Davis Cup Semis and Play Offs + Final

steven · Tennis legend

RE: Davis Cup Semis and Play Off's

JonH · All-time great

Thanks Steven!

JonH · All-time great

Finishing off this thread probably, France have selected the same venue in Lille for the final as for the Semi.

It holds 27,000 and in 2014 27,400 crammed in for a world record attendance when Switzerland beat France.

With France and Belgium being near neighbours, we should expect massive crowds for the final.

www.daviscup.com/en/news/273407.aspx

What is also impressive is how France have organised this in days - when GB select venues it takes literally down to the last minute; how do France do it, they must have pre agreements in place?

Spectator · All-time great

One more thing ... just noticed that Canada won its playoff with three points: two in singles, contributed by 18-year-old Denis Shapovalov, and one in doubles, of which half was contributed by 45-year-old Daniel Nestor. That's got to be a record in some fashion for youth and age winning a WG-level tie!

wolf · Tennis legend

Can't believe that France have subbed out Mahut for Gasquet. Okay they're probably still favourites for the doubles, but will they ever learn? I hope Belgium punish them.

JonH · All-time great

RE: Davis Cup Semis and Play Offs + Final

Spectator · All-time great

Nicolas Mahut is a person of great grace, but I do wish he hadn't had to exhibit it quite so frequently vis a vis the Davis Cup teams.

I can understand that they feel they will most likely win the doubles (can't see Goffin playing given the end of year he's had), wanted Gasquet for the fifth rubber if they needed him, and didn't want to put either Mahut or Herbert into that position. So in that case, why not just say, "we needed three singles players" and leave it at that. But to add insult to injury with the comment about "the two best doubles players"?!!! For goodness' sake, they've only had one French number one in singles or doubles in the Open Era, and that was Mahut. And to make a comment like that puts Herbert in a horrid position, too.

I would be appalled (not, as I say, by the selection, but by the comment) except that nothing the French authorities do can shock me. How did a nation with so many really lovely players get such administration?

wolf · Tennis legend

Surely if you were to a drop a doubles player (which I greatly disagree with anyway and is not the way they've done it all year so why change methodology now) you would not drop the experienced Mahut who you know you can rely on in pressure moments. Herbert I've seen collapse under pressure quite a few times and Gasquet is not exactly known for his big match temperment. Not withstanding Herbert now has to switch his returning side. What a baffling decision.

Spectator · All-time great

I think it's actually, interestingly, a situation that parallels almost exactly their moves at Queens, where they felt they would lose both singles against Andy Murray and were scared enough of James Ward that they decided on a third singles player instead of a proper doubles team. And we all know how that turned out Nice for Goffin and Darcis to know they establish that much fear. Think that some of the French journalists are as mystified/horrified by the decision and its communication as we are, though. Some are saying that Mahut is injured and withdrew ... but it's curious.

Vis a vis your comments, wolf, I've never understood the French establishment's treatment of Mahut. He's their number one doubles player (6 to Herbert's 13, and the UNR Gasquet, with a CH of 45) - and yet they have always seemed to treat him as if he were somehow not quite up to the mark. He and Herbert virtually had to become the number one pairing even to get called up. And they have long seemed to blame him for Queens, though it was not his fault that they'd made a series of dubious choices that left an untested doubles team to face the Murray brothers.

I'd previously felt that this was a 'can't lose' match, in that I wanted some of my favourite French players to win a DC, but also have massive admiration for Goffin and for the whole Belgian team. I'm now slightly tempted to shift towards a bias to the Belgians - but I think that as Mahut and Benneteau both played in earlier rounds, they'd still both get cups and medals, no?

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 23rd of November 2017 05:19:01 PM

-- Edited by Spectator on Thursday 23rd of November 2017 05:23:20 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

Wow unbelievable, especially after the Queen's farce ( presumably more about keeping a triumvirate all reasonably happy than keeping powder in reserve to deal with James Ward ). And yes the "two best doubles players" comment is insulting, shocking and ridiculous. Not to say no doubt disingenuous.

Some French players one would like to see have a Davis Cup title, but c'mon Belgium !!!

PS: And if Mahut is actually injured surely you just say that rather than this rubbish, insulting to Mahut for one and to most people's intelligence, non?

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 23rd of November 2017 11:37:46 PM

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Just as an aside, having seen Mahut and PHH play at the O2 last week, Mahut played very poorly for most of the first set, and then played a dream. PHH was middling all the way through - and weak at key moments (as he has a tendency to be). There's no way you would chose PHH over Nico based on that (which is very recent), unless you had a key number one player (Gasquet????) and were trying to pick your second player purely on whether they complemented your key player or not.

Spectator · All-time great

This is Mahut's response: www.lequipe.fr/Tennis/Actualites/Nicolas-mahut-c-est-la-regle-du-jeu/853203. He really is a star. And he spent yesterday in part being the 'referee' (and presumably offering comment) for a doubles practice for the French team, in which Benneteau also took part.

-- Edited by Spectator on Friday 24th of November 2017 09:11:24 AM

JonH · All-time great

Goffin wins the first set. Commentator on BBC website suggested that Gasquet was picked to bolster their singles options. I guess they think doubles is a slam dunk and thus better having a 3rd strong singles player. Tsonga and Pouille are both often fragile so maybe it has some sense, but personally think it was a mistake

indiana · Tennis legend

JonH wrote:
Goffin wins the first set. Commentator on BBC website suggested that Gasquet was picked to bolster their singles options. I guess they think doubles is a slam dunk and thus better having a 3rd strong singles player. Tsonga and Pouille are both often fragile so maybe it has some sense, but personally think it was a mistake

The doubles could have been a slam dunk.

I guess the 5 man teams from next year might save France from themselves. Unless they pick 4 singles players to give them options and allow for possible injuries and/or egos.

JonH · All-time great

indiana wrote:
JonH wrote:
Goffin wins the first set. Commentator on BBC website suggested that Gasquet was picked to bolster their singles options. I guess they think doubles is a slam dunk and thus better having a 3rd strong singles player. Tsonga and Pouille are both often fragile so maybe it has some sense, but personally think it was a mistake
The doubles could have been a slam dunk.
I guess the 5 man teams from next year might save France from themselves. Unless they pick 4 singles players to give them options and allow for possible injuries and/or egos.

Interestingly, on the ego's front, Simon and Chardy where both in the front row of the players area supporting; so they have managed to get a good range of non selected players out to support, as well as Mahut (hats off to him) and Benneteau