Assigning training partners

Greetings team,
I am back here after some while :)

How are you?

I was thinking about what currently happening more and more at our trainings. Our new coach (new since October) continually descreased the variance between the training pairs. He basically established a state where everyone of us plays always with one single the same player. I have played my last more than 30 trainings with only one player. Two regularly training girls always train with each other.

When someone does not come,the coach always either takes his partner to multiball or play with him/her himself,or sends him/her to play service,but he also does it when two players are missing.

For example, the players train
A-B
C-D
E-F
G-H

When C and E do not come,their partners D and F could play with each other,but the coach often does not allow it. He says "you need your  assigned training partner else the training does not make much sense." Only when someone new or irregular comes, he acts trangely. There is a player who comes to train to our club only 2x a week. He ALWAYS ends up with me. It is very difficult to train against him,because he has only power and no control. Yet,he is always tasked by playing against my defense,which has simply no point in his current state when he cannot play a decent stroke other than BOOOMB. However,when someone new (and weaker than the abovementioned bomber in terms of overall performance), comes,they get assigned to stronger players or overally much better sparrings.

We tried to talk about it with the coach,but to the abovementioned player he said rudely "This is my competence". To me he said "There is no other logical way" without further explanation. I would like to ask what is your view on the situation and on the "who should train with who" thing.

Thanks Dan

Hi Dan, 

Great to hear from you, and it's good to see that you're actively engaged in your training environment! The practice of pairing players consistently with the same training partners, as your coach is doing, can have both pros and cons. Consistently pairing players allows each to become very familiar with their partner’s play style, which can be beneficial for working on specific aspects of their game. It allows for a more tailored approach where each player’s strengths and weaknesses are well-understood and can be directly addressed during training sessions. However, as you’ve pointed out, there's a significant downside to this approach: it can limit players' exposure to various styles of play and strategies, which is crucial for developing a well-rounded game. Facing different opponents challenges a player to adapt their strategies and responses, thereby improving their overall game flexibility and readiness for competition. Regarding your situation where one of the players only plays powerful shots without much control, it's indeed challenging, especially if the training doesn't seem constructive. It might be useful for your coach to consider balancing training between developing specific skills with your regular partner, and mixing it up with other partners to hone adaptability and tactical responsiveness. As for how the coach is handling the assignments and the feedback from players, communication seems to be an issue. It's important for a coach to provide clear explanations for their training decisions to ensure players understand and buy into the training process. Without this, it can create frustration and a feeling of stagnation. Perhaps you could suggest a team meeting or a one-on-one discussion where these concerns can be addressed more thoroughly. It might be helpful to propose a trial period where players rotate partners more frequently, so the coach can observe if this influences the overall performance and development positively. Remember, a good coach should be open to feedback and willing to adapt strategies if that leads to better outcomes for the players. Keep the conversation constructive and focused on how changes could benefit not just individual players but the entire group's development.