Coaching on court: the pros and cons

Coaching is to sports as roots are to trees. There is not a major, established sport in existence that doesn't promote the reliance on well-trained, professional teachers and coaches in the development of skills, especially in young people. Take coaching out of some professional sports, and you've just got a bunch of guys playing street ball on a manicured lawn or polished wood floor. Is and should tennis at the pro level be any different? I think the answer is yes, and I entreat you to share your views with me. But first, let me explain my position.

Tennis has been compared with boxing and wrestling — sports with great physical and psychological demands — and for good reason. The one-on-one physical and mental combat that is the cornerstone of these sports is the trademark of tennis, also. Yet boxing and wrestling have allowed, indeed have promoted, the presence of qualified coaches and trainers working in the corners of their charges. There is a very good reason for this: boxers and wrestlers are at great risk of sustaining extreme physical trauma every time they step into the ring or onto the mat. Were no coach or trainer present, more athletes would leave the arena with serious injuries, or even on stretchers. Granted, the referees are there in large part to protect the athletes, but between rounds it is the coach and/or trainer who must assess his athlete's ability to continue and the likelihood of his sustaining serious injury should he go on.

Tennis players are not at nearly as great a risk of sustaining severe trauma. And should a player sustain one of the many common injuries during play, such as an ankle strain, ligament or cartilage tear, or severe cramps, heat exhaustion or dehydration, a non-partisan trainer is always waiting in the wings to assist that player. In fact, while the physical demands of tennis are great at the professional level, the risk of permanent or career-ending injury is fairly low. Life-threatening injuries are very rare to non-existent.

Tennis has also been compared to chess, with its multiple strategies and tactical maneuvers. And, while the physical demands of chess are not as great, surely mental stamina plays a large role in a chess master's success. But notice there are no coaches on the sideline helping the chess master to determine his next move or to help him see the deficiencies in his strategy or defense. The chess master is expected to adapt to the circumstances and to figure out on his own the best path to victory.

I believe that thinking for oneself is a cornerstone of the successful and admired tennis player. The successful player is able to think his way out of trouble — to innovate and improvise. He is first and foremost a problem solver, and each match is a test of his abililty to solve the puzzle and then to adapt his tactics in order to execute his new, winning strategy. As soon as a coach is allowed to "enter the ring" and sit beside his charge at the changeovers, call out to him between points, or make hand signals and gestures, the puzzle solver is no longer the guy with the racquet in his hand. The coach becomes the mastermind, and the player is reduced to executioner of the grand plan passed on to him. He's still the quarterback, but he receives his direction from the sidelines.

While on-court coaching would undoubtedly make for compelling TV, especially should the coaches be hooked up to microphones, it would also bring the sport down from its lofty perch as the only major individual sport, aside from the track and field events, bicycling and swimming (which do not have interruptions and are not so much mental challenges as physical), in which the best athletes are also the best thinkers on their feet. One cannot deny the entertainment value of hearing a coach tell a player to stop going wide to the forehand and start using his head for something other than a hat rack. But one must also face facts: the most successful players (who also have the largest bank accounts) would be able to afford the most astute coaches, while those struggling to make it on the tour or to climb up the ranks would be facing not only a higher-ranked opponent but also one who has the best help money can by. Talk about stacking the deck!

In addition, whatever happens on the pro level would likely make its way onto the junior circuit, where more harm than good can be done. As it stands today, we've got far too many coaches lined up on the edges of city parks watching like hawks over their charges, and far too few linesmen, umpires and roving judges to stop the numerous rule and code violations. When coaches are tasked by eager parents to produce winners in young players, abuses regularly occur. Overzealous coaching leads to cheating as well as verbal, physical and emotional abuse. Instead of acting as guides in a young player's development, too often coaches step over the line. Allowing on-court coaching would simply feed this pathology.

It is my hope that tennis will remain the true individual sport it was intended to be, and that the guidance of the coach is restricted to the practice court.

AUTHOR'S NOTE: This material is copyrighted and may not be reprinted or reproduced without the express written or verbal consent of the author. Thank you for your cooperation.