Davis Cup 2016 Round One

As first matches get underway on Friday 4th with draw ceremonies (i.e. final nominations and order of play) on Thursday, I thought I'd kick off this thread.

Fixtures for round one are:
Great Britain vs. Japan
Serbia vs. Kazakhstan
Italy vs. Switzerland
Poland vs. Argentina
France vs. Canada
Germany vs. Czech Republic
Australia vs. United States
Belgium vs. Croatia

GB v Japan is the only tie with a clash of top 10 players. France v Canada promised much, but with Raonic and Nestor out should be straightforward for the French. Kyrgios is out of Aussie team with a virus and Hewitt comes out of perhaps the shortest retirement in history to replace him.

Hewitt back. Amazing. Interesting that Andy M has said he'll play all the matches this year. Thought may be if GB bt Japan he would duck the next round, knowing they would be safely through to the World Group for next year. This Japan tie could be the one tie where Andy could afford to lose a singles and GB still go through.
Going to be very difficult for GB this year. But hey, at least they've won it in our lifetimes !

The tough match will obviously be Serbia in the QF providing Novak plays. If there's full commitment thereafter from whichever of the Novak/Andy gets through, I'd expect the winner of that match to win the Cup.

Evans in for Edmund, who's got a bad back. Evans of course has beaten Nishikori before...

Australia and USA 1-1 after first day. Tomic bt Sock in four, Isner bt Groth in three. Still uncertain whether Hewitt will play in the doubles.

So the position at the end of day 1

GB 1-1 Japan
Serbia 1-1 Kazakhstan
Italy 2-0 Switzerland
Poland 0-2 Argentina
France 2-0 Canada
Germany 1-1 Czech Rep
Australia 1-1 USA
Belgium 1-1 Croatia

So pretty even, except for the teams missing their best players: Switzerland, Canada & Poland. In fact, I think the only upset on ranking in the World Group was Kukushkin beating Troicki.

USA-AUS doubles scheduled for 1am UK time, so only just over an hour for Hewitt to sub himself in.

I watched both GB-Japan matches today. I thought Murray was very rusty, and the scoreline really only reflected the gifts he got from his opponent. But then Nishikori was nowhere near his best either. Overall, I enjoyed both, but certainly hope for better quality when the 2 no.1's meet on Sunday.

Strange story about why Australia shouldn't have been to choose grass for this tie:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/sports/tennis/davis-cup-matches-on-grass-should-have-been-on-hardcourts.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

After the doubles:
GB 2-1 Japan
Serbia 1-2 Kazakhstan
Italy 3-0 Switzerland
Poland 1-2 Argentina
France 3-0 Canada
Germany 1-2 Czech Rep
Australia 1-2 USA
Belgium 1-2 Croatia

So the Swiss and Canadians heading for the playoffs already. Hewitt did play doubles, but lost. Murray-Nishikori on paper the best match in the reverse singles, though Tomic-Isner intriguing too.

Isner, with 49 aces, has beaten Tomic in four to put USA through. They will be at home next and must have a great chance this year.

Bit of a fallout between Tomic & Kyrgios.
http://m.smh.com.au/sport/tennis/davis-cup-2016-bernard-tomic-appears-to-take-dig-at-nick-kyrgios-during-change-of-ends-20160306-gnbox9.html

I don't think the USA have a great chance - the Bryan's are on the way down. Plus wouldn't back Isner to be that consistent. Hewitt & Peers took the Bryan's to five.

G82 - yes, not good between Tomic and Kyrgios, although Tomic and Hewitt tried to smooth things over afterwards.

At last someone is taking Novak to the wire.. looks like 5 sets ..
Into the unknown

Nishi to serve for the 4th!

I'll probably get shot down in flames here but what an epic match between Murray and Nishikori. A gruelling marathon but still seeing great rallies. Do think TeamGB made a mistake playing Andy Murray in the doubles but there yoou go. Murray holds in another lengthy service game and leads 5-2 in the final set.

