Davis Cup (for India) 2007

[sameerph]

Form Leander's comments it does seem that the door is firmly shut on Rohan at least for the moment. To be fair to Lee, manner of Rohan's withdrawl was totally unprofessional coming as it did a day before the team was to be annouced & not answering phone calls & all.

India's next opponent , Kazakstan got promoted this year to group I & last year they played & won both their matches on hard courts.
It may be possible that they may choose clay courts considering India's weekneses on it . Still it would not be bad against such a team ( with their no. 2 player only ranked in 700's) to continue with blooding a young team . It remains to be seen if Somdev will available in the peak of college season. If not alongwith Karan any two out of Vivek , Divij , Sanam , Sunil can be chosen depending upon the thier performance in the interim period. 

[jayakris]

I cannot believe how LP is pilloried for saving us from the ultimate grace - losing to Pakistan in tennis at home.  What Rohan could have done is mere speculation.  What LP did is actual result.  The last I checked LP has more singles wins than anyone else in the current Indian team.  To hold grudge for pulling him out and using it as an example of mistrust is completely inappropriate for a novice on the Indian tennis team like Rohan.  In contrast, Rohan should probably thank LP for saving him from the situation of being in the pressure cooker.  It is even more disgraceful for forum members to keep bringing it up again and again as example of LP's selfishness, poor captaincy, and dissing the players.

None here has accused LP of selfishness.  I have only accused him of over-reaction.  The fact is that, however you say it, there is no way a player can be expected to take it as "being saved from the pressure cooker" if he is pulled out at home against somebody as lowly as Aqeel Khan, on supposedly your favorite surface grass, and not even be given a chance to do something for your country.    I was less critical of LP then (thinking there must have been an injury issue or something for RB for the 5th match against PAK), than I am now, having seen RB skip Davis Cup.  Here is what I said then ...

While I do not feel as strongly negatively about LP playing, like Dhruv does - I felt that it was at least a borderline poor decision (and still do) despite his winning.  He over-reacted to Rohan being unable to do much against Aisam.    But having seen how PA did not do any better than RB against Aisam (and had beaten Aqeel rather easily), it was one more indication that RB would have been able to beat Aqeel too.  Unless LP felt that Aqeel had some uncanny mobility and guile that would cause a matchup issue for Rohan (or that RB has some aches or pains hampering him, that we don't know of), there probably wasn't a reason for LP to play the fifth match.  It was a bit of an over-reaction and panic from LP to go out and play yesterday.  With good intention, we must admit.  ...

All is well if he properly took RB into confidence about why he was playing (though I am not sure how he could do that!).   ....

In summary, I cannot say that LP committed a crime or anything, and we should really give him props for doing what it takes.  I wish he would stop over-reacting to everything and work towards some sort of smoothness and confidence developing in our Davis Cup team and in their plans.

That is not pillorying him for his decision to play -and we all gave credit for him coming through over cramps to take care of AK.  But now it looks like LP's decision may have caused more trouble than I expected then, actually.

One thing is there though - in 8 ties under Leander Paes, no Indian has been able to play even marginally above expected in nearly 30 singles matches, and we have seen at least 2 or 3 matches where our players played below par.   Under Ramesh Krishnan, we at least had RB taking sets off Verkerk, and HM taking sets off Arthurs and taking Hewitt to a tiebreaker - and I don't remember