Dan Evans called up for Davis Cup semi-final

First topic message reminder :

Strange move this. I'm a big fan of Evans, think he has lots of talent.

To be fair, I am guessing he probably has more chance of winning a match than Ward at the moment. Edmund is obviously injured too.

GB likely to still be relying to two Murray singles wins and the Murray's winning the doubles.

If Andy Murray's back can last out the year then I hope he takes a stand against the threats of the ATP in trying to force him to take part in the WTF.  He made the brave decision to appoint Mauresmo as his coach and advocates more women coaches at the elite level.  He should now make a similar stand against the bully boys of the ATP - see below**.

With it being the end of season and with Andy Murray's body barely holding together, and with the gruelling nature of best of five set clay court tennis, it seems certain that the fate of the Davis Cup lies outside of Andy's hands.  This is because he needs to be fit enough to face the No. 15 ranked player in the World David Goffin on the third day.  

Given Belgium have home advantage, have a tradition of clay court tennis, and that it is at the end of a long season for Andy who's body is barely holding up, and the pressure on him from the ATP to enter the ATP Masters & WTF, and given my own pessimistic nature on life, I would say Belgium are favorites - I will also add that Belgium were good enough to make it to the final.  

I just don't buy the argument that Great Britain Men's Tennis team just need to turn up to win nor that the Great Britain "team" should win, and if they don't win nor should they be hauled over the coals and beaten to an inch of their lives and then made to stand in the naughty corner for the rest of the day.

**Chris Kermode, executive president of the ATP which governs men's professional tennis, said Murray would be expected to play in London. "The ATP World Tour Finals is a mandatory event on the ATP World Tour," he said. "All players who qualify, unless injured, are required to compete in the event." Behind the scenes someone who wishes to remain anonymous also told us "Kermode added If he doesn't turn up to our event he will take a big financial hit and we will consider banning him from the ATP World Tour and consider sending the boys round to smash his knees in".

Nore Staat wrote:
Given Belgium have home advantage, have a tradition of clay court tennis, and that it is at the end of a long season for Andy who's body is barely holding up, and the pressure on him from the ATP to enter the ATP Masters & WTF, and given my own pessimistic nature on life, I would say Belgium are favorites - I will also add that Belgium were good enough to make it to the final.  

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with that. Belgium, to reach the final, have beaten:
- Switzerland without Feds or Stan: they actually lost both singles to Henri Laaksonen (quite...), and needed to sub in Goffin for the final singles match to get through.
- Canada without Raonic or Pospisil, represented by Dancevic and Peliwo (who?)
- Argentina with Leo Mayer pulling out of the reverse singles.

The highest ranked player they've faced in singles so far is Mayer by a mile, and he only played one singles match. Yes they've done well, but they've also been very fortunate with the draw. GB by comparison have beaten USA who had Isner and Young and of course the Bryans, France (Tsonga, Simon, Gasquet), and even Aus had a much better team than anything Belgium have faced. On paper, Belgium are probably the weakest team that GB have faced all year.

Of course, Belgium do have the advantage of playing at home, which counts for something, but I can't make them favourites.

I appreciate that you're exaggerating, NS, but the thing is that the ATP & Chris Kermode are quite right. This is their flagship commercial event and they expect the top players, especially those already announced as qualified, to play. The top players are making a considerable income because of the way the ATP World Tour and the WTFs are organised, so their contract with the ATP is mutually beneficial and cannot just be ignored. That said, of course with the Davis Cup final the week after, often there are players who prioritise that event above the WTF, and who are simply not willing (understandably) to "leave it all out on court" in the way that the others are at the end of the season. What that ultimately means is spectators paying big money for tickets for a single session and not getting the most competitive match.

Bit of a dilemma for Murray - withdraw and face the penalties, withdraw with a fake injury (bit obvious now, eh?), turn up and play sub-optimally (not very nice for the fans) or turn up and give it his all with possible consequences for his one shot at the Davis Cup. It's a toughie! I would think it likely that he will show up, play the round robins Sun - Thurs without qualifying for the semis and happily exit at point.

Mad For Chelsea Comment: All the above comment is doing is raising expectation of a victory hence potentially belittling the achievement if it comes while providing grounds for censure if it doesn't.

YvonneT's Comment: I think the real issue is between the ATP and the ITF: World Tour versus Davis Cup - with the top players being caught in the middle.

withdraw with a fake injury, Feds did it last year

Turn up for the WTF. "roll" your ankle first RR and pull out. Also call number 9 in the race and make sure he makes himself available as a replacement. Now its on clay he cant afford to play the WTF if hes serious about winning the dc

In all seriousness Murray's one of the big guns, it's unlikely the ATP will go too hard after him even if he does withdraw. From what I gather, the worst that they can do (apart from a hefty fine which probably won't bother him too much...) is to take away his automatic qualification for ATP tournaments. While in theory that could make him have to qualify, in practise he could ask for WCs everywhere, and it's hard to see many tournaments not giving him one...

Yeah, Belgium certainly had the oddest route to the final in a while - but I believe the phrase is "you can only beat who's put in front of you". They are they far & square! I think they have a reasonable shot but certainly GB are favourites.

The fact weve got this situation now makes it clear how much of a farce this scheduling is, maybe theyll actually do something about it

Nore Staat wrote:Mad For Chelsea Comment: All the above comment is doing is raising expectation of a victory hence potentially belittling the achievement if it comes while providing grounds for censure if it doesn't.

I don't think it does. I'm merely explaining why in my mind GB are favourites for this one. That's just being realistic for me.

YvonneT wrote:Yeah, Belgium certainly had the oddest route to the final in a while - but I believe the phrase is "you can only beat who's put in front of you". They are they far & square! I think they have a reasonable shot but certainly GB are favourites.

If Andy Murray wasn't playing would Great Britain still be favourites? If Andy Murray and David Goffin weren't playing would Great Britain still be favourites? I think David Goffin being the younger Man might be able to also play doubles if called upon.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

Nore Staat wrote:Mad For Chelsea Comment: All the above comment is doing is raising expectation of a victory hence potentially belittling the achievement if it comes while providing grounds for censure if it doesn't.

I don't think it does. I'm merely explaining why in my mind GB are favourites for this one. That's just being realistic for me.

Your comment was fair because it is something that is "out there" in the general discussion so needs to be included. I just thought my response also needs to be put out there as additional food for thought.

temporary21 wrote:The fact weve got this situation now makes it clear how much of a farce this scheduling is, maybe theyll actually do something about it

Not sure about - certainly a bit of a Murray-centric view. Federer's had the same issue, Djokovic too to an extent, I'm sure there's been more in the past. I think Murray has a specific issue about adapting to clay that doesn't seem to apply to all players.
It could be worse in that the DC final could be on a different continent to the WTFs (hasn't happened since WTFs been in London) - in that case, I think the ATP should accept that DC players should be exempt from the WTFs, although in theory that could mean them several of their stars.

Nore Staat wrote:If Andy Murray wasn't playing would Great Britain still be favourites?

No, they wouldn't. I was looking at probabilities without ruling him out. Of course, within those probabilities, there is a probability that AM won't play, though injury or similar.

Lets face it - Murray is, at worst, the third best player in the world on this surface (WTF) and it's unlikely he wouldn't qualify for semi-finals given how he has performed this season.

I actually have tickets and would rather he pulled out than tanked.

YvonneT wrote:

temporary21 wrote:The fact weve got this situation now makes it clear how much of a farce this scheduling is, maybe theyll actually do something about it

Not sure about - certainly a bit of a Murray-centric view. Federer's had the same issue, Djokovic too to an extent, I'm sure there's been more in the past. I think Murray has a specific issue about adapting to clay that doesn't seem to apply to all players.
It could be worse in that the DC final could be on a different continent to the WTFs (hasn't happened since WTFs been in London) - in that case, I think the ATP should accept that DC players should be exempt from the WTFs, although in theory that could mean them several of their stars.

Could they not move Davis Cup final back 1 week? It would only affect a maximum of 8 players anyway.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:withdraw with a fake injury, Feds did it last year

Oooooh errrrr

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:withdraw with a fake injury, Feds did it last year

Oooooh errrrr

sorry


it was just too tempting

Guest82 wrote:Could they not move Davis Cup final back 1 week?  It would only affect a maximum of 8 players anyway.

They could, I suppose, so long as players didn't mind the shortened off-season. The WTF came forward a week a few years ago, so I suppose an extra week between WTF and DC would only put DC back where it originally was anyway.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Mad for Chelsea wrote:withdraw with a fake injury, Feds did it last year

Oooooh errrrr

sorry


it was just too tempting

But in fairness Federer did play the event up until the final. Andy might do a Rome!

A few people have said they think Kyle Edmund has a good chance against Darcis. I don't think that's way off, but bearing in mind that that would be the fifth rubber (assuming of course Murray and Goffin do play), I would heavily favour Darcis for that match. As well DC experience v DC rookie and home crowd v hostile crowd factors, if it goes to a live fifth rubber then Belgium would have beaten either Murray in singles and/or our doubles pair and the whole Begian team is likely to be rather too psyched up to let Edmund stand in their way.

legendkillarV2 wrote:But in fairness Federer did play the event up until the final. Andy might do a Rome!

In terms of the tournament, it is better for someone to withdraw during the RR stage, as they can be replaced, than at the knock out stage when a session is left with no singles match. That's not a criticism of Federer as I don't think he came in with a plan to withdraw and the long match with Wawrinka meant he didn't have much choice unless he was willing to forego the DC final.

Born Slippy wrote:I think Craig's point was that your other examples were not like for like. Federer could afford to lose to Monfils last year because he had Stan who was himself better than any of the French team. Similarly, the likes of Tipsy and Troicki have been borderline top 10 players and could take pressure off Novak.

GB is literally a one-man team and Andy has no margin for error at all. He has to win every match if GB are to win.

The overall point is obviously right. The format enables one top class player to effectively win the DC on his own but its a huge effort to do it.

Exactly. Team GB winning the Davis Cup would be a more monumental achievement for Andy Murray than it was for Roger Federer or Novak Djokovic. Trying to compare a GB win is like trying to compare a Man United FA Cup win with Wimbledon's one. One is no great surprise as one has an abundance of talent at their disposal whilst the other was not and was a great shock considering the contrast of talent at their disposal and the fact it is unlikely to ever happen again.

I can't see it being a shock given the opponents in the field. The Federer's/Wawrinka's/Djokovic's didn't give it any priority this year. As Andy has the draw opened up nicely for GB. Probably be the one and only time that GB has a great chance of DC success.

It carries more weight for Andy because of his sheer consistency he has shown during this campaign, but not playing the players ranked above is a massive boost.

I wouldn't call it monumental or put on par with Wimbledon's FA Cup win. More of opportunity snaffled

Lk check out the bookmakers odds though at start of the tournament. GB were outsiders to win it - much more so than Switzerland and Serbia will ever be. GB rely totally on Andy in the singles unlike Switzerland and Serbia. I don't see that is open to any sort of debate. Heck they had a world no.300 in their side in the semis for the singles. I would guess that is the lowest ranked player ever to play in a Davis Cup semi.

In Britain various online betting companies will give odds of about 1 to 3 GB and 2 to 1 Denmark.  Not sure if this is the same if one were making bets from Denmark.

Bookmaker odds CC are based on many variation factors such as players. So for this year it wouldn't have surprised me to see Switzerland as favourites if Federer and Wawrinka are playing in all the matches. This wasn't the case so I have no doubt the odds would've changed quite drastically.

For it to be a shock say on Wimbledon proportions you'd need for Murray not to be in the team!

The way I see it CC is that Murray playing, against the field he has is more or less a banker he will win his singles rubbers. It was similar to when the Czechs won it in 2012 I think it was and Berdych more or less played every rubber inc doubles. His record was 11-1 for that year. Murray as it stands is 8-0 this year. How do we rank Berdych's exploits?

Personally it will be fantastic Murray, I get that. How it ranks with Federer's/Djokovic's/Nadal's victories is subject to debate, not one I wish indulge. I just see GB's success of one great opportunity that presented itself

2012 Czech Republic.  The final was on hard courts.  However the Czech v Argentina semi final was on clay and Berdych played on all three days.  First match he won in five sets.  The doubles he won in three.  The third match he won in straights.

