “just talk” except to advise, “shake your head yes, like I might
   know something.” At least the opponent may wonder.
3. Don’t walk away from me in contempt or show me up. If I order you
   off the court for behavior, don’t react in any way but by getting your
   gear and exiting the court.

An Elon graduate, Kyle Smialek, and his family donated tennis
scoreboards at the Jimmy Powell Tennis Center on the campus of Elon
University. Graciously, they named the scoreboards in honor of my
assistant, Bob Owens, and me.
Kyle’s mom, Jill Smialek, wrote me this nice email:
I am hoping you will be there! Kyle is going as well as Kaylyn.
If it wasn’t for you my children wouldn’t be going and there might not
be a scoreboard!
But, God bless you, you had given him a chance–and to his credit he
followed through for four years. Because of your dedication, which you
have passed on to my son. He never gave up. He was Elon inside and out.
Tom, you have given my son the determination to try his best. He may
never had been given that chance if it weren’t for you. He may not ever
made it “big” in college tennis but his loyalty and his determination are
admirable. And that loyalty drove Kaylyn to try her best at Elon. And again
she struggled with tennis but never gave up!
I attribute that determination to you. They have both grown through
Kyle Smialek with Tom Parham Elon tennis and have now become successful adults. Two children thatmake me very proud of their accomplishments.
So when you are there–look at those scoreboards and know you made a
difference on not one but two people’s lives. You deserve that scoreboard.
Enjoy it!
Hope you get to catch Kyle and Kaylyn while there.
My very best to Margaret.
Cheers,
Jill  

I responded with the following email and the thought, “One parent is
worth more than 100 teachers.”
Jill,
What a kind note and thanks. Here is an alternate explanation for the
kid’s success. In James Michener’s “Mexico,” Michener uses bull fighting
as a metaphor for death. He asks the reader “what is the worst thing that
can happen from a promoter’s point of view?” Answer: The bull must have
courage or he won’t fight! Picture Ferdinand the Bull.
Next question: what is the surest way to determine if a bull has the
necessary courage? Practice fight? Can’t do that, because one practice and
the bull figures out the deal about the cape. Kills the matador. Promoter’s
best guess at determining the potential courage of a young bull? Fight
the mothers. If the mother has heart, the offspring will have courage. You
did good with the kids, Mom. Jill, I loved Kyle as a person and you all as a
family. I’m glad, but not surprised about their success. Margaret and I are
quite thrilled about the scoreboards and look forward to seeing them in
action. (Hopefully with some Phoenix wins on the boards). I must tell you
and your family that as much as we appreciate our names up there with
Elon, our most intense thanks are for the remembrance of our beloved
friend, Bob Owens. I truly believe Bob is an angel. Can’t wait till next
weekend.
Stay in touch, and thanks once again.
Tom and Margaret Parham
The Smialeks think I did Kyle a favor by keeping him on the team. It was
a no-brainer. First of all, he was a good player. More importantly, he was a
heck of a fine student and person.
But I started to think about unsung contributors who often don’t get to play much. Football coach Henry Trevathan is a dear friend and legendary
coach. I once asked Coach Trevathan what he liked most about coaching.
As was his way, he pondered the question a while and finally said, “There
was almost always a kid trying out for the football team who had no
business trying out: Too small, lack of talent, slow—whatever. But he had
one quality. He wouldn’t quit. I somehow could keep him around and turn
it into a positive for him, the team, and myself. Took some time,
some patience, some faith.”
I had several of those kids who played for me, Kyle was one; his friend
George Memory was another. George’s family, the Don Memorys, are part of the “Memorys of Wake Forest College.” Bull and Jasper Memory are icon-
ic at “Old Wake Forest.” They were also tennis players who took my father, E. T. Parham, under their wing when he was an aspiring young theology
student and ministerial hopeful. They taught him tennis, and he played
number four for Wake Forest in 1928. I met Don Memory socially when
George was a senior in high school. We uncovered our connection, and
I learned that George was interested in Elon. We got him to Elon, and he
was a “marginal” player who I kept on the squad. The summer of George’s
second year I checked my returning player data with Elon and George was
not enrolled. I called his dad, and I don’t believe Don would object to me
saying there were “tears in his voice” when he told me that George “had
worsened” (he suffered from severe kidney problems) and would not be
able to play anymore. And he was not going back to Elon. I encouraged
both to have him come back. I would keep him as manager and “in”
tennis—a game he loved.
Fast forward two years, George’s health had thankfully improved and he
was able to return to the team. We were playing Davidson; they were good
and it would take all of our efforts to win. George and Kyle Smialek were
up to play doubles together in a “scratch match.” We may have already won
but you’d never know watching Kyle and George. I don’t remember much
else about that day, just that our team won. It was beautiful out and
watching Kyle and George play together made a lot of sense. It was a
tremendous jolt of joy, for me and the team.
I did my share of winning. It is worthwhile to do your best. I remember a lot of these “Smialek” moments and what great kids some of these non-
starter, marginal players were. Many of my era’s kids would have played on a lot of fine college teams but were bumped by the influx of foreign and
international players. My first team had great guys who would not have
played later. However, given the chance and some time, they blossomed
with experience. Joe Roediger was number 13 on my first Elon team. He
worked his way up to number 5, graduated when no one thought he
could, and has taught tennis for 20 years. No one loves teaching tennis more than Joe. Many of these marginal players ended up as teachers and
coaches. The players who are cut, end up bitter at tennis and probably quit
playing, let alone teaching. The marginals though, will possibly be your
next great tennis teacher, pro or coach.
One of the few things that I did not like about Title IX was that it dictated
squad size for men be equal to women, or vice versa. You had to cut at a
certain equal number. Until then, I could let them hang around as long as
they would. Coach Jim Verdieck of Redlands University and our NAIA days,
kept 32 on his squad. He gave the top 16 a private hour lesson weekly, the
bottom 16 a half hour. Many of these “subs” are teaching today. Plus,
Verdieck won more national tennis titles than anyone, ever, in college
tennis.
I did, of course, kick a few off. None who didn’t deserve it. And I kept a
few I should have run off. Maybe I was idealistic, but I thought they could
all be salvaged. Often, a challenge match cost a kid a starting slot, or a
chance to stay on the team. One kid lost a challenge match on the match
point of a third set tiebreaker—on a double fault. That hurts. But he didn’t
quit and eventually became a fine starter. Almost every kid I kept, sooner
or later, came back and got me a crucial win. Peter Van Graafeiland lost
and lost and lost. He was as nice a kid as ever played. He figured it out and
became solid at the bottom of the lineup. Jon Hodges, Ashley Shaw,
Justin Clark, and Micheal Prelec were Americans who sat out until their
time came. John Morel grew four inches in his freshman year. He later
became all conference.
So many more examples, Chad York teaches at one of the better tennis
clubs in Charlotte. He took lump after lump, and it killed me to watch him come up short. Chad has never blinked, to this day. Tommy Stratford teach-
es tennis in D.C. He would bleed to play and always, always supported the team. Tommy Nielsen was the same. A guy named John Potanko was
recruited out of PE classes. Andrew Hodges teaches today. I watched him
play freelance every day while we practiced. I convinced him to come over
to the varsity courts, hit with some of the better players. He didn’t think he
was good enough. Great kid. Kevin McCabe was another. Sebbe Bredberg,
a Swede, fought shoulder problems and substituted for a school year. Next
go—Southern Conference Champion, Bredberg a hero! There were similar
kids at Atlantic Christian College and, I’m sure I’ve forgotten several.
I wrote this thinking of, and thanking, the Smialeks. More than that,
thanking my persistent kids. I loved seeing them make it. More than either,
though, I write this for the young coaches. “Don’t cut ’em; don’t give up on
’em; coach ’em; coach ’em; coach ’em!”

“You can observe a lot by watching” –Yogi Berra.
I have felt apologetic to the people I coached in my “pre-Leighton” career.
We had good teams and kids early, but I really had no “body of knowledge,”
or thorough concept of what to suggest. Having a background in other
sports helped me make common sense decisions, and I was developing an
eye for how to help. Still Leighton provided the base to expand on.
I began to see things that I hadn’t been aware of, and a great new source
of learning emerged. I was seeing things my own players did or didn’t do
properly. Other teams provided examples. And while I hardly know about
the upper echelon of tennis, I now see things the pros were doing that
helped. Television brought the great players right into my living room.
And tennis fits television like a glove: Borg, Connors, McEnroe, the U.S.
Open, Wimbledon, Billie Jean vs. Bobby Riggs, etc.

A team requires a “critical mass.” Chemistry. We had that in 1979. Tom
Morris was the leader. Part of the Bassett Furniture family, they lived in the
wealthiest part of Columbia, South Carolina. Sam Modlin’s family of six
lived in a trailer. Tom and Sam were the closest of friends. Sam died in a car
crash two years after graduation. Tom’s father, Jack Morris, told me that he
thought Tom almost died himself when Sam was killed. Sam was a beauty,
and we still miss him. Jay Aldridge was the third member of that critical threesome. Jay won  the first Maryland High School tennis singles title by the score of 7–6, 6–7, 7–6. Played indoors with the old nine-point tiebreaker in existence, Jay said neither he nor his opponent  lost their service. Jay won the last breaker 5–4, having the last serve by
virtue of winning the toss. A junior on this team, Brian Staub was from
the Hampton, Virginia, area. His coach, Ron McVittie, had quit coaching
Brian’s team because of the team behavior, including Brian’s. I’d never met
Brian when he showed up at one of our matches. Jay told me who he was,
and that he was ranked number five in the middle Atlantic states. That was
a good ranking for our level. I introduced myself to Brian and asked if he
was visiting a friend? “No sir, he said, I’m hoping I can be on your team next
year.” Brian went on to explain that he’d felt so bad about his coach, he’d
begged him to return. Classmates were mad because McVittie was a great
person and coach. “If you won’t return, will you please help me with mycollege choice,” Brian begged. Coach McVittie advised him to “go to Atlan-
tic Christian College, they have a coach there who can keep you straight.”