Analysing Proposed Davis Cup changes by ITF

Tennis, like many sports has been often been accused of being stuck in a malaise of tradition.

However, tennis has been involved in quite a bit of innovation over the decades.  For instance the tiebreak, which was introduced in 1970; before the tiebreak, first sets in matches could often end up 10:8!  Tennis along with cricket were also the first sports to introduce Hawk-Eye.  Cricket initially brought in Hawk-Eye (developed by Paul Hawkins) for the benefit of television viewers, then later as part of the review system for the Third Umpire to check LBW (leg before wicket) decisions on the TV monitor in the back studio.  Tennis soon followed suit introducing Hawk-Eye in 2006 as part of their review system, where a player could challenge a call made by the umpire or line judge.  The ATP tour has introduced the no ad scoring system in doubles matches, however, I consider that more of a convenience for television rather than an innovation. 

One competition that has been crying out for change or innovation is the Davis Cup, the mens team event.  There is no doubt that the Davis Cup is a great competition, just look at the fervour of the crowds at any Davis cup match anywhere in the world at any level; and the players clearly love playing the competition.  However, for as long as I have been watching tennis, the Davis cup has been held back by its format but now the International Tennis Federation (ITF) has finally come to the conclusion that the Davis cup format needs looking at with some urgency.  There are many reasons why this should be the case, the future is looking brighter already if some of these ideas can be implemented.

If we look at the open era, I believe the Davis Cup has continually shot itself in the foot. 

The first problem is each round of the Davis cup is held the week after the four major tournaments.  Invariably a player who wins a major tournament misses the Davis cup.  This has become even more stark in the last 25 years where major tournaments have become bigger, with more prestige, ranking points and prize money than ever before; due to the fact the Australian Open and Wimbledon are no longer routinely skipped by top players who didn’t want to play or grass or travel to Australasia around the Christmas period.  Whoever wins a major tournament today is sure to be drained physically and mentally and can hardly be expected to play a Davis cup tie just a few days later.  This weakens the competition immediately and thus weakens the prestige as well. 

The next problem is the competition is too long, with four rounds of play from February culminating with the final in either late November or early December.  Considering the tennis season recommences on 28th or 29th December every year in Doha, it seems strange to drag a competition on for such a long period of time.  Participants in the final almost get no time to rest before training begins for the start of the new season. 

These two factors have been key reasons as to why whoever wins the Davis cup more or less hinges on which players make themselves available for the entire year.  For instance, in 1995 Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras were the top two players in the world, both said they would only play if the other was playing; the Americans went on to win the Davis Cup that year beating Russia in the final. The implication being neither player wanted to give the other an edge by being fresher throughout the year for the big tournaments. In recent years this has become even more noticeable; it really depends on whoever makes themselves available as to who will actually win the competition.  In 2014 both Roger Federer and Stan Wawrinka made the commitment to play Davis cup for Switzerland and they duly won the competition for the first time. The very next year in 2015 neither player was available for the first round tie which they promptly lost and were left fighting to avoid relegation. In 2015 Andy Murray was the only top five player who made himself available for the entire year and Britain went on to win the competition for the first time since the 1930s.

What is needed is a competition where all of the top players are available to play on a yearly basis, which in turn gives more credibility to the competition; the argument that players should be proud to play for their country regardless of factors and circumstances doesn’t quite work in tennis which is an individual sport first and foremost.  The previous President of sixteen years, Italian Francesco Ricci Bitti, was always intransigent in his views towards the Davis cup, due to being concerned that the ATP was attempting to gain more control over the tennis calendar.  However, new President American Dave Hegarty, has fully accepted that some changes should be put in place to make the Davis Cup a more viable and much more watched event, especially by neutral fans when it comes to the latter stages of the competition.

According to the ITF’s website, the proposed changes include: (direct quote from the website).

·      The launch of an open bid process to assess fixed host cities for the Davis Cup and Fed Cup by BNP Paribas Finals – a model used by events including the UEFA Champions League Final, Superbowl and European Rugby Champions Cup; 

·        Further steps towards the introduction of a 16-team World Group for Fed Cup by BNP Paribas via the introduction of a Final Four event;

·       full industry consultation on scheduling alternatives for the 2020 season;

·       A review of current match formats used in Davis Cup by BNP Paribas, particularly the current best-of- five-sets approach and scheduling requirements during the week;

·       An extensive feasibility study, by the newly created Davis & Fed Cup Taskforce, of format changes below World Group to better support and encourage involvement in both Davis and Fed Cup - particularly by developing tennis nations, and to further increase worldwide interest and viewership;

·       A full assessment of current staging options for host venues and cities;

·       A review of Junior Davis Cup and Fed Cup including the potential benefits of introducing new age group events

There is no doubt some of these proposed changes might prove controversial to some and a little ambitious, after all tennis is not football where the finals of major competitions have always been held in neutral venues so there is a tradition there.  However, I think some of these changes are well worth considering and indeed implementing over the next few years.

The first key change will be scheduling. Scheduling changes will be very difficult to implement so it will be interesting to see what the ITF come up with.  This is one area where the ITF, ATP and WTA need to work more closely together with absolute urgency.  At present in my opinion the ATP tour is too long, whilst the WTA tour is just about right.  Over recent seasons, the WTA has truncated the season considerably, with the end of year championships and Fed cup finals all completed by the end of October which gives the players one month of rest and an extra month to prepare before the new season begins at the end of December. 

However, the ATP World tour finals is not completed until mid November and the Davis cup final takes place after that, which means the players who play to the end do not get enough time to rest and prepare for the new season; before it was even worse, with the season often finishing in early December until a few years ago.  The problem revolves around the ties taking place a week after major tournaments; the ITF have to find a way to play these ties perhaps two weeks after major tournaments.  However, at the same time there is and has always been too many tournaments sanctioned by the ATP, which is more like a disparate arrangement than a coherent plan.  The question would be, how much would the ATP be willing to compromise their calendar for the Davis Cup?  This in my opinion is one of the keys as to why Francesco Ricci Bitti was unwilling to consider any changes to the Davis cup during his time in office.

The other key suggestion is no doubt the idea of switching matches from best of five to best of three sets.  This will be an issue for players and fans alike, some liking the suggestion and others not.  I definitely think it is something worth considering; some matches are taking too long to complete which does not help television.  Also, the choice of surfaces are also a factor, even indoor courts are now medium slow and there is no willingness by anyone to speed up surfaces to quicken points; the next best thing is indeed to reduce the length of matches.  This may well persuade top players to commit to playing Davis Cup every year as opposed to every two or three years at a time which currently happens. However, if the ITF and the ATP can find a solution to move ties further away from major tournaments there may be no need to contemplate best of three sets. 

The most intriguing proposal is the idea of hosting finals in neutral venues with cities bidding for the final as happens every year in the Champions League.  The questions I would ask are:

a) What would be the criteria, would it have to be indoors every year?  If an Australian city wanted to host the final they could do so in outdoor conditions during that time of year.

b) Would there be a consensus that all finals will be held on a particular surface?  Every year the host finalist is allowed to the choose the surface they wish to play on; we often see finals played on indoor clay to put the opponent off, will the national federations be willing to agree that from now on all finals are to be played on indoor hardcourt?  Would it be slow medium, fast medium, fast hardcourt?  Will the tennis balls be heavy duty or lighter?  These are all factors the ITF will have to take into account if they are serious about having neutral cities host the final; tennis is not as clear cut as football.

c) Where will semifinals be played?

It is good to see the ITF are ready to look at the format of the Davis Cup to see how it can be improved and preserved for future generations. Let’s see what concrete measures come out of these proposals over the next two years.  In the ITF’s quest to improve the Davis cup, I hope they do not tamper with the dates of the Federation cup which are working well and not interfering with major tournaments.  If the ITF wish to play the Fed cup final in a neutral venue that is fine.