Murray wins a thriller in five sets in just under five hours and TeamGB win the tie.

A five-hour epic between Kei and Andy and nearly five hours in the Djoko match in Belgrade. Terrific stuff.

TeamGB will travel to Serbia to play Djokovic and Co in the quarter-finals. Serbia came from behind to beat Kazakhstan 3-2 today.

Massive win for Andy, despite being nowhere near his best. Sounds like Novak was very poor in his match as well but still got the job done in the end.

Well Andy is having to do it the hard way. First Kei, now Novak. Even in Belgrade, it could be that DC is Andy's best chance of beating Djoko.

I think Wimbledon is Andy's best chance of beating Novak. Andy's phenomenal movement on grass levels things up quite a bit. Plus home support could give him that mental edge that he needs and has lacked in huge matches in the last year or so.

I don't fancy GB's chances in Serbia at all, if I'm honest.

Some tremendous DC matches over the weekend, with players giving their all. Quite rightly, given the extreme physical nature of the event, some of the top players have given the DC a miss from time to time.
Yes, it's a terrific event, but surely it would make more sense to play it once every two years rather than annually. That way, you might get more of the top guys giving it a go.
Murray was marvellous yesterday. Closing in on a claim to be Britain's greatest-ever sportsman?

Obviously DC should require full use of 5-7 players. At the moment it can be a one man team, which we already have in singles competition.

Also, can coaches be banned from standing up and applauding after every point, win or lose? I know it's what passes for motivation but frankly it looks sad and pathetic.

"but frankly it looks sad and pathetic"

A bit like some of YOUR posts at times!

Good one..............

sportslover wrote:"but frankly it looks sad and pathetic"

A bit like some of YOUR posts at times!

Devastating comeback, I feel humbled.

bogbrush wrote:Obviously DC should require full use of 5-7 players. At the moment it can be a one man team, which we already have in singles competition.

Also, can coaches be banned from standing up and applauding after every point, win or lose? I know it's what passes for motivation but frankly it looks sad and pathetic.

That clearly hasn't changed from the very start (and isn't quite accurate anyway given a decent doubles player is also needed). It is somewhat ironic though that, until Fed won it, there were a lot of his fans claiming that the only reason he hadn't won it was because he hadn't got any support. The argument being made then was that even Stan wasn't sufficient back-up! Now that Andy (supported, of course, by the number 2 doubles player in the world) is providing a strong backbone for the GB team, its a singles event and needs changing.

My main concern is that Andy is having to compromise his schedule to fit in the Davis Cup. He basically wrote off the season after the US Open last year to focus upon it. Given that there are even more events this year, I'm concerned that a match in July with Serbia is only going to lower his prospects at the bigger events to come. I would happily see him abandon the DC this year, now WG status is secure, and focus on getting somewhere close to the 5+ grand slams a player of his talent should, at a minimum, attain.

bogbrush wrote:Obviously DC should require full use of 5-7 players. At the moment it can be a one man team, which we already have in singles competition.

Also, can coaches be banned from standing up and applauding after every point, win or lose? I know it's what passes for motivation but frankly it looks sad and pathetic.

I do agree in some part, but again a counter argument in some rare cases players being outside the top 150 performing in a BO5 match without being a consistent feature at the 1st round of a Slam.

I agree with the applauding. Just because I am like competitive dad in that sense I wouldn't applaud something for the sake of it! It's like the fist bump in doubles after a losing a point!

Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

I have to agree. There was no mention of the way teams can be propped up by great players when roger was doing it , and ONLY doing it in playoffs way back when. A team does more than compete and there's clearly s bunch of lads in the gb team now that will play to the death for each other .

The atmosphere is more football like sure... But it's davis cup it should be

I DO think though from now gb have to make Jamie and Dom the doubles pair, murray can't keep playing all 3

Not one for BB to watch then:-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWObvSVnFb0

The Swiss coach can be standing throughout the last game and no doubt fist pumping. At least we can agree on this - Andy was quicker to commiserate with his beaten opponent than Roger.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

Sorry but what has changed in the Davis Cup? Nothing has changed in the format and it is up to players what they prioritise. But I said it last year and will say it again - GB winning it was a far better or more eye-opening event than Switzerland who had two world class singles players whereas Britain has one and usually another boxing well above his weight so to speak.

So nothing has changed in the Davis Cup over the years and as that video showed it is not a TeamGB alone thing to have a coach on his feet fist pumping every point - Switzerland did it as well but we never heard about it then so why now? It just seems like a totally invalid reason to pour scorn on what we see in TeamGB match.

The way I see it in any case Team GB are far less well-equipped to compete in the Davis Cup than a fair few teams in the World Group but use what they have to the maximum - what is wrong with that? Winning is the name of the game after all.

If we were to use the whole team. It would take longer, and only France would really have the depth to do it. I do see the point, the narrative between when the Swiss won it, to when gb did seemed to shift dramatically. It went from a great win dedicated to his team to it not meaning anything because they've only one good player and didn't play ant good teams.

Though tbf how people view lots of things in tennis changes drastically depending on who wins it... It can understand why that's frustrating though , it can be seen as diminishing the achievements of players that aren't as revered

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

GB now have a pretty strong doubles player in Jamie as well. Don't think that Andy paired up with Dom Inglot (another good doubles player) would have won all the matches that Jamie and Andy have won in the past year. It's also well documented that even with Andy winning all the matches he played in last year GB would probably have gone out in round 1 if James Ward had not beaten Isner.

Despite the weakness in singles. Gb have a very strong doubles team. They are certainly at least as competitive as Kazakhstan. James Ward also beat isner.

If we also remember that the team without murray basically got to the wg on its own, I think it a little unfair to call the team unfit to be there

I mean if you want it to be a PROPER World Cup of tennis that's taken seriously... Then it needs to be. 4 week tourny every so often. With the winning team tsking 2-3 million I. Shared prize money, otherwise the winner will ALWAYS benefit from some fortunate scheduling, and top players not bothering

Could the format for the Davis Cup be tweaked to make it a better team competition? Presently a Davis Cup team consists of four players but it's possible to use just two. If the format was tweaked to ensure that all four players on the team had to contribute then it would be more of a team competition. Maybe the rules should stipulate that all four players should play one singles match each. Or perhaps have two doubles matches and three singles again with no singles player playing more than one singles match and different pairs playing the doubles.

As it is there are far too many dead rubbers where a top ten player gets presented with opposition that doesn't usually play on the main tour. At least with this format the teams could be seeded so that the matches are more competitive.

But that gets too tactical. You stsrt guessing what order guys get paired off. There HAS to be reverse rubbers which makes it too long if you have 3 matches.

Davis cups a weird one. Competitive matches aren't guaranteed nearly as much with closely ranked players. Look at isner ward and kukushin Djokovic. Part of the draw of the event is the David v Goliath story, and it throws them up a lot

The formula is fine. It's the frequency that's wrong.

One small tweak they could make without changing the format significantly would be to make the Number 2 players play the third singles and the number 1's the last one. Would be interesting to have seen for instance Kyle Edmund playing the Belgian Number 2 in the final last year or Dan Evans playing the Japan number 2 yesterday. A chance for them to close the tie out and get the kudos for doing so.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

Sorry but what has changed in the Davis Cup? Nothing has changed in the format and it is up to players what they prioritise. But I said it last year and will say it again - GB winning it was a far better or more eye-opening event than Switzerland who had two world class singles players whereas Britain has one and usually another boxing well above his weight so to speak.

So nothing has changed in the Davis Cup over the years and as that video showed it is not a TeamGB alone thing to have a coach on his feet fist pumping every point - Switzerland did it as well but we never heard about it then so why now? It just seems like a totally invalid reason to pour scorn on what we see in TeamGB match.

The way I see it in any case Team GB are far less well-equipped to compete in the Davis Cup than a fair few teams in the World Group but use what they have to the maximum - what is wrong with that? Winning is the name of the game after all.

You're missing the point entirely.

Your taking this as a "Andymoaner" brigade thing and it isn't. The point people are making is that a top singles player can make it a priority and more or less win the damn thing singlehandedly. The GB victory epitomised that. We can grow about award beating Isner till the cows come home, but doesn't change the fact that Andy did the bulk of it. 

That's not taking the gloss of it or anything like that. I feel if there was more depth in teams (yes teams and not GB) then there might be more closer and unpredictable matches. The position of the DC as it stands for me is you have 1 strong singles player on either side and the outcome of their rubber decides the tie ultimately.

As it should. One strong player should make a difference. I think the argument here is there was nearly none of this the last 2 years. What's changed ? Having 1 strong player wasn't this much of an issue the many other times

It was an issue.

Just if your favourite player happens to be caught up that the noise gets cranked up.

The same rumblings will go on and beyond. They tap on the "strength" of the current era debate.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

Sorry but what has changed in the Davis Cup? Nothing has changed in the format and it is up to players what they prioritise. But I said it last year and will say it again - GB winning it was a far better or more eye-opening event than Switzerland who had two world class singles players whereas Britain has one and usually another boxing well above his weight so to speak.

So nothing has changed in the Davis Cup over the years and as that video showed it is not a TeamGB alone thing to have a coach on his feet fist pumping every point - Switzerland did it as well but we never heard about it then so why now? It just seems like a totally invalid reason to pour scorn on what we see in TeamGB match.

The way I see it in any case Team GB are far less well-equipped to compete in the Davis Cup than a fair few teams in the World Group but use what they have to the maximum - what is wrong with that? Winning is the name of the game after all.

You're missing the point entirely.

Your taking this as a "Andymoaner" brigade thing and it isn't. The point people are making is that a top singles player can make it a priority and more or less win the damn thing singlehandedly. The GB victory epitomised that. We can grow about award beating Isner till the cows come home, but doesn't change the fact that Andy did the bulk of it. 

That's not taking the gloss of it or anything like that. I feel if there was more depth in teams (yes teams and not GB) then there might be more closer and unpredictable matches. The position of the DC as it stands for me is you have 1 strong singles player on either side and the outcome of their rubber decides the tie ultimately.

No I am not missing the point - more taking up the point made by BB who we can all presume he was talking about TeamGB as was talking about one man teams (as such). And as others have said - there are lots of them around so lets not just make this a GB specific thing. And then there was his revulsion at fist pumping coaches on their feet which is nothing new at all. The Swiss coach was at it in that video the year Switzerland won it but it was an irrelevance then so what is the problem with it now? That is my issues.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

Sorry but what has changed in the Davis Cup? Nothing has changed in the format and it is up to players what they prioritise. But I said it last year and will say it again - GB winning it was a far better or more eye-opening event than Switzerland who had two world class singles players whereas Britain has one and usually another boxing well above his weight so to speak.

So nothing has changed in the Davis Cup over the years and as that video showed it is not a TeamGB alone thing to have a coach on his feet fist pumping every point - Switzerland did it as well but we never heard about it then so why now? It just seems like a totally invalid reason to pour scorn on what we see in TeamGB match.

The way I see it in any case Team GB are far less well-equipped to compete in the Davis Cup than a fair few teams in the World Group but use what they have to the maximum - what is wrong with that? Winning is the name of the game after all.

You're missing the point entirely.

Your taking this as a "Andymoaner" brigade thing and it isn't. The point people are making is that a top singles player can make it a priority and more or less win the damn thing singlehandedly. The GB victory epitomised that. We can grow about award beating Isner till the cows come home, but doesn't change the fact that Andy did the bulk of it. 

That's not taking the gloss of it or anything like that. I feel if there was more depth in teams (yes teams and not GB) then there might be more closer and unpredictable matches. The position of the DC as it stands for me is you have 1 strong singles player on either side and the outcome of their rubber decides the tie ultimately.

No I am not missing the point - more taking up the point made by BB who we can all presume he was talking about TeamGB as was talking about one man teams (as such). And as others have said - there are lots of them around so lets not just make this a GB specific thing. And then there was his revulsion at fist pumping coaches on their feet which is nothing new at all. The Swiss coach was at it in that video the year Switzerland won it but it was an irrelevance then so what is the problem with it now? That is my issues.

BB I am assuming hasn't just formed that opinion on watching the GB match.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Curious. I never heard such disparaging talk about the Davis Cup when Switzerland and Roger Federer lifted the cup - it was probably being lauded if anything. Now because Murray has won it with the GB team it is berated as a competition when it has not changed one iota in format.

It's not down to because Team GB won it. The argument is a team with a relatively strong singles player (who can more or less bag their 2 rubbers) is lopsiding the tournament. I think what BB is proposing is all players are used to make it a more level playing field. It was counter-argued that a strong doubles pairing has the same effect eg. the Bryans.

Don't understand why the argument comes back to "Well when Roger does it" because even then BB said that if a top player wants to prioritise and win the DC, they more or less can because of the equality spread out in most of the nations. However, I think that has been the case for a while.

Sorry but what has changed in the Davis Cup? Nothing has changed in the format and it is up to players what they prioritise. But I said it last year and will say it again - GB winning it was a far better or more eye-opening event than Switzerland who had two world class singles players whereas Britain has one and usually another boxing well above his weight so to speak.

So nothing has changed in the Davis Cup over the years and as that video showed it is not a TeamGB alone thing to have a coach on his feet fist pumping every point - Switzerland did it as well but we never heard about it then so why now? It just seems like a totally invalid reason to pour scorn on what we see in TeamGB match.

The way I see it in any case Team GB are far less well-equipped to compete in the Davis Cup than a fair few teams in the World Group but use what they have to the maximum - what is wrong with that? Winning is the name of the game after all.

You're missing the point entirely.

Your taking this as a "Andymoaner" brigade thing and it isn't. The point people are making is that a top singles player can make it a priority and more or less win the damn thing singlehandedly. The GB victory epitomised that. We can grow about award beating Isner till the cows come home, but doesn't change the fact that Andy did the bulk of it. 

That's not taking the gloss of it or anything like that. I feel if there was more depth in teams (yes teams and not GB) then there might be more closer and unpredictable matches. The position of the DC as it stands for me is you have 1 strong singles player on either side and the outcome of their rubber decides the tie ultimately.

No I am not missing the point - more taking up the point made by BB who we can all presume he was talking about TeamGB as was talking about one man teams (as such). And as others have said - there are lots of them around so lets not just make this a GB specific thing. And then there was his revulsion at fist pumping coaches on their feet which is nothing new at all. The Swiss coach was at it in that video the year Switzerland won it but it was an irrelevance then so what is the problem with it now? That is my issues.

BB I am assuming hasn't just formed that opinion on watching the GB match.

Ah right that was judged on watching Serbia V Kazakhstan on an obscure cable channel beamed live from Eastern Europe. Silly me I thought sure he'd be watching GB V Japan on BBC. I suppose the coaches there were fist pumping as well mind you that has been the norm for a long time.

If BB wouldn't mind, would you be so kind to clarify that your dissatisfaction over fist pumping by DC coaches was formed by seeing Leon Smith alone doing it in GB vs Japan.

legendkillarV2 wrote:If BB wouldn't mind, would you be so kind to clarify that your dissatisfaction over fist pumping by DC coaches was formed by seeing Leon Smith alone doing it in GB vs Japan.

Well it wasn't formed watching Switzerland's coach of that I am sure. If so I would have recalled having this conversation before. We have had this discussion about Murray's fist pumps and 'Come ons' before that grated with BB but I recall posting videos of Federer doing exactly the same.