In the summer of 1986, 23-year-old Paul Annacone defeated John McEnroe — handing the former champion a shock round one exit at the US Open. A relentless serve-and-volleyer, he achieved a best ranking of 12 during his career.
But Annacone is better known for the many years he spent as a coach, shaping the games of Pete Sampras and Roger Federer. Under his tutelage, Sampras won nine Majors and Federer reclaimed the No.1 ranking and the Wimbledon title in 2012.
At the launch of his latest book , Annacone talks about Sampras, Federer, coaching and serve-and-volleying. Excerpts: Coaching for Life
Tell us about the book. How long has it taken for you? When did this idea come in?
was something I started over decade ago. It really is about using tennis as a metaphor for life. We all see the tremendous physical traits that great athletes bring, but rarely talk about the combination of skills that allows the truly elite succeed in the most pressure packed scenarios. It talks about personal experiences of mine that have shaped my coaching and life philosophy! It talks about how Sampras and Federer (along with Tim Henman and Sloane Stephens) use their complete package of skills to manage adversity, expectations and pressure to achieve excellence. I feel this translates to life. Coaching for Life
You joined Sampras when he was going through a pretty emotional time. Tell us about your experience with him.
I started with Pete when he was 23 and his coach Tim Gullikson was battling brain cancer. It was a very complex time and environment. Tim helped navigate the environment of expectation and pressure, and truly helped my transition be a smooth one. This was a horrible time, to see Tim fighting for his life. But both Pete and I knew some of the best medicine for Tim would be Pete continuing to be successful.
Pete’s ability to focus and trust his skills were immense. I’m not sure I have ever seen a great athlete more able to focus on the task at hand and trust his skills in the most pressure-packed moments. Pete was truly one of a kind.
6 Jun 1999: Pete Sampras of the USA with his coach Paul Annacone at the Stella Artois Championships at Queens Club in London. \ Mandatory Credit: Alex Livesey /Allsport
Sampras and Federer had already reached the top when you started coaching them. How much of your work was psychological and motivational, and how much was technical, tactical and strategic?
Most of the work at that level is strategic — within that strategy is balancing the emotional and psychological. They are great players, you are not overhauling their game. You are tweaking it and implementing a strategy that they believe in and that can hold up under pressure. In the off season or when there are big breaks, you can tweak technique. At that level, technique focus is minimal.
You started coaching Federer when he was 29. You write about how everything had to be tempered differently to suit his age. How do you see his current run?
Roger is a very expansive thinker and human being. He lives a busy and complex life, and enjoys being a citizen of the world. I had to understand who he is and how his life works, then try to coach the tennis aspect so it works efficiently and effectively. He is a very bright guy and has a terrific team around him, led by his wife. Mirka is amazing! She understands tennis and, most importantly, Roger and what makes him so special. The entire RF team is a very well-oiled machine, and Roger is one of the most uniquely gifted athletes ever. He can detach from things seamlessly, and also is secure enough to hold a mirror up and evaluate how he needs to get better without compromising his self-belief.
LONDON, ENGLAND - JUNE 28: Roger Federer (L) practices with his coach Paul Annacone on court 4 on Day Eight of the Wimbledon Lawn Tennis Championships at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club on June 28, 2011 in London, England. (Photo by Julian Finney/Getty Images)
His joy for the game and the life he leads is what has enabled this incredible longevity. Who knows what he can do and how long, but at 36 winning two Majors in 2017 — that is pretty spectacular. They broke the mould with Roger Federer indeed.
What would surprise people most about Sampras and Federer?How different they are, but how they are both able to get to the same “mental” place so their talents shine. The moment they are in “that moment”, they are able to zero in, focus, trust and believe, and neither is fearful of losing. Those are some unique traits — both have them and both get there through different personalities, but ultimately both trust and believe in themselves and their process.
Sloane Stephens has had an incredible journey. What was it like coaching her when she was still in her early days?Sloane is immensely talented. I think, as a 19-year-old, she was thrust on the world’s stage and was not quite ready for that environment. Her injury in 2016 allowed her to take a step back, see her athletic mortality, re-focus and have a different perspective. That perspective along with hard work has allowed her talents to shine and win the 2017 US Open. Athletically, there are very few boundaries for Sloane. Now she has a new landscape, a new canvas to paint on if you will. So there is a slight transition for her again as a Major title holder. I am excited to see where she goes from here.
You’ve worked with a lot of older players. And then Stephens. What stark differences did you see?Very differently developmentally. Younger players are trying to figure out who they are and how good they can be. Just like in life. Things change; it’s a very different mindset once you become “great” and then trying to achieve greatness. You have to know why you play and what you are trying to achieve. This is one reason why at 36 Roger is so unique — 19 major titles and still wants to play and enjoy. He loves winning, but he truly loves the process and can handle victory and defeat without denting who he is as a person. Younger players are more fragile in that regard, so you have to build a solid foundation, and then be able to adjust play and deal with the results regardless of what they are. This is a major theme in my book; trust the process and believe in that. The results will take care of themselves.
Speaking of younger players, you’ve written a lot about Nick Kyrgios. Why do you find him so exciting? There’s a chapter in your book where you mention “self-sabotage”.He is one of the most talented players I have ever seen. His emotional make-up and who he is as a human being make it very challenging for him to deal with the day-to-day rigours of being an athlete with that type of talent. He shows us that no matter how physically gifted you are, there are other ingredients needed to sustain that level. So much fun to watch those skills and also confounding, trying to understand the level of volatility that emerges at times in managing the environment. But that is merely part of his process, and he is making progress.
And given a chance, would you coach him?I am a fan of his talents and think the sky is the limit, but I wouldn’t be a great match-up for Nick. He needs someone closer to his age, who is a confidant and friend as well as a good tennis mind. When people ask me who should coach Nick, I always say: “Someone he will buy into, day in and day out”. That is a complex and comprehensive relationship.
You were an unrelenting serve-and-volleyer. But the numbers seem to show that it is an art that is slowly dying.The environment has changed. Slower courts, heavier balls, different strings and rackets — those are the major ingredients that have led to a baseline-driven game. I don’t see a relentless serve-and-volleyer being the best in the world any time soon, but it is a style that can be effective in today’s game. If the court speeds and conditions change, then there is a possibility. But you have to match the athletes’ skill-sets with their style of play. So time will tell. But I miss the diversity in styles.
And what exactly does coaching serve-and-volleying entail?Well, give it some thought. How do most kids learn to do anything? By seeing someone great do it. When was the last year you saw a ‘great serve-and-volley-based player’? So these young kids haven’t seen it in a while and the people teaching haven’t seen it, so they are teaching kids to play how they see the game. The challenge a coach has is to have the foresight to know what is ahead, but more importantly, match the style of play with the athlete. Currently the wisdom is there, the climate is not — in terms of how it fits in today’s game.
The US Open allowed on-court coaching in qualifying this year. What’s your position on that?I am torn. I understand and appreciate the concept, I just don’t see how you implement it so it works seamlessly. Also, I embrace the fact that tennis is one-on-one! No one to help you problem-solve under pressure. No teammates to rely on. That is something to celebrate — it’s a terrific life-learning skill. As a coach, I also believe that my job is to give players the tools so they are self- sufficient and can think their way through adversity. So that kind of goes against on-court coaching. I would be open to trying something, but not sure there is a ‘great way’ forward yet to endorse this.
