Session No.
|
Date & Venue
|
Group:
|
12
|
Equipment:
|
Sponge Tennis Balls
|
Risk Assessment
|
|||||||
Objective
|
Games Led Approach within the service boxes. Using
different constraints which effects Task, Human and Environment.
|
||||||||||||
Timings
|
Task and planning
|
Constraints
|
Aims
|
Progressions
|
|||||||||
Within the service boxes 2v2 play the point out the
constraints that are being used are sponge balls and when we hit the ball we
need to be in the service box.
|
Sponge balls rather than using a proper tennis ball this ball is
a lot slower, so makes the game have longer rallies.
|
||||||||||||
Progression 1- Still playing the point out but one person from
each pair starts at the net.
|
This closers the court down, because there will be one person at
the net and other at the back. This works on trying to avoid the net player.
|
||||||||||||
Progression 2- One person from each pair starts in between
the service line and baseline for the first four shots 1v1 after the other 2
players come in which becomes 2v2.
|
Can
the first player rally without making any mistake then the two others come in
and play the point out.
|
||||||||||||
Progression 3- 2v2 point but in both services boxes. Larger
spaces.
|
The
task changes again by having more opportunities to make your opponent move.
|
||||||||||||
The affect that the constraints had on the participant’s
performance was they all needed to communicate because on progression 1 because
there was one player at the net and the other back they needed to say ‘yours
and mine’. They needed to use good/high levels of decision making by either
playing safe or taking a risk, this affect their performance positively and
negatively. Within last progression which was you had a larger area to hit into
this constraint made the participant now having a bigger area they had more
chances to attack which their performance level increase and they had more
confidence as well. The constraint that really effected how the participants
played we using the sponge ball because a normal tennis ball, when you contact
the ball you don’t need to swing long and fast but the sponge ball because it
travels slower, the participants needed
to increase their racket speed.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the games approach to the tennis
service box games are, throughout each progression it bought out different
behaviors from the participants for example being defensive or offensive. Also
it didn’t really matter how much tennis knowledge they got straight into it and
understood each drill and realized why. Weaknesses are most of the drills are
not realistic so within a proper tennis court or like a mini red court. Below
are the court sizes. 
First Tennis Shaping Play Session
Session No.
|
Date & Venue
|
Group:
|
Equipment:
|
Sponge Tennis Balls
|
Risk Assessment
|
|||||||||
Objective
|
||||||||||||||
Timings
|
Task and planning
|
Constraints
|
Aims
|
Progressions
|
||||||||||
1 v 1 singles where we work on all the intentions by
playing the point out. Working on trading. Trading means rallying where you
move your opponent back which creates space.
|
There
are no constraints
|
|||||||||||||
Still 1v1 singles but now working on building. The drill is playing the point out trading
for a rally of 4, and then when we are building you move your opponent around
by attacking the spaces, (the corners).
By doing this by putting coloured spots either side of the court.
|
The
constraint was for the task before hitting the ball you call out the colour
you hit to.
|
|||||||||||||
Finishing- When you finish the point it is classed as a
winner, so it’s really important that your building shot puts your opponent
under pressure then this gives you the opportunity to win the point.
|
If you finish the point at the net with a volley, smash or
a drop shot. You pick up an extra point.
|
|||||||||||||
Criteria
|
Score
|
Comments
|
Safety
|
||
Awareness of environment, participants
& equipment issues (health and safety)
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
I made sure that the participant was aware of the tennis
nets.
Before the drill took place I went to see if there were
any risks. There was none.
|
Concern for participants
well being
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
First Impressions
|
||
Professional Appearance
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
I was confidence when talking about each drill, because of
my good knowledge about tennis this affected in my delivery.
My appearance within the session was appropriate I had the
correct coaching clothing and footwear.
|
Delivery
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Self Confidence/ Positivism
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Organisation
|
||
Quality/ Appearance of
session plan
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
I provided a session plan explaining the tactical
information/games approach part was.
Using demonstrations and verbal directions throughout the
drills, the participants then had a good understand on what to do.
|
Skill in organising space,
equipment and groups
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Explanation/ Directions
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Coaching Process
|
||
Warm up progression fits topic
and group
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Didn’t do much in the warm-up just a steady jog (3 laps
around the court).The warm-up didn’t fit in with the session.
Using the tactics made the participants try new things
which made them become more creative.
The participants were all challenged although because we
did not have many progressions after a certain time the participants found it
easy.
All the participants were included but we had a lot of
rotation due to lack of courts, everyone did have a good period time on each
drill.
From us coaching our feedback was lacking this was a part
within our coaching where we could of improved on.
|
Realism in practises /
creativity
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Ability to diagnose key
faults
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Ensure all players were
challenged at an appropriate level for each individual
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Inclusion of all
participants
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Encourage feedback and
illustrated teaching moments with participants
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Communication
|
||
Quality of voice and speech
habits
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
I gave clear instructions but not my voice clear although
my voice wasn’t loud and I was clear.
Using demonstrates were really effective because when I
was showing what to do for each drill. This broke it down and made it easier
for the participants.
I used more of a democratic style because I needed to
demonstrate the layers so they would have a better understand by seeing it.
The overall energy throughout the session from the
participants was good; also I and the other coaches motivated the players.
|
Effectiveness of
instruction
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Effectiveness of
demonstrations
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Appropriate use of coaching
style
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Interaction and response
with group (eye contact, use of names ect)
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Overall enthusiasm &
personality in session
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Reflecting
Reviewing the session as a whole, really most of the session
needed to be improved.
Although, we did do good demonstrations and they did have a
bit of an understanding on what the three tactical intentions were. We also
used constraints for some of the tactical intentions. For trading this was
probably the best part of our session as we used quick constraints within a
point situation. For example, because when you trade the main objective is to
hit the ball deep to create space in the court, then for the opportunity to
build. We said if you can push your opponent off the back of the court you can
play the point out.
The tactical approach was not very effect as really the was
no coaching involved. After trading intentions, building we did not really use
any constraints (no targets). The journey that the participants took of the
shapes of play stopped. We still put on a drill of building but is was not
realistic as just putting spots either side of the court because some people
just went straight building rather than go trade then to build. Although when
we did finishing the last tactical intention we did included one or two
conditional points, e.g. if you finish the point at the net with the first
volley you pick up an extra point. This did bring it a bit of decision making
for the participants, when is the right time to come to the net, because the
building part of the session was not good as the progression to finish so they
did not know much about building when approaching the net.
Areas of improvement are that next time we need to do a lot
more coaching rather than watching the participants just play therefore then
they are improve their technical knowledge within a tactical game of play. Also
after the session the participant did not understand even the basics of
trading, building and finishing, because when we were demonstrating we just
said what the drill is rather than explain each tactical intention. The communication between us coaches was poor as we did not talk about the constraints together and progressions before the session so, some drill went on for more time, which made the participants bored. Overall we needed to coach more.
Improvement Second Session on Shaping Play
Session No.
|
Date & Venue
|
23/02/2016
Queens Park Leisure
Centre
|
Group:
|
14
|
Equipment:
|
Sponge Tennis
Balls, Rackets
|
Risk Assessment
|
||||||
Objective
|
. Aim- To show the participants the 3 main tactical
intentions within a tennis point. By breaking each tactic down and explain
why, when and where do we hit the ball.
|
||||||||||||
Timings
|
Task and planning
|
Working On
|
Aims
|
Equipment
|
|||||||||
7 minutes
|
Warm-up- Nets are up, so one person either side of the
net. Sidestepping while throwing the ball underarm over the net.
Starting the pairs on different courts.
Progression 1- Two Balls
Stretches (Dynamic and Static)
|
One ball between a
pair
|
|||||||||||
5 minutes
|
Warm up Game- Hand rally/point trade, build and finish by
throwing the ball.
|
Basics
of the tactical intentions
|
To introduce the
participants to trade, build and finish within a hand rally.
|
One ball between a
pair
|
|||||||||
10 minutes
5 minutes for each constraint
|
Main theme (Trading) - Talk about when to trade, it is to
hit deep and move your opponent a little bit around.
Constraints 1. Before you can play the point out you and
your partner get a rally of four shots down the middle of the court.
Constraint 2. When you trade by moving your opponent you
need to hit the ball deep (pushing them back). To play the point out the
first person in your pair to hit the ball behind the spot gets a bonus point
and they play it out.
|
Ball characteristics- depth, height and speed.
When trading the same speed with you and your partner.
Positioning where to play a trading shot
|
Racket for every
participant. A ball between each pair.
|
||||||||||
10 minutes
5 minutes for each constraint
|
Building- Talk about the ways that you can build and the
positioning when you would hit a building shot.
Constraint 1- The drill is playing the point out trading
for a rally of 4, then when we are building you move your opponent around by
attacking the spaces, (the corners).
Constraint 2- When someone hits a short ball this is a
great opportunity to build. The drill is that you and your partner trade for
2 shots each, then on the fifth shot the player hits a short ball, so the
other can build to then come to the net. Continue then playing the point.
Swap the approach every point.
|
Ball characteristics- direction, speed and depth.
Positioning where to play a building shot.
When you get the shot ball can they keep the ball lower
over the net.
|
Racket for every
participant. A ball between each pair.
|
||||||||||
5 minutes
|
Finishing- A finishing is really classed as shot that ends
the point.
Constraint 1- If you finish off your first shot at the net
you pick up 2 point rather than 1.
|
Discuss about if
the building shot isn’t good enough when you go to the net you could get
lobed or passed.
Positioning where
to play a finishing shot.
|
Racket for every
participant. A ball between each pair.
|
||||||||||
5-10 minutes
|
For the participant now to let them play the point out
themselves.
|
This is their
chance to make the decision themselves.
|
|||||||||||
Criteria
|
Score
|
Comments
|
Safety
|
||
Awareness of environment,
participants & equipment issues (health and safety)
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Before the session took part we looked around the sports
hall for any dangers that could affect the session there was none.
Just the session started we asked if anyone had any
injuries and jewellery.
|
Concern for participants
well being
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
First Impressions
|
||
Professional Appearance
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Delivery- After
doing the last session before this one session I felt a lot more positive
about after doing the session, as I thought I got my point across.
Appearance- My appearance was good as I believe that a
showed good body language and also the correct coaching clothing.
|
Delivery
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Self Confidence/ Positivism
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Organisation
|
||
Quality/ Appearance of
session plan
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Session Plan- The session plan was quality as it explained
each stage of the different types of play.
Organising the space of the group- Have the right number
of participants make the session for us easier because we had three courts,
so everyone was spread out.
Directions- The directions from me and the other coaches
could of being improved as at the end of the session we needed to review what
they have learnt.
|
Skill in organising space,
equipment and groups
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Explanation/ Directions
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Coaching Process
|
||
Warm up progression fits
topic and group
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Within the coaching process most of the drills/shapes of
play showed an understanding.
Both the warm-up and warm-up game fitted in with the
session and was a good progression then to go into the session.
Although the first drill was not realistic without the
racket (hand rally).
Not one participant was waiting off all the participants
when the drill took place they were all included.
I think feedback within the session was good as each coach
demonstrated feedback to at least one person. Everyone did have either a
technical or a tactical or both to work on or what they are doing well.
|
Realism in practises /
creativity
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Ability to diagnose key
faults
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Ensure all players were
challenged at an appropriate level for each individual
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Inclusion of all
participants
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Encourage feedback and
illustrated teaching moments with participants
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Communication
|
||
Quality of voice and speech
habits
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Throughout the session our communication was very good as
we all had a word to say. The important thing is we had a bit of the fun/
banter with the participants as a result this made them relaxed and made the
session more fun.
Demonstrations was very effect as when showing the shape
of play this was important that the participants to see it in real time, as a
result they all understood it.
The overall energy throughout the session from the
participants was good; also I and the other coaches motivated the players.
|
Effectiveness of
instruction
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Effectiveness of demonstrations
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Appropriate use of coaching
style
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Interaction and response
with group (eye contact, use of names ect)
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
|
Overall enthusiasm &
personality in session
|
5 4 3 2 1
|
Reflecting
Reflecting after doing the session I think that this session
was heights above the first session that we delivered. Throughout the session
we all referred to the three tactical intentions within all of the drill, by
doing this made the participants understand how to win a point in the right
way.
Throughout the session all most all of the participants did
not play a good point, they tried to win the point straight, therefore they
were making unforced errors. After the games approach session I could see that
most of the players had a bit understanding of a point. By looking/watching the
participants throughout each of the drills which had many constraints in, this
bought out different behaviors and attitudes of the participants. For example
so people liked to trade and then wait until their opponent makes a mistake or
most people liked to hit one or two trading shot then building, then finish.
The planning part of the process was a lot better this time as we planned to session together so we all knew what we were doing, this made the session flow better and plan was more precise about each tactical intentions and what we were working on.
This was within the warm-up when we used constraints to make the drill harder. Catching the ball with one hand. This gave the participants a challenge, rather than keeping it simple. 
This demonstration was when we were demonstrating the building intention part of the session. By using demonstrations this made the participant see a visual point in real time and also made the participants understanding it more.
Although where the participants were sitting, maybe they should of been closer to see the drill better.
The things that were changed from the previous session was
that I and the other coaches actually introduced the technique within the
shapes of play, by using coaching points for the group and also individually.
Also from the other session what was better in this session was we broke down
the tactical intentions and after the session we did a Q and A session to see
what they have learnt and all the participants knew now what and why we do it. We
used more constraints and the progressions of the constraints made the
participants have options in each tactical intention. E.g. when building
hitting into the corners or approaching the net. Us coaches did use a lot more feedback to players about why we do the tactical intentions and for each player always motivating them to achieve the best.
Areas of improvement of the session would be to spend more
time on the building and finishing part of the session because if I was a
participants this part is more attacking and playing the point. Also would be
to bring in the overarm serve because then if you are serving you have to
opportunity to building off your serve.
