Execution redundancy: the effect of varying technique for a similar outcome on player’s groundstroke performance

Michael Davis Higuera

doi:10.52383/itfcoaching.v27i79.76

Abstract

Execution redundancy, defined as varying technique for a similar outcome, is a newer defined type of variability which opens new avenues of thinking about tennis training. 19 club-level tennis players were put through different training interventions: low variability where players had to rally to hit a target and maintain technique; and, high variability where players did the same but varied technique slightly. The high variability group improved after a retention period of 1 week in a test of accuracy (measuring average distance of 4 balls hit to a target) and success (measuring number of balls over the net and within a target radius of 500cm). The results suggest that that varying technique for a similar outcome improves performance more than low variability, possibly due mechanisms surrounding increased exploration creating better adapted motor patterns. The results show positive support for variability of this kind of training, but care needs to be taken to ensure that sound biomechanical and technical principles are observed.

Highlights

Variability should be an essential part of every coaches toolkit, present within every teaching methodology in different ways, such as: discovery learning, by allowing the player to explore different solutions to solve a problem (Crespo and Miley, 1998); in variable practice - varying the different situations of practice (Pankhurst, 2013); in varied practice – varying the outcome of the shot (Pankhurst, 2013) ; or even, in distributed or random practice (Shea and Morgan, 1979; Reid et al, 2006) - varying the order of practices and intertwining learning of one skill with others
The two tests were as follows: 1) a lower pressure test where a ball machine fed four shots down the middle of the court alternating to the forehand and the backhand slightly of the player standing on the centre mark – to test whether high-variability or execution redundancy would positively affect learning even though the situation does not explicitly require variability/adaptation; and, 2) a higher pressure test as above with four shots but feeding wider more angled shots – to test whether high-variability would cause improvements in a pressured condition where adaptation and variability may be more required, as suggested by the specificity of practice theory
The results show that training with high variability in execution redundancy has a positive effect on shot accuracy and success, but only in the lower pressure test which suggests that high-variability, and prescribing variability in technique, even for a similar outcome, improves performance

Summary

Introduction

Variability should be an essential part of every coaches toolkit, present within every teaching methodology in different ways, such as: discovery learning, by allowing the player to explore different solutions to solve a problem (Crespo and Miley, 1998); in variable practice - varying the different situations of practice (the incoming ball) (Pankhurst, 2013); in varied practice – varying the outcome of the shot (Pankhurst, 2013) ; or even, in distributed or random practice (Shea and Morgan, 1979; Reid et al, 2006) - varying the order of practices and intertwining learning of one skill with others.Even with a beginner trying to adhere to a very strict technical model, variability is present as the learner is exploring motor solutions to try to replicate the skill and outcome. A high-performance player trying to hone a skill performs many slightly varying repetitions in order to improve the outcome. This does not mean that high amounts of variability should always be prescribed. A good coach is one who is able to decide which different learning styles and coaching methodologies are suitable for each player in each situation (Crespo and Miley, 1998) It is the coach’s duty to understand that variability is present in the learning process in one way or the other as well as decide how to best prescribe this variability

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion