Tag: development

Posted on by

Gender Interactions in Tennis

The role of Gender Interactions in the tennis development spectrum is fairly widespread with most young girls and boys having the options to learn together opposed to being separated as result of their gender. More often the case in ‘other’ sports where only girls can play and/or only boys can play, the good news is this has been evolving over time and has gained further traction since the initial release of The Secrets to Optimal Coaching Success five years ago! However, there is still a substantial way to go until equal parity is reached but that doesn’t mean inroads can’t be made in respect to Gender Interactions to push our sport forward.

Often overlooked, the Top 3 on the ATP tour with 20 Grand Slams or more are often of discussion when it comes to the ‘G.O.A.T’ debate. Between these players are more than 60 Grand Slam titles. This means over the past 15 years (roughly) these three players have primarily been responsible for these Championship wins with merely a handful of other players that have come between i.e. Murray, Wawrinka to Del Potro. Of course, over the last 3-4 years this has started to change with the likes of Thiem, Medvedev to Alcaraz capturing their maiden Championship wins with Rudd to Tsitsipas as finalists. Of course, there are more players in the mix and these merely serve as examples, but there is quite a significant contrast here to the WTA tour which is often forgotten.

Serena Williams amassed 23 Grand Slams over a similar time period. As such, instead of ‘two’ other players being her primary competitor in contrast to the ATP’s Top 3, Serena had to compete against a significantly greater number of players who were responsible for sharing the equivalent of 40+ Grand Slams.

That’s phenomenal. This statistic is often ignored but when it comes to Gender Interactions it should be front and centre. The likes of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic were at their own respective levels and in turn shared 60+ Grand Slams between them with only a handful of other ‘contenders’ progressing to the Championship finals and walking away with the Championship. In simple terms, the quality of play on the ATP tour in comparison to these primary three went near unrivalled due to these varying levels of play. Interestingly, on the WTA tour this was not the case. By all accounts, it was dominated by Serena but at the same time the likes of Hingis, Venus, Henin, Sharapova, Azarenka, Kerber, Halep to Osaka were prime contenders who won multiple Championships whilst Serena was active and/or progressing towards her peak. More recent Grand Slam Champions, however, are not considered in this equation due to Serena’s retirement and/or her footprint not being synonymous with this state of play in her last season on tour.

Whilst there is a long running subjective discussion on Gender Interactions in tennis and varying standards, it is too often forgotten the role of physiology to biology. That is, men are physiologically different i.e. testosterone, and women are also physiologically different i.e. oestrogen. Not to mention various biomechanics differences each sex is born with, it is so important to be mindful of a women’s peak performance is in fact the “same” as a man’s peak performance. But, when these physiological to biological differences are accounted for, of course the metrics change. Why? Because testosterone and a male’s biomechanics are more aligned with these performances in contrast to a female’s physiology. As such, a women working at her max is still her max but it can only be sustained for a set period in contrast to a man’s due to these differences. For example, a man is more capable to withstand elite levels of play over 5 sets courtesy of his testosterone to his biology whereby a woman with higher amounts of oestrogen and substantially less amounts of testosterone is not as equipped to last this length of time and the 3 set format is more aligned with their performance being sustained at and/or of an equivalent benchmark.

Nonetheless, this does pose a very interesting question. If a male is to work towards those peak performance cycles, their max will look different to a female of the same calibre of play at their max. However, if these levels vary Gender Interactions should be more widely encouraged and this also underscores why a Top 200 male with heightened power output may assume the role as a hitting partner for a progressing WTA player. The power they have to offer to speed — courtesy of their biology, is rewarding for the female player’s progression as they combat their fellow opponents at similar levels. That’s right. This isn’t to say they can’t hit at this pace but at the same rate, these Gender Interactions afford an advantage by not practicing with your primary competitors. A wonderful example here is why Serena and Venus would practice together at the beginning of their career due to the power both women had developed and become accustomed towards. But tennis is more than power.

This is where the female delivers the advantage for male players. From craftiness to varying ball paces can force a male player to slow their game down as they work on these configurations of play before integrating power once more. And most WTA players have the power that packs a punch. Most ATP players do, too. But there are always exceptions to the rule where not all ATP players inside the Top 20, for example, use power and/or pace as their weapon of choice. The same applies on the WTA tour. Although there is one thing for sure and that is Gender Interactions are positive influences in a players game and the sooner these are ingrained in a developmental players progressions — for both boys and girls, the more versatile and agile a player’s game will become.

To learn more about Gender Interactions in Tennis, head on over to Beyond Top 10 Tennis and head to Episode 57. More? Catch up on our Tips over on TikTok, Twitter, Threads or Instagram for quick snippets to apply in your game, today.

Posted on by

Body Image, Self-Worth and Tennis Players: A Coach’s Responsibility

How a tennis player sees themselves matters. How an individual sees themselves matters. How a human sees themselves matters. And this includes how a child sees themselves — it matters. Irrespective of the level of play, oftentimes this level is associated with a players/athletes self-worth. This needs to stop. How a player/athlete sees themselves starts from an early age and stay with them as they mature — shaped by those they’re exposed to and the commentary of those around them. Unfortunately, it is not always positive. At the same rate, those that are ‘around’ a player/athlete can be incredibly broad due to the role of social media throughout the past decade which has grown to influence developmental players/athletes and higher — impacting the way they see themselves.

Whilst this topic is a significant one in itself and is much broader than the tennis courts and/or developmental cycle of a player/athlete, it is just as important and applicable. The commentary of those around a player/athlete can be controlled to an extent when they’re in an environment where they feel safe, valued and heard. It remains a coaches responsibility to shape this environment and to ensure it is conducive to not simply a player’s performance but also their general wellbeing which happens to include their self-worth.

This means the language used around players/athletes matters. It is also means any commentary of a players/athletes body is not applicable — it is out of bounds. And this applies for coaches and fellow players/athletes.

It should be common  knowledge that comments on a child’s and/or adolescents body is off limits. Those inside this demographic are often within the developmental cycle — progressing through their initial 10 Years of Play and adhering to The Pathway before they undertake The Long Game after this initial period. For those players/athletes who are in their ‘second’ decade of play, this doesn’t mean that they’re any less susceptible to this commentary and/or that it is appropriate. Rather, the commentary oftentimes is amplified with misconceptions around performance metrics and progressions associated with being, for example, smaller and/or more muscular. 

Once a player/athlete progresses to that next level and they’re beginning to nudge closer towards the Top 10 — be that Top 200 to Top 80 as their sights are set on steadily progressing, they’re also more exposed to a larger audience and safeguarding players/athletes should still remain front and centre irrespective of the stage of development. By all means, the younger a player the more vulnerable and concrete steps should be in place to ensure the players/athletes overall wellbeing is front and centre. However, the message remains clear…

…safeguarding players/athletes is a priority throughout these years be it 6 years of age through to 16 years of age (plus) it remains absolutely the number one priority ‘behind’ performance.

How does this relate to body image through to self-worth? Simple. A players/athletes appearance needs to be off the table — removed from the equation. It is the performance that counts. Commentary on a players/athletes body image can cause negative emotions for their self-worth. The same applies if a players/athletes performance it put before their self-worth. And I get it — it can get a little tricky and confusing but not if the correct protocols are put in place and followed. At the end of the day all players/athletes should be treated equal — irrespective of their level of play. And all players/athletes should be encouraged to support one another to contribute towards one another’s self-worth in positive ways that is not limited to a performance outcome. As for body image, there is zero data to support ‘one size’ is the ‘perfect size’ that is associated with a Top 10 tennis ranking. Zero. So any conversations around body image should be removed from the discussion. 

To learn more about Body Image, Self-Worth and Tennis Players: A Coach’s Responsibility, head on over to Beyond Top 10 Tennis and head to Episode 35. More? Catch up on our Tips over on TikTok, Twitter, Threads or Instagram for quick snippets to apply in your game, today.

Posted on by

Education and its Role in Aspiring Tennis Players and Athletes

A topic that is often overlooked and not given the attention it deserves, education can play an incredibly powerful role in players and/or athletes development if given the right guidance and pathways. This can come in varying forms — ‘whatever’ works for the player/athlete and draws a positive response. In order to help the player/athlete leverage their education it begins with the right guidance to allows this ‘balancing act’ to flow through to their performance. At the same time, this corresponds with The Pathway and what’s in place specifically for that player/athlete.

Whether a two year plan to ten year pathway, education allows the player to offset their performance in a way that draws on their ‘education’ — from problem solving skills (mathematical to science subjects) to creative skills (humanities to artistic subjects). Although these correlations are scarcely leveraged, it is absolutely fundamental to note that these are tools at your disposal — for the player/athlete, coaches and parents. From using education and the present learning framework that is being adopted (i.e. specific to that player/athlete and their year/grade of study) and to tap into these areas, where possible, not only has the capacity to inadvertently help the player/athlete in their subject area…

…but through highlighting similarities to applicabilities can encourage a player/athlete to ‘think outside the box’ whilst using their sport of choice and adding another dimension to their player capacity.

This interrelationship can also bridge the gap often seen between students in their later formative years from primary/elementary school through high/senior school and a level of disengagement. Although this is not the case for all, more often that not there is always a subject or three that aren’t as compelling as one or two that really peak the players/athletes interest. It is fair to say that by using the ‘favourite’ subjects has more to gain and a higher rate of engagement, the coach and/or parent can also use these less favourable subject/s to assimilate and use their passion/enjoyment for tennis to reframe how they see this subject and its potential to aid in their performance.

By building a level of engagement from an educational perspective whilst including tennis (and/or sport of choice) to tighten this level of interest, at the same time you’re adding that ‘next level‘ to the players/athletes overall player capacity to leverage now and throughout the duration of the set pathway. This affords the player to think more openly to complexly in a way, if conditioned in conjunction to and/or with, their point structure to conditioning that in turn can be used to empower both ends of the players/athletes performance that will set them up for further success in the years to come. And of course, the same runs true for players/athletes post-school and can be captured and leveraged in additional education settings (i.e. tertiary).

Tune in to Beyond Top 10 Tennis for this week’s episode to learn more. And if you enjoy the episode, be sure to like, follow to subscribe or even a few stars or five! In the interim, catch up on the episode notes for all of our social links (or simply scroll to the bottom of this page).