Agree with this post: The Games approach offers additional advantages, such as fostering a sense of teamwork and decision$-$making skills as players navigate dynamic game scenarios. Furthermore, it creates an environment that closely mirrors actual game conditions, promoting a seamless transition from practice to competitive play. However, its drawbacks include the potential for players to overlook essential technical aspects that may require focused drills for improvement. On the other hand, the Traditional approach, with its structured format, provides players with a systematic and controlled environment for skill mastery. It ensures a deliberate focus on specific techniques and allows for isolated skill development. Yet, it may fall short in preparing players for the unpredictability of real$-$game situations and the ability to make split$-$second decisions. Balancing both approaches strategically allows for a comprehensive training regimen that addresses the strengths and weaknesses inherent in each method, maximizing the overall effectiveness of player development.