My post was about the value of repetitions and used the example of Kyle Korver and Steve Kerr doing less total repetitions but more effective repetitions.
The commenter made the point that those particular players have previously done a high volume of repetitions and that what they are doing now is not a good example of how to practice.
I have a couple of thoughts. Firstly, the point of the post is provoke discussion and consider about what an actual ‘repetition’ is. We do a lot of things in practice, all of which we count as ‘repetitions’. But not all of these repetitions can possibly have equal value in the learning process. I would propose that many drills that we consider repetition drills, play only a small part in the learning process, and then at the beginner level. They have only an aesthetic relationship to the skill that we are trying to learn or improve and as coaches we can be lured into thinking that the aesthetics IS the skill.
Secondly, by focussing on the individual examples, we can too easily lose sight of the bigger picture. The point of the examples is not about the drills themselves, or the people involved. It is about performers looking critically at what they are really trying to achieve and searching for ways they can gain more value from their training.
I will add that none of these ideas are originally own, but they are supported by my experience and by research. You can see the same things at John Kessel’s blog, for example this post about ball control.
The point is always about finding better ways to do things.
Read about the great new Vyacheslav Platonov coaching book here.