|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 2,621
|
Just wondered......
I sometimes have wondered whether players who are naturals, make for poorer coaches. Things come so easily for them, they would 't know how to articulate something to pass onto others. Whereas players who had to struggle, had to learn bit by bit can convey the components much more readily because they have had to reflect on them a lot more. Top coaches - roche, cahill, gilbert, annacone - guys who were very good players but not quite at the top. Just a theory. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,731
|
Coach in tennis is not comparable to being coach in soccer or other team sports. The coach is a secondary figure who is paid by and depending on his pupil. Exception is the captain in Davis Cup, where dominant people like Hopman, Talbert, Noah or Pilic come to mind. I think really great players wouldn't risk their name by being hired and fired by a single player. Of course some exceptions like Connors or Lendl do exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,318
|
Quote:
__________________
"I can cry like Roger, it’s just a shame I can’t play like him." - Andy Murray |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Professional
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 869
|
Quote:
In basketball we have the likes of Jackson, Riley, Auerbach and Popovich, none of whom would make the HoF on their resume as a player alone, in fact quite the opposite in the latter two's cases. Stefanki is the Phil Jackson of tennis, the kind of coach who helps players who are close to breaking through realize their full potential. But I'm not as impressed with his success over the long term. That's where Phil has him beat (and perhaps all the others). |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
||||||
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|