Federer: Does he need a (new) coach? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer: Does he need a (new) coach?

Pages : [1] 2

gillian
11-23-2004, 07:30 PM
Totally objective question (I don't feel strongly either way). Do you think Roger Federer needs a coach? If so, why?

alfonsojose
11-23-2004, 08:32 PM
He doesn't need a coach. He needs a couch to f*ck Mirka really hard, to celebrate a great 2004 :aplot:

RonE
11-23-2004, 08:36 PM
:lol: Alfie

I think in the long run he does need a coach. As good as he is the game will keep evolving, and of course he has the ability to evolve with it. But seeing things from the perspective of another person alot of the times can help and sometimes it is needed even for a guy as brilliant as Federer is.

Strategies and game-wise aside, a coach is also there to organise a player's schedule- be his intermediatery. With Federer's packed schedule it might be a good idea to have someone help him out with it as doing it all by yourself is very demanding and wearing.

gillian
11-23-2004, 08:56 PM
:lol: Alfie
Strategies and game-wise aside, a coach is also there to organise a player's schedule- be his intermediatery. With Federer's packed schedule it might be a good idea to have someone help him out with it as doing it all by yourself is very demanding and wearing.

Good point, but it's my understanding that his Mom & his girlfriend handle is schedule for him.

merle
11-23-2004, 09:03 PM
It's been just incredible how Fed has done this whole year w/o a coach! :hatoff:
I personally was sure he was waiting fo Cahill but now? :shrug:
IF Agassi keeps on playing and Cahill denies the rumours.... And Roach also not taking the job... I guess maybe Fed will think about a coach again when some losses start coming next year. And obviously he has made some thoughts or have these been just rumours?

alfonsojose
11-23-2004, 09:37 PM
Mirka is lover, cooker, scheduler, friend, sister. Where's my Mirko :tears: ?

Fedex
11-23-2004, 09:51 PM
No, not at the moment

Ginger
11-23-2004, 10:30 PM
Mirka is lover, cooker, scheduler, friend, sister. Where's my Mirko :tears: ?
Where are your millions $$$$ and GS titles? ;) ;) btw, nothing against Mirka, I really like her...

Jennay
11-23-2004, 10:35 PM
I don't think it's a matter of 'needing' a coach, because he obviously does not.
In the long run it would probably be nice to have a positive influence other than Mirka.

Ginger
11-23-2004, 10:35 PM
I read somewhere that he will train part time with Tony Roche in Australia... I think Roger is going to Australia after his current holiday in the Maldives...

alfonsojose
11-23-2004, 10:37 PM
Where are your millions $$$$ and GS titles? ;) ;) btw, nothing against Mirka, I really like her...
Shallow :p Heart is what matters :o ;) Money ... could be good :o

superpinkone37
11-23-2004, 11:00 PM
i think in the long run it wouldnt hurt to get some outside help, but obviously he doesn't need a coach if he did so well this year without one

cartmancop
11-23-2004, 11:24 PM
NO! If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Leena
11-23-2004, 11:25 PM
Why does anyone need a coach?

Marat should have adopted this plan years ago.

tennisman.
11-23-2004, 11:32 PM
NO! If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

You said it my friend

naiwen
11-23-2004, 11:36 PM
I read somewhere that he will train part time with Tony Roche in Australia... I think Roger is going to Australia after his current holiday in the Maldives...

They are in Maldives or Sri Lanka?

Fergie
11-23-2004, 11:50 PM
Not for now ;)

Leena
11-23-2004, 11:52 PM
Cliffy said Roger and Bloatface were travelling to the Maldives right away!

euroka1
11-23-2004, 11:56 PM
Sometimes one wonders how useful, in the long term, these coaches are. Federer seems to be doing very well with a comparatively small entourage.

mitalidas
11-24-2004, 03:32 AM
Roche declined --- I read it in the Aussie press. He said it was an honor/compliment, but could not do the travelling required

I will unearth the blip I read and post

WF4EVER
11-24-2004, 01:13 PM
Need? I don't think so, but sure if he wants to give away a huge salary for nothing I'll take the job.

I was able to watch only one of Federer's matches from the Masters Cup; the SF versus Marat and I tell you, when I watched Roger play that match I wondered if Roger could continue that form next year.

First of all I was so happy that he was fully recovered from his injury and after watching his mastery yet again vs Marat I just couldn't help but wonder who could possibly stop Roger next season. Poor LLeyton in that final, suffering another complete domination by Rogi.

People, please upload some of these matches to the 'net. I really want to see these matches. Thank you.

mitalidas
11-24-2004, 03:36 PM
Here is the "confirmation" (or, web gossip):

It is remarkable that Lendl’s coach at the time, Mr Tony Roche, the Australian, was asked by Federer a month ago if he might consider helping the Swiss along. Mr Roche politely declined, saying that he did not want to travel the circuit again, but that he would treasure the offer. Who would not?

Doris Loeffel
11-24-2004, 04:35 PM
Still Roger will train again with Roche from mid December on in Australia. So I still think it doesn't hurt to have someone alongside to help develop the game and help watching the changements/improvements of the other players.

merle
11-24-2004, 05:55 PM
Thanks for the news Doris! Good to hear he's taking his game so seriously still! :)

RPH
11-24-2004, 06:47 PM
No :)

Cervantes
04-15-2005, 08:09 PM
Without a coach in the past year and a half Federer has a 109-8 record, but still he's in need of a coach quickly! Today's defeat against Gasquet proves it yet again, Roger has problems playing people for the first time, especially youngsters of the new generation. Last year he was beaten by Nadal and Berdych in the first meeting and today it was the same story with Gasquet. So that makes 3 out of 8 losses have come against young, upcoming players, who Federer hadn't faced previously. Not to take anything away from them, but you can't help feeling as though he wasn't prepared properly to play them.

A coach would definitely help in this situation. Roger probably didn't have the time to go and watch a couple of Gasguet's matches to get a feel of his strengths and weaknesses, where a coach would have. Perhaps Roger watched some highlights from Gasquet's previous match, but that's nowhere near as effective as actually watching (a couple of matches) live. A coach could also help determine a strategy and point out some flaws in the opponent's game, things Roger can take advantage of.

Of course there's a difference between playing these youngsters and playing the "old" guys. Federer knows how to play the rest of the field cause he's played them before and worked out a strategy to beat them with Peter Lundgren. I don't think it's a coincedence anymore that Roger loses more against the next generation than against his own generation.

Discuss!

wimbledonfan
04-15-2005, 08:24 PM
I don't think he needs a coach . Federer is so great that he can make adjustments during the match . Like he said , playing tennis is like going into an exam , you don't have your textbooks during a test and you certainly don't rely on a coach to bail you out during a match

onewoman74
04-15-2005, 08:27 PM
another thread about how crap Roger is? He's not mentally tough...he needs a coach...he loses to the younger generation...Nadal is his rival...Safin is his rival...he needs to dump Mirka...he needs to wax his legs...he needs a haircut...he needs to grow out his hair...he needs to date a supermodel...he needs a date w/ Paris Hilton...how can he be more famous in the US...

shall i go on?

Lalitha
04-15-2005, 08:29 PM
Yes, he needs - whenever he loses.

Cervantes
04-15-2005, 08:46 PM
Yes, he needs - whenever he loses.

ah come on, this thread is not based upon one accidental claycourt loss. It's not the one loss against Gasquet, it's about systematic underperforming against the next generation. Or is this next generation simply so much better than the current generation (Hewitt, Roddick, Safin)?

Jenrios
04-15-2005, 08:50 PM
well, Sky pointed out that when Fed was asked about Gasquet yesterday, he said he didn't know much about him except he had a great backhand. A coach would be able to scout players for him.

euroka1
04-15-2005, 08:54 PM
It's not the one loss against Gasquet, it's about systematic underperforming against the next generation. Or is this next generation simply so much better than the current generation (Hewitt, Roddick, Safin)?

I think your right on although just who the future top people will be is not yet clear.

Dirk
04-15-2005, 08:55 PM
Roche will be with him in Rome and Hamburg Roger hinted. Jenrios is right a traveling coach would help but Roger is doing damn well on his own. This event was good for him and he is in good spirits for the rest of the clay season. Roger will be fine.

Jenrios
04-15-2005, 08:59 PM
Good news about Roche!

Skyward
04-15-2005, 09:04 PM
well, Sky pointed out that when Fed was asked about Gasquet yesterday, he said he didn't know much about him except he had a great backhand. A coach would be able to scout players for him.

I see Mirka is getting lazy. ;)

MisterQ
04-15-2005, 09:06 PM
I don't think he needs a coach . Federer is so great that he can make adjustments during the match . Like he said , playing tennis is like going into an exam , you don't have your textbooks during a test and you certainly don't rely on a coach to bail you out during a match

Roger is a genius, but even geniuses benefit from doing their homework. ;)

Whether he NEEDS a full-time coach or not, surely his life would be a little easier if someone was there to scout out lesser-known oppponents.

sigmagirl91
04-15-2005, 09:07 PM
another thread about how crap Roger is? He's not mentally tough...he needs a coach...he loses to the younger generation...Nadal is his rival...Safin is his rival...he needs to dump Mirka...he needs to wax his legs...he needs a haircut...he needs to grow out his hair...he needs to date a supermodel...he needs a date w/ Paris Hilton...how can he be more famous in the US...

shall i go on?

Do go on...I'm sure the list will grow longer with time. For most of you, Roger may as well pose nude for Playgirl or rob a bank in order to become more interesting.....

Jenrios
04-15-2005, 09:08 PM
I see Mirka is getting lazy. ;)

:haha:

sigmagirl91
04-15-2005, 09:15 PM
I see Mirka is getting lazy. ;)

And fatter.....

lunahielo
04-15-2005, 09:22 PM
He lost a match! Duh!!
Wow~~this is the second one he's lost since 2005 began! Oh my! :lol:


~As Dirk said~~Roger will be fine.
Roger is fine. :yeah:

World Beater
04-15-2005, 10:02 PM
No he doesnt need a coach...a scout is useful for everyone though

Raul-Lopez
04-15-2005, 10:32 PM
Without a coach in the past year and a half Federer has a 109-8 record, but still he's in need of a coach quickly! Today's defeat against Gasquet proves it yet again, Roger has problems playing people for the first time, especially youngsters of the new generation. Last year he was beaten by Nadal and Berdych in the first meeting and today it was the same story with Gasquet. So that makes 3 out of 8 losses have come against young, upcoming players, who Federer hadn't faced previously. Not to take anything away from them, but you can't help feeling as though he wasn't prepared properly to play them.

A coach would definitely help in this situation. Roger probably didn't have the time to go and watch a couple of Gasguet's matches to get a feel of his strengths and weaknesses, where a coach would have. Perhaps Roger watched some highlights from Gasquet's previous match, but that's nowhere near as effective as actually watching (a couple of matches) live. A coach could also help determine a strategy and point out some flaws in the opponent's game, things Roger can take advantage of.

Of course there's a difference between playing these youngsters and playing the "old" guys. Federer knows how to play the rest of the field cause he's played them before and worked out a strategy to beat them with Peter Lundgren. I don't think it's a coincedence anymore that Roger loses more against the next generation than against his own generation.

Discuss!

Totally agree with you. The number one maybe not need improving his game skills now but the scouting actually , in professional sport its very important .

Great Cervantes :worship:

euroka1
04-15-2005, 10:46 PM
I agree with all of this at the same time as being aware of a powerful new generation of players coming along.

Long may Federer continue to play his great "thinking" game.

federer express
04-15-2005, 10:48 PM
is it not possible federer is doing just fine as he is? maybe he doesn't need to change anything. and if he does then he needs to make these changes when he is winning matches too, not just when he loses one every couple of months. nobody can go unbeaten in tennis...not in the mens game. federer is dominant, so i would suggest he doesn't 'need' to do anything differently. (just my opinion)

mangoes
04-15-2005, 10:54 PM
I think federer just had a bad day. He played badly. It wasn't his favorite surface. Yet he had several match points. So I think this match is being over analyzed. Today just wasn't his day.

NATAS81
04-15-2005, 11:07 PM
Federer is the mental. No coaches apply.

Federer should coach the top 10.

boliviana
04-15-2005, 11:12 PM
I think federer just had a bad day. He played badly. It wasn't his favorite surface. Yet he had several match points. So I think this match is being over analyzed. Today just wasn't his day.

I would agree except that he struggled in several matches in Miami . . . his forehand failed him several times in several matches . . . it's more than he had a bad day. He had another bad day and this time got caught. Might be good for him though . . . he'll focus more for Hamburg and RG.

mangoes
04-15-2005, 11:22 PM
I would agree except that he struggled in several matches in Miami . . . his forehand failed him several times in several matches . . . it's more than he had a bad day. He had another bad day and this time got caught. Might be good for him though . . . he'll focus more for Hamburg and RG.


I also think he needs a break. I wasn't shocked that he struggled in the beginning matches in miami, he had been playing a lot of tennis. And to beat agassi, I think it took the last reserves of his energy. I was there and the tennis was simply beautiful.

But, I think he has been playing a lot of tennis and needs some time off. So hopefully, he will get it before Hamburg and Rome.

erik-the-red
04-16-2005, 12:27 AM
Roger does quite well without a coach. He's mentally strong enough to do so.

Besides, he became the first man in sixteen years to win three major titles in a year. Moreover, he was one title shy of tying Thomas Muster's record of twelve titles won in a year. In addition, he won the Masters Cup - all without a coach.

This year he's teamed up part time with Tony Roche. Yes, he was outgunned down under by the only man who could do so, Safin, but he bounced back by winning the American Double. And three other titles...

alexito
04-16-2005, 12:54 AM
please, you are the fans federer? for the one match lose? federer no is god, no is perfect, please

WyveN
04-16-2005, 01:58 AM
Given how well his coaching arrangement has been working over the past 18 months I see no reason for him to get a full time coach right now. I can only see Federer changing if he remains slamless in 2005.

The reason Nadal, Berdych and Gasquet beat him is not because Roger knew nothing about them but because they had nothing to lose, went for their shots and for the most part executed almost perfectly in crucial moments.

I don't think the #1 player in the world would have problems getting information about other player games and it is probably a very small factor in these losses.

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 03:44 AM
He loses a match and all of a sudden he needs a coach. If he wants someone to scout, he could always get Yves Allegro to do it.

He has lost 2 matches this season, it's far from crisis time and the arrangement with Roche he has seems to be good enough.

Nadal, Berdych, Gasquet, Safin, Costa, Guga were all the better players on that day, since when has it been Federer's divine right to go through a season unbeaten.

Sjengster
04-16-2005, 03:49 AM
Exactly. Federer is a believer in social contract theory just like everyone else on the ATP.

World Beater
04-16-2005, 03:53 AM
He loses a match and all of a sudden he needs a coach. If he wants someone to scout, he could always get Yves Allegro to do it.

He has lost 2 matches this season, it's far from crisis time and the arrangement with Roche he has seems to be good enough.

Nadal, Berdych, Gasquet, Safin, Costa, Guga were all the better players on that day, since when has it been Federer's divine right to go through a season unbeaten.

Since when was sampras's divine right to have won 14 slams...

Maybe after he won it. But it was federer's divine right to win 3 slams last year. Something people thought he couldnt do

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 04:02 AM
Since when was sampras's divine right to have won 14 slams...

Maybe after he won it. But it was federer's divine right to win 3 slams last year. Something people thought he couldnt do

What are you trying to say?

NYCtennisfan
04-16-2005, 04:06 AM
This poster makes a good point about Federer against players he has never faced before.

Lalitha
04-16-2005, 04:11 AM
ah come on, this thread is not based upon one accidental claycourt loss. It's not the one loss against Gasquet, it's about systematic underperforming against the next generation. Or is this next generation simply so much better than the current generation (Hewitt, Roddick, Safin)?

You are right. But hasn't he beaten them in their next meeting?

bad gambler
04-16-2005, 04:20 AM
he has done ok without one so far

El Legenda
04-16-2005, 04:29 AM
ill coach Rogerer.

jacobhiggins
04-16-2005, 05:19 AM
Federer figures people out. Look how he has turned around his losing streaks to certain players. He not only adapts in a match, but after a match, do you hear the specific way he talks about players tactics and how they play! Federer is no dummy! Also Federer gives off the impression he dosen't train, he's just that good. There have been reports of Federer's crazy training and if you look closely you can tell. His personality in a way hides the fact that he's a monster in the gym! He has some massive legs and a big frame. He dosen't give off the impression, but he's physically pretty tough!

Read his interview, Federer tells you exactly what i'm saying, I have a feeling he'll figure out this kid, just like he's figured out everybody else http://montecarlo.masters-series.com/1005/players/interviews/05_federer5.asp

He's not bitter at all, good read!

RichardParker
04-16-2005, 05:48 AM
Read his interview, Federer tells you exactly what i'm saying, I have a feeling he'll figure out this kid, just like he's figured out everybody else http://montecarlo.masters-series.com/1005/players/interviews/05_federer5.asp

He's not bitter at all, good read!
Good one!
Q. The only two matches you lost, you had matchpoints.

