Dimitrov hires a new coach

Vensai

Professional
I'll be interested to see how this works out. And what is with Dimitrov and hiring Federer's old team?
 

marc45

G.O.A.T.
I said here last week that Rasheed is a guy that gets you in shape and makes you more competitive, a better fighting spirit..but there is a reason he only stays a brief while and then is moved on...have to guess he's not a good strategist

all you one hand backhanders should love it, Paul was one and every guy he's coached is one
 

President

Legend
Not convinced that Paul is a fantastic coach/communicator, but we'll see what he can do. I think everyone wants to see Grigor do even better next year.
 

Tshooter

G.O.A.T.
Not convinced that Paul is a fantastic coach/communicator, but we'll see what he can do. I think everyone wants to see Grigor do even better next year.
Yes and yes.

I hope Paul proves me wrong but have there been any instances where Paul has taken someone not already on the GOAT list and made him/her better ?

I'd like to see Gilbert back in business for the laughs and also I think he's a great strategist, which is what Grigor may need. Though I realize a lot of it is the personality matchup and Gilbert not only may not be every players cup of tea it seems that Gilbert likes to be part of the show too. Which may not be what Grigor "showtime" wants or needs.
 
Last edited:

winstonplum

Hall of Fame
No one even congratulated the OP. Did he just scoop all major sports sources? That would be pretty incredible if he did. I don't see it reported anywhere else.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
No one even congratulated the OP. Did he just scoop all major sports sources? That would be pretty incredible if he did. I don't see it reported anywhere else.
Now that you mention it... Matt, sell the footage and information to the media for $$$$ :twisted:
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
Bad move. Annacone wasted Federer's prime years and now he'll destroy career of baby Fed.

Better thing is at least he went for proper coach rather than just a physical trainer.

Ideal coach for Dimitrov is skills based aggressive former retired player like Haas (he has already shown interest), McEnroe, Sampras, Becker, Edberg and many other S&V players from 90's or previous era could help him evolving his all court talent.
 

merlinpinpin

Hall of Fame
Bad move. Annacone wasted Federer's prime years and now he'll destroy career of baby Fed.

Better thing is at least he went for proper coach rather than just a physical trainer.

Ideal coach for Dimitrov is skills based aggressive former retired player like Haas (he has already shown interest), McEnroe, Sampras, Becker, Edberg and many other S&V players from 90's or previous era could help him evolving his all court talent.
I think Magnus Norman could do him a world of good to sort out his mental issues, the way he did with Söderling and Wawrinka. Of course, there is the slight issue of him not being available right now, but definitely a move to consider in the future, imho.
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
I think Magnus Norman could do him a world of good to sort out his mental issues, the way he did with Söderling and Wawrinka. Of course, there is the slight issue of him not being available right now, but definitely a move to consider in the future, imho.
For me early he get rid of Annacone would be better for his career.

Norman is still better Option than Annacone. IMV Norman can help him building his weak ground game especially forehand like he did with Sod, Wawr.
 

Russeljones

G.O.A.T.
For me early he get rid of Annacone would be better for his career.

Norman is still better Option than Annacone. IMV Norman can help him building his weak ground game especially forehand like he did with Sod, Wawr.
I think you're probably considering a different Annacone. Not the one that coached Pete Sampras and Federer.
 

reaper

Legend
Dumping Rasheed is the right thing to do. Not so sure hiring Anacone is right. Anacone played a now dead serve volley/ chip charge style. Still, a change for the better I think.
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
Became world number 1 and won Wimbledon. Unclear whether or not he carried a bad back already. Hard to impress you.
So you mean Annacone is great coach?

Federer was capable of winning more than one slam physically during 2010-12 period. With Annacone Federer was like lottery. He used to play brilliantly but once in 6 months. With Edberg even with advanced age Federer has more consistent results, more wins over top 10. Federer never put focused efforts working on every aspect of his game like he did with Edberg.

Current Federer physically declined but his serve, backhand, volleys are much better and consistent than 2010-12 period
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
Paul Annacone. Confirmed today by Maximagq Inquirer. Reporting live from the University of California at Los Angeles.
HOLW coy this is Huge. paul annacone will make sure Grigor never misses a flight ever again or hotel room is always booked.........................YES
 

Russeljones

G.O.A.T.
So you mean Annacone is great coach?

Federer was capable of winning more than one slam physically during 2010-12 period. With Annacone Federer was like lottery. He used to play brilliantly but once in 6 months. With Edberg even with advanced age Federer has more consistent results, more wins over top 10. Federer never put focused efforts working on every aspect of his game like he did with Edberg.

Current Federer physically declined but his serve, backhand, volleys are much better and consistent than 2010-12 period
Three things become clear from your posts in this thread. You know next to nothing about Annacone's career as a coach and you believe a healthy Federer being better than an injured Federer is due to Edberg being a better coach than Annacone. Last but not least, you forgot this thread is about Dimitrov.
 

D.Nalby12

G.O.A.T.
Three things become clear from your posts in this thread. You know next to nothing about Annacone's career as a coach and you believe a healthy Federer being better than an injured Federer is due to Edberg being a better coach than Annacone. Last but not least, you forgot this thread is about Dimitrov.
Federer wasn't injured in 2010-12 period. Back injury started troubling him at Wimbledon 12? Before that he was healthier and physically stronger than currently he's.

Thread is about Dimitrov but his coach's performance with Federer is matter of discussion.

I can see you have different opinion, let's move on and meet year after to see what developments Annacone has made? I hope I'll prove wrong since Tennis needs new guys to emerge.

My personal opinion is Annacone won't help Dimitrov to evolve his game to level we are expecting. Dimitrov will dump him within year or more.
 

TheCanadian

Semi-Pro
Dimitrov is the next Federer. Today age 26 is the new 18. So, Dimitrov's peak will be age 29-32 and he will start dominating then and winning.
Yes, now late twenties is when players peak, just as squash by the way. Grigor Dimitrov has the best chances of the young players to win slams.
 
L

Laurie

Guest
You know having read all of the posts here I see where some of you guys are coming from. Initially I said it's good and that is still the case. But I also share some of the views of his previous stints.

For instance, I was never satisfied with how Sampras' game went from the late 1990s onwards. I much preferred the Sampras under Tim Gullickson and before that Joe Brandi. Sampras said in his book he resisted Annacone in wanting him to play attacking tennis non stop but in the end he did. He played too quick, didn't demonstrate enough patience too often especially 2000 onwards. One of the plays I disliked the most was jettisoning the tried and trusted running round the backhand to fit big forehands on return of serve in the ad court, which he was extremely good at, for the chip and charge instead, which he was no so good at. I also didn't like the serve volley on both serves on hardcourts because it was totally uneccessary and gave opponents too many targets. The Sampras up to around 1999 was still very much the Gullickson one, and he had more overall success that way. Success really dried up during the attack attack attack 2000 - 2002 period, and his confidence suffered.

Now in Federer's case, I do remember 2012 Wimbledon final was his best tennis for a number of years. One might argue Murray allowed Federer to play that way once he got rid of the nerves. Again, Federer was chip charging the Murray 2nd serve (which does make sense as Murray's 2nd delivery is seriously lacking), and Annacone did help Federer get back to number 1 so must be given credit. But Federer is not quite as attack minded as Sampras and so there might have been confusion in his mind on how best to deal with Annacone's tactical plans.

So really, Annacone's job has to be to strike the right balance, in what he learned from coaching Sampras and Federer. Which is to strike the balance between attacking and defending. Sampras had that good balance for many years and then jettisoned it, Federer enjoys defending probably a little bit more too. Defending is fun as long you can switch defence to attack from time to time.

I think Dimitrov has the capability but one thing he doesn't have for sure, is the Federer and Sampras ability to hit winners at will. Sampras could hit clean winners well behind the baseline off both wings and Federer is one of the very best around the basleine itself not giving ground. So Dimitrov really has to play more up the court like Agassi but be prepared to hit into the corners and attack the net which I think he is good at. And add some more explosiveness to his shots so he can start hitting winners which would make his opponents' more worried when they play him.

This is probably Paul Annacone's last chance with a top player, if he doesn't get Dimitrov to top 5 and into a slam final, his stock will definitely go down and his methods may be deemed outdated. We'll see.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Three things become clear from your posts in this thread. You know next to nothing about Annacone's career as a coach and you believe a healthy Federer being better than an injured Federer is due to Edberg being a better coach than Annacone. Last but not least, you forgot this thread is about Dimitrov.
Sorry, I hate to say it, but I agree with DNalby12. Annacone for me is an overrated coach. He latched onto players who were multiple slam winners already. I did not see a lot of improvement with Roger's game under Annacone and I think Edberg is a much better coach for Roger who should have come on board the Roger train a few years ago. JMO.

Let's see if Annacone is up to the challenge of taking a player who has not won multiple slams for a change and make him slam viable. I have my doubts but then again I have my doubts about Dimitrov in general and how far he can go.

Nothing wrong with different opinions on here, this is a tennis discussion forum.

Is Annacone officially Dimitrov's new coach? I have not seen any confirmation on that.
 
Last edited:

marc45

G.O.A.T.
those who favor Edberg over Paul with Fed might consider two things..

1. as someone earlier said I think Edberg got a healthier Fed

but 2. maybe deep down Fed just didn't respect Paul as a player enough to take his advice which I'm guessing was pretty similar to Stefan's ...those slam wins seem to garner extra respect with these celebrity coaches now coming on board...

remember, the player is the ultimate boss in tennis..he does the hiring, firing, benching etc....and I know statements are released in the press but who knows what goes on with these relationships behind the scenes
 

marc45

G.O.A.T.
and I agree with someone else above, where's the official announcement of this?...I notice Paul is not calling the doubles match at TC today...but we'd all look pretty foolish if this doesn't happen
 
D

Deleted member 307496

Guest
You know having read all of the posts here I see where some of you guys are coming from. Initially I said it's good and that is still the case. But I also share some of the views of his previous stints.

For instance, I was never satisfied with how Sampras' game went from the late 1990s onwards. I much preferred the Sampras under Tim Gullickson and before that Joe Brandi. Sampras said in his book he resisted Annacone in wanting him to play attacking tennis non stop but in the end he did. He played too quick, didn't demonstrate enough patience too often especially 2000 onwards. One of the plays I disliked the most was jettisoning the tried and trusted running round the backhand to fit big forehands on return of serve in the ad court, which he was extremely good at, for the chip and charge instead, which he was no so good at. I also didn't like the serve volley on both serves on hardcourts because it was totally uneccessary and gave opponents too many targets. The Sampras up to around 1999 was still very much the Gullickson one, and he had more overall success that way. Success really dried up during the attack attack attack 2000 - 2002 period, and his confidence suffered.

Now in Federer's case, I do remember 2012 Wimbledon final was his best tennis for a number of years. One might argue Murray allowed Federer to play that way once he got rid of the nerves. Again, Federer was chip charging the Murray 2nd serve (which does make sense as Murray's 2nd delivery is seriously lacking), and Annacone did help Federer get back to number 1 so must be given credit. But Federer is not quite as attack minded as Sampras and so there might have been confusion in his mind on how best to deal with Annacone's tactical plans.

So really, Annacone's job has to be to strike the right balance, in what he learned from coaching Sampras and Federer. Which is to strike the balance between attacking and defending. Sampras had that good balance for many years and then jettisoned it, Federer enjoys defending probably a little bit more too. Defending is fun as long you can switch defence to attack from time to time.

I think Dimitrov has the capability but one thing he doesn't have for sure, is the Federer and Sampras ability to hit winners at will. Sampras could hit clean winners well behind the baseline off both wings and Federer is one of the very best around the basleine itself not giving ground. So Dimitrov really has to play more up the court like Agassi but be prepared to hit into the corners and attack the net which I think he is good at. And add some more explosiveness to his shots so he can start hitting winners which would make his opponents' more worried when they play him.

This is probably Paul Annacone's last chance with a top player, if he doesn't get Dimitrov to top 5 and into a slam final, his stock will definitely go down and his methods may be deemed outdated. We'll see.
I think Sampras' 2000 Wimbledon form was decent enough. His serve and groundgame took a backseat compared to '99 but he was still rather vicious; especially when he attacked a whole lot more.

I get a feeling that Sampras started to compensate for his slowing speed with greater aggression; and that it did not always leave the desired results.
 

Bendex

Professional
Wow, Rasheed needs to change up his training routines, keep things more interesting. These young guys aren't interested in "whatever it takes", apparently.

I hope Rasheed takes on one of the young Australians next.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Well if he is going over tactics with Grigor on what serving strategies he should execute, that must mean something.
As torpantennis says, maybe Dimitrov is consulting with Annacone for a few weeks while Rasheed is in Australia? Maybe Dimitrov is testing Annacone out? Could be a lot of different things.
 

Bendex

Professional
@roger_rasheed · Nov 13
Completing the off season program for @GrigorDimitrov ,I'm frightened for him just reading through what I've in store 4 him when I arrive


Well if Grigor really did fire him, I think we know where Grigor's fight or flight mechanism is at.
 

Lea

New User
Good news, although not official. At least a sign he sees that Roger can not improve his tactics significantly.
 
Top