In a recent conversation with a fellow coach, the topic of technique’s permanence surfaced. We pondered, after how many repetitions does a forehand become second nature to a player? This question led me to consider the nature of movement in tennis. Observing the evolution of Novak Djokovic’s serve or Andy Murray’s adaptations post-hip surgery, it’s evident that technique is continually evolving.

Is it realistic, then, to expect a player to reach a point where their technique becomes immutable? I’m sceptical. With the young athletes I mentor, my focus is on providing solutions that work for today. Projecting too far into the future seems futile, given the unpredictability of a player’s development across physical, emotional, and potential injury-related changes.

This mindset has led me to advocate for what I term “temporary movement solutions.” These are ways players can utilize their racket, footwork, or body mechanics to succeed or overcome a challenge in the present moment. A recent example from a training session involved an 8-year-old practising a jump serve to gain more power, as instructed by his coach. Given his lack of leg strength, the ineffectiveness of this technique with a sponge ball and on a smaller court, and the unnecessary strain on his kinetic chain, it was clear this advice was misaligned with his current capabilities. This scenario illustrates the risk of coaching with a professional game mindset, rather than tailoring guidance to the individual player before you.

Rob Gray’s “How We Learn To Move” highlights a study on the variability of knee bend in professional tennis players, demonstrating the diverse and adaptive nature of their movements even within a single match. This reinforces my belief that technique and movement should not be viewed as permanent fixtures.

The myth of muscle memory and the emphasis on high repetition have long been propagated in tennis coaching circles. However, perhaps it’s time to shift our focus away from prescribing rigid “shapes” or basic movement patterns. Instead, we should encourage players to explore and adopt temporary solutions that address the immediate demands of the game they’re engaged in.