Different Approaches
Published: 09 Mar 2007 - 09:13 by raystrach
Updated: 31 May 2007 - 16:38
Subscribers: Log in to subscribe to this post.
We are in the process of filming a range of video content for the Squashgame website. We plan to have content from both ends of the playing spectrum, from the top level down to the social player. While we were filming, we had a basic disagreement on how to approach the problems we faced.
Although it did not hit me at the time, what we our disagreements were based on the approach we each took to coaching. Put simply, Rita wanted to coach in a segmented or chained way and I wanted to coach in a wholistic way. She likes to explain thing in terms of where the shoulder, the elbow, the wrist, the legs etc, my thing is to tell the player what I want to see happen and then see if they can make to happen for themselves.
Who is right?
My immediate response is to say that I am, and I am sure that Rita would say that she is. The answer can only come from the player. Each person responds differently to the same instruction. You can tell a player to do the same thing in 5 different ways it has no effect whatsoever. Tell them to do it a sixth way, and hey presto, they immediately get it!
I tend to think that the segmented approach can make things too complicated. It can reduce a player with a smooth but poor swing into a uncoordinated mess. Although you can sometimes see a more immediate effect with this approach, when taken out of the coaching context, there is an immediate switch back to the former style.
With the wholistic approach, I try the player to adapt their movement, trying to retain the fluidity. there is often a key point at which the player has to pay particular attention to create the "new" swing. If they can get on top of this key point early, they can make quite a big change quite quickly, although this does not always happen.
A good example is one of our main subjects (or should that be victims!). A former tennis player, her forehand is a typical topspin swing. We both had difficulty in getting here to produce a more direct open face swing. While she has got it right a few times, she is struggling.
Her backhand is better but still needs work. I gave her two simple instructions and she played some great backhands almost immediately.
Soon I expect that you will be able to purchase an implant which can be controlled by a device like a playstation, and the coach will just take the player through the stroke with the control stick. When it happens, it will save a lot of arguments. In the meantime, Rippa Rit will surely point out where I am going wrong!
How to add images to Members' Forum posts and replies here...
Replies...
Please Note: The most recent replies are now at the top!
From edmpnd1961 - 31 May 2007 - 16:38
From raystrach - 19 Mar 2007 - 10:49
there always have to be a degree of both styles of coaching. you are right adz when you questioned what happens when wholistic does not work or when trying to refine a skill. there will be times when one aspect has to be addressed individually, but with some people this need to be limited to one element at a time.
this is especially true when trying to break very old habits. the muscles have very long memories and changing technique is a long term project and it can take several 'phases' or steps.
the biggest breakthrough you can make as a coach is when the student can recognise for themselves when they do something which is not desirable or a habit or action that needs to be changed
From Viper - 14 Mar 2007 - 08:31
From Adz - 13 Mar 2007 - 22:46
I think that both of your methods are correct, but you should be able to tailor your method to the needs of the student! A one minded coach can only teach like minded students and will always fail some of the students some of the time.
By learning BOTH methods it gives a coach the option to change their style to get the best from their students and in turn it allows the student to progress in a way that they feel most comfortable.
What Hagesy said is definitely correct in that different people learn in different ways, and teaching the correct thing in the wrong way still doesn't work no matter how hard you try. If space and time permits then you should both work on showing how your methods can aid a student and not how the other person's method is wrong!
e.g. Rita's view gives the impression of:
Analyse the little bits individually to see which bit needs improving. Correct each part and in turn the whole motion will be correct.
Query: What if someone just cannot get the one part correct? What if they cannot get the link between movements correct? Do you then resort to using a wholistic approach to show them how each move flows into another?
Ray's view gives the impression of:
Show or describe how the end result should appear and see if the student can create this themselves. Focus on the end result so that the student can correct all areas at once.
Query: What if someone just cannot get it all right? What if you can see that it is only there should rotation (for example) that is wrong? DO you then go into Rita's method to apply small corrections?
Ha Ha! Now that should give you two some food for thought! I guess the ultimate question for any coach is:
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOUR METHODS AREN'T GETTING RESULTS FROM A CAPABLE STUDENT?
ADZ
From hagesy - 13 Mar 2007 - 12:27 - Updated: 13 Mar 2007 - 12:29
I myself usually prefer to coach in a segmented way. highlighting what looks to me the player is doing wrong and then trying to correct. I believe the player has to strive for the perfect technique and most efficient style on the court. As a player moves up the grades if their technique has a flaw in some way they will be found out, eventually by the faster pace, a tighter length, a quicker opponent etc, etc.
However, when coaching adults who have been playing for 20 years and now want some coaching to improve, it is almost impossible to get them technically right, due to the bad habits they have been reinforcing for some years. Sometimes you have to compromise and try and use the style and technique the player is most comfortable with. As long as the player knows when they hit an error to know what they did wrong and therefore strive to correct it next time, that is a huge improvement.
About 6 months ago i attended a coaching seminar with Jeff Wolstein and someone smith (i forget his first name). Jeff presented the normal sort of coaching seminar information, whilst the other fellow presented information on the various different learning styles of different people, whether visual, literal etc, etc. The theory was the first step was to learn in what style your student best responded, and then change your style of coaching to suit your student. It was very interesting and helped me alot.
From rippa rit - 12 Mar 2007 - 11:00
Also, we never seem to keep to our deadlines as all the simple things seem to turn into complex things for presentation.
We are just chipping away sometimes not knowing which is the most important.
From aprice1985 - 12 Mar 2007 - 07:53
From rippa rit - 09 Mar 2007 - 14:29 - Updated: 09 Mar 2007 - 14:32
Yes, the funny side is I had to buy a card of bulldog clips for the backdrop at the courts for the video shoot, but I have kept one aside to put over my mouth, for obvious reasons. We always keep going in spite of our differences otherwise we would have thrown in the towel long ago.
In spite of my dogmatic approach I have the last laugh since Ray played D Grade when he first came for coaching at 21 years of age, and did actually make A grade about 3 or 4 years later, so I thought that would be a good enough recommendation. Though I am sure he would have got on the court at least 3 or 4 times per week in those days to do the repetition. For sure, on the other days he would have practised the swing in the lounge room, and maybe ghosting in the backyard, in between lessons.
Another interesting lecture I attended - about the workings of the brain. When it was explained the difference in what people see often is because of how their brain works, left/right side, male/female brain (and you do not have to be male to have a male brain) some players and coaches can only be taught by the holistic approach. In an ideal world we need both approaches.
I rest my case. But there is more ..............................
I bet you will all be curious to see the end result of our videos, and then you can have your say too.....Sorry, only members can post replies on this and all other Members` Forum items.
Support Squashgame
Support us here at Squashgame.info! If you think we helped you, please consider our Squash Shop when purchasing or make a small contribution.
Products Now Available
US Squash Shop
Testimonials
"Wow - this forum is getting busy. I wish we'd get as many posts on our forum."
Sorry, logins temporarily disabled
We hope to see you back soon when we launch our updated site.
Wholistic approach works for mature and adult students with adequate skills in squash not to juniors (16 years blow ) and beginners, who hardly hit a ball.
Also as a coach, u are suppose to be able to lower expections according the level of the students, (u aren't suppose to impart a grade A programme to a grade E student. )
rgds
level one squash coach..
Back to top