How much credit should Annacone get?

Now of course Roger deserve's the lion's share of credit and Annacone has a great deal of talent and experience to work with, but I think that Annacone does deserve a lot of respect. In past years, Roger was much more patient in his shot selection happy to display his full arsenal of court craft, his deft slice, and beautiful footwork and speed. Annacone in my mind has very importantly sped up fed's shot clock so to speak, Roger takes command of points much earlier and doesn't let his opponents out grind him anymore. He comes over returns on the backhand that he would chip virtually 95 percent of the time before. This in particular has made a big difference for Roger. Also new Roger will go up the line with his backhand much more often and come over that shot more often than he would in the past. Annacone has kept Roger focused on the right style of play he needs to be playing. Now Roger of course can figure this stuff out on his own but a good coach can make it a lot easier on the player and keep him on task. So I think Annacone has been a shrewd selection by federer and this connection has worked perfectly.

First time we saw the new fed playbook was WTF finals of 2010 where he beat an inform Nadal using a completely reworked playbook, this was just a few months after partnering with Annacone. Nadal was stunned that federer wasn't chipping back returns for him to eat up with his forehand. He was stunned that Fed wasn't just happy to exchange cross court forehand (Nadal) v. fed cross court backhand and that for once fed was cranking that ball and up the line and not settling on that pattern. And fed took Nadal that night and I think started the long road to recapturing the #1 ranking.

Quite a lot I think, though in turn Federer chose him to achieve something specific for him. I believe Federer decided the direction and found a guy to help him achieve it.

Is it just me, or are you two getting on much better this week?

We're hardly speaking, so yes.

Seriously, no grudges from me, it's only a forum.

I try to stick to the tennis as much as possible and not get into the ancillary stuff Murdoch. I don't have any animosity towards anyone, not real animosity. Ok there is one person and it isn't BB who I might be a bit bent out of shape towards, and that is more because on more than one occassion said person hurled racial abuse at me.

One other thing on this issue is that I think these tactical wrinkles fed has worked into his gameplan has to some extent caught his younger opponents off balance. It caught Djoko off balance in the FO semi of 2011, and at various times the last 18 months I think Roger has surprised Murray and nadal as well at times with the updated playbook. Nadal less so because he is still a nightmare matchup for Roger young or old Roger. But what I saw that WTF final 2010 and posted on old 606 was that Roger should have played Nadal that way from the beginning of their rivalry. However he stubbornly seemed to refuse to acknowledge that he needed a plan B or Plan C against Nadal till pretty late in the game and by then the genie was out of the bottle so to speak. But credit to both parties they have really worked out a winning formula to deal with fed's age and modern players and conditions.

With the bookmakers and tennis pragmatists touting No. 1-ranked Novak Djokovic in the Wimbledon semifinals, Annacone stoutly defended his current employer, one Roger Federer.

"You can always make it more complicated than it is," Federer's coach of two years said Thursday afternoon. "I thought he'd win before the tournament. If he plays well, he will win, in my opinion. Obviously, I'm biased."

http://espn.go.com/tennis/wimbledon12/story/_/id/8135225/wimbledon-just-old-times-roger-federer

Annacone is the current visible coach and has made significant contributions, but credit should also be given to others, like Roche, Lundgren and Carter, for what Federer is today.

I think Anacone should be given credit for helping Roger to rediscover his net game. It was always there, there were just some cobwebs that needed to be dusted off of it. I would also add that Mr. Anacone helped Roger to compensate for his slower movement by playing more aggressive tennis.

They obviously work very well together, and it was wonderful to see Fed approaching the net so often at W, and winning the points too.

So glad for Annacone that they achieved a slam victory together, and that elusive singles Olympic medal.

Annacone was supposed to come in and save British tennis. But he shifted his derriere when he saw everyone else running for the doors, and when he saw the possibility of a swiss man adventure. I hope he reveals all in his next autobiography.

In Roger Draper we trust.

It's hard to know. In 2008 I felt Federer was too predictable on the slice and it wasn't good enough, consistent enough. From I dont know maybe 2010 onwards the slice improved and, more importantly or pleasingly for me, he started to drill more hit backhands as well which has made a difference in my opinion.

The other thing that changed was a bigger serve from what, 2009 onwards. (Mind you, just checking and found Annacone was hired August 28th 2010, and Fed served 50 aces against Roddick at Wimbledon in 2009, so I could be wrong. Then again, his game did seem more solid at the end of 2010 and was it Doha 2011, and I was expecting great things at that time.)

Also, a slight mental strength or releaxed attitude improvement I would argue. (Debatable.)

It's hard to know what influence Annacone had isn't it. At the end of the day, Federer is the man on the court producing the shots.

Just found this. Worth reading if you are interested in this subject.

http://www.perfect-tennis.co.uk/is-the-federer-annacone-partnership-successful/

Great article Henman bill, basically echoes my feelings exactly. Annacone forced Roger to trust his backhand return and his backhand up the line and to rely less frequently on the slice. His slice works well against most players but against Nadal who moves around his forehand so well and up into the court that shot has proven his undoing. The writer of the article you linked Henman Bill seems to be saying a lot of the same stuff. Like I said I really started to notice the different approach at the end of 2010. I think to a certain extent it has caught his younger opponents off balance because they don't really play that way and aren't used to playing other players that play that way. That is why Djokovic I think has made such a point whenever asked about Federer to say that he is the most aggressive player on tour. It must seem that way to the other big 4 guys who have become used to lengthy cross court exchanges and heavy spinning shots.

A lot of credit to PA. like with Sampras and Henman he instils an aggressive game based around the serve. Feds serve is working better than ever and this has been the key for me, has pulled him out of many tight situations this year. Also the SHBH is much more solid but then it always was outside of Nadal breaking it down.

Lydian do you see it like I do that Roger is hitting a much lower percentage of slice backhands than compared to his heyday? I don't know if it is massively different than before. But to me it seems he is much more likely to come over the backhand both in the rallies and in the return than he ever was. This for me has been crucial.