I just don't think Andy Murray is fit enough to win three matches on clay on successive days.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I don't think that's quite fair. You still need a good doubles player alongside him (and Jamie is a more than just "good" of course).

Confirmed Belgium will play the final on clay. Thoughts? For me it makes it harder for Andy to play all three matches, but I would back Jamie and Inglot to get the job done in the doubles, and Edmund has a decent chance against Darcis on clay?

More than good? What is he, great?

(Answer = no)

very good

Pretty good maybe? Two times runner up this year

Belgium's Davis Cup team

Name ......................... Singles rank ............ highest singles rank
David Goffin ..................... 15 .....................  14 (July 2015)
Steve Darcis ..................... 59 ..................... 44 (May 2008)
Ruben Bemelmans ............. 85 ..................... 85
Kimmer Coppejans ............  132 ................... 97 (June 2015)

+ home advantage.

I know I'm far from the first to make this observation, but .......could there possibly be anything more complex & bewildering in the entire world of sport than the structure and modus operandi of the Davis Cup .....

I decided to go back to basics and try once & for all to get to grips with it from the Wiki page. Which - in fairness - offers what looks to be a very 'professional' summary. I was making good progress , but soon hit problems with the section on 'Structure'. Just about got through the stuff on nations/groups/zones okay, and then conceded defeat when I read.......... "The total number of nations in Group One is 24. However, the distribution among the three zones may vary each year, according to the number of nations promoted or relegated between Group One and the World Group"

Was just wondering if anyone here actually feels confident enough to stand up (though not here .....I've lost the will to listen, to be honest !) and explain the whole system - and without reference to any notes/crib sheet !?

I'm out Jeff.

Well kinda group 1 is divided into sections based on areas of the world. Sort of like World Cup qualifying. Thus the number in section depends in where the countries in the group are.    I think

temporary21 wrote:Well kinda group 1 is divided into sections based on areas of the world. Sort of like World Cup qualifying. Thus the number in section depends in where the countries in the group are.    I think

Oh right. That's absolutely crystal clear then.

When you put it like that, I don't know why anyone could possibly be confused ........

wikipedia wrote:"Note: The total number of nations in Group One is 24. However, the distribution among the three zones may vary each year, according to the number of nations promoted or relegated between Group One and the World Group. The number of nations in the World Group and Group One together is 22 from Euro/African Zone, 9 from Americas Zone and 9 from Asia/Oceania Zone.

So we have
16 nations in the World Group
24 nations in Group One
This gives a total of 40 nations.

Now these are split into three zones: Americas, Europe-African, Asia-Oceania.
The combined number of American nations in the "World Group + Group One" is 9
The combined number of Euro-African nations in the "World Group + Group One" is 22
The combined number of Asia - Oceania nations in the "World Group + Group One" is 9
This gives a total of 9+22+9 = 40

If one more Americas nation is promoted into the World Group than is relegated from it, then the difference has to be made up from the other two zones (one more relegated than promoted).

The key is that the World Group supposedly contains the top 16 nations and these may come from any of the three zones.  So changes in the distribution within the World Group must be balanced by corresponding changes in the distribution within Group One.  More American nations in the World Group - Less American nations in Group One ... Less Asia-Oceania nations in the World Group - more Asia-Oceania nations in Group One.

Murray probably should have just cried off with injury. Maybe he's been a bit naive.

Even when players cite "fatigue" which as far as I know is just code for "tired and don't feel like it and need a rest" there is never any repercussions, as far as I know. The name of the game appears to be that you can skip an event as long as you don't take the p1ss in the way you go about it.

mhm, its fairly simple.

I meant to add two comments explaining it but I accidentally over wrote the first one.

Working on the premise that this Dan Evans thread has turned into a general Davis Cup thread, I'll post the 2016 draw here instead of starting a new thread.

GBR v JPN
SRB v KAZ
ITA v SUI
POL v ARG
FRA v CAN
GER V CZE
AUS v USA
BEL v CRO

Britain are at home to Japan, which might tempt Murray to play - certainly wouldn't have expected him to travel since he said he was taking Feb off the tour. However, Japan is one that GB have at least some chance of winning without Murray as their second single players are Challenger level as are GB's (or Bedene might even get his appeal), and they are weaker in doubles.

France-Canada is probably the tie of R1 and the one most likely to have top players committing. Both had a good shot this year until Raonic and Pospisil got injured and France got edged out by GB.

Of the current top 10:
1,2,3,4,7 in top half (but few will play)
5,9,10 in bottom half
(7,8 not in world group).

lags72 wrote:I know I'm far from the first to make this observation, but .......could there possibly be anything more complex & bewildering in the entire world of sport than the structure and modus operandi of the Davis Cup .....

Ha, try understanding the differences between WTA International, Premier, Premier 5 & Premier Mandatory tournaments and their 2 tier (soon to become 3 tier I believe) season ending championships.

I don't think the Davis Cup is that bad at all. They actually explain it quite well on their website too and it's easily navigated (well, the Roland Garros web designers haven't got their hands on it quite yet).

Australia usa will be quite interesting.  Their teams are pretty evenly match bar the doubles

YvonneT wrote:Working on the premise that this Dan Evans thread has turned into a general Davis Cup thread, I'll post the 2016 draw here instead of starting a new thread.

GBR v JPN
SRB v KAZ
ITA v SUI
POL v ARG
FRA v CAN
GER V CZE
AUS v USA
BEL v CRO

Britain are at home to Japan, which might tempt Murray to play - certainly wouldn't have expected him to travel since he said he was taking Feb off the tour. However, Japan is one that GB have at least some chance of winning without Murray as their second single players are Challenger level as are GB's (or Bedene might even get his appeal), and they are weaker in doubles.

France-Canada is probably the tie of R1 and the one most likely to have top players committing. Both had a good shot this year until Raonic and Pospisil got injured and France got edged out by GB.

Of the current top 10:
1,2,3,4,7 in top half (but few will play)
5,9,10 in bottom half
(7,8 not in world group).

That's an interesting draw. A real winnable tie for GB depending on Nishikori's fitness. Even though Japan still have Sodea, Ito and Daniel in reserve, Japan would need Nishi firing on all cylinders. Serbia in the next round should they win? Ouch!

I'd say Switzerland vs Italy is tie of the round. Seeing Fed/Stan against the Fog and Seppi.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

............................................

I'd say Switzerland vs Italy is tie of the round. Seeing Fed/Stan against the Fog and Seppi.

Yes, an interesting tie, although the countries did meet in the semis exactly 12 months ago.

For reasons which now escape me (fitness ....?), Seppi did not become involved until the fifth - and dead - rubber, by which time the Swiss had taken the 3 points needed. Fed and Stan had each beaten the Fog, and Fed also beat Bolelli in the opening match.

lags72 wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

............................................

I'd say Switzerland vs Italy is tie of the round. Seeing Fed/Stan against the Fog and Seppi.

Yes, an interesting tie, although the countries did meet in the semis exactly 12 months ago.

For reasons which now escape me (fitness ....?), Seppi did not become involved until the fifth - and dead - rubber, by which time the Swiss had taken the 3 points needed. Fed and Stan had each beaten the Fog, and Fed also beat Bolelli in the opening match.

Was the encounter on Clay? I am thinking that if it wasn't, it might well be on this occasion.

No, it was hard, in Geneva.

Yes, clay would tip the odds in favour of Italy, you would think.

The thing about Switzerland-Italy is that it seems unlikely to me to feature top players on both sides. Hasn't Federer said he's doubtful for DC next year? Fair enough as I'm sure his priorities are elsewhere - and I doubt Wawrinka is all that motivated to try to win ties by himself.

That's why France-Canada stood out.

Interesting that all bar one tie (Aus-USA) are being held in Europe.

Back to Dan Evans, and if Murray doesn't play against Japan, it would be interesting to see GB going with a fast indoor court and seeing what he could do. He's beaten Nishikori before, of course. Not sure if a fast court would suit Ward or Edmund though.

Has anyone else noticed that when Andy plays Davis cup he 'opens his shoulders' as they say and goes for it?
He looks such a better player than he does in the slams. It's like he relaxes when he's a big fish in a small pond, which seems perverse. Maybe he's just so confident against these lesser players, but I'm still pretty sure he wouldn't play like he did if he faced kokinakkis in a slam.