During his days as a doubles specialist on the ATP Tour, Robbie Koenig's post-match press conferences could draw the type of crowds you might expect to see at an Ilie Nastase seminar on sportsmanship. Times have changed and Koenig's work as an analyst for both television and web coverage of ATP Masters Series events have seen him conduct compelling question and answer sessions that have gained a global fan following.
As a tennis commentator, the native of Durban, South Africa doesn't simply regurgitate what you've just seen on the screen, he draws upon his experiences as a player and a coach to consistently question the tactics employed by the world's best players and offers his own answers into strategic shifts players should be consider.
Ever since he first picked up a tennis racquet, Koenig has viewed tennis as an educational experience. At 5-foot-8, 155-pounds Koenig did not possess the physical strength to hit his way past opponents. Instead, he relied on his best weapon — his mind — to think his way through matches. In an era when big bang tennis ranging from screaming serves to guttural grunts can make a tennis court sound as serene as a construction site, Koenig is a voice of reason who explores and expounds on the subtlety of the sport in providing a blue print on point construction.
"I'm trying to talk to the viewer from a different perspective," Koenig says of his commentary style. "Strategy, without a doubt, was my strength as a player. I had no weapons so I had to use my mind. So in my commentary I'm trying to take the viewer on the court and talk about the strategy each player is using as well as the tactics they could be using."
The former U.S. Open doubles semifinalist has spent recent years sharing his insights as a tennis analyst who helps home school tennis fans around the world. During last month's Rafael Nadal-Lleyton Hewitt Hamburg semifinal, Koenig pointed out that Nadal is much more comfortable and effective running around his backhand to hit his inside out forehand and suggested Hewitt, who can take the ball early particularly on his backhand side, might have more success going directly at Nadal's forehand. It was Hewitt's ability to apply that tactic in hitting short-angle crosscourt backhands and inside out forehands that helped him push Nadal to three sets before bowing.
Asserting Nadal's heavy topspin forehand not only posed problems for Federer's one-handed backhand, but also sometimes caused Federer to mis-hit his forehand when he tried imparting heavy topspin off that side, Koenig advocated Federer must move forward in the court and take advantage of his all-court ability to shorten points and pressure a weary Nadal. Federer, who amped up his aggression in the final two sets of the Hamburg final, responded with his first career clay-court victory over Nadal.
Tennis Week caught up with Koenig, who retired from the ATP Tour in 2005 but still works in a coaching capacity with Mahesh Bhupathi for this interview in which he analyses the Federer-Nadal rivalry, offers his opinion on the continuing struggles of American men on clay and weighs in with his view on September's Davis Cup semifinal between the United States and Sweden.
Tennis Week: Robbie, how did you transition from playing the tour to your commentary role?
Robbie Koenig: My last tournament was playing doubles with Thomas Johansson at St. Petersburg in the fall of 2005. I was always interested in commentary because I love tennis and have always been fascinated and interested in the tactics of tennis. I had done bits and pieces [of commentary] for Davis Cup. I felt like it came pretty natural and I always liked listening to Mark Petchey as a commentator and I found I was watching matches and thinking about strategy he was saying what I was thinking. I'm watching the game and he's saying what I am thinking. I always enjoyed the strategy of the game and I seemed to have a good mind for that. I've been traveling in a coaching capacity with Mahesh Bhupathi and was living in London for a while. Jason Goodall, the guy who does Masters Series commentary, lives almost right next door to me in London. One day I ran into him on the street as he was walking to the shops and he asked me about commentating and possibly filling in here or there. I thought it would be very interesting and popped in to do it at Indian Wells and Miami. I ended up doing five or six matches with John Barrett and it just so happened he was retiring so my timing could not have been better.
Tennis Week: You're very good in devising and explaining tactics during the course of the match. How many of the players you see actually do change tactics during a course of a match and when it comes to a player who has an edge over another on a surface as we've seen with Nadal vs. Federer how much difference can a coach make tactically if the player is committed to a certain style?
Robbie Koenig: That's a great question and for me the tactics are among the most fascinating aspects of a match. When you play against Nadal the tactic is pretty simple: you must be willing to move forward and attack. I ask myself two things: one, has the coach the picked it up? And two is the player trying to implement those tactics. So it's one thing telling Roger Federer or anyone what tactics to use and it's another thing doing it.
Tennis Week: And in the case of Federer, he's won 10 majors and dominated tennis playing his style and he's accustomed to other players adjusting to him rather than him adjusting to another player.
Robbie Koenig: Absolutely and it really is only one guy — Nadal — who has given Roger problems. And I can see the stubbornness. Without a doubt if you're that good, if you've been that successful for that long and you actually believe that is the way to play, then it can be tough (to change), but on clay he cannot play the same way against Nadal.
Tennis Week: What gives you the greatest satisfaction doing commentary and what do you try to convey in your commentary?
Robbie Koenig: I love it — I love the tactics, I love the game, love being around it. You don't understand how much I love the game. The greatest regret I have is that I wasn't a more high profile player — not for my own gratitude — I wish I could influence more people. In order to reach people on a wider scale you need to have that wow factor that comes from having won a Grand Slam. I would love to be in a position to influence young people to pick up the game because tennis is a great sport and could use the exposure. We've had some fine players from South Africa, but back home tennis players still get so much less respect than rugby guys and other sportsmen and it's a pity. To answer your question about commentary, I'm trying to talk to the viewer from a different perspective. Strategy, without a doubt, was my strength as a player. I had no weapons so I had to use my mind. So in my commentary I'm trying to take the viewer on the court and talk about the strategy each player is using as well as the tactics they could be using.
Tennis Week: Are you encouraged by the state of tennis today, the direction the game is taking and the potential growth of the game?
Robbie Koenig: Definitely. I believe tennis is on the right track on two fronts and I will tell you why. Globally, I've got to friends who do some work for Babolat and Wilson and they tell me they are producing more racquets for youngsters than they have in the past and that's a sign that more kids are starting to play. The other factor is that we've got two great role models for tennis in Federer and Nadal who always give of their time to promote our sport and above and beyond that there is a rawness, a realness and a humility about these two guys that is genuine. I was sitting around recently talking to a few guys at a tournament and Toni Nadal happened to be one of them. He was telling us how he can't understand how some guys can get six racquets strung for free, use two of them, then go out and rip out the strings of the other four they had not used and get them re strung the next day. What a waste. Rafa would not dream of doing something like that because he was raised to appreciate what he's got. He's grateful he gets his clothes and racquets for free and takes great care and great pride in that which is one reason you never see Nadal throw a racquet. So I think with two great champions and role models in Federer and Nadal it will only help tennis grow globally.
Tennis Week: Let's talk about their rivalry. How does Federer finally breaking through and beating Nadal on clay in the Hamburg final impact this rivalry? What does that match mean if they meet again in the French Open final?
Robbie Koenig: I honestly think the loss in Hamburg is not gonna affect Nadal that much. I think perhaps the fact the whole winning streak is over is actually a good thing for Nadal. I think he was definitely tired in some of those matches. From Federer's perspective, the tactics were so good and he executed so well and that's why Federer made him look ordinary and uncomfortable. Rafa was making a lot more unforced errors in Hamburg and whether that was tactics or tiredness I honestly think it was a combination of both. I think the big advantage is that Roger has now beaten him once so he knows he can do it. I believe Roger's got to mix it up at times, stay aggressive and continue pressing forward. I believe a good number for Roger is to come to net between 15 and 20 times a set. In Hamburg he was coming in on quality approaches so he was at net in position to finish the point out. To me, the biggest factor for Federer in a clay-court rematch with Nadal is he has got to get his tactics right. I honestly believe even if Federer plays his best tennis on a clay-court and gets his tactics completely wrong, then Nadal will beat him. But you look at the Hamburg final and he didn't serve that well at the start, but tactically he was spot-on and that made the difference so the tactics are crucial for Federer against Nadal because tactically Nadal does not have to change. Nadal can play his game and we've all seen when he plays his game on clay how tough he is to beat.
Tennis Week: The French Open story in the States the first week was the clay-court collapse of the American men in the first round. First, are you surprised the results were that poor? Secondly, why is adapting to clay so difficult for Americans?
Robbie Koenig: I think Andy lost to a quality player in Andreev. On a clay court, Andreev is not exactly an underdog against many people and you see what Andreev has done since beating Andy so I look at that as Andy had a very tough draw. I'm surprised at Blake losing. I thought he was ready to win a couple of rounds and maybe possibly reach the round of 16. But you know part of what it is as a player I call it the "feel good factor." When you arrive at a place or a tournament where you've had success you feel good and you feel confident. This clay-court season in Europe, including the French Open, does not have that feel good factor for the American guys. Most of the American guys are all good mates and most of them probably talk about how shitty they feel in Europe and how they loathe the four or five weeks a year being there. If you go back and look at the guys who have fairly long careers and review their records more often than not you'll see them doing well at the same places, the same tournaments, year after year. For me, I always liked playing in Auckland. Sure, it was the first week of the year, it could be windy, but I just love Auckland, I love the people there, I love the windy conditions so my frame of mind was really good and positive before I even got there. Look at Federer how well he always plays in Germany: he has a great record in Halle and in Hamburg. So I think part of it is a mentality and that feel good factor is something you cannot underestimate.
Tennis Week: I know you're friendly with the Swedish players. What is your take on the Davis Cup semifinal between Sweden and the USA and did Mats Wilander make the right choice selecting a carpet court given the fact the Americans were so abysmal on clay in Paris?
Robbie Koenig: The Swedish guys are a great unit as are the Americans and so I'm excited about that semifinal because it is two tight-knit teams who really take pride in Davis Cup. I'm a big believer that you play to your strength and not your opponent's weakness. [Robin] Soderling and [Thomas] Johansson can hang with the best of them on a fast court. I was asking Jonas [Bjorkman] about it and he was saying their thinking is they've had some of their best results on that surface, they beat Argentina on that surface and they can play with anyone on it. I think they made the right choice. And you know from the Australian Open that the Swedish fans are among the best and most knowledgeable tennis fans in the world so they will be out in full force for that semifinal.
Tennis Week: How do you explain the longevity of Thomas Johansson and Bjorkman? Why have they been so competitive for so long?
Robbie Koenig: Both of them train hard and have kept themselves in good shape, but I think there are slightly different reasons for each of them. Tommy Jo is technically so sound in his strokes and basically since the age of 10 years old he's had a rubber arm. They say he was born with a $5 million arm and not much has changed in that regard: he still hits the ball so clean and he's a strong guy with tree trunks for legs. Jonas reminds me of Pat Rafter a bit, not that they play the same game, but Jonas has got the competitive rawness of a Rafter and he plays with his heart and soul every time out. He just loves to play and you can see that when you watch him.
Tennis Week: Are you still actively coaching?
Robbie Koenig: I do a bit of stuff with Mahesh [Bhupathi] in a coaching capacity as well as the commentary at the Masters Series events so that's kind of my schedule. I missed the French to hang out with my family as we just moved back to South Africa, but I'll be at Wimbledon. I'd like to get into coaching even more. I really what to share the knowledge and experienced I've had over the years. I love doing stuff overseas and I've done some clinics in the past. The response we've received in America is phenomenal, people have been very enthusiastic at the clinics we've done so I'd like to do more of that. I really feed off that stuff when the players are enthusiastic and willing to work hard.
Tennis Week: I know from listening to your commentary you are an advocate of playing all-court tennis, of guys developing their volley so they can become more versatile, become comfortable from more areas of the court and give themselves options. Do you think the success of Federer will encourage more young players to try to develop all-court games as Djokovic is trying to do or do you think basically it's a fractured tour where you have clay-courters and the faster-surface players?
Robbie Koenig: I think there is a huge naivety among some players and coaches in that they are not developing more all-court skills. And don't give me the bullshit that it doesn't work and that guys hit too hard for players to come to the net. Because when you see a guy like Stepanek do it you realize it can be done. Stepanek hits the ball flat, but yet he knows how to read the ball around the net and he's developed an attacking game. So I think when you look at Nadal and see how he has worked so hard to develop his game and become a more varied and complete player it's a clear sign that is what more players need to be doing.
Tennis Week: You played doubles for quite a long time. Now that the ATP's change to doubles scoring has been in place for a while, what do you think of the ATP's doubles policy and what do the doubles players you know think of it?
Robbie Koenig: I think the guys have accepted the fact the system is in place. I think they still get a bit annoyed that part of the reason the system was put in place was to try to gauge the exact start time of matches yet you still have the doubles final starting three hours before the singles final in some cases, which is not right and does not help give doubles greater exposure. You want to have the curtain raiser right before the main event and not at some ungodly hour where fans aren't there to see it. So why not start the doubles final at 11:30 before a 2 p.m. singles final? That way fans can come in and watch the doubles final and see some great tennis before the singles final and you're giving the fans more value and you're giving the doubles the exposure it needs because when people see it they do like it and do respond. So I think the schedule for doubles is probably something that needs to be looked at and can be improved. I would like to see doubles players being taken more seriously for what they contribute to tennis. To me, it's not fair that the doubles guys gave up so much for this initiative and they should get something back like a better schedule. I think doubles is lucky to have Bob and Mike Bryan around because they are awesome ambassadors for the sport of doubles as are a couple of other teams and in many cases they do so much more to promote the sport than some singles guys. If I've got one gripe around the tour it's that some of the guys don't do enough for the sponsors and fans in terms of doing the meet-and-greets, the dinners, the fund raisers. These are the types of things the golfers do and they do it the week of their tournaments too. My feeling is if you don't show up for these things during the week, then you shouldn't get to play that week.
Tennis Week: I know on the senior tour, both Jim Courier's Outback Champions tour here in the states and the BlackRock Tour in Europe, many of those guys are former Grand Slam champions and they all participate in the corporate clinics. I mean even some of the guys who were regarded as not very media or fan friendly during their days on the ATP Tour, are very good in that regard on the senior circuit so you wonder if some of it is the fact some of the ATP guys are so young and inexperienced they might not realize they're making a living because of sponsor money and fan interest and that is so vital to the game? So perhaps educating the guys as they join the tour is important?
Robbie Koenig: I was talking to Alex Corretja, who does TV commentary now, recently and Alex Corretja was always one of the good guys in terms of giving back to tennis and even he was telling me it was only until he got to the latter stages of his career that he realized how important working with the sponsors was and how much influence top players can have in promoting tennis. The thing is sometimes by the time players realize it they are either at the end of their careers or perhaps have moved on so you they are not in the limelight as much and it's a pity. There's a lot of great guys on the tour and sometimes it's just that they are so young they just don't know and then you have a few who think the sun shines out of their ass. I'm a bit old school in that way that you really need to give back to the game because it's given all of us so much. It's an exciting time, a very exciting time for tennis, with Roger and Rafa, who are both so classy and committed to the sport, at the top and so many talented young players coming up so I am excited about the future for our sport.
