Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Davis Cup 2005: A Final Reflection before the Finale

Once again it's Davis Cup final time and more on the finalists Slovakia and Croatia later and the significance of these two small and newly fomed nations making the final of the largest annual global team sporting event.

Personally, I am a huge fan of Davis Cup, that might me make to be "a dumb nationalist" to some, which is rich considering that my country hasn't made the World Group and I don't see tennis becoming a boom sport in Norway anytime soon. This is the point, that the Davis Cup brings tennis to many different places around the world and is not about the money, though this has been changing for the worse like Filippo Volandri wanting more money to compete for Italy in their play off tie against Spain, it shouldn't be about the cash, of course these players are professionals and they are looked after well enough when they play for their countries. While Pippo was being selfish, Andreas Seppi stepped up and beat Ferrero from two sets to love down in his first live Davis Cup match. As these matches are different from the regular circuit and the Slams it gives them an extra edge. Considering it's a team event, and they are not playing for themselves solely as they're no ranking points on offer, it's the team aspect that is brings out the best and worst in some players..

Thomas Muster articulates this feeling well. " It’s not about just the players, it’s about a nation. It brings the national emotions into it – a nation playing against another brings a lot of interesting emotions up." There are many examples of players playing above themselves in the Davis Cup environment, also others that struggle with the extra pressure and it's a great test to see how they handle the situation. The first round doubles in the Swiss vs the Netherlands tie, when Yves Allegro and George Bastl were down two sets to love and match point, they fought so hard and won this match. Paul Henri-Mathieu back into a live fifth match and managed to win against the Swedes, though old wounds were opened up later on in the tournament.


The quarter finals had some interesting results with Argentina going to Australia and beating them on grass. The Australians thought they had it all worked out that they were going to win, but fine performances from David Nalbandian and Mariano Puerta surprised the hosts to win 4-1. The Lleyton Hewitt and Guillermo Coria match was entertaining and had plenty of feeling, say what you want about these guys, but both of them love playing for their countries and it showed clearly in this match. Nalbandian does not have motivational problems when he is playing singles for Argentina, as he has been known to have on the tour. Paul-Henri Mathieu had the nightmares of playing Russia again in the deciding match, though unlike against Mikhail Youzhny, he had no chance and those demons which he thought were gone, came back to haunt him.

Argentina fell at the semi finals again, Coria wasn't able to handle Beck and Hrbaty on the fast indoor surface and the Slovaks marched to an easy victory. Argentina and Spain have the best overall depth on tour, but Argentina need to win some Davis Cup crowns soon, before this generation gets too old, nothing is guaranteed in professional sport.

Here comes the last part of this review, the comments from people bitching about Davis Cup. I mean cause the Americans don't care about it, doesn't mean the rest of the world thinks like that. The Davis Cup tradition is alive and well in Argentina, France, Spain, Australia, Sweden (Robin Söderling excepted) and especially in Croatia and Slovakia as well, it is a traditional event and fortunately an all-inclusive one, unlike previously when it was just amomg the elite. Thankfully most of the top players are making an effort to play it and yes Roger Federer, the excuse that there is a poor number 2 player isn't valid as Stanislas Wawrinka has improved a lot and with the right draw and improvement from Stani there could be a Davis Cup crown for the Swiss.

As for changes to it, the best thing would be only to have 14 teams in the World Group. This would mean the previous years finalists would have byes into the quarter finals, though all teams that lost in the first round and quarter finals would be made to fight for their place in the World Group. This won't happen as the ITF would lose money from this, which they would be not keen on and a lot of their revenue is generated through staging Davis Cup ties.

I will finish on a quote from Yannick Noah about Davis Cup in an interview.
You once said: "What I love about Davis Cup it is not about contracts, schedules and business. This tradition is much bigger than dollars. What you do in Davis Cup is sacrifice for others." Sampras and Agassi complain that the Davis Cup format is too demanding and that it should be played every other year is there anything you’d change?


Noah: No! I wouldn’t change anything. Every Davis Cup weekend, you have players playing for their lives, whether it’s in Zimbabwe or in Germany or in Korea or in Brazil – all the different geographical zones, all the different divisions. Davis Cup is the most beautiful event in tennis. Now you have two spoilt guys who want to change the whole thing because they are powerful. This is the most selfish thing. I’ve never heard them talk about the beautiful qualities of Davis Cup. Therefore, I hope these two guys are not going to break up the Davis Cup.

Thankfully they haven't been able to do that, but there always seems to be someone around that will try and change it and not for the right reasons.

Friday, November 25, 2005

Too Much Tennis Part 2

The season should be shortened, there are too many tournaments at the moment. Sure, players are playing exhibitions in December after some rest, most of these are just hit and giggle affairs, but as was said in the last entry, the competitive aspect of tennis is very tough and the week in, week out nature, contributes to mental fatigue as well and unlike golf, tennis is a physical sport and out of the other main global sports it does have the shortest off season. Well, considering all the vested interests involved in the game, it will be extremely difficult to initiate any changes without some compromise.

For example look at Formula 1, there are many things that aren't good about the sport, but they have a clear and defined off season where they do their testing, the drivers do their training and then when the season starts there is a keen anticipation as there is enough time in between the off season and the new season to generate sufficient interest in the events, whereas sadly with tennis, it seems there is a convergence from the last season straight into the next one. It hasn't affected the commercial interests and the prosperity of the sport, by not having races every week.

Football is another sport, where in many matches there are plenty of empty seats in stadia and not as much money coming through as previously, the commercial bubble has burst, many fans priced out of watching the game, it happens in tennis and could even get worse in this regard and it seems to be more about sponsors than fans and not balanced as it should be. People not caring about a Mickey Mouse trophy, even further separation between the fans and the millionaires.

There are too many hardcourts events and they adversely effect the joints and is harder on the body than the clay for example, but there needs to be a reduction of tournaments on hardcourts, clay and indoors. At the same time it's a global sport and this needs to be reflected in the calendar. There would have to be some structural changes but there will be a clear surface distinction as well for example.

- The season would start in the first week of Feb and finish in November.
- The first 4 weeks would be a lead in to the Aus Open with a TMS in the 3rd week, and then once the Aus Open in March is finished. That would be 6 weeks of hardcourt/Rebound Ace.

- Then Davis Cup 1st round matches and after that the claycourt season begins in week 8 in South America with a clay TMS in Buenos Aires in Week 10 and finishes in week 19 at the end of the French Open, which is the third week of June.

- There will be no claycourt events at ATP level after that, this would mean that there would be a two break between the TMS events, and maybe some of the other tournaments could be moved to earlier dates or have two or maybe three of them in the off weeks. Week 20 at the end of June the grasscourt season begins.

- Then for the whole month of July it's grasscourt tennis with a week 21 TMS grass event, then optional event and the last two weeks are for Wimbledon.

- The start of August the DC quarters which is week 25, then after that it's the lead in for the US Open on the hardcourts with an Asian/North American hardcourt circuit before heading to North America for 2 TMS events and a warm up for the US Open which would be in week 31/32 the last weeks of September.

- October would have the DC semis, then after that it would be much reduced indoor season, which would last 4 weeks, from week 34/37 it would have Madrid and Paris in week 35 and 37 respectively, then the TMC and Davis Cup final.

- The vast majority of players would half of November, all of December and January free from tennis tournaments. It would provide clear transition from surfaces, gives a TMS to grass, while taking a way a hardcourt one, making sure there is at least a 2 week gap between TMS events.

It would mean shedding a few tournaments, and maybe having some more tournaments where there are 3 events in non-TMS weeks, plus some will re-organise into different positions in the calendar.

This would reduce the workload, give the players and fans a break from the game and while injuries are always going to be a factor within professional sport, the calendar would not be blamed as there are clear transition periods between surfaces.

It is disappointing that it has to take the withdrawals of certain players for this issue to be discussed, then again there has always been a hierarchy in society and tennis is no different in this regard. If the top cash cows aren't playing, then the product suffers and for this reason and not to respect the players or fans, will more than likely be the cause of any changes to the tennis schedule.

Thursday, November 24, 2005

Too Much Tennis Part 1

There seems to be an increase in voices dissenting about the length of the tennis season. This is not a new problem, but since there was the spate of withdrawals at the Masters Cup and the preceding TMS events such as Madrid and Paris this year, in addition to the fact that is the more of the top players that are withdrawing from these events, has brought this issue back into the limelight.

It doesn’t matter that players have been getting injured before, but now since it’s the top players and the bigger cash cows, that they decide this is an issue, whereas it simmered in the background before, this and the increase of tennis on hardcourts is a factor in this process, but more on that later.

So, who are the losers in these circumstances? Whether people like these players or not, the top players do generate extra ticket sales, advertising and more revenue for the tournament, so the tournament directors aren’t happy, as for the fans they are not usually the first people considered, as it is usually the corporate and the sponsors that are taken care of first, before the average fan is considered. Fans have only one thing in common in that they like tennis, what one fan might complain and sigh none of the stars are so they won’t watch, while others will take the opportunity and appreciate the tennis is on offer and not just cause of the name.

The tennis season goes through from January to December and there is a minimal break for the players and fans. It's too long and the off season isn't long enough for them to recover from the year and prepare physically in that period for the next season. Though the only players who can take time off properly during the season are the better ranked players, who can afford to do so. At the same time players with the current schedule have to be flexible and play the tournaments they need and what suits them instead of just chasing the cash.

This is a multi dimensional problem. Having spoken to many people in different sporting fields, trainers and personal experience, there needs to be sufficient recovery times for athletes and also these players will have different peaks during the year. It is the competitive nature of the sport as well, that can lead to mental fatigue as well as physical fatigue. In an ideal world the players will want to peak for the four Slams, using the lead- up TMS events in the process of attempting to peak at the Slams, but this is not always the reality. Don’t believe the bullshit and propaganda from the English-language press and commentators that all the players want to win Wimbledon. There are many Spanish-speaking players who want to be at full peak for Roland Garros and then come down after that, while there are many who use Roland Garros as fitness, so they can be prepared for Wimbledon and the US Open.

The Australian Open is a clear example of who has prepared well in the off-season and this should be rewarded, but in reality the lead up for a Slam is too short and there would be a TMS before it, though that would involve a large restructuring of the tennis calendar. The transition from clay to grass is notoriously difficult, yet it has a very short timeframe for it to happen. Ideally Wimbledon would move back a week or so and give the players an extra week to adjust to the grass, but Wimbledon is generally all about its own interests and not necessarily for the game, even more so than the other Slams. For something like this to be discussed, this would mean disparate groups such as the ATP, ITF, tournament directors would have to come together and make compromises for the better of the sport, if there are enough forward thinking individuals within the respective organisations to do that.

The second part of this issue will be continued in the next posting.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

2005 Masters Champion the Third Alternate David Nalbandian

Yes, that is what makes Nalle's victory all the better that he was the third alternate for the Masters, yet he was good enough to win and deserved his triumph.

I remember seeing Nalle play in 2001 and got a tip off about him from a very good friend who saw him play in the Palermo final in which he lost that year to Mantilla, he said this guy could play and then I had this confirmed when I saw him at the Aus Open in 2002, and saw he had a very compact and good game and used his brains on court which was unusual compared to his contemporaries.

This breakthrough has been a while coming, but worth the wait, though there will always be the doubters saying that he only won because of all the players that withdrew like Safin, Nadal, Hewitt and Roddick. It's an irony that Roddick the man who took advantage of Nalle's lapse in concentration at the US Open 2003 for his biggest triumph, was the player that pulled out so Nalbandian could take his place in this field and could have his biggest victory.

As for the final itself it was an enjoyable match, and an excellent way to end the regular ATP season. For some reason I felt that Nalle could win the match. Federer had his huge finals streak going and someone had to break it eventually, plus Nalle was playing well and if it went the distance he would have the advantage, plus unlike Gaston Gaudio, Nalbandian isn't just happy to be on the same court as Federer.

After not getting discouraged after some ordinary calls and being 2 sets to love down, Nalle held it together and raised his level of play and got to Nalle a 4-0 lead , but he hung tough and didn't panic when Federer came back to 4 all and was serving for the match and David held his nerve for a deserved title.

These two players are the best all surface players at the moment and played an entertaining and enjoyable match. Federer will bounce back, but the question is whether Nalbandian be able to build on this and be able to win a Slam and be consistent enough throughout the year.