Connect with us

Culture

Coco Gauff and Naomi Osaka meet at a tennis coaching crossroads in Beijing

Published

on

Coco Gauff and Naomi Osaka meet at a tennis coaching crossroads in Beijing

The ‘other guy’ theory of coaches is a sporting truism.

A team that loses more than it wins with a so-called ‘players’ coach’, someone who specializes in relating to athletes and creating an easygoing atmosphere, will often replace them with a disciplinarian. Reserved coaches who don’t find success get replaced by high-energy, emotional types big on motivation. The bookish sort who focusses on the X’s and O’s comes back when that act wears thin.

Tennis players are no different, the latest cases being Coco Gauff and Naomi Osaka, who dueled on Tuesday in Beijing at the penultimate WTA 1000 tournament of the year.

Both players entered the year with high hopes but did not meet them. After early eliminations from the U.S. Open — Gauff lost in the fourth round, Osaka in the second — they both announced coaching changes. 

Gauff jettisoned Brad Gilbert, one of the biggest personalities in the sport. He is an ESPN commentator and the former coach of Andy Roddick and Andre Agassi, with a grand unified theory of tennis, otherwise known as Winning Ugly. Gauff then brought in Matt Daly, a little-known grip specialist, to work alongside Jean-Christophe Faurel, the low-profile French coach who has worked with Gauff on and off since she was 14.

Advertisement

Faurel most recently rejoined Gauff’s entourage last spring, to work alongside Gilbert. Gilbert and Gauff barely knew each other when she hired him in the summer of 2023. Weeks later, she was U.S. Open champion.

Osaka, meanwhile, pivoted from Wim Fissette, the quiet, cerebral Belgian who helped her win two Grand Slam titles in 2020 and 2021. Fissette would be fine if he never appeared on television. Osaka’s new coach is Patrick Mouratoglou, the former coach of Serena Williams. He has a gift for motivation and self-promotion, with a brand empire that includes an academy in the south of France, plus the freewheeling Ultimate Tennis Showdown (UTS) tennis exhibition events and coaching camps at luxury resorts.


Coco Gauff and Naomi Osaka have made coaching changes, but from different tennis perspectives. (Yanshan Zhang / Getty Images)

He was almost too recognizable for Osaka. Mouratoglou’s history with Williams and his presence in the game made her want to avoid him. 

“His persona is so big,” Osaka said in a press conference in Beijing. So big that she was skeptical of his coaching abilities: anyone coaching the greatest female player of the modern era might have enjoyed their part in the success of Williams.

Then I met him, talked to him, worked with him on the court,” she said.

Advertisement

“He absolutely is a really good coach.”

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Patrick Mouratoglou says ‘something has to be done’ for tennis’ future. Is he that something?


John Kerry, the longtime senator, U.S. secretary of state and American climate czar, once reduced his philosophy of governing, war and diplomacy to, essentially, ‘getting things right as quickly as you can when you are wrong’.

Sporting aphorists often cite the first law of holes: when you are in one, stop digging. 

Both basically sum up Osaka’s and Gauff’s coaching pivots. Players usually make these moves once the season ends, rather than with another two months to go. Gauff and Osaka are on the Asian swing, which is especially important for Osaka, Japan’s torchbearer at the Tokyo Olympics three years ago. Then come the WTA Finals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, which Gauff may qualify for, and the Billie Jean King Cup in Malaga, Spain, which Osaka plans to play.

Advertisement

But by mid-September, they already had all the data they needed to conclude that they were either heading in the wrong direction (Gauff) or stalling (Osaka). 

While Gauff’s results were off target — with a fourth-round exit at Wimbledon to Emma Navarro before Donna Vekic defeated her in the third-round of the Paris Olympics — the bigger issue was of technique. Gilbert’s ability to cover up her weaknesses, one of his greatest strengths as a coach, had faded.

