Roddick needs a new coach

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by barry, Aug 1, 2004.

  1. barry

    barry Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,269
    Roddick has gone about as far as he can with Gilbert, He needs to fire him and hire Annacone who will teach him the attacking game. Roddick does not match up well with top 10 players and must develop an all court game. His volley is 5.0 level. Notice he never draws Hewitt, Nailbanian or Henman anymore since they beat him.

    But he is still the best American player out there.
     
    #1
  2. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Your conspiracy theories re the draw are a bit far-fetched. Nalbandian was in his half of the draw in Cincy, but he withdrew at the last minute. Chela took his place. (Which may be good for Nadal. :wink:) [Now, are you saying Team Roddick paid him to withdraw???]

    And Hewitt was in his draw in Queen's -- Andy beat him in straights.

    As for Henman, he sure popped up in Andy's draw a lot earlier in the year. He hasn't as much lately, but then again, Henman has had his own troubles. Luck of the draw, perhaps???

    Andy's the best player out there behind Roger. At least according to the rankings, and the latest results. Yes, Roger is undefeated since the French. Andy's only two losses since then are to Roger.

    Brad has taken him to this level, and they know they have a tough nut to crack with Roger. But they are cracking every other nut out there, so to speak.

    The only player giving Andy trouble is Roger. And Roger is giving trouble to everyone else out there. And Andy is, too -- except Roger.

    So perhaps there's a coach out there who can coach him on how to defeat Roger -- but he needs someone to get him through the other matches as well. And Brad has done that just fine.

    It's just that Roger is the better player right now. Everyone knows it. And now Andy and everyone else has to improve stuff. I'm sure Brad, Doug and the rest of Andy's team know that, and will work on it.

    But total kudos to Roger. I'm very impressed by him and his composure in key moments. He definitely is raising the bar, and he's going to be tough to beat.

    And it's nice, Barry, that you acknowledge that Andy is the best American player out there. Yes, he is. He's also the second best player on the Tour right now, bar none.
     
    #2
  3. The tennis guy

    The tennis guy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,625
    Well, there is only that much a coach can do. Roddick is the second best. Myabe he just has to accept that for a while if Federer keeps his level of player. Roddick has more power than Federer. However, Federer is not someone who can be over powered easily. Players like Hewitt, Nalbadian give Federer more trouble than pure power players like Roddick, Safin.

    I think Roddick has to change strategy a little. He tried at Wimbledon to go for broke, it didn't work out for him. On slower surface, there is no way he can go for broke on every shot to beat Federer unless he is perfect on go for broke. That chance is quite small, maybe 1 in 7, I suppose.
     
    #3
  4. Pyro

    Pyro Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    109
    I also think he needs a new coach. All Brad did was make Roddick read his book. I can just imagine what goes on at practice: "Hit the ball harder and don't hit it long, here's your racquet, now have fun". He has improved his backhand and his volley(just a bit on the volley), but honestly all Brad gave him was a simple strategy for every guy. He needs someone who can teach him how to use movement and finesse and implement it into his game, Brad is telling him what he already knows. It seems like a sort of yin-yang relationship with Federer. Fed needs someone to teach him to s&v more (he is abandoning it for now and his volley technique is suffering a bit) as well as put some juice into his serve.
     
    #4
  5. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Okay, this begs the question.

    Why aren't you suggesting that other players get new coaches?

    They aren't having any better of a time against Fed? [Except for Nadal, who is 1-0 against Fed. :wink: ]

    Or is your point that Andy, with a bit better coaching, could get the best of Fed? :?

    I'm confused. From prior postings, I thought you never thought he could beat him.

    And perhaps more to the point, who do you all think can beat Fed in coming weeks/months?

    Or is this a Serena Williams situation -- just pencil in Fed as the winner of every tourney he enters? At least, in the foreseeable future. *add boring emoticon*
     
    #5
  6. tommytom11

    tommytom11 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    195
    that Andy needs a new coach is undoubtedly the most ignorant comment that could be made. he is playing great and has improved every aspect of his game. he has become almost unbeatable. the problem for him is that Roger, when he is on, is.
     
    #6
  7. AAAA

    AAAA Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,389
    By some accounts Ivan Ljubicic gave Roddick some trouble last week.
     
    #7
  8. larrhall

    larrhall Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Messages:
    444
    Prediction 1: Andy Roddick will never be a serve volleyer nor an all-court player.

    Prediction 2: Brad Gilbert will be blamed frequently in the future for Roddick's 'failures' (the sort we would all love to have).

    Roddick's best path, imo, is exactly the one Gilbert, Spreen etc. have him on - work in variety, improve fitness and quickness, improve his defensive skills. It's hard to know what to say about that volley. It's still a painful shot for a 7.0 player. Then again, Edberg's forehand was always awkward...
     
    #8
  9. Swan Song

    Swan Song Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,156
    You are right about that AAAA. Now the whole coach issue. What Andy and Brad needs to do is sit down, have a cup of coffee(optional), and go back to the drawing board. I do not know how Brad coaches, but the only way to find out Federer's weakness for them is to watch 1000+ videos of Federer and find his glitch and take notes. Second, he needs to work on placement, speed, and variety. Roddick's does not have to concentrate too much on pace since he has got enough. What he has to is to serve at a constant speed until he needs to serve his fastest. Maybe he might even have to go down to 100mph. I know we have heard this numerous times, but what kills him the most is his VOLLEYS!!!!! If his guy does not fix his volleys, he will always play defense, and Federer is a type of guys who love to tinker with defense people. If he follows that, and if Brad thinks of something in his dreams, Roddick would change.
     
    #9
  10. bigserving

    bigserving Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    583
    If Roddick does not get a new coach soon, he may only be the number two player in the world behind some guy named Federer!?!?!

    We read all of these posts about Federer being a tennis god, and will he challenge Sampras for the all-time majors, then when he beats Roddick, its Brad Gilbert's fault. Huh?
     
    #10
  11. J D

    J D Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Messages:
    182
    There's no point in studying Federer trying to find weaknesses to exploit, there are none. If Roddick wants to beat Federer, he's got to improve the holes in his own game, namely his lack of quickness and mobility, his volley, his fairly weak backhand, and his service return (that's a pretty long list).

    Most of the top players have had one other player that always gave them fits. For Andy, that person is Roger. There's just too many weaknesses that Federer can exploit with his anticipation, quickness, more compact strokes, and all-court game. Roddick's serve and forehand are big enough weapons to get him past everyone else right now, but he's got to become a much better all around player if he wants to stand a chance with Federer.

    I do think that Gilbert has been great for Andy and has gotten him to the next level. Rather or not he is the right person to get him over the final hurdle is a question only time will answer. Gilbert's specialty has been showing top players how to get the most out of their game. He really isn't known as being a technical coach that helps players develop new on court skills, which is what Andy needs right now. Perhaps Roddick could use a second coach to teach him some new skills and help him with some drills to improve court coverage and footwork. IF Roddick can improve in all these areas, the rest of the tennis world had better watch out. In the meantime, Federer is obviously the guy that no one wants to play, especially Roddick.
     
    #11
  12. StupidCupid

    StupidCupid New User

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2004
    Messages:
    88
    Right !! what about Roscoe Tanner. He will be the ideal person who fits A Dick's style. Moreover, I read from somewhere that he needs cash (based on vague memory, I might be wrong about this).
     
    #12
  13. speedofpain88

    speedofpain88 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    357
    After getting together with Gilbert Andy's record has been a whole lot better than it was before. He became the #1 player after the switch and when you're at #2 I wouldn't say it's your coach's fault that you're not #1. On the other hand, BG does seem to only tell Roddick to rip all his shots. Andy is overall a greatly improved player since BG became his coach.

    Perhaps Roddick should just not have a coach like Fed. Maybe that is the secret to tennis.
     
    #13
  14. Kobble

    Kobble Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    2,365
    The good thing now is that Roddick has nothing to lose against Federer anymore. It could free him up to start taking chances and experimenting with different styles of play against Roger. I don't think anything is wrong with Gilbert, I think the real problem is with Andy himself. Andy is so far behind a few of the leading people to beat Federer in the volley area. He doesn't have the touch, speed, or footwork to accomplish what he needs to do at net. In all seriousness, everyone is lacking some piece to dominate Federer, but Roddick should not be as far off as he is. I bet he never thought in a million years that his success would suffer because of his volleys, and now he must be kicking himself for not developing a S&V game earlier. IMO, Ancic will be the front runner against Federer. He already has the serve and strategy necessary to beat him, and he is still improving at it. Plus, he is 1-0 against him.
     
    #14
  15. Chanchai

    Chanchai Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    787
    Umm... Gilbert has really improved Andy's game... And is a fit for Andy. Just because Roddick goes to someone like Paul Annacone does not means he's going to become a Serve and Volley player. (Heck, to think that all Paul Annacone does is preach S&V.... sigh....)

    All Gilbert does is get Roddick to read his book? Whatever...

    Let's see what's happened with Roddick since Gilbert....

    -He definitely comes out more as a professional and has arranged pretty much a professional team to help him out with various various areas of his game. He's no longer the dorky kid with visors preaching about "let's win on my terms" every match and he's at least controlled himself much more in terms of composure (he still loses it, but it's a noticeable difference now).

    -His gameplans are much more solid imo--they actually factor the other guy on the court. He's no longer mainly "just playing his game" regardless. He's playing his game as it works against his opponent's game. He's also had a much more confident view of his overall game, he's choking much less on his weak areas (though still choking a lot at net overall, but he hardly went to net before). But better yet, he more or less has an appropriate strategy for his opponents. It's pretty clear, and not as one-dimensional as it used to be.

    -His focus on improving fitness is greater than before. He will still suffer injuries from time to time like everyone else, but he's building a better body for tennis. I used to think the only improvement to his fitness before Gilbert was just making sure he wouldn't cramp up much anymore.

    -Improved variety and application of the serve. He isn't just going for aces all of the time, though he still does it a lot (and should). He's aiming for a weaker wing, a weaker return, to disrupt his opponent's rhythm, etc... He's developed a much faster and grasscourt friendly second serve, a wide as hell changeup kick serve that might not ace because it's obvious, but it'll pull a guy out of the rally pretty well, a somewhat bigger kickserve than he used to have, a slice serve he'll thrown in on occasion, a complete changeup serve when his opponents feel they can blast his serves back on the day. It's in addition to what he's had before, a fast as hell flat serve, high kick serve, and a twist serve. What's more important than the variety is the application, he's picking his times better. He's also serving the bigger points better nowadays as opposed to working almost purely in streaks.

    -His backhand has totally improved. It's underrated, but I'm not gonna say it's an amazing or great backhand. But the fact is, the guy is lasting backhand rallies so well nowadays. Perhaps the one thing his two-hander can do best is passing shots against opponents at net. Its weakness is that it doesn't have the penetration to be a weapon in baseline rallies, but he can control it well enough for the most part. I think Gilbert just built confidence in his backhand because it's not god-awful, but is a valid piece of the arsenal--but also so Roddick will not throw himself out of position trying to avoid it. Roddick's slicebackhand is much better now and allows him to setup for the next shot as well. His backhand isn't a weapon unless it's against an opponent at net. But it's a good tool, especially combined with his improvement in movement. I think his backhand is underrated simply because people only want to look at it as a point finisher or pure weapon. From a counterpunching or point construction perspective, it's good and seems to actually be getting better. The big thing about it is that Brad has killed Andy's fear of his own backhand.

    -Roddick is simply moving better and much more solid. The guy isn't throwing himself way off balance anymore. The expense is temporary in my book. That expense is that because he's no longer throwing his entire body way off for some shots, particularly the running forehand like he used to, he's been netting some of the running forehands. I think it's a matter of time before he gets used to this, but his movement and room to recovery from this will be a huge benefit and it's already showing. But he's no longer living/dying by the body-thrown forehand anymore like he used to, not much anyways. I think that's a good thing that he's working much more on that footwork and his steps and recovery are so much cleaner now.

