Federer and coach Annacone split up.

[GameSetAndMath]

The main problem in Roger's game these days is that he comes into the net too often
and most of the time after poor approach shots. I think this style was, at least partly,
something he acquired from Paul Annacone. The other part of the reason for this style
is perhaps that he does not want to indulge in baseline rallies as he feels he is a step
slower due to age.

However, it is not possible to win in modern tennis without paying your dues in
baseline game. Of course, I am not suggesting Fed indulge in 56 shot rallies. But,
he definitely should not come into the net like a maniac and should come in only
after good approach shots.

Coming in to the net like a maniac is not even his original style of play.
In fact, he was often criticized for not coming in more often in the past.
Now, it is going the other way.

I don't think Pete would be interested in coaching Fed, both due to
personality issues and also due to the fact he does not want to travel much
and he wants to spend time with his family.

John McEnroe would be very willing to offer his services and Fed would
be very willing to reject the unsolicited offer (this drama already played out once).

Connors might be a good fit.

I think Fed will not hire a coach just because he is coachless. He will hire someone
only if he feels that there is a hope that this person will have something to offer.
After all Fed has won multiple slams without a coach by his side.

 

[Kieran]

I think he'll go solo for a while, though I have no basis for this. I just can't think of a coach who'll tell him something fresh or different enough to spur him on, and he's previously done well enough on his own. Roger's is one of the shrewdest, most clued in analyzers of the game and I think he knows what he needs to do...

 

[Front242]

If he wasn't already working with Wawrinka I'd actually like to see what Magnus Norman could do for Fed.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

If Federer is such a great analyzer of the game, might as well not hire a coach. He'll be fine next year without a coach, maybe.

 

[Kieran]

If Federer is such a great analyzer of the game, might as well not hire a coach. He'll be fine next year without a coach, maybe.

He's done well without a coach in the past, so why not?

 

[19USC66]

Don't be surprised if this is the last coach retains. Fed clearly stated he and Paul had a three year plan. To return to number one and win another major. Both goals were accompolished. I refer to a question Fed was asked in 2010. "Would you rather win Olympic Gold or Davis Cup. Answer: "I would like to win Wimbledon one more time." Federer has accompolished all his goals. It's not his coach. The problem is Federer's mind is no longer vested in the game as he once was. What does the man have left to accompolish? NADA. He loves to play tennis, but not poorly like today. Roger is going to retire sooner than people think. When a players body and mind arn't on the same page then winning is very difficult. Those of us on this board playing club tennis know exactly what I mean regarding body and mind commuication. If there is conflict between the two primary sources a players game won't work well and I firmly believe this is Federer's issue. Yet, what is the real crux of the matter is he is 32 years old and times change. He started this decline in 2008. Not one season in the last six years has Roger Federer played an enitre season in top form. He is up he is down. Roger has been if anything inconsistent for a very long time. Unfortunately in 2013 he has been down the entire year.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

If Federer is such a great analyzer of the game, might as well not hire a coach. He'll be fine next year without a coach, maybe.

He's done well without a coach in the past, so why not?

Tougher and more complicated challenges than ever before. Federer had the answers for beating Roddick/Hewitt/Safin, in fact the answer was his natural ability. He played his own game, and those guys had no answers. Nadal/Djokovic/Murray is more difficult to figure out, and maybe his natural ability isn't enough. See, I think Federer is at his best when he plays off instinct. But when his instincts don't get the win, what then? Its new territory.

 

[Mog]

I'd love if it was Connors. All Roger can really use from a coach right now is someone not afraid to tell it like it is, someone to rile him up and get the fire lit under him again. That's the main thing that's missing, he didn't forget how to hit a tennis ball to the point that nobodies should be dominating him at his 2 best slams.

Agree with shawnbm and Darthfed about Connors.

 

[Ricardo]

If Federer is such a great analyzer of the game, might as well not hire a coach. He'll be fine next year without a coach, maybe.

He's done well without a coach in the past, so why not?

Tougher and more complicated challenges than ever before. Federer had the answers for beating Roddick/Hewitt/Safin, in fact the answer was his natural ability. He played his own game, and those guys had no answers. Nadal/Djokovic/Murray is more difficult to figure out, and maybe his natural ability isn't enough. See, I think Federer is at his best when he plays off instinct. But when his instincts don't get the win, what then? Its new territory.

I thought it was his natural ability that won him 2012 Wimbledon beating Djoker and Murray back to back, and a ton of MS1000 and whatnot. Of course his level was high then, and it's generally very low this year. Remember when someone asked him about the new racquet..... he said his level was too low to even make a judgement.

 

[Kieran]

I honestly don't see Connors being Roger's type, and vice versa. Roger even once said he thinks Nadal is much closer to Jimbo than he is...

 

[Fiero425]

The main problem in Roger's game these days is that he comes into the net too often
and most of the time after poor approach shots. I think this style was, at least partly,
something he acquired from Paul Annacone. The other part of the reason for this style
is perhaps that he does not want to indulge in baseline rallies as he feels he is a step
slower due to age.

However, it is not possible to win in modern tennis without paying your dues in
baseline game. Of course, I am not suggesting Fed indulge in 56 shot rallies. But,
he definitely should not come into the net like a maniac and should come in only
after good approach shots.

Coming in to the net like a maniac is not even his original style of play.
In fact, he was often criticized for not coming in more often in the past.
Now, it is going the other way.

I don't think Pete would be interested in coaching Fed, both due to
personality issues and also due to the fact he does not want to travel much
and he wants to spend time with his family.

John McEnroe would be very willing to offer his services and Fed would
be very willing to reject the unsolicited offer (this drama already played out once).

Connors might be a good fit.

I think Fed will not hire a coach just because his coachless. He will hire someone
only if he feels that there is a hope that this person will have something to offer.
After all Fed has won multiple slams without a coach by his side.

I guess I must not be watching enough! True enough I'm one of those people who say he doesn't come into the net enough! I suppose some can say he's "being a maniac" attacking the net on bad approach shots! You can't have it both ways also saying he shouldn't invest in points lasting 56 strokes! There's got to be a workable and effective happy median because whatever he's doing now isn't working! If this continues, he'll start looking like Sampras in his last years winning nothing for 2 years until the USO in '02! I don't want to see that! Adjustments have to be made regardless and a coach is the least of Roger's problem! The other top players are just more effective at blunting what he does well!

 

[DarthFed]

I honestly don't see Connors being Roger's type, and vice versa. Roger even once said he thinks Nadal is much closer to Jimbo than he is...

Connors isn't Roger's type if you are looking for a personality match. In that regard Annacone might be the perfect fit and that's why it seemed worse and worse at the end. He looked more like just another dude in the player's box rather than someone in charge of motivating him and coming up with the X's and O's on a day to day basis. I would picture Connors telling him that he is tired of seeing Roger play like garbage, tired of seeing Rafa and Nole steal all his thunder, etc. Roger needs all those things because as we see, 17 slams might not be enough... Roger needs to see the future a bit and not submit so easily to Father Time.

 

[Kieran]

I think we can't judge Annacone from how still he sits in the box! The guy has pedigree (that word again) at operating at this level, and when he re-joined Pete, it turned Pete around. I think a guy like Connors wouldn't gel with Roger in the day to day stuff on court, plus the companionship etc. Sure, he'd say pump your fists and get in his face, etc, but that's not Roger's style. I just don't see it. Also, Jimbo hasn't got a great record as coach. He had an effect on Roddick for a while, but then he didn't. Roger's a low profile guy who handles himself a certain way, Connors seems too different a personality type to gel with him, to me...

 

[DarthFed]

I think we can't judge Annacone from how still he sits in the box! The guy has pedigree (that word again) at operating at this level, and when he re-joined Pete, it turned Pete around. I think a guy like Connors wouldn't gel with Roger in the day to day stuff on court, plus the companionship etc. Sure, he'd say pump your fists and get in his face, etc, but that's not Roger's style. I just don't see it. Also, Jimbo hasn't got a great record as coach. He had an effect on Roddick for a while, but then he didn't. Roger's a low profile guy who handles himself a certain way, Connors seems too different a personality type to gel with him, to me...

You may be right, it also might be the case that Roger should go solo again. Annacone is a fine coach but Roger is beyond the point where he will benefit from the day in day out coaching. Someone who has been there and done that and someone who can get him to play with some fire is the only type of coach that can benefit him IMO.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

I think the decision Roger has to make first, even before hiring a new coach, is what he wants to do. Does he want to just "exist" in the game because he loves it so much, or does he want to get to the top level again. If the answer is A, than keep doing what you are doing and you will win some, lose some, whatever. If the answer is B, things have to change. His peak was 2007. That was 6 years ago. He needs a new approach to his physical training. The loss of half step is not coming back, so what do you do ? He needs someone that has been there and done that at an older age, or helped someone do that at an older age. In that sense, I agree with Darth , Jimbo might be the guy. He might light the fire under his backside that Roger needs.

 

[Mastoor]

About time...we all hav been saying this in the forums for quite sometime. .wonder whoz gonna step into the shoes now

Todd Martin. :snigger

Todd definitely, though I've heard of other options too.

One is that Mirka will coach her husband from now on and another one is that No1e and Fed are swapping coaches, Annacone for Vajda.

 

[Moxie]

I think the decision Roger has to make first, even before hiring a new coach, is what he wants to do. Does he want to just "exist" in the game because he loves it so much, or does he want to get to the top level again. If the answer is A, than keep doing what you are doing and you will win some, lose some, whatever. If the answer is B, things have to change. His peak was 2007. That was 6 years ago. He needs a new approach to his physical training. The loss of half step is not coming back, so what do you do ? He needs someone that has been there and done that at an older age, or helped someone do that at an older age. In that sense, I agree with Darth , Jimbo might be the guy. He might light the fire under his backside that Roger needs.

I like the idea of Connors, too. Roger is entering the uncharted waters that few have been in...multi-Slam champion post-32. There are few that can speak to that with experience. I think using him in more of the way he used Tony Roche, as counselor/mentor, a kind of life-coach, on a part time basis. I don't see them fitting as full-time traveling on the road together, but Connor may have some things to say that Fed could and should hear.

 

[Mog]

I think the decision Roger has to make first, even before hiring a new coach, is what he wants to do. Does he want to just "exist" in the game because he loves it so much, or does he want to get to the top level again. If the answer is A, than keep doing what you are doing and you will win some, lose some, whatever. If the answer is B, things have to change. His peak was 2007. That was 6 years ago. He needs a new approach to his physical training. The loss of half step is not coming back, so what do you do ? He needs someone that has been there and done that at an older age, or helped someone do that at an older age. In that sense, I agree with Darth , Jimbo might be the guy. He might light the fire under his backside that Roger needs.

Well said Murat.
And I do think Conners could be the right choice now.

 

[britbox]

I don't think Connors would be a good fit at all. A great player doesn't necessarily make a good coach and that applies to all sports.

I think Tony Roche would be a good fit. He was a top player, has proven coaching pedigree and they know each other well (Roche coached Federer when he won 6 of his major titles). To my knowledge Roche is still working with Lleyton Hewitt. I guess it depends not only if Federer wanted him back on board but whether Roche would be willing to a) break with the Hewitt role, and b) commit to Federer.

I might be wrong, but I seem to remember Federer approaching Roche again after the originally split and got turned down.

 

[BalaryKar]

I am all for a coach more accomplished than Roger himself. How about Steffi Graf? In case she is ready to do the things required of a coach, she can coach all players who are 15+ GSs and less than 22. Positive that she would make a great coach, if needed be, if not to Federer than somebody else.

Don't think Connors will make a great coach. Roger should rather not go for time-tested proven coaches. While Annacone and the previous one (sorry forgot his name) during FO08, though good, have not been spectacular coaches for Fed. With Annacone, I would say the results have been satisfactory and not great one. Thinking otherwise, I don't think one GS and return to No.1 is a big goal for somebody who was never below No.3 during that entire stretch. A coach who is more critical will be more useful. I believe, he should rather go coachless and play more freely and give 100% at the 4 slams. One will certainly fall in his lap. First, he needs to get of the current rut.