Week 19 - WTA Premier ($4.03M) Madrid, Spain - Clay

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

RE: Week 19 - WTA Premier ($4.03M) Madrid, Spain - Clay

indiana · Tennis legend

I think going as far as 200 is quite an exagerration.

Certainly top 20 at her best, out to maybe about 80 to 100 at worst and averaging about 30 to 50 on average ( i.e. pretty much in line with her rankings ) which is picking up a bit from earlier in the year.

Jan · Hall of fame

I was so tired I had to give up and go to bed at 2-2 in the 3rd. Given how the match had been going, I was pleasantly surprised this morning to see that Laura had done so well in that last set. Some of her play earlier in the match had been outstanding. I hope she's not too disappointed at the loss.

korriban · Challenger level

Jan wrote:
I was so tired I had to give up and go to bed at 2-2 in the 3rd. Given how the match had been going, I was pleasantly surprised this morning to see that Laura had done so well in that last set. Some of her play earlier in the match had been outstanding. I hope she's not too disappointed at the loss.

Suspect she will be, given 5-2 up final set. Match had spectacularly variable tennis - excellent shots from both, and glaring unforced errors from both, usually going for low percentage winners. Looking at Ana, lots of similarities to Laura......a formerly superb serve now riddled with anxiety, poor ball tosses, aces and DFs; spectacular forehand winners and good backhands too, but striving for too much at times; massive nerves and tightness at key moments (it seemed). Ana was world #1, won RG and looked very much a champion around Laura's age, but then self-doubt and the yips started to creep in.........hope it works the other way round for Laura.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Ok, for what it's worth, here's my tuppence ha'penny worth:

Obviously Laura will be disappointed after leading 5-2 in the last set but, overall, I think she played a very good match and, more importantly, has made really significant progress in many key areas - movement, balance, using her legs. The acceleration through the ball with the weight going forward is superb, the choice of shots really pretty good . . . Anyone seed who draws her in the first round is going to be mighty nervous.

Of course the service is a bit of a problem but I don't think it's a major point. For any tight three set match (she must have served about 16 games, plus a 'game' in the tie-break), 11 double faults is not dreadful. And the DF statistic is easy to focus on but not always helpful. I know that many national coaches tell their top juniors that they want aggressive kicking second serves and they don't care about double faults - at the top end of the game doddy second serves that just get the ball into play will get you nowhere.
Also, Ana was really attacking her second serve, and indeed her first, (unlike Aga), so Laura was obviously going to go for more. I'm not saying that there's not a lot of work to do (and the final DF was pitiful) but she shouldn't get too hung up about it.

(If she wants consolation and a laugh, maybe she should watch some old footage of Dementieva - now that girl had a pretty brilliant top-10 tennis career, and a truly lamentable serve - any work she did it on it was purely a damage limitation exercise. In fact, Elena said that, throughout her career, the one shot that she worked on longest and hardest in training was the third shot of the rally, the return of the return of serve, if you will). NB Laura's serve is nothing like Elena's, I know, and has the makings of an excellent shot, it's just a bye-the-bye comment.

I do think that all the focus on whether she's really a top-10 player or a top-200 player is rather misplaced.

The average age of the top 20 players is 26. The average age of the top 5 players is 27. This tells you something.
Laura is 19, the youngest player in the top-50. As such, one would expect far more highs and lows, it's very much a work in progress.

PS Laura wasn't the player that I most wanted to win yesterday - she's very much on track for an excellent career, IMHO, and had had a very good week, whatever the result turned out to be. I was more pleased for Sam (and Jade), and James the day before - these are players that really have to make the difference right now.

Anyway, onwards and upwards . . .

tony_orient · ATP qualifying

Only with Laura can you feel a bit disappointed at the end of a tournament when she beat Radwanska.

It's certainly been a dramatic week with the split from her coach announced in between a stunning win over Aga and a close match against Ana. Many more positives than negatives which is the main thing.

Her serving problems aren't going to go away over night so she will just have to manage it as best she can and be thankful that only a handful of players can return like Ana Ivanovic did yesterday.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

indiana wrote:
I think going as far as 200 is quite an exagerration.

Certainly top 20 at her best, out to maybe about 80 to 100 at worst and averaging about 30 to 50 on average ( i.e. pretty much in line with her rankings ) which is picking up a bit from earlier in the year.

Well top 150 then, she's certainly lost to quite a few players in the 100s since the US Open, and although there is a reason/excuse for each, a loss is a loss, and all those DFs for a top 40 player are inexcusable.

Don't get me wrong, I really want Laura to do well, I'm just frustrated at the obvious amount of physical talent compared to the lack of mental talent.

korriban · Challenger level

Helen40 wrote:
indiana wrote:
I think going as far as 200 is quite an exagerration.

Certainly top 20 at her best, out to maybe about 80 to 100 at worst and averaging about 30 to 50 on average ( i.e. pretty much in line with her rankings ) which is picking up a bit from earlier in the year.
Well top 150 then, she's certainly lost to quite a few players in the 100s since the US Open, and although there is a reason/excuse for each, a loss is a loss, and all those DFs for a top 40 player are inexcusable.
Don't get me wrong, I really want Laura to do well, I'm just frustrated at the obvious amount of physical talent compared to the lack of mental talent.

I actually think she has bottle, heart, and a fighting spirit in adundance. What I think she currently lacks are clear gameplans (or the ability to stick to them) in general and for "tight situations", and a mental coping routine for serves (returns are fine) which works under pressure.......although her technical problems on serve exacerbate the problem. I would argue with you that she has technical talent and raquet skills in abundance, rather than physical talent..............she has certainly improved, but her physical attributes (speed, mobility, footwork, endurance) remain a relative handicap. Incidentally, Krajan slagged her off today as immature and not prepared to work hard enough to have success. He does sound like a miserable old git, and uniquely unsuited to working with women players, but I'm sure there's a modicum of truth in what he says..............

.......to succeed she will need to be more mature, more focussed on the court (she still looks like a kid sometimes, or a rabbit in the headlights), and work hard week in week out on physical, mental and technical aspects, but she needs to find a coach/team who can make this FUN as well..........look at Andy's team: hard as nails, work like dogs, yet laugh and joke with each other................Mr Krajan, watch and learn!

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

korriban wrote:
Helen40 wrote:
indiana wrote:
I think going as far as 200 is quite an exagerration.

Certainly top 20 at her best, out to maybe about 80 to 100 at worst and averaging about 30 to 50 on average ( i.e. pretty much in line with her rankings ) which is picking up a bit from earlier in the year.
Well top 150 then, she's certainly lost to quite a few players in the 100s since the US Open, and although there is a reason/excuse for each, a loss is a loss, and all those DFs for a top 40 player are inexcusable.
Don't get me wrong, I really want Laura to do well, I'm just frustrated at the obvious amount of physical talent compared to the lack of mental talent.
I actually think she has bottle, heart, and a fighting spirit in adundance. What I think she currently lacks are clear gameplans (or the ability to stick to them) in general and for "tight situations", and a mental coping routine for serves (returns are fine) which works under pressure.......although her technical problems on serve exacerbate the problem. I would argue with you that she has technical talent and raquet skills in abundance, rather than physical talent..............she has certainly improved, but her physical attributes (speed, mobility, footwork, endurance) remain a relative handicap. Incidentally, Krajan slagged her off today as immature and not prepared to work hard enough to have success. He does sound like a miserable old git, and uniquely unsuited to working with women players, but I'm sure there's a modicum of truth in what he says..............
.......to succeed she will need to be more mature, more focussed on the court (she still looks like a kid sometimes, or a rabbit in the headlights), and work hard week in week out on physical, mental and technical aspects, but she needs to find a coach/team who can make this FUN as well..........look at Andy's team: hard as nails, work like dogs, yet laugh and joke with each other................Mr Krajan, watch and learn!

My apologies for not being clear in what I was trying to express - trying to be brief, but I guess ultimately confusing.

I would agree she has fighting spirit, and true grit as it were, does 'bottle it' in tight/pressured situations. When that happens she often seems unable to play at her best, and can get much worse (I am comparing her I guess to the Williams sister which I realise isn't fair at her stage, but are good example of getting tougher when the chips are down). I get really nervous for Laura when she plays matches that she is 'supposed' to win, especially towards the end. She has said herself in pressers that she has gotten nervous, the most recent example of this that springs to mind was her great dubs run.

I agree with your assesments of the 'physical' side, again , not well articulated by me.

I am interested that Krajan slagged her off, not a great thing for any coach to do even if there was some truth in it.

I think Laura could learn from Andy's team, we all wondered how he'd do with this set up. but it's reaped dividend for him. I guess it's pretty expensive having that many people too. But to find a coach with that attitude? I wonder how hard that would be..

blob · All-time great

Sports Illustrated have a reasonable encapsulation of the main points: http://tennis.si.com/2013/05/09/laura-robson-coach-zeljko-krajan/

On a tangent, included is a quote from Jonathan Overend.
I don't think his leaving has been mentioned on this forum at all yet, but I for one will be sad when he soon hangs up his BBC Tennis Correspondent hat. For me he has done a consistently excellent and entertaining job, providing me with many hours of enjoyable and informative coverage, in that free ranging way that only radio sports commentary seems able to achieve.

Thank you Mr. Overend.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

blob wrote:
Sports Illustrated have a reasonable encapsulation of the main points: http://tennis.si.com/2013/05/09/laura-robson-coach-zeljko-krajan/

OEM covered quite a lot of the same ground under the heading "Faulty service [how nice to see the original word used instead of that awful Americanism, "serve", but I guess the latter wouldn't have worked so well... ] provides Robson with food for thought on exit" in today's Times. He includes a slightly longer quotation from Krajan:

"The mentality is different," Krajan said yesterday. "I did expect more from Laura, but when it doesn't go that way any more, it is not the time to stay. [not entirely sure what the second half of that sentence is supposed to mean, which may be why it didn't feature in the SI piece! confuse ] She was not mature enough to do this kind of work sometimes for me. She needed to be more serious and to commit herself more. When she had to really prove herself, she did it."

OEM then comments:

Tennis is a tough world in which coaches come and go at a player's whim. Some believe in harnessing the technical aspects of a player's game, soem that punishimng regimes on the practice court are sacrosanct, others believe they need to be psychologists. Krajan clearly wanted to make Robson fitter, whereas from what he says, she clearly wanted a less rigid regime.

murray_2k9 · Challenger qualifying

Krajan says the same crap everytime hes sacked. I aint buying.

RBBOT · Futures qualifying

Coup Droit wrote:

For any tight three set match (she must have served about 16 games, plus a 'game' in the tie-break), 11 double faults is not dreadful.

It was pretty dreadful. You need to count points rather than sets or games, as some matches have several long deuce games that can inflate the number. This one didn't and 21% of 2nd serves not going in is just too high. Ivanovic at the other end was just as bad with 20% missed, but the deciding factor in the match was that she tended to do it on less critical points.

In general, a lot of people go on about the number of unforced errors in her matches, but if you take out the double faults from those totals, they don't look so bad, and I don't see them as much of an issue - sure lower would be better, but when you watch the match rather than look at the numbers on a score sheet, you rarely feel that was why she lost. Lots of winners is far more entertaining to watch than someone who just returns every ball to the middle of the court, and it's worth putting up with a few UEs in my opinion.

However, the thing that really frustrates me when watching her is the first few games of the 2nd set. She always seems to lose concentration for the first 3-4 games, before coming back stronger in the latter half - sometimes well enough to win, sometimes not. Even against Aga on Monday she had a few off games around this point in the match. If she could sort that out there wouldn't be so many 3rd sets to worry about as she has a very good record in 1st sets.

But as Tony said, you can't be that disappointed in a tournament where she beats the world No.4 and goes out to the No.16 on a tie-break.

steven · Tennis legend

The real mystery here is why he got taken on by Laura in the first place (when it was obvious what he's like) if that's not the kind of coach she wanted.

I say "obvious" because although it wasn't obvious to me, some of those who follow the women's game on here were saying it right from the start and they had very little to go on whereas Laura surely asked his past charges what it was like to work with him (?)

blob · All-time great

10sballs.com* have additional , though un-sourced, ideas about the original appointment: http://www.10sballs.com/2013/05/09/laura-robson-fires-coach-zeljko-krajan/

Namely that:
Robson's Australian mother Kathy was integral in the appointment of Krajan after vetting several potential coaches and she will again play an important role in the next appointment. However Laura will not be rushed into naming a replacement, make sure she is compatible with the new man and contemplate playing both the French Open and possibly Wimbledon with the backing she is currently using.

From which, one might assume there is no possibility of a female coach being appointed then!

*Please note that the article is duplicated on the page. A repeat of the original immediately following the original as though it were part of one article.