By Blair Henley | Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Brad Gilbert is a true jack of all (tennis) trades. At 54 years old, the former world No. 4 has coached some of the biggest names in the game, authored a popular book on tennis strategy, helped launch a coaching website for tennis amateurs and sustained a successful career as an ESPN analyst. A “stats guy” at heart, Gilbert can pull up details on just about any player at a moment’s notice. He’s also gained quite a following on Twitter thanks to his honest commentary and the entertaining nicknames he doles out to top players.

Video: Rafa's Anti-Tweener Lob in Rio

Gilbert sat down with Tennis Now during a visit to Houston, Texas, where he spoke at a fundraiser benefitting the Houston National Junior Tennis and Learning programs. In addition to his in-depth interview below, don’t forget to check out his Lightning Round video segment (above) where he talks tennis idols, doubles death matches and winning ugly.

Let’s start with the Australian Open. The winners weren’t a huge surprise, but as a coach, what would you tell Maria Sharapova before she heads out to play Serena, having lost to her 16 straight times now?

Well, nobody beat you 17 times in a row (laughs). I think no matter what, you only think about the matches at hand. Maybe you go back as a coach and re-watch, and see where you’re making progression…try to figure it out, continue to be positive and make a plan that when it comes up again, you’ll be in a position to maybe succeed.

Any specific advice for Maria facing a player like Serena?

Obviously there are two things that jump out: the difference in serve and the difference in movement. Considering that Serena is six years older, they are pretty big differences. I felt like that was the closest Maria was to her in that second set. I felt that Serena had to play another level, considering that she wasn’t feeling well. It’s amazing what she’s doing at her age, let alone at any point. It reminds you a little bit about what Andy Roddick went through with Roger Federer.

You’ve coached Andy Murray. Do you have any words or wisdom for him, having lost to Novak now three times at the Australian Open?

Right afterwards, I never like to address a match. Maybe a few days later, you can really dive into it. Three times they’ve played in the last couple of years – the quarterfinal of the US Open, and the Australian Open ‘13 and ’15. They split two tiebreakers and all three times after that, Djokovic rolled. You’ve got to figure out what happened in those two sets that all the sudden were different from the first two sets. The key to coaching is short-term memory loss. You’ve got to put it behind you because it’s not coming back. What can we do to move forward and learn from what happened in this match?

Whether it was manufactured by the media or not, there was a bit of drama on the men’s side during the Australian Open with Murray against Berdych or the third set of Murray vs. Djokovic. Of course, that’s tame compared to a few decades ago. Do you miss the Wild West tennis days?

When I first turned pro, I felt like McEnroe and Connors were bigger than the sport. They could do whatever then, and the rules have dramatically changed to where you can’t do things that are bigger than the game. I do like the way the rules are, but we do miss characters. That’s why what we saw from Nick Kyrgios, his attitude and the generation that he is, was so refreshing. But still, there is nothing you can do to get outside the rules of the game, and I do like that.

We talked a little bit about the nicknames you give to players, but they really have taken on a life of their own. How did that start? Do they come to you in the middle of the night? Do you have a committee?

I have no committee. I have no staff (laughs). When I started on Twitter about five years ago, I felt it should be fun, and it started out of that. Some names are easier to work with. I haven’t had too many players say, “Geez, I hate the name” or “I like the name.”

I got one last week, he just turned 17, and he’s a good young player who wanted to know why I don’t have a nickname for him already. His name is Stefan Kozlov. He’s got a name to work with, so I was thinking about it…Rock the Kozbah. Some names, when they don’t have something good to flow with, it does make it tougher. Another thing with Twitter, I get so many people saying, “Give me a nickname!” But like I said, some names are a lot easier to work with.

So are the nicknames confined to the tennis court? Or are you making up names for your mailman?

No (laughs). I might come up with another athlete or something like that for Twitter, but it’s for Twitter.

As I’m sure you know, people have very strong opinions about commentators and analysts, and yet, doing it well is not as easy as it seems. What would you say is the toughest part of your job with ESPN?

I like to think about it like I’m talking on the telephone. I am what I am. I’m not different on TV than I am in real life. I enjoy passionately what I’m doing. I have three different roles: When I’m down on the court, it’s a lot more x’s and o’s; when I’m in the booth, it’s a little bit different on how you’re calling a match; when I’m in the studio, that’s when I can do some nicknames and it can be a little more lighthearted. It depends on what role I’m doing, and it depends on the content. Is it something controversial? Is it something lighthearted? I try not to overthink it. I don’t study myself—I know a lot of people study themselves and watch tape. Oh, and I like live. I don’t like tape. You just let it rip and let go.

How honest do you feel like you can be with your assessments when you’re on the air? Do you find yourself holding back?

I’m sure sometimes you feel that way, but ESPN pays you to have opinions. If all the sudden they know you’re not giving yours when your opinion is merited, they are going to want to know why. But, knock on wood, I haven’t gotten called into the principal’s office for anything. I don’t have a plan of attack. Sometimes you’re watching the action unfold in front of you, and you’re calling it like you see it.

Thanks to your job, you’ve seen a lot of tennis matches. Is there a match that sticks out as the wildest thing you’ve seen? Whether it was the match itself or something that happened within the match?

It’s a little bit like baseball. They say that every day you go to the park, you may see something you’ve never seen before. I was numb after it happened, but sitting there watching Andre and Pete play [at the US Open quarterfinals in 2001], that match at night with four tiebreakers and no breaks in the whole match. I just never thought I would see a match like that.

I just saw Stan Wawrinka in the fourth set against Garcia-Lopez at the Australian Open. He was down 5-0 in the tiebreaker, then 6-2 and then boom! He reels it off. That’s a little thing, but I still feel like the kid and fan in me could see something I haven’t seen.

In addition to coaching at the pro level, you’ve also spent some time with recreational players with your site www.ProTennisCoach.com. What do you see as the biggest mistake amateur players are making when they hit the courts?

I love helping people at all levels. I think a lot of times with the club player, a lot of them over-evaluate. They see a pro do something and think they can do it. They go for too many 1-in-10 shots. They might make one out of seven or eight going to for it, so you’re minus six, which is a bad number. It’s learning to play within yourself, learning to understand your strengths and be honest about your weaknesses. A lot of club players and juniors aren’t honest about their weaknesses, and they over-value their strengths.

How is tennis different from a sport like golf, for instance, where a player of any level can look at Tiger Woods’ swing and try to emulate that with good results. Is tennis an unusual case in that trying to hit a forehand like Rafa might end with disastrous results for the recreational player?

Sometimes you can look at [a stroke] that gets a phenomenal result, but that doesn’t mean you can copy it and make it work. I always say at the 4.0 level, even 4.5, [it’s about] making shots. When you hit a screaming winner, you only get one point. A lot of us try to chase that screaming winner, but it’s keeping the ball going. At the club level, everyone hates the pusher, but keep more balls in play and work on your cardio. The fitter you are, it gives yourself more options. Keeping more balls in play is usually your best option.

So props to the pusher then?

Absolutely. It also takes a mindset. To me, I’d much rather over-err on keeping the ball in play than trying to chase for the tough winners.