September/October Tennis Magazine: UNCLE TONI, Greatest Coach Ever?

[Luxilon Borg]

Tony Roche must be included among the top guys.

Yes, but interestingly it was a bust with Rogah. He claimed he was very disappointed in the pairing.

Specifically, he felt Roche was uncommunicative.

What about Brad Gilbert, Darren Cahill, Paul Annacone, and Peter Lundgren? At least on the list. Let's face it, the conversation about Toni has to do with the fact that he is Rafa's one and only coach, and Rafa is an all-time great. Roger has had a few coaches, and so did Pete. So what are the criterion, then, for the best coach?

Very good question

For some reason, I get delight in pointing out Brad Gilbert was fired from every coaching job he had....Agassi, Roddick, Murray...LTA...:lolz:

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Hard to prove who is even a good coach, let alone the greatest coach ever.
Only the coach and pupil knows exactly what the coach did for the pupil.
Many coaches may regularly offer strategic or technique advice, only to have that advice overridden by the pupil.
And some coaches may not even play a role relating to strategy or technical know-how.
Some coaches are more like friends, and some are "yes men".
So just because a coach is able to hold a job for years with a top-ranked player, it doesn't prove the coach is having much of an impact.

 

[Moxie]

Tony Roche must be included among the top guys.

Yes, but interestingly it was a bust with Rogah. He claimed he was very disappointed in the pairing.

Specifically, he felt Roche was uncommunicative.

What about Brad Gilbert, Darren Cahill, Paul Annacone, and Peter Lundgren? At least on the list. Let's face it, the conversation about Toni has to do with the fact that he is Rafa's one and only coach, and Rafa is an all-time great. Roger has had a few coaches, and so did Pete. So what are the criterion, then, for the best coach?

Very good question

For some reason, I get delight in pointing out Brad Gilbert was fired from every coaching job he had....Agassi, Roddick, Murray...LTA...:lolz:

Maybe, but…who talked Agassi into even playing the French Open that he won? The super-loquoacious, unrelenting Mr. Gilbert. Actually, I think Andre won 6 of his 8 Major titles under Gilbert. And Andy Roddick won his only one under Gilbert, finished year-end #1 while they were working together, and was in the Wimbledon final before they parted ways, if you can believe wikipedia.

 

[Moxie]

Thinking of it, why not at least begin to judge the question the way we start with players…by majors won, (or, in this case, having been the coach-of-record on?)

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ Might as well. Imaginary/non-existent awards like GOAT and Greatest Coach of All-Time may consist of whichever criteria the 'imaginee' wants.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Too small a sample size - he's only worked with one player of note.

If we use sample size as the basis , I would have to say Uncle Toni great but Richard Wlliams is the brilliant mad scientist genius of the greatest tennis coach ever, to produce to number 1 champions that dominated the tennis game during the same era in both singles and doubles..(from southern Calif with less than a middle class income). This is a pure no Brainer

 

[Luxilon Borg]

Tony Roche must be included among the top guys.

Yes, but interestingly it was a bust with Rogah. He claimed he was very disappointed in the pairing.

Specifically, he felt Roche was uncommunicative.

What about Brad Gilbert, Darren Cahill, Paul Annacone, and Peter Lundgren? At least on the list. Let's face it, the conversation about Toni has to do with the fact that he is Rafa's one and only coach, and Rafa is an all-time great. Roger has had a few coaches, and so did Pete. So what are the criterion, then, for the best coach?

Very good question

For some reason, I get delight in pointing out Brad Gilbert was fired from every coaching job he had....Agassi, Roddick, Murray...LTA...:lolz:

Maybe, but…who talked Agassi into even playing the French Open that he won? The super-loquoacious, unrelenting Mr. Gilbert. Actually, I think Andre won 6 of his 8 Major titles under Gilbert. And Andy Roddick won his only one under Gilbert, finished year-end #1 while they were working together, and was in the Wimbledon final before they parted ways, if you can believe wikipedia.

You are correct about Agassi and the French.

My pointing out BG being fired from every coaching job was really just to illustrate that his personality is basically intolerable, not to indict his coaching skills. The criticism from all his players is that he give TOO much information and guidance. He does not know when to hang back. He has probably learned from his past mistakes and he is obviously more mature now.

He probably would be a better coach now then in his Agassi heyday.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

But Gilbert was Agassi's coach for longer than most guys have ever been willing to keep a coach.
So is Gilbert really intolerable?
Agassi probably isn't the type of guy that would tolerate the intolerable.
I mean Agassi liked to have fun, so I doubt he'd have kept Gilbert around for all those years (10 years approx?) if Gilbert was intolerable.
And Gilbert lasted longer with Roddick than Connors did with Sharapova. Way longer.
I think Raonic should hire Brad Gilbert.
Raonic gets plenty of cheap points but because his movement will never be awesome, he needs to find innovative ways to break serve, and Gilbert can help him 'win ugly'.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

But Gilbert was Agassi's coach for longer than most guys have ever been willing to keep a coach.
So is Gilbert really intolerable?
Agassi probably isn't the type of guy that would tolerate the intolerable.
I mean Agassi liked to have fun, so I doubt he'd have kept Gilbert around for all those years (10 years approx?) if Gilbert was intolerable.
And Gilbert lasted longer with Roddick than Connors did with Sharapova. Way longer.
I think Raonic should hire Brad Gilbert.
Raonic gets plenty of cheap points but because his movement will never be awesome, he needs to find innovative ways to break serve, and Gilbert can help him 'win ugly'.

What you fail to take into consideration, is that Agassi, during his time Gilbert, took several extended breaks from the game, and from Gilbert. This is all detailed in his book.

He ALSO says that when they first started working together, Gilbert was ill mannered, gruff, and downright arrogant. Agassi "domesticated" him.

I give Gilbert full credit for one thing with Agassi, the 1999 rebirth after the 97/98 disaster years.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

^ I read "Open" and "The Agassi and the Ecstasy", so I'm well aware of Gilbert and Agassi.
I give Gilbert credit for the best partnership in tennis history.

The conversation Agassi had with Sampras stands out, when Agassi told Sampras how he can't imagine doing any of this without Gilbert, and Sampras looking at him bewildered.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

^ I read "Open" and "The Agassi and the Ecstasy", so I'm well aware of Gilbert and Agassi.
I give Gilbert credit for the best partnership in tennis history.

The conversation Agassi had with Sampras stands out, when Agassi told Sampras how he can't imagine doing any of this without Gilbert, and Sampras looking at him bewildered.

Yeh, that was pretty funny.

Two very different individuals.

To be honest, IMO, I repeat, IMO, Sampras was a dolt. He was supremely gifted with two things..easy power, and fluid movement. He played what I called "winning tennis", meaning the shots that naturally came off his racket were destructive to his opponent, there was no need to think about it.

There were maybe 4 or 5 players like him that created this natural winning tennis..McEnroe, Laver, Leconte, Ashe, Nastase...

Mcenroe and Laver were extremely intelligent, but Sampras shares the total lack of any thought process on court as displayed by Nasty, Leconnte, and Ashe. Ashe altered his game for one match in his entire career..the 75 wimby final.

Sampras never, not once, altered his game, against any opponent.

 

[Luxilon Borg]

^ I read "Open" and "The Agassi and the Ecstasy", so I'm well aware of Gilbert and Agassi.
I give Gilbert credit for the best partnership in tennis history.

The conversation Agassi had with Sampras stands out, when Agassi told Sampras how he can't imagine doing any of this without Gilbert, and Sampras looking at him bewildered.

..and as far as coaching goes..I never saw any difference with sampras no matter who was coaching him. All they did was organize his practice sessions, keep him motivated, and look concerned in the box if he looked sluggish. :snigger

 

[NADAL2005RG]

..and as far as coaching goes..I never saw any difference with sampras no matter who was coaching him. All they did was organize his practice sessions, keep him motivated, and look concerned in the box if he looked sluggish. :snigger

Exactly, exactly how I see it :clap

Everyone made a big deal of Annacone when Federer hired him :s

 

[Luxilon Borg]

..and as far as coaching goes..I never saw any difference with sampras no matter who was coaching him. All they did was organize his practice sessions, keep him motivated, and look concerned in the box if he looked sluggish. :snigger

Exactly, exactly how I see it :clap

Everyone made a big deal of Annacone when Federer hired him :s

Obviously Rogah hired Annacone for the Samlras connection. But I think it was a beneficial arrangement.
Annacone is highly intelligent and gave Rog his space. I think what he did is constantly remind Rog of his strengths during bad patches.

 

[Moxie]

As to Uncle Toni, I think Rafa would have won 4-6 RGs, on his talent alone, and probably Wimbledon on his commitment to doing it. And even Toni has said that Rafael came preternaturally disposed to focus. But I think a lot of the discipline and hard work that got Rafa to beyond 7-8 Majors, and got him HC ones, has a lot to do with Toni.

But their relationship is very symbiotic. And I think the early work was key. IMO, Toni would be a great coach for another player only if he started with them young. His is a philosophy of being. A way of thinking. I'm not sure how he'd fit with a mostly-formed player.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

As to Uncle Toni, I think Rafa would have won 4-6 RGs, on his talent alone, and probably Wimbledon on his commitment to doing it. And even Toni has said that Rafael came preternaturally disposed to focus. But I think a lot of the discipline and hard work that got Rafa to beyond 7-8 Majors, and got him HC ones, has a lot to do with Toni.

But their relationship is very symbiotic. And I think the early work was key. IMO, Toni would be a great coach for another player only if he started with them young. His is a philosophy of being. A way of thinking. I'm not sure how he'd fit with a mostly-formed player.

I haven't read Nadal's autobiography (I'm saving it for after he retires), but I'm curious, how many kids has Uncle Toni coached? I've seen photos of him with several kids on the tennis court. Has he been coaching kids every year forever? Or only coached kids when Rafa was a kid?

 

[I.Haychew]

I'm wondering...Iph there was no Uncle Toni, would Pholks still be a lephty?

 

[Moxie]

As to Uncle Toni, I think Rafa would have won 4-6 RGs, on his talent alone, and probably Wimbledon on his commitment to doing it. And even Toni has said that Rafael came preternaturally disposed to focus. But I think a lot of the discipline and hard work that got Rafa to beyond 7-8 Majors, and got him HC ones, has a lot to do with Toni.

But their relationship is very symbiotic. And I think the early work was key. IMO, Toni would be a great coach for another player only if he started with them young. His is a philosophy of being. A way of thinking. I'm not sure how he'd fit with a mostly-formed player.

I haven't read Nadal's autobiography (I'm saving it for after he retires), but I'm curious, how many kids has Uncle Toni coached? I've seen photos of him with several kids on the tennis court. Has he been coaching kids every year forever? Or only coached kids when Rafa was a kid?

My impression is that he coached a lot of kids, in general, until he focused only on his nephew. That's it. (PS: If you ever want to read the Nadal book, read it soon. It has a short shelf-life. It's meant to be read now, like a long magazine article.)

 

[NADAL2005RG]

My impression is that he coached a lot of kids, in general, until he focused only on his nephew. That's it. (PS: If you ever want to read the Nadal book, read it soon. It has a short shelf-life. It's meant to be read now, like a long magazine article.)

My rule is to not re-watch a Nadal match (I DVD record all his slam finals) and to not read a Nadal book.
After Nadal retires, I can re-watch his matches and read his book, to partially make up for him not being on the tour anymore.
I read Agassi's "Open" book a couple of years ago, and it was by far the best reading experience ever.

 

[Moxie]

I read Agassi's "Open" book a couple of years ago, and it was by far the best reading experience ever.

I'm hoping you meant to imply "…for a sports autobiography," at the end of that statement. I really enjoyed it, too.