New Davis Cup Format by Richard Evans

Written by: Staff on 16th November 2013

Serbia vs Czech Republic tennis Davis cup final draw

New Davis Cup Format by Richard Evans

epa03949552 Radek Stepanek (L) and team captain Vladimir Safarik (R) fist bump during the draw ceremony for the Davis Cup final in Belgrade, Serbia, 14 November 2013. Serbia will play against Czech Republic in the Davis Cup World Group finals from 15 until 17 November in Belgrade. EPA/ANDREJ CUKIC |

Let me apologize up front. What I am laying out here is not new. It is the basis of a format for the Davis Cup that I forwarded to the Davis Cup committee, at the specific suggestion of Mr Davis Cup himself, Neale Fraser, four years ago.

It gained sufficient traction for it to be presented to the Davis Cup captains when they met that year. But that, of course, was as far as it went.

All we hear from the Davis Cup and its President, Francesco Ricci Bitti, — repeated again this week in Belgrade — is that the format will not be changed. Why? Because, says Ricci Bitti, the home and away format is sacrosanct and the competition must be held every year and everyone else should keep their cotton pickin’ hands off the ITF’s most prized possession. (Memo to Francesco: No one wants to steal the Davis Cup. We just want to improve it.)

So let’s take a look at my proposal which differs only in detail to that conceived by Mike Davies, who created the World Championship Tennis tour for Lamar Hunt, and Butch Buchholz who created the Lipton, now Sony, Championships in Miami. And one that is supported wholeheartedly by ESPN’s Cliff Drysdale. All three gentlemen, to put it mildly, know what they are talking about.

All of us agree that a Davis Cup final, separated by three months from the semi-final and played between two relatively small nations, doesn’t hack it. It doesn’t even create enough waves and world wide media interest when Spain, France or the United States are involved. When the US played Russia in the final in Portland, Oregon in 2007. L’Equipe from France was the only non-US or Russian newspaper or magazine to send a reporter.

So clearly, if one of the world’s great sporting competitions is to make the most of itself and punch its weight in the ever more demanding commercial market place, it needs to be revised.

And this is the way I suggested it be done:

#Clear two weeks in the calendar at the end of September and beginning of October and stage a two week Davis Cup bonanza involving the eight quarter finalists. Enough nations would be represented in that group to DEMAND media attention.

#Enlarge the World Group from 16 to 29 nations.

#Divide 28 nations into seven groups of four. Within their groups, have them play knock out semi-finals. That would constitute the first week of Davis Cup in April. The winners would move forward to the final of their individual groups to determine seven winners. That would be the second week of Davis Cup play in July. (The losers, meanwhile, would play off with the losers of that battle being relegated from the World Group)

#All these ties would be played on a home and away basis. Excluding the relegation matches, this format provides for 21 home and away World Group ties. Under the current system it only provides for 15. You might imagine my confusion when one ITF official, having looked at the proposal, accused me of reducing the number of home ties. When I went to school 21 was more than 15.

#What this format does do, of course, is put the quarter finals, semi-finals and final all in one place. And, as the arithmetic also tells you, if you have seven winners from seven groups going into an eight nation draw you need another participant. That would be the Champion nation from the previous year.

#Reverting half way back to the old Challenge Round system, the champion nation would not only get an automatic place in the quarter finals but earn the right to stage the two week Davis Cup Finals. So, instead of the frantic rush to find a stadium that hasn’t already been booked in September for a final in November, the holders would have an entire year to find or even build a proper venue.

There are plusses and minuses to every plan so let’s take a look at them.

The Upside:

#The creation of a new tennis event that will have world-side appeal; attracting vastly more media attention and would be far more understandable to the public the majority of whom don’t have a clue what is going on. And, most importantly, perhaps, for the ITF, television revenue will be hugely increased.

#The new format can still be completed in four weeks – exactly as the World Group is now.

#With the Champion Nation missing the early rounds, an over-worked player like Novak Djokovic or Tomas Berdych, to take the two top ten players competing in this year’s Final, would only have to play two weeks of Davis Cup instead of four if his team wins the competition.

#Having an enlarged World Group can only be good for those nations who struggle to make any money from the promotion of a Zonal tie. A World Group tie is always an easier sell to sponsors.

#A bigger World Group would also significantly reduce the chance of major tennis nations like Australia and Britain not even being in the elite group. Both have suffered this fate in recent years and it does the competition no good at all. Nor does it help promote the game in these major nations when their stars are not competing at the top table.

The Downside:

#The last three rounds would not be played on a home and away basis.

#It is possible that one would end up with a final being played in Serbia or Spain that would not include the host nation. This has proved a problem with Fed Cup but, with respect, the appeal of the two competitions is not comparable. With the build up and excitement engendered by having eight nations compete at one venue, especially with the majority of the world’s best player competing, the crowds are not going to disappear on the final weekend.

#The possibility exists that the Champion nation will not have the facilities to stage an eight nation event. Ideally it should be played outdoors and a late September date makes such an outcome feasible. Off the top of one’s head, it would be reasonable to expect that Spain, France, Argentina, the US, Canada, Britain and the Czech Republic all to have a tennis complex capable of carrying the event. I am not familiar with the outdoor facilities in Serbia but it is hard to believe that Djokovic would not be able to persuade the Serbian government to build a new complex if this format came into being.

Note: This format does not suggest that the Davis Cup should only be played every two years. That would be ruinous financially for many nations even, as has been the case with South Africa, it actually costs a Federation money to stage a tie because the ITF hog most of the advertising. Most nations are able to get some revenue from the Davis Cup.

Unless I am missing something, I think this addresses all the ITF’s concerns and offers them a chance to make more out of what they already have. Several Davis Cup captains agree with me. And, as Jim Courier says, the Davis Cup is not an American problem, it is a worldwide problem.

This, I hope, offers a worldwide solution.

Topics: 10sballs.com, Davis Cup, Itf, Novak Djokovic, Ricci Bitti, Tennis, Tennis News, Tomas Berdych, World Championship Tennis