Coaching adults vs coaching kids

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

I posted this in a thread on videos but I think it deserves a thread of its own.

Right now there are some coaches that I know in my city that can take a kid with talent and make them really good really fast, give them really perfect technique, great footwork. (I am watching with amazement the progress some kids here are making now with the various Chinese coaches we have here). Some of those same coaches will understand that an adult middle-aged player, at almost any level, cannot be trained quite the same way as a promising cadet. And some don't ever figure this out. They were trained a certain way, starting at age 7 or 8, and that is what they are going to do. I have seen them injure adult players (worst outcome), or actually lower the level of their game (next worst) or in the end not really help them (maybe not that bad an outcome if the student enjoys the lessons).

But I have known some coaches who were awesome with adult players, sadly the two best no longer live here. (One of them, while a very good player, is not even close to the level of these Chinese coaches, but he is still a much much better coach for adults). People who specialize in coaching adults tend to approach things quite differently. One thing they need is pretty good language skills in the language of their student.

Among adult players there are different categories. There are players who took up the game as adults, and players who played as kids on into early adulthood, often at a reasonably high level, and then took very long breaks to get on with their lives, to take up the game again at some point much later (that is my case, and also quite a few of my regular practice partners). Even those two groups of adult players I think need to be coached a little differently.

If you don't have a coach, and that is true in a lot of places, than you try to find stuff that can help wherever you can.

Ilia Minkin · Feb 9, 2017

Let's consider and adult who has no health restrictions and is in a reasonably good physical shape, starting from scratch. That can practice, say, 4 or 5 times per week for 2 hours. Is coaching him different from coaching a talented kid? My question relates to the content of their practice sessions, of course communication should be different.

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

Ilia Minkin said:
Let's consider and adult who has no health restrictions and is in a reasonably good physical shape, starting from scratch. That can practice, say, 4 or 5 times per week for 2 hours. Is coaching him different from coaching a talented kid? My question relates to the content of their practice sessions, of course communication should be different.

A pretty small group of people you have just defined. But starting from scratch I would imagine you would go about it the same way as with kids, but progress will be a lot slower. I'm not sure I've seen many adults start from scratch and then train 2 hours per day 5 days per week. Actually, I can think of one but he was in his early 20s. He has peaked out just under 2300. He was kind of a garage player at the start but was also pretty gifted for racket sports.

For a lot of adults, part of what I am getting at is that intrinsic athleticism is different at 50 than it was at 18. Can you learn or train the same way? Some things yes, some things maybe not. I am actually thinking not about people just starting out, but more of your typical forum member who may be anywhere between (let's say) 1500 and 2200. How do you take a 45 year old 1500 player and take them to, say, 1800 or 2000? Assume reasonably good health and condition for that age (which has to include susceptibility to injury), but know that this almost always includes some skeletomuscular issues, maybe minor but still there.

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

Also, can trying to fix every possible flaw in stroke mechanics in an adult player be a really good used of time, or might it be better to focus on some other things?

Broken · Feb 9, 2017

Baal said:
A pretty small group of people you have just defined. But starting from scratch I would imagine you would go about it the same way as with kids, but progress will be a lot slower. I'm not sure I've seen many adults start from scratch and then train 2 hours per day 5 days per week. Actually, I can think of one but he was in his early 20s. He has peaked out just under 2300. He was kind of a garage player at the start but was also pretty gifted for racket sports.

For a lot of adults, part of what I am getting at is that intrinsic athleticism is different at 50 than it was at 18. Can you learn or train the same way? Some things yes, some things maybe not. I am actually thinking not about people just starting out, but more of your typical forum member who may be anywhere between (let's say) 1500 and 2200. How do you take a 45 year old 1500 player and take them to, say, 1800 or 2000? Assume reasonably good health and condition for that age (which has to include susceptibility to injury), but know that this almost always includes some skeletomuscular issues, maybe minor but still there.

I think motivational issues and time is a large part of teaching adults as well. You usually don't have to motivate a younger person in the same way. A young person is usually a lot more curious and you can motivate them with some competition and fun exercises. Adults have more bagage that gets in the way.

NextLevel · Feb 9, 2017

Ilia Minkin said:
Let's consider and adult who has no health restrictions and is in a reasonably good physical shape, starting from scratch. That can practice, say, 4 or 5 times per week for 2 hours. Is coaching him different from coaching a talented kid? My question relates to the content of their practice sessions, of course communication should be different.

The biggest difference IMO is that you have to discourage them from hitting the ball with technique that doesn't get optimal power. Adults are so in love with smacking the ball hard that even when they have the right physical tools, it can be hard to get them to spin the ball and play with a long term technical focus. How much you spend focusing on technique depends on the balance between short term effectiveness and long term growth. There are adults with flawed shots that you know will or can get better so you may not waste time on that. But there are adults with technique that if you don't fix it, they just can't get to the next level.

Another big difference is that I would spend much more time on point construction if they were tournament players. Adults like to problem solve and strategize independently.

The language issue is huge - adults like to think of learning as logical, not execution, unless they have experience getting good at another sport.

Finally they often have no experience of being really close to the table. They have to grow into that over time.

TTFrenzy · Feb 9, 2017

Adults = brain full of data, very low brain elasticity/plasticity compared to kids => You have to psych them out, get into their brains through trial and error (if you have a better way please propose) evaluate their strengths weaknesses and learning abilities and eventually create an approach that you believe is the best.

Kids = zero data, super duper brain elasticity, the teacher is god because they are taught so .

Definitely, in most occasions, its easier to teach young kids the basics no doubt about that (but then again, a kid with no talent at all maybe harder to teach than a talented adult, rare occasion but it happens ).

When it comes to polishing the overall attributes of the player to reach a semipro or pro level then its definitely a matter of good communication in both occasions.

The hardest thing for me is to persuade a player about what is best for him/her, especially when he/she believes otherwise. Kids are easier and learn faster, their brains are blank.

An adult with a "bad" habbit needs to erase it and start from scratch , but first you need to convince him to erase it and you have to be sure (which means lots of time "Wasted" on trial and error tests) about what your training/communication approach will be for the player to evolve. I dont find it surprising that good coaches damaged adult players. When I returned to TT after 15 years break I got much worse through training because I was listening to every advice on technique and rubber from everyone, didnt have the necessary experience to filter which advise is good or not.

So a great factor is the player's self awareness on his playing strengths and weaknesses. A talented kid with super duper FH has almost 0 self awareness, most of them cant actually explain/grasp WHY their FH is so good. And you also have guys with crappy body mechanics that think copying ma long is easy and even more funny they actually convinced themselves to believe that they need this kind of FH, but the truth is they want that kind of FH because its flashy.

Coaching adults is way harder in my experience, but also way more rewarding in terms of self affirmation. I feel like I can control a giant puppet when things go as expected/planned but the dissappointment of a wrong approach/advice is also very frustrating because all the hard work has gone into the trash can and at least for me is very tiresome because you must always reassess and re evaluate your thought process to adapt to the player's needs

parkash.imangry · Feb 9, 2017

Awesome thread guys

Sent from my Redmi Note 3 using Tapatalk

SchemeSC · Feb 9, 2017

Baal said:
Also, can trying to fix every possible flaw in stroke mechanics in an adult player be a really good used of time, or might it be better to focus on some other things?

A stroke mechanic is always worth fixing if it is capping the student's ability to get to the next level.

For example, I never used to be able to play a down-the-line backhand because I always kept my elbow too close to my body. When I learned to get my elbow out laterally, a backhand down-the-line suddenly became possible. This has opened up a whole world of tactical possibilities for me in real matches that I didn't have before.

The problem is that most adults have the wrong idea about which technical flaws are the ones that are truly capping them. So they spend a lot of time obsessing over minute details that are besides the point.

Richie · Feb 9, 2017

NextLevel said:
The biggest difference IMO is that you have to discourage them from hitting the ball with technique that doesn't get optimal power. Adults are so in love with smacking the ball hard that even when they have the right physical tools, it can be hard to get them to spin the ball and play with a long term technical focus. How much you spend focusing on technique depends on the balance between short term effectiveness and long term growth. There are adults with flawed shots that you know will or can get better so you may not waste time on that. But there are adults with technique that if you don't fix it, they just can't get to the next level.

Another big difference is that I would spend much more time on point construction if they were tournament players. Adults like to problem solve and strategize independently.

The language issue is huge - adults like to think of learning as logical, not execution, unless they have experience getting good at another sport.

Finally they often have no experience of being really close to the table. They have to grow into that over time.

It seems that you as an adult were able to adapt your technique despite issues in mobility. You fixed/adapted it, hence you got to the.. NextLevel

.

I think there are many factors which need to be considered, a lot of it depends on the adult learners mindset too. Overthinking things is probably more of an issue in adults. As an adult learner myself (even though I am a younger adult I perhaps face less physical issues at the moment) I've found the biggest problem has been to find a coach that's interested in helping me develop, sadly.

The few coaches around here where I live just aren't that interested and as NL has pointed out before the difference between coaching adults and kids means the coach requires different skills in order to accommodate to the learner. The biggest issue for me has been that and the lack of continuous coaching/training.

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

I have seen a coach try to fix an adult player's ugly but effective shot. Tried to turn it into something perfectly orthodox. It didn't make him better.

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

SchemeSC said:
A stroke mechanic is always worth fixing if it is capping the student's ability to get to the next level.

For example, I never used to be able to play a down-the-line backhand because I always kept my elbow too close to my body. When I learned to get my elbow out laterally, a backhand down-the-line suddenly became possible. This has opened up a whole world of tactical possibilities for me in real matches that I didn't have before.

The problem is that most adults have the wrong idea about which technical flaws are the ones that are truly capping them. So they spend a lot of time obsessing over minute details that are besides the point.

I think it sometimes takes a pretty insightful coach to know what to fix and what to leave alone. Not everybody can make that distinction.

Another thing that sometimes a good coach realizes is, ok, we're never going to be able to fix this one thing, it is too ingrained or the student has some physical limitation that makes it necessary, then how do we get the best out of this player with what he has? How can we work around this tactically or technically?

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

Actually one of the two best coaches I have ever known for adult players is Perry Schwartzberg (lives in San Diego now, the other was Eric Owens). At the time I worked with Perry he was only a couple of hundred rating points higher than me, but he helped me a lot, maybe more than anybody else*! Part of this is we were within a couple years of the same age, (I am older but more fit, it kind of balances out, in fact I remembered him from my junior days but we never played then), So he kind of knows what some of the issues are. A lot of the newer Asian players used to ask if we were brothers.

One thing Perry would do with all his students right up front is ask them what they wanted to get out of it and he would work from there. One guy, pretty wealthy but busy guy, just wanted to come in and get exercise, hit a lot of balls, feel athletic again, feel good about himself, have balls put in a place where he could make could solid contact and enjoy the sensation of a rally where the ball was moving kind of fast. He really didn't care that much of he got better, and he was able to do this about once per week. And that is what he got, and he was happy. (Actually he did get a bit better anyway). That is perfectly legit as long as everyone is on the same page. But I used to see a different coach do basically the same thing with students who had quite different goals. I think it was just laziness. I used to shake me head. Frankly, I helped some of those people lot more for free just hitting with them for an hour and making a few suggestions.

* Certainly he and Eric helped me more than anyone. And I have had lessons with about every professional coach that has been through this city, and most of them were much higher level players than Perry. But Perry has awesome communication skills, an amazing collection of drills, knows just how hard to push you, and like Brett of TT Edge has great physical analogies, and he knows how to win and he knows how to teach that.

NextLevel · Feb 9, 2017

Baal said:
I think it sometimes takes a pretty insightful coach to know what to fix and what to leave alone. Not everybody can make that distinction.

Another thing that sometimes a good coach realizes is, ok, we're never going to be able to fix this one thing, it is too ingrained or the student has some physical limitation that makes it necessary, then how do we get the best out of this player with what he has? How can we work around this tactically or technically?

I personally think it is important to look at the amount of variety in good players, especially the Europeans at the USATT 2300 level and above. Lots of variety in grips and playing styles and just about everything that you can consider very wrong can be found in one good player or another.

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

It's a good thing nobody ever tried to "fix" Eric Bogan!

NextLevel · Feb 9, 2017

Baal said:
It's a good thing nobody ever tried to "fix" Eric Bogan!

He could always point to Danny!

That said , I was thinking too much about the grip - their styles were really really different and Boggan was just different from other people. Had the hitting influence of his father as well.

NextLevel · Feb 9, 2017

BTW I saw Perry play in the U2400 finals at Nationals in 2014 I think (may have been 2013) vs a kid from PA. The kid from PA won a close match, but it was beautiful watching Perry's touch and his use of what I thought at the time were short pips. Just smart table tennis.

Baal · Feb 9, 2017

Perry uses SP on his BH. Old Stiga Alser blade. Some sort of modern inverted on his FH. And yes, a really really smart player. He will never beat himself. Puts the ball in an uncomfortable place for the opponent. Stays in balance. Amazing anticipation. And his serves are incredibly deceptive, a bit like Samsonov without such a high toss but the spin variation from the same motion is very large. And he is good at teaching those things, actually. When he lived here, he came back after a long layoff, was about 2200, but quickly went to about 2425. He has been in San Diego a few years now, last time I spoke to him he told me he doesn't play very often against higher level players.

NextLevel · Feb 9, 2017

Baal said:
Perry uses SP on his BH. Old Stiga Alser blade. Some sort of modern inverted on his FH. And yes, a really really smart player. He will never beat himself. Puts the ball in an uncomfortable place for the opponent. Stays in balance. Amazing anticipation. And his serves are incredibly deceptive, a bit like Samsonov without such a high toss but the spin variation from the same motion is very large. And he is good at teaching those things, actually. When he lived here, he came back after a long layoff, was about 2200, but quickly went to about 2425. He has been in San Diego a few years now, last time I spoke to him he told me he doesn't play very often against higher level players.

As a prior head coach at the prestigious U.S. Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Colo., Schwartzberg's teaching style is based primarily on the theory that each individual should play the style that most suits the personality and abilities of the individual.

http://www.chron.com/homes/senior_living-/article/Local-table-tennis-coach-brings-back-sport-for-5400871.php

Der_Echte · Feb 9, 2017

Baal said:
I have seen a coach try to fix an adult player's ugly but effective shot. Tried to turn it into something perfectly orthodox. It didn't make him better.

I played vs Brian Maxwell at NA TEAMS and he mugged me with a BH slapshot on balls to FH and wide FH.

His shot, a bh with elbow way up that looks real ugly, but was earning him points left and right.

Why fix that if he can play 2000 level with it?

I had to start making bh shots to turn that match around.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Coaching adults vs coaching kids

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads