Doubles Only Tennis Podcast

David Macpherson Interview: Bryan Bros Stories, Club Strategy Tips, Advice for Coaches, & More

• Will Boucek • Episode 260

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 42:48

David Macpherson coached the Bryan Brothers for over 15 years. He's a former #11-ranked ATP doubles player and also coached John Isner from 2018 to 2023. He's one of the smartest doubles coaches on the planet, so you'll learn a ton in this conversation.

We unpack how smart scouting, sharp words, and steady culture turned the Bryan Brothers into the GOATs and made John Isner a doubles force for a short stretch in 2022. We also discussed tactics for club players.

  • Early mentors shaping his precise coaching voice
  • Advice for coaches on saying less, backing the plan, and owning the misses
  • A story from the Wimbledon final where David's scouting turned out wrong
  • Managing Bob and Mike's practice rivalry without taking sides
  • Why groundstroke reliability helped their doubles success
  • Club tactics on lobs, net depth, and flexible positioning
  • Serve strategy and weighing your strengths vs the opponent's weaknesses
  • Why Bob Bryan had to abandon the lob return vs a certain opponent and why
  • Team chemistry as a competitive advantage
  • Coaching John Isner around strengths, returns, and net instincts
  • Ideas to make men’s doubles more watchable for fans

Learn more about David & follow:

-----

**Join the #1 Doubles Strategy Newsletter for Club Tennis Players** 


**Become a Tennis Tribe Member**
Tennis Tribe Members get access to premium video lessons, a monthly member-only webinar, doubles strategy Ebooks & Courses, exclusive discounts on tennis gear, and more.


**Other Free Doubles Content**

Meet Coach David McPherson

SPEAKER_00

I've talked in the past about how much fun I have when I'm able to have a conversation with some of the smartest minds in double, some of the best coaches in the world. And this is another one. You're about to hear my chat with David McPherson. David coached the Bryan brothers for the majority of their careers. He also coached John Isner for five years from 2018 through 2023. And he was a doubles player himself, reaching as high as number 11 in the world. In this conversation, we talk about uh David's career. We talk about who had the biggest influence on his game growing up, how he became such a smart doubles coach and a tactician and a strategist. He also has really great advice for tennis coaches out there. We talk about the rivalry that the Bryan Brothers actually had between each other on the practice court. David goes through several stories from the Bryan Brothers' career and his time with them. We discussed tips for club level doubles players. I really liked his advice on net positioning. Then we get into specific strategies that he and the Brian Brothers used against some of their biggest rivals. At the end, we talk about team chemistry, how he scouted opponents, and more. So this is a conversation that, regardless of whether you're interested in the Pro Tour or you're a club level player looking to improve your game, you're gonna get a lot out of this. And one more thing, David was in a hotel with a little bit spotty Wi-Fi. We did our best to edit this as much as possible, but you will hear a few audio issues. Just know that that's not your phone or the device you're listening on. Um that was uh the Wi-Fi in the hotel that David was at, but you're still gonna be able to hear the majority of this very clearly. So without further delay, enjoy this conversation with David McPherson. Hey everyone, welcome to the show. Today we have David McPherson on. David, welcome.

SPEAKER_01

Thanks, Will. Glad to be with you.

Roots Of A Tennis Mind

SPEAKER_00

Glad to uh have you on. I'm excited for this conversation. Um, I want to uh talk a little bit about your career, talk about uh coaching uh Bob and Mike Bryan, um, even talk about John Isner a little bit, who you also coached. But before I get to all of that, uh I wanted to start with asking who gave you your tennis knowledge, who had the biggest influence on you and your kind of tennis mind?

SPEAKER_01

Wow, that's a that's a great question. I mean, my my dad had a really good uh tennis brain. And uh so I think I think most of it's from my dad. Like I he uh was a he was um not a powerful player, but you know, he uh was a good tactician. And uh even when I as I was coming up trying to play, he would often you know offer some really wise words. You know, he wasn't a very um hands-on tennis parent, per se, by uh most standards. But uh when he did speak, it was normally you know something really, really um wise. You know, he was a wise old owl. So and I think that I'm my father's son, so I tend to think the way he thought. Um then, of course, I had some amazing uh influences in my life. Tony Roach was my coach from about 13 years old to 16 years old. So he taught me so much about uh tennis and the game competing uh as well, you know, the strokes. Uh and then you know, I've had uh probably more as I had a more of a doubles uh career as a player. Yeah, a lot of the doubles plays back in my day didn't really travel with a coach per se. So after I left Tony as a teenager, I was pretty much on my own. So uh as a coaching influence, I suppose it was mostly um just back to my dad. Um and then I played till I was about 35 years old and then uh just got into coaching. And I was just able to take my perhaps playing experience uh into my work with Mike and Bob. And then I think we just collaborated really well. And I grew as a coach as I went along, you know, like I brought some stuff to the table right away that perhaps was fresh for them. But then I can honestly say I was a much better coach for them 10 years into our work than I was perhaps in the first year.

SPEAKER_00

Hmm. I I want to get to that and your your time with Mike and Bob. Um, but uh you something you said about your dad. So he he I think you said he didn't have a lot to say all the time, but when he said something, it was something very wise. And this is something that I hear people say a lot when they're talking about some of the best coaches, right? They might be quiet for a long time and then they say something and you listen up because they don't speak too much, they don't overuse their words. Um, talk about what that means and why that works so well. And um, is that also something that you've inherited from him as well?

Coaching Philosophy: Say Less, Mean More

SPEAKER_01

Definitely. That's that is my philosophy, also. Like I really try to choose my words carefully. Um, especially with such great players like Michael Baum be a great example. I mean, they they didn't want to tolerate like an unnecessary comment or a, you know, just a, you know, so I really, really, because they knew so much, you know, they were already 25 or so when I started coaching them. So they were already on the cusp of greatness. They'd been to multiple Grand Slam finals, they'd won the French Open. So um I really did pick and choose my words carefully, but we sort of back my judgment though, when I felt like something really needed to be addressed or felt really in my core that this was the correct strategy for this particular match. You know, you've got to back your judgment as a coach and and and put it on the line, so to speak. I mean, that's what we're that's what we're there for. And then, you know, as Bob and Mike often said, you know, I I often say, Oh, I got a few, I got a few wrong, you know, and they said, but you've got a lot more right. So, you know, that that meant a lot to me. Yeah, they uh they they've said that multiple times. And I because I think back to some occasions where perhaps a little bit of tactical advice or whatever just didn't quite hit the mark on a critical match. And but you know, they're they're sort of like, yeah, but think about all the ones that did that did go right. So yeah, that's uh that's coaching.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah. I mean, that's really just like part of the process of doing anything important, right? Like sometimes you're going to fail and like do it wrong. And if if that's not happening, then I feel like you're not not really putting yourself out there enough and and doing the important things. Because they're right, like you you wouldn't have been able to have all the successes without probably some of those um times you got it wrong. Um, do you have an example maybe of a time that you think about where you got something wrong tactically?

SPEAKER_01

I've never gotten over the uh I've never gotten over the 2007, I think, Wimbledon final. Uh I started working with Mike and Bob at the US Open of 2005, which they won. And that was such a kind of a turning point moment in their career to sort of get off the snide of losing Grand Slam finals. And then they won the 2006 Australia and the 2006 Wimbledon, um, 2007 Australia. I mean, like the titles were coming thick and fast at the slams, but I think it was the 2007 final of Wimbledon. They were playing the French team Clement, Arnaud Clement and Michael Lodre. And I'd spent a lot of time scouting uh the the those matches, that opponent. And in the semifinals, Clement uh really every time, not every time, but a lot of the time he had to play a difficult backhand first volley, he eased it down the line as opposed to volleying solid cross-court. And I I just really felt like, you know, as great a poacher as Bob was, I thought that Clement would be uh inclined to do the same thing, go with that backhand down the line first volley, because everyone was afraid of Bob's forehand volley poach from the ads after Mike Bryan had made a great return. So anyway, I I just I still in my mind said to Bob, okay, I think we can, if you can throw him some head candy, you know, as we used to call it, like I think you know you can get him to volley down the line and you'll be there to put it away. Well, about halfway through the fourth set, after the 12th time, Clement had hit back and volleyed cross court, and Bob could have poached, but on my advice didn't. Bob looked up at me and shaking his head like, yes, you've gotten down the line once. And I and I put my hand in my ass. I know, I was mouthing, I know, I'm sorry. You know, and they lost that final, and I never forgave myself as evidence. But Bob, like Bob was not blaming me. They were absolutely amazing about they really shouldered all the responsibility themselves. You know, you see a lot of players really over the last decade in particular looking over at their coaching or support staff and seeming like blaming them for what's going wrong out there under the stress of competition. And Mike and Bob, but never did that. Like they always uh, you know, they they took uh, you know, whatever strategy session we had and all the preparations that we had, the game plans, but once they stepped between the lines, they you know, it was on them, and that I love that about them.

The Wimbledon Tactics That Backfired

SPEAKER_00

That's such a good story. Um, yeah, I I've had to learn how to phrase things like you know, in that scenario, like he takes this backhand line the majority of the time. That's what he's been doing. It could change, you know. So it's it sounds like you scout you scouted it right, but he just he changed it because maybe he knew you would scout it or whatever it is.

SPEAKER_01

But it will never be truly known unless I run into Uno one day. But uh anyway, but then you're so right. You have to choose your words carefully and you have to present the information. And when you do feel like you have a strong tendency, you know, you you definitely want to put it out there. Um, but the way you phrase it, if you've got a good relationship with your player and your players of the caliber, you know, of character that can, you know, deal with you know some adversity and then the fact that uh, you know, a game plan is not guaranteed, uh, tendencies are not guaranteed. And if they can, you know, just navigate through that, then then you've got a strong, a strong formula.

SPEAKER_00

How do you if maybe if you've ever had to coach a player who doesn't have the character to deal with that, uh how do you handle that or how do you help them develop that character?

SPEAKER_01

Yes, well, I mean that's where you have to be blunt with players and obviously the the uh and and communicate well uh because we're always in this uh unique situation in the sport of tennis, or somewhat unique, where the it's oftentimes the player is your employer, uh whereas you know coaches in the team sports are employed by employed by school or a you know an owner, uh different to the players themselves. So it's a very tricky dynamic uh where the player is the one writing your check at the end of the day. But if you can't if you can't sort of have that relationship where you can be uh tell your player the truth, and uh if they can't handle the truth to quote, you know, Jack Nicholson, well then you know you're doomed to failure. So that's where um I I I've had coached a few different people, um, other obviously other than Mike and Bob, and I thought they were perhaps the absolute pinnacle of like really like the greatest of of our game, like Federer and Nadal. You never see them over blaming uh anyone else, uh, but then taking the responsibility themselves. But like so, um you know it's it's it it isn't been uh coaching is just let's just say it's difficult the players are out there on involved. So when things uh go on and and uh perhaps the preparation that you did doesn't seem to be adequate to victory done. I mean things can get really, really testy.

SPEAKER_00

Did you know that you wanted to coach after your playing career was over?

SPEAKER_01

Well, I retired at about 35 years old and had a couple of years uh in Sarasota just with my children and my wife, uh just teaching juniors in the at my club. But uh it just was fate. I think I just ran into Mike and Bob Bryan in 2005 playing world team tennis, and we shared the team. I was sort of their backup player, I suppose, and just gave them a little advice one night uh on a rain delay, uh, just trying to help them get through, navigate through a set against uh I think it was Ehrlich and Ram, one of their you know uh tremendous rivals from the tour. And yeah, things worked out on the rain delay, and then the next thing you know, Wayne's on the flight the next day asking me to do a trial period of coaching them on the tour. So I I didn't really envision going back on the tour as a coach, to be honest. I just in my mind I thought, oh, well, now it's time to be, you know, dad. And uh, but Mike and Bob was such a dynamic opportunity that uh I I I guess I pivoted and and then from there on I sort of have being become a tour coach.

SPEAKER_00

Did you think when when you were a player, did you think that not in a cocky way, but uh I don't know, maybe a confident way, I guess that you were a smarter player than than most of your opponents, or that that was maybe an advantage of you just having a little bit more kind of tactical knowledge or ability to make strategic adjustments in match?

SPEAKER_01

Well, I certainly wasn't an arrogant player. Uh I was quick, and I I guess I did. There were some parts of the doubles game where I really felt like I had an advantage of anticipation uh of where the ball would go. Like I suppose the things that I pride myself on a little bit as a coach, I had as a player too. I couldn't serve you off the court. I had very poor returns, uh, but I was very good at uh helping my partner hold serve and uh just trying to do the right thing at the right time, play clutch, I suppose, with decisions of points of importance. Um I was at uh coming up with the right play for the right time. So I suppose that translated into coaching. Like I, because I wasn't a particularly good player by those standards, by you know, top professional standards, I think you know, you have to use your guile, your experience, and your anticipation in a lot of situations.

SPEAKER_00

Um, I want to move on to club players for a second. So you you and I met uh about a month or month and a half ago in Delray during Davis Cup. And I was sitting there chatting with you, uh telling you about Tennis Tribe and what I do. And one thing you said to me has kind of stuck with me since then. We were talking about club players and the use of the lob. And you said some players always lob and some players never lob at the club level. Can you say more about that?

Telling Players The Truth

SPEAKER_01

Yes. Well, um, I actually, you know, have had a fair bit of experience of watching um UST eight league matches, you know, from you know the 3-5 to the 4-5 uh rating in particular. And um, yes, my uh I would watch my girlfriend at the time, you know, play her matches, and it was you know pretty obvious to me, you know, what what their patterns were and stuff. So I'm gonna try now for a little bit. But I do uh the coaches sometimes aren't uh at that level coaching flexible, like because if you're playing an opponent that's standing very close to the have very little adequability, it makes all the sense in the world to to use the lob. Um and uh then you can take the strategical advantage of coming in behind Bob. And if you can put away some kind of volley or a smash at that level player, that's a great win the point. So I I just like at level they should take more notice uh when you turn a say of how close your opponent's playing the net. Um, because chances are they're not six foot six four like Mike and Bob were, and they can't move backwards very fast. So sometimes hitting the ball, your favorite shot over the middle, might not be the most sensible play. And then conversely, when you're playing the net, you should uh vary your net uh depth from the net based on your opponent's tendencies. If you're playing someone with a very nice lob, uh their favorite shot, then it makes no sense to be on top of the net. Play deeper, keep the ball in front of you.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, yeah, that makes tons of sense. So it's both the um the opponent's position in terms of where they are at the net can dictate the type of shot you hit from the baseline, whether it's a lob or a drive. And then your position should be dictated on the opponent's tendency, whether they tend to lob or tend to hit the ball a bit harder. That makes a lot of sense.

SPEAKER_01

Absolutely will. Yes. I mean, and you you do see at the club level, sometimes they're really good at one style of play. Like some of them, you know, the 4-0 ladies just hit a really nice flat ball uh every time. And they're the ones that, you know, I was would advise you, no, get close to the net. Just, you know, they're not going to go over you. So the closer you are to the net, the better. It's easier to just deflect volleys winners, as long as you're quick enough with your hands to absorb the pace. But then some you can see right away when some people have continental strokes, they're the types of players that play the lob, you know, quite deftly. And you must respect that. You don't want to have your partner having to cover your side uh 75% of the time. That's that's a asking a lot of your partner. Uh that's just one of the things I think at the club level is perhaps a little bit undercoached. Being flexible and reading the strengths of your opponent and dictating, you know, what depth you play and what types of shots you play.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I like that. Um, I want to move back to Bob and Mike. Um, what was the hardest part about coaching them?

Becoming The Bryans’ Coach

SPEAKER_01

Oh gosh, I suppose the hardest part was just trying to uh navigate through their their twin rivalry that they had in practice. Like uh every practice session was um a battle between the two of them trying to win the drill, win the win the practice day. You know, they were such competitors, and it was a great thing because it sharpened them to the point where they uh were so razor, razor sharp in matches. But each practice day was somewhat of a war of psychological attrition. So I you really had to, I had to just find a way to cope with that amount of intensity on the practice court, uh, that rivalry, and find a way to navigate the situations that would arise every day where they would try to get me to side with one or the other, you know, like and that was very tricky. Like even if they had maybe like had the right tack on a particular situation, like I had to find a way to coach with integrity but without favor.

SPEAKER_00

Um, do you do you have a story or like an example of where that might have happened? Because I can see how that you you have to find that balance. Like you can use that rivalry against like to help them improve, right? And and help them motivate them, but you don't want it to go overboard, right?

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, yeah. No, well, they pushed it to the limit, to be fair. Like they were so competitive with each other. Um, and not not every single day, there was not one day. Uh we would start our practices by playing baseline games to 11, even though they were, you know, doubles specialists by the time they were in their mid-20s, that we did not neglect the ground stroke part of the game. And that was one of the things that separated them from the other great doubles teams. They were so automatic with their ground strokes that they got into the point you could rely on Mike and Bob to not miss uh an unnecessary groundy because they did so many baseline 11s. So, and of course, let's say Bob wins the first, Mike wins the second, and Bob wins the third. So now it's two-one, and we had agreed to play three baseline 11s to kick off practice. Well, Mike wasn't quitting there. He'd like one more, you know, and then let's say Bob wins that one again. There'd be like one more. Mike would win one, and then Bob would want one more. It was like, it was so funny. Like they would, and we'd end up spending an hour of uh the whole practice sometimes on baseline 11s, and I'd really have to intercede and say, fellas, you know, we really do need to get to other aspects of the of the game, please, you know, let it go. So that was just a common daily occurrence where baseline 11s were an important part of our system, I suppose, our training regimen. Uh, but their competitive nature, oftentimes it was hard to get them to move on from that because uh because they uh didn't want to be the one the guy to have lost the last point for the last 11.

SPEAKER_00

That's so funny. Um were these 11s through the singles court? It was just like singles rules.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, singles rules. We just really valued, you know, we just wanted to keep them as you know athletic and dynamic and consistent as possible. And I think it was a really good strategy. I mean, they had you know, Bob's forehand in particular and Mike's back end in particular were just amazing shots. And um, you know, just to see them, you know, Bob would try and pick on, you know, like it was strength on strength. When Bob would go cross-court forehand to Mike, Bob would fight it off and then run around and use his forehand. I mean, it was just they were great, great battles that they would have with each other.

SPEAKER_00

Uh how I want to talk about game planning a little bit. Um, so when they are obviously the best doubles team ever, so they're number one in the world most of the the time or a lot of the time that you're coaching them. How much when you're going into a match, say even against another top team, how much do you weigh Bob and Mike playing to their strengths versus attacking an opponent's weakness? How much did you have Bob and Mike stick with their strengths versus attacking an opponent's weakness? So, for example, if they liked the T-serve and the Deuce court, but the opponent has a really good uh backhand return from there, how do you kind of weigh those against each other?

Club Doubles: Lobs And Net Depth

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, well, that was that's a great question. I would say that when Mike and Bob were serving, we sort of backed ourselves to be able to have full command of the service box. So um even though perhaps Bob's favorite serve might be to the right-hander's backhand, if we felt like the forehand was definitely the place to go, we backed Bob to execute serves to the forehand on the big points. So from this from a serving perspective, you you must have full command of the box and be able to put a serve wherever you want. And um, and that's all about then attacking the opponent's more brittle return for sure. And sometimes a guy might have an amazing backhand return, but he hits it cross-court every time. Like Sam Query would be a great example of that. Like he had a really nice cross-court backhand from the ad side, but I'll be darned, he hardly ever hit it up the line, no matter how many times you poached on it. It was quite remarkable. So sometimes in that situation, you'd go to his strength, his backhand return, but you'd you'd cut off the cross-court return, and that seemed to work just fine. But when you're the returner, then um that that's a little bit different. Like maybe you let's say Mike loved his cross-court backhand, uh, but you had to use common sense. You know, if you're playing against a really uh smart team that is always having their net man in position to cut off the cross-court return and they have good hands, you know, Mike have to make the sensible decision and hit the majority of his backhand returns up the line, just knowing that the opponents are most likely to cut off the cross-court return, knowing that it was Mike's strength.

SPEAKER_00

Okay, that yeah, that makes a lot of sense. What about the use of the uh lob return? How did you think about implementing that?

SPEAKER_01

Well, they both had tremendous lobs, like Bob's perhaps his most effective backhand return was his punch lob down the line. He was so good at that shot, he could control the trajectory and the depth of it so well. Um, and that one helped win so many matches. There was one team in particular that it didn't help us so much against, and that was Nestor Zimenich. Uh, they were a big serving righty lefty team. And if Nestor served and Bob went down the line, even if he got it over Zimenich, Nestor was there to hit it on a left-handed smash. And when Zimenich served, um, Nestie was so difficult to lob over, he was tall, and sort of he knew that Bob's tendency was to lob off the backhand, so he wouldn't get too close to the net. So in that instance, it was sort of like we were, I would coach Bob to say, I know it's comfortable to lob off the backhand side, and you're so good at it, but against this team, we really need to just try and resist that impulse and go for the cross-court flatter return off the backhand uh would be a good example of sort of going away from your strengths just because you acknowledge that the opponents uh you know are smart enough and skilled enough to nullify that strength on the lob.

SPEAKER_00

How much do you think team chemistry was an advantage for them? Obviously, being brothers and playing together uh for their basically their whole career. Um how much was that an advantage versus other teams, especially teams who maybe were new partnerships or had switched partners every one to two years?

SPEAKER_01

Definitely a massive advantage because uh they were both when they stepped between the lines, any twin uh disagreements that they might have in practice, you know, they were you know, they'd throw them out the window and they would come together as like a little military regiment that would just be so uh positive and uh energetic and fierce. So they had that dynamic as well as just the chemistry, the synergy of knowing where, you know, exactly where Bob would hit a ball, say without really a signal being needed. Like, you know, Mike would know that Bob would hit that forehand second shot diving into the middle, and he would sweep across with his forehand volley, just counting on Bob being um executing his favorite shot. So they just knew each other inside it out. It was so fun to watch too, because they were seemingly, you know, so um synchronized that they would uh move in in tandem and it was it was beautiful to watch. And that was a massive advantage they had over the other teams. And where where doubles can be tricky is the personal uh uh dynamic. Sometimes when you play with someone for a long time, uh it's just to sort of be critical of each other, like when sometimes you see teams play for two or three years, and eventually team morale erodes because you like you look back at matches and say, Oh, that was your fault. That was your fault. Like maybe there's someone out there that wouldn't miss that volley in that situation, or not double fault, you know, critical situations. And that's just human nature, always think of grass as greener. And Mike and Bob, of course, uh were never under any circumstances going to uh leave each other. You know, they were thick and thin for better or worse as twin brothers. So they had many advantages, you know, that uh came from being twin brothers.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, that's interesting. I wonder if that like maybe frees you up as a doubles player, knowing that you know they're not going to go looking for another partner. Um, so I can it free it might free me up to kind of play uh without tension and play my best.

Managing Twin Rivalry In Practice

SPEAKER_01

Absolutely. So many teams, I think, from club level to to all the way to the top of the game. Like if you feel like your opponent is judging you, I mean it has pressure that you need it very hard to be free to execute clutch shots at any length, you know, and you feel like partner is ready to pull the bright and refuse to stay with you ever again in situation, or you know, to get on the phone and call somebody else about the you know upcoming tournament. So it Mike and Bob, it was just never an option. They were gonna play, obviously, when Bob got injured badly. Um Mike uh teamed up with Jack Sock for a few you know successful outings, but you know, that was only because you know Bob was uh had hip surgery. Um, but uh other than that, it didn't matter, you know, uh if they were they never really did have a protracted period of um of lack of success. But uh even if they did, it was thick or thin, there was there was definitely no no for any loss.

SPEAKER_00

How did you keep improving as a coach during these couple of decades? Um, obviously you're trying to get the most out of your team, you're trying to make sure each of your players. Players improves and the team improves. But I imagine you've got to you need to make sure that you keep getting better as well. So how did you improve as a coach during that time? What was kind of your process for that?

SPEAKER_01

Through the the Brian time, I um yes, well, it wasn't like Mike and Bob were, you know, perfect. Like we were uh Bob and I were always trying to get a little bit more out of his return of serve game. And um, so you never stopped uh looking for you know little keys, little improvement keys, and and Mike perhaps uh always on top of his serving just to make sure that he was getting the most out of his serving. So we we never really ever relaxed about oh we but but you also have to trust your your game too. So I think that we were such advanced technique that there wasn't a lot of too much fiddling. Um, and then a lot of my where I took a lot of pride in is like I've got two fantastic players, you know, the ultimate competitors here, just let me move the margins in their favor as best I can by scouting the opponents, uh making sure that I uh communicate their tendencies, weaknesses, and strengths as best I can in a succinct fashion, you know, where our normal routine was to, you know, if we knew an opponent, say two days in advance, we'd probably talk about it the day before from 10 or 15 minutes. And normally we'd do is just in the warm-up, just after the warm before the warm-up in the day of the match, we would just go over the critical points in a probably a five-minute recap briefing. Um, and I just tried to be as sharp as I could in those in those uh briefing sessions to make uh to bring clarity to the match so that they would make the right decisions in the key moments and play the right shot for the right for the right uh situation.

SPEAKER_00

So I want to ask about uh your time with John Isner and then a couple more questions, and I'll let you hop off. Um so John had a great run in doubles in 2022. Uh he won the Sunshine Double with Jack Sock and uh Um Hercotch, and then made the finals in Rome with Diego Schwartzman. Talk about that run and then also what made John a good doubles player.

SPEAKER_01

Oh my goodness. Yeah, John was really tough to beat in doubles, you know, given a good partner and his motivation level. Obviously, his focus was always single. So these little pockets of double success sort of happened a bit organically. I think he he might have taken a an early loss in Miami in Indian Wells, perhaps, and that sort of freed him up. He knew that, well, I might as well do as well in the doubles as I can because Miami's sort of spread out, you know. So he really um threw himself into the doubles in Indian Wells, and then obviously his service game pretty much you could put a a statue there, he'd probably still hold. Um, and then he was a darn good returner in double. Inside out back in return was very, very good. Uh he had forehand up line return and forehand second shot. Doubles were very, very high quality. So if you didn't know sort of exactly where to cover John, um, and he didn't play that much doubles, so it wasn't like there was extensive footage for the doubles teams to know what John's tendencies were. So if you allowed him to hit his favorite shots on return and second shot, I mean he could really light you up. And then I would just say we, you know, spent a lot of time uh working on his net game and working on his rexes. And I tried to over time be help him in the limited amount of doubles practice that we did to try and help him be a better service partner, try to give him some um bravery about coming across the middle and and being a factor at the net. And that was sort of a fun thing that we had between the two of us to try and help the big fellows because he was never going to get the animation. So um to you know, sort of come up there when Jack saw who be her catch would serve to to part and try and get one or two put aways himself at the net. That was that was a challenge.

Game Plans: Strengths vs Weaknesses

SPEAKER_00

How do you coach someone? Um I guess this is doubles or singles, but specifically with John folk more focusing on singles. Uh how do you coach someone who relies on such a massive weapon? Obviously, there's not a ton of um extended rallies, there's not a ton of tweaking you can do. Um you know, he's got a very unique game style, I guess is another way to say it. So, how do you coach someone like that differently than maybe somebody who's more of an all-court player?

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, no, well, I certainly didn't um need to coach John all on the serve. He had the most beautiful motion by the time I started coaching with him, and I made a point trying to, you know, just stay away from that. You know, I said that's just as you know, he's so much confidence in that shot. The less said the better. What we would talk about on his serve was just direction of second serve. Like there are some players in the game with just amazing um uh back end returns. Like so we would just make a point and say, look, on second serve, let's you know, make sure that we uh hand and forehand be above like Francis Tiafa or something like that. Let's not know your second serve's amazing, you know, Francis or someone like him has got such a good backhand return. We we won't go there unless we're sort of going for you know a really aggressive second serve. So there was this fraction of sort of tactical work with the serve, but the thing that John and I would always work on is you know, how can we be a better return? Like, where should we stand? How aggressive should we be on return with our targets and what we're trying to do? And then in the rallies, like how quickly should we go for the the offensive shot down line? Should we use any drop shots? Like, that's where for him that we were always looking to find solutions to his parative lack of uh of uh mobility compared to the other top players in the world, the the players that you know six foot five that could easily clearly just out move John with him being somewhere 6'11. Sure.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Um so last couple of questions for you. Uh how can we make doubles more popular?

SPEAKER_01

Oh gosh, well, I'm glad you asked. I mean, I really have this uh uh we never really on the ATP tour ever I don't think have a rules committee that a lot of the professional sports do, where we at the end of each resume you analyze the game and say, how can we make it better for the fans? And I know that that I wish we did have a tennis committee because I'd be I'd love to be on it. And when it comes to doubles, like the first thing I'd say is be let's make a rule where the service partner can't stand inside the service line um till the service struck. Because I feel like in men men's levels in particular, the serving is so strong. The and the net play is especially from the eye formation, is so so overwhelm um suffocating that we don't see enough entertaining points. And that's why doubles, I think, in the men's level can be it can be ugly at times when the serving is too good for the returning. So I'd like to see the service partner have to stay like out of the kitchen, so to speak, to uh quote a pickleball reference. Um, and then I think that the returner could just make a good solid return, engage the serving team in a point, and then I think it would just be make for a lot more attractive doubles.

SPEAKER_00

Do you feel like we'd need another kind of Brian Brothers type team? And if so, what would it take for that to happen? Are there any young up-and-coming teams that you feel like can have maybe not that full potential because they had so many ingredients that kind of came together, including being the best team, but maybe a team like that that's that's a bit more marketable?

The Lob Return And Tough Matchups

SPEAKER_01

Yes, well, that would obviously we really that would be wonderful. And uh what we really did is a very charismatic team that uh that match well and stay together. That and I think that would have to be a great returning team because that's where I think the game is is unattractive. I think in men's doubles, it it's become just a very, very hard to break uh as time has gone on, and that's why I like my rule about a kitchen. But for a team, if we don't change the rules as they are, as they stand right now, a team needs to come along with a lot of passion, a lot of vibrancy, like Mike, and the need to be returned team so that they can create more points. They can get the serve past the net man to the server and engage him rather than let the net man just polish off volley after easy volley. And that's where I think men's doubles, you know, is is it's a challenge. It's a challenge to get fans to really to give them entertaining enough points for the fans to get excited about when there's high stakes, like the Davis Cup match that we just coached in Delray Beach, where Ram and Krychek beat the Czech team. Uh, that was a tremendous match, and it was entertaining. The court was quite slow, so there was quite a number of good returns played, and the points were by and large fairly entertaining and somewhat protracted. That was a great doubles match. And because of the occasion and the quality, really, really enjoyed that so very, very much. But um, if you haven't got a huge occasion or great returning, that's where I feel it can be a little dull.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, that was really an awesome match. Um, and yeah, it would be great to see more stadiums and crowds like that for doubles um because it does uh have so much potential if we can come up with some solutions to to kind of make it more popular. Um, David, thanks a ton for coming on. This was a lot of fun. Hopefully, we'll uh see you down the road and get to do it in person next time.

SPEAKER_01

You go it's plenty of talking about it.