Will the increasing prevalence of on-court coaching in tennis alter our evaluation of its champions’ problem-solving abilities?
Last week at Roland Garros, in his semifinal match against Jannik Sinner, Carlos Alcaraz came up to the baseline to serve on a crucial point. Simultaneously, his coach, Juan Carlos Ferrero, leaned forward in his seat across the court, clasped his hands together, and pounded them into his left chest.
Perhaps still living in the days when tactical signals were frowned upon in tennis,success at Roland Garros one of the commentators surmised that Ferrero was pushing Alcaraz to play from the heart. However, a different interpretation might have occurred to anyone who has observed the exchanges and overheard the constant banter between this coach and player over the years: Ferrero appeared to be requesting a body serve to the backhand side of his opponent. Alcaraz won the point a few seconds later by placing the ball there at a speed of up to 120 mph.
Prior to the summer of 2022, Ferrero’s guidance during Alcaraz’s matches would have been against the law. Few players traveled without full-time coaches over the majority of tennis’s history, which aided in the development of the game’s self-sufficiency culture. When coaches did start to show up in the 1970s, it was against the rules for them to offer advise during games. For those who played the sport, the phrase “you have to do it all by yourself” became both a burden and a source of pride.
For many of us, it’s an ethos that will never die.
I follow Juan Carlos’ advice the great majority of the time. The coach’s job is to provide you with the finest guidance and assistance possible. I thus submit an application. On the court, there are many times when I’m not sure what to do. There are others where I lose my cool because I can’t figure out how to play.
In an interview with L’Équipe, Carlos Alcaraz
I had assumed that I had come to terms with coaching’s legalization during the past almost two years. For me, the biggest advantage is that there’s no longer any uncertainty about whether a coach or player is being dishonest when they speak. We can now hear their conversations and focus on the game. Additionally, the players make their own decisions throughout points, despite the coaches’ involvement to some extent. It is up to them to rely on their gut feelings when things get tough and make quick adjustments.
It was strange, though, to see Alcaraz heed Ferrero’s counsel at crucial junctures in a Grand Slam match that he would ultimately prevail in. Although I’m aware that coaching is a component of almost every other sport, I’m still not used to seeing it demonstrated in ours so obviously and in public on such a large scale that it could have had an impact on the result of a major.
For many years, “sending signals” in tennis had a deceptive and oppressive connotation. It was equivalent to accusing a player of not being a problem-solver in the true tennis tradition to say that they were taking advice from other players during a match. Recall the uproar that followed Maria Sharapova’s eating of a banana during the 2006 US Open final at her team’s request?
After the former overcame Alexander Zverev in five sets on Sunday, Alcaraz and Ferrero, who won Roland Garros in 2003, shared an embrace.
Carlos Alcaraz’s success at Roland Garros
Clearly, that was then, and this is today. During games, Iga Swiatek speaks with her sports psychologist. Brad Gilbert often gives Coco Gauff a hard time when she plays. If the new regulations are helpful, then all players should and can benefit from them. I wonder how long it will take for officials to permit coaches to be on the court with their players at this point. Would it differ in any way from our current situation?
I’m highlighting Alcaraz not to belittle him or cast doubt on his greatness, but rather because (a) he represents the future of tennis and (b) he and Ferrero exchange barbs more often than any other team on the circuit.
Team Alcaraz toasts to his first-ever Grand Slam triumph in Paris.
Regarding his instructors at Roland Garros, Alcaraz said, “Sometimes I do what they told me, and sometimes [I] depend on my feelings in that moment.”
He clarified to the French sports publication L’Equipe, “I apply what Juan Carlos advises me to do in the vast majority of cases.” “The coach’s role is to provide you with the finest guidance and support possible. success at Roland Garros,I thus submit an application. On the court, there are many times when I’m not sure what to do. Others drive me to lose my cool because I can’t figure out how to play.
Alcaraz clearly doesn’t feel embarrassed to acknowledge that he needs assistance, even though he is in no need of it. It will ultimately grow on diehard supporters, and other players may wish to copy it. success at Roland Garros Ferrero currently has more conversations with his player than any other coach does; given Alcaraz’s success, perhaps in the future the pros will seek more tactical advice from them.
Which begs the question: Will our future player evaluation methods be altered by the new coaching philosophy? I wrote about how good Alcaraz was at brushing off a bad set and moving on after his thrilling victory over Alexander Zverev at Roland Garros.success at Roland Garros, Looking back at the match, he realized that he was on Ferrero’s side of the court and could see and hear his support, and that’s when his attitude started to change near the end of the third set. This year, in the quarterfinals of the Australian Open, Alcaraz was defeated by Zverev in four sets while Ferrero was unable to travel to Australia.
for more details visit here