Pro Coaching:
How Does It Really Work?

What influence does a tour coach actually have in producing Grand Slam champions? If we look at the great players in the modern game, there is far from one answer. Or possibly, even any that are certain.

Players have won Slam titles with professional coaches, with part time coaches, with family coaches and with the absence of coaches. At least in some circumstances, a coach may not be a critical element in reaching the highest levels on the tour. And the presence of a great coach is not necessarily a guarantee that a talented player will ever win a Slam under his guidance.

Just two months ago at Wimbledon, Paul Annacone became a rare member of the coaching fraternity when he saw his player, Roger Federer, win a Grand Slam.

Annacone's accomplishment is rare. That makes him one of a handful of coaches with two players winning a Slam title under his guidance. (He was also the man in 14-time Grand Slam champion Pete Sampras' corner for the majority of his career.)

Annacone is obviously a great coach. But consider this. In 2004, while Federer was in between coaches Peter Lundgren and Tony Roche, he won 11 titles, including three Grand Slams.

Aussie Tony Roche, who is considered one of the sport's great minds, coached Ivan Lendl to Slam titles. He also took Patrick Rafter and Lleyton Hewitt to the top, winning Slams along the way. But, interestingly, Roche was unable to establish a solid working relationship with Roger Federer.

Brad Gilbert coached Andre Agassi to multiple Slam titles. He also was with Andy Roddick when he won his first and only slam at the U.S. Open.

However, the relationship with Andy ended abruptly.

And in his next assignment, Gilbert was unable to do the same with Andy Murray, who simply wasn't ready despite Gilbert's efforts.

Even with great success, some coaches eventually tire of the work as a full time profession. Darren Cahill was also able to coach Agassi as well as Hewitt to Slam crowns. Eventually though he decided that he preferred broadcasting and part time coaching to having top please one player day in and day out.

How about the much lauded Larry Stefanki, who was able to coach Yevgeny Kafelnikov to the Roland Garros and Australian Open titles, and was also able to bring Marcelo Rios to No. 1?

Stefanki wasn't able to help Roddick gain a second slam title. The same was true of his time with Tim Henman and with John McEnroe in his last great professional run.

Clearly coaching matters. But how much of a role can it play compared to team sports?

Pro coaches in football and basketball build teams from many pieces. Not every player needs to be the best at his position for a team to win championships.

But in tennis, the best players over time are the ones who win titles. Coaching simply can't substitute for ability. The mystery is exactly how much coaching contributes to the outcome for a given player at a given event.

The goal of every pro coach should be to get the most out of the player. But how is that defined?

It could be said that former world No. 4 James Blake never realized his potential under his longtime coach Brian Barker because he never reached the semifinal of a major. It could also be said that without Barker's patience and foresight, that Blake would have never even cracked the top 100.

Looking at coaches in the women's game is particularly fascinating, because so many of them are parents who have not had formal training. Is Richard Williams the greatest coach in the history of women's tennis?

His players, who happened to be daughters Serena and Venus, have won over 20 Slam singles titles and 13 in doubles. Robert Lansdorp recently suggested only half in jest that, based on Richard's record, he should be made head of USTA player development.

Try to imagine Joe Montana's or Terry Bradshaw's fathers as the coach for their Super Bowl championships. That sounds crazy. But not in tennis.

And, obviously, Richard Williams is far from the only example. Take Yuri Sharapov and Stefano Capriati for instance.

Monica Seles' dad had a huge influence on her game. He was the mastermind of the two-handed style on both sides.

Then there was Steffi Grad's father Peter. The recently retired Elena Dementieva was primarily coached by her mother Vera, who never picked up a racket.

Currently there is Caroline Woznaicki's father Piotr – a former soccer star – who can be super intense and runs a very tight ship when it comes to his daughter's career.

So for all the complaining about how overbearing parents can stunt a player's development, there are concrete examples of parents who brought their kids to tennis stardom.

What is not often discussed is that parents who are the most flexible often end up benefiting their children the most. Yuri Sharapova, who appears to be so tough and inflexible on the outside, was willing to bring Maria to Robert Lansdorp. Even though there is no longer a formal relationship, he continues to call Lansdorp for advice.

It's not well known, but Yuri also brought to Maria to Jimmy Connors. It didn't work out in the long run, but that shows flexibility.

After the split with Lansdorp Yuri handed the reigns off to Michael Joyce and stopped appearing in the players' box. Then he didn't get heavily re-involved when Maria switched to her current coach Thomas Hogstedt.

But let's also remember that Venus Williams has been with the same "hitting partner" who is essentially her touring coach, David Witt, for many years. The same goes with Serena Williams who has been with Sasha Bijan for a long stretch. And recently Serena hired the notable French coach, Patrick Mouratoglou, to advise her.

Even Piotr Wozniacki, who is hyper-involved in his daughter Caroline's career, hired former Australian Open champion Thomas Johansson to help her out.

On the men's side, where there is generally less parental involvement, there have been family members who did teach their kids but later reached out to others.

Let's start with the fact that Gloria Connors and her mother (Two Mom to Jimmy), developed Jimmy's technical game, but later accepted Pancho Segura's coaching.

Rafael Nadal's uncle Toni, a former Futures level player, wasn't shy about bringing in another coach when he got tired of traveling, adding fellow Spainard Francisco Roig, a former tour player with 9 doubles titles to Nadal's team. Andy Murray's mother Judy, who also played at a low pro level, sent her son to Spain to train in Barcelona.

In all the variety and diversity, what is clear is that all successful coaches identity what a player needs to do to improve and then set out a clear path to get there. But whether the player will accept the input and follow through is always an open question.

Coaches have to be flexible, both on court and off, as they spend an enormous amount of time traveling, practicing, and even eating with their player. They have to be sympathetic, and must subsume their egos to that of their players. Often this is not easy, as they usually have much more knowledge than the player and egos of their own.

A great example of a coach who has been able to accomplish it all is Sven Groeneveld, who coached Mary Pierce and Ana Ivanovic to Slam titles. He took the Serbian to the Roland Garros crown just after he had accepted a head-coaching gig with adidas player development back in the spring of 2008.

It cannot be easy to coach a series of excellent players, many of whom want a coach's attention 24/7, but Groeneveld, gets high praise from every adidas players he has worked with – Ivanovic, Wozniacki, Andy Murray, Sorana Cirstea and Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova.

Still, some very good coaches end up burning their bridges, Take Zeljko Krajan, a Croatian former top 100 player, had fallings out with former No. 1 Dinara Safin and top 15 player Dominica Cibulkova. Interestingly, both women claimed he was too intense to communicate with for an extended period.

Others turn quiet intensity into a positive, like Justine Henin's lifelong coach Carlos Rodriguez. Carlos recently re-emerged on the tour as the coach of Li Na.

China's top player was so impressed with Carlos, she immediately began to play better when they signed a contract, talked extensively, but never met up in person. The 2011 French Open champion was so honored that he believed in her game that her confidence level soared.

Federer is also said to a very fair boss. When he and Annacone went through their trial, the most important thing to Roger was seeing that the American was really committed to him.

He wanted to know that Annacone really had faith is his ability to compete for Grand Slams titles even when Nadal was climbing all over him.

"I knew Paul, but it was just important to see how he was working on the practice courts and then how was he giving me advice for matches," Federer told me when I asked him the genesis of their relationship last month. "I'm a person who can trust rather quickly. I have a pretty good sense of who's in it for real and who's not."

Possibly this is the most important lesson for all pro coaches: make sure your player sees that you believe in them. Maybe that precept explains the crazy variety of successful coaching relationships in our sport.