I think a lot of people forget Andy Murray's first full season on tour (2006). That was littered with first round losses, inconsistent tennis, and fans and pundits complaining that he was playing much too passively. He made a couple of fourth rounds at the slams (Wimbledon and US Open I think) and stunned Federer in Cincinnati but he still received a lot of criticism.

Then he put in a serious off-season, and began 2007 playing like a world-beater. I remember watching him in Doha at the start of the year, and he was so much more aggressive and physical, totally dominating lesser players. His Aussie Open 5 setter with Nadal that month was one of the matches of the year.

My point is - while Emma is already a major champion after that remarkable run last year, it's still totally understandable that she's a bit tactically confused, injury-prone, trying to figure out her best game plan, how to adapt her game to different surfaces, and finding it tough to find her best level. She's only 19, hasn't had a proper off season, and her family's penchant for switching her coaching situation around hasn't really helped.

Personally I was very impressed with her level at the Australian Open - she really dialled it up and looked like a classy player. If the blister issues hadn't struck, she could well have made the second week there. I think she overthought the clay and tried to adjust her game too much by adding the loopy topspin, rather than sticking to her natural ball-striking strengths, and she's been playing the same way on the grass and hard courts so far.

She may win a few matches in New York or she may lose first round, I don't think it really matters too much. If she has a decent off season and finds the right mentor, she'll be ready to hit the ground running in 2023. Having a lower ranking and the target off her back might help a little too. I think the main concerns will come if she ends up with a streak of losses next year and has to drop down into the lower events - all those new sponsors won't be enormously happy with that.

But she'll come good. You don't win a slam and beat players like Bencic, Sakkari and Fernandez on the biggest stage by fluke

I remember saying at the time on here I think or perhaps elsewhere that we shouldnt be judging Emma on her US Open win going forward and Im sticking with that. I also think Harriet will be ranked number 1 by year end. Emma has many years ahead of her but its unfair to think of her as a top 20 player in my opinion. All the stars aligned for her to win last year especially with a fortuitous draw. Let her develop and avoid such harsh reactions to defeats. There was always going to be more of them this year as she plays more tournaments.

THere's a distinction between any real criticism of Emma, and that of her coaching.

The latter, I think, is an interesting discussion - after all, Sheddie writes:

"I think she overthought the clay and tried to adjust her game too much by adding the loopy topspin, rather than sticking to her natural ball-striking strengths, and she's been playing the same way on the grass and hard courts so far."

And the question that absolutely jumps out at you is, why did the coach allow that to happen?

It's a LONG time (clay - grass - now hard courts) - it's not rocket science - it's exactly what coaches are for

As I've said before, Emma is A1 fine - what's going on now is irrelevant to her in 3, or 5 or 10 years - yes, she's been pushed forwards by wonderful force of circumstance, and there are certain drawbacks with that too - but none of it really matters - she's so young

But the coaching question doesn't go away (and not about the family for changing so often, but about the coaches themselves)

And, yeh, Sheddie, howdie

I havent watched any of Emma in the past 12 months apart from some of her matches at Wimbledon, but I do follow the scores. She seems to have a regular habit of starting off well and getting to 4-2 up or 4-3 with a break, and then things seem to run away from her. Not every time but I am sure on quite a few.

I wonder if she isnt playing with the mental freedom she had a year or so ago, she starts well and free but then her brain becomes clouded, she changes her game plan at the point when the set is getting close and then fugs up, loses confidence and the whole thing unravels.

She talks about working it our herself a lot, which is fine, but she probably needs a clear thinking, experienced team with her who are able to make her relax and not worry about things.

She seemed to have that a year ago with Richardson - it was all fun and her attacking approach worked.

Like others, I think this was probably all to be expected and not to be stressed about in the long run; it will no doubt come back as she starts to play more of the events where she can learn her trade, be herself, a little off the radar. But getting a good coach who is clear, free and easy and able to make it fun is key - what happened with Andy R, no one really knows but whatever it was he brought to the table last year is probably what she needs in the next 12 months.

But I certainly dont think this is a time for panic, even though it would be lovely to see her winning (or watching the scores show her winning, as I say, I dont actually watch her matches, just read the reports and look at the scores!)

-- Edited by JonH comes home on Wednesday 10th of August 2022 04:57:15 PM

Pancho P wrote:

---

Good post Jon. I m the opposite I watch all her matches, since that amazing match she played against cirstea at wimbo last year. Do you just prefer mens tennis ?. Glad your following from afar anyway

---

 Hi Pancho

Thanks for the note - being honest, I just can't get into womens tennis at all ; I love to see our girls doing well, I really do, and follow the scores, but as a game it leaves me quite devoid of any real feeling I am afraid; so, yes, it very much is the mens game. I think it stems from playing a lot as a youngster, several times a week, everyday in holidays , and pretending I was Borg or McEnroe or Connors etc etc and mimicking their games and styles, a sort of fantasy player and the mens game just took me. I am 57 now but still focus v much on the mens - I guess I identify with it much more as a player and a fan (although I dont play these days, sadly, although I am tempted by Padel!). 

But I do keep on top of results and who is doing well in the womens and do support our girls to do well! 

The coaching situation is my one particular concern, especially with the changes to Emma's grip and stroke production. A number of pundits last year praised Emma's stroke production and made points such as it is so well developed it just doesn't look like breaking down.

The girl has got it and can certainly come again stronger and better but there are some things that may take a little time to unsort like that loopy stroke and surely an increasing lack of confidence.

This moving from coach to coach, supposedly to take the best out of each, to my mind so risks confusion whatever intelligence Emma may have. It also stands against so much evidence of the multiple instances where one particular coach has clearly made the big difference to a player and been right for them. It seems to undervalue the worth of one good coach and overestimate Emna's capacity to deal with the situation. And it seems to be driven by folk beyond Emma so maybe indeed she might/should in time take more control of this.