Is Jimmy Connors REALLY doing Andy Roddick (and by extension, American tennis) any good?

Question

Can the presence and influence of one boorish, arrogant, and obnoxious American (Connors) really be of benefit to essentially the younger version of himself (Roddick)? Roddick has always been rude and cocky - the classic "ugly American" - and now he's being mentored by the grand-daddy of them all? Is it any coincidence that Roddick's unseeming on- and off-court behavior seems to have intensified since the introduction of Connors to his team? Profanity in press conferences, additional swagger on the court, and the now infamous "you don't bring sand to the beach" comment with Paris Hilton on his arm? Roddick can't seem to play a match without staring longingly at Connors between EVERY point. Like a teenager clutching their precious mobile phone for dear life, this grown adult has now grown completely dependent on Jimmy Connors for constant validation. This is the guy we want representing American tennis? Did Roddick need a new mentor, or does he really need a good etiquette class?

Answer 1

I like what Connors is doing with Roddick. Although Roddick has some obvious talent, he's still a big project in the works for Connors. Connors has Roddick going to the net more often - this is a good strategy against Federer. However, Roddick cannot keep slicing approach shots in the middle of the court and expect Fereder to dump passing shots. FedEx passes too well. Roddick need to pound the approach shots, get Federer in trouble, then finish the volleys at the net. Also, Roddick must use his serves better. Many players have found that if then get the service return deep (i.e. floaters) against Roddick, they have a descent chance of winning the point. Roddick needs to punish floating deep service returns by mixing in some serve and volley game - which is what he was trying to do in the semi's against FedEx. The problem is, Roddick does not yet have any coordination at the net. He reminds me of Monica Seles at the net - no feel, no touch. I believe Connors has Roddick trying to do the right things, but the results are not there yet. Also, Roddick is very head strong. He'll not listen to someone he does not respect - I believe he has a very high regard for Connors. Ivan Lendl adjusted his game in the mid 1980s (better serve, better net game, great fitness etc.) - it took some time but Lendl became #1. The year he won over McEnroe in the 1985 US open finals, he finally went to the net a lot (I belive after working with Tony Roach) and was the main reason he beat the BigMac.

Answer 2

Roddick is not representative of "American" tennis. That's like saying Tiger is representative of American golf. Tennis and golf are personal sports. You are only representative of yourself. Conners cannot help Roddick. Roddick is the best he can ever be. Roger could fire Tony Roche and still be #1 in the world and win Wimbledon and the US and maybe the French. Look at Martina Hingis, do you see a coach in the stands at her matches? Once you reach a certain level, unless you have a specific problem like Elena Dementieva's service motion, you don't really need a "coach". Take for example my son, you don't know him so listen to this. I took him to batting cages every week when he was growing up, he is 15 now. We played catch 5 or 6 days a week. We worked on switch hitting when he was 3. He is righthanded but prefers to bat lefthanded. His on base percentage last year was .866. He is the best batter the coaches have ever seen. He's also a super fielder and can pitch a little, but he can't run fast. He is just not fast and I can't coach that into him, that's just the way he is. And I can't "coach" him now and improve on it. He is at the best he can be, which is about .400 higher than Barry Bonds who has the highest on base percentage in MLB. So what I am saying is that he is like Hingis and Federer. They don't "need" a coach. Neither does Roddick. All a coach can really do for someone like my son or Federer or Hingis is to keep them working out and offer moral support. Tha's all Conners can really do for Roddick.

Answer 3

Whether you're a Roddick fan or not, you can't deny how much Andy has improved. He's gotten so much better. Andy always had the talent, he just needed someone to pull it out of him.

Well his personal life has nothing to do with how well or how bad he plays. So thats not even a factor. And if anyone needs etiquette classes, its Marat Safin. Did you not see the Roddick vs. Safin in the Australian Open. Roddick kept his composure through out the whole match.

Answer 4

well u cant deny the fact that roddick has improved cos before connors he was completely down and out.its true he lloks at jimmy after every point and i think he will now not be able to manage without him.he is definitely coming tothe net a lot.his behaviour is far better than sharapova who has too much of an air about herself.but an etiquette class would do him good i suppose.

Answer 5

Personally I don't know anything about roddick's personal life, and I would like to see some proof that he was hanging with paris (mole) hilton. However his tennis game has improved in leaps and bounds and he is probably the second or third best player in the world now behind federer and similar to gonzales.

Answer 6

Jimmy Connors or not, Andy Roddick is just serve & he thinks he could be nr.1 cuz of it & Conners. Take his serve away & he would drop to a 100. His time is up ! In men tennis, a good serve does not take u far cuz most men tennis players have good returns to a huge serve . Unless Roddick improves his game(which i doubt), he will slip down & down.

Answer 7

Roddick's is just a big serve.junior game. Somebody should have taught him years ago how to come to net on his first serve, get an attacking backhand, and play all-court power tennis.

It's too late now.

Answer 8

yes because andy roddick was a complete player before connors coached him

roddick just had to use his game much better that is wat connors is there for