An ingrained tendency towards traditional methods is damaging player development

In a recent Racket Business feature Steve explored survivorship bias in tennis coaching, where coaches often focus on the successful players who have reached the top and assume their training methods were what made them successful. However, just as insidious—and equally limiting—in traditional coaching is confirmation bias. In this article, we’ll unpack what confirmation bias is, how it manifests in tennis coaching, and why recognizing and challenging this bias is essential for developing players more effectively and inclusively.

What is Confirmation Bias?

Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out, interpret, and remember information in ways that confirm one’s preexisting beliefs or theories. It’s a deeply ingrained cognitive bias affecting people in many areas, from personal beliefs to professional practices. In the context of tennis coaching, confirmation bias can lead coaches to reinforce and stick to traditional methods, even if those methods don’t necessarily lead to optimal player development.

How Confirmation Bias Manifests in Tennis Coaching

For many tennis coaches, traditional practices and methods are hard to shake. With confirmation bias at play, coaches tend to pay attention to outcomes that align with their preexisting beliefs about what works in coaching, while ignoring or downplaying evidence to the contrary. Let’s examine some key ways confirmation bias influences traditional coaching in tennis:

1. Selective Success Stories

Much like survivorship bias, confirmation bias leads coaches to highlight the players who succeeded under traditional methods and use them as proof that these methods work. If a coach’s most successful player has a textbook forehand, for example, they may assume that focusing on technique drills and isolated repetitions will yield the best results for all players. However, they may overlook cases where players with non-traditional techniques or different training pathways also succeeded—or cases where traditional methods have led to stagnant development.

2. Ignoring or Explaining Away Failures

Confirmation bias also affects how coaches interpret players’ struggles. If a player fails to improve under traditional methods, coaches may attribute the failure to the player’s lack of effort or “mental toughness” rather than questioning the methods themselves. This creates a scenario where the player, rather than the approach, is seen as the issue. The coach doesn’t question whether more adaptable, player-centered training methods might be more effective; instead, they look for evidence that validates the current approach.

3. Sticking to Drills That Reinforce Beliefs

Coaches influenced by confirmation bias often design training sessions that align with their current understanding of “good” technique or “effective” play. They might rely heavily on technical drills, basket feeding, and repetitive patterns, believing that these isolated skills are essential for match play. When players exhibit skill in these drills, coaches take this as proof that their methods are effective. Yet, because these drills lack game-like variability, players may struggle to transfer these skills to actual matches—an outcome confirmation bias allows them to overlook.

4. Discounting Modern Research in Skill Acquisition

Coaches affected by confirmation bias are often resistant to newer, evidence-based approaches like ecological dynamics and constraint-led coaching. Even though research shows that representative learning environments and variable practice yield better transfer to match play (Davids, Button, & Bennett, 2008), coaches may be more inclined to dismiss these findings in favour of methods they’re familiar with. Confirmation bias causes them to place greater weight on the evidence that supports traditional drills and techniques, while ignoring data that contradicts their beliefs.

The Drawbacks of Confirmation Bias in Traditional Coaching

Confirmation bias in tennis coaching can lead to a variety of negative outcomes, including limited player development, frustration for both coaches and players, and missed opportunities to innovate. Here are some ways confirmation bias holds players back:

1. Lack of Adaptability in Players

Players who train with rigid, technique-focused drills lack opportunities to learn how to adapt to unpredictable game conditions. Confirmation bias leads coaches to focus on “perfect” technique as a marker of success, but tennis requires adaptability more than technical perfection. As a result, players may look polished in practice but struggle to make quick adjustments in a match.

2. Reduced Player Autonomy

By focusing on pre-set “ideal” forms and techniques, coaches risk limiting players’ autonomy and self-discovery. Tennis, like all sports, requires players to make split-second decisions based on their opponent, their position, and other dynamic elements of the game. Over-relying on a coach’s guidance and predetermined techniques can reduce a player’s confidence in their own decision-making, creating athletes who need constant direction rather than being independent problem-solvers.

3. Diminished Creativity and Confidence

Coaches who prioritize tradition over adaptability risk stifling players’ natural creativity and instincts. When players are told to perform specific techniques without room for exploration, they lose the opportunity to experiment with different shots, techniques, and approaches to problem-solving. For example, a player may have an unconventional but effective backhand; however, a coach’s confirmation bias may lead them to “correct” it, diminishing the player’s confidence in their unique style.

4. Missed Opportunities to Innovate

Confirmation bias can lead coaches to dismiss new methods, like constraint-led coaching, even though research supports their efficacy. By adhering to traditional methods, coaches may inadvertently limit their players’ potential by failing to incorporate approaches that foster more adaptable, resilient athletes. The reliance on outdated methods can result in players who are less prepared to face the dynamic nature of actual match play.

Ecological Dynamics: A Path Beyond Confirmation Bias

Overcoming confirmation bias requires tennis coaches to approach player development with an open mind. An ecological dynamics approach provides a framework that emphasizes adaptability, creativity, and decision-making, all of which are essential to success in tennis.

In contrast to traditional methods, ecological dynamics views each player as a unique system that interacts with their environment, task, and constraints. This approach encourages coaches to design representative practices that mirror the unpredictable nature of matches. Research demonstrates that variable, game-like practice environments are more effective in promoting skill transfer than isolated technical drills (Renshaw et al., 2010).

For example, rather than isolating players in repetitive forehand drills, an ecological approach would introduce them to situations that require them to react to different ball speeds, spins, and placements. The emphasis is on developing a player’s ability to adapt rather than perfecting a single stroke in isolation.

Embracing New Approaches in Tennis Coaching

Breaking free from confirmation bias means questioning our long-held beliefs, even if they feel ingrained in the culture of tennis coaching. Here are a few strategies coaches can use to reduce confirmation bias in their work:

1. Embrace Reflective Practice

Reflective practice encourages coaches to evaluate their methods honestly and be willing to adapt based on outcomes. Regularly reviewing player performance in game scenarios, rather than just in practice drills, can provide insight into whether their coaching truly translates to real-world play.

2. Focus on Evidence-Based Methods

Coaches who are open to evidence-based approaches, such as ecological dynamics, are less likely to fall victim to confirmation bias. By staying informed of current research in skill acquisition and motor learning, coaches can evaluate their practices against the latest evidence, rather than just relying on tradition.

3. Encourage Player Feedback

Players are a valuable source of feedback, and listening to them can provide fresh perspectives. Rather than sticking to a set formula, ask players how they feel about the drills, what they’re learning, and whether they find it transferable to their match play. Honest feedback can help highlight areas where traditional methods may be falling short.

4. Commit to Lifelong Learning

Tennis coaching, like any field, is evolving. Committing to continuous learning helps coaches remain open to new ideas and research, which can prevent the entrenchment of confirmation bias. Attending seminars, reading recent studies, and exploring alternative approaches can keep coaching practices fresh and relevant.

Ready to Break Free from Confirmation Bias? Join “From Drills to Skills”

If you’re ready to question the traditional norms and move beyond confirmation bias, I invite you to check out my “From Drills to Skills” course. Designed with modern skill acquisition theories in mind, this course will guide you in creating practices that focus on adaptability, decision-making, and real-game scenarios. You’ll learn how to implement representative learning environments and challenge players in ways that traditional drills can’t.

Breaking free from confirmation bias isn’t easy, but it’s essential if we want to develop players who can thrive in the dynamic, unpredictable environment of competitive tennis. With the right tools and an open mind, you can make coaching decisions that truly benefit your players and bring fresh insight into the way tennis coaching is approached.

https://mytenniscoaching.com/drills-to-skills-fast-track-to-match-success/

References

• Davids, K., Button, C., & Bennett, S. (2008). Dynamics of skill acquisition: A constraints-led approach. Human Kinetics.

• Renshaw, I., Davids, K., & Savelsbergh, G. J. P. (Eds.). (2010). Motor learning in practice: A constraints-led approach. Routledge.