I Want to Play Wimbledon!

FIRST SET: YOUR CHILD!

Your child is obviously already playing tennis, otherwise you wouldn't have this book in your hands!

Tennis can be played at different levels.

It's possible to play a little "pill pounding" once a week with a few friends and a youth coach, to let off some steam.

Maybe he or she is already playing in a club team and has already had a taste of competition.

That's great, and I think it's fantastic if children can play tennis at all, getting exercise and gaining some valuable experience.

At this level, the focus is clearly on fun, friendship and exercise.

A fitting parent's statement could be something like this: "I'm glad that my child is at the tennis club and plays some sport there. There are nice teammates with whom my child feels very comfortable. There are pleasant people at the club, and I have the feeling that my son is in good hands there. I think that the two or three hours of school sports alone are not enough to keep him fit!"

As already mentioned, I think tennis is great and, regardless of the level of play, everyone can have a lot of fun on the court.

I assume that your daughter or son doesn't fit into this "freestyle category" but certainly already has some match experience, is probably already ranked in one of the various youth rankings, or perhaps already enjoys the support of a club, district or association.

In one way or another, you have already thought about your offspring's tennis career.

Exactly, otherwise you would not have purchased this handbook!

HOW IMPORTANT IS TALENT?

Ta-lent (Noun)

a certain great ability for something, which a person has not acquired through learning or training, but has possessed from birth. "His talent was already evident at a young age."

Synonyms: Giftedness

So much for the definition spat out by the Duden.

"How important are these genetic predispositions for extraordinary peak performance?"

In recent years, scientists from all imaginable disciplines have been working on this precise question.

Certainly, exceptional athletes have been the first to be scrutinized.

Very quickly, the "code was deciphered", and the connection between talent and top performance was further investigated and transferred to all other areas of life. Thousands of studies exist on this topic, hundreds of publications or self-help books crowd our libraries . just to support a very simple and clear core statement: "Talent is massively overrated!"

There are many musical children. What distinguishes them from Mozart?

Many people are great at math. What is the difference to Bill Gates?

So many kids play basketball. Why has Michael Jordan become so much better than the rest?

Did little Novak, little Rafael and little Roger have more talent than the other kids in their class?

Is there anything in their genetic makeup that is different?

No!

So, what lessons can you parents or coaches learn from this, in relation to tennis, without having to study two dozen books about high performers?

Certainly, a child's normal, average "basic sporting ability" is important.

This requirement is fulfilled by the largest part of humanity.

Already, in early childhood, you can see that there are some who, by nature, somehow learn a little faster.

In our case, we are particularly interested in the motor skills. But if these abilities are not discovered by anyone - family, teachers, trainers - then they are worth nothing.

Whether or not there is a little more "good motoric disposition" in the genes, the decisive factor is promotion!

Mozart would hardly have become a musician and composer if his parents had not sat him at a piano.

Michael Jordan would probably not have gotten into basketball if he had been born in the Maldives, just as Roger Federer's first strokes with his father and mother were his foundation for a subsequent tennis career.

Many of the top players admired in Grand Slam matches on television today were not exceptional sports heroes with any guarantees of millions of dollars in salary in their sporting beginnings.

Here are two instances from my old racket bag:

At the beginning of the eighties, I served two years in the Swiss National League A for a club in Geneva.

At one of our home matches, my opponent and I were so annoyed, we asked the chair referee to change the ball boy at the net as soon as possible.

This motoric dead-loss was not capable of picking up a tennis ball while passing by, then getting back to his place next to the net post without regularly losing the ball, his cap or a shoe, or simply landing flat on his nose.

The spectators quite rightly laughed their heads off at the red-haired, freckled Hobbit, but for us players, these permanent time delays between serves were just annoying.

Well: The ball boy at the net was a certain Marc Rosset.

In his active career, he made it to position 9 in the ATP world rankings, won 15 tournaments, became Olympic Champion and netted almost seven million dollars in prize money.

Not bad for a motoric dead-loss.

At the beginning of the nineties, I was in Florida as a coach with one of my former players, and we were preparing for the American hard-court tournaments with Rick Macci in his academy in Boca Raton.

At one point, a black girl approached me and asked if I would play some balls as a sparring partner for her.

The girl was as lithe as a new-born giraffe, wearing an unsightly tennis dress which hung off her, as it was far too wide and baggy, and that's exactly how she moved on the court.

The little one had quite a good bounce on her basic strokes, providing she was actually on the ball (which was rarely the case!), but with her huge serving movements, you were constantly afraid about whether she would fall or seriously injure herself with the racket.

The little giraffe was Venus Williams, who became number 1 in the WTA rankings, won a total of 67 WTA Tour titles in singles and doubles, 7 Grand Slam singles - and 13 Grand Slam doubles titles. She has earned 31 million US dollars in prize money to date!

I could regale you with some more stories of this kind, and many of my colleagues who have coached at my level and with whom I still talk today could tell you a lot of similar experiences.

"A diamond is a valuable piece of jewellery."

But first, a rough diamond has to be found and brought to light.

Then, an experienced jeweler has to inspect, care for, work on and cut this stone until, bit by bit, it becomes a precious piece of jewelery.

It is his duty to remove or squander as little of the precious material as possible. Experience, know-how and the right tools are essential in order to not scratch or, in extreme cases, even destroy the raw material!

There is no better way to describe the "making" of a tennis champion!

SO, WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT TO YOUR CHILD
THAN TALENT?

In my career as a coach, I have worked with many so-called talents.

Did I enjoy this work?

Yes, very much, a lot of fun!

The student has a natural ability to move. Technical changes are implemented easily and casually, without visible effort and almost instantly correctly.

The body, arm, racket, strings and ball seem to harmonise with each other as if in symphony.

Matches are perceived as a game and are literally celebrated with playfulness and creativity.

You may already wonder: Where is the hair in the "talent soup"? Or why do so few make it to the absolute top of the world rankings?

Here are my experiences on this topic:

Talents are lazy!

The more generously a player is blessed with natural talents, the less they have to do or work to achieve goals, at least in the short term.

Success literally falls into their lap! And that is bad!

Let's turn back the clock a little by about 20 to 30 years.

Players like Vitas Gerulaitis or John McEnroe made it to the absolute top of the world rankings and won Grand Slam titles. And that with the minimum of work but with an overdose of "talent".

There were some pretty big girls. (Here I prefer to keep names to myself .) In any case, the ladies were not really fit! But these ladies had an above-average hand and a well-developed understanding of the game. Even with that, they were able to make a small fortune on the WTA Tour.

The evolution of the sport of tennis does not allow such a thing in today's professional circuit. Talent alone has long since ceased to be enough.

The sport has developed technically. The rallies have become longer, faster and more intense.

The proportion of athletics has gradually increased and will continue to increase.

Beautiful strokes and a relaxed "gambler mentality" are just enough for average success today, period!

So, if it's not talent, i.e. the genetic predispositions of a child, then what skills are the fundamental pillars of a successful career as a tennis player?

Why is it that, in an important tournament match, the less gifted child, the "underdog", suddenly defeats the much more graceful and aesthetically fantastic "super-talent"?

Here, my studies of high-performance psychology and my many years of personal experience are also absolutely...