Novak Djokovic’s win over Rafa Nadal in the 2011 Men’s US Open Championship showed tennis fans a new level of play in the history of the sport.   I’ve discussed Nadal’s “Circle” strategy to defeat Federer and the rest of the men’s tour consistently.   But Djokovic has taken the baseline game to a new level. He has perfected deep, heavy shots that keep Rafa out of his circle.

Djokovic and his team have engineered their rise to the top of the men’s game much like Andre Agassi’s team did. A rigorous fitness regimen and diet have amplified his natural counter-punching style, and he is returning serve and hitting passing shots as effectively as any player ever.    I can’t remember a Grand Slam final (grass, hard, or indoor) where the first service percentage carried almost no statistical advantage.   Neither Nadal nor Djokovic benefited from their normally deadly first serves.   It makes you wonder if Pete Sampras could have held service while serve-and-volleying against Djokovic.

This also makes me wonder about the upward evolution of the game, and who will achieve the next level.   Djokovic has almost perfected “corner to corner” baseline strategy.    One thing that does seem to be growing in effectiveness is the drop shot.    The old adage that “you can’t drop shot on a hard court” is being tested more at the top level.

There are four corners on each side of the court.    Two are up at the net.   The only player I have seen who could hit a un-returnable drop-shot from the base line was Charlie Owens.    Many watched Charlie dismantle quality players with a disguised, feather like drop shot that confounded even great players.   Maybe there is someone coming along with this unique touch, who combined with the other tennis skills needed will produce the next level in the never ending evolution of tennis.

Women players might be well advised to note this possibility.    And to be aware that not only should she be able to hit drop shots, she must be able to defend against them.    My guess is that many players and teachers have realized there are four corners on each side of a tennis court.

NCTF PROMOTIONS/PRESS RELEASE
A GUIDE FOR HIGH SCHOOL COACHES, TEAMS, AND PLAYERS

The North Carolina Tennis Foundation proudly announces a new project geared specifically for varsity boys and girls high school tennis has been successfully completed. Every current coach (711 teams) has been provided a copy of THE LITTLE GREEN BOOK of TENNIS by Tom Parham, life long North Carolina coach, teacher, and administrator.
Total funding was provided by private donors. Shipping and logistics also by volunteers.

The author admits to plagiarism. And even stooping to golf for guidance. Coach Parham suggests “…we had a great model for our teaching method. Mr. Harvey Penick’s all time best seller of golf books (HARVEY PENICK’S LITTLE RED BOOK) provided time-honored proven lessons at the highest level. I could hear Jim Leighton’s voice issuing the same firm messages for tennis enthusiasts.”
Method, message and cause. What greater cause than North Carolina’s youngsters.
The book seems to be functioning. Lots of favorable comments.
One coach of multiple sports contended “…this isn’t a book for just tennis coaches, it is for all coaches.” A follow up reader noted, “…this isn’t just a book for coaches, but for all teachers. “
“Some of the best tennis teachers/coaches came form the South. My teams played in 28 national college championships. Jim Verdieck (Redlands University from California) coached 22 national team winners. I watched him closely. So much came out of California. Verdieck worked closely with Dennis Van Der Meer, as did Coach Leighton. Don Skakle, J.W. Isenhour, Ron Smarr , opponents and their players matches, Clinics at U.S. Open, sources every where . I was just their messenger” said Parham.
The North Carolina Tennis Foundation/Association does a plethora of tasks and services for the game. Adult programs, league play, youngsters just beginning. No other priorities that high school and junior participation fit higher on their mission statement.
Coach Parham lauds the organization. I am proud of the success of the project and grateful for all the support of donors and volunteers. My strong feeling is our next high school goal should be to link communities to the kids. Our best results have come from the traditional family to club pro (or community player, to those many who simply loved the kids and the game. ) Next junior tournament play, in combination of twenty or so team play matches. There is much mutual gain between club teaching pros and high school tennis. Most are truly fine teachers who can really be support for high school teams and coaches. Maybe more cooperation along these lines is next.
The annual North Carolina high school tennis clinic will be hosted by UNC-GREENSBORO and Coach Jeff Trivette on July 20. Elon’s Coach Michael Leonard will be the head clinician. Coach Parham will be on hand for questions about the book, plus how it may best be utilized.

On two occasions (2007 and 2015) I tried to make note of the current changes or additions in the game of tennis.

