I Hope You Dance/Begin The Beguine
I Hope You Dance... '
This was written by an 83-year-old woman to her friend. *The last line says it all. *
Dear Bertha,
I'm reading more and dusting less. I'm sitting in the yard and admiring the view without fussing about the weeds in the garden. I'm spending more time with my family and friends and less time working.
Whenever possible, life should be a pattern of experiences to savor, not to endure. I'm trying to recognize these moments now and cherish them.
I'm not "saving" anything; we use our good china and crystal for every special event such as losing a pound, getting the sink unstopped, or the first Amaryllis blossom.
I wear my good blazer to the market. My theory is if I look prosperous, I can shell out $28.49 for one small bag of groceries. I'm not saving my good perfume for special parties, but wearing it for clerks in the hardware store and tellers at the bank.
"Someday" and "one of these days" are losing their grip on my vocabulary. If it's worth seeing or hearing or doing, I want to see and hear and do it now
I'm not sure what others would've done had they known they wouldn't be here for the tomorrow that we all take for granted. I think they would have called family members and a few close friends. They might have called a few former friends to apologize and mend fences for past squabbles. I like to think they would have gone out for a Chinese dinner or for whatever their favorite food was.
I'm guessing; I'll never know.
It's those little things left undone that would make me angry if I knew my hours were limited. Angry because I hadn't written certain letters that I intended to write one of these days. Angry and sorry that I didn't tell my husband and parents often enough how much I truly love them. I'm trying very hard not to put off, hold back, or save anything that would add laughter and luster to our lives. And every morning when I open my eyes, tell myself that it is special.
Every day, every minute, every breath truly is a gift from God.
If you received this, it is because someone cares for you. If you're too busy to take the few minutes that it takes right now to forward this, would it be the first time you didn't do the little thing that would make a difference in your relationships? I can tell you it certainly won't be the last.
Take a few minutes to send this to a few people you care about, just to let them know that you're thinking of them.
"People say true friends must always hold hands, but true friends don't need to hold hands because they know the other hand will always be there."
Life may not be the party we hoped for, but while we are here we might as well dance
+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+
Lyrics by Cole Porter
As sung by Mario Lanza
-----
When they begin the beguine,
It brings back the sound of music so tender . . .
It brings back the night of tropical splendour,
It brings back a memory evergreen.
I'm with you once more under the stars,
And down by the shore an orchestra's playing . . .
Even the palms seems to be swaying
When they begin the beguine.
To live it again is past all endeavour.
Except when that tune clutches my heart . . .
And there we are swearing to love forever,
And promising never, never to part.
What moments divine, what raptures serene,
'Til clouds came along to disperse the joys we had tasted . . .
Now, when I hear people curse the chance that was wasted,
I know but too well what they mean.
So, don't let them begin the beguine.
Let the love that was once a fire remain an ember . . .
Let it sleep like the dead desire I only remember,
When they begin the beguine.
Oh yes, let them begin the beguine, make them play!
'Til the stars that were there before return above you . . .
'Til you whisper to me once more, "Darling, I love you!"
And we suddenly know, what heaven we're in.
When they begin the beguine...
When they begin . . . the beguine!
Watch a beautiful presentation from YouTube.and
from a guitar soloist.
Hero
photobucketIt was one of those very rare occasions that I watched a movie on a local TV station last night. Not that I have any misgivings about their programs as such but that the commercial interruptions (too many, too frequent and too long) mar one’s enjoyment to the point of exasperation.
Under Yimou Zhang’s sleek direction, Hero unfolds with Nameless being summoned by the Emperor of Qin who wants to hear from him how he eliminates three highly skilled swordsmen who are bent on a mission to assassinate the king.
With unfeigned modesty, Nameless weaves his heroic deeds to his sole listener. The emperor listens with intent and, unexpectedly, interjects the presenter’s account as fabrication. Told from two sides of the same tale, Nameless and the Emperor spin their respective versions of how each believes events unfold through a series of cleverly conceived flashbacks that are clearly Rashomon in effect. It culminates with the assassin getting within striking range of the king to kill him. The assassin, however, underwent an ideological conversion at a critical moment, convinced that “all under one heaven” was for the collective good of the country.
