Going coachless or really not so much coaching

[GotGame?]

Do pros really need a coach?

Federer went coachless last year, and many dogged him for doing so, but it all culminated with winning three out of the four slams, compared to only one so far out of the three already played this year guided by Roche. His playing level clearly showed in his slam losses to Safin and Nadal, IMO Federer was not 100%. Dent has also gone coachless and has been doing well lately.

My theory on this is that pros don't really need a technical coach, but a mental coach like Gilbert. Look what Gilbert did for Roddick, and imagine if someone could make Dent's mindset right. Federer's mentality is already there, and I don't think Roche needs to mess with that or Federer's technical game for that matter, let Federer do this on his own. Not only Federer, but at this level I feel you should only get a technical coach like Roche if you need improvements on your net game such as Roddick, but Federer does not need such drastic improvements, and someone like Gilbert could deal with the few improvements Federer needs, plus bring him a "nasty" mental game coupled with the great mental game he already has.

 

[GotGame?]

Bump... What are your thoughts on this? Has this already been discussed or just plain stupid to discuss?

 

[rhubarb]

I think it depends on the pro. Federer obviously managed pretty well without one for a while, and many of the more experienced players can do the same.

However, I do think Fed has taken on Roche for the technical side, as well as for his experience in the game. Not to do any major remodelling, but just make slight improvements here and there. Does he need any mental strengthening? It's not clear yet, but it might be an issue when his performance starts to fall off. I cannot imagine him ever wanting to work with Brad Gilbert though - if Roddick had problems with him, and Safin refused him, it's difficult to see how a sensitive soul like Federer would get along with Gilbert, or even what Brad could really offer him.

 

[GotGame?]

I think it depends on the pro. Federer obviously managed pretty well without one for a while, and many of the more experienced players can do the same.

However, I do think Fed has taken on Roche for the technical side, as well as for his experience in the game. Not to do any major remodelling, but just make slight improvements here and there. Does he need any mental strengthening? It's not clear yet, but it might be an issue when his performance starts to fall off. I cannot imagine him ever wanting to work with Brad Gilbert though - if Roddick had problems with him, and Safin refused him, it's difficult to see how a sensitive soul like Federer would get along with Gilbert, or even what Brad could really offer him.

Hmm.. What has Roche done for Federer that Federer did not do himself? I think it's up to Federer, but I don't see why he feels he needs the coach. Things come so naturally to Federer, and wouldn't a coach disrupt the flow faster than Federer himself? If Federer could just have anyone drill him, it would keep him straight.

Brad Gilbert was a bad example for Federer, but I still think that Safin's mental game could have benefited from a guy like Gilbert. From what I hear from you, the issues go deeper though.

 

[Max G.]

On the contrary, I don't think Safin would benefit that much from Gilbert.

Gilbert's favorite is the xs and os of the game, as he calls them. Which shots to do when. How to pick a gameplan. It's certainly what Agassi used to need. It's what Roddick needed/needs - help on how to make the most out of his weapons through a gameplan.

That's not so much what Safin needs. Safin's problem isn't that he has a bad gameplan or that he's not picking the right shots - sure that could use some work, he makes some brain cramps, but really his problem between the ears is of a different sort. When he's off, his entire game just falls apart - he just stops making his shots and starts missing them.

I saw one match of his against Taylor Dent earlier this year. It's not like he could have won that by picking a better gameplan - he just needed to STOP F'ING MISSING EASY SHOTS, DAMMIT. It's not like he was even going for too much in that match - it's routine shots he'd miss.

Maybe Gilbert would have indeed helped him get through his French Open match against Robredo. That was close enough.

But I think Gilbert working with Safin would end up frustrating them both.
Gilbert would give Safin instructions as to what to do. Safin would try, and sometimes it would work and Safin would blow people off the court as he sometimes does; and sometimes he'd come out and just not be able to execute the plan. All the planning in the world is useless if you can't execute the shot, which is what happens to Safin...


Or maybe I'm completely wrong and it would help. But it seems to me though that Safin's between-the-ears problems won't be solved by telling him which shot to try when, it's a focus/concentration thing and not a shot selection thing.

 

[GotGame?]

I see your point Max, and I agree. Like you said, Brad can give you the plan, but will it do you any good if you can't execute it? Safin is a good example of a guy who does not need a coach or little coaching; he needs a psychologist.

 

[VictorS.]

Obviously each player has different needs. However I don't think there's any doubt that a top 10 player in today's game definitely needs a supporting cast which can include coaches, trainers, massage therapists, friends, family, etc. The coach obviously plays a major role in most cases. However, Federer is a very unique individual. He obviously is a very intelligent player who knows his strengths and weaknesses...not to mention he possesses a talent for tennis which is off the charts.

However, I think guys like Roddick and Hewitt would falter without a coach because they rely so heavily on the moral support which their respective coaches bring. Roddick really needs a guy who believes in him. It's obvious in the number of times he checks in the stands for his coach's approval. Federer on the other hand rarely looks to his box.

 

[devila]

That doesn't mean that the coaches helped Roddick much. He hasn't done much and he's only interested in going to TV shows and advertising sponsors/charities/exhibitions. Winning is not a big priority. Look at his body language and constant butt kissing. Asinine attitude.

 

[Deuce]

The term 'coach' is actually quite misleading.

The main function of a coach is to take care of the 'little things' - like reserving practice courts, arranging practice partners, ensuring that the player gets the food he wants when he wants it, and that the transport is on time, etc.

Once every 4 months or so, a coach may spot a little kink, or flaw, in the player's stroke, or movement, and come up with a valid and useful technical suggestion - but, apart from these isolated incidents, the pros know what they're doing right and what they're doing wrong in the technical department.

Also, as 'GotGame?' mentioned, a coach can help with the 'strategic' aspect - as Gilbert obviously did with Roddick.

Most of all, though, the coach is like the player's own personal 'security blanket'.

 

[devila]

What great thing did Gilbert do? Roddick won A FEW touranments because the quality of his matches were mediocre. He certainly didn't have practice partners who made him better. As last year, he learned nothing and felt no desire to win in each event. He let his fitness worsen.
He was raised to be fake. He keeps putting himself down. No wonder he doesn't care a lot.
Roddick said, "I just kind of fly by the seat of my pants out there and (Dean Goldfine)'s a real thinker. http://www.statesman.com/sports/content/sports/stories/other/07/30roddick.html

 

[Rickson]

I see your point Max, and I agree. Like you said, Brad can give you the plan, but will it do you any good if you can't execute it? Safin is a good example of a guy who does not need a coach or little coaching; he needs a psychologist.

Psychology is voodoo medicine and has no merit. Safin needs to work on his mental strategy, yes, but he doesn't need to see someone who was taught that all girls have penis envy and that all boys want to sleep with their mothers.

 

[ctbmar]

Roche coached the Mean Father Machine of all modern era's tennis players....LENDL...when Lendl was at his peak, he thrash everyone and had winning records against mcenroe, sampras, agassi, conners, wilander, edberg, becker. His mental is one of the best ever, his strokes were always mechanical but very consistent, but his style and personality was not so appealing to an average fan. Roche also trained Lendl to volley decently. So Federer can be trained by Roche to be even stronger mentality, more consistent, more deadly with his forehand, and also improve his volley techniques and hand-eye coordination. Federer is really spot-on with Roche. Roche is Australian, and there are many good serve-&-volleyers in his generation, so he can impart Federer with "old school" or classic volley strategies & techniques that may have been lost in the 80s, 90s...What I am saying is, when person no. #1 teaches person no. #2, who later teaches the same stuff to no. #3, then no. #3 teaches no. 4....until 30 to 40 years later, no. #10 may only learn 10% of what the original person no. #1 has taught. So Federer is making a wise choice by seeking advice from someone at least 4 generations older than himself.