NOTE:  MORE CHANGE!   After rereading the article below (done in 2015) I’d like add a few things.  I do think a rereading  before reading the “new” comments may help.

Time moves on. What has changed from the 1980’s up until now in the tennis world? Certainly some “physical” improvements have affected rackets. 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 are commonly used, etc.

A very positive change in 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 even year round, not just in the “weather-blessed” areas. When you don’t stop all year long, your “tennis education” grows expontentially (no re-learning” time needed, or wasted.)

One contrast with football and basketball is related to size. Soon there will be a 400lb, 6’9” football left tackle who is also quick (Read The Blind Side) or a basketball 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”)

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 back-

hand under spin ball. It is a “tool” worthy of learning this 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 rackets aid young players here, but the “western gripped – open stance- sling-shot forehand” stands on it’s own feet (one quite “open”).

All players now have access to what the great players of the later twentieth century taught tennis. Here are some examples (in addition to two handed back hands, and open stance forehands):

Bjorn Borg. I  think Borg taught the world to “hit is 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- strokes 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 groundstroke – 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!

The one constant is that “…things change!”  What’s new in 20014-15?

I do believe that Chet Murphy was right in concluding that the “old timers” (myself included) were right about most of the “classic teaching methods.

In “The Little Green Book of Tennis” I 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 forty 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 saying, “If you put lights up, he’ll stay there all night, and I’ll leave him.”

His roster included twenty-four players – a very large team. Not only that, each week every player in the top eight had an hour private lesson with Verdieck. 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 sixty 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 sixty-five 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 very close to my mentor, Jim Leighton. Verdi eck said, “know Dennis”? I taught him 90% 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 Sweetbriar 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 the one who I most

respected.

Still not convinced, he said his knees has 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 thirty 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 p.m.”

You’re never to 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.

Someone said “…a short pencil is better than a long memory!”  One of the first things I noticed about CoachVerdieck was that he was constantly taking notes during his players matches.  Most tennis coaches at that time just wandered around (we couldn’t talk to our players during the match then) and socialized.  Not Verdieck.

Technology is changing everything today.  We didn’t have metal rackets to begin with.  Jim didn’t have a ball hopper, but a big red bag full of balls.  One year his team lost by one point, as one of his players missed a high forehand volley.  As we began to exit the courts I noticed Verdieck walking with that young man to a court farthest away carrying the red bag of balls. Intrigued, I told our players to watch as Coach Verdieck dutifully set up practice shots like the volley just missed. “Every match is preparation for another match”.

Rackets have changed the game.  And strings.  Who knows what technology holds but I doubt if anything will be much more helpful than a good coach.

I think the rackets allow shorter, more compact shots.  And that this is helpful particularly with mid court shots. (Doubles, service returns, approach shots, volleys)

One negative with racket technology is that the added pace they yield causes the player to have to move more rapidly, more often, more awkwardly; thus causing more injury. Therefore the role of conditioning and the necessity for good trainers and rehab have exploded.

Parity—-too—-caused much more intense effort at the elite levels (Junior Champions, College players, and certainly at the professional level.)

We used to stress “accuracy first, power later”.  I’m not sure it’s bad advice now to train talented kids to “hit it hard, hit for the lines, and “damn the torpedoes”.

If I taught a 2015 talented youngster I might suggest:

1. Use a Western grip for all deep forehand shots
2. Use the backhand to Continental grip (s)  for every other shot.  It is the most versatile and functional grip.
3. You must change your western forehand to this universal grip to volley, hit most forehand approach shots, and short, low forehands.
4. See Danny and the Forehand chip return (blog 27).

I would emphasize “hitting-on-the-rise” for all good players, and more so for the talented ones.  why?

1. it “takes court away from your opponent
2. It puts pressure on your opponents
3. It creates “lousy hit-spots that yield errors or weak returns.
4. It takes away “big shots” that your opponent has hit
5. It gets you to the net
6. It is your only good option against most high quality shots.  Particularly services.

My teams would practice “inside the lines” games.  OR you rally or volley only from inside the court.  If you step outside (deep or wide) the boundaries, you lose the point.  Play to “21”.  I put 5 in play on a bounce hit, then you get 5.  Everything then—-inside the lines only.  (hint—you can volley!)