ROGER FEDERER: (Smiling).

Q. What that means?

ROGER FEDERER: I choke badly (laughing).
:haha: :haha:

Art&Soul
04-16-2005, 05:52 AM
Read his interview, Federer tells you exactly what i'm saying, I have a feeling he'll figure out this kid, just like he's figured out everybody else http://montecarlo.masters-series.com/1005/players/interviews/05_federer5.asp

He's not bitter at all, good read!

Yup he's not bitter at all, that's good and that's mean he need this loss for a better long goal :)

Levo.
04-16-2005, 06:49 AM
FWAHAHAHA Federer sucks. I doublt he'll win another match for the rest of his life. He should retire now and save face ;)

Cervantes
04-16-2005, 09:08 AM
Thanks for the replies, I see a lot of people think this is a panic thread cause Roger loses one match, but let me tell you again, it's not! Of course Roger has the right to lose a match every now and then, and a 35-2 start to the season is by no means bad for anyone, so I'm not complaining :)

Federer figures people out. Look how he has turned around his losing streaks to certain players. He not only adapts in a match, but after a match, do you hear the specific way he talks about players tactics and how they play! Federer is no dummy! Also Federer gives off the impression he dosen't train, he's just that good. There have been reports of Federer's crazy training and if you look closely you can tell. His personality in a way hides the fact that he's a monster in the gym! He has some massive legs and a big frame. He dosen't give off the impression, but he's physically pretty tough!

Completely agree, Roger indeed adapts to players during a match and after the match. I haven't seen Federer-Nadal from Miami yet, but that's probably what happened during that match, Roger figured out how to play Nadal somewhere along the way. This is great of course, but wouldn't it be even better if he knew a bit more about Nadal's game a year ago? Maybe he could have won their first match too.

You are right. But hasn't he beaten them in their next meeting?

He did beat Nadal in their next match, he hasn't played the others for a second time yet. Like jacobhiggins said, Roger adapt to players during and after a match, so he came up with a better (although in this case not flawless) gameplan for the second encounter with Nadal.

Given how well his coaching arrangement has been working over the past 18 months I see no reason for him to get a full time coach right now. I can only see Federer changing if he remains slamless in 2005.

The reason Nadal, Berdych and Gasquet beat him is not because Roger knew nothing about them but because they had nothing to lose, went for their shots and for the most part executed almost perfectly in crucial moments.

I don't think the #1 player in the world would have problems getting information about other player games and it is probably a very small factor in these losses.

At this moment no one has anything to lose against Federer, so players like Roddick and Agassi could also go for their shots and beat Roger. However they can't beat him cause he plays smarter against them.

He can get information from other players, but it'll be something like "he has a great backhand" or "he's very consistent, doesn't make a lot of errors". A coach would give him much more detailed information, like where a player serves during a match and at critical moments. Whether a player can handle different kinds of spin. Maybe for a certain player it's better to hit more spin and less pace or the other way around. Better to find out such things before a match instead of during the match.

Becarina
04-16-2005, 09:24 AM
FWAHAHAHA Federer sucks. I doublt he'll win another match for the rest of his life. He should retire now and save face ;)


good idea ;)

Puschkin
04-16-2005, 09:30 AM
ah come on, this thread is not based upon one accidental claycourt loss. It's not the one loss against Gasquet, it's about systematic underperforming against the next generation.

Systematic underperforming :confused: Get real, folks! ;) Roger lost 2 ( in words two) matches in 2005 and had match point in boths of them!

I don't agree with the analysis on another thread either that he plays worse than last year. Nobody can win all the time. Other guys also know how to play.

Furthermore, I think it was the right message at the right time and I am convinced that we will see great things from Roger again, rather sooner than later. :wavey:

Action Jackson
04-16-2005, 09:32 AM
Exactly. Federer is a believer in social contract theory just like everyone else on the ATP.

Never thought of it like that, but yes he must be.

MariaV
04-16-2005, 12:37 PM
Just wanted to say - Fed's press conference was TERRIFIC!!!!! :yeah: :yeah: Absolutely GREAT answers, GREAT attitude!!!!! :worship: :worship: :worship:
And I hope all Fed fans are still OK and as :cool: as the man himself.

euroka1
04-16-2005, 12:45 PM
Federer figures people out. Look how he has turned around his losing streaks to certain players. He not only adapts in a match, but after a match, do you hear the specific way he talks about players tactics and how they play! Federer is no dummy! Also Federer gives off the impression he dosen't train, he's just that good. There have been reports of Federer's crazy training and if you look closely you can tell. His personality in a way hides the fact that he's a monster in the gym! He has some massive legs and a big frame. He dosen't give off the impression, but he's physically pretty tough!

Read his interview, Federer tells you exactly what i'm saying, I have a feeling he'll figure out this kid, just like he's figured out everybody else http://montecarlo.masters-series.com/1005/players/interviews/05_federer5.asp

He's not bitter at all, good read!

Thanks. That was a very classy interview. I came away with new respect for the man and his game.

WyveN
04-16-2005, 01:06 PM
At this moment no one has anything to lose against Federer, so players like Roddick and Agassi could also go for their shots and beat Roger. However they can't beat him cause he plays smarter against them.


Agassi doesn't have the sort of aggressive game that can blow you away with winners like Gasquet did to Fed yesterday. Agassi is a amazing timer of the ball but his game is to play relatively safely, with margin for error, move the opponent around the court and outlast them, particularly at this age
.
Roddick managed to hit Roger off the court for one set at Wimbledon but wasnt good enough to keep that level up for longer, obviously beating Roger on grass is extremely difficult and Roger raises his level for finals which makes it very tough for Roddick while his big liabilities, the backhand and return of serve, prevents him from really challenging Roger.



He can get information from other players, but it'll be something like "he has a great backhand" or "he's very consistent, doesn't make a lot of errors". A coach would give him much more detailed information, like where a player serves during a match and at critical moments. Whether a player can handle different kinds of spin. Maybe for a certain player it's better to hit more spin and less pace or the other way around. Better to find out such things before a match instead of during the match.


I agree with all of that and I was against Roger going coachless but after seeing his results but why try to fix something that isn't broken? He has lost 8 times since going without a full time coach, half of those in extremely tight matches.As roger himself said in a interview, when I start losing to someone in straight sets regularly, then I need to look at changing things.

MariaV
04-16-2005, 01:27 PM
Well said WyveN! :yeah:

Cervantes
04-16-2005, 07:22 PM
Systematic underperforming :confused: Get real, folks! ;) Roger lost 2 ( in words two) matches in 2005 and had match point in boths of them!

I don't agree with the analysis on another thread either that he plays worse than last year. Nobody can win all the time. Other guys also know how to play.

Furthermore, I think it was the right message at the right time and I am convinced that we will see great things from Roger again, rather sooner than later. :wavey:

Learn to read! My comment was about systematic underperforming against the new generation. So whether he loses 20 matches in a row or wins 20 in a row is irrelevant. This topic is about Roger's matches against upcoming players who he faces for the first time.

Roddick managed to hit Roger off the court for one set at Wimbledon but wasnt good enough to keep that level up for longer, obviously beating Roger on grass is extremely difficult and Roger raises his level for finals which makes it very tough for Roddick while his big liabilities, the backhand and return of serve, prevents him from really challenging Roger.

There it is, Roddick's liabilites prevent him from winning against Federer. Very true and Roger takes full advantage of those liabilities to beat Andy again and again :) But doesn't Gasquet's game have any flaws? It probably does (although I haven't seen him play yet so I can't tell for sure) and it's Roger's job to take full advantage of that like he does against other players.

Skyward
04-16-2005, 07:43 PM
Learn to read! My comment was about systematic underperforming against the new generation

There's not enough evidence to come to this conclusion. Since Federer's leave of Peter Lindgren he played younger players (2 years difference or more) only 14 times.

He won 11 times: Bogomolov, Reid, Bogdanovich, Andreev, Baghdatis (twice), Wawrinka, Ancic (twice), Minar, Nadal

He lost 3 times: Nadal, Berdych, Gasquet.

Dirk
04-16-2005, 07:53 PM
Thanks Skyward for those stats. People seem to only remember the youngster Roger loses too.

World Beater
04-16-2005, 08:17 PM
No i dont think its against younger players, but more against good young guys who have nothing to lose and will have a good future.

Nadal, berdych, gasquet and baggy have already been touted as guys to watch, while the rest havent received much attention. Ancic i dont think should be included. Hes been around for a little longer

Cervantes
04-16-2005, 08:26 PM
There's not enough evidence to come to this conclusion. Since Federer's leave of Peter Lindgren he played younger players (2 years difference or more) only 13 times.

He won 10 times: Bogomolov, Reid, Bogdanovich, Baghdatis (twice), Wawrinka, Ancic (twice), Minar, Nadal

He lost 3 times: Nadal, Berdych, Gasquet.

My argument was about first time encounters, so Ancic, 2nd Baghdatis and 2nd Nadal are out. This means 6 wins against 3 losses, sounds like underperforming to me.

Also note he should know Wawrinka's game pretty well as they've praticed together. And of course Bogdanovich is a first class loser hyped up by the British media.

Skyward
04-16-2005, 08:39 PM
My argument was about first time encounters, so Ancic, 2nd Baghdatis and 2nd Nadal are out. .

Unfortunately, I have to use your own words. Learn to read. That's what you had to say-

"Learn to read! My comment was about systematic underperforming against the new generation".

That's why I listed younger guys who belong to the new generation. If you mean first time encounters, then we also have to mention his matches with "old" guys. Either way, there's not enough evidence.

Cervantes
04-16-2005, 09:20 PM
Unfortunately, I have to use your own words. Learn to read. That's what you had to say-

"Learn to read! My comment was about systematic underperforming against the new generation".

That's why I listed younger guys who belong to the new generation. If you mean first time encounters, then we also have to mention his matches with "old" guys. Either way, there's not enough evidence.

lol yeah, but in my opening post I did explain properly. The reason I'm not discussing first matches against older opponents is he must have seen them play a couple of times before their match. For example Coria last year in Hamburg, it's no problem not playing him before, because he's probably seen Coria play quite a few times.

You're right there's not enough evidence to conclude statistical significant underperformance, but there's is enough evidence to suggest it. I guess we'll have to wait and see how his first match against Monfils turns out.

rogeragassi
06-12-2006, 03:15 AM
McEnroe is completely right: When Nadal kicks it high to Fed's backhand, both off the serve and off the ground, he needs to be chipping. As it stands, he was basically just either missing or hitting flat short balls that Nadal can easily attack. His backhand was worthless today-- it killed him.

I still think Fed can beat this guy on clay. He needs to figure out how to get more forehands, get into net, and put three solid sets together.

Jimnik
06-12-2006, 03:17 AM
How about Mr. Gilbert ;)

ChloeLove
06-12-2006, 03:21 AM
I agree. They panned to Roche at one point, and his head was in his hand. Looked to me like he was sleeping...apparently he doesn't do too much coaching either. Federer does alright with him though.

Lady Natalia
06-12-2006, 03:51 AM
Who is really to say that he needs a new coach? He might not need a coach at all. Without one, he was 3 of 4 in GS and since 3 of 6. But if Roger gets a new coach he should consider getting someone fulltime.

chicky841
06-12-2006, 03:59 AM
:retard:

hasanahmad
07-05-2006, 08:34 AM
He has come all this way through his own but alot of players are now trying to find out ways to beat federer instead of federer finding out ways to beat them.


1) The Coach has to instill more mental toughness into roger and for that I think a tough coach is needed to eliminate brain farts

2) The Coach needs to help make roger's backhand more consistent without changing any mechanics

3) Give advice


Who is the best coach for Federer?

Stevens Point
07-05-2006, 08:36 AM
Tony Roche? :shrug:

BlueSwan
07-05-2006, 08:38 AM
What players exactly is it who's beating Federer. It's Nadal and absolutely noone else. Infact Federer seems to be increasing his dominance over the rest of the tour.

As for beating Nadal, I don't think it takes a coach. It takes a whole lot of matches so that Fed can find some way to deal with the high-bouncing Nadal shots to his backhand.

lshdure
07-05-2006, 08:51 AM
Don't think Nadal lightly. He has a lot of potentials for becoming Great Player. He has what Fed. does not have, mental toughness. While stiking to present success, Federer gave players a chance to catch him. It is his backhand. His backhand did not improve since Masters cup Huston, 2004. At that time his backhand was explosive and very powerful. But since then, i think his BH has became powerless except grass court. Roach improved volley, but didn't care of Fed's BH. Fed now really need couch.

robinhood
07-05-2006, 09:11 AM
Don't think Nadal lightly. He has a lot of potentials for becoming Great Player. He has what Fed. does not have, mental toughness. While stiking to present success, Federer gave players a chance to catch him. It is his backhand. His backhand did not improve since Masters cup Huston, 2004. At that time his backhand was explosive and very powerful. But since then, i think his BH has became powerless except grass court. Roach improved volley, but didn't care of Fed's BH. Fed now really need couch.

A powerless backhand?
Zero mental toughness??
Tony Roche's only cared about his volley???

What????

fyi
07-05-2006, 09:13 AM
:confused:
I don't think Federer will be interested in hiring a coach or a new coach. I have read somewhere that Federer said he could be a coach himself... The reason he hires Tony Roche because Tony is lefty. He needs a lefty coach to give advice to handle Nadal. :o

robinhood
07-05-2006, 09:25 AM
:confused:
I don't think Federer will be interested in hiring a coach or a new coach. I have read somewhere that Federer said he could be a coach himself... The reason he hires Tony Roche because Tony is lefty. He needs a lefty coach to give advice to handle Nadal. :o

Roche and Fed started working together at the end of 2004 before Nadal became Nadal, so that cannot be 100% correct.
If Fed had somehow foreseen the future, then apparently he picked a wrong coach because he's not exactly winning.

deliveryman
07-05-2006, 11:17 AM
:confused:
I don't think Federer will be interested in hiring a coach or a new coach. I have read somewhere that Federer said he could be a coach himself... The reason he hires Tony Roche because Tony is lefty. He needs a lefty coach to give advice to handle Nadal. :o

I'm convinced you know absolutely nothing.


Basically what robinhood said.

nobama
07-05-2006, 11:29 AM
Roche and Fed started working together at the end of 2004 before Nadal became Nadal, so that cannot be 100% correct.
If Fed had somehow foreseen the future, then apparently he picked a wrong coach because he's not exactly winning.How is that Roche's fault? It's not a coaching problem it's a mental problem.

Plastic Bertrand
07-05-2006, 11:33 AM
Federer has only lost to Nadal in 2006 and he needs a coach. MTF makes my heart sing.

prima donna
07-05-2006, 11:39 AM
He has come all this way through his own but alot of players are now trying to find out ways to beat federer instead of federer finding out ways to beat them.


1) The Coach has to instill more mental toughness into roger and for that I think a tough coach is needed to eliminate brain farts

2) The Coach needs to help make roger's backhand more consistent without changing any mechanics

3) Give advice


Who is the best coach for Federer?

Ignorance at it's best.

tennisgal_001
07-05-2006, 12:04 PM
He has what Fed. does not have, mental toughness

:haha:
LMAO! That's the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while.

yanchr
07-05-2006, 01:03 PM
Don't think Nadal lightly. He has a lot of potentials for becoming Great Player. He has what Fed. does not have, mental toughness. While stiking to present success, Federer gave players a chance to catch him. It is his backhand. His backhand did not improve since Masters cup Huston, 2004. At that time his backhand was explosive and very powerful. But since then, i think his BH has became powerless except grass court. Roach improved volley, but didn't care of Fed's BH. Fed now really need couch.
Regardless of the coach thing...

Federer doesn't have mental toughness? How will you explain the Rome Final, last TMC final or 05 AO semi? And what about Federer has what Nadal doesn't have, eg, the variety, just to name one?

And power is not the only thing which determines if his backhand is better or not. In my view, his backhand improves tons since then. His backhand is never his main weapon. It is very well used to fit his overall game now.

bokehlicious
07-05-2006, 03:46 PM
Yeah, Roger needs someone to show him a way to play tennis, he barely knows how to handle a racquet these days :retard:

Magical Trevor
07-05-2006, 04:40 PM
The last time I looked, Rochey was arguably the best coach in the world, and Federer is winning every single match he plays bar against a specific player.

And that's a psychological thing than a technical or tactical thing

lshdure
07-05-2006, 09:04 PM
Regardless of the coach thing...

Federer doesn't have mental toughness? How will you explain the Rome Final, last TMC final or 05 AO semi? And what about Federer has what Nadal doesn't have, eg, the variety, just to name one?

And power is not the only thing which determines if his backhand is better or not. In my view, his backhand improves tons since then. His backhand is never his main weapon. It is very well used to fit his overall game now.

Fed. lost in the same way in Rome Final, TMC final, 05 Ao Semi. Showing what he can do is one thing, and winning the match is another. He can trail bravely, but he does not seem to finish winning a match. It was the same scinario at 05 RG final. Fed. broke at 4-5 in the Nadal's serve, postponing Ndl's second RG winning. But he was innert at tie break. Do you know what this mean? His mental toughness can not sustain until the end. Fed. until now is tough in mentality, but not so tough as being THE GREATEST EVER.

I do want Fed. to be THE ONE but he need improve in this respect. He need to learn Hungry Spirit from his couch, not technique.

R.Federer
07-05-2006, 09:06 PM
Huh?
Isn't Tony Roche a coach? He's not just a travelling companion, sport spectator in the player's box, etc. Tony Roche is Roger's coach!

FedFanUS
07-08-2007, 06:45 PM
With Nadal being there right with him now I think it would be smart of Roger to hire a coach who can help to get him to yet another level and fix some of the errors he is commiting here recently.

If he stands pat, I personally think Nadal is going to pass him up, barring injury of course.

goldenlox
07-08-2007, 07:32 PM
If he thinks the field is closing in, he might. But with 5 straight Wimbledons and 10 straight slam finals, he probably feels his current situation is working.

celia
07-09-2007, 06:26 AM
Whatever happened to his plan to hire Darren Cahill? Did I dream that?

Bremen
07-09-2007, 06:45 AM
Whatever happened to his plan to hire Darren Cahill? Did I dream that?

Would Cahill coach again? He seems to be settling into his commentating role rather well.

Eden
07-09-2007, 03:56 PM
If he thinks the field is closing in, he might. But with 5 straight Wimbledons and 10 straight slam finals, he probably feels his current situation is working.

Roger is experienced enough to analyze the situation of him this year. He has said that he would go to the French Open and Wimbledon without a coach. I trust in him that he makes the right decision. He has some time off now, so lets wait which news he might have when he is back to the court.

Adler
07-09-2007, 04:05 PM
Roger is one of the very few players with the ability to find solutions on his own. In 2006, Wertheim even nominated him for coach of the year or something. That's why I think that hiring a coach is not a necessary thing to do. Besides, didn't Cahill denied this Federer coaching?

Kolya
07-09-2007, 04:10 PM
Federer might hire a coach if Nadal keeps closing the gap even more.

tennis2tennis
07-09-2007, 04:23 PM
Roger’s dad Robert was on swiss radio sdf this morning he said that roger has someone in mind, but the person has stopped coaching for quite a time, He said he’s not going to name the person roger is pursuing because it wouldn't be fair.

Forehander
07-09-2007, 05:32 PM
yeah, i like this, keeping us suspended and guessing

Dina
07-09-2007, 05:37 PM
the only people I can think of who haven't been coaching I can think of are Tony Pickard or Bob Brett. He doesn't need a coach, he's already coached by milkathehutt

doddel
07-09-2007, 05:37 PM
they mentioned on BBC last week that Roger's management received over 200 applications over the past few months...

Dina
07-09-2007, 05:40 PM
yeah, from his fans on here probabaly

bayvalle
07-09-2007, 05:41 PM
If he thinks the field is closing in, he might. But with 5 straight Wimbledons and 10 straight slam finals, he probably feels his current situation is working.
Agreed. Besides, a player is on his own once he enters the court.

KrisJB
07-09-2007, 06:32 PM
I heard that Roger thought about being coached by Stefan Edberg !!

helen phillips
07-09-2007, 06:35 PM
Lets hope so - clearly he can manage on his own but there is room for him to continue to improve and that doesn't seem like it will happen without a coach. He seems a little more ordinary out there than he used to be but then again maybe some of those superlative performances were more about the quality of his opponents? Hard to know - still 11 Slams with 5 consecutive Wimbledons is impressive. 3 more and we can hopefully put to rest the concept of Pete Sampras as the best ever.

ranaldo
07-09-2007, 08:56 PM
I heard that Roger thought about being coached by Stefan Edberg !!

Wow that's about the worse idea I'd expect from him. Isn't Edberg the kinda guy who'd ask Roger to rush the net even more ???

TenHound
07-09-2007, 09:04 PM
If "that coach has stopped coaching for quite a time", as Poster heard his Dad say on Swiss radio this am, that could very well be Steffi's coach, Heinz (can't spell last name) Gunthardt, who is Swiss & Impt. figures had said would be an exc. choice.

Magus13
07-10-2007, 12:24 AM
Would like to see Fed slice the ball more on his approach to the net against Nadal. When the ball is waist high he gets some ridiculous angle, eve from 6 feet behind the base line. Also approach up the middle taking away the angle.

lazyman
07-10-2007, 01:28 AM
i think fed should get a coach. he is the best player on tour but he is starting to lose his domination status. if he wants to keep his edge on the pack he should be doing everything possible. it would be stupid not to have a coach if it makes him a better player. its not like he has an issue paying for one so why shouldnt he get one. on the otherhand he should not rush into something. he needs to pick the right coach and that may not be so easy.

zadle69
10-21-2007, 06:11 PM
How many people think coming into 2008 and trying to break Sampras record that Federer needs a coach?

bokehlicious
10-21-2007, 06:12 PM
Federer is done, coachless or not he'll never catch Sampras.

CmonAussie
10-21-2007, 06:12 PM
...
yeah i was thinking the same thing<:)

after FED dumped Roche I was concerned, considering that it was remakable that he won Wimby & USO again!!

prima donna
10-21-2007, 06:14 PM
No.

Action Jackson
10-21-2007, 06:17 PM
Retire

vincayou
10-21-2007, 06:18 PM
This is the third coming of Just Cause (the second being Jcempire)

FedFan_2007
10-21-2007, 06:20 PM
Expected thread. Mess in aisle 5, move along, nothing to see here.

guga2120
10-21-2007, 06:27 PM
No, he lost to somebody, hes been losing to since he was a kid.

Merton
10-21-2007, 06:45 PM
It is time to retire Federer Truba. Sigh. At least, if Roach was around that would be the time to call for him getting fired.

K90
10-21-2007, 06:56 PM
oh come on, he lost 6 or 7 matches in a year, yeah hes terrible

FedFan_2007
10-21-2007, 07:04 PM
Fat Dave has always owned Federer Truba.

trixtah
10-21-2007, 07:06 PM
Time to go back to challengers...

Pfloyd
10-21-2007, 07:16 PM
Ugh, what threads

KoOlMaNsEaN
10-21-2007, 07:19 PM
He better get a freakin coach.

FedFan_2007
10-21-2007, 07:21 PM
Federer might struggle at the Challenger level - Donald Young owns that circuit...

Adler
10-21-2007, 07:28 PM
Mirka would play better than Federer these days

mariyella80
10-21-2007, 07:31 PM
this THREAD issss sooooo POINTLESS

trixtah
10-21-2007, 07:32 PM
Federer might struggle at the Challenger level - Donald Young owns that circuit...

That's true, he'd never take Young in his own house

Xristos
10-21-2007, 07:38 PM
this THREAD issss sooooo POINTLESS

So was your post..

FedFan_2007
10-21-2007, 07:40 PM
Mirka Truba!

R.Federer
10-21-2007, 07:53 PM
:lol:
Because he lost a final today? How did he win Wimbledon and USO? He'll do alright. He probably confers with people anyway, but finally has to go and do the stuff himself

RagingLamb
10-21-2007, 07:56 PM
you're right. he does need a wake up call after winning only 3 of the 4 majors this year.

sierra91
10-21-2007, 08:06 PM
Federer might struggle at the Challenger level - Donald Young owns that circuit...

:rolls: :rolls:

scoobs
10-21-2007, 08:06 PM
No it's a warning to stop being such a dick in 3 set finals and letting his opponent take over and dictate the match He's done that too many times in finals this year.

ReturnWinner
10-21-2007, 08:09 PM
no, he is doing awesome without one since very much time go -except that short part time deal with Roche, so why to

change that just because he lost in a very tough match against a very

difficult player in a master series final?

AnitaOlea
10-21-2007, 08:16 PM
ok I don't like the guy but RETIRE? what r u talking about... he lost ONE match and u start talking nonsense stuff... beside he lost to nalbandian and he played extremely well, should then nadal and djokovic retire too?? :retard:

trixtah
10-21-2007, 08:20 PM
ok I don't like the guy but RETIRE? what r u talking about... he lost ONE match and u start talking nonsense stuff... beside he lost to nalbandian and he played extremely well, should then nadal and djokovic retire too?? :retard:

Yes, they should. These three need to hit the practice courts and the challengers--I'm not so sure they can compete with the top 50 in the world anymore

RagingLamb
10-21-2007, 08:29 PM
ok I don't like the guy but RETIRE? what r u talking about... he lost ONE match and u start talking nonsense stuff... beside he lost to nalbandian and he played extremely well, should then nadal and djokovic retire too?? :retard:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sarcasm

CyBorg
10-21-2007, 08:39 PM
He'll never win a title again.

kiwi10is
10-21-2007, 08:43 PM
those long tournament breaks are not good for him. But even if he plays a little less dominant he is still superman... with our without coach he will stay at the top

LocoPorElTenis
10-21-2007, 08:44 PM
He'll never win a title again.

He might win a Challenger if he's lucky enough to avoid Isner and Young in the draw.

zethand
10-21-2007, 09:09 PM
There are many players who would want to save the cash they pay to their coaches... Certainly, just a master like Federer, can do this kind of things. He is richer, than everyone in the tour and he doesnt have to pay a coach... PRICELESS!!!

Savo
10-21-2007, 09:30 PM
It's hard making ends meet as it is. He can't possibly afford a coach...

leng jai
10-21-2007, 10:07 PM
I've heard from a very reliable source that Federer is skipping Paris and WTF to assess his future in the sport.

jasmin
10-21-2007, 11:42 PM
So silly...Federer makes ever final in 2 years and wins 3 of them out of 4 for 2 years in a row. Lost how many times this year and he needs a coach. This lost is not a big deal. He's going to lose sometimes. He doesn't need a coach because of this match. I think Federer needs coach but one that's there for him even off the court.

R.Federer
10-21-2007, 11:50 PM
I'd like to see him with Lundgren again. But probably too much water under the bridge to let that relation recover

NYCtennisfan
10-22-2007, 12:15 AM
Consecutive finals in Hamburg, RG, Wimby, Canada, Cincy, USO, and then TMS Madrid along with two wins on the road in DC = needs a coach badly or it will be time to retire. For perspective's sake, no other player on tour has ever made more than 4 consective finals in row, let alone 4 TMS or Slam events.

jcempire
10-22-2007, 12:57 AM
How many people think coming into 2008 and trying to break Sampras record that Federer needs a coach?

He not long need a coach. He doesn't need coach,

No....

jcempire
10-22-2007, 01:00 AM
Federer is done, coachless or not he'll never catch Sampras.

Roger is a guy who don't need a coach.

Come on, Be honest, Coach not go to help him.

He could do everything by himself. Coach only make him feel stupid, because he won't get a coach as MR Andre, Roddick, now Murray's

trixtah
10-22-2007, 01:03 AM
I think he should hire Marat to work on his mental fortitude...Roger will be lucky to escape from the first round here on out. Look for the Bye to beat Roger for the rest of the year. You heard it here first!

cmurray
10-22-2007, 01:08 AM
I think he should hire Marat to work on his mental fortitude...Roger will be lucky to escape from the first round here on out. Look for the Bye to beat Roger for the rest of the year. You heard it here first!

Yeah. Just LOOK at the way his ranking is slipping. What a waste of natural talent.

jasmin
10-22-2007, 01:27 AM
I think most of the responses are sarcastic.

jcempire
10-22-2007, 01:41 AM
I think he should hire Marat to work on his mental fortitude...Roger will be lucky to escape from the first round here on out. Look for the Bye to beat Roger for the rest of the year. You heard it here first!

LOL, he could easy lost 10 matchs in a row, if Marat was his coach. Marat told him to make more money, forget about Ranking

buzz
10-22-2007, 09:30 AM
He has natural talent. No human can teach him... God is his coach I think...

Or Levy
10-22-2007, 09:53 AM
I'd like to see him with Lundgren again. But probably too much water under the bridge to let that relation recover

I don't see Roger ever doing that, he has problems 'breaking it up' but when he's made his desicion he will not look back.

zcess81
10-22-2007, 10:02 AM
You guys are funny. You know what this loss means to Federer? NOTHING, it's not even a bump. So he lost AMS title, so what? He doesn't have room in his toilet to fit any more of those anyway. I'm sure he's not losing any sleep over this loss. When someone sets such high standards over the years as Federer has, even the SMALLEST loss and you guys criticize him like it's the end of Federer or something. Be realistic.

Wolbo
10-22-2007, 12:00 PM
Federer needs a mental coach not a trainer.

tennis2tennis
10-22-2007, 12:05 PM
You guys are funny. You know what this loss means to Federer? NOTHING, it's not even a bump. So he lost AMS title, so what? He doesn't have room in his toilet to fit any more of those anyway. I'm sure he's not losing any sleep over this loss. When someone sets such high standards over the years as Federer has, even the SMALLEST loss and you guys criticize him like it's the end of Federer or something. Be realistic.


intellignet and logical input not welcomed in MTF!!!
Federer needs a mental coach not a trainer.

yeap this guy is a disgrace only 12 grandslams ...

on another note why does he need to do it 2008? what's the rush sampras retired at 33 roger is 26 he has 7 years to break that record..

BlueSwan
10-22-2007, 12:29 PM
I hope Federer learns his lesson from this match. Next time, offer a bag of donuts to Dave at each changeover.

trixtah
10-22-2007, 10:47 PM
I hope Federer learns his lesson from this match. Next time, offer a bag of donuts to Dave at each changeover.

To get him on a sugar high and have him go Super Saiyan? I think not! Haven't you heard? Fit Dave plays for Lettuce and Celery these days

Minotaur
11-12-2007, 07:40 PM
When he was on the top he said he doesn't need one.

But now it's not evident that his game does better any more.

What do you think?

tennizen
11-12-2007, 07:51 PM
I don't think anything that has happened now indicates the need for a coach. So what if he has lost back to back matches. It isn't as if he was playing badly. However, I think it is a good idea for him to have a coach "in general" as it eases things for him a little bit. He probably needs someone to help him regroup after losses like this.

Sunset of Age
11-12-2007, 07:53 PM
There is a lot of discussion about this subject already going on in the Fed forum, and I believe this thread should be moved/merged there...

Eden
11-12-2007, 08:01 PM
There's already a recently thread on this topic on GM ->

http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=111987&highlight=coach

didadida
11-12-2007, 08:36 PM
yeh i think he needs a coach

Johnny Groove
11-12-2007, 08:42 PM
He needs to get rid of that fat bitch Mirka

Sunset of Age
11-12-2007, 08:44 PM
He needs to get rid of that fat bitch Mirka

Oh come on, Jonathan. I know you don't like her, and you're entitled to that opinion, but this is a bit harsh don't you think? :awww:

Johnny Groove
11-12-2007, 08:46 PM
Oh come on, Jonathan. I know you don't like her, and you're entitled to that opinion, but this is a bit harsh don't you think? :awww:

Not at all. That is the only solution. she is simply weighing him down with her incessant bitching, texting during match, Gucci handbag buying with Roger's money, and a lackluster sex life.

Sunset of Age
11-12-2007, 08:50 PM
Not at all. That is the only solution. she is simply weighing him down with her incessant bitching, texting during match, Gucci handbag buying with Roger's money, and a lackluster sex life.

:eek: :awww: :sad: :rolleyes:

jasmin
11-12-2007, 09:10 PM
I just thinks he needs a coach that is there and can give him a new perspective. He needs someone to check out the other players. He doesn't have time to do all that. Whatever he decides it's okay. It's okay to not be as dominate. I just want him to reach his goals which right now is the match and surpass Sampras.

Denise
11-13-2007, 02:48 AM
Yeah, he needs a coach ;) he is not 100% well as before ! :p

The Oracle
11-13-2007, 02:56 AM
Probably not, there is this old saying that you cant teach old donkey new tricks,
so no, I dont think Federer can learn any more new tricks.

doddel
01-23-2008, 09:36 AM
he seems clueless at times, and makes very strange tactical decisions.

What about Paul Annacone?

leng jai
01-23-2008, 09:36 AM
He needs a hawkeye coach.

tennisgal_001
01-23-2008, 09:42 AM
He needs a hawkeye coach.

You beat me to it. I was thinking just that when I read the thread title.

doddel
01-23-2008, 09:44 AM
I'm serious though! He isn't attacking Blake's second serve, is slicing it back all the time.

adee-gee
01-23-2008, 09:50 AM
Why would the ego king listen to anyone else?

