Drills have long been the cornerstone of tennis coaching. From neatly aligned players hitting balls in repetitive sequences to coaches barking instructions from the sidelines, the methodology feels ingrained in our profession. But have we ever stopped to question where these practices come from? Why are they so pervasive? And, most importantly, do they actually prepare players for the complex, decision-rich environment of a tennis match?

The British School System and Military Influence

The roots of modern coaching practices can be traced back to the British school system and its connection to military-style drills. Historically, the British education system emphasized discipline, order, and repetition—values that aligned closely with the demands of the industrial and military worlds. Physical education mirrored this structure, focusing on regimented activities that cultivated obedience and uniformity rather than creativity or adaptability.

Military drills, in particular, aimed to prepare soldiers for predictable and standardized tasks. Repetition was the key to ensuring that soldiers could respond instinctively in high-stress environments. While this approach might be effective for marching or assembling firearms, it doesn’t translate well to sports like tennis, where unpredictability reigns supreme.

Research by historians such as F.M. Cornford and education theorists like Sir Robert Baden-Powell has detailed how these methods influenced early physical training programs in schools, emphasizing conformity over individual expression.

The Problem with Drill-Centric Coaching

In tennis, traditional drills often isolate specific skills. Players hit countless forehands or backhands in predictable patterns, with little consideration of context or variability. While these drills may look effective—and even produce short-term technical improvements—they fall short in developing the decision-making abilities required in real match scenarios.

Outdated Concepts: Muscle Memory and Automatism

Many drill-based coaching practices are rooted in outdated scientific ideas, such as the concept of “muscle memory.” This term suggests that muscles can “remember” movements through repetition, but research in motor learning and control debunks this myth. Skills are not stored in muscles; they are emergent behaviors resulting from the interaction between the brain, body, and environment.

Similarly, the belief in automatism—the idea that players can achieve perfect, repeatable actions through drills—ignores the variability and adaptability required in tennis. Matches are dynamic and unpredictable, demanding constant adjustments based on factors like opponent behavior, ball trajectory, and court conditions. Rehearsing static drills does little to prepare players for these challenges.

The Role of Ecological Dynamics

Ecological dynamics provides a modern framework for understanding skill acquisition, emphasizing the interplay between the individual, task, and environment. Unlike traditional drills, this approach acknowledges that every movement is context-dependent. Skills are not pre-programmed but emerge as players adapt to the unique constraints of each situation.

Key Figures in Ecological Dynamics

The field of ecological dynamics owes much to pioneers such as James J. Gibson, whose work on ecological psychology introduced the concept of affordances—opportunities for action presented by the environment. Karl Newell’s model of constraints further shaped this field by highlighting the interaction between individual, task, and environmental factors in skill development.

Researchers like Keith Davids and Duarte Araújo have expanded on these ideas, applying them specifically to sports and skill acquisition. Their work demonstrates how variability and representative learning design can enhance performance by mimicking real-game conditions.

Evidence Supporting Representative Learning Design

Research in representative learning design (RLD) highlights the importance of creating practice scenarios that mimic the decision-making and perceptual demands of competition. For example, studies by Davids et al. (2008) show that variability and game-like conditions enhance skill transfer to match play, as they force players to explore and discover effective solutions in real-time.

By contrast, traditional drills often strip away the very elements that make tennis challenging. Cones, targets, and pre-determined shot patterns remove the need for players to interpret and respond to the game’s inherent uncertainties. This disconnect explains why players who excel in practice often struggle under match conditions.

Why Outdated Practices Persist

Despite mounting evidence against drill-centric coaching, these practices remain prevalent. Why? The answer lies in tradition, convenience, and perception:

1. Tradition: Coaching methodologies are often passed down through generations without critical examination. The “if it worked for me” mentality perpetuates outdated practices.
2. Convenience: Drills are easy to organize, especially in group settings. They allow coaches to manage multiple players efficiently while maintaining control over the session.
3. Perception: Parents and players often equate structured, drill-heavy sessions with professionalism, reinforcing their continued use.

Moving Beyond Drills

To truly prepare players for the demands of tennis, we must embrace approaches that prioritize adaptability, creativity, and decision-making. Here’s how:

1. Adopt a Constraints-Led Approach (CLA): Use task, environmental, and individual constraints to shape learning. For example, introduce a rule that players can only hit crosscourt if the ball lands past a certain marker, forcing them to adapt to new conditions.
2. Focus on Perception-Action Coupling: Design practices where players must read and react to dynamic cues, such as an opponent’s positioning or the ball’s spin.
3. Encourage Exploration and Discovery: Allow players to experiment with different solutions during practice, fostering a deeper understanding of their capabilities and the game itself.
4. Educate Stakeholders: Help parents, committees, and players understand the limitations of traditional drills and the benefits of modern, evidence-based methods.

Final Thoughts

The history of drills reveals a legacy rooted in outdated systems that prioritize repetition and control over adaptability and creativity. As coaches, we have a responsibility to move beyond these practices and adopt approaches that align with the realities of tennis. By embracing ecological dynamics and challenging entrenched beliefs, we can empower players to thrive in the dynamic, decision-rich environment of the sport.

Let’s leave the drills of the past where they belong and create a future of coaching that truly prepares players for the game of tennis.

Join my weekly newsletter to move away from the drills and start developing skills.