Is Alcaraz disproportionately benefiting from coaching?

power_backhand said:
First of all, his coach is a former number one and has a much better understanding of tennis.
Click to expand...
The most sucessfull coaches havent necessarily played on a top level.
Toni Nadal, Severin Lüthi prove you wrong and even people like Marian Vajda and Peter Lundgren were not that good. Lets not talk about Nick Bollettieri, Patrick Mouratouglou or even Günther Bresnik.

Fact is there are players that like to be coached on court and the ones that dont. The ones that like it always found a way. That starts with youth tournaments without umpires and cameras and ends with hidden signals on tour .
 
Arak said:
Some players get distracted and lose their focus with constant coaching. Alcaraz seems to be well receptive to coaching and able to implement the instructions.
Click to expand...
That’s true.

He is very pliable and easy to coach. There is something else to note and that is coaches can see and feel if their player is in tune with them. I think it’s an essential part of any successful coach and player relationship.

A good example of this is the number of coaches that Radacanu has gone through in her brief career. I think most people feel she needs stability and this constant changing of coaches can only undermine her development as a player. She needs to find the right fit.
 
Atleast his coach is good. Could have Brad Gilbert telling you not to attack a second serve that’s averaging 65 mph …. In the case of Coco gauff lol
 
The two things that’s stopping me from completely getting onboard with Alcaraz is his constant two way chatter with the coaching box. And the second, is that awful awful borderline hindrance level grunting he does after hitting the ball.
 
Krish0608 said:
The two things that’s stopping me from completely getting onboard with Alcaraz is his constant two way chatter with the coaching box. And the second, is that awful awful borderline hindrance level grunting he does after hitting the ball.
Click to expand...
And his constant celebrations after every single point.
 
Eureka said:
I do not support coaching during play. It was disappointing that the ATP allowed it. However, coaching took place during matches by some despite being illegal before the rule change. At that time it was tantamount to cheating.

Players with integrity, such as Federer, did not engage in it but several of his rivals did.
That was unfair and I can see how, by making it legal, it becomes an option for all players. In this regard it is a level playing field.

The premise of this thread is flawed. CA cannot dictate which player's coach should give coaching and if that player's coach is silent that is a matter for him. Quite why this is somehow deemed CA's fault / to state the lack of coachng by the opponent's coach is unfair beause CA's coach does his job and they don't is just nonsense.

Does coaching make CA the outstanding player that he is? No. Would it make HH less prone to losing matches? No. Could it assist players regarding tactics during a match? Possibly.

If being a great player is about doing what your coach says during a match there would be a flood of great players. There is no flood. The fact is that this thread raises a red herring. Happy fishing.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t have put it better.
 
But it's legal, if Alcaraz is working within the rules, and everyone else has access to their coaches, I don't see a problem.

As long as it is even playing field. Alcaraz actually stated that Ferrero was giving him incorrect information for the semis because he kept on giving the wrong feedback on where HH was going to serve on all those BPs. It doesn't always help.
 
Vincent-C said:
Tennis is not one of those other sports, alas. It's supposed to be a *solo effort*; that's a big part of its appeal to me,
and one reason I particularly admire the Great Man Federer, who rarely even looked toward his box. Bravo ("literally").
Click to expand...

At the college level, I got coached so much during matches I occasionally wanted to smack a ball at mine.
It was only when the ATP/ITF decided it was an unfair advantage to lower ranked players(specifically outside the top 10) that it was banned.
Like most things, it was kinda sorta banned at first, but then we just got used to it. Like speed limit laws and taxes.
It had nothing to do with the 'solo effort' in their decision at the time.
Unlike in college, where your coach drags YOU around, in pro tennis you pay for that dude, and you pay a lot.
One of the main reasons they allowed it back is the top players and coaches were outright cheating the rule. So the top players and the best coaches we're cheating for a further advantage.
Basically, in practice it was even worse than banning coaching. So it's back, baby.
 
I think it's a disservice to the player in the long run, sometimes you need to learn to work things out for yourself, especially in a non-slam/lower stakes tournament, Ferrero should keep his trap shut and let Carlos grow as a player.
 
The effectiveness of coaching during a match is overrated.
It's not like they don't study their opponents beforehand. And a player doesn't just change completely during or for a specific match.
There aren't that many things you can tell a player when he already knows who he's playing. This is not a 1980s sports film where the genius-yet-troubled coach finds a magical formula or a weak spot in the opponent that ultimately defeats him.
 
weakera said:
I think it's a disservice to the player in the long run, sometimes you need to learn to work things out for yourself, especially in a non-slam/lower stakes tournament, Ferrero should keep his trap shut and let Carlos grow as a player.
Click to expand...
also JCF is perpetuating a facade that his constant coaching gets noticed and is perceived as needed, probably building up his own credentials
Eureka said:
I do not support coaching during play. It was disappointing that the ATP allowed it. However, coaching took place during matches by some despite being illegal before the rule change. At that time it was tantamount to cheating.

Players with integrity, such as Federer, did not engage in it but several of his rivals did.
That was unfair and I can see how, by making it legal, it becomes an option for all players. In this regard it is a level playing field.

The premise of this thread is flawed. CA cannot dictate which player's coach should give coaching and if that player's coach is silent that is a matter for him. Quite why this is somehow deemed CA's fault / to state the lack of coachng by the opponent's coach is unfair beause CA's coach does his job and they don't is just nonsense.

Does coaching make CA the outstanding player that he is? No. Would it make HH less prone to losing matches? No. Could it assist players regarding tactics during a match? Possibly.

If being a great player is about doing what your coach says during a match there would be a flood of great players. There is no flood. The fact is that this thread raises a red herring. Happy fishing.
Click to expand...

Rattie said:
Couldn’t have put it better.
Click to expand...
a while ago, saw heated debates on twitter that the rule change is to benefit Alcaraz.
couple of questions to you both on this matter:
do you think there is a constant barrage from JCF or it's being exaggerated?
if it's not needed, why are they persisting with it, despite getting tagged on these accusations?
[even saw clips of Alcaraz yelling where should I serve, tell me, tell me]
 
So because Juan Carlos Ferrero is an effective coach with Alcaraz who is a good player who takes what he says and adjusts etc.. it's unfair? c'mon. Hubi may not want coaching or it doesnt work for him, everyone has their own way of doing things...
 
JustMy2Cents said:
also JCF is perpetuating a facade that his constant coaching gets noticed and is perceived as needed, probably building up his own credentials



a while ago, saw heated debates on twitter that the rule change is to benefit Alcaraz.
couple of questions to you both on this matter:
do you think there is a constant barrage from JCF or it's being exaggerated?
if it's not needed, why are they persisting with it, despite getting tagged on these accusations?
[even saw clips of Alcaraz yelling where should I serve, tell me, tell me]
Click to expand...
Well I certainly hear him a lot although I don’t speak Spanish so I’ve no idea what he’s saying. There is a lot of ‘Vamos’ which isn’t much more than encouragement. Coaches aren’t infallible, apparently he was telling Carlos where Hubie would be serving and getting it wrong all the time. Culturally the Spanish tend to be very vocal, just listen to their rapid and animated commentary as an example, so I think that’s also a factor.

All coaches have the opportunity to talk to their players and advise them, if others don’t bother using that for whatever reason, that’s their choice. Whatever a coach tells a player on the court, it’s up to the player to execute it, if they can and they don’t always have to listen or agree. I don’t think it gives a player some kind of advantage when their opponent has access to the same options.
 
weakera said:
I think it's a disservice to the player in the long run, sometimes you need to learn to work things out for yourself, especially in a non-slam/lower stakes tournament, Ferrero should keep his trap shut and let Carlos grow as a player.
Click to expand...
Which is the case periodically. JCF wasn't in Toronto. He was neither at Queens nor at Miami last year. Also he wasn't there in at least one of the South American tournaments earlier this year.

Alcaraz is more than fine by himself.
 
Grizzy said:
Well she finally beat Swiatek so maybe there was something to it...
Click to expand...
Don’t be fooled. Swiatek made so many unforced errors. Coco served well but cocos not attacking Swiateks weak serve yesterday really kept iga in the match. Brad Gilbert wanted her to shape the ball instead of attack a weak second serve.
Coco is still young but she doesn’t lack power. She needs to build confidence to attack balls especially on her forehand side.
 
power_backhand said:
I've never liked allowing coaching. It seems to me like Alcaraz is benefiting much more than his rivals (Sinner, Hurkacz, Tsitsipas, etc) from coaching. First of all, his coach is a former number one and has a much better understanding of tennis. Secondly, his coach talks to Alcaraz WAY more than the other coaches, especially on critical points and Alcaraz actually listens. The Hurcacz match today is a perfect example. In the second set tiebreak, Alcaraz is getting coaching after every point from Juan Carlos. And on Hurkacz's side, not a word. Alcaraz comes back and wins. Clearly, Juan Carlos is telling him to play to the Hurcacz forehand. I don't like how coaching benefits the more coachable player with a better coach. Hurcacz would have absolutely won that set if there was no coaching.
Click to expand...
Rules are the same for both. If Hurkacz's coach wants to talk, he can. Different players. Different methods.
 
Look, I am spaniard and I can tell you that 90% of Ferrero’s chats with Alcaraz are like : come on , stay strong. ...Use your head... make him work for it now. That kind of stuff, not really tactics .Against Paul he was reminding Carlos to get a higher Contact point on his serve and also not to throw the ball Up in the air so much in front of him though.
 
Last edited:
power_backhand said:
. First of all, his coach is a former number one and has a much better understanding of tennis ................Alcaraz actually listens. ...................I don't like how coaching benefits the more coachable player with a better coach
Click to expand...

I won't comment on the stuff I left out however these 3 objections are ridiculous.
 
Leonidas said:
Look, I am spaniard and I can tell you that 90% of Ferrero’s chats with Alcaraz are like : come on , stay strong. ...Use your head... make him work for it now. That kind of stuff, not really tactics .Against Paul he was reminding Carlos to get a higher Contact point on his serve and also not to throw the ball Up in the air so much in front of him though.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. So 90% encouragement which is the impression I got. The rest is no different to what other coaches do.
 
power_backhand said:
I've never liked allowing coaching...Alcaraz is benefiting much more than his rivals... First of all, his coach is a former number one and has a much better understanding of tennis.
Click to expand...
I don't like it either but its perfectly legal and isn't going away. Your remark about JFC having an advantage because he's a former #1 is utterly ridiculous. JFC was #1 for 8 weeks.

Using your logic, Connors should have been a fabulously successful coach since he was #1 for 268 weeks, but his coaching attempts with Roddick and Sharapova were disastrous. Agassi was #1 for 101 weeks and his coaching of Djokovic was also a failure. The past career or success of a tennis coach is immaterial. Roger never won a slam under Edberg, for instance.
 
Eureka said:
I do not support coaching during play. It was disappointing that the ATP allowed it. However, coaching took place during matches by some despite being illegal before the rule change. At that time it was tantamount to cheating.

Players with integrity, such as Federer, did not engage in it but several of his rivals did.
That was unfair and I can see how, by making it legal, it becomes an option for all players. In this regard it is a level playing field.

The premise of this thread is flawed. CA cannot dictate which player's coach should give coaching and if that player's coach is silent that is a matter for him. Quite why this is somehow deemed CA's fault / to state the lack of coachng by the opponent's coach is unfair beause CA's coach does his job and they don't is just nonsense.

Does coaching make CA the outstanding player that he is? No. Would it make HH less prone to losing matches? No. Could it assist players regarding tactics during a match? Possibly.

If being a great player is about doing what your coach says during a match there would be a flood of great players. There is no flood. The fact is that this thread raises a red herring. Happy fishing.
Click to expand...
I think you made good points. I’m talking about that particular tie break of alcaraz and hurcacz. I was enjoying the match up until about 4-2 in the tiebreak where it became obvious to me that coaching seemed to be having an impact on the match. I was annoyed by the constant coaching for one side. Yea, it seemed unfair as I watched because alcaraz was getting out played both mentally and tennis wise up to that point. My opinion is that he would have probably lost that tiebreak and the match if there was no coaching. And yes, having the coaching rule can be abused during big points. It can distract and intimidate the other player, especially if he doesn’t have as good of a coach. It is possible there could be a selection effect for “coachable” players during matches at the top of the game in the future . Alcaraz, to me is by far the best at soliciting advice from and listening to his coach during matches out of the top next gen players. I do understand that most of JCs comments are motivational, but it did *seem* to have an effect in this match.
 
Last edited:
BeatlesFan said:
I don't like it either but its perfectly legal and isn't going away. Your remark about JFC having an advantage because he's a former #1 is utterly ridiculous. JFC was #1 for 8 weeks.

Using your logic, Connors should have been a fabulously successful coach since he was #1 for 268 weeks, but his coaching attempts with Roddick and Sharapova were disastrous. Agassi was #1 for 101 weeks and his coaching of Djokovic was also a failure. The past career or success of a tennis coach is immaterial. Roger never won a slam under Edberg, for instance.
Click to expand...
Hmm… I’m not sure if that’s ridiculous. He understands what alcaraz needs to do at 4-2 in the tie break and can convey that more effectively than the opposing players coach. It’s not just that he was a former number one player. There are other factors. He’s also smart and an effective communicator. But it plays a role. Enjoy the djokovic final. Will be exciting to see if JCF continues point by point coaching on the big moments!
 
socallefty said:
Pro tennis is entertainment. So, if coaching improves the quality of the tennis, it improves the quality of the entertainment. I used to be more traditional and be against it due to thinking of tennis as a 1-1 gladiatorial contest. But, then I watch young pros who don’t know how to strategize, make adjustments etc. and it is frustrating to watch them play the same way and consistently lose to more experienced players. Now, I am in favor of on-court coaching and maybe it will help younger players displace the established pros faster which will make pro tennis matches more interesting for me.
Click to expand...
If coaching helped to get Alcaraz in the final against Djokovic, then that is a good thing for me as a fan. Seeing #1 vs #2 on a fast and bouncy court is something we haven’t seen in a final in a while. We’ve seen the two play on clay and grass at the Slams - let‘s see what happens on a fast hard court.
 
power_backhand said:
Hmm… I’m not sure if that’s ridiculous. He understands what alcaraz needs to do at 4-2 in the tie break and can convey that more effectively than the opposing players coach. It’s not just that he was a former number one player. There are other factors. He’s also smart and an effective communicator. But it plays a role. Enjoy the djokovic final. Will be exciting to see if JCF continues point by point coaching on the big moments!
Click to expand...
At 4-2 in the TB, Hurkacz was caught out late on an 82mph second serve resulting in a short return that Carlos put away for a winner. Isn’t that a result of a Hurkacz error rather than JCF’s input?
You are right though, lots of chatter from JCF in the TB. I guess I just think that if Hurkacz’s coach has nothing to say to Hubie at that point, that’s on him.
 
A player has to be coachable and willing to take on advice & directions and execute it afterwards. JCF was with Zverev for a while and that amounted to nothing because JCF wasn't impressed with Z's work ethic.
all these top players can afford to hire the best minds, they can also utilize the rule to their benefits, stop ****ting on a team that makes things work???
Even Goran yaps on the bench as well and you'd think Djokovic is above needing any assistance.
 
At this level, players can literally afford any coaching they want, so it’s not a question of access (and therefore fairness). If player #1 doesn’t benefit from coaching as much as player #2, it’s player #1’s fault or to player #2’s credit.
 
Last edited:
drvil said:
A player has to be coachable and willing to take on advice & directions and execute it afterwards. JCF was with Zverev for a while and that amounted to nothing because JCF wasn't impressed with Z's work ethic.
all these top players can afford to hire the best minds, they can also utilize the rule to their benefits, stop ****ting on a team that makes things work???
Even Goran yaps on the bench as well and you'd think Djokovic is above needing any assistance.
Click to expand...
It’s not ****ting on a team. It’s more observing the effect of the recent addition of coaching to the men’s game. It benefits certain players and teams. It’s not going to ever benefit hurcacz or sinner as much as alcaraz because of their personalities. They simply aren’t going to be able to match alcaraz in on court coaching point to point unless they receive specific training to do so. As close as there matches are with alacaraz, it could have a real effect on who will win these big matches.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, well, I don’t really like allowed coaching, but there’s no unfairness there. Every player is allowed the same coaching. If Alcaraz is benefiting more, that’s because he’s being smarter to have a better coach and listen to him
 
Agree. Why didn’t the ATP stick with the system of coaching on change overs? They can limit to it to three sessions per match or something like this. Coaching from the stands just seems like a hindrance and can easily be abused.
 
Somehow you don't say much about Djokovic's coaching. NON STOP chatter after point. They were telling him what to do. Every point. This was Apostolos multiplied 10 times. Not Goran. The other guy. Don't know his name.

Ferrero was just egging him on. Hardly any coaching.
 
I remember the Canada Open match where Ferrero wasn't present, Alcaraz was like a different player, he was clueless about what to do and there were plenty of frustration throughout the match.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Humble Crumble
Sinner v Alcaraz coaching
Replies
3
Views
291
Humble Crumble
Humble Crumble
Tranqville
Team Alcaraz deserves huge credit
Replies
1
Views
413
WeekendTennisHack
WeekendTennisHack
intrepidish
Ferrero made the best coaching upgrade: from Zverev to Alcaraz, & it looks better every day
Replies
19
Views
1K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
Rurumania
How much credit does Ferrero deserve for Alcaraz rise?
Replies
12
Views
798
serbiavic
serbiavic
M
The Arrogance of Alcaraz is and will be his undoing
3 4 5
Replies
215
Views
10K
Gary Duane
Gary Duane
Back
Top