Brad Gilbert

FedForGOAT

Professional
Brad Gilbert is an amazing coach. He has good strategies and varieties which led to the rise of many of his desciples (Roddick, Murray, Agassi). He used many of those strategies himself, "winning ugly" and rising to #4 on the ranking.

Nowadays, Andy Roddick has struggled and was widely criticized for his one-dimensional game.

Brad gilbert didn't have any major weapons (no amazing fh, no amazing bh, no incredible footspeed) but he was able to keep the ball in play by hitting it high and deep and and stopped great players from hitting winners.

I was thinking: if Gilbert w/o weapons could do so well, why can't roddick w/great serve+fh? i mean roddick is fairly adept at keeping the ball in play, so how does fed hit so many winners against him?

Does anyone know what roddick should do? Gilbert was obviously onto something, as roddick became world #1 under him.

Sorry this is kinda vague, i couldn't phrase it better.
 

LarougeNY

Professional
Brad Gilbert is an amazing coach. He has good strategies and varieties which led to the rise of many of his desciples (Roddick, Murray, Agassi). He used many of those strategies himself, "winning ugly" and rising to #4 on the ranking.

Nowadays, Andy Roddick has struggled and was widely criticized for his one-dimensional game.

Brad gilbert didn't have any major weapons (no amazing fh, no amazing bh, no incredible footspeed) but he was able to keep the ball in play by hitting it high and deep and and stopped great players from hitting winners.

I was thinking: if Gilbert w/o weapons could do so well, why can't roddick w/great serve+fh? i mean roddick is fairly adept at keeping the ball in play, so how does fed hit so many winners against him?

Does anyone know what roddick should do? Gilbert was obviously onto something, as roddick became world #1 under him.

Sorry this is kinda vague, i couldn't phrase it better.


Roddicks most recent loss can definitely be blamed, at least partially, on his knee injury and thus his movement. Don't think I'm a supporter, because I really don't like roddicks game, but he is a good player. His best days are behind him though, especially with the rise of the new younger players and the continuing reign of the two kings.
 
Roddick chooses to not be coached by Brad Gilbert anymore. He played his best ever tennis under Gilbert, and fired him in a foolish knee jerk reaction to not winning a slam in 2004. He has payed the consequences since and his stock has fallen much further down. If he had stayed with Brad he might have been on his way to winning 4-5 slams. The tennis he played in 2004 was still an extremely high level despite not winning another slam that year, he was still on the right track overall. It has been downhill since then, and Goldfine ruined his game in many ways, I am sure his intentions were good but he turned out to have the wrong idea how to tamper with Roddicks game. Connors is doing a pretty good job, but Roddick has lost too much ground since leaving Gilbert, and with guys like Nadal and Djokovic emerging.
 

Fedace

Banned
^^Ok roddick became #1 before Federer came into his prime. Roddick is just not as good as federer, and he is slow, so fed can hit winners past him all day long.
 

Azzurri

Legend
I can't believe he got to 4th in the world. Amazing considering it was 1990. Think about all the great players at that time.

playerprofiles


Awfull picture, but check his head/head with Sampras and Agassi...it will surprise you.

Man, he was 1-29 against Mac and Lendl.

I'm startin a new thread. Who's better Mac/Lendl or Pete/Andre.
 
Last edited:

Rhino

Legend
If he had stayed with Brad he might have been on his way to winning 4-5 slams.

I don't think so. He managed to just sneak a quick slam in before Federer assumed total dominance. That was his window, and he maximised it. I don't think Brad or anyone else could have coached him to another slam after Fed became #1.
 
I don't think so. He managed to just sneak a quick slam in before Federer assumed total dominance. That was his window, and he maximised it. I don't think Brad or anyone else could have coached him to another slam after Fed became #1.

You might be right. However in 2004 he still showed potential to threaten Federer, the Wimbledon final for example. I just think his game went in the wrong direction under Goldfine, once he left Brad.
 

Leelord337

Hall of Fame
I can't believe he got to 4th in the world. Amazing considering it was 1990. Think about all the great players at that time.

playerprofiles


Awfull picture, but check his head/head with Sampras and Agassi...it will surprise you.

Man, he was 1-29 against Mac and Lendl.

I'm startin a new thread. Who's better Mac/Lendl or Pete/Andre.

lol, brad gilbert's face from this link should be somebody's avatar
 

Rhino

Legend
You might be right. However in 2004 he still showed potential to threaten Federer, the Wimbledon final for example. I just think his game went in the wrong direction under Goldfine, once he left Brad.

I guess we'll never know, but I hear a lot of what-if's and nearlys, and could-have's when people talk about Roddick.
What if Nalbandian had've converted that match point in the 2003 US Open semifinal? Sometimes I think Roddicks been lucky not unlucky.
 

RoddickistheMan

Professional
Imo Roddicks biggest career mistake was not rehiring gilbert. He went one year without a gs so he ditched arguably one of the greatest coaches of our era. Gilbert made roddick a winning machine. Huge forehand huge serve perfect one two punch. Now all roddick has is his serve and a mediocre forehand. Im a biut hard on roddick because I know what hes capable of. Roddick's court intellect clearly isnt one of his strengths either, but gilbert made up for that with his great insight for the game.
________
Honda cb400 history
 
Last edited:
Imo Roddicks biggest career mistake was not rehiring gilbert. He went one year without a gs so he ditched arguably one of the greatest coaches of our era. Gilbert made roddick a winning machine. Huge forehand huge serve perfect one two punch. Now all roddick has is his serve and a mediocre forehand. Im a biut hard on roddick because I know what hes capable of. Roddick's court intellect clearly isnt one of his strengths either, but gilbert made up for that with his great insight for the game.

That is what I feel too. It was a knee jerk reaction to not winning a slam in 2004, and it was a big mistake.
 

FedForGOAT

Professional
I can't believe he got to 4th in the world. Amazing considering it was 1990. Think about all the great players at that time.

playerprofiles


Awfull picture, but check his head/head with Sampras and Agassi...it will surprise you.

Man, he was 1-29 against Mac and Lendl.

I'm startin a new thread. Who's better Mac/Lendl or Pete/Andre.

I noticed that, too. I guess it kind of makes sense, because he emerged and played them when they were at their primes. also, his tactic which frustrated other pros, matched up poorly against Mac and lendl. His keeping the ball in play wouldn't disturb lendl and his fitness+topspin as he would outlast him and make less errors. it would be very hard for him to consistently keep the ball in play by making passing shots, given mac's fine volley game.

I think that explains why he's 1-13 against Mac, and 0-16 against Lendl.
 

edmondsm

Legend
^^Ok roddick became #1 before Federer came into his prime. Roddick is just not as good as federer, and he is slow, so fed can hit winners past him all day long.

You are correct sir. Federer showed in the O4 Wimbledon final that he could handle Roddick even on Andy's best day with little trouble. I do think however that Roddick might have faired better against Federer had he stayed with Brad Gilbert.
 

LarougeNY

Professional
You are correct sir. Federer showed in the O4 Wimbledon final that he could handle Roddick even on Andy's best day with little trouble. I do think however that Roddick might have faired better against Federer had he stayed with Brad Gilbert.

to be fair, federer did struggle at times. It was a close match, their second closest behind the masters cup last year.

And you really think Roddick would've done better with gilbret? His closest match with Fed was when he had conners, and he's been playing far better with conners.

Gilbert got lucky in his career, agassi had so much talent that he barely needed gilbert's guidance. Gilbert's got more talk than walk if you know what I mean.
 
to be fair, federer did struggle at times. It was a close match, their second closest behind the masters cup last year.

Actually it was their 3rd toughest match, behind the toughest for Federer which was a LOSS to Roddick in the Rogers Cup semis 4 years ago, and then 2nd toughest the Masters Cup last year.
So under Gilbert Roddick had his 1st and 3rd most successful matches ever with Federer, under Connors his 2nd most successful. A win> a near win.


And you really think Roddick would've done better with gilbret? His closest match with Fed was when he had conners

Incorrect. Roddick's only ever WIN over Federer was with Connor's. As for the closest grand slam match, Roddick-Federer 2004 Wimbledon final was closer then Roddick-Federer 2005 U.S Open final.

and he's been playing far better with conners.

Is that why he has dropped to #5 in the world below Nikolay Davydenko, has losses to David Ferrer and Fabrice Santoro on hard courts this year, and has only 1 win over a top 10 opponent this year that wasnt due to retirement (Ivan Ljubicic, then #8, and no longer in the top 10).

Gilbert got lucky in his career, agassi had so much talent that he barely needed gilbert's guidance. Gilbert's got more talk than walk if you know what I mean.

If Agassi had so much talent that the coach was irrelevant, Agassi would not have had his 3 best years ever-1994, 1995, and 1999 under Gilbert. Why could he not win so much with Bolleteri, also a highly respected coach, if Gilbert was just along for the ride. Gilbert helped get him in peak physical condition, and helped him understand the game and how to use his gifts most effectively. Gilbert did a brilliant job with Agassi, and was doing so with Roddick too until he was fired IMO.
 
Last edited:

LarougeNY

Professional
Actually it was their 3rd toughest match, behind the toughest for Federer which was a LOSS to Roddick in the Rogers Cup semis 4 years ago, and then 2nd toughest the Masters Cup last year.
So under Gilbert Roddick had his 1st and 3rd most successful matches ever with Federer, under Connors his 2nd most successful. A win> a near win.




Incorrect. Roddick's only ever WIN over Federer was with Connor's. As for the closest grand slam match, Roddick-Federer 2004 Wimbledon final was closer then Roddick-Federer 2005 U.S Open final.



Is that why he has dropped to #5 in the world below Nikolay Davydenko, has losses to David Ferrer and Fabrice Santoro on hard courts this year, and has only 1 win over a top 10 opponent this year that wasnt due to retirement (Ivan Ljubicic, then #8, and no longer in the top 10).



If Agassi had so much talent that the coach was irrelevant, Agassi would not have had his 3 best years ever-1994, 1995, and 1999 under Gilbert. Why could he not win so much with Bolleteri, also a highly respected coach, if Gilbert was just along for the ride. Gilbert helped get him in peak physical condition, and helped him understand the game and how to use his gifts most effectively. Gilbert did a brilliant job with Agassi, and was doing so with Roddick too until he was fired IMO.


Ok, for the sake of agrument I'll respond. But I don't know how to do that fancy work you do with the quotes.


I. Yes you're right, but the circumstances were quite different. When we're talking about close matches, I mean matches when Federer became who he is, the no.1 which happened at the beginning of 04. In 03, especially at the Rogers Cup, Roddick was on fire and was outplaying almost everybody. It was after the open that he got his no.1 ranking. And, Roddick was much closer to winning (he essentially won, had 3 matchpoints) under conners, the only reason he didn't win being Federer's majestic playing under pressure. He did beat federer pre-aus open, which I'm sure they both played seriously in even though it was an exo.

II. You've probably realized that Roddick has dealt with some injuries this year, keeping him out of tournaments and causing him to depart early out of them therefore losing points and not winning matches. Besides, in all fairness, Davydenko is the better player, more consistent although without a slam.


III. Yes my comment about that was somewhat misinformed. Gilbert worked wonders with agassi and rios, but I was correct in saying they were extremely talented. Roddick, apart from that shotgun of a shoulder, isn't nearly as up there as andre or rios. Besides, there's been an improvement (however ephemeral) with many players when they first get a coach (nalbandian in recent memory, gonzales as well) and so its perfectly logical that he played his best tennis in that temporary state when he was playing well under gilbert.
 

Leelord337

Hall of Fame
Has anybody ever noticed that there are no other players on the ATP tour with the last names of:

Agassi, Sampras, Federer, Nadal, Edberg, and many more former greats
 

RoddickistheMan

Professional
to be fair, federer did struggle at times. It was a close match, their second closest behind the masters cup last year.

And you really think Roddick would've done better with gilbret? His closest match with Fed was when he had conners, and he's been playing far better with conners.

Gilbert got lucky in his career, agassi had so much talent that he barely needed gilbert's guidance. Gilbert's got more talk than walk if you know what I mean.

Not true look at what he has done with murray so far. He is a genius when it comes to getting the most out of players. Murray will be in the top 5 next season hands down. he has a game that fairs well on all surfaces. Wouldnt be surprised if he makes it to multiple semis and maybe even a final.
________
BUY VAPORMATIC
 
Last edited:
Top