    -Trust and Confidence. Aside from looking completely shattered after his loss to Federer today, Roddick is just much more confident nowadays. I think he only seemed so cocky before because he was really insecure about his tennis and his place in the game before last year. Nowadays, he's just flat out confident and maybe he's still cocky, but he's backing it up a bit more and not blaming some other factors as much as he probably used to. Trust is big imo... if you have a coach, you need it. And I believe Gilbert has (rightfully) earned that trust.

    And there's probably much more... but at this point, I think I covered a lot and more than enough to justify my viewpoint that Roddick has been and is still improving with Gilbert as a coach. I don't even know how Annacone would coach him, maybe do a wonderful job. But if let's say some other coach, one that just advocated Serve and Volley to Roddick--I imagine that would only discourage the guy and frustrate him.

    Besides, to the credit of the Serve and Volley game and to an extent the all-court game--the serve and volley game seems to be a game that has to be nurtured--it's not something you pull out of your @$$ because you have a big serve--though of course the Grasscourt season shows players that do that well (or used to). From what I've understood, it's such a nuanced and feel game that you have to be trained in it and many players don't fully blossom under it until years through putting in the work.

    I don't think Roddick will ever be a great Serve & Volley player. He has the serve, but he doesn't really have the feel. His volleys are getting better, but maybe just because he's actually volleying now. What's important for Roddick is just knowing when to come in, not to come in everytime he serves. So an all-court focus as opposed to S&V is imo, more important. On Grass, he could use S&V play more. I just see it becoming a liability for him on clay, hard, and indoor if that's all he focuses on.

    Could go on and on... and probably will soon :p

    -Chanchai
     
    #15
  16. barry

    barry Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,269
    With Roddick's current game he is top 10 at best. If he wants to improve, and take the number 1 spot, he will have to change is 2 ball rally game style, and become a all court player.
    Confidence and hype will only take you so far. He has done poorly on Clay and maybe should only play grass or fast hard courts tournaments.
    Looking at his match record for the year shows few quality wins against top 10 opponents http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/players/46 which implies he is not ready for prime time.
    Let face it ESPN hypes Roddick so much because he is the highest ranked American (Macenroe davis cup coach) and they believe if he goes down, no one will watch tennis!
    I for one got very tired of watching the Williams sisters. Constant hype, dispuption of good matches just to watch them play doubles etc..
    Point being, if Roddick wants to become the number 1 player, he has to chance his game. Even Henman beat him this year!
     
    #16
  17. Chanchai

    Chanchai Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    787
    Barry, your post is perfectly fine until the last part... "Even Henman beat him this year!"

    Even Henman beat Federer this year!

    Aside from Wimbledon, which I can't say was horrible for him, Henman's been having a great year. It seemed the guy had a new set of confidence after breaking up with his old coach, winning his first TMS title last year taking down an amazing array of opponents, and this year backed it up with great success on hard, clay, and grass (I consider quarterfinals at Wimbledon a good result).

    As for Roddick. Fine, I'll give you that... but he's not the only one. You play the hands you're dealt with, but you will eventually meet up with stronger opponents. Agassi eventually met up with Sampras on occasion, Roddick eventually meets up with Federer on occassion. And I'll admit both those players have many times benefitted with draws that were not immediate head-turners, but I wouldn't their opponents were horrible either. Every player has to play the hand their dealt and sometimes that implies that some will play it great and others won't... Roddick has benefitted from the fact that players in his draw have not played their hands so well. And then there's the factor of "who is hot this week or in these conditions." Some players specialize in the 3 of 5 format with an extra day between matches (grand slam tournaments). Some players have superb hot streaks that are above and beyond their norm for a week or two (I say it's hard to argue that anyone would have beaten Guillermo Canas the week he won Toronto two years ago--not to take away from his normal ability, but he can be a headcase). But of course we're entitled to have opinions about the fairness of such cases, though I say it's a common concept in sports. Heck, I get upset when a player totally lucks out on Poker and goes way against the odds and somehow wins.

    Of course there's always everyone having their own ideas of what's a good opponent. I believe it's about matchups for the most part. Some people refuse to consider any great claycourter as a good player on anything but clay...

    -Chanchai
     
    #17
  18. barry

    barry Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,269
    Chanchai

    Point on Henman is he just came off injury but still won. He lost in the final to Roger Federer, but was able to defeat Roddick.

    I think for Roddick to be number one, it is obvious he will have to alter his style of play. Not only does he lose to Federer, he also lost to Henman another top 10 player. Understand he gets the easier draws and is the last hope for American male tennis these days, but P McEnroe sounds like a cheerleader when Roddick plays. Two ball rally style tennis is not going to get it against the best in the world, which I think everyone agrees Federer is raised the bar.

    I think if Roddick is happy being in the top 10, do not change your game, but the next step will take some work. Remember a player called Borg who never served and volleyed, he won 5 Wimbledon's. Change will make Roddick a more complete player and Gilbert unfortunately is not his long-term savior.
     
    #18
  19. crosscourt

    crosscourt Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,280
    Roddick is the second best player on hard and grass courts. Coria and Federer are the best or second best on clay. I don't know where Roddick is on clay. Maybe top 5.

    Roddick should be downhearted by Toronto. Federer didn't play at his best all week, and was still good enough to win the tournament. He played some exceptional points when he had to, particularly in the game to break Roddick in the second set. Roddick also played some exceptional points in the final.

    I don't think that Roddick's problem is the weaknesses in his game. All players have these, and Federer struggled with some shots all week. Roddick has shown that he has the game to win majors. If you have the gane, its all about the mind. What seems to happen to Roddick is that if Federer gets on top of him, he stops believing that he can beat Federer if Federer plays well. This happened at Wimbledon, when Roddick was 2 sets to 1 down and still had a huge chance of winning the tournament. He seemed to accept that Federer was the better player and, though he kept playing well, seemed to lose that resilience that can be the difference between winning and losing the biggest tournaments. Same thing yesterday. At one point Roddick seemed to want to be almost friendly with Federer on court, as if they were botrh collaborating in a great spectacle. Part of this is what makes him seem so affable, and being a confidence player can be what lets him blow through the draw.

    It reminds me of the Borg/Vilas rivalry. Thet started off as friends, but Borg could always shut that out on court. Vilas couldn't. Eventually, Vilas had to stop being friendly before he could win against Borg.
     
    #19
  20. johnkidd

    johnkidd Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    725
    Maybe the reason Roddick doesn't have many wins over the "Top 10" is because they get knocked out before they play him? Seems to me Roddick has gone deep in every tournament he's played this year except the Italian and French
     
    #20
  21. Swan Song

    Swan Song Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,156
    I guess Andy needs to start drawing cards out in his minds to pick his weapon rather than his normal game plan. I hate to spoil this, but not every man in the world is perfect and that includes Roger Federer, although he plays perfect.
     
    #21
  22. VamosRafa

    VamosRafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    4,202
    Okay, I'm trying not to laugh too much, but this is a bit laughable:

    OMG, I'm stating the obvious. Andy had the No. 1 spot, and finished as No. 1 last year, ahead of Fed.

    Do you even look at the rankings, and see where these guys are placed? :roll:

    So assuming this thread isn't a joke, which it must be, I'm just saying look at where the top guys are placed, and where Andy is vis-a-vis the rest of them.

    Andy has been Top 10 for quite a while. I'd have to check things a bit more, and I'll let you guys crunch numbers, but he obviously was in Houston last year (where he finished No. 1), and the year before he was an alternate for Shanghai -- so he was just about in the Top 10 even then. And that was before he went on his roll last summer, etc.

    So why would anyone think that Andy is Top 10 at best with his current game. He seems Top 2 no problem. :?:

    Yes, there are lots of guys who aren't stepping up to the plate, but they haven't stepped up to it in a while, and why do you think they will step up and move Andy out of the Top 5? Much less, the top 10?

    Let's hear some facts?

    More specifically, I want to hear who should be above Andy and why you think they can realistically get there? And why they haven't? [I don't think the USTA has been able to rig draws so far this calendar year :roll:]

    And we'll just leave Roger out of the equation, as he's more than proved he's No. 1 this year. That's a fact.
     
    #22
  23. speedofpain88

    speedofpain88 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    357
    Like Rafa said where do you come up with this info that Roddick is only top 10? Who are the 8 players that will move ahead of him?
     
    #23

Share This Page