This is from Nick Jacques Tennis. Nice ideas for a constraints led approach (CLA). This already shows the difference between CLA and differential learning (DL). In the CLA the intention and the plan for the development of the skills is an idea of the coach („avoiding backswing“). In a DL approach the coach also offers different situations (like those in this video). But the solution is in the responsibility of the player, not in the responsibility of the coach!
Both approaches are implicit, but there is an important difference in the attitude to the learning athlet. While the coach in the CLA drill has a goal (backswing), the DL coach knows and intends nothing. The system „player“ is a black box and there is no expectation in the long term development of individual skills. The examples in Nicks CLA are in DL only one possible solution for the motion and will not be repeated.
Thx to Nick for the nice ideas ?. I love his quote: „I have no influence over this as I am still with very little noise from me.“
“ 3 constraint led approach drills that have helped reduce the size of my students take back. Lillian has previously been taught a large loop on her take back which has isolated her upper body from her lower body, making it very hard for her to adapt to the many different balls she would need to cope with in a match situation. Lillian has made great improvements on her coordination, here are a few key exercises that have helped her progress. Note how Lillian is intrinsically motivated as the exercises engages her and draws out the effort, you can see I have no influence over this as I am still with very little noise from me ? „
There is a very exciting discussion in the Facebook Group Tennis.Haus about the review on studies about the game-based approach (GBA).This ranges from full approval to the GBA to the defense of the technology-oriented approach.Striking are in the debate but the nuances.After that, that’s just good for the athletes, what works.Even if scientific knowledge is completely neglected.
I am very divided.It certainly seems presumptuous to question the training practice of successful coaches.On the other hand, I am aware that numerous factors are responsible for the athlets success.Methods and didactics of tennis training are only one component among many.But would’nt it be more responsible to the players, if such successful coaches would coach to their obvious strengths even more evidence-based? The following is my answer on the discussion on Tennis.Haus.
„The thing is that you can become a very good tennis player if your coaches are strictly orientated towards an ideal technique and continuous technique corrections are elementary components of their training. Just like one of the most creative players of his time, Björn Borg said: Science based or arbitrariness weiterlesen →
Constraints led approach (CLA) drill to improve skills ant tactics in standard situations. Using different balls (from red to yellow). You can also mix old and new balls. Pears and apples weiterlesen →
Changing constraints and using non-linear pedagogy for skill development.
Changing constraints like court size, balls, rules, equipment, court surface, interference, improves the evolution of your players game. Working differencial with regularly changing constraints without repetition gives players the chance to find creative solutions for unexpected situations of the game. Setting this in an playful approach makes motor learning and skill development more creativ and stable. 4 fruits weiterlesen →
Mark O’Sullivan, talking about non-linear pedagogy in coaches conferences in soccer in Sweden and practicing in his swedish club, was confrontated with an academy club presentation presenting its methodology as deliberate practice and explicit instructions using a research from Canada in mathematics (class room) on the short coming of discovery learning as scientific proof to why guided discovery should not be used in football training.
Marks question was: should research that has been done in one learning domain like the classroom be used as proof to explain learning in another domain such as football training (dynamic environment)? There was a very interesting discussion about this.
Learning is an never ending process. As I have talked about some posts before, I am working as a mentor for the Heidelberger Ballschule. They make wonderful conferences and workshops for coaches and teachers about playing and supporting kids to create their base for a lifetime presence in ball sports.
This days they send me some literature so I can prepare myself for the workshops I will have to manage. It is so amazing to read. Complete hours of practice, so much theory and science about implicit learning. Let’s go.
Non-linear pedagogy and implicit-differencial learning exemplified by the service in tennis. With many games and drills for your trainings. Coming soon here and in TennisSport 4/2017 the journal for training and competition in tennis.
Written and developed by Frercks Hartwig
Non-lineare Pädagogik und implizit-differenzielles Lernen am Beispiel des Aufschlags im Tennis. Mit vielen Drills für das Training. Demnächst hier und in TennisSport 4/2017, der Fachzeitschrift für Training und Wettkampf im Tennis.
Entwickelt und zusammengefasst von Frercks Hartwig