Is Lendl the most overrated coach of all time?

Yes of course I am a Red Star fan. Why on earth would I be a Partizan fan?? ;)

Completely re-energises a team?? Football is different from Tennis you cannot compare. Fernando Santos worked for two years with this Portugal team before they became champions of Europe. Luis Enrique had an average season first half of the season with Barca when they went on to win the Treble in 2015. These things don't generally happen straight away. Leicester had a whole pre-season of hard work before they won the EPL

Yeah. That would be like supporting Celtic....

Respectfully disagree mate. I think all pro sportspeople play their best when they are at their most confident. Ivan imbues confidence in Andy is my thesis. I can't 'prove' it of course, but it's my tuppence worth.
 
Yeah. That would be like supporting Celtic....

Respectfully disagree mate. I think all pro sportspeople play their best when they are at their most confident. Ivan imbues confidence in Andy is my thesis. I can't 'prove' it of course, but it's my tuppence worth.
Okay. Atleast we can respectfully agree to disagree. I am not arguing he didn't improve Murrays game in 12-13. But I am not sure he will this time. I don't think Murray is that much of a worse player now besides his IMO mental problem against Djokovic.
 
Yes, you don't need factual basis to claim something but myths like weak era. I know, I know!
Find me one post when I said it was a fact. Go. Cause otherwise you're trying to disprove my OPINIONS based on facts which is nonsense.
 
Last edited:
Becker and Edberg's coaching is obvious to see as it is to do with serve, volley and tactics respectively.

Lendl's is more on the mental side and also making him believe he can play attacking tennis when needed and more confidence in second serves.

Becker does deserve a lot of credit in Novak's success. His serve has improved 200% since Becker. Becker has provided enough help for all the room service that Novak provides
 
If Murray had played Raonic or Berdych for his first 10 GS finals then he'd have a lot more than 3 GS titles. He just had horrible luck.
so would a lot of other players. Those guys both played terrible matches...they were no challenge at all. (inb4 someone uses their seeding or ranking to prove why they were very tough players that Lord Mezziah brushed aside waving his magic wand)
 
The stats show that Murray became a more aggressive player during his first Lendl spell.
Serve and forehand esp increased in avg speed.
Some say this helped him win GS's.
After Lendl the ball speed and play dropped back again to his comfort zone somewhat.
Now with Lendl back it's up again!
He enthuses Murray to hit harder, be more aggressive and it pays off!

How Lendl does this is none of your or my business.
He may seem passive and even uninterested during matches but I bet he isn't. That brain is working away.
Murray grows in stature, gets tactical guidance and belief rather than technical input I would think.

Lendl did not opt to coach fellow Czech Berdych. I guess he did not see the potential...He jumped at the chance with Murray again, just a txt did it!
Prob not to tour the world again but for Wimbledon. As Lendl never achieved the win, I guess it feels so goid contributing to Murray doing so.

Hawk eye stats don't lie! The effect Lendl has is working and can be seen.
I believe I'm right in saying Lendl was the first super coach for the top players. The others saw the effect it had and thought, hang on a minute, I want some of that!
So came Edberg, Becker etc.
Only Nadal has resisted and stayed with uncle-punckle! Many said he should drop Tony and go elsewhere during his major dip in form... Perhaps a super coach would have helped. Who though? Another thread for that perhaps...

Every youngish gun needs a Yoda!
 
The stats show that Murray became a more aggressive player during his first Lendl spell.
Serve and forehand esp increased in avg speed.
Some say this helped him win GS's.
After Lendl the ball speed and play dropped back again to his comfort zone somewhat.
Now with Lendl back it's up again!
He enthuses Murray to hit harder, be more aggressive and it pays off!

How Lendl does this is none of your or my business.
He may seem passive and even uninterested during matches but I bet he isn't. That brain is working away.
Murray grows in stature, gets tactical guidance and belief rather than technical input I would think.

Lendl did not opt to coach fellow Czech Berdych. I guess he did not see the potential...He jumped at the chance with Murray again, just a txt did it!
Prob not to tour the world again but for Wimbledon. As Lendl never achieved the win, I guess it feels so goid contributing to Murray doing so.

Hawk eye stats don't lie! The effect Lendl has is working and can be seen.
I believe I'm right in saying Lendl was the first super coach for the top players. The others saw the effect it had and thought, hang on a minute, I want some of that!
So came Edberg, Becker etc.
Only Nadal has resisted and stayed with uncle-punckle! Many said he should drop Tony and go elsewhere during his major dip in form... Perhaps a super coach would have helped. Who though? Another thread for that perhaps...

Every youngish gun needs a Yoda!


Great poast!

I'm hearing that Murray has been making overtures to Ivan to return for more than 12 months. Murray was gutted when Ivan dropped him - and be under no illusion, for all the 'mutual consent' spin of the time, Ivan walked. Only he knows why but I have my suspicions (I'm guessing it was because of the same reason he said no to Berdych).
 
[QUOTE="speedysteve, post: 10485367, member: 733648"
I believe I'm right in saying Lendl was the first super coach for the top players. The others saw the effect it had and thought, hang on a minute, I want some of that!
So came Edberg, Becker etc.
Only Nadal has resisted and stayed with uncle-punckle! Many said he should drop Tony and go elsewhere during his major dip in form... Perhaps a super coach would have helped. Who though? Another thread for that perhaps...

Every youngish gun needs a Yoda![/QUOTE]

If you mean Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray as "the Top players" then Federer had Roache. Lendl had Roache? So Murray maybe first Super super coach.
 
Lets see here.

Without Ivan Lendl being Andy Murrays coach he has won 0 grand slams.

With Ivan Lendl as his coach he has won 3 grand slams and an Olympic Gold medal.

And you think he is overrated as a coach?????

Even if you think Ivan has not done anything for Murray's game or fitness (which you could argue) its clear and apparent Ivan has done worlds for Murrays tactics and mentality on court. This is a very important aspect of coaching as well.

I think this thread is absurd.
 
Didn't Murray on average hit his forehand 6mph harder when he was with Lendl during 2012-2013?

Also I believe Lendl somehow manages to inspire confidence into Murray. This might be subtle, but can't be underestimated, the mental side of tennis is hugely important.
 

Good article. I don't think he is overrated. In 2012 when Lendl first joined Murray, Murray ended up as a finalist at Wimbledon, won the Olympics, one his first slam at the US OPEN and then won Wimbledon 2013. IMO Murray's improvement in the big moments is why Djokovic hired Becker. Yes I believe based on how the tournament unfolded that Murray could have won Wimbledon with me in his box, but Lendl is there to help him in those moments against Djokovic and Federer.
 
No.

The job of a coach is to get the best out of his player/team. Be that showing them new tactics, new gameplans or just being a rock for them off the court. Bottom line is that if the player/team does better with that coach. He is a good coach. It matters not how or in what way they coach, as long as its effective.
 
Oh c'mon at all this people who overrate Lendl.He is a fine coach,but he doesn't have any kind of "magical" power. :rolleyes:
Like Murray was going to lose any of his 3 Slams against Raonic and subpar Djokovic.
Or like any lendelized Murray would beat Djokovic in AO-FO or Federer at US 08,AO 10.
Not to mention Wimby 2012 were Andy was close to peak and still lost in 4(with Lendl in his box)
 
He gets results out of Murray, at least so far albeit with a relatively small sample size. That fact is undeniable.

However, more time is needed to fully evaluate the Lendl Effect.

Let us all not be rash in rushing to judgment, instead finding a more measured and sober evaluation the prudent path forward.
 
Last edited:
Lets see here.

Without Ivan Lendl being Andy Murrays coach he has won 0 grand slams.

With Ivan Lendl as his coach he has won 3 grand slams and an Olympic Gold medal.

And you think he is overrated as a coach?????

Even if you think Ivan has not done anything for Murray's game or fitness (which you could argue) its clear and apparent Ivan has done worlds for Murrays tactics and mentality on court. This is a very important aspect of coaching as well.

I think this thread is absurd.

Agree, it's given us the chance for some great put down responses though :)
 
Oh c'mon at all this people who overrate Lendl.He is a fine coach,but he doesn't have any kind of "magical" power. :rolleyes:
Like Murray was going to lose any of his 3 Slams against Raonic and subpar Djokovic.
Or like any lendelized Murray would beat Djokovic in AO-FO or Federer at US 08,AO 10.
Not to mention Wimby 2012 were Andy was close to peak and still lost in 4(with Lendl in his box)


We get it. Murray only wins when his opponent is subpar, plain rubbish or due to some other extraneous factor. Novak has never lost a match where he wasn't subpar. In fact, the very fact that he lost a given match is irrefutable evidence that Novak was subpar that day.
 
Didn't Murray on average hit his forehand 6mph harder when he was with Lendl during 2012-2013?

Also I believe Lendl somehow manages to inspire confidence into Murray. This might be subtle, but can't be underestimated, the mental side of tennis is hugely important.

Enough with the facts mate. We've already established that you can prove anything with them.
 
We get it. Murray only wins when his opponent is subpar, plain rubbish or due to some other extraneous factor.
I didn't intend to hate on Murray,but it is objective stuff.
Murray himself played subpar on a couple of Slam finals,thus allowing Djokovic to win more Slams.It works the other way around.
Novak has never lost a match where he wasn't subpar
Not true he lost plenty(all matches from US 07 to US 10,AO2014,RG 07,08,11,12,13)
In fact, the very fact that he lost a given match is irrefutable evidence that Novak was subpar that day
See above.
 
Didn't Murray on average hit his forehand 6mph harder when he was with Lendl during 2012-2013?

Also I believe Lendl somehow manages to inspire confidence into Murray. This might be subtle, but can't be underestimated, the mental side of tennis is hugely important.

Murray disagreed with this assessment, he says it was due to his back surgery that he struggled to find pace at times.
 
Oh c'mon at all this people who overrate Lendl.He is a fine coach,but he doesn't have any kind of "magical" power. :rolleyes:
Like Murray was going to lose any of his 3 Slams against Raonic and subpar Djokovic.
Or like any lendelized Murray would beat Djokovic in AO-FO or Federer at US 08,AO 10.
Not to mention Wimby 2012 were Andy was close to peak and still lost in 4(with Lendl in his box)

not sure if Murray would've held up in the 5th set of the USO 12 final without lendl helping him with the mental component.

he hit his peak top level during lendl's tenure - including a better FH, especially FH DTL, a somewhat better 2nd serve - better mental strength

AO 12, wim 12, USO 12, AO 13, wim 13 and Olympics 12 are all testament to that ..

wouldn't give him much credit for this wimby win ( 16 ), but 12-13 ? hell yeah, plenty of it ..
 
Some folks here have a very strange view of tennis. You can't argue against numbers and Batz's posts highlight it very clearly.

As a Djokovic fan, the last thing I wanted was Andy Murray to get back with Ivan Lendl. The biggest obstacle for Djokovic getting to Federer's 17 slam record is Andy Murray under the tutelage of Ivan Lendl.
 
Some folks here have a very strange view of tennis. You can't argue against numbers and Batz's posts highlight it very clearly.

As a Djokovic fan, the last thing I wanted was Andy Murray to get back with Ivan Lendl. The biggest obstacle for Djokovic getting to Federer's 17 slam record is Andy Murray under the tutelage of Ivan Lendl.

While this is a correct long term perspective, Djokovic has to hope he does not draw Sam Querrey at the majors.
 
LOL X 10,000 :) You sir, are one of a kind. Always in top form! :)

The loss to Sam Querrey could be a one-off but as many people on this forum rightly point out, it's losses like this that can give other players a strong message that Djokovic isn't unbeatable. Confidence does wonderful things to players

While this is a correct long term perspective, Djokovic has to hope he does not draw Sam Querrey at the majors.
 
The delusion is high in here. ''Becker did squat to make novak better player''. Damn.

Vajda and Dr Igor turned him into Nole 2.0 originally. He couldn't sustain it due to several reasons for the next couple of years until Wimbledon 2014 happened.

Please enlighten me how Becker made him a better player stating the specific timeframes from when he joined the team.
 
Last edited:
not sure if Murray would've held up in the 5th set of the USO 12 final without lendl helping him with the mental component.

he hit his peak top level during lendl's tenure - including a better FH, especially FH DTL, a somewhat better 2nd serve - better mental strength

AO 12, wim 12, USO 12, AO 13, wim 13 and Olympics 12 are all testament to that ..

wouldn't give him much credit for this wimby win ( 16 ), but 12-13 ? hell yeah, plenty of it ..

Murray was around physical peak,abmk,that is why he was so good.
And what about AO15, RG15, Wimby15. He had no Lendl there,but still played as good as ever,coming after a terrible 2014 season.
As I said,Lendl is a fine coach,but Murray didn't do anything else other than proving his potential.
 
I don't know what possible evidence one would need other than 3 slams with and 0 without to prove that whatever the method or reasons, having Lendl in his box does something positive for Muzzard.

Until further evidence proves otherwise, this officially ends any argument on the issue.
 
Murray was around physical peak,abmk,that is why he was so good.
And what about AO15, RG15, Wimby15. He had no Lendl there,but still played as good as ever,coming after a terrible 2014 season.
As I said,Lendl is a fine coach,but Murray didn't do anything else other than proving his potential.

no, he wasn't as good in 15 , as he was in 12-13..not top level wise. He didn't have the confidence to hit his FH that much - especially going FH DTL ..even his 2nd serve was better during Lendl's time -- not by a lot, but still ..

and the mental strength/focus component that lendl gave him is not up for debate , honestly.

even 2009-11 was around murray's physical peak ...didn't help him get any majors,did it ?
 
no, he wasn't as good in 15 , as he was in 12-13..not top level wise. He didn't have the confidence to hit his FH that much - especially going FH DTL ..even his 2nd serve was better during Lendl's time -- not by a lot, but still ..

and the mental strength/focus component that lendl gave him is not up for debate , honestly.

even 2009-11 was around murray's physical peak ...didn't help him get any majors,did it ?
He showed up in exactly 3 tournaments in 2013: AO,Wimbledon,Miami,big deal really
Finished behind Ferrer in rankings lol:rolleyes:
AO15 and Wimby15 are every bit as good level wise,not to mention the much improved clay game.
2012 was all different,he peaked in 3 Slams there,I will give you that,just don't put it alongside 2013.
 
He showed up in exactly 3 tournaments in 2013: AO,Wimbledon,Miami,big deal really
Finished behind Ferrer in rankings lol:rolleyes:
AO15 and Wimby15 are every bit as good level wise,not to mention the much improved clay game.
2012 was all different,he peaked in 3 Slams there,I will give you that,just don't put it alongside 2013.

nope, his AO 13 SF was much better than anything he showed in AO 15 ..arguably his best match at the AO ...

wim 13 was still a bit better than wim 15 - top level wise

he also won brisbane and queens as well

its not that didn't show up for IW ...delpo got the better of him, he got the better of djokovic as well there.

of course he had back surgery after the USO in 2013 ..

the only thing in favour of 2015 honestly is the clay game ( when he did play )
 
Last edited:
I dont think you need to be Brad Gilbert to coach Murray to a wimbledon title via Cakewalk muggified draws where you're best competition is Raonic.

Murray's titles came during a time when Djoker wasn't that particularly well and during this weak wimbledon tournament

I'll judge Lendl more when I see what MUrray does when Nole comes on like a house of fire again
 
My theory is that Lendl adds value to Murray game...just by being there. It's like a kid trying to impress his dad or something. Idk. The respect that Murray has for Lendl somehow improves his match playing. Like he wants to impress him, wants to live up to his expectations, and I think it keeps him focused and allows him to find another gear, because truthfully he is a remarkably talented player who is worthy of at least 3 slams.
 
I think when guys are around an alpha male like Lendl, they naturally produce more testosterone and scruffy facial hair.

Or maybe Lendl is just a really really shrewd investor and knows exactly when to buy, when to sell - and when to buy again.
 
Most overrated of all time? I disagree, Murray didn't ask him to return for nothing. Tennis players know what they need to add to the mix. Two Wimbledon titles with Lendl there, that's no mere accident. Even a little stability, focus is all it takes to sometimes add that little extra for an already top flight pro such as Murray. I am happy for him, after all those years, Murray is playing the best tennis of his life now.
 
Maybe he was underrated as a player but I am so tired of people acting like Lendl is the key ingredient to Murray's success. It's like claiming that Sampras and Fed would be nowhere without Annagoat.

Here's my two cents:
1) Lendl is extremely taciturn and phlegmatic. This MAY temper Murray's outbursts but it also means he is doing nothing to motivate Murray. Murray has enough cheerleaders anyway.
2) Has Lendl really made any obvious technical changes to Murray's game? I have not really seen anything obvious.
3) Coaches in general are highly overrated in general because half the commentators are coaches themselves and naturally want to promote themselves.

Lendl himself said that he is not there to try and advise on Murray's technique. He is there to just give advice on approach and tactics and be a steady rock for his charge. He seems to fulfil that role admirably. Murray trusts and respects him and vice-versa. There's no denying that there seems to be a bit more focus and determination when Lendl is watching.
 
Deny his improvements in the last couple of weeks??? I have failed to see any. He won Wimbledon. But he did that with Djokovic losing early. You can't judge against players he has been beating regularly anyway.

He beats Djokovic in a slam. Then we can talk about Lendl

2012 USO? 2013 Wimby? Lendl in the box both times? Coincidence or short memory? :D
 
I think he's the most underrated coach ever.

Show up in the players box, say nothing, your player wins slams.
 
Why not? You're from Serbia, so I'm guessing you are a football fan (Red Star?). How many times have we seen the phenomenon whereby a new coach completely re-energises an under-performing team? Happens quite a lot right?

I'm guessing you haven't watched as much of Murray as I have mate, but trust me, Murray at Queen's and Wimbledon was a different guy to the one that had played so far this season. More aggressive with the FH much bigger, closer to the baseline, less energy expended on pointless rants, no grasping at phantom limb pains. If you check my history you'll see that I've been calling for Murray to get Ivan back at any price from about the time they split up.

Been watching Andy since he was ranked in the mid 300s - he is a different guy with Ivan at his back. I would argue that this is demonstrably true from both a qualitative and quantitative perspective.

I would temper that slightly by pointing out that he had had a very respectable clay season beforehand (2 Masters finals v Djokovic with one win and a run to his first ever FO final beating the defending champion along the way). So the groundwork was already there.
 
You're right, but what is he actually DOING? He just sits there half dead during the match and gets massive $$$

He is sending out powerful mental vibes to Murray but he needs to focus without any unnecessary distractions like laughing, frowning, cheering, shouting or clapping! :)
 
Maybe he was underrated as a player but I am so tired of people acting like Lendl is the key ingredient to Murray's success.

I agree. Lendl was viewed as this amazing coach for Murray because Andy had won his two slams under him. But beating Djokovic at a slam was simply an easier task in 2012 and 2013. Little else is extraordinary about Andy's 2012 and 2013 seasons. This year, Murray made the AO final, had an amazing clay season, and made the FO final all without Lendl. Andy won Wimbledon with Lendl back, but with the draw playing out as it did, Murray would have won regardless.
 
Great poast!

I'm hearing that Murray has been making overtures to Ivan to return for more than 12 months. Murray was gutted when Ivan dropped him - and be under no illusion, for all the 'mutual consent' spin of the time, Ivan walked. Only he knows why but I have my suspicions (I'm guessing it was because of the same reason he said no to Berdych).

I read an article in the Daily Mirror today entitled "Lendl Did His Homework". In it, Murray's trainer, Matt Little, is quoted as saying Lendl phoned him after Murray had got in touch to inquire about Murray's physical condition. Matt assured him that he was close to the maximum on his physical conditioning and that he didn't think that was what was holding him back.

I cite this as confirmation of my suspicion that the real reason why Lendl walked in 2014 was because he could see Murray struggling to regain form following his back surgery and he didn't think he had it in him anymore!
 
I agree. Lendl was viewed as this amazing coach for Murray because Andy had won his two slams under him. But beating Djokovic at a slam was simply an easier task in 2012 and 2013. Little else is extraordinary about Andy's 2012 and 2013 seasons. This year, Murray made the AO final, had an amazing clay season, and made the FO final all without Lendl. Andy won Wimbledon with Lendl back, but with the draw playing out as it did, Murray would have won regardless.

Hmmm... I doubt either Nadal or Murray would agree with you that it was a particularly easy task to defeat Djokovic in a Slam in 2012-13.
 
Maybe he was underrated as a player but I am so tired of people acting like Lendl is the key ingredient to Murray's success. It's like claiming that Sampras and Fed would be nowhere without Annagoat.

Here's my two cents:
1) Lendl is extremely taciturn and phlegmatic. This MAY temper Murray's outbursts but it also means he is doing nothing to motivate Murray. Murray has enough cheerleaders anyway.
2) Has Lendl really made any obvious technical changes to Murray's game? I have not really seen anything obvious.
3) Coaches in general are highly overrated in general because half the commentators are coaches themselves and naturally want to promote themselves.

I think you will find that Lendl has helped (persuaded) Murray to make some key changes in his game to help him become a champion. I will explain where:

Murray had many issues with his forehand. When Murray went crosscourt, due to the grip he was using, was not penetrating the court, his ball often dropped short which made him vulnerable. Murray was also often pushing the ball down the middle of the court which surely you must be aware of. What Lendl persuaded Murray to do is hit through his forehand much more, do not pull up on the shot which drops the ball short, hit deeper and into the corners, in other words take a few more risks, of course, when you hit the ball in the corners, you are more likely to make mistakes. At the highest level it is about risk and reward, the talented ones who are prepared to take the risks, are more often likely to get the reward.

It appears that Lendl has also persuaded Murray to stand closer in to return serve, standing too far back opens up the angles on him, especially by Federer who can exploit that.

Those are the technical adjustments Murray has made under Lendl. Murray was also improving his 2nd serve but Lendl would have reminded Murray to keep moving the ball around the box at least 90mph and deep more often than not. Until recently, Murray was never brave enough to hit 2nd serves to the forehand on the ad court. Players take a longer swing on the forehand, that is why you will find the likes of Sampras regularly served there on the 2nd serve, not just a regulation 2nd serve to the backhand which can often get hammered.

Now, you will also find that before Djokovic hired Boris Becker, he had exactly the same problem with the forehand. Djokovic was often pulling up on the shot and was unable to finish points. Becker changed all that, Djokovic's forehand now has much more penetration and he hits much better in the corners too. Remember, Djokovic lost a handful of major finals before he hired Becker.

I recommend you watch a re-run of the 2013 Wimbledon final. I think you would be shocked at how difficult it was for either player to hit a winner, both were pulling up on their forehand time and again, hence a 3 set match took almost 3 hours and 30 minutes.
 
I read an article in the Daily Mirror today entitled "Lendl Did His Homework". In it, Murray's trainer, Matt Little, is quoted as saying Lendl phoned him after Murray had got in touch to inquire about Murray's physical condition. Matt assured him that he was close to the maximum on his physical conditioning and that he didn't think that was what was holding him back.

I cite this as confirmation of my suspicion that the real reason why Lendl walked in 2014 was because he could see Murray struggling to regain form following his back surgery and he didn't think he had it in him anymore!
Sounds like he lost faith. If there's truth to that story, Murray shoulda told him to pound sand.
 
Back
Top