How I Identify Talent: Looking Beyond Technique and Results Alone

A practical framework for evaluating junior players based on performance, potential and character — rather than technical perfection or rankings alone. One of the questions I get asked most often by younger coaches is: “How do you identify talent?” Many coaches start with technique. Others focus almost entirely on rankings and results. Both matter, but neither tells the complete story. My process starts with a simple question: Can the player already win?

The first things I look at are objective measures of performance:

If a player consistently wins at a certain level, that tells me far more than watching five minutes of forehands.

One mistake I see coaches make repeatedly is falling in love with technique.

We watch a player hit a beautiful forehand and immediately start imagining how good they could become. At the same time, we often overlook the player with unconventional strokes who keeps winning matches.

Tennis is not judged on appearance. It is judged on results.

That does not mean technique is unimportant, but winning should carry more weight than aesthetics. If a junior consistently beats quality opponents, many important pieces are already working — regardless of whether their strokes would appear in a coaching manual. That said, results require context.

I am always careful when evaluating ratings such as UTR. A player may have one exceptional win that inflates the number, while another may maintain a high rating despite losing frequently because they compete against strong opposition.

For that reason, I never look at ratings alone. I combine them with match history and win percentage. Personally, I like seeing players win roughly two-thirds of their matches. To me, that often indicates a healthy balance between success and challenge.

Once I know a player can compete and win, I ask a different question: How much room does this player have to improve?

One of the first things I investigate is the player’s training environment.

Has the player already received top-level coaching and resources?
Or have they achieved these results with limited support?

Players who have achieved similar results with fewer resources often have much more room to grow. Sometimes what excites me most is not what a player has already achieved, but what they might become in the right environment.

If I have the opportunity to watch a player in person, three things stand out immediately:

1. Time
When the pace increases, does the player look rushed or comfortable?

The best players seem to have more time than everyone else. Their anticipation, movement and decision-making allow them to stay composed under pressure.

2. Effortless Ball Speed
Does the ball come off the racket with quality and penetration without excessive effort?

Some players simply produce a heavier ball naturally. That quality is difficult to teach and often shows up in players with high ceilings.

3. Physical Tools
Is the player fast, strong, explosive and athletic?

I am not looking for a finished athlete. I am looking for physical qualities that can be developed over time.

If I had to choose one factor above all others, it would be character.

You learn very little about character during a phone call or a practice session. You learn about it through competition, adversity and time. Questions I ask include:

Talent may open doors, but character determines how far a player walks through them. One example that has stayed with me involved a player from a small island in the Canary Islands. His results were decent, but not overwhelming. If I had only looked at rankings and match records, I probably would have passed. When I saw him play, I noticed several positive indicators. The ball exploded off his racket with very little effort. He was physically strong and athletic, and he had achieved his level with far less coaching and structure than many of his peers. But what ultimately convinced me was his character. He was obsessed with improvement. He desperately wanted to play college tennis, was eager to learn and embraced every opportunity to develop.

In the end, I took a calculated risk.

The results alone did not make the decision obvious, but the combination of physical tools, untapped potential and exceptional motivation did. It turned out to be one of the best recruiting decisions I have ever made. Once he entered a more structured environment, he improved faster than almost any player I have worked with, dominated throughout his college career and is now making the transition into professional tennis. That experience reinforced something I have seen repeatedly: Character is often the difference between good players and players who exceed expectations.

This may surprise some coaches, but technique is one of the least important factors I evaluate early on. Many of the best athletes I have worked with had technical characteristics that traditional coaching manuals might consider flaws — extreme grips, large takebacks or unconventional mechanics. Yet they won.

Technique matters when it limits performance, creates injury risk or prevents a player from progressing. But technique alone rarely tells me how good a player can become. The longer I coach, the more I find myself asking a simple question:
Can this player compete? If the answer is yes, I can work with a lot of different technical styles.

When I evaluate talent, I begin with evidence. Can the player win? Can they compete against strong opposition? Can they perform under pressure?

Once those questions are answered, I look for indicators of future growth: environment, ability to handle pace, effortless power, physical tools and character. Technique has its place, but it is rarely the factor that convinces me a player has a bright future.

For me, talent identification ultimately comes down to three words: Results. Potential. Character.