Quality opponents had figured out how to counter the looping forehand that he introduced to cover up her shakiness on that side. They would step in and take the ball on the rise, before it bounced high enough to trap them at the back of the court. 

Against Navarro at Wimbledon, she pleaded with Gilbert to tell her something, realizing in the moment that she did not have the tools she needed to escape Navarro.

Then there is her serve. At the U.S. Open, her fourth-round defeat to Navarro included 19 double faults.

Advertisement

“I don’t want to lose matches like this anymore,” she told reporters afterwards.

go-deeper

Gilbert, who has forgotten more about tennis than most people know, would never peddle himself as a serve specialist, or even the kind of coach that someone as mired in technical limitations as Gauff is right now would need. Even during Gilbert’s tenure, Gauff had worked with Roddick on some minor serve adjustments. 

In an interview last week, Gilbert declined to get specific about his work with Gauff, but said it was a positive experience overall.

He believes that the ultimate parameters of tennis have not changed. Players have to figure out their strengths, then they have to figure out what their opponent does well. Then they plan to impose their own strengths on the match, while nullifying those of their opponent. But at 63, after more than four decades around the pro game, Gilbert knows the drill. Once a player wins one of the Grand Slams, expectations rise, even though the competition remains fierce. Everyone wants to win and there are only four majors each year.

The women’s game has a little more unpredictability, Gilbert said, but still, “there isn’t a lot of opportunity”.  

“Each coaching experience is a unique experience and you move on,” he added. “That is a beautiful thing.”

Advertisement

Gauff, still only 20 years old, is impatient for success but she is taking the long view. She is approaching the fall tournaments in Asia as an extended pre-season, prioritizing improvement over wins and a top-eight finish for the season, which would qualify her for those season-ending tour Finals.


Coco Gauff’s forehand has long been a vulnerability against top-level opponents. (Yanshan Zhang / Getty Images)

Her team prefers that her coaches speak little about her; she is finding that the subtle changes Daly has made have already begun to pay dividends. 

Daly, 45, played at Notre Dame and briefly coached Denis Shapovalov. He is the founder of a company that sells a gadget called GripMD, which wraps around the handle of a racket to help players use a traditional continental grip. 

Gauff hits her forehand with a heavy western grip, essentially holding the racket underneath the handle. Don’t look for her to switch to a continental grip on her forehand anytime soon — it just doesn’t cut it. Her immediate focus is her serve, but it might take some time before the dividends show up on the stats sheets. She had six double faults and 27 unforced errors across the two sets Tuesday, which she and Osaka split before Osaka retired with a back injury.


If Gauff is taking the long view, Osaka wants results now. It wasn’t always this way.

Advertisement

She has been handed tough draws all season, most notably when she came within a point of knocking Iga Swiatek out of the French Open. At the time, she was introspective, coining a little aphorism of her own: the results weren’t resulting, she told reporters. Fissette and Osaka were focussing her comeback in the long lens — for this season and the next five years. Wait for summer and fall, when tennis moves to the hard courts on which Osaka built her reputation, was the mantra.

That waiting steadily chipped away at Osaka’s confidence. After Karolina Muchova defeated her in New York, she told reporters that a part of her dies when she loses. That Osaka was not the wry, magnanimous Osaka of Paris. The French Open was a lifetime ago in her world, and she had believed that she would have more success on her favorite surface. Muchova, who floated to the U.S. Open semifinals and was likely one stuck volley away from the final, is pretty much doing what Osaka wants to be doing.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

How should a world No 1 be? Iga Swiatek and Naomi Osaka have an idea

Osaka and the rest of the locker room know she needs to return better, improve her second serve and regain the confidence that, in her best moments, made her an absolute banker in crunch time. More than anything, that had been her superpower, and it’s been mostly missing this year.

This is why she switched to Mouratoglou with two months to go in the 2024 season. She is world No. 73, and desperately wants to get into the top 32, so she can be seeded at the Australian Open in January. 

Advertisement

Fissette, her former coach, is known as a master strategist and tennis technician. Confidence comes from results in his world. He shares with Mouratoglou a belief in playing aggressively, and building that intensity up when it brings results, but he is no one’s definition of a hype man. Mouratoglou could get a letter carrier fired up about delivering the mail.


The China Open is Naomi Osaka and Patrick Mouratoglou’s first official tournament together. (Robert Prange / Getty Images)

Osaka had considered hiring Mouratoglou before she linked back up with Fissette, when she was plotting her comeback from maternity leave. She went with the Belgian then because of their history of success. When it didn’t return, she and Mouratoglou worked together in California after the U.S. Open, then decided to take on the women’s tour together. 

I don’t want to have regrets,” Osaka added last week in Beijing. 

“I really need to learn as much as possible in this stage of my career. Patrick seemed like the guy with the information.” 

They were off to a good start, with three consecutive wins, including Osaka’s first comeback from a set down in over two years, against Yulia Putintseva. But even the best coach can’t have much success with an injured player. 

Advertisement

After shaking hands with Gauff at one set all, before the American carried her bag off court, Osaka said that her back had stiffened to the point of locking in practice. She was able to start but her condition worsened as the match wore on.

“Totally worth it though lol,” she wrote on Threads.

Sounds like something Mouratoglou would say.

(Top photo: Yanshan Zhang / Getty Images)

Advertisement

Culture

What America’s Main Characters Tell Us

Published

on

What America’s Main Characters Tell Us

Literature

Oedipa Maas from ‘The Crying of Lot 49’ (1966) by Thomas Pynchon

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

“The unforgettable, cartoonish protagonist of this unusually short novel is a California housewife accidentally turned private investigator and literary interpreter, and the mystery she’s attempting to solve — or, more specifically, the conspiracy she stumbles upon — is nothing less than capitalism itself,” says Ngai, 54. “As Oedipa traces connections between various crackpots, the novel highlights the peculiarly asocial sociality of postwar U.S. society, which gets figured as a network of alienations.”

Advertisement

Sula Peace from ‘Sula’ (1973) by Toni Morrison

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

“Sula arguably begins to disappear as soon as she’s introduced — despite the fact that the novel bears her name. Other characters die quickly, or are noticeably flat. This raises the politically charged question of who gets to ‘develop’ or be a protagonist in American novels and who doesn’t. The novel’s unusual character system is part of its meditation on anti-Black racism and historical violence.”

The speaker of ‘Lunch Poems’ (1964) by Frank O’Hara

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Advertisement

“Lyric poems are fundamentally different from narrative fiction in part because they have speakers as opposed to narrators. Perhaps it’s a stretch to nominate the speaker of ‘Lunch Poems’ as a main character, but this book changed things by highlighting the centrality of queer counterpublics to U.S. culture as a whole, and by exploring the joys and risks of everyday intimacy with strangers therein.”

This interview has been edited and condensed.

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Culture

Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden

Published

on

Poetry Challenge: Memorize “The More Loving One” by W.H. Auden

Advertisement

Let’s memorize a poem! Not because it’s good for us or because we think we should, but because it’s fun, a mental challenge with a solid aesthetic reward. You can amuse yourself, impress your friends and maybe discover that your way of thinking about the world — or even, as you’ll see, the universe — has shifted a bit.

Over the next five days, we’ll look closely at a great poem by one of our favorite poets, and we’ll have games, readings and lots of encouragement to help you learn it by heart. Some of you know how this works: Last year more Times readers than we could count memorized a jaunty 18-line recap of an all-night ferry ride. (If you missed that adventure, it’s not too late to embark. The ticket is still valid.)

This time, we’re training our telescopes on W.H. Auden’s “The More Loving One” — a clever, compact meditation on love, disappointment and the night sky.

Advertisement

Here’s the first of its four stanzas, read for us by Matthew McConaughey:

Advertisement

The More Loving One by W.H. Auden 

Looking up at the stars, I know quite well 

That, for all they care, I can go to hell, 

But on earth indifference is the least 

Advertisement

We have to dread from man or beast. 

Matthew McConaughey, actor and poet

In four short lines we get a brisk, cynical tour of the universe: hell and the heavens, people and animals, coldness and cruelty. Commonplace observations — that the stars are distant; that life can be dangerous — are wound into a charming, provocative insight. The tone is conversational, mixing decorum and mild profanity in a manner that makes it a pleasure to keep reading.

Advertisement

Here’s Tracy K. Smith, a former U.S. poet laureate, with the second stanza:

Advertisement

How should we like it were stars to burn 

With a passion for us we could not return? 

If equal affection cannot be, 

Let the more loving one be me. 

Advertisement

Tracy K. Smith, poet

These lines abruptly shift the focus from astronomy to love, from the universal to the personal. Imagine how it would feel if the stars had massive, unrequited crushes on us! The speaker, couching his skepticism in a coy, hypothetical question, seems certain that we wouldn’t like this at all.

This certainty leads him to a remarkable confession, a moment of startling vulnerability. The poem’s title, “The More Loving One,” is restated with sweet, disarming frankness. Our friend is wearing his heart on his well-tailored sleeve.

Advertisement

The poem could end right there: two stanzas, point and counterpoint, about how we appreciate the stars in spite of their indifference because we would rather love than be loved.

But the third stanza takes it all back. Here’s Alison Bechdel reading it:

Advertisement

Admirer as I think I am 

Of stars that do not give a damn, 

I cannot, now I see them, say 

Advertisement

I missed one terribly all day. 

Alison Bechdel, graphic novelist

The speaker downgrades his foolish devotion to qualified admiration. No sooner has he established himself as “the more loving one” than he gives us — and perhaps himself — reason to doubt his ardor. He likes the stars fine, he guesses, but not so much as to think about them when they aren’t around.

Advertisement

The fourth and final stanza, read by Yiyun Li, takes this disenchantment even further:

Advertisement

Were all stars to disappear or die, 

I should learn to look at an empty sky 

And feel its total dark sublime, 

Though this might take me a little time. 

Advertisement

Yiyun Li, author

Wounded defiance gives way to a more rueful, resigned state of mind. If the universe were to snuff out its lights entirely, the speaker reckons he would find beauty in the void. A starless sky would make him just as happy.

Though perhaps, like so many spurned lovers before and after, he protests a little too much. Every fan of popular music knows that a song about how you don’t care that your baby left you is usually saying the opposite.

Advertisement

The last line puts a brave face on heartbreak.

So there you have it. In just 16 lines, this poem manages to be somber and funny, transparent and elusive. But there’s more to it than that. There is, for one thing, a voice — a thinking, feeling person behind those lines.

Advertisement

W.H. Auden in 1962. Sam Falk/The New York Times

When he wrote “The More Loving One,” in the 1950s, Wystan Hugh Auden was among the most beloved writers in the English-speaking world. Before this week is over there will be more to say about Auden, but like most poets he would have preferred that we give our primary attention to the poem.

Advertisement

Its structure is straightforward and ingenious. Each of the four stanzas is virtually a poem unto itself — a complete thought expressed in one or two sentences tied up in a neat pair of couplets. Every quatrain is a concise, witty observation: what literary scholars call an epigram.

This makes the work of memorization seem less daunting. We can take “The More Loving One” one epigram at a time, marvelling at how the four add up to something stranger, deeper and more complex than might first appear.

Advertisement

So let’s go back to the beginning and try to memorize that insouciant, knowing first stanza. Below you’ll find a game we made to get you started. Give it a shot, and come back tomorrow for more!

Your first task: Learn the first four lines!

Play a game to learn it by heart. Need more practice? Listen to Ada Limón, Matthew McConaughey, W.H. Auden and others recite our poem.

Question 1/6

Advertisement

Let’s start with the first couplet. Fill in the rhyming words.

Looking up at the stars, I know quite well 

Advertisement

That, for all they care, I can go to hell, 

Advertisement

Tap a word above to fill in the highlighted blank.

Advertisement

Ready for another round? Try your hand at the 2025 Poetry Challenge.

Advertisement

Edited by Gregory Cowles, Alicia DeSantis and Nick Donofrio. Additional editing by Emily Eakin,
Joumana Khatib, Emma Lumeij and Miguel Salazar. Design and development by Umi Syam. Additional
game design by Eden Weingart. Video editing by Meg Felling. Photo editing by Erica Ackerberg.
Illustration art direction by Tala Safie.

Illustrations by Daniel Barreto.

Text and audio recording of “The More Loving One,” by W.H. Auden, copyright © by the Estate of
W.H. Auden. Reprinted by permission of Curtis Brown, Ltd. Photograph accompanying Auden recording
from Imagno/Getty Images.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Culture

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Published

on

Famous Authors’ Less Famous Books

Literature

‘Romola’ (1863) by George Eliot

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

Who knew that there’s a major George Eliot novel that neither I nor any of my friends had ever heard of?

Advertisement

“Romola” was Eliot’s fourth novel, published between “The Mill on the Floss” (1860) and “Middlemarch” (1870-71). If my friends and I didn’t get this particular memo, and “Romola” is familiar to every Eliot fan but us, please skip the following.

“Romola” isn’t some fluky misfire better left unmentioned in light of Eliot’s greater work. It’s her only historical novel, set in Florence during the Italian Renaissance. It embraces big subjects like power, religion, art and social upheaval, but it’s not dry or overly intellectual. Its central character is a gifted, freethinking young woman named Romola, who enters a marriage so disastrous as to make Anna Karenina’s look relatively good.

Advertisement

It probably matters that many of Eliot’s other books have been adapted into movies or TV series, with actors like Hugh Dancy, Ben Kingsley, Emily Watson and Rufus Sewell. The BBC may be doing even more than we thought to keep classic literature alive. (In 1924, “Romola” was made into a silent movie starring Lillian Gish. It doesn’t seem to have made much difference.)

Anthony Trollope, among others, loved “Romola.” He did, however, warn Eliot against aiming over her readers’ heads, which may help explain its obscurity.

All I can say, really, is that it’s a mystery why some great books stay with us and others don’t.

Advertisement

‘Quiet Dell’ (2013) by Jayne Anne Phillips

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

This was an Oprah Book of the Week, which probably disqualifies it from B-side status, but it’s not nearly as well known as Phillips’s debut story collection, “Black Tickets” (1979), or her most recent novel, “Night Watch” (2023), which won her a long-overdue Pulitzer Prize.

Phillips has no parallel in her use of potent, stylized language to shine a light into the darkest of corners. In “Quiet Dell,” her only true-crime novel, she’s at the height of her powers, which are particularly apparent when she aims her language laser at horrific events that actually occurred. Her gift for transforming skeevy little lives into what I can only call “Blade Runner” mythology is consistently stunning.

Advertisement

Consider this passage from the opening chapter of “Quiet Dell”:

“Up high the bells are ringing for everyone alive. There are silver and gold and glass bells you can see through, and sleigh bells a hundred years old. My grandmother said there was a whisper for each one dead that year, and a feather drifting for each one waiting to be born.”

Advertisement

The book is full of language like that — and of complex, often chillingly perverse characters. It’s a dark, underrecognized beauty.

‘Solaris’ (1961) by Stanislaw Lem

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that, in America, at least, the Polish writer Stanislaw Lem didn’t produce any A-side novels. You could just as easily argue that that makes all his novels both A-side and B-side.

Advertisement

It’s science fiction. All right?

I love science and speculative fiction, but I know a lot of literary types who take pride in their utter lack of interest in it. I always urge those people to read “Solaris,” which might change their opinions about a vast number of popular books they dismiss as trivial. As far as I know, no one has yet taken me up on that.

“Solaris” involves the crew of a space station continuing the study of an aquatic planet that has long defied analysis by the astrophysicists of Earth. Part of what sets the book apart from a lot of other science-fiction novels is Lem’s respect for enigma. He doesn’t offer contrived explanations in an attempt to seduce readers into suspending disbelief. The crew members start to experience … manifestations? … drawn from their lives and memories. If the planet has any intentions, however, they remain mysterious. All anyone can tell is that their desires and their fears, some of which are summoned from their subconsciousness, are being received and reflected back to them so vividly that it becomes difficult to tell the real from the projected. “Solaris” has the peculiar distinction of having been made into not one but two bad movies. Read the book instead.

Advertisement

‘Fox 8’ (2013) by George Saunders

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

If one of the most significant living American writers had become hypervisible with his 2017 novel, “Lincoln in the Bardo,” we’d go back and read his earlier work, wouldn’t we? Yes, and we may very well have already done so with the story collections “Tenth of December” (2013) and “Pastoralia” (2000). But what if we hadn’t yet read Saunders’s 2013 novella, “Fox 8,” about an unusually intelligent fox who, by listening to a family from outside their windows at night, has learned to understand, and write, in fox-English?: “One day, walking neer one of your Yuman houses, smelling all the interest with snout, I herd, from inside, the most amazing sound. Turns out, what that sound is, was: the Yuman voice, making werds. They sounded grate! They sounded like prety music! I listened to those music werds until the sun went down.”

Once Saunders became more visible to more of us, we’d want to read a book that ventures into the consciousness of a different species (novels tend to be about human beings), that maps the differences and the overlaps in human and animal consciousness, explores the effects of language on consciousness and is great fun.

Advertisement

We’d all have read it by now — right?

‘Between the Acts’ (1941) by Virginia Woolf

Advertisement

Karl Leitz for Anthony Cotsifas Studio

You could argue that Woolf didn’t have any B-sides, and yet it’s hard to deny that more people have read “Mrs. Dalloway” (1925) and “To the Lighthouse” (1927) than have read “The Voyage Out” (1915) or “Monday or Tuesday” (1921). Those, along with “Orlando” (1928) and “The Waves” (1931), are Woolf’s most prominent novels.

Advertisement

Four momentous novels is a considerable number for any writer, even a great one. That said, “Between the Acts,” her last novel, really should be considered the fifth of her significant books. The phrase “embarrassment of riches” comes to mind.

Five great novels by the same author is a lot for any reader to take on. Our reading time is finite. We won’t live long enough to read all the important books, no matter how old we get to be. I don’t expect many readers to be as devoted to Woolf as are the cohort of us who consider her to have been some sort of dark saint of literature and will snatch up any relic we can find. Fanatics like me will have read “Between the Acts” as well as “The Voyage Out,” “Monday or Tuesday” and “Flush” (1933), the story of Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s cocker spaniel. Speaking for myself, I don’t blame anyone who hasn’t gotten to those.

Advertisement

I merely want to add “Between the Acts” to the A-side, lest anyone who’s either new to Woolf or a tourist in Woolf-landia fail to rank it along with the other four contenders.

As briefly as possible: It focuses on an annual village pageant that attempts to convey all of English history in a single evening. The pageant itself interweaves subtly, brilliantly, with the lives of the villagers playing the parts.

It’s one of Woolf’s most lusciously lyrical novels. And it’s a crash course, of sorts, in her genius for conjuring worlds in which the molehill matters as much as the mountain, never mind their differences in size.

Advertisement

It’s also the most accessible of her greatest books. It could work for some as an entry point, in more or less the way William Faulkner’s “As I Lay Dying” (1930) can be the starter book before you go on to “The Sound and the Fury” (1929) or “Absalom, Absalom!” (1936).

As noted, there’s too much for us to read. We do the best we can.

Advertisement

More in Literature

See the rest of the issue

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending