13
Spadea On Rios, Young, Bogomolov and the Life on Tour
32 Comments · Posted by in Bios, Dan M
Why didn’t Vince beat Rios when he handled Kafelnikov three times? (I’m only writing this because Michael asked me to write more on Vince and less on Fed and the Joker). According to Vince, Rios played the same exact game he did, only a little better. He was faster, had a better forehand and serve. He said you could look at Rios’s career exactly the way you look at his career. Did Rios over-achieve or under-achieve?
Vince thinks he over-achieved. Stefanki, Vince said, toughened him up, improved his serve and his movement. And he got him to No. 1. The fact that he never won a major and only reached one major finals is surprising, but Vince thinks he still overachieved.
Remember, Vince goes by the Pete Fischer stance on winning slams: It’s all about technique and mechanics. You’ve got those two things in abundance and you”re a big game player, then you can win a slam. Vince thinks he could take Donald Young Jr. to No. 1 player in the world. He thinks Young has more talent than Rios had. He’s faster, Vince said, they both had great hands, but Young is a better volleyer. Young has Rios’s ability to stroke the ball. Rios was not spectacular, Vince said, and that’s why he didn’t win any slams, but you don’t have to be spectacular to win slams. You have to have incredible technique, mechanics and heart. But Young is soft and Vince would step in the same way Stefanki stepped in and toughen him up.
Alex Bogomolov Jr. asked Vince to coach him in Atlanta next week, but Vince declined. He doesn’t want to get back out on the tour with all the traveling unless it’s going to be with a player who he thinks could get in the Top 10. He said he’d coach Bogie on the telephone for free and if Bogey got to the quarters through his phone coaching, they’d work on a percentage. But Vince looked at Bogey’s last six losses (Bogey’s lost 6 straight and Young 12) and said, “Dude, you’re losing like you did in Newport to Querrey, like 5 and 4. It’s all about you stepping up at the big moments and refusing to lose. You’re punking out. All tennis is is not missing shots. When Rios was No. 1, he didn’t miss. Plus, you’re first serve percentage points won is under 70 per cent. You’ve got to beef up your serve. You can’t win on the tour if it’s below 70 per cent.”
But the Youngs haven’t called back inquiring about Vince coaching Donald. He’d be interested in Gulbis, but he said Gulbis probably doesn’t listen to his coach and that’s why he’s not as good as he could be. Vince said his favorite coach was Peter Lundgren, but he only coached Vince for a short while. He said Lundgren is a guy who was a top player, works his player hard and stays on you to play past your fears. Last week, Lundgren was coaching Michael Russell in Newport. But essentially, Vince doesn’t want to go back on the tour with Bogey for one week, take the flights, take the taxis to the court, get the balls, push Bogey and stare down his opponents like Fish and Isner, who he said can’t play grass court tennis. Vince said he got further at Wimbledon than Isner has and Vince said he was a terrible grass court player. You’ve got to be able to move on the grass, and Isner can’t. Vince made the Newport semis and finals and mirrors and bluffing, he said.
But Vince’s know-how, he played well at Newport just like savvy players like Santoro, Rochus (who Sanguinetti says has the best one-handed backhand on tour, up there with Haas and Kohlschreiber and all the rest) and now Hewitt, because he understood how to play. He understood his own flaws, he had a steady game, but besides his backhand he didn’t hit his serve or forehand through the court enough, he loved the competition, being a warrior, but unless the right player comes along, I don’t think we’ll see Vince out there on the coaching sidelines anytime soon.
Scoop Malinowski · July 14, 2012 at 12:51 am
Terrific fantastic read Dan. Really love these insights from the guru named Vince. That’s a bold statement saying he can take DY to #1. Love it. Good to hear that Vince’s phone is ringing and his coaching expertise is in demand. I like his comment that Rios was an overachiever, nobody else has ever said that, they all say what a wasted talent he was. Vince sees things a different way.
Steve · July 14, 2012 at 2:05 am
Courier had some clunky mechanics on some of his key strokes and won slams. There’s goes that theory but I see his point. Certainly makes things easier.
Michael · July 14, 2012 at 5:07 am
More of this Spadea guy ! I demand it. Why have you been hiding this ? This stuff is even more interesting than reading Scoop’s reposts of tournament or manufacturer press releases.
Dan, have you ever considered writing a book about Spadea ? Taking DY to #1. Classic. But it is what you need in a coach. Trite to say but if a coach doesn’t believe in you then you have the wrong coach. It’s also a good sell to the Dad. I can take ’em to #1. (OK, how about we tie your compensation directly and exclusively to that goal….)
As far as Gulbis, I bet a lot of coaches would like to get their hands on that level of talent. Put a Roddick-like head on Gulbis and we are talking multiple Major’s.
It most definitely isn’t just about technique and mechanics. I noticed later you did add “heart.” Or what I might describe as being mentally tough. The not so minor element that along with T&M explains why Nadal is one of the greatest players ever and the greatest on clay. HIS HEAD AND HEART. But you can’t coach what Nadal has. That’s why it’s so rare.
But maybe Spadea thinks you can coach it. That great T&M goes hand in hand with mental toughness ? Because you know you have the goods so you become tough ? If so, I think not.
loreley · July 14, 2012 at 9:47 am
Nadal’s brain works like that, because his uncle(family) manipulated him when he was a child. He needs to win in order to be happy.
You cannot coach it, because it has to happen when a player is a child.
Dan Markowitz · July 14, 2012 at 10:16 am
I think it goes unstated that anyone who’s in the Top 100 has some serious competitive mojo. That’s not the issue. All these guys/gals want to win badly, they’ve done a lot of winning in their tennis lives and it’s just a matter of retraining or activating the right mindset again so they can win.
Look, what was Agassi’s ranking when Gilbert took over? I think you make a great point, Michael, one Spadea actually made in the book we did write together, and that is that it takes a special talent to go out day in, day out over a 30-year career, because Spadea started playing seriously at 5 years old, and hit tennis balls over a net. If you have great technique and mechanics, you most definitely have mental toughness.
But sometimes, like in a player like Young, you’ve got to spark that toughness and genius alive. Haven’t you ever in your life been down in the dumps and not activating your full talents? I know I have and I slip back and forth. But a good coach is a guy/gal, again as you say, who believes in their player’s greatness and is able to trigger them into having the same belief and then super results.
Great players like Spadea don’t think about becoming No. 10, they think about becoming No. 1, as Spadea was in the entire USA for his age group when he was 14. And they recognize the other players who have that potential to be No. 1, too.
Steve · July 14, 2012 at 1:15 pm
You used to be able to win a slam with non-perfect mechanics (see Roddick backhand) but that’s probably not gonna happen with our current top 3.
You see #8 hit with #68 and you won’t see much difference in talent as Nadal said in his book. It’s the mental aspect that’s the difference. Today’s top 3 though are just at another level. DY with proper coaching and everything going right would have achieved a lot if he ever scratched up to #20.
Being a dominant Jr. is often the kiss of death.
Scoop Malinowski · July 14, 2012 at 1:47 pm
Yes they all have competitive mojo, but like Luke Jensen and John Paul Fruttero said, so many of the players play like businessmen, they don’t really seem to love it, almost just going through the motions. Very few players have that passion and extra zest. Young Roddick had it. Nadal, Fed, Djok have it. There are a lot of robots out there. Even Spadea played with so little emotion and passion though we know he loves the sport. It’s such a difficult game to master maybe when you get to the top 100 or top 50 they become intimidated and lose some of their fire and self belief. We know what a colorful guy Spadea is with a great personality but on court he was quite subdued.
Michael · July 15, 2012 at 4:35 am
Agreed, of course, they all have super competitiveness. That is not the same I think as what we all think of by mentally tough. Though we haven’t exactly defined it we know it when we see it — Nadal. Ferrer. And it’s not simply willingness to grind. I think Roddick had it. Whereas Tsonga has all the weapons but I don’t think you’d describe him as among the mentally toughest players on tour. (Sure do like watching him though.)
I think you make very strong points. I’m questioning now whether you can teach it. I think if you’re going to coach you have to believe you can mentally toughen someone. But I’m not sure Agassi is a good example. It’s not that Agassi wasn’t mentally tough he just didn’t care for a while. And maybe Gilbert helped him to care again and to exploit his talent. Maybe Lendl isa better example. Because Lendl I do remember people thought he didn’t have it upstairs. When he folded 6-0 to Connors at the USO in the finals (I saw that one) you thought you saw a guy beat not just on the court but in the head. But boy were people wrong on him. So maybe Spadea is correct. Murray may be in the category of modern Lendl with the jury still out.
But I still think a Nadal comes along once in a generation. Hewitt was like that. Connors. Players that will never fold. You have to beat them everytime. They won’t ever give it to you because it’s just not in their basic nature.
But you’ve definitely put doubt in my mind. I think you can get better mentally or maybe a coach can bring out what is there but not developed ? And Spadea is probably right that if the T&M get stronger so goes the head (and I would add to T&M exceptional physical conditioning being a requirement in the modern game to lay the foundation of being mentally tough. No more Eddie Dibbs being in the top 10). But can a coach turn a Young into a Nadal upstairs ?
Dan markowitz · July 15, 2012 at 1:29 pm
No, there’s no way a DY can become a Nadal in mental toughness, that degree of fight is ingrained very early in a player’s psyche. But Donald could be a lot more mentally strong. And a guy like Spadea could pick up the little cues when DY is flagging. Agassi was strong mentally, but also had questionable work habits and bailed out of a lot of matches and it took a guy like Gilbert, who Vince said was a stiff as a player, to make him not give up. But you have to really want to coach and I question if Spadea will ever put in the commitment to do so.
Scoop, do you know if Gambill is coaching Vanderweghe?
Scoop Malinowski · July 15, 2012 at 1:40 pm
DY can become mentally stronger by becoming a lot physically stronger. He’s got normal fitness now, he has to work much harder and become a physical beast to become mentally stronger. Was Vince ever a physical beast? He was fit but how fit can you be when you love the Cheesecake factory? Gambill was coaching Coco and I’m pretty sure he still is now.
Steve · July 15, 2012 at 1:56 pm
Tipsarevic would make an incredible coach one day. He’s gets the maximum out of his abilities. He knows exactly when to take risks.
Scoop Malinowski · July 15, 2012 at 2:42 pm
Agree Steve, Tipsarevic is a very smart person too. Super tough competitor.
Andrew Miller · July 15, 2012 at 3:59 pm
Spadea thinks uniquely. I think he’s right on some stuff and dead wrong on other things, and there’s no real match up between what anyone thinks and the reality out there outside of our heads and brains anyways (where the rubber meets the road), so in that sense Spadea’s about par for the course. Semi delusional, semi prophet, semi realist.
As for Rios vs. Spadea, here’s my delusional take: Rios was a bad matchup for Spadea. Tennis being a game of matchups, and the fact being they played on all sorts of tennis court surfaces, from indoor to clay to hard and Spadea losing all of them, Rios proved a bad matchup for Spadea. Similar to Gilbert-Lendl – beating Lendl just wasn’t in the cards. But moreover, and let’s not gloss over this, arguably Rios was better in every single category of tennis than Spadea – serve, movement, forehand, backhand, volleys, court knowledge. Better across the board.
Something that also comes across, Spadea believes good coaching turns a talented player into a player that reaches their potential and gets the results they SHOULD get, vs. the results that their talent gets them alone.
As for who Spadea will or won’t coach, I like it that he tells players what he thinks and what’s on his mind. But that he won’t get some experience in coaching by working with Bogolomov is, I think, a mistake. How are other players going to evaluate Spadea as a potential coach if they don’t see any coaching experience with a player of repute? Seems like a blind spot for Spadea here.
As for the right player to come along, on one hand good to keep your reputation intact. On the other hand, that may mean Spadea never coaches ever. Given the way things can sometimes work out for the worst, by NOT taking initiative, kind of believe if you’re not in the game, you’re not in the game. But as many prove me wrong on a daily basis, maybe that will work for Spadea and make him a great coach. Look at Brad Gilbert: he only coaches the “sure thing”. It’s less risky. No Bogomolov on his resume.
Bogdanovic, yes, and not by choice. You could even hear how disappointed Gilbert was when Murray then the LTA demoted Gilbert – he was basically like “Bogie has to do a lot. Sheesh, yeah he has to do a lot. Boy will he have to improve an awful lot to be able to do anything on this tour.” It was the least reassuring feedback I’ve ever seen in my life – for a player who felt he won the lottery by default in having Gilbert in his corner – a miracle – and then seeing that same miracle evaporate because Gilbert had no intention, whatsoever, of helping a “journeyman”.
Hear that NCAA players? Tour is brutal. Hope you guys enjoy the journey!
Andrew Miller · July 15, 2012 at 4:05 pm
DY better than Rios? Ha ha ha. Maybe with some spectacular coaching and rigorous real training, but otherwise, no way. I’ve seen them both in practice, Rios would slice and dice DY up like an apple in a blender with multiple buttons. I don’t think DY would get a game off Rios. I love DY’s game and talent, but that self-destructing attitude and if Rios is motivated on the day they played, hypothetically, we may be looking at a pair of golden sets, Shvedova world.
DY, mesmerizing but as Dani Hantuchova, a fan of Milo Mecir, once said: “Talent is one step away from being lazy”.
Dan markowitz · July 15, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Not going to debate Rios/Spadea, but Agassi had better everything than Vince, too and V beat him in a major and a master. You think Gilbert did anything better than Becker?
JC · July 15, 2012 at 5:27 pm
And Spadea beat Agassi *after*Agassi dismissively called him a journeyman! I always thought Agassi was a punk/phony, and still do. Spadea spanking him was one of the great moments in tennis!
Vince, take the good advice and work with some lesser players, help them get some results, work your way up. You do have a lot to offer, but get yourself established. The wall at the park will still be there when you really are done with it all.
Steve · July 15, 2012 at 8:01 pm
” You think Gilbert did anything better than Becker?” This is exactly why your guy going have to suggest some tactics. I’ve seen DY destroyed by players.
Becker was notorious for being a slow starter and could get frustrated easily. Gilbert was the master at frustrating Boris. Tactics won’t get DY to #1 but move him up significantly. Where are the strategies?
I’m sure Scoop can attest that pretty strokes mean nothing in competition.
Andrew Miller · July 15, 2012 at 8:19 pm
Gilbert was 4-4 vs. Agassi. Spadea tagged Agassi twice when they were both playing well – a major plus for Spadea (Agassi was in comeback mode, but he was deep in his comeback and playing good ball). Rios better than both of them in their matchups – Rios essentially didnt lose to Agassi (that 1 set all tie in Miami doesnt really count as a loss).
Anyhows, enough of me defending Rios or Agassi or any of them. I like Spadea and believe he has a lot to offer to players and think he would be quite a good coach. Whether or not he wants to make that transition is his decision. I think it would be unfortunate for him to leave the game, if only because that video of him on youtube is very sad. Clearly he loves the sport, similar to Federer. Why else would he want to play Davis Cup, or make a comeback after being on one of the deepest losing streaks in the ATP?
Pride, love of the sport, belief, discipline. Spadea reworked that forehand and made it count – if he had the forehand he ended up with during the 90s, I am sure he would have seen even better results, maybe worked himself into a slam semifinal.
Just my opinion. He could leave the game better off, get back in the game by being in someone’s corner. He has the street cred, just not the coaching cred.
Harold · July 15, 2012 at 8:35 pm
The guy couldnt figure his way out of a 21 match losing streak….Now you want him to take over a guy in a 12 match losing streak..They can compare notes…
Andrew Miller · July 15, 2012 at 9:57 pm
Hey he won after that losing streak! He kept beating good players, excellent players well after his 2004 peak. No question, Spadea is definitely someone who can provide perspective. He knows the lows of the game, and he knows the highs of the game. I think he can help players out – his idea about technique is good. I think he also has to work with someone on attitude – technique and practice help a player, and attitude is like the power – the fuel.
Scoop Malinowski · July 15, 2012 at 11:57 pm
LOL JC, guess you saw the You Tube video of Vince on the wall with his impeccable form. Yes Vince has to come up the hard way in coaching and earn his stripes. Welcome to the site JC
Scoop Malinowski · July 15, 2012 at 11:59 pm
Steve you gotta have nice strokes and techniques at the higher levels 4.5 and up. You can get by with junk balls at 4.0 and under but form and technique are mandatory to become a good 4.5 and above player.
Steve · July 16, 2012 at 12:26 am
Well, nice & pretty are two diff. things. I’ve need a 4.5 with ugly, abbreviated strokes destroy a 4.0 with pretty, fluid strokes.
Did you ever watch an entire Brad Gilbert match? Some ugliness there…
Andrew Miller · July 16, 2012 at 2:18 am
I watched Brad Gilbert’s matches all the time! Possibly because Gilbert played more tournaments than any other player knew existed, and TV just happened to show his matches. Gilbert in Rotterdam, Orlando, D.C…everywhere I turned the dial in 1990, there was Gilbert.
I thought he was awesome – I was like whoah, how is he beating players like Malivai Washington, this kid from Michigan? Or Reneberg? Or anyone? I was like, this Gilbert is good – I will watch this guy. For whatever reason, which had nothing to do with the beauty of his game, he was beating good players and would only lose to the top guys – Edberg, Sampras, etc.
I could see how Agassi and Roddick, Nishikori, and Murray, Querrey now, benefited from Gilbert – the trace of Gilbert appeared in all of their games, controlled aggression. Even Bogdanovic’ DNA supposedly changed with Gilbert. I don’t think it’s so much that their “game” changed drastically – but their games became “more refined”. Essentially he made them better at their own brand of tennis, made them cut out the errors and stop giving away matches.
I think if we can agree on anything with Gilbert and his ugly game, it’s that he’s a top shelf strategist. Players he coached started to play a little uglier – a little more with the end game in mind and appreciation for small stuff that could turn a match wide open. I once watched Agassi, still coached by Gilbert I think (?) win a match vs. Blake in DC. During the match, I thought wow, how is Agassi going to pull this off? And when he beat him, I could have been forgiven for believing Blake won the match, given how many more passing shots and laser forehands he hit. But none of that mattered – it was that Agassi brought a workman-like attitude to the match, broke down how he was going to finish the match even with the Blake game, and at the end of the match shook hands as the winner.
Michael · July 16, 2012 at 3:16 am
Nominating for best of thread:
@scoop “He [Spadea] was fit but how fit can you be when you love the Cheesecake factory?
Steve · July 16, 2012 at 12:13 pm
New Gear review request, esp. now that everyone believes in Federer:
http://insider.nike.com/us/shoes/nike-zoom-vapor-rf-287-3714/
Scoop Malinowski · July 16, 2012 at 2:28 pm
Steve are you buying a pair? $287 is a bit steep but they do look good. Considering how loyal and devoted Fed fans are I bet there will be over a 50 people wearing these at the US Open each day.
Scoop Malinowski · July 16, 2012 at 2:30 pm
Steve 4.5 players don’t have ugly abbreviated strokes, they can play. Actually never did see BG play he was before I got really into tennis. Wish Tennis Channel would show some of his classic matches. They should. He’s a legend.
Scoop Malinowski · July 16, 2012 at 2:31 pm
Spadea’s greatest comeback came after that streak. Check out the latest post about it.
Mitch · July 16, 2012 at 4:51 pm
I tried to buy a pair, sold out in seconds. I doubt you’ll be seeing too many people wearing these – they are limited edition and already quite valuable.
Steve · July 17, 2012 at 4:20 pm
I tried too. 287s are already on Ebay selling for over $1,400.
Scoop Malinowski · July 17, 2012 at 11:13 pm
Wow. Federer is gold. Nadal’s lime 2.3 Ballistecs from the 2010 US Open sell for over $700 on ebay now.