I think it's clear that Lendl and some others really do see a huge talent that is not fulfilling his potential at the moment.
So there are potential kudos and real satisfaction to if they can work with Andy and really bring out the best from him.
I see the earlier arguemnts that who is to say working with Valverdu won't work and some cynicism about how much a coach really does matter.
I do though a) think that good coaches have made differences to players in the past and b) I really do think that Andy does need an experienced coach to work with him, maybe still with Valverdu around as well.
-- Edited by indiana on Monday 28th of March 2011 02:40:21 PM
Not likely to happen according to Mark Petchey, but a change is in the pipeline, just about how long it will take. Barry Cowan still would like a link up with Wilander.
-- Edited by philwrig on Monday 28th of March 2011 05:27:34 PM
Not likely to happen according to Mark Petchey, but a change is in the pipeline, just about how long it will take. Barry Cowan still would like a link up with Wilander.
-- Edited by philwrig on Monday 28th of March 2011 05:27:34 PM
I personally think Barry Cowan is now too old and too long away from top tennis for Wilander to really be much use to him
Call me a cynical so-&-so, but isn't the Lendl affair just another example of "bored has-been misses the limelight and wants something to do"?
And what is it with your need to believe in a Messiah?
I remember Mats Wilander supposedly being the man to sort out poor old Marat Safin - "Mats knows about work ethic and won't stand any nonsense, bla bla." How long did that last?
And there was Connors with Roddick - same sort of thing, "Jimmy knows how to maximise talent, and won't stand any nonsense, bla bla."
And now we have Ivan Lendl, who as far as I know has mainly been playing golf for the last 17 years. LET ME GUESS - He won't stand any nonsense either!!!! Do me a favour, people .... and come on, I know journos will do anything for a story, but surely we have more sense than that.
Next thing, it will be Goran Ivanisevic (ahem) "offering his services".
(And what's all that about - when one wishes to "offer one's services" to someone, isn't the orthodox way to do this to talk to them, rather than calling the Press?)
__________________
"Where Ratty leads - the rest soon follow" (Professor Henry Brubaker - The Institute of Studies)
And to finally put this ridiculous idea that "elite level player = brilliant coach" to bed, here are the credentials of the top 10 players' coaches:
1. Toni Nadal (Nadal) - never played professionally 2. Marian Vajda (Djokovic) - CH 57 3. Nobody (Federer) - (last coaches were Lundgren & Annacone, both CH over 30) 4. Claudio Pistolesi (Soderling) - CH 82 (although to be fair, his previous coach Magnus Norman had a CH of 2) 5. Dani Vallverdu (Murray) - CH 727 6. Javier Piles (Ferrer) - never played professionally 7. Tomas Krupa (Berdych) - CH 1064 8. Larry Stefanki (Roddick) - CH 35 9. ? (Verdasco) = ? 10. Joakim Nystrom (Melzer) - CH 69
And since Del Potro should be back in the top 5 shortly, I may as well mention that his coach Franco Davin had a CH of 30.
So can I start the "No to Ivan Lendl" campaign?
__________________
"Where Ratty leads - the rest soon follow" (Professor Henry Brubaker - The Institute of Studies)
Didn't see anyone here say that "elite level player = brilliant coach"
Just as you say Vallverdu might work ( kind of you to put him with Murray at no 5 but one did not cause the other though actually Andy will be going up to 4 ), so you don't know working with Lendl wouldn't work.
I will not say that Lendl will be a flop but the point isn't that...
Everyone seems to be jumping around and quoting big names who (should)/(are apparently about to) become Andy's coach and writing off Vallverdu as a joke. But as you can see, there is absolutely NO indication that if you aren't a top tennis player, you can't be a good coach. So what's the basis for people recommending Lendl and writing off Vallverdu? I suppose these fans/journalists were coached by Lendl and Vallverdu in the past?
By the way, Ratteh, ATP website says that Nystrom had a CH of 7. Your point still stands, though!
-- Edited by Salmon on Tuesday 29th of March 2011 11:31:32 AM
Everyone seems to be jumping around and quoting big names who (should)/(are apparently about to) become Andy's coach and writing off Vallverdu as a joke. But as you can see, there is absolutely NO indication that if you aren't a top tennis player, you can't be a good coach.
-- Edited by Salmon on Tuesday 29th of March 2011 11:31:32 AM
I quite agree, on the other hand there's nothing obvious to recommend Vallverdu over and above anyone else.
I see Jamies comments are being widely reported, from an original Times article I think.
I just hope whatever decision Andy makes it helps him regain his form and confidence.
I quite agree, on the other hand there's nothing obvious to recommend Vallverdu over and above anyone else.
Er, apart from the fact that Andy knows him really well, and has sufficient confidence in him to make him his coach?
And I go back to my first point. What does a coach actually do?
You see the thing is, with respect, I don't think that any of you really know. You just want a Messiah to come along and rescue our hero. And somehow Vallverdu doesn't quite fit the bill as a Messiah ...
Chill out. Andy's a top 5 player going through a sticky patch which will PROBABLY resolve itself, with or without a Messiah.
(Although the other top guys like Djokovic, Nadal and del Potro do seem to have distanced themselves a bit from him, but c'est la vie ...)
.. Yeah, fish dude, I thought Nystrom was better than 69, that was off the ITF website, clearly wrong....
__________________
"Where Ratty leads - the rest soon follow" (Professor Henry Brubaker - The Institute of Studies)