Murray to re-unite with Lendl

At least during the grass season apparently. 

A good move I think providing that Andy maintains the increased variety. Just gives him an experienced head to speak to again before the big matches.

Interesting. I am surprised Lendl will do it. The first time around worked out so well that it will be a hard act to follow. If it does not go as well this time around, it will be viewed as a failure, or disappointment at least.

Born Slippy wrote:At least during the grass season apparently. 

A good move I think providing that Andy maintains the increased variety. Just gives him an experienced head to speak to again before the big matches.

Very good point about the variety aspect. That went out the window, last time Ivan was in charge and whilst it gave the results needed in the Slams, other than (yes very important) an improved forehand - other aspects of his game which makes him so special, were dropped / underused etc - so that his overall results were actually no different

It shows what a great player Andy is though, Lendl has refused every other approach

summerblues wrote:Interesting.  I am surprised Lendl will do it.  The first time around worked out so well that it will be a hard act to follow.  If it does not go as well this time around, it will be viewed as a failure, or disappointment at least.

Murray's a great player. Clearly, Lendl believes in him far more than most of the scribers on these boards It's not a risk.

Let's be honest here, Slams and most Masters are going to either him of Djoko for the next couple of years - hence if your Lendl, you're thinking even if he only wins one slam, that's a success and there has to be a chance of that

Not a bad time to come in. Second best player in the world on his best surface, with a dominant number 1 he isn't expected to beat. If Murray goes out early I doubt Lendl will get the blame. If he loses to Novak it will be seen as standard. However, if he wins then Lendl looks like a miracle worker.

I do not see it like that.

I think it will be quite simple how this second stint will be viewed.  If Andy wins a slam, it will be a success and if he does not, then it will be a failure.  Not much in-between.

That alone is not so horrible, because Andy must have some reasonable-ish chance to win a slam.  But the problem is that even if it is a success, it will just be sort of more-of-the-same, whereas if it is a failure, then it will become more visible.

Lendl's not a fool.

Say Murray wins Wimby, then everyone says it's down to him, when it would be more down to the fact that really Andy has been the best grass court player of the last 3-4 years

His 2014 defeat was due to someone trying to get their body to do something it couldn't after surgery

Last year, was condition led. Fed would have beaten Nole under those SF conditions last year

Hence, it would be no surprise to me if Andy wins Wimbledon, regardless who's coach

Yes banbro, I agree with that.  There is certainly some chance that Lendl has a slam fall in his lap, yet he gets all the credit for it.  But on balance, I still think it is a losing proposition for Lendl.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how it works out.

Just watching a replay of the Novak/Andy, Olympic SF from 2012

Amazing how much slower, they both looked to be hitting their shots, even as recent as four years ago

Great match though, but boy Novak is a totally different player now

Great news. My guess is they are both trying it out to see if it's still compatible. If it becomes full time, I think the result will be Andy winning more slams.

I don't care about him maintaining the variety to be honest. If he can balance it with aggression, fine. If not I'd rather he played the Lendl way of before, front foot on the baseline, consistent depth, hitting through the forehand... That's the tennis that won him the big hardware.

This is tremendous news.

Danny_1982 wrote:Great news. My guess is they are both trying it out to see if it's still compatible. If it becomes full time, I think the result will be Andy winning more slams.

I don't care about him maintaining the variety to be honest. If he can balance it with aggression, fine. If not I'd rather he played the Lendl way of before, front foot on the baseline, consistent depth, hitting through the forehand... That's the tennis that won him the big hardware.

This is tremendous news.

I think it's pretty much an agreed deal, regardless of Wimby an event which was always Lendl's weakest anyway

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/36511186

Happy to see Lendl back. Hope it results in more slams but even if not I feel it is a positive move.

banbrotam wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:Great news. My guess is they are both trying it out to see if it's still compatible. If it becomes full time, I think the result will be Andy winning more slams.

I don't care about him maintaining the variety to be honest. If he can balance it with aggression, fine. If not I'd rather he played the Lendl way of before, front foot on the baseline, consistent depth, hitting through the forehand... That's the tennis that won him the big hardware.

This is tremendous news.

I think it's pretty much an agreed deal, regardless of Wimby an event which was always Lendl's weakest anyway

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/36511186

Even better! Perfect appointment for Andy. I am now extremely hopeful that Andy will add to his slam count.

If Ivan can come up with a solution on how to beat Novak (as he has done in the past at the USO and Wimbledon) then great - however his calming influence on court for Andy will help and I am sure it will pay dividends either way.

It's interesting that it was stressed "part of the team" not coach.

I wonder who Mauresmo will be supporting if Murray plays Djokovic at Wimbledon. A part of her might want Murray to win, but on the other hand it would make her look bad.

Officially she will be supporting Murray "with whom she enjoyed working together, and with whom she is still close" (or some such line) and unofficially she will be hoping he gets triple bageled.

Makes absolute sense for Murray to do this.

Easy to say with hindsight but Mauresmo was always going to struggle.

Lendl-Murray was such a deadly combo. Reuniting it is Murray's best chance to break the Djokovic-Becker stranglehold.

Murray doesn't lack talent, having Lendl back in his corner is a massive boost to his morale. Will make him believe Djokovic is beatable.

At Wimbledon with home support, happy memories of 2013, Murray will be a big threat even to Djokovic this year.

I think it's a good idea, there's nothing to lose and Murray's record vs. Djoko on grass is 2:0.  If they meet at Wimbledon in the final it's a different story to RG..... with any luck!

BBC are reporting it as a 20 week per year deal with Delgado his year round coach.  Last time Lendl was on a 25 week per year deal in the first year then he dropped it to 20 weeks per year deal in the second year.  Then he wanted to drop it again but Murray decided it wouldn't work and they parted company.  So it seems that Lendl will focus on the grass court season and the hard court season probably US Open and Australia.  It has been mentioned by the BBC that Murray pretty much knows how to beat everyone apart from Federer (last five matches) and most significantly Djokovic.  Game plans and technique. Ivan Lendl has already flown in to London to be with Murray for Queens. John McEnroe is coaching Raonic at the same tournament.

I checked the head to head of Lendl vs Becker and it was 11 to 10 in Lendl's favour.

I think if Murray is to beat Djokovic then it'll be on grass.

I make Djokovic a great player than plays ok on grass, rather than a great grass court player.

Interesting times ahead. I think against the very best players (basically just Novak at the moment), Andy does seem to struggle with belief and, based on past experience, I do think that Ivan can help with that.

The stat that Jim Courier flagged at the French showing a marked drop in average forehand speed post-Lendl was an interesting one and I won't be at all surprised if Andy starts hitting the forehand bigger again. Of course, Andy is a lot more than just a ball-basher and I'm hoping a balance can be struck between power and variety.

Of course, when it comes to aggressive intent, forehand speed is really quite a crude measure. I think court position and frequency of net approaches are far more important in gauging Andy's level of aggression.

Andy's previous two slam wins against Novak did come from trading from the baseline, but given how Novak's game has developed, I just don't think that trying to outmuscle him from the baseline is going to cut it any more. To crack the Djokovic conundrum, Andy has to find a way of exploiting his potential for an expansive all-court game. Hoping that's the way that Lendl sees it also.

Guest82 wrote:I think if Murray is to beat Djokovic then it'll be on grass.  

I make Djokovic a great player than plays ok on grass, rather than a great grass court player.  

Depends. If it's cold and heavy or the roof is on, then it's not much different to a slow/medium hard court with a lowish bounce

Problem is both Andy and Roger (when playing at his best) need fast conditions to beat Novak. So if there's some heat (i.e. like 2013) then great, as the extra speed keeps Novak more honest - for once they can both hit through him to a certain degree

I maintain that if you reverse the Friday (very hot) and Sunday (cool) weather from Wimby last year, then Andy (or Roger) wins his SF and then beats Novak in those hot conditions

The big issue, is that only the fastest conditions make Novak look vulnerable and even then it barely favours the other two

Andy's a better grass court player, but that means diddly squat when it's mano v mano

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:Interesting times ahead. I think against the very best players (basically just Novak at the moment), Andy does seem to struggle with belief and, based on past experience, I do think that Ivan can help with that.

The stat that Jim Courier flagged at the French showing a marked drop in average forehand speed post-Lendl was an interesting one and I won't be at all surprised if Andy starts hitting the forehand bigger again. Of course, Andy is a lot more than just a ball-basher and I'm hoping a balance can be struck between power and variety.

Of course, when it comes to aggressive intent, forehand speed is really quite a crude measure. I think court position and frequency of net approaches are far more important in gauging Andy's level of aggression.

Andy's previous two slam wins against Novak did come from trading from the baseline, but given how Novak's game has developed, I just don't think that trying to outmuscle him from the baseline is going to cut it any more. To crack the Djokovic conundrum, Andy has to find a way of exploiting his potential for an expansive all-court game. Hoping that's the way that Lendl sees it also.

I actually think a return to 2012/13 style is Andy best shot. Add those KPH back to the forehand, stay close to the baseline, dictate on first shot after serve. Also, treat Novak like an enemy. No pally practice sets against him (Lendl banned those last time). Add that to his serve improvement, I think he can beat him on grass AND on a hard court.

The problem with incorporating variety is that Andy's instinct has always been, in my view, to use that as a counter punching weapon. When he mixes pace and spins he reverts to old Andy and regresses behind the baseline. It will work against everyone outside the top guys, but hand the initiative to Novak in a point and you rarely get it back.

I think he needs to get back to very close to what he was doing before with Lendl. That is proven. It is the only time in his entire career he's beaten Novak and Roger in 5 set matches. 4 times in that 2 year period, 0 times before or since.

I disagree with nearly all of that. He should definitely look to practice against Djokovic as much as possible. It will take away all the mystique. It's no coincidence that he hit with Rafa immediately before Madrid and then was able to comfortably take him apart in the proper match. As it is, most of the time he gives Novak a head start before adjusting to his game.

2012/13 Andy largely relied on outlasting Novak - particularly in the US Open win. That was a winnable tactic then. It isn't now. Andy has to be aggressive and use variety if he is to get the better of Novak. The Rome final or the first set of the French were excellent examples. What I'm hoping Lendl will be able to do is help Andy maintain that level throughout big matches.

Andy now is playing far better tennis than previously under Lendl. He cannot regress to that style of play or he is never beating Novak who is vastly improved. It's vital he continues to build on the current game style, using Lendl's extra experience to just give him an extra couple of percent in the big games.

Fair enough, agree to disagree. I think it was far more than outlasting him that won those 2 majors, but there we go.

We'll see which way Lendl and Andy go.

lendl or not - Murray has a great opportunity to add to his slams. Only Djokovic stands in his way compared to when there where 3 great players in his way. And comparatively it is an easier task to beat Djokovic than it was to beat Federer on grass or Nadal on clay in days gone by. So his chances at two of the four slams in theory are better. Certainly also at the USO - where both Federer and Nadal have looked supreme over the years.

So really a huge opportunity, and it's not like Djokovic has been playing unbelievably great tennis.

Well, whatever the winning tactic is, it seems the problem for Andy is not so much finding it, but maintaining it. Part of that may be physical (you can't really avoid a physical bust up against Novak), but a much bigger part is mental and I'm hopeful that Lendl can help with that.

Agree with others that grass represents Andy's best chance, in part because I think that there's a greater chance that Novak gets ambushed by someone else (like Anderson almost did last year). Having said that, with two titles on the trot, Novak's win streak on grass is not looking too shabby.

Danny_1982 wrote:

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:Interesting times ahead. I think against the very best players (basically just Novak at the moment), Andy does seem to struggle with belief and, based on past experience, I do think that Ivan can help with that.

The stat that Jim Courier flagged at the French showing a marked drop in average forehand speed post-Lendl was an interesting one and I won't be at all surprised if Andy starts hitting the forehand bigger again. Of course, Andy is a lot more than just a ball-basher and I'm hoping a balance can be struck between power and variety.

Of course, when it comes to aggressive intent, forehand speed is really quite a crude measure. I think court position and frequency of net approaches are far more important in gauging Andy's level of aggression.

Andy's previous two slam wins against Novak did come from trading from the baseline, but given how Novak's game has developed, I just don't think that trying to outmuscle him from the baseline is going to cut it any more. To crack the Djokovic conundrum, Andy has to find a way of exploiting his potential for an expansive all-court game. Hoping that's the way that Lendl sees it also.

I actually think a return to 2012/13 style is Andy best shot. Add those KPH back to the forehand, stay close to the baseline, dictate on first shot after serve. Also, treat Novak like an enemy. No pally practice sets against him (Lendl banned those last time). Add that to his serve improvement, I think he can beat him on grass AND on a hard court.

The problem with incorporating variety is that Andy's instinct has always been, in my view, to use that as a counter punching weapon. When he mixes pace and spins he reverts to old Andy and regresses behind the baseline. It will work against everyone outside the top guys, but hand the initiative to Novak in a point and you rarely get it back.

I think he needs to get back to very close to what he was doing before with Lendl. That is proven. It is the only time in his entire career he's beaten Novak and Roger in 5 set matches. 4 times in that 2 year period, 0 times before or since.

I'm unconvinced on the Lendl factor at slams and think it's a classic case of lies, damned lies and statistics

I watched the 2012 Olympics SF and in comparison to now Novak was hitting the ball so much slower, I thought for a minute I was watching Connors in the 70's

Seriously, there are several factors that have put Andy at a disadvantage more or less until now as follows

1) Novak's improvement
2) Back surgery - It wasn't really until the spring of last year that the fully competitive (with his three rivals) Murray was back
3) Federer had a slump, due to his own issues at the back end of 2012/13. Even so, Murray still managed to make a meal of beating him at the 2013 Aus Open - actually showing that nothing much had changed, i.e. if Andy can take four hrs instead of two, he will - ultimately that extra mental effort cost him

I do agree that mentally Lendl's a help, but let's be honest here Murray totally lost his way in the 3rd and early part of the 4th sets at the US Open - it was only that Novak was so bad that he got back into it. And the Wimby win had so many breaks of serve, it was classed as a failure not to break. It was also baking hot and fast, just want Novak didn't want and what really Andy must have dreamt of (despite his modest claims that he would have been toast if it had gone to a fourth set). Put it another way get Andy playing Novak in last years hot SF and I think Andy wins

Ironically, I think Lendl's best work was for the Wimby final of 2012. Here, there was a competitive Murray taking it more to his opponent in a final, far more than he had ever done before

So yes of course Ivan is an asset, but the success / failure isn't quite as black and white

I'll defend muzzas 2012 U.S. open though. We forget but Murray had actually played his way back into it by the middle of the 4th set. By the end of that set he was the better player, and he took that into the 5th and dominated despite clear nerves

He was beastly that finsl set he could barely miss. He certainly won that one

I don't know if this will impact Murray that much. I think it may help him close the gap that has opened up between himself and Djokovic in terms of quality. But Novak has kept getting better, we have seen how his serving improved in both 2011 and then again improved in 2015 and is now yielding more free points. Also he is more comfortable with his slice backhand and volleys as well. So even if Murray does improve, I don't feel that he will be able to close the gap as much as maybe he think he will. It is still a good move and should help him, but he is dealing with a better Djokovic now than the one he had to deal with in 2012 and 2013.

Hi Socal

Andy's best chance against Novak must be on Grass, and if he can't who else do you see being able to beat him?

banbrotam wrote:

Danny_1982 wrote:

Aut0Gr4ph wrote:Interesting times ahead. I think against the very best players (basically just Novak at the moment), Andy does seem to struggle with belief and, based on past experience, I do think that Ivan can help with that.

The stat that Jim Courier flagged at the French showing a marked drop in average forehand speed post-Lendl was an interesting one and I won't be at all surprised if Andy starts hitting the forehand bigger again. Of course, Andy is a lot more than just a ball-basher and I'm hoping a balance can be struck between power and variety.

Of course, when it comes to aggressive intent, forehand speed is really quite a crude measure. I think court position and frequency of net approaches are far more important in gauging Andy's level of aggression.

Andy's previous two slam wins against Novak did come from trading from the baseline, but given how Novak's game has developed, I just don't think that trying to outmuscle him from the baseline is going to cut it any more. To crack the Djokovic conundrum, Andy has to find a way of exploiting his potential for an expansive all-court game. Hoping that's the way that Lendl sees it also.

I actually think a return to 2012/13 style is Andy best shot. Add those KPH back to the forehand, stay close to the baseline, dictate on first shot after serve. Also, treat Novak like an enemy. No pally practice sets against him (Lendl banned those last time). Add that to his serve improvement, I think he can beat him on grass AND on a hard court.

The problem with incorporating variety is that Andy's instinct has always been, in my view, to use that as a counter punching weapon. When he mixes pace and spins he reverts to old Andy and regresses behind the baseline. It will work against everyone outside the top guys, but hand the initiative to Novak in a point and you rarely get it back.

I think he needs to get back to very close to what he was doing before with Lendl. That is proven. It is the only time in his entire career he's beaten Novak and Roger in 5 set matches. 4 times in that 2 year period, 0 times before or since.

I'm unconvinced on the Lendl factor at slams and think it's a classic case of lies, damned lies and statistics

I watched the 2012 Olympics SF and in comparison to now Novak was hitting the ball so much slower, I thought for a minute I was watching Connors in the 70's

Seriously, there are several factors that have put Andy at a disadvantage more or less until now as follows

1) Novak's improvement
2) Back surgery - It wasn't really until the spring of last year that the fully competitive (with his three rivals) Murray was back
3) Federer had a slump, due to his own issues at the back end of 2012/13. Even so, Murray still managed to make a meal of beating him at the 2013 Aus Open - actually showing that nothing much had changed, i.e. if Andy can take four hrs instead of two, he will - ultimately that extra mental effort cost him

I do agree that mentally Lendl's a help, but let's be honest here Murray totally lost his way in the 3rd and early part of the 4th sets at the US Open  - it was only that Novak was so bad that he got back into it. And the Wimby win had so many breaks of serve, it was classed as a failure not to break. It was also baking hot and fast, just want Novak didn't want and what really Andy must have dreamt of (despite his modest claims that he would have been toast if it had gone to a fourth set). Put it another way get Andy playing Novak in last years hot SF and I think Andy wins

Ironically, I think Lendl's best work was for the Wimby final of 2012. Here, there was a competitive Murray taking it more to his opponent in a final, far more than he had ever done before

So yes of course Ivan is an asset, but the success / failure isn't quite as black and white

I agree a very good post by banbro here. I can't see how anyone discusses Murray's recent difficulties with Djokovic and doesn't look at the back issue and Novak's improvement particular in terms of his serve and his variety as big reasons why this gap has opened up. The prevalent opinion being that if Murray hires Lendl he still can't just turn back the clock to 2012 or 2013. But I do think it will help him mentally, like having that security blanket and that respect for his coach and mental discipline and resolve it takes. I think Lendl will help him, but can't see it being a magic bullet of any kind, Lendl did benefit from some good timing the first go around and nothing he does can recreate the set of circumstances that existed in 2012 and 2013.

sportslover wrote:Hi Socal

Andy's best chance against Novak must be on Grass, and if he can't who else do you see being able to beat him?

Can't agree more. The crowd, he is a more natural grass courter and he needs that little bit more zip on his serve and FH to hit through Novak, where as Novak can find away to get through Murray more easily even on the slower surfaces. Nice to hear from you again, SL.

emancipator wrote:

So really a huge opportunity, and it's not like Djokovic has been playing unbelievably great tennis.

Really, I don't see how by any objective measure that can be the case. I mean when you have won 5 of the last slams even in WEAK ERA (LOL! see Fat Dave) how can the tennis not be unbelievable. Where exactly are his weaknesses? I mean is great tennis simply down to whatever subjective criteria you would like it to be, ie the player doesn't look like Screech? I think his tennis has both been great and unbelievable. Sets two and 3 at the FO final was just a masterclass of shot making hitting through Murray with all manners of winners on wet damp clay. If you watch sets 2 and 3 at the FO final against the number two player, an incredible retriever, on slow clay, and see how easily Novak hit through him then there can be no doubt as to his shotmaking. That should have been the acid test where he won by attrition and errors, but that isn't how that match was decided was it? He had Murray shaking his head and giving him "are you kidding me" looking for like 2 hrs.