Deivid23
01-23-2008, 09:54 AM
OMFG :haha:

That ball was like 1 km long Roger :lol:

Deivid23
01-23-2008, 09:55 AM
Blake looked like thinking, "Imagine how well he´d played if he could see well"

leng jai
01-23-2008, 09:55 AM
He uses hawkeye as a means to vent, not as a means to override a call. Champion interpretation of the system.

madmanfool
01-23-2008, 09:56 AM
Blake looked like thinking, "Imagine how well he´d played if he could see well"

:D:D:D

dam0dred
01-23-2008, 09:57 AM
I think he should get a clay court specialist to coach him for the French Open.

Outside of that, I don't think he needs much advice.

Deivid23
01-23-2008, 09:59 AM
:haha:

Another good one Roger, wear some fucking glasses

doddel
01-23-2008, 10:01 AM
that serve was even inside the line LOL

Kolya
01-23-2008, 10:04 AM
He is using hawkeye to piss of his opponents.

madmanfool
01-23-2008, 10:05 AM
he is using to piss off himself

leng jai
01-23-2008, 10:06 AM
If anything, Blake's use of hawkeye is pissing Federer off. Clown post.

W!MBLEDON
01-23-2008, 10:30 AM
:lol:

He made a challenge, and when Hawkeye was taking a while to start, he asked how long it took. :lol: Impatient!

Kuhne
01-23-2008, 10:35 AM
Fuck hawkeye coach, he needs a plain eye coach, have you seen mirka

leng jai
01-23-2008, 10:37 AM
He needs someone with scissors to cut that leash.

Bibberz
01-23-2008, 10:50 AM
If I was Blake I'd shank a ball forty feet wide and insist on a Hawkeye review. There wouldn't be anything on the display except the blue court. Take that, Federer....

Apemant
01-23-2008, 10:54 AM
I'm serious though! He isn't attacking Blake's second serve, is slicing it back all the time.

Still won over 50% of 2nd serves... meaning it's okay, at least vs. Blake. I'm not very convinced about Joe tomorrow... :)

adee-gee
01-23-2008, 10:59 AM
Fuck hawkeye coach, he needs a plain eye coach, have you seen mirka

:spit: :rolls:

FedFan_2007
01-23-2008, 11:03 AM
He's only gotten to 3 straight slam finals and another semifinal, winning 2 already and winning the TMC, securing YE #1 since ditching his last coach(who wasn't even a real full-time coach).

doddel
01-23-2008, 11:26 AM
He's only gotten to 3 straight slam finals and another semifinal, winning 2 already and winning the TMC, securing YE #1 since ditching his last coach(who wasn't even a real full-time coach).

I don't say he is doing badly, it's just that he is loosing his edge. He sometimes looks a bit clueless IMO, and his tactical plan isn't always working.
This AO, he hasn't played agressively against top players. He will have to do that against Djoko, who is much more consistent in attacking than Blake or Berdych

bokehlicious
01-23-2008, 11:48 AM
another quality thread :yeah:

:retard:

The Magic Hand
01-23-2008, 12:05 PM
Yeah seriously, how many slams has Federer won without a coach? If there's one player on the tour that doesnt need one, that's Federer. Last year even made it look like a coach could make him play worse.

dragons112
01-23-2008, 12:25 PM
The surface of clay is not the problem. He beats everyone else but rafa. In the finals its the unforced errros that kill him. He needs a coach to bring back the slice

Apemant
01-23-2008, 12:31 PM
The surface of clay is not the problem. He beats everyone else but rafa. In the finals its the unforced errros that kill him. He needs a coach to bring back the slice

Sorry, but slice doesn't work against Rafa on clay. I don't think Federer is that stupid to mindlessly try to outplay Rafa with topspin if slices would work just fine.

The thing is that Rafa never hits flat with his FH, even when the ball flies high he still doesn't send it straight down, but again applies topspin and the ball flies upwards first, then drops. So, basically he doesn't mind low bounces that much, which is why he is surprisingly good on grass. But it also means slices don't affect him; he just loops them back until doomsday. It's more likely that Fed would send a slice right into the net (or wide/long) than he would draw an error from Rafa like that. (on clay at least)

jcempire
01-23-2008, 12:34 PM
He doesn't need a coach

fishfriend
01-23-2008, 12:37 PM
There is no coach worthy of him

dragons112
01-23-2008, 12:46 PM
Sorry, but slice doesn't work against Rafa on clay. I don't think Federer is that stupid to mindlessly try to outplay Rafa with topspin if slices would work just fine.

The thing is that Rafa never hits flat with his FH, even when the ball flies high he still doesn't send it straight down, but again applies topspin and the ball flies upwards first, then drops. So, basically he doesn't mind low bounces that much, which is why he is surprisingly good on grass. But it also means slices don't affect him; he just loops them back until doomsday. It's more likely that Fed would send a slice right into the net (or wide/long) than he would draw an error from Rafa like that. (on clay at least)


Slice to the rafa backhand is a certian win. So is a slice and forehand to forehand roger would win it. You cant beat rafa buy going to his power (backhand). Pkus roger only loses each set in the RG finals by one break and he is hitting about 49% first serves ontop of 69 unforced errors not to mentio forced errors. So if roger can be around 60% first serve half the errors and win more than one break point he should be sweet.

You should research the final stats from last year. You know roger is better than that the surface has nothing to do with first serve percentage or any aspect of a game unlees your andy roddick

Apemant
01-23-2008, 02:24 PM
Slice to the rafa backhand is a certian win.

No, it is not. DTL slice is awkward anyway, Fed's slice flies CC naturally, to his (righty) opponent's BH. But alas, Nadal has a FH there. As for DTL slices, they leave enough time for Rafa to run around them and blast them with a FH again. He often does it, in fact. Rafa just loves that position, being outside the court leaving his FH side wide open. Then if someone dares to aim that side, he runs there quickly and executes his trademark FH on the run, either DTL or CC, often producing a winner. I've seen hundreds of points he won like that.


So is a slice and forehand to forehand roger would win it.

Sorry? Slice and forehand to forehand? How do you mean that.


So if roger can be around 60% first serve half the errors and win more than one break point he should be sweet.

Yes, but in that very match he didn't slice too much. So what is it, too low % of 1st serves or not enough slices, that cost him the match?


You should research the final stats from last year. You know roger is better than that the surface has nothing to do with first serve percentage or any aspect of a game unlees your andy roddick

This is not entirely true. Clay takes a lot of speed from the ball as it bounces from the ground; Nadal uses it to his advantage by receiving far behind the baseline, so the ball which was already slowed down by the impact with the ground must fly a long way back, giving him ample time to prepare his topspin FH. In short, he gets a vast majority of 1st serves back into play - and gets them back in such a way that it is hard for the server to just pounce a winner off of it - making the 1st serve much less of an advantage than on HC.

Therefore, even if you improve your percentage a lot it still might not enough to hold your serve comfortably enough. And after that, he's literally like a steamroll - you can outrun him in periods, but he keeps rolling and eventually catches up with you and rolls over you, like in Pink Panther cartoons. :devil: Federer is the Pink skinny Panther in that analogy. :devil:

gmokb
07-09-2008, 03:41 AM
Does anyone else feels that Roger needs a FULL time coach. I am a huge fan and this is not an attempt to bash him nor is it to explain or excuse his recent loss. I just think that these younger players are able to successful play him and he could benefit from a coach, who might be able to introduce something new in his game, thus allowing him to distance himself once again from the pack. You can see the improvement in Nadal`s game but Roger`s looks the same as when he was unbeatable. I could be wrong but.....

leng jai
07-09-2008, 03:45 AM
He probably wouldn't listen to his coach if he got one anyway,

star_of_dusk
07-09-2008, 03:55 AM
Definitely he needs someone, or something different

Sebby
07-09-2008, 04:03 AM
Yep he needs a full time coach.

I want Peter Lundgren (once again) Mats Wilander, Brad Gilbert, Yannick Noah (impossible I know...) or Toni Nadal :umbrella:

Jagermeister
07-09-2008, 04:18 AM
I do think he needs a full-time coach. I just can't come up with any good names. It can't be too big an ego (so that leaves out Johnny Mac and Brad Gilbert). It has to be somebody he respects (after all the crap Wilander has said about him in the past, would that work?). Lundgren is just a re-hash.

Sebby
07-09-2008, 04:44 AM
Darren Cahill maybe... there were even some rumours that he could have become his coach at the end of Agassi's career.

btw Paul Annacone would be nice too.

tennis2tennis
07-09-2008, 10:26 AM
I think roger is more in the need of a mentor ala uncle tony than a coach!

nisha
07-09-2008, 11:21 AM
all federer needed was a heatbreaking loss...and hes got it.
watch him win everything now until the season finnishes.

Sebby
07-09-2008, 11:26 AM
all federer needed was a heatbreaking loss...and hes got it.
watch him win everything now until the season finnishes.

Yep, if he can mentally recover...

RagingLamb
07-09-2008, 11:34 AM
Merged with 8 other threads on the same topic. Good ol' search button. too bad no one uses it.

As for Fed getting a new coach, it may provide some sort of support for him, but at this stage it will do 0 for his game.

finishingmove
07-09-2008, 11:42 AM
mirka needs to get a whip

groundstroke
07-09-2008, 12:44 PM
Federer doesn't need a new coach. Higueras did nothing for him, at all. He's that good. He just needs to be taught the things that you don't see. The ability to convert most break points. Confidence in the backhand stroke, etc.

hilluis
07-09-2008, 01:29 PM
I think a coach is a good idea. I dont know why Roger didnt go for the break on Rafa's service games in that 5th set. He held serve( just, at times) and then didnt go for the break at all. A coach might have pointed out a few things.... play as he did in the tiebreak on Rafa's service games, or at least reinforced them, ie, 5th set is almost another match and don't assume the momentum is with you even if you have won sets 3 and 4.

thesupreme
07-09-2008, 02:11 PM
The answer:

**BRAD GILBERT**

Federer needs someone that conditions him mentally more than physically. We all know he can do almost anything he wants, he just needs the mind to be able to do it consistently and especially against Nadal...

sports freak
07-09-2008, 02:13 PM
Jimmy Connors/Gustavo Kuerten two that come in mind!

Bazooka
07-09-2008, 03:00 PM
Yes.

Bernard Black
07-09-2008, 03:09 PM
Sorry if I'm repeating what's been said earlier in the thread, I don't have time to read it all.

Federer has had such success now and knows he is one of the all-time greats. It's going to be difficult now for him to have respect for a coach, I mean would Federer put up with a guy telling him a part of his game is wrong or he needs to rethink his mental approach?

It seems a lot of coaching today is for the mentoring side of things, someone there to provide encouragement when needed and to be a talisman. Pains me to see the players on the men's tour looking up at their coach in desperation when losing a match, save that kind of behaviour for the women, you're on your own out there.

In conclusion, can a full-time coach teach Federer anything he doesn't know? I doubt it.

Does Federer need encouragement from the stands or a shoulder to cry on? No.

gillian
07-09-2008, 03:26 PM
Jimmy Connors/Gustavo Kuerten two that come in mind!

I'd kill to see Kuerten as Federer's coah. Ok, maybe not kill:)

Collective
07-09-2008, 05:56 PM
What is he going to learn from Kuerten? To hit high backhands so Rafa can smash them? He already did that last sunday like a million times.

Sunset of Age
07-09-2008, 06:02 PM
It seems a lot of coaching today is for the mentoring side of things, someone there to provide encouragement when needed and to be a talisman. Pains me to see the players on the men's tour looking up at their coach in desperation when losing a match, save that kind of behaviour for the women, you're on your own out there.

Fully agree with your post, Tidus. It's a disgrace that at the WTA this kind of behaviour is so common already (it in fact makes me ashamed of being a woman myself :(). One of the special things about tennis is that it's an all individual game... or at least it should be IMHO.

Still, I think it wouldn't be bad for Fed to have someone around him who can encourage him etc. - not so much for his game, as it's already near to perfection, but I surely think he may benefit from someone who can help him out a bit in the mental department. He used to be very vulnerable in that particular area and with his current 'slump' (note the parentheses ;)) going on...

Would love to see Kuerten at his side. :angel:

jacobhiggins
07-09-2008, 07:43 PM
You guys might think i'm crazy, but I think Federer needs to improve PHYSCIALLY.

I think Novak,Nadal, and Murray are physcially stronger then him, not neccesarely in all aspects but in some big ones. Adding muscle does improve aspects of your game.

Sunset of Age
07-09-2008, 07:49 PM
^^ Murray? Ooooookkkkaaayyyyy... :lol:

jacobhiggins
07-09-2008, 07:50 PM
Okay Murrays not there yet, but Murray is on his way I believe. I think the younger players have caught up and Federer's gonna have to improve.

pauline
07-09-2008, 08:14 PM
What about Justine Henin's coach Carlos Whathisface to help out with his backhand - that's the only thing that Fed needs to improve to beat Nadal.

LinkMage
07-09-2008, 09:25 PM
Yes, but a real coach. Not another 70 year old grandpa like Roche or Higueras. And he also needs a sports psychologist.

Sebby
07-09-2008, 10:16 PM
What about Justine Henin's coach Carlos Whathisface to help out with his backhand - that's the only thing that Fed needs to improve to beat Nadal.

Not a bad choice and the guy knows how to win RG. Of course WTA is not ATP and we're in total fiction but if I could I would like to give Rodriguez a try. It couldn't be worse than Higueras :rolleyes:

Albatros99
07-09-2008, 10:23 PM
What he doesn't need is Nadal, like a few posters here.

gulzhan
07-09-2008, 10:42 PM
Of course he does, everyone does, and he needed him yesterday btw

groundstroke
07-09-2008, 11:35 PM
The answer:

**BRAD GILBERT**

Federer needs someone that conditions him mentally more than physically. We all know he can do almost anything he wants, he just needs the mind to be able to do it consistently and especially against Nadal...
Nice troll attempt. Gilbert would ruin Federer's career.

groundstroke
07-09-2008, 11:38 PM
You guys might think i'm crazy, but I think Federer needs to improve PHYSCIALLY.

I think Novak,Nadal, and Murray are physcially stronger then him, not neccesarely in all aspects but in some big ones. Adding muscle does improve aspects of your game.
Federer doesn't need to improve physically. On clay, against Nadal, in a 5 setter, some small signs show as his backhand is put under constant pressure, but other than that, he has never retired in a match, ever. If anything, he's one of the fittest guys on tour. Definitely fitter than Murray, Djokovic. Nadal, too, yes. Nadal burns out after half the season.

groundstroke
07-09-2008, 11:39 PM
^^ Murray? Ooooookkkkaaayyyyy... :lol:
Murray is very physically strong. (by the way, I hate Murray)
-
What about Justine Henin's coach Carlos Whathisface to help out with his backhand - that's the only thing that Fed needs to improve to beat Nadal.
Get a women's coach to help him? When he made the pass of the tournament iwth his BH? His backhand isn't that bad. It's not great, he can't finish, but it's #1 quality.
-
Yes, but a real coach. Not another 70 year old grandpa like Roche or Higueras. And he also needs a sports psychologist.
Roche took him to the top, but I agree that he needs a psychologist.
-
Of course he does, everyone does, and he needed him yesterday btw
No he didn't. He pulled off an amazing comeback, the only thing that let him down was a bit of luck and extreme determination by Nadal.
-

Bernard Black
07-10-2008, 12:26 AM
Murray is very physically strong. (by the way, I hate Murray)
-
-

Federer crushes Murray physically, and probably mentally too.

Xenosys
07-10-2008, 12:43 AM
Federer looked like he had some excess belly-flab this year at Wimbers. Maybe it was the belt that extenuated the flab... made it look worse than it actually was. Instant replays really don't do him any favours. He could tell his physical conditioning coach to add some sit-ups into his regime.

Matt01
07-10-2008, 12:52 AM
Federer fitter than Nadal and Murray fitter than Federer? You learn something new every day :lol:

bad gambler
07-10-2008, 12:59 AM
This seems to be raised as an issue whenever he loses, nothing was said when he was winning slams without a coach.

luie
07-10-2008, 01:02 AM
Federer fitter than Nadal and Murray fitter than Federer? You learn something new every day :lol:
Well nadal's the one who has constant KNEE problems !!! Fitness is NOT the difference between them as both are physically fit.

Xenosys
07-10-2008, 01:02 AM
This seems to be raised as an issue whenever he loses, nothing was said when he was winning slams without a coach.

That's true. Although, the coach is there not only to talk technique, he/she is also a psychological outlet for the player. When Federer was winning slams, he wouldn't have required the use of a coach to any serious degree because he was getting results on the court. Everthing was hunky dory. As soon as he starts to lose a few matches, the seeds of doubt creep into his game and the coach is there as a pillar of support.

I'm sure Roddick felt the same when Connor's was coaching him.

Sunset of Age
07-10-2008, 01:04 AM
This seems to be raised as an issue whenever he loses, nothing was said when he was winning slams without a coach.

Yeah... and nothing is said about him having not just lost 'a' match, but a match which lasted for four hours and 48 minutes, where eventually the total point difference between him and his opponent was a mere five points. Not too bad for an unfit player with a potbelly, no? :rolleyes: