Lendl May (Or May Not) Have His Work Cut Out

Ivan Lendl retired holder of 8 slam titles has just arrived in Brisbane to start working with his new charge the world number four Andy Murray. What will he be working on?

Most agree that it will not be improvements in the technical side of Murray's game. Lendl has no previous coaching experience and from what I've read his own style and stroke production was very different to Murrays. Murray is a mature player and technical changes at this stage are not easy so it is probably safe to assume that if he wanted help with this he would have sought a more experienced coach.

Many have speculated that it is his on court behaviour that Lendl might work on. This appeared reasonable as I believe Lendl had great emotional control on court. This however is what Murray himself had to say about the way he behaves on court just a few weeks ago (at a time when presumably negotiations were going on with Lendl.

ANDY MURRAY believes Wayne Rooney's character flaws have helped him become one of the best footballers on the planet.

So the Scot is adamant he can lift a Grand Slam title without ditching his Rooney-like temper tantrums and meltdowns.

The world No.3 has been heavily criticised for his on-court demeanour
and the regular rants he directs at those watching in the players' box.

Murray has been told more times than he cares to remember that he needs
to sort out his mental approach - with ex-Davis Cup skipper John Lloyd
among his biggest critics.

However, the 24-year-old insists he would lose his competitive edge and
do more harm than good if he underwent a radical personality
transformation.

Murray said: "I'm not perfect, I know that. But everybody is different.


"Roger Federer stays calm. Yet if you look at a great footballer like
Rooney, getting p****d off at his team-mates or at himself, he is a
completely different character but still a fantastic sportsman.
"I'm sure Rooney tries to improve his temperament. It is a flaw but it doesn't stop him being one of the best in the world.

"That is where I am. It just wouldn't make me feel good to bottle my
emotions. Saying nothing and standing there makes me feel uncomfortable
and flat.

"There is a fear of emotion in tennis. If someone boos everyone looks at
them as if to ask, 'What the hell are you doing?' Yet in other sports
it happens all the time.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/tennis-news/2011/11/16/atp-world-tour-finals-passion-is-the-key-as-andy-murray-goes-in-search-of-huge-cash-prize-86908-23565441/


It doesn't sound like an area of his game he is seeking to change. From reports of his matches in Brisbane despite saying he has been in contact with Lendl and that he is working on mutually agreed areas he has been his usual self on court. I can understand why he may not change because despite what many believe IMO this sort of behaviour helps him win. Particuarly against lower ranked players but it can prove disruptive to even the best. On a few occasions Nadal has not coped well. I don't understand why it disrupts other players because if they watched a video of him they would know what to expect but it does. I think Lendl would approve. He wasn't interested in being popular he just wanted the win. I will be surprised if this is something that Lendl will seek to change.


Lendl improved his own game by working on his physical fitness. After a loss Murray often says he needs to improve this area of his game. He has said things like "I need to get stronger". IMO this is the area that Lendl will be working on.

I am also curious to know why Lendl has decided to return to the tennis world after such a long time away. Frew McMillan (a commentator on Eurosport who knew him personally) expressed complete surprise. I wonder what Lendl himself is hoping to gain from the partnership. From what I've heard about him he doesn't sound like a magmanimous character.

Hawkeye, you don't seem too fond of Murray.

Anyways i don't see why there is some scrutiny over Murray's appointment of Lendl from some angles. In my opinion, there is little to no risk involved in this. Murray is at a crucial point of his career and i believe entering his peak. Lendl has been out of the game for so long and has no prior coaching experience so it's not like Murray is employing a proven coach who will be expected to perform. This is trial and error. if it does not work out both part their ways but i think a fresh perspective is needed for Murray. Some one to motivate them from past experiences like Lendl losing 4 slam finals and coming back. For me hiring another experienced coach will probably give him the same ideas Corretja, Maclagan have recently.

Murray at 25 will find it hard to make technical changes to his game. His forehand remains his weakest weapon and even considering his mental approach, it is still what is letting him down at crucial points in slams. The forehand has to improve and that means adding more power and fiddling around with his grip. Murray seems to use an Extreme eastern grip to me and he will have to adjust this perhaps to a semi western grip as i believe this could give him enough spin and power he currently lacks. I don't know how hard this will be for a professional tennis player. I thought his forehand was really great at the FO and he was hitting it with more power so it's a wonder he can't do so often.

Simple_Anaylist

Do you think Lendl has been brought in to make technical changes to Murray's game? Do you think thats what he's best qualified to do? I would say no to both questions.

I am looking forward to the media response to Lendl when he returns to the tennis area. Especially at the slams where there is always such a big press presence. There is bound to be a big interest. I wonder if there has been a clause in his contract that will prevent him talking about Murray. I hope not.

I don't understand all the fuss about this appointment.
Surely bringing in additional help can only improve Andy and his game.
Judge him later on in the year once you can see if it has benefited him, not now.

Y I Man

Lendl is an 8 time slam winner who walked away from the game and is now returning. I think he deserves a little fuss. Don't you?

I bet in Australia there will be a long queue of reporters wanting to interview him. Not to mention all his fellow players (who are now commentators) that he hit with tennis balls waiting to have their say...

By 'fuss' I meant all the "is he the best qualified etc etc etc"

Alan Pardew isn't the best qualified manager for Newcastle Utd, but he has the job and is getting the right results.

It doesn't matter if Lendl is the best qualified for the job or not. If he gets on with Andy and raises his game and the results come, then that is all that matters.

Andy will win a slam this year, im certain of it.

Hawkeye, I think there has been quite a lot of media response already. Personally I hope he will be limited in what he can say to the press. In your previous thread, you asked what Llendl can add that hasn't already been said by various pundits. Someone alluded to this then, but to really help with getting over the performances issues in slam semis & finals, Andy would need to be totally honest with how how he is feeling. He can't do that with pundits, but only with someone whom he can completely trust & confide in.

Regarding what Lendl will get out of this, maybe he is looking for a challenge. Maybe he just wants to promote his tennis academy.

On your original question, the challenge is surely to change the behaviour to be less negative when things are going well, but not leaving Andy feeling flat either. So, yes, Lendl will have his work cut out on that front. I wouldn't expect any technical changes, but I think Andy has recently been missing tactical advice on the biggest matches. Yes, he can mostly work this out himself, but I feel that someone more experienced to talk this over with would be greatly beneficial.

Rooney one of the best in the world? top 50 if he's very lucky

Any appointment of a new coach means a vision to have technical changes made so yes, that's one of the reason Murray appointed him. Lendl was also a player who played with heavy topspin so perhaps he could work on Murrays forehand grip to achieve more of this. I don't believe just flattening out his forehand for more power is what Murray needs. But i think working on the mental aspect will be one of the targets. For all the changes Lendl can make, it won't be his net play or serving because Lendl was never great at any of those and Murray hardly needs to improve his net game.

For me the appointment is to improve Murray's forehand and mental appraoch to the game.

About the media, may be for once in a slam like Wimbledon a little less media pressure will be on Murray as Lendl will also be in the spot light as well taking the questions and answers. That will be a wise thing to do for me. His recent coaching staff have just taking the backseat and Lendl can change that. No disrespect to Maclagan but who was really interested in what he had to say?

Y I Man

I certainly wasn't asking who was best qualified for the job. I think it's great that Lendl has got it and am very much looking forward to what he has to say. Do you think he will get on with Andy? What do you think he will work on to improve his game? As I said I think it will be the physical aspect do you agree?

I know little about football but I have to say that Alan Pardew must have the perfect qualifications for his job if he is getting the right results! As far as football goes do you think Wayne Rooney is a good example for Murray to follow. I know this might sound shallow but I know more about Rooney's off court... I mean pitch activities... cough! than I do about his on pitch personality.

Lol Alan Pardew had alot of past experience managing but always seems to get fired. I was shocked when he was appointed NewCastle boss those. His West Brom and Charlton teams in the PL were one of the worse i ever saw but he has done great things at Newcastle recently and is qualified for the job. Lendl i'll think is also qualified for this job. Don't think he would have taken it if he thought he wasn't.

hawkeye wrote:Y I Man


I know little about football but I have to say that Alan Pardew must have the perfect qualifications for his job if he is getting the right results!

Surely this very same ideology can be applied to the current British Davis Cup captain too? Do you agree hawkeye?

hawkeye wrote:As far as football goes do you think Wayne Rooney is a good example for Murray to follow. I know this might sound shallow but I know more about Rooney's off court... I mean pitch activities... cough! than I do about his on pitch personality.

No, absolutely not. I'm appalled he even mentioned him.

As I've said in a prior thread on this subject:-

"Personally I think Murray should have initially appointed him on a part time basis or a short term contract to see how things went. Then later make the decision to go full time, stay as they are or go their separate ways.

Mainly because, as great as Lendl was, he's never been a full time coach to a top player."

Murray's having a laugh if his thinks his antics are 'showing emotion'.

Federer shows emotion, Nadal shows emotion, Djokovic, Tsonga and everyone else do. Murray has an on-court acting routine that aims to hide his emotion, the exaggerated hard-man act. His fist-pump sits along Henman's as the most awkard of 'celebratory gestures'. Bring in a psychologist so we can finally see how Murray plays when he's fully in the game and not weighed down with self-consciousness. Maybe he could be a great player, but will we ever find out?

So everyone shows emotion on the court besides Murray?

Interesting theory.

So when he looks angry, he's not actually angry. When he looks pleased with a shot, he's not actually pleased. It's all something he learned when Judy sent him to RADA prior to his stint in Spain.

Murray's attiude baffles me at times...half the time he looks unintrested, half the time he shows no emotion whatsoever.

This might be a bit off the OP, but I would consider Magnus Norman (and his work with Soderling) as a case study that should be on Lendl's book list to consult. This should not be considered a comparison of Soderling and Murray as tennis players, in the least. Another worthwhile case study is Gulbis+Gumy+Canas.

Lendl has nothing to prove to anyone. He has always liked a challenge. On another thread, Jubbahey had pointed to a set of Lendl articles on the Tennis Warehouse forum. It is worth a look to see what motivates Lendl.

As YvonneT says, a bit of self-promotion never hurt anyone.

cricketfan90 wrote:Murray's attiude baffles me at times...half the time he looks unintrested, half the time he shows no emotion whatsoever.

In the light of the OP that's a strange observation.

Simple_Analyst wrote:Lol Alan Pardew had alot of past experience managing but always seems to get fired. I was shocked when he was appointed NewCastle boss those. His West Brom and Charlton teams in the PL were one of the worse i ever saw but he has done great things at Newcastle recently and is qualified for the job. Lendl i'll think is also qualified for this job. Don't think he would have taken it if he thought he wasn't.

What are you on about he has never managed west brom and he took over at charlton at xmas and definitely improved and almost kept them up back in 06/07. He did well for West Ham in their first season back in the prem, getting them to the fa cup final for god sake! Since then it hasnt gone right for him but hes doing a job at Newcastle. Maybe stick to tennis ohhh nooo he didaaannttttttt

Oh West Ham i meant.


Any telling me to stick to tennis hardly makes your point any better. Pardew got almost every team he managed in the PL to near relegation with his sides playing some of the worst football in years. Yes i remebered him sending West Ham to the FA final and unluckily they conceded a brilliant goal by Gerald late in the game and lost on penalties. Doesn't change the fact that prior to Newcastle he was never good enough a manager for PL level. In the championship actually he was ok. Why do you think Newcastle fans were agains his appointment initially? They knew his track record.

Why do you think Newcastle fans were agains his appointment initially?

Because he is Mike Ashley's mate, meaning Mike could pull the strings on transfers and Pardew would be his puppet.

I'm not aware of that but also because he wasn't very successful at PL and also Hughton was doing a good job bringing the club back to the PL.
He is doing a great job now though but also lucky to have Ba in that kind of form.

I have only the first few posts. I was struck by YI Man's surprise at the OP. what is the harm in discussing as well as commenting on such a vital moment.

Murray has nothing to lose by appointing Lendl. Lendl has nothing to prove either.

one thing is for sure, if Lendl is going to be in his box constantly, i bet Murray will tone down his cursing and swearing at the box. highly unlikely that Lendl will put up with it.

i think this pairing is pretty unique in tennis since its the first time that the coach has a much more formidable CV than the coachee.

has such a pairing been done before?

No not unique at all. After all didn't Jimmy Connors coach Andy Roddick and other players and was far more successful than those players he coached. Tony Roche had won a slam and took over coaching Lendl who (like Murray) had suffered slam final defeats and then Lendl overtook his coaches achievements. I am sure there are many other such instances in tennis today and throughout history.

coolpixel

I think many expect Murray to tone down his on court behaviour. But as I explained in this article I'm not so sure.

I think he gets benefits from this sort of behaviour. Many think its not something he can control but from the quotes about Wayne Rooney he appears to be implying that it is deliberate. Lendl had a very different court persona but he shared Murray's philosophy that a win is more important than popularity. I'm not so sure he Lendl will see it as something to change. We shall soon see.

Connors did coach Roddick for a while. Maybe this was less unexpected because they were both American and presumably knew each other beforehand. I enjoyed seeing more of Connors whilst he accompanied Roddick. I can remember one Wimbledon during a rain break listening to Connors and McEnroe talking about old times. It was a shame when it stopped raining...

I'm maybe expecting a little of the same with Lendl.

If Murray benefits from his rather peevish on-court demeanour, maybe he needs to ratchet it up a level to gain more benefit. This might take Murrays game to the next level needed to win a slam.

It seems that Darren Cahill recommended Lendl. My question is why did he ignore Gregg Rusedski?

Nore Staat wrote:It seems that Darren Cahill recommended Lendl.

He was certainly present during the first meeting between them.

Nore Staat wrote:If Murray benefits from his rather peevish on-court demeanour, maybe he needs to ratchet it up a level to gain more benefit. This might take Murrays game to the next level needed to win a slam.

It seems that Darren Cahill recommended Lendl. My question is why did he ignore Gregg Rusedski?

I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Murray did "rachet it up" a leval.

I know you were teasing with your mention of Rusedski but if Murray didn't dislike him it could have worked. Rusedski in his commentators role is very objective about Murray and what he needs to do to improve. Some of the things he would say would IMO be both useful and the "wrong" thing according to Murray. I also think he could help Murray technically with his serve. For those that think Murray is seeking to change his on court behaviour that technique Rusedski had with the towels could be a useful calming distraction. Strange as it may sound I don't think he would be brave enough to "hurt" Murray with his advice so wouldn't be quite right for the job. Another good choice would be Annabel Croft. Maybe not technique but she is very perseptive about some of Murrays mental problems.

That was just fun speculating though. I am very happy that Lendl has the job!

Hmmm I wonder how many players Greg Rusedski has coached and how many slams he has won? Loooking at those credentials alone Ivan Lendl wins hands down.

Nore Staat wrote:If Murray benefits from his rather peevish on-court demeanour, maybe he needs to ratchet it up a level to gain more benefit. This might take Murrays game to the next level needed to win a slam.

It seems that Darren Cahill recommended Lendl. My question is why did he ignore Gregg Rusedski?

Anyone who thinks that Tsonga is the new Nadal, gives the impression of not knowing anything about Tennis - let alone get the privilege of coaching one of the best players in the world. Greg talks in soundbites and brings nothing new to the table, I actually think (based on the summaries) Annabel Croft would be better

And if Cahill recommended Lendl - who on earth are we to argue

djlovesyou wrote:So everyone shows emotion on the court besides Murray?

Interesting theory.

So when he looks angry, he's not actually angry. When he looks pleased with a shot, he's not actually pleased. It's all something he learned when Judy sent him to RADA prior to his stint in Spain.

His half-hour-long 'giving himself a good talking-to' is a bit more than just looking angry. It's a pretense that when he's losing it's something that could be corrected by calling himself an idiot, i.e. it diminishes his losing by making it seem as though it's just due to him being a silly boy. I.e. if he wasn't being such a silly boy that needs a good telling off then the match would DEFINITELY be in his control. It doesn't appear to be a misrepresentation that enhances his performance, instead it gets in the way.

A pointless article, simply because it relies on the old and ignorant soundbites about the Lendl and Murray personalities - but I'll justify my criticisms as follows;-

1) "Most agree that it will not be improvements in the technical side of Murray's game" - Really? The player with arguably one of the best forehands ever, cannot improve his player who has one of the worst (under pressure) in the Top 10

2) "I believe Lendl had great emotional control on court" - Once he started winning Slams, yes. Previously, no. He was often surly, sulky, prone to looking like he'd just been told his house was on fire. Sound familiar?

3) "So the Scot is adamant he can lift a Grand Slam title without ditching his Rooney-like temper tantrums and meltdowns" - Yep! We can deduce that from this comment . Ever thought that, quite rightly that Murray is a bit peeved at the constant attention to the so called tantrums? He actually has them during every match - but they get talked down when he wins and talked up when he loses. His point is, that there is nothing wrong with a bit of fire in ones belly

4) "I wonder what Lendl himself is hoping to gain from the partnership" Credibilty. It probably still irks Ivan that he's not revered in the same way as Mac, Connors, Becker or even Willander - despite the fact the won more Slams than all of them (except Jimbo). Why are you so cynical? Anyone with an ounce of intelligence can see the enormous gain Lendl could get. Imagine they work for 3 years and Andy wins, say five slams. That then means Lendl becomes the most revered Tennis personality of all time having done both sides of the job (so to speak)


4) "From what I've heard about him he doesn't sound like a magmanimous character" I'd stop reading "The Black and White News of the Day" newspaper, if I was you, it tends to limit a persons ability to look beyond the headline. Google Lendl and look into how successful he has been off court as a true family man, which is totally at odds with his 'iron man' image


A mean spirited cynical article - but hey ho, that's your right

droogle wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:So everyone shows emotion on the court besides Murray?

Interesting theory.

So when he looks angry, he's not actually angry. When he looks pleased with a shot, he's not actually pleased. It's all something he learned when Judy sent him to RADA prior to his stint in Spain.

His half-hour-long 'giving himself a good talking-to' is a bit more than just looking angry. It's a pretense that when he's losing it's something that could be corrected by calling himself an idiot, i.e. it diminishes his losing by making it seem as though it's just due to him being a silly boy. I.e. if he wasn't being such a silly boy that needs a good telling off then the match would DEFINITELY be in his control. It doesn't appear to be a misrepresentation that enhances his performance, instead it gets in the way.

OK Dad

The point is that if he deludes himself that what he's doing is somehow healthy for his game that's almost certainly ensuring GS failure. So I agree he needs a sports psychologist.

droogle wrote:The point is that if he deludes himself that what he's doing is somehow healthy for his game that's almost certainly ensuring GS failure. So I agree he needs a sports psychologist.

Droogle. If he was struggling to get into the Top 10, i'd agree with you. The fact is that his slam losses were, the first when anyone could argue that he was knackered after his two day marathon with Nadal - no tantrum there, the second Fed played one of his three best matches since the end of 2007 and the third - well we saw that no-one could live with Nole for that first five month. To hear some people talk, you'd think he'd lost then all to bagels against some no-hopers

Fact is, he has one of the best final conversion ratio of all time - so his game is actually in rude health and very rarely loses from a winning situation. So how on earth can he have a flaky mentality - it just doesn't wash. Go watch him against Fed in the two consecutive Masters final beatings he gave him (2010) and I'll think you'll see the Swiss genius, getting a little down on himself.

What happens is people, who don't like the tantrums, exaggerate the affect they've had in his career. Yes, he sometimes loses it at the wrong time, but the benefit of him "expressing himself" far outweigh the negatives

Spot on banbrotam. I'll lay a bet Andy has flung many tantrums in his run through to his best wins of his career so if that were hindering him he would never have won 22 ATP titles. Likewise in many matches that he has beaten legends like Federer and Nadal I'd bet he'd thrown at least one tantrum in the match but it didn't alter the result. The area he needs to work on is how to ensure he comes out all guns blazing in slam finals and keeps at that high level. When he does that the slam win will come and Lendl will hopefully help him to achieve that.

How do you know that what he's doing is unhealthy for his game?

If I said that if Nadal stopped sulking and snarling throughout his matches, he'd be miles better. How would you react to that?

What if I said that Tsongo would be a multi-slam champion if he stopped doing that funny dance thing after his matches?

Re Greg Rusedki's coaching ability, he last year coached the juniors team to a historic David cup win. You may not like the guy but he is one of the very few player- commentAtors to put his credibility on the line and win something

coolpixel wrote:Re Greg Rusedki's coaching ability, he last year coached the juniors team to a historic David cup win. You may not like the guy but he is one of the very few player- commentAtors to put his credibility on the line and win something

I neither like or dislike Greg. Indeed, I think he's hard to dislike as a personality, he seems a very warm person. However, coaching juniours is a million miles from coaching one of the world's best players. Anyone who can make that comment about Tsonga has not got the to work with the very best nous. Could you imagine the scene, Murray's about to face Tsonga in this years Aus final and when discussing with coach Greg about how to combat him, Rudseski comes out with "well he's the new Nadal - so play him like you'd play Nadal"!!

So he has not coached any pros? Like Lendl then. Difference is Lendl is/was a far more successful tennis player than Rusedski so why not Lendl above Rudeski - especially if he comes recommended by Darren Cahill.

I agree that Lendl will have his work cut out for him if he wants to turn Murray into a slam winner, but thats where my acquiescence with the rest of the article ceases.

Lendl has by far the best credentials to make an impact on Murray's slam career and his chances to win one.

Its not coaching per se, its the tweaking and confidence boost that will give Murray a far better chance to play his best tennis in the 2nd week of any slam, even the FO.

1/ Confidence is a double edged sword and can instantly turn bad in a few seconds. those that can keep a positive attitude in pressure moments are the ones who succeed more often. Lendl was such a player.

2/ Continually tweaking ones game to ensure that all parts are well oiled and working to perfection (or a close as is humanly possible) give a player a better chance to perform at peak levels. Lendl was such a player.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that many positive things can come from a "willing", motivated student with a "motivated", willing tutor.

Jubbehey

I'm confused. What bit of my article do you disagree with?

It was basically a question asking what part of Murray's game Lendl has been brought in to improve. I am very happy that Lendl will be doing this job. BTW I read the article that you linked for me on another thread. Thank you again for that it was very interesting. I can recommend it to anyone who is interested in Lendl. (Not sure if I'm allowed to give a link?)

It was after reading more about Lendl and also what Murray has said himself that I thought he would focus on the physical side of the game. I also explained my reasons for thinking he might not (as many others presume) try to alter Murray's on court behaviour.

I agree with you about confidence being a double edged sword. Annabel Croft said something about this yesterday prior to the Doha final. She said that in both AO finals Murray was over confident. That he believed he had put all the hard work in therefore there was no way he could lose. When he did lose the shock and disbelief sent him into his well known slumps.

For this reason IMO Lendl should of course build up his confidence but also be realistic. There is a chance starting at the AO that he will be beaten yet again by the top 3. Some would even say the odds are in favour of this happening. If it does Murray can't really afford at his age and stage of career to go into similar slumps in form. Part of Lendl's job should be to ensure this doesn't happen.

I'm not sure what you mean by "tweaks" to Murray's game. Do you mean technical tweaks?

banbrotam wrote:

droogle wrote:The point is that if he deludes himself that what he's doing is somehow healthy for his game that's almost certainly ensuring GS failure. So I agree he needs a sports psychologist.

Droogle. If he was struggling to get into the Top 10, i'd agree with you. The fact is that his slam losses were, the first when anyone could argue that he was knackered after his two day marathon with Nadal - no tantrum there, the second Fed played one of his three best matches since the end of 2007 and the third - well we saw that no-one could live with Nole for that first five month. To hear some people talk, you'd think he'd lost then all to bagels against some no-hopers

His slam performance is really odd, he's often so close to going out in a couple of the matches before he gets to the later rounds. It's true, when he plays the top 3 he cleans his act up completely, I guess he knows that nothing other than total commitment and focus will give him a chance of winning, plus he's relieved of the burden of the expectation of winning. And perhaps those matches are so intense there's simply no space for bringing in baggage: then occasionally you get a performance like the 2010 WTF nadal semi where you can actually believe that he's got what it takes to beat the best in the big tournaments. But there clearly is something that's getting in the way of him really letting go on court, and I think it's visible in general in his game, his forehand in particular always looks tight. I think the pressure and perceived expecations have been a barrier, and the early rounds in slams, rather then being opportunities to hit out and find his rhythm, tend to be emotionally tortuous roller-coasters where it's only when he's nearly lost the match that he lets go and finds form.

I'd agree, that in the last two finals - he wasn't his natural self, as though he was trying to be good first and hope to play well second

However, I think he would still have lost both, but would probably have taken at least a set

Murray says there is no need to cut out on court tantrums

Andy Murray claims he does not need to eliminate on-court tantrums from his game
completely, but believes new coach Ivan Lendl can help him maintain his
focus when he does lose his rag.



Murray accepts his behaviour on court has at times been unacceptable -
the Scot has been in trouble for swearing on court and smashing his
racket in frustration. But the British No. 1 insists that tantrums will
not impede him, as long as he learns to respond in a positive manner.



http://www.espn.co.uk/tennis/sport/story/129982.html

My hunch appears to have been correct!

I like the fact that he has said that his goal is to make No. 1 this year. That is an excellent target to aim for and it's amazing what you can achieve if you create a really ambitious target. I also happen to think that it's not an entirely unrealistic target that is set to become a stick to beat him with. If Lendl had anything to do with that, then good.

If it works then fine but I’m not very clear what Lendl can bring to Murray’s table. I can see the similarities as both are dour, very committed types and heavy on the work ethic but all this means is that mentally they are already very similar anyway. Lendl may be able to explain to AM how he won his titles but that is just exactly that….his way, and that may not be the same as Murrays’. There are many better coaches out there expert in changing a players game and tactics; specifically, in what area will Lendl help?

bradman99.94 wrote:If it works then fine but I’m not very clear what Lendl can bring to Murray’s table. I can see the similarities as both are dour, very committed types and heavy on the work ethic but all this means is that mentally they are already very similar anyway. Lendl may be able to explain to AM how he won his titles but that is just exactly that….his way, and that may not be the same as Murrays’. There are many better coaches out there expert in changing a players game and tactics; specifically, in what area will Lendl help?

First, they are actually not "dour". That's just the image they portray on court caused by the intensity of the situation - look at Nadal and how he 'snarls' around the court. They can't all be smiling like Tsonga!! McEnroe himself has said that Lendl is one of the most rounded personalities he knows. I was actually shocked at this and thought that the Yank great was merely being nice - until I found confirmation of this

Secodn. Murray is a miniscule away from winning a major. He doesn't need loads of coaching help. He needs help in the tiny differences that might help to win a major - which can only be gained either by those who have won one or helped a player to win one