I would emphasize Coach Verdieck’s “2 and in” attack.  He marked at a square from the baseline corner.  2 steps in from the baseline, two steps in from the sideline.  As you rally practice come to the net if your sound ground shot will land in this deep square.  He also marked a second smaller square inside the first  (one step in from each line)  Come in on any shot that will land that deep.

This is another way to attack,  rather than an approach shot. 

**Note: This does  create an odd angle to come in on, and you must also practice this unusual position when you decide to “2 and in”.  This works!  *****More on this tactic and FEDERER’S improvement later.

No question that ground strokes are becoming more “open”,and “wristy”, and that rolling the wrist and elbow over during the hit zone work (Just not too soon or loosely).  Borg was the evidence for the new forehand, but he had a lot of respect for “the moment of hit” and the “six ball hit zone”.  Then let it fly!!

Some teachers had a tough time watching this evolution.  Maybe we learned each has their own way.  Let them make choices when things are 50/50.

I watched one of Coach Leighton’s varsity players use a forehand that violated much of Leighton’s fundamental thought.  I asked “are you gonna let him keep playing that way?”  He simply said “watch him hit it!”  “Boom, boom, boom!  Then coach said: “if a flaw works don’t change it”.

Michael Jordan explained that he shot with his tongue out because that’s the way his Dad worked on his car.  A “mannerism” that doesn’t bother anything.

I classified players this way:

1. “Look bad, play bad”
2. “Look good, play bad”
3. “Look bad, play good”
4. “Look good, play good.

Brad Gilbert was talking about #3 in “Winning Ugly”.  They will fool you!  

For professional men the 2007-2014 period belonged to a great group (Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rafa Nadal, Andy Murray.)  Great role models with individual styles and strategies.

Who would have predicted the US Open 2014 Men’s Final (Marin Cilic vs Kei Nishikori)

Much changes, much stays the same.  Please keep the learning going.  Be adaptable, but again———-don’t neglect history and the fine teachers like Harvey Penick, Jm Leighton and Jim Verdieck

****JULY 2018 A few recent”add-ons”:

The latest edition of GOLF DIGEST features an article extolling the virtues of PICKLEBALL.  Not only allowing it on base, but citing all the golfers who are now playing this growing game.  If the game will get golfers running it must have some worth.  Having plugged the game for years, I suggest interested parties read blog numbers 209, 188, 168, 187, 184, 149 for starters.  To summarize two “no-brain” suggestions:  The USTA SHOULD BUY THE RIGHTS TO PICKLEBALL.  2.  Pickleball should adjust its rules so ordinary tennis net heights are the same for pickleball.  This makes any courts suitable once $100 lines are added to each court.

All hail John Isner.   Not only American, a college graduate, from neighboring Greensboro ( which allow me to watch him develop), but his personal virtues merit true appreciation.  Super improvement this season!!!!  Plus he aided the acknowledgement of shortening some formats.

ISNER brings up my “hackalooski gene”.  (From golfers, a hackalooski is a bad player advising a good player, or great player.   John’s great improvement this year stirred the coaching or hack in me.  For years, rooting for John, I wanted to whisper to John, “…forget  long rallies, bomb the return, groundies, and passing shots.  Hold serve and “go for it” on the above mentioned.  It seemed apparent that John adapted that philosophy and it really  got results.  (for more see blog 122).

Twas said of Ted Williams,  “…Gods don’t answer letters”.  Fed is as near to a tennis god as we have seen.  Yet has continually added positives.  The “sneak attack by Roger” was perfection of Coach Verdieck’s “2 and in play”  (see ****above! )   Commentators have raved about his service return lately and it is great, albeit  the bread and butter return is a basic slice or underspin backhand.  Roger just  improved his chip return.  Again Verdieck and  “I didn’t change anything, I gave you a new one” (blog 59).  I think one handed backhands  and services are hard to teach –and learn–(particularly for girls, women and youngsters)  because you have to change grips.  Remember 1.  check your grip at  the hit-spot.  2.  grip must match stroke or, if you change your grip you need to change your stroke.  Please check  blog 203 and 222   for a great way to teach the one handed chip shot.  And a backhand volley.

As an old coach I can’t resist two individual “hacks” .  John Isner–I truly believe you can develop a topspin lob off either side that would serve your game well.

Forgive me Roger, but I don’t think you played  30-0 and 40-15 points with enough intensity.  While you made up for that possibility by playing so well from behind, the coach in me felt like you played loosely on some of  those killer points.   Only you know and I’d love to know what you think.

3. To  all of tennis.  I was spot on about drop shots and defending against drop shots. Much more widely used, executed, and defended in recent years.  (See blogs 132, 172,157).   It took me too long to see that players can execute swinging volleys on certain shots.  These volleys are more powerful.

4. ON HIGH SCHOOL TENNIS—BLOG 171.

5.  HEAD INJURIES IN SPORT.  A growing problem.  Since my earlier writing it now seems  anyone who charges admission to a football game is subject to litigation (colleges, junior colleges, high schools, JVs, recreation teams.)  SCARY!

6.  COLLEGE ATHLETICS IN AMERICA.  SEE BLOGS 208, 46, 53, 85, 139, 157, 161, 199.

7.  INTERNATIONAL IN AMERICAN TENNIS (AND OTHERS SPORTS) – BLOG 192.

8.  FAULT LINES (SEE BLOG 168).

9.  CHATEAU LOW RENT (73).  AND , FOR A LAUGH SEE BLOG 65.

10.  EVERYTHING ABOUT HOW BAD THE IRAQ WAR DECISION WAS,  IS PROVEN MORE AND MORE TRUE DAILY.

 

 

 

1.  Wake Forest University drops S.A.T.  admissions requirements.     2.  Pembroke University, UNC-Charlotte,  Campbell University, and Old Dominion University are regional institutions that have recently added varsity football teams.   3.  Barton College has joined the Conference Carolinas   in adding Men’s varsity volleyball.   Wake Forest cites diversity as their rationale for dropping the S.A.T.   My guess is the high standards for the  S.A.T. scores skews the male/female ratio heavily toward females.   All three moves are, in no small part, related to the continuing  growth in the female populations in higher education.   Private schools are  particularly affected with  a near normal ratio of 70% to 30% in favor of women.  Football additions, of course, would be male.   And not for the reason one might think:   Not only would the male players be additions,  but male students who want to attend a “football playing school.”   I  am pleased that Barton College has elected to join an exclusive group (varsity volleyball for men in Conference Carolina).   While men have been playing collegiate varsity volleyball for many years on the west coast (and to some degree in the northeast), almost no colleges play in other parts of the country, most notably the south.   There are  some 300 women’s volleyball teams in American higher education institutions.  There are only about 80 for men.   Volleyball,  for men, women, or co-ed is a great game.  It is comparably inexpensive to fund teams,  with institutions already having gyms and equipment ready to go.   BUMP,SET, SPIKE.   Let’s go!   P.S.   You people in the big time  (the SEC, the ACC, SOUTHERN CONFERENCE,   and all DIVISION I AND  II  schools)  ought to get on board too.

‘

When they presented me with the 1990 National “Coach of the Year” for NAIA Tennis, I tried to give it to Coach Fred Kniffen of the University of Texas at Tyler.

Fred had a firm rule in 1990 that no one rode in the van without their seat belts on. No exceptions.

En route from Tyler to Kansas City, one of the two team vans ran off a 35-foot embankment.

All belted, there was one minor injury.

I know I gave one player above a thousand career points or more. It had a strange origin. I taught badminton in PE classes. Soon, thinking myself a pretty good player, I encountered one Anand Jaggi, Professor of Economics. Anand was ranked 13th in the world of badminton. And was his “State Champion” in his native India.

Rarely did I get a point. He won the singles, doubles and mixed doubles state badminton championships, held annually at Duke University. And I soon noticed an “uncanny” ability he had. He never played the shuttle-cock when it would land out of bounds. It was “dropped” or let alone.

While my badminton ego suffered, I took this logic to my tennis team. We need to “learn the court”, or like Dr. Jaggi, not hit out of bounds points. We adopted this policy:

1) In practice, if you have any doubt let it go and lets see if you are right

 

2) In a match, with any doubt, go ahead and play it

Soon I could see our players use better and better judgement. We would occasionally let one drop in, but our percentage grew drastically.

The player that benefited most from this was Chai Navawongse, a Thai left-hander who came in on “everything”. Chai had played doubles with Pandorn Schriciphan, so he came in “with game”. Soon, however, I noticed he was playing anything close. There may be 10-20 points a match he played that would have been out. Some, way out.

I explained the “Jaggi” or “learn the court” theory. A bright youngster, and fine player, you could see the light click in his head. Before long he was close to Jaggi in judgement, rarely playing an out ball, simply pointing “out” with the left hand.

In the mid-eighties I began writing a coaching manual. Maybe I’ll add the next twenty years experience to that in a “tennis coaching book” later. If I do, one person will be responsible.   Coach Jim Leighton of Wake Forest University.

North Carolina had, for years, featured the East-West High School All-Star Games. The state added more sports, then girl’s all-stars, and the games progressed. My team had just won a trip to the NAIA Nationals. Hell, we finished fifteenth in the nation.   The first tennis clinic being held in Greensboro was an afterthought.   Coach Norfolk was going to the Basketball Game and I figured I’d pile in with him.   My running buddy, Jack Hussey, was at the clinic, as always, and we were off.   We were all over Guilford County, and Greensboro as well.   Norfolk was in the bed when I sneaked in the shared motel room, very late.   The tennis clinic was the next morning.   I knew Norfolk was awake because he smoked 11 “Viceroys” before taking a morning leak.

I drug my ass out of bed just in time to make the 9:00 clinic at Latham Park in Greensboro.   There were four coaches there including me.    Coach Leighton rolled up with racquets & balls.   He wore traditional white and it matched his hair. He looked just like “Colonel Sanders”.   After pleasantries and introductions he began speaking in a new language.   Two puzzled coaches left in ten minutes.   The other at noon.

Coach Leighton was a master teacher, and my first introduction to someone that knowledgeable about the game.   I was fascinated.   One of his players, Paul Caldwell, was with him.    When the other guy left, leaving only me, I was embarrassed, both by how much Leighton knew, and my own misjudgment about my greatness.   I offered to abandon the afternoon session.   I was delighted, and impressed, as Coach responded, “Tom, we’ve agreed to stay until 4:00. I can tell you are interested in learning.   As long as you’ll stay, we’ll stay.”

Our college offered two hundred dollars per year for “professional growth” at convention trips.   I never again spent mine on anything but my new mentor, Coach Jim Leighton  . He would try to refuse my money, but I’d have paid triple.   I was in his home, at his club, at his varsity practices, watching tapes on everything from his current players to sequential pictures of Ellsworth Vines. He had just completed “Inside Tennis: Techniques of Winning.”   This book, much of the information by Leighton himself, also included contributions by Dennis Van Der Meer, Welby Van Horn, Chet and Bill Murphy, Wayne Sabin, Pauline Betz Addie and others.   I loved Leighton and the book.   I had so many questions.  I’d book time in his Buena Vista Road home in Winston-Salem.   We’d talk about the book, and with explanations by Coach Leighton, I felt like Moses on the Mount.

The USTA held our annual Teacher’s Convention just prior to the US Open in Flushing Meadow.   One year Jim and I made almost every session.   Every coach seemed to want to use his session to further his tennis standing.   At one session Leighton’s bullshit detector kicked in.   A coach was trying to sell a lame idea as the end of all tennis instruction; Leighton politely questioned the man’s premise.   The clinician sloughed off this old white-haired guy’s puzzlement. Again coach queried, “I want to make sure I’m understanding what you’re saying.”   An abrupt, “Am I not speaking plainly enough?” was his answer.   Selling the same lame premise, the clinician was startled when Leighton rose and stated, “Sir, you are addressing the tennis teachers of America and beyond.   Never have I heard such a crock of baloney.”   He turned to me and said “Get up Tom, we’re getting out here!”   I followed beside him.

One day at the New York host hotel he asked, “Do you want to hear someone who knows tennis?”   My immediate response was “Sure!”   Coach said,“Meet me in the lobby at 6:30 AM for breakfast.”   I joined Coach and Chet Murphy in a downtown café.   Chet and Bill Murphy were Californians who knew the biomechanics of tennis.   I’d heard Chet Murphy as a clinician.   He seemed nervous, my having heard so much about him, but once the first technical question was asked, he was off and running.   This morning Leighton did something I’d never seen him do.   He deferred to Murphy, asking questions the way I’d asked of him.   And while there was great mutual respect, I’ve got to say Murphy was impressive.   I was all ears  . This was a time when all kinds of research was being done in tennis. I was pleased with the next question asked by Coach Leighton, “Chet, how do you feel about what we’ve done?”   (Meaning the old time proponents of “classic” tennis instruction.)   Chet thought a moment and said, “We should have let them hit more western grip forehands. Other than that everything was right.”

Coach Leighton was buried the day the “Jimmy Powell Tennis Center” was dedicated at Elon in 1988.   It was in Wait Chapel on the campus that had named their stadium after this fine man, coach and friend.   People say you don’t have to play to be a coach.   Or that you don’t have to have much other than good players (“You can’t make chicken salad, ‘till you get the chicken.”)   My feeling is I became a much better coach after meeting my mentor.   I know it made me money. I taught everyone in Wilson and the surrounding area for years.   I took Leighton’s advice and sought out private sessions with Dennis Van Der Meer and Welby Van Horn.   They couldn’t have been nicer to me.

There are three main “parts” you have to coach: Physical, Mental and Emotional. The emotional part is the toughest to deal with. However, there are really only two villainous emotions; fear and anger. And they are both self-directed.

Macky Carden, our Elon football coach, told me, “When they get that old sinking feeling, you’ve got to change their minds.”

That “old sinking feeling” exists in a lot of places, one is on the tennis court. “Frozen elbows” cause practice to be worthless. Few people can play when angry at themselves. Maybe McEnroe was “actually nervous” when he created those incidences. Angry, maybe, was better than scared for Mac. Only he knows.

One freshman player’s father accompanied him to my office upon reporting to Elon. He brought a bag that contained thirteen broken racquets. The father wanted to know if I would appeal to Wilson Sporting Goods to replace the “faulty” $100.00 racquets.

The fault wasn’t the racquet, it was the anger with which they were being thrown or banged. I attempted to fix the real flaw, the self-directed anger that ruled the boy’s game.

No one would practice harder. But to no avail. Within moments this young man would go into a tantrum, chastising himself in a hopelessly damaging tirade. He didn’t get angry much with others. It was self-directed and a killer. It took a long time to change this attitude, but without changing, I wouldn’t allow him to represent us. It took a lot of patience for him to learn to quit “beating yourself up.”

Here are several comments about the emotional part of coaching:

1. Some players don’t have the “nervous system” of a tennis player. Sorry.
2. The only ones that do you any good as a team player are those who can handle pressure. It’s in college tennis. Either you can handle it or lose. You can learn to deal with it.
3. Blood flow, more specifically “venous return,” causes “butterflies.” Proper warm up can help get rid of the “jitters”. For many they go away once you exercise.
4. There is a psychological “proper level of arousal” for athletes. Not too “torqued-up” but you do need your game face. Different strokes for different folks.
5. Psychologically tough people make the best college tennis players.
6. What pressure does to the “one piston” player is amazing. I saw a lot of #1 seeds lose in the National tournament due to early round “nerves”.
7. If you “hang in there” it is truly amazing what can happen. Some call it “momentum” but “pressure” is a more influencing variable. Tennis is truly unique in that “one point can turn the match around.” This is a “core” belief.

Perhaps one of my premier coaching attempts centered around pressure and playing “ahead”. You are either Tied, Ahead or Behind. Behind and tied are motivators enough. Playing while ahead is a critical emotional moment.

I don’t know how many matches I saw unfold like this:

Player A is ahead 5-3 in the third set. His opponent is serving. In the back of Player A’s head drifts this dangerous thought: “Even if I lose this game, I can serve out the match.”

All this results in a lackluster effort at another, and match winning, service break. The opponent breaks for 5-5 and the “momentum” has reversed itself. Now the pressure, and it’s power, has shifted dramatically.

Teaching “killer instinct” is key. Ahead a service break? Get a second.

I think that the most vulnerable points are “ahead points”, 40-15 and 30-0. These are the ones that twenty year olds lose concentration on, thus allowing that “old sinking feeling” to re-enter.

When ahead, keep the pressure off yourself by staying ahead.

Borg taught a magnificent lesson one day on TV. Having just beaten McEnroe in “the greatest match ever,” I watched commentator Bud Collins interview the Wimbledon Champ.

Collins asked Borg, “How did you do it?”

Borg, stoic as ever, said simply, “Legs.” Nothing more.

Collins had several minutes on his hands and rambled on in a commentary I don’t remember.

Then, Borg, having thought some, took the mic from Bud. His comments were:

1. I was very nervous inside…
2. I thought, surely I will lose…
3. I told myself, I must put these thoughts out of my mind.
4. I will not quit under any circumstances!

End of clinic. Pretty good advice for a lot of areas.

Young coaches-Reread ten times.