Davis Cup 2017 World Group QF - France v Great Britain - Rouen - 7-9 April

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

RE: Davis Cup 2017 World Group QF - France v Great Britain - Rouen - 7-9 April

wolf · Tennis legend

Helen40 wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
wolf wrote:
indiana wrote:
Chardy beat Kyle 6-4 6-4 to make it 4-1 and in truth much more reflect the comprehensiveness of the French win than a 3-2 result would have.
For me the result should be 3-0 and that's that.
Yes. Give the Sunday ticket holders a refund and call it a day.
I'm really undecided on the refund route. Maybe have it as an option for the fans? The reason I say this is that hotels and flights will already be booked in many cases, so they may want to spend their day watching some tennis even if it won't affect the outcome.

Fair point. Of course if the Davis Cup goes down the Fed Cup route of three set matches over 2 days, the tie will be guaranteed to be live on Sunday.

-- Edited by wolf on Sunday 9th of April 2017 07:56:35 PM

christ · Futures qualifying

wolf wrote:
My point was you shouldn't count dead rubbers in the final result, though I probably agree with you.

Certainly not when at least some of the points in the dead rubbers are played three-on-one.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
[John Lloyd is] so wrong about if the top players want 3 sets then the ITF have to give them 3 sets. Nooooo !!! Certainly the lack of top players does detract for me, but not at that cost, and as Sue says the fans wouldn't be for that, they love the format. Plus I'm actually far from convinced changing singles to best of 3 would have the effect of getting most of them playing that might not have otherwise, many would surely still want the week off. You really risk losing on both fronts. Best of 3 without the top players and Davis Cup would be truly gone for me. Be very careful, ITF !

It seems Leon would beg to differ - from the Beeb's rolling sports news page:

'Too long, not fan friendly, not player friendly'

Posted at 10:46

Great Britain lost 4-1 to France in the Davis Cup quarter-finals over the weekend to end Britain's defence of the title they won last year. [my bold - ]

GB captain Leon Smith says changes need to be made to the competition.

"It's a tough ask for children to come in and watch two five-setters in one sitting," Smith told BBC's Sportsweek.

"It's simply too long. It's not fan friendly and it's not player friendly."

Spectator · All-time great

Hmm. I'm with the five sets supporters, much though I respect Leon Smith! Speaking of the latter there's a lovely article quoting him singing the praises of Jay Clarke and Cameron Norrie: www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/09/andy-murray-davis-cup.

Meanwhile, on the thesis that anyone who has played part of a match should be counted as an opponent for all of it, congratulations to Dan Evans for singlehandedly defeating half the French team.

Wakey · Junior player

Spectator wrote:
Hmm. I'm with the five sets supporters, much though I respect Leon Smith! Speaking of the latter there's a lovely article quoting him singing the praises of Jay Clarke and Cameron Norrie: www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/apr/09/andy-murray-davis-cup.

Meanwhile, on the thesis that anyone who has played part of a match should be counted as an opponent for all of it, congratulations to Dan Evans for singlehandedly defeating half the French team.

I also think 5 sets is better. Best of 3 matches can so often lack the drama of best of 5 because all it takes is for one player to be off the pace early on and the match can be gone in a flash. You get much more ebb and flow in a best of 5 as players can play themselves into form.

LordBrownof · Futures level

Great to hear that the LTA is taking advantage of Carril's talents!

indiana · Tennis legend

I wonder if the group who are really into 5 sets are your more hard-core tennis fans, such as to be found on this forum, ( and possibly most of these that actually go to Davis Cup ! ) where we do seem mostly for best of 5.

We watch much more tennis and really do like the distinction of best of 5 from your normal week to week tennis. But yes I accept Leon may have a point re children and possibly the more casual tennis fan.

Now if the players also would much prefer best of 3 maybe there is a strong case we should grin and bear it, though I really do think it devalues the Davis Cup and the drama folk remember, these happy to sit through 5 sets of top tennis, are some epic swaying matches that have gone all the way. While I am not traditionalist in all things tennis ( eg Slam final set tiebreaks, have I mentioned Slam MD WCs ) the Davis Cup has a very worthy format and tradition that sets it apart.

But as I say if nearly everyone else beyond the hard-core enthusiasts .... I still though remain rather unconvinced that top players will return to Davis Cup in droves if you simply change from best of 5 to best of 3. Many surely simply want the week off whatever. I strongly suspect that it is less the Davis Cup format itself that keeps many away, but the overcrowded tennis calender in which it has to find a place.

Wakey · Junior player

indiana wrote:
I wonder if the group who are really into 5 sets are your more hard-core tennis fans, such as to be found on this forum, ( and possibly most of these that actually go to Davis Cup ! ) where we do seem mostly for best of 5.

We watch much more tennis and really do like the distinction of best of 5 from your normal week to week tennis. But yes I accept Leon may have a point re children and possibly the more casual tennis fan.

Now if the players also would much prefer best of 3 maybe there is a strong case we should grin and bear it, though I really do think it devalues the Davis Cup and the drama folk remember, these happy to sit through 5 sets of top tennis, are some epic swaying matches that have gone all the way. While I am not traditionalist in all things tennis ( eg Slam final set tiebreaks, have I mentioned Slam MD WCs ) the Davis Cup has a very worthy format and tradition that sets it apart.

But as I say if nearly everyone else beyond the hard-core enthusiasts .... I still though remain rather unconvinced that top players will return to Davis Cup in droves if you simply change from best of 5 to best of 3. Many surely simply want the week off whatever. I strongly suspect that it is less the Davis Cup format itself that keeps many away, but the overcrowded tennis calender in which it has to find a place.

I'm not sure it keeps casual fans away either, look at Wimbledon which is the tennis most casual fans watch and its the 5 set epics that get people excited and see people tuning in not the ones over in 3 easy sets. Kids I can see it being the case as they have shorter attention spans but casual fans want drama first and foremost. To me, if they are wanting to switch to a shorter version for 'casual fans' they need to do more to make that format more exciting and quicker at the same time.

stevemcqueen · Futures qualifying

I would like to see the attendance figures for all fixtures throughout the year as well as total gate receipts . I would also like to see information re. how much TV pays for broadcast rights. I hypothesise that nearly all tickets are sold - fans vote with their feet and their credit cards. Therefore, any change that reduces the number of days play would not be logical. It seems that everyone and their dog has a theory about what should happen to the DC, but nobody ever backs up their ideas with hard data. Tennis is a business and should largely be run as such. The DC shouldn't be an exception.

Spectators who buy tickets for Sunday take a gamble - they might see damp squib tennis played by reserve team players with nothing to play for, or they might see thrilling tennis that decides the tie. If there is anything that could be done to make dead rubbers more interesting, it should be considered.

Football stadiums with roofs are becoming more common. Perhaps these could be occasionally used to host tennis - their capacity is much greater than indoor arenas.

goldfish · Futures qualifying

My tickets for the DC in Rouen cost 90 for cat 1 on Friday/Sunday, 81 on Saturday. Cat 2 tickets were very limited. I would say this is the major factor putting off those other than the hardcore tennis fans. Compare that with a ground pass for Wimbledon in week 1 this year - £25. If I remember correctly, play starts about midday and carries on until it gets too dark to see, weather permitting. You can watch top players on outside courts from very close proximity, matches from the main courts on screen from the hill. No comparison for the casual fan in this country if you don't mind queuing. Some countries seem to charge much more realistic prices that encourage fans to go to DC ties and I'd love to know how they manage that.

I enjoyed Dan's match with Benneteau. They had fun, the crowd joined in and there was a great atmosphere. Don't think the dead rubbers should count in the tie score though.

mike55 · Lower Club Player

stevemcqueen wrote:

Football stadiums with roofs are becoming more common. Perhaps these could be occasionally used to host tennis - their capacity is much greater than indoor arenas.

One of the great things about watching tennis live is the intimacy, which could easily be lost in a football stadium. When we last played the US away in DC they used a corner of a baseball or an American football stadium (can't remember which). You'd have to do something similar. If not you'd either end up with a court that is way too far away from the fans or else build stands on the grass (what would the grounds staff think of that!). The worst case would be a half empty stadium with the court so far away you needed binoculars. On balance I think football stadia are not a good idea.

brendan · Strong Club Player

they've held music festivals at Old Trafford (the cricket ground, apparently there's a football ground of the same name) so anything's possible

Spectator · All-time great

Nice article about Jay Clarke in L'Equipe: www.lequipe.fr/Tennis/Actualites/Jay-clarke-de-derby-a-rouen-itineraire-d-un-espoir-du-tennis-britannique-longtemps-delaisse/791350 though it doesn't really acknowledge the role of the LTA in enabling the link with Esteban Carril (the main narrative emphasises the previous lack of support from the LTA) and is to my mind a bit too keen to suggest that the good results have followed from Carril's work, when those of us who have followed him for longer know that his long-term coaching team were the ones supporting him at the start of his meteoric rise! But still, it does make clear the role his family have played and is very positive about his prospects.

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 13th of April 2017 05:46:22 PM

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Spectator wrote:
Nice article about Jay Clarke in L'Equipe: www.lequipe.fr/Tennis/Actualites/Jay-clarke-de-derby-a-rouen-itineraire-d-un-espoir-du-tennis-britannique-longtemps-delaisse/791350 though it doesn't really acknowledge the role of the LTA in enabling the link with Esteban Carril (the main narrative emphasises the previous lack of support from the LTA) and is to my mind a bit too keen to suggest that the good results have followed from Carril's work, when those of us who have followed him for longer know that his long-term coaching team were the ones supporting him at the start of his meteoric rise! But still, it does make clear the role his family have played and is very positive about his prospects.

Thanks for that, Spectator. Fascinating article, which clarified at least one thing for me: for some reason, I had assumed from her posts on here that Yasmin was his mum, not his elder sister! Re the link-up with Carril, you can't really expect a foreign sports paper to capture all the finer points of our domestic scene, especially the not very joined-up thinking of the LTA, but at least it had the good sense to shine the spotlight on him & show him in a good light, which I don't think has been done by the domestic press. Was amused by the rather damning comparison of Leon's choice of Jay as a hitting partner for Team GB with Noah's of poor Jonathan Eysseric...