Hero is reputedly the most expensive Chinese movie ever made and has on board illustrious names to boot. Apart of that, I have no idea of the storyline and was not in any way disadvantaged by it. In fact, with no anticipation of what was to follow, I was forced me to think and be more alert.
The filming was handled with unusual skill with the end result that it was an unforgettable experience of unparalleled imagery. The bold use of the four primary colours to denote the vibrancy of emotions that humans are ruled by, as well as to demarcate and yet string segments of the story together is the stroke of a genius. One is treated to sheer cinematography.
The movie has everything in it – love, betrayal, politics, calligraphy, patriotism, despondency, melancholy, and carries a provocative message. Whether atrocities are justifiable as a means to an end is highly controversial. Was the director taking a dig at the communist regime and the Tiananmen Massacre?
I do not think the voices of Tony and Maggie are dubbed. because their diction sounds a little different from that of Jet Li and Zhang. Despite the ability of today's costmetic industry to enhance if not transform a person's looks, the studio did nothing to minimize open pores on Jet Li's face. Zhang’s role as Moon in the plot is insignificant except that, if not for her, we wouldn’t get to see the beautiful autumn duel between her and Maggie. And I was pleasantly surprised to read in the credits that the melancholic yet lyrical solo violin was rendered by Pincas Zukerman, or was it Itzhak Perlman?
Pandering To One’s Ego
I never knew that playing tennis could be such an ego trip for some people. In what was supposedly a social or recreational event, a handful allowed the ugly side of their character to surface by adopting double standards in applying the rules of the game Fortunately, such accounts are few and far in between but they are enough to get you under the skin.
- My opponent’s first serve did not clear the net and the ball rolled within the playing court. I returned his second serve and the ball collided with the ball from the first serve. He claimed a let. But if the situation had been reversed, he would say "That's your fault for not clearing the ball."
- I used to serve with two balls in hand as it was easier to launch the first ball with another ball beneath. During play, I discarded the second ball that I would normally had pocketed it. My tennis wear had no pockets then. My opponent objected and claimed his point. I do agree it was not appropriate of me but to me it was picky to cite disruption of his concentration. It was not like we're playing in a tournament. He was taking a social game far too seriously.
- I served what was apparently to me a fault and there wasn’t the anticipated call from the receiver. Instead, he returned serve. Naturally, I did not react to his return of my serve. It emerged that his tactic was to wait to see my reaction. If I chose to continue play, he would make his call. If I chose inaction, that would be a point I lost to him because he hadn't call. Or, a sublet variation of this tactic was to display a body language and a lackadaisical return of to suggest that my serve was out. and taking that as the cue, I did not play on. Thereupon, that cost me the loss of a point.
- My opponent attempted a drop shot and failed to clear the net. In rushing to the net in anticipation of that drop shot, my racquet touched the net. My opponent claimed he won a point.
- Just after volleying, my racquet made contact with the net. My opponent claimed his point, mind never that the ball had landed and was therefore no longer in play when the net contact was made.
- In playing doubles, one of my opponents and I were at the net. He occasionally faulted me for double hit or double bounce and called it his point. I disagreed with him what constitutes a double. A vague perception that the ball first makes contact with the beam of the racquet before the string bed does not make a double. Nor does playing by ear, as he maintained. No one has the skill to intentionally execute that at will!
- Before beginning serve, the onus is on the server to see that the receiver is ready. However, immediately following a first serve, a receiver has no excuse to "unready" himself for the second serve by turning sideway to avoid looking at the server and rehearse his swing.
- My opponent called my serve ‘out’ and then deemed it good. Why should be I penalized by having to serve again? If he misjudged what was good, I should get a point forthwith. Having to re-serve is adding insult to injury. Miscalls do not entail the caller to a "let".
Consider also:-
- We all know that if a ball lands centrally on a line, it is indisputably good. What if the ball hits a little more away from the center towards the outside parameter of the line but nevertheless still touches the line? You will find almost every player exercising his right of call as "out".
- From the player's perspective, the point of ball contact with the racquet must always be from his side of the net and that it is perfectly legitimate for his racquet to cross the net plane thereafter. But what if, in his follow-through, the racquet touches the net AFTER the ball has crossed the net plane? We seem to regard the net as something of a taboo.
What men really want in a game of tennis? To win every point regardless of means fair or foul? It is unfortunate that a
social tennis game should fall into the trap of becoming a contest of egos that I got drawn into against my intention.
whoops.... so embarrassing!
Say Only Nice Things
"I’m sorry, I’ll say that again" (from Life!Mailbag)
Anthony Lee wrote:
Like other Singaporeans, I looked forward to watching Peschardt’s Peope on BBC World after reading Lee Sze Yong”s story (Fann on BBC Tonight, Life!, Aug 19). I’m not a fan of Fann.
On the show with producer and host Michael Peschardt, she was relaxed and chatty and her diction didn’t disappoint, despite her long association with Mandarin productions.
Then, she faltered on a question about nude scenes, pausing for words before offering an ambiguous “nudity is special”.
What a let down this was, when she could have clarified what she had said by perhaps adding that nudity was “unnecessary” or “not us”.
If she had meant “caring”, “exotic” or “excessive” we’ll never know. She also referred to cable TV as “cables” several times.
Asked about shooting in cemetery locations, she spoke about spiritual precautions and a “a list of names to pray to”. Did she mean names from immediate headstones or names of cast and crew to pray for?”
Her pronunciation wasn’t up to scratch either and when she mistook “longetivity” for longevity twice, Peschardt politely did not correct her.
When the western media’s favourite question on political freedom finally came, she fudged before declaring: “I don’t touch on politics.”
This was certainly an unimpressive answer.
------
I did not watch the interview and I am not Fann’s fan but I can’t help feeling that the writer is slanted in his views.
He started by mentioning “her diction didn’t disappoint” and then contradicted himself by concluding that “her pronunciation wasn’t up to scratch”.
He faulted her “nudity is special” forgetting that, just as in the rest of the interview, she was responding from HER perspective. If the writer would have prefered her to substantiate that as “unnecessary” or “not us”, then he is pretending to be prudish. In any case, to clarify that nudity is "unncessary" or "not us" is simply incongruous with the the statement that "nudity is special".
Oh, use your head: would you pray for the crew or cast-members with you?! They'll promptly have you "deceased" for doing that.
If Peschardt didn’t correct her, how did the writer know “Peschardt politely did not correct her”. Guess he meant: Out of politeness, Preschardt did not correct her.
Finally, the writer should know that talking about local politics in front of the camera is taboo unless you say only nice things.
The Hazards of Playing Doubles at the Net
One of the dictums in playing doubles in an up-down formation is that the player at the net should not look back at his partner or at the direction of a ball that passes him. Rather, he should focus ahead of him and, by judging the body language of his opponents, tell what type of shot his backcourt partner hit and anticipate his opponent’s next shot so as to intercept it.
When I started out inexperienced, I was chided by my one-off partner not to look back at him and I was rather piqued by that. Never critique your partner while a point was being played. And it doesn't mean that the "don't look behind you" principle is always right or safe. An incident illustrates how that policy can misfire with dire consequences.
My partner at the backcourt inadvertently hit a floater that was quickly pounced upon by the opposing net man. There was no way I could see a floater coming. With one fell swoop, he lashed out a karate chop with his Ncode5. The next thing I knew was the ball had hit me on the left eye. Oh Lord, it was a bull’s eye! It happened quick as a flash.
It was rather late in the night to seek medical attention and I rushed home with the hope of sleeping it away. However, as I hit the sack, pain and pressure started to well up in the eye.
Without prior appointment, I sought medical treatment at the national eye clinic the next morning. Registration done, I took my seat to wait for my turn. It was a soaring business for the clinic judging by the attendance. Was it always like that? I don't know. I never had an eye-test until then.
It needed two applications of eye-drop before the pupil was sufficiently dilated for examination. The doctor could not ascertain from preliminary examination any long-term damage that the inflammation might mask and I was scheduled for another appointment. Meanwhile, the inflammation subsided with the use of steroids laced eye-drops but it soon became clear that my vision was not clear. The inflammation had given way to a dark tiny patch within the cornea that moved in tandem with the eye movement. It was as if an insect was flying annoyingly in front of me whenever my eyes moved. When I closed my eyes in sleep, the dark spot turned white. That condition lasted three worrisome days. All-in-all, I had to be examined three times spanning 3 weeks to test confirm normalcy of eye pressure and vision.
The twin hazards of playing doubles are ... being hit in your front, crotch included. That aside, from your rear on your head!
Or squarely on your butt!
Woe betide you, my partner!
(search word tennis)
The un-meowing Cat Concerto
The Cat Concerto is a one-reel animated cartoon short subject in the Tom and Jerry series, produced in Technicolor and released to theatres on 26 April 1947 by Metro-Goldwyn Mayer. It was produced by Fred Quimby and directed by William Hann The Cat Concerto is a one-reel animated cartoon short subject in the Tom and Jerry series, produced in technicolour by MGM. It won the 1946 Academy Award for Best Short Subject: Cartoons.
Released to theatres in April 1947, be delighted by this timeless animation now in the comfort of your own home. You will really appreciate its creativity if you are familiar with Franz Liszt"s Hungarian Rhapsody no.2 on which it is based.
For good measure, I've included another Tom and Jerry that drew inspiration from another piece of classical music,
which is an opera. Finally, from the creator of Peanuts, Schroeder plays .........
Beethoven's Piano Sonata no.3.
"SM Goh: Help Solve The Puzzle of Missing Babies" in ST today
Puzzle? What Puzzle!?
That we are having fewer babies now is the repercussion of short-sighted and ill-conceived policies of the past.
Remember how swiftly the Family Planning Board was set up to implement the Birth Control Policy and the vigor with which various campaigns were organized to drive home the point that “Girl or Boy Two is Enough” and the “Stop at Two” admonition? Remember the blatant discrimination against failure to stop at two?
Remember the argument that with limited land and no natural resources, a population explosion spelled economic catastrophe for the country?
Remember the incentives to husbands to go under the knife, never mind the evidence that vasectomy, though reversible, does not always restore fertility.
Remember the jaundiced favoritism accorded graduate mothers in the name of eugenics and how young couples were advised against marrying too young.
We DO remember. In short, ways and means were resorted to to bring the population to a standstill and in the process the baby was thrown out with the bath water. Do we know how many pregnancies were aborted that otherwise might not?
The focus is now on couples who are DINKS, i.e, with "double income no kids. Only they should procreate or copulate. The State has no wish to be left holding babies of couples of lesser means or inferior genes, you know.
When Chivalry is Neighbour to Xenophobia
Two letters in the ST Forum today lamented the dearth or death of chivalry in Singapore.
37y/o Alex Tan’s gripe is mainly against women wherein they were mentioned no less than five times his letter. To his acts of chivalry, “Most of the women simply walked away either as if nothing had happened or with a facial expression that seemed to imply that I had done or said something rude to them. All I had done was something most would describe as either chivalrous or courteous.”
Well Alex, in an age of equality for the sexes, women don't need you to stoop to opening doors for them, certainly not when they fancy they have the face that launches a thousand ships. A sampan like you won't do.
In the case of a Brendan Buxton (the name would suggest a white), he had the misfortune to encounter a self-confessed xenophobic. Brendan invited contempt on himself for going to such lengths just to extract an acknowledgment from the party he rendered what he deemed a favour or service, never mind that it was entirely voluntary on his part. "While he felt like a victim, he acted like a hero." Best not to expect anything in return for kind deeds and you will not be disappointed.
When the concept of chivalry is invoked, it goes back to an era of princes, princesses and castles in the air. It often associated with the ideals of medieval knighthood as portrayed in the legends of King Arthur and his Knights of Round Table. The prefect knight in shining armour was thought to embody a distinct array of ideals such as bravery, compassion for suffering, piety, justice and a rescuer of damsels in distress. In matters of love, he acted with moderation, composure and patience in wooing his fair maiden. The chivalrous man wanted his lady love to love him for his worthy character more than anything else. Character is what maketh a man.
Chivalry, then, means much more than the simple good manners or politeness of today like opening doors for ladies or spreading one’s trench coat over a puddle. These are merely the outward signs of a deeper character that go towards making a man the man within.
The Science Of Tennis
Book Link Authors: Brody, Cross and Lindsay
Sweet words they'd be to any author reading a reviewer’s summarization: “This is a book that you can’t put down once you pick it up”.
With a twist, this is a book you can’t pick up once you put it down. The package it came has a stated weight of 3.13lbs (or 1.42kg). Imagine, if you will, lumbering such a weight as a reading material to engage in on the train or in a bus.
Admittedly, the title of the book arrests your interest if you are a believer that knowledge (read that as technology) is power and it can give you the competitive edge in almost anything (read that as tennis). It is however quite a cumbersome volume to sieve through just to pick out the gist of it findings. In fact, you’ll soon realize that it reads like a textbook for students offering Physics as a subject at ‘A’ level. In keeping with a subject as dry as physics, the book is a mine-field of photographs, mathematical formulas, diagrams, graphs, and flow-charts describing the physical phenomenon that is being investigated. Complex if not obtuse scientific concepts such as Vertical Angular Acceptance and Coefficient of Restitution are expounded with enthusiasm. Most readers may find the concepts difficult to grasp.
Somewhat dated by now, it is a pity that the book does not cover the latest technologies in racquet materials and strings and there is apparently no co-ordination between the authors to merge and present their findings collectively so as to eliminate overlapping or redundancy. Not every reader has a physicist’s mind. The less technically minded will have to comb the entire text to unearth an insight or two.
Comprising over 40 different articles, they are the results of research, investigation and experiments conducted scientifically by highly respectable people - two physicists and a publisher. It objectively clears the air about many misconceptions the layman has about tennis per se and most of the findings are contrary to popular beliefs.
Some pickings from the book:
- A standard Type 2 (that’s the type in common use) professional tennis ball should rebound 55% when dropped from a height of 100 inches onto a concrete surface.
- The ITF has recently allowed the use of a new Type 3 ball, which is slightly lighter and softer but 6% larger in diameter. (I believe it was to slow down the game but the idea didn’t latch on and Type is not available locally)
- Even though you can’t see it with the naked eye, during impact, the ball squashes by as much as 50% and the frame bends out of shape.
- The number one determinant of serve speed is the velocity of the racquet at the impact point on the ball.
- Professional players can serve almost as fast with an old wood racquet as with a modern graphite racquet – the difference is rarely more than 5%.
- Tennis has conflicting adages in “keep the ball on the loose stings longer for better control” and “tight strings give better control”. Lower tension will provide a little more power, and an open string pattern will also produce more power.
- String tension is largely a matter of preference. Lower string tension will give you more power but only 1% more.
- Stiff strings normally increase jarring since they cause the handle to vibrate more and to slam into the hand.
- ‘Control’ cannot be measured. No one knows how to.
- All racquets have essentially the same power. A common view is that a stiff frame generates more shock at impact. In reality, it vibrates less and feels better as they is less shock.
- A racquet also needs stability when impacting the ball, thus at a certain point (e.g. below 8 oz), a lighter racquet can never compete with a heavier one in terms of stability.
- The number one way of improving service percentage is by hitting the ball at a higher elevation. An increase of 6 inches in height increases the acceptance window by almost 30%.
- By the time a 110 mph service gets to the other baseline, it has slowed down to 55 mph due to air resistance and friction from the bounce.
- Moving 5 feet behind the baseline gives the receiver 10% more time to react to the service.
- Unlike the bounce of balls in most sports, the angle of reflection does not equal the angle of incidence for tennis balls rebounding from a racquet.
- Higher string tension actually increases string life because at higher tension there is less string movement, hence less “sawing” and “notching”.
- A ball hit with topspin arrives at the receiver spinning between 50 to 100 revolutions per second
- Perimeter weighting drastically reduces shock
- Backspin groundstrokes are easier to hit than topspin, but have much less tolerance for error.
- Pros do not use the racquets they are touted to endorse – it’s just a paint job
- (to be continued)
Book Link
Waltzing Matilda (sung by the Brothers Four)
Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong,
Under the shade of a coolibah tree,
And he sang as he watched and waited till his billy boiled,
"Who'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me?
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda,
Who'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me?"
And he sang as he watched and waited till his billy boiled,
"Who'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me?"
Down came a jumbuck to drink at the billabong:
Up jumped the swagman and grabbed him with glee.
And he sang as he shoved that jumbuck in his tucker-bag,
"You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me.
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda,
You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me."
And he sang as he shoved that jumbuck in his tucker-bag,
"You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me."
Up rode a squatter, mounted on his thoroughbred;
Down came the troopers, one, two, three:
"Who's that jolly jumbuck you've got in your tucker-bag?
You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me!
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda,
You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me.
Who's that jolly jumbuck you've got in your tucker-bag?
You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me!"
Up jumped the swagman and sprang into the billabong;
"You'll never catch me alive!" said he;
And his ghost may be heard as you pass by that billabong,
"You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me!
Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda,
You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me!"
And his ghost may be heard as you pass by that billabong,
"You'll come a-waltzing Matilda with me!"
* swagman: an intinerant farmhand, carrying his "swag" (his blankets) rolled into a cylinder
* billabong: a creek (normally with a pronounced "oxbow" bend)
* coolibah tree: a eucalypt (gum) tree )
* waited till his billy boiled: a billy is a tin can used to heat water over a campfire to make tea
* jumbuck: sheep
* tucker-bag: bag or box used to store food
* squatter: farmer/grazier who simply found good land and took possession; some became extremely rich
* trooper: policeman or soldier on horseback
Hear authentic song in You-Tube.
Smile, Land of Perpetual Campaigns
“Smile… We’re Serious!”
screamed one of the pages in Lifestyle section today.
In conjunction with the IMF-World Bank meeting come September, we’re prevailed upon to put on a smile to welcome the delegates and tourists. (yeah, that's what it is... a put-on and take-off face mask)
What could be the motivation behind the smile campaign? So we could hear the cash-register tinkling merrily away? Or is it an apportunity to eye-wash the expected 13,000 delegates that we are a happy lot of people... politically, and to project our global image no less.
Can you really coax a smile out of people just as you coax an animal to perform in a circus?
Smiling is a natural reflex action. You smile when you feel good. Try forcing or forging a smile when you are feeling down or stressed-out and you'll know it isn't natural or genuine. It is like a woman faking orgasms.
What should be done is to encourage Singaporeans to less abrasive, if not friendlier, when they rub shoulders with each other. Charity begins at home; if you can smile with your fellow countrymen, smiling to visitors to your shores will be a spontaneity, like second nature.
Thailand is sold as a Land of A Thousand Smiles. That's too meager.
Naturally, in a Land of Perpetual Campaigns, Singapore campaigns to be a Fabulous Land of Four Million Perpetual Smiles.
Mark my word, when the "'mile-stone" event is over, everything will be forgotten, proving that this is just to eye-wash the vistiors into believing that we are happy and contented lot of people and all is well with us. Amen.
Tennis Without Tears
By Oscar Wegner
McGraw-Hills, Camden
222 pages/2005
$18.95 USA
Do you ever feel exasperated when things aren’t going your way on the court and you’re wondering what’s wrong with you and how you may change that? I did. That’s why I brought this book for it promises to simplify the game for you and play like the pros in 2 hours! Of course, that is to be taken with a pinch of salt.
The number of tennis players in the States has been in the decline since the last 20 years. The guru coach attirbutes this to incorrect and complicated teaching methods of the past. You see, all this while you have been taught to play one way whereas the pros play a different way. On this basic, the sole tenor running through the book is to point out how the pros play and what better way than to watch closely how they play, and, bravo, emulate them!
Playing tennis had been widely taught as a hand-eye-feet co-ordination. However, says the authur, if you were to break down the dynamics of the best stroke productions, tennis was a game of hand-eye correlation only, the rest, presumably, is doing the what-comes-naturally with your innate motor skills. Tracking the ball with your eyes is the first crucial factor in playing well. Just eyeball the ball like you goggle at girls and thereafter let your basic instinct take charge with your athletic flair and showmanship. In other words, don't analyze too much.
A sample of what the author diagnosed as Myths and Facts that:
(A) I am in complete agreement because it is in-line with my playing style:
Myth: Learn every move – tennis is a game of positions, specific steps, and preparations that you must learn in detail.
Fact: Go to the ball in a nature, instinctive way, focusing only on what to do with the ball and racquet. (With a little bit of ball sense, there is nothing like relying on your reflexes or instinctive reaction to get the ball back)
Myth: Prepare as fast as you can.
Fact: Restrain yourself from reacting too quickly. (Trust me, when age has caught up with you, you are naturallly restrained. If you prepare yourself as fast as you can, you’ll tire out in no time)
Myth: take your racquet back as soon as the ball leaves your opponent’s racquet.
Fact: Keep your racquet to the front until the ball is close. (Trust me again, because my racquet is extremely head-heavy, I need the aid of my non-playing hand to hold it up in front of me for as long as is necessary)
Myth: Hit the ball early.
Fact: Wait for the ball. (I certainly wait for the ball in order not to mistime or mishit, sometimes, unfortnately, I waited too long!)
Myth: Keep your arm straight on your forehand.
Fact: Bend your arm on your forehand. (This is stating the obvious because nobody can keep his or her arm straight on the forehand!)
(B) I am in agreement even it is not my playing style:
Myth: Topspin is more stressful on you arm.
Fact: Flat shots are harder on your arm. (Meeting a shot head-on (flat for flat) does generate shock on the foreman even when the racquet is held firmly. However, playing topspin requires more skill than hitting flat.)
(C) Finally, what I disagree because it does suit my playing style:
Myth: Keep your distance from the ball – usually at arm’s length.
Fact: Move closer to the ball for greater power and control. (Keeping my distance from the ball enables me to take a swipe at the ball. It is in sweeping or swooping at the ball that power is generated. Getting too close to the ball cramps the movement)
Myth: stay down through the stroke.
Fact: lift up through the stroke. (Your body needs to stay down to reach a low ball. Rising up too quickly inadvertently sends the ball long. Staying low is a better option)
Myth: you have to hit deep all the time.
Fact: the deeper you try to drive the ball during rallies, the more mistakes you’ll make. (Who ever said that you have to hit deep all the time? That’s just not possible! However, you should hit deep whenever conducive. Not hitting deep does not guarantee you freedom from mistakes. Instead, it invites your opponent to come forward and gain control of the net. It it challenging to hit baseline shots)
Even before starting out, many people think that playing tennis to the level of enjoying the game is beyond them. Oscar’s book, for beginners and clubbers, should dispel the myth that only pros can play like pros. And the moral of it all? Better get it right from day one. The longer and harder you train with incorrect techniques, the harder it is to change to quality tennis. You cannot bend a tree already blowing and bowing in one direction for too long.
The book has a section on Troubleshooting. This is particularly useful for identifying your problems and remedies are offered.
Rated 4 out of 5 stars. That doesn’t mean it will turn you into a star with the exception of Gustavo Kuerten, the most celebrated of the coach’s protégé.
My gripe with this publication - white prints on grey is not a very good idea.
Book Link
