Davis Cup Final Live Thread

by Henman Bill Thu 26 Nov - 18:58

First topic message reminder :

Well at one stage it was in doubt due to terrorism, that seems to have faded away and looks like it's going ahead. The rest of this article courtesy of BBC:

Davis Cup final: Belgium v Great Britain
Venue: Flanders Expo, Ghent Dates: 27-29 November
BBC coverage: Watch on BBC television, the BBC Sport website, Connected TVs, tablets, mobiles and app and listen on Radio 5 live and 5 live sports extra. Full details.
Kyle Edmund will make his Davis Cup debut in the final after he was selected as Britain's number two singles player to face Belgium.

Edmund, 20, will play David Goffin in the opening singles match at 12:30 GMT on Friday, followed by Andy Murray against Ruben Bemelmans.

Jamie Murray will join brother Andy for the doubles on Saturday.

Captain Leon Smith has retained James Ward for the reverse singles should the tie go to a fifth and final rubber.

The best-of-five tie takes place over three days at the Flanders Expo, with 13,000 spectators expected each day - including more than 1,000 British fans.

Great Britain are in the final for the first time since 1978 and are hoping to win their first Davis Cup since 1936, while Belgium have yet to win the competition.

Edmund will become only the sixth man in the 115-year history of the Davis Cup to make his debut in the final.

Davis Cup final draw
Day One David Goffin v Kyle Edmund; Ruben Bemelmans v Andy Murray
Day Two Kimmer Coppejans/Steve Darcis v Jamie Murray/Andy Murray
Day Three David Goffin v Andy Murray, Ruben Bemelmans v Kyle Edmund

by Mad for Chelsea Sun 29 Nov - 20:41

a lot of silly quibbling on here, but may as well add my tuppenth worth.

Simply put, if Andy had lost just one of his EIGHT singles matches this year, GB would most probably not have won the DC. If Andy and Jamie had lost one of their three doubles matches together, GB would most probably not have won the DC.

Yes, other top players weren't around, but Andy still beat four top 20 players, and some other decent ones besides. Considering the pressure he was under to deliver, it's a remarkable effort.

Totally agree with temp's post from a while back. This was a team effort. A while ago Andy pulled out of DC duties on the basis that the rest of the team weren't backing him up and needed to grow without him. They did so, and got GB back into the world group. Let's not forget the heroics of Evans against Slovakia and Russia, Ward against Russia then the USA (twice), and of course the doubles players, the doubles team having been a strength for a while - Fleming, Slupski, Hutchins, and of course Jamie.

by Calder106 Sun 29 Nov - 20:47

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 21:12

Calder106 wrote:Ok.

Andy Murray, James Ward, Dan Evans, Kyle Edmund, Jamie Murray, Dominic Inglot

Richard Gasquet, Giles Simon, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Gael Monfils, Nicolas Mahut, Julien Benneteau

Which is the stronger squad ? (note I'm talking squad).

So I hope your taking doubles into account.

I'd say 3-3 on the players relevant strength. So for me Andy the stronger singles player and Jamie and Inglot the stronger doubles players.

So I ask did you take into account doubles or did you base strength on single players and singles rankings alone?

by temporary21 Sun 29 Nov - 21:14

id put mahut and hubert above jamie and dominic personally

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 21:15

Given Herbert wasn't in the 'squad' Headscratch

I wouldn't put Mahut above them 2 tbh.

by temporary21 Sun 29 Nov - 21:19

I mean put Tsonga and Mahut in the doubles, and GB's ability to win that match rests entirely on Murray. GB would lose it probably 4-1 or 5-0 without him, thats a lot for one man to do, so it does not make them favourites to me

Otherwise a squad with the highest ranked player would always be the favourites regardless of the rest, which cant be true

by temporary21 Sun 29 Nov - 21:24

I man take out Tsonga Monfils and Gasquet out of that squad... its still going to make it a 3-2 loss at the very worst.
We cannot play down how almost inhuman it is to win three 5 set matches in three days, one were you may be carrying your doubles partner

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 21:30

I think Jamie's role is understated! When the serves and volleys are on, he can be unplayable. There is an element that doubles matches are not treated in the sense of one. Meaning that it's treated as an expanded singles match hence why many of the teams go for a doubles and a singles player rather than the doubles specialist. Sadly teams are not blessed with a Bryans team. The French decision not to play REV was a massive mistake.

by CaledonianCraig Sun 29 Nov - 21:32

And in the final last year I do believe Monfils beat Federer in the opening rubber. Proof that no match is a walk-over even for the very best players.

by Henman Bill Sun 29 Nov - 21:46

Great win. I think that the Davis Cup is an important tournament, although views on here over the years have tended not to fully agree. One of the things that's good about it is resonates through history and is something that can be compared when comparing players records of all ages. Personally I put it about on a par with the world tour finals or the Olympics as something you want in your trophy cabinet as a player, and above all others (apart from slams, obviously).

I know I'm not the first to mention it but worth mentioning twice: credit to Ward for beating Isner and a victory for him that is all the sweeter now. That is the one moment in the tie when someone produced the 1 shock result that was needed to perhaps win the title. Yes, team effort as well and good shout on coming back from 2-0 down against Russia in 2013, might not have been able to win it this year without that.

A few people this year were saying it was all rather easy for Murray, especially before the final. But rather curious that it was accepted wisdom a few years back on forums that we would never have a chance to win it until we got a strong, second single player. Not true as it turned out.

It's one thing to say that Murray should be expected to beat all the players he played individually, in each match he was favourite, but that certainly does not equate to being favourite for all 8 of the singles rubber (or all 11 with the doubles). Young, Isner, Tsonga, Simon, Tomic, Kokkinakis, Bemelmans, Goffin, they are all solid players and had he won 7 and lost 1 that would have been a reasonable record, and yet would have perhaps cost the tournament: Murray loses to these players now and then on the tour.

by barrystar Sun 29 Nov - 21:48

What a marvellous moment for the Murray family - winning the DC with your brother must be awesome. Judy Murray must be bursting with pride - and their father and grandparents.

We all know that the DC field is patchy from year to year dependent upon which of the top players decides to give it a go, and this year the draw fell wider open that some other years - but I think that taking such a lop-sided team to the Cup is a tremendous achievement. It was fantastic to see how much it meant to him - he has been vindicated for throwing down the gauntlet and ask how much support he was going to get from the rest of the team in 2009-2010, and he's more than fulfilled his half of the bargain.

I hope he can build on this and pick up another slam or two, maybe even take that extra step to #1; those are the obvious goals left, but with Djoko in the way it's a tall order.

Whatever else happens, as far as I am concerned he's got nothing left to prove - he needn't play another DC match as long as he lives either.

by Henman Bill Sun 29 Nov - 21:54

2016 I see an opportunity for someone, because I think it again won't be a full field. With all the big 4 now having it in their trophy cabinet, and all now in the second half of their career with nothing to prove and needing to watch their schedule physically, and especially with it being an Olympic year, adding both to the schedule overall, and with one DC tie being reasonably near to the Olympics, it seems likely that big 4 absences will continue.

By the way, have any of the big 4 ever played each other at DC. I cannot remember it?

Doubt it will happen but would be nice if all the top players got together in 2017 and said let's all play it for once most or every round.

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 21:55

I go back to MFCs point about the pressure Andy played with and the ability he has shown to handle it. Hope he transfers that to the Slams. Hope this moment turns into a second wind.

by Henman Bill Sun 29 Nov - 21:57

It's good to see Jamie Murray developing a good career. I've always like him. Obviously he had success early on with a mixed doubles title at Wimbledon, but then in the middle of his career you felt he wasn't quite achieving his potential, but now this year with 2 slam finals and the Davis Cup has to be the best year of his career.

It would be nice if he goes on to win a slam title in men's doubles. Not sure whether he will or not, may be tricky, but let's see. That would be a great finish to his career.

by Henman Bill Sun 29 Nov - 21:58

legendkillarV2 wrote:I go back to MFCs point about the pressure Andy played with and the ability he has shown to handle it. Hope he transfers that to the Slams. Hope this moment turns into a second wind.

Well if he can follow Djokovic's example he can look forward to the AO, the first four masters of the year, a 3-slam season, and no 1....you never know...stranger things have happened....

by Calder106 Sun 29 Nov - 22:01

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Calder106 wrote:Ok.

Andy Murray, James Ward, Dan Evans, Kyle Edmund, Jamie Murray, Dominic Inglot

Richard Gasquet, Giles Simon, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Gael Monfils, Nicolas Mahut, Julien Benneteau

Which is the stronger squad ? (note I'm talking squad).

So I hope your taking doubles into account.

I'd say 3-3 on the players relevant strength. So for me Andy the stronger singles player and Jamie and Inglot the stronger doubles players.

So I ask did you take into account doubles or did you base strength on single players and singles rankings alone?

Don't think there is much in it but both Mahut and Benneteau have won Mens Doubles slams in the past 18 months Jamie Murray made a couple of finals this year and Inglot a semi.

Anyway we could go on and on. So I'm out of this particular conversation now. My points were first that with Andy Murray fully committing himself to the Davis Cup this year (and last) backed up excellently by Jamie, James Ward, Dan Evans, Dominic Inglot, Kyle Edmund the Davis Cup has been deservedly won. Not forgetting Leon Smith and the back room team. So saying that certain players not fully committing to Davis Cup this year makes them fortunate rankles a bit. Second no matches are a given because your ranking is much higher (Isner v Ward). Players often seem to raise their game in the DC format. Bemelmans v Murray on Friday on paper looked easy. It was far from that even though Andy won in 3.

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 22:12

Calder106 wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
Calder106 wrote:Ok.

Andy Murray, James Ward, Dan Evans, Kyle Edmund, Jamie Murray, Dominic Inglot

Richard Gasquet, Giles Simon, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Gael Monfils, Nicolas Mahut, Julien Benneteau

Which is the stronger squad ? (note I'm talking squad).

So I hope your taking doubles into account.

I'd say 3-3 on the players relevant strength. So for me Andy the stronger singles player and Jamie and Inglot the stronger doubles players.

So I ask did you take into account doubles or did you base strength on single players and singles rankings alone?

Don't think there is much in it but both Mahut and Benneteau have won Mens Doubles slams in the past 18 months Jamie Murray made a couple of finals this year and Inglot a semi.

Anyway we could go on and on. So I'm out of this particular conversation now. My points were first that with Andy Murray fully committing himself to the Davis Cup this year (and last) backed up excellently by Jamie, James Ward, Dan Evans, Dominic Inglot, Kyle Edmund the Davis Cup has been deservedly won. Not forgetting Leon Smith and the back room team. So saying that certain players not fully committing to Davis Cup this year makes them fortunate rankles a bit. Second no matches are a given because your ranking is much higher (Isner v Ward). Players often seem to raise their game in the DC format. Bemelmans v Murray on Friday on paper looked easy. It was far from that even though Andy won in 3.

Again I will state it so my point is crystallised. The point I made from the off was that certain teams were not in their path. At no point did I reference players commitment. Whether you like it or not there are better players out there. Without them in the equation, improved GBs chances. The fact Andy even states post match that he doesn't see the feat being repeated echoes that.

I wasn't bandwagoning this achievement like it was the major upset it wasn't.

Team GB won. It's fantastic.

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 22:14

Henman Bill wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:I go back to MFCs point about the pressure Andy played with and the ability he has shown to handle it. Hope he transfers that to the Slams. Hope this moment turns into a second wind.

Well if he can follow Djokovic's example he can look forward to the AO, the first four masters of the year, a 3-slam season, and no 1....you never know...stranger things have happened....

One can hope. I'd love to see him bag more Slams. Certainly has it in him. Will also be interesting to see if Mauresmo comes back on board next year.

by **JuliusHMarx** Sun 29 Nov - 22:17

McEnroe circa 1984 wasn't playing in this year's Davis Cup. If he had been, esp. with Fleming in the doubles, I don't think GB would have beaten the USA.

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 22:19

Or maybe Djokovic 2015 if he can get past Laver 1969.

by Henman Bill Sun 29 Nov - 22:28

legendkillarV2 wrote:Thing is CC your throwing out a Man Utd victory compared with say Wimbledon. That's not the metric I would use. I'd say GBs victory is like that of Blackburn's title win in 94-95. You have the perfect ingredients come together. One person spearheading that charge. Which in this case Shearer=Murray. Every chance GB could go the way Blackburn did after the success. That season Blackburn didn't beat Utd in any other their fixtures and still won the league.

The point is CC you can still win the big prizes without the beating the better teams.

It's an observation.

To continue this theme a bit, I'd say Alan Shearer played just as well in each of his four years at Blackburn. He scored a few more goals in the title winning season, but only because he played more games, and no injuries. His goals per game ratio was on a par with other seasons. While he was the star player, it helped to add Chris Sutton so they had a feared double act rather than just one striker, and also they had a great spine of the team, from Flowers through Hendry at centre half through Sherwood at centre mid through Shearer up front. Colin Hendry in particular had an immense season, as good as Shearer I'd say.

To illustrate how difficult it is to win with a one man team, imagine a team composed of the all time GOAT, a player who could routinely destroy other GOAT contenders 6-0 6-0, and three schoolboys picked at random. They would surely lose 3-2 every time.

by Calder106 Sun 29 Nov - 22:30

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Calder106 wrote:
legendkillarV2 wrote:
Calder106 wrote:Ok.

Andy Murray, James Ward, Dan Evans, Kyle Edmund, Jamie Murray, Dominic Inglot

Richard Gasquet, Giles Simon, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Gael Monfils, Nicolas Mahut, Julien Benneteau

Which is the stronger squad ? (note I'm talking squad).

So I hope your taking doubles into account.

I'd say 3-3 on the players relevant strength. So for me Andy the stronger singles player and Jamie and Inglot the stronger doubles players.

So I ask did you take into account doubles or did you base strength on single players and singles rankings alone?

Don't think there is much in it but both Mahut and Benneteau have won Mens Doubles slams in the past 18 months Jamie Murray made a couple of finals this year and Inglot a semi.

Anyway we could go on and on. So I'm out of this particular conversation now. My points were first that with Andy Murray fully committing himself to the Davis Cup this year (and last) backed up excellently by Jamie, James Ward, Dan Evans, Dominic Inglot, Kyle Edmund the Davis Cup has been deservedly won. Not forgetting Leon Smith and the back room team. So saying that certain players not fully committing to Davis Cup this year makes them fortunate rankles a bit. Second no matches are a given because your ranking is much higher (Isner v Ward). Players often seem to raise their game in the DC format. Bemelmans v Murray on Friday on paper looked easy. It was far from that even though Andy won in 3.

Again I will state it so my point is crystallised. The point I made from the off was that certain teams were not in their path. At no point did I reference players commitment. Whether you like it or not there are better players out there. Without them in the equation, improved GBs chances. The fact Andy even states post match that he doesn't see the feat being repeated echoes that.

I wasn't bandwagoning this achievement like it was the major upset it wasn't.

Team GB won. It's fantastic.

Ok. We will just have to agree to disagree. I haven't 'bandwagoned' the achievement just applauded the planning, commitment and effort to get there. If people want to put caveats that's fine the record book will still say GB won in 2015.

by Guest Sun 29 Nov - 22:35

Like I said earlier I am not asterisking the victory...

I applauded it.

by YvonneT Sun 29 Nov - 23:09

I think that Craig maybe tried to elevate this Davis Cup above others and LK was just trying to put it into perspective. Personally, that's why I avoid GOAT debates because inevitably, by trying to talk up one player as the greatest, you end up belittling the achievements of some pretty fine players. Of course, not all tournament wins are as hard won as others, that is of course true. Anyway, I don't think Andy, James Ward, Federer, Berdych or Stepanek care what anyone thinks of their Davis Cup wins - I bet they all reflect on those runs with enormous pride and so they should.

I'd also mention how impressive Goffin was today - considering how the pressure seemed to get to him on Friday, he played really well today and kept the pressure on Murray for the full 3 sets. And that after 5 sets on Friday and 4 yesterday. (Also, how that shows up that horrible David Lloyd comment about how Murray could win blindfolded - how disrespectful!).

by Henman Bill Sun 29 Nov - 23:12

Does anyone know what the deal is with dead rubbers. Usually they play them, but occassionally they don't?

by YvonneT Sun 29 Nov - 23:22

Every other tie, they play the dead rubber(s) if either the tie is over on the Saturday or if the fourth match is only 3 sets. Must be different in the final, but certainly don't think either the Belgian fans nor the British fans would have wanted to bother with it.

by Born Slippy Sun 29 Nov - 23:30

The teams can elect to play them or not nowadays. Obviously, probably not going to bother in the final.

by YvonneT Sun 29 Nov - 23:35

Think next year the winner of the Canada - France R1 tie might win. Nishikori is the next highest ranked player yet to win, but doesn't have strong backing in singles or doubles.

by Tennisfan Sun 29 Nov - 23:44

I think this was a great achievement for Team GB.
Murray became only the third person after McEnroe and Wilander to end a campaign with an 8-0 singles record; and he matched Sampras 20 years ago who was the last man to win three live rubbers in a final.
I refuse to downplay his achievements - his contribution has been outstanding.

by Born Slippy Mon 30 Nov - 9:39

If both win their first round, the GB v Serbia 2nd round match could be interesting. Have to assume neither Djokovic or Murray will play just before the Olympics. If Bedene plays for GB then the second string are relatively balanced.

by dummy_half Mon 30 Nov - 12:10

As others have said, Murray has to be highly praised for how well he handled the pressure and expectations - 8 singles rubbers and 3 doubles rubbers, played knowing that he had to win each match if GB were to take the Davis Cup (perhaps bar the final - I think Edmund could have done a job on the Belgian #2). Yes, he went into each singles match as a clear favourite (the draw certainly didn't hurt GB this year, but you can only beat what's in front of you, and looking back in a few years time no-one is really going to say that we only beat Belgium...), but winning 8 five set matches is certainly a fine achievement

Obviously, Ward's win against Isner now takes on big significance - the US were the one team with a clearly better doubles pair in the squad, so was the match where the winning point had to come from somewhere else.

It of course does help that Andy Murray is the best doubles player of all the top singles players. It's a shame that he and the other top guys don't play doubles to any great extent in the manner of McEnroe, as high quality doubles is such an entertaining event.

Now, where to put the money for next year? Don't see any of GB, Serbia, Spain or Switzerland taking the event that seriously with the Olympics to fit into the schedule.

by Born Slippy Mon 30 Nov - 12:49

I actually don't think it would be a bad shout for GB to retain. Andy has said he will play the first round. If so, they should get past Japan. As mentioned above, it could be Serbia next and I doubt either Andy or Novak would play that, so Bedene, Edmund and the doubles guys could have a decent crack.

GB is then back in the SF which would surely encourage Andy to play the September match - which I think would be home to Italy if Switzerland decide not to bother again.

A Murray led GB would be 50-50 at worst against any of the teams jn the bottom half - with the possible exception of the US.

by Mad for Chelsea Mon 30 Nov - 13:02

Think Murray made it reasonably clear he would definitely be playing the first round, which is the only round to come at a sensible time in the calendar really. He also made it clear he wouldn't play the next round, as it comes in the middle of the Wimbledon-Olympics bit, though this also means it's unlikely Djokovic would play it either.

Thing is, the SF and Final are right after the US Open and WTFs, respectively. We saw this year that not going deep at the US helped Andy in the DC (he was significantly fresher against Australia than he had been in the previous round against France) and we also saw that preparing for the DC final significantly hampered his WTF performance (maybe partly deliberately?).

My gut feeling is that Andy will play the first round, which should be enough to beat Japan. I'm not sure he'll play much more after that, even if GB got through to the semis without him (which is just about possible). Certainly Andy committed 100% to the DC this year, at the detriment of some of his individual performances. I'm not sure I can see him repeating that commitment next year. One solution might be for him to "only" play the singles...

by Guest Mon 30 Nov - 13:18

I think World Group status retention would be a result. Andy playing the Japan tie would certainly balance it nicely in maybe getting a result and non-participation beyond that wouldn't be the end of the world. If GB lose to Japan again not end of the world as the play off would be September IIRC.

If Bedene becomes eligible to play would help give some depth to the team and if Edmund continues upwards, brilliant.

I do have a feeling that 2016 might be Andy's last involvement in the DC and I reckon Smith would follow suit if that was the case.

by Henman Bill Mon 30 Nov - 13:59

Don't see it being a priority for Murray next year at all. His priority at the moment should be the Australian Open and French Open.

Actually a good year for Murray in the end, with clay masters and no 2 ranking and Davis Cup.

For next year's Davis Cup, maybe it's France's turn. They have got a lot of good players who maybe are going to realize that they are not quite good enough to win a slam and need this to have a satisfactory career. Simon, Tsonga, Gasquet. If the big 4 mostly don't play much, there's a chance there for what is perhaps the strongest team. Or at least would be if big 4 are not playing.

by ListenUp Wed 2 Dec - 13:34

Poor Argentina – they hold the unenviable record of never having won the DC and and being runners-up 4 times. Even without their former top tenners, they were close to making the final this year, probably would have if Leo Mayer hadn't got injured. There are positive vibes about Del Potro coming back for the start of next season. I can't see him making DC a priority just yet, but if he was to stay sound and play DC again that could be interesting.

by ListenUp Wed 2 Dec - 16:37

While it's certainly to be hoped that GB's Davis Cup win will influence a surge of new talent coming through, I'm rather pessimistic about how soon that will start to show.

A few years back, we were excited by the promise of several junior boys, notably Kyle Edmund, Oli Golding, Liam Broady and George Morgan. While Liam looks like he can still make an impact, Oli & George have both given up their tennis careers.

Kyle is the youngest of those (almost 21), and I don't see anyone coming through from the age group just behind him, which is worrying. GB has had very few male participants in any of the junior slams the last couple of years. Four years ago GB won the Junior Davis Cup, with Kyle, Luke Bambridge and Evan Hoyt. Those two are both the same age as Kyle, and are ranked in the low 600s. There are currently no British players aged under 20 in the top 1000, while Kyle broke the top 500 at 18.

In the junior world rankings, the highest-ranked British boy is Jay Clarke at 25th. I had to look that up, I couldn't have named a single British junior among the boys, while in the Edmund/Broady/Golding "era" I knew of quite a few.

by Henman Bill Fri 4 Dec - 20:37

Based on that one performance, I'd put Edmund as someone who can make top 50 and maybe a shot at top 20 if he is really dedicated, but perhaps not higher. It's hard to judge from the first time I saw him play. Not sure what others think.

Laura Robson has been a disappointment the last couple of years, because I really thought she might be able to crack top 10-20 at one point, and in the women's game, that means challenging for a slam occasionally it is so open. A shame about the injuries that she has had.

Hm just looking at her wikipedia article it says she reached rank 27 as a peak in July 2013, at the age of 19, did not realize she got that high, I thought she had peaked around 50. A shame about her injury problems since then.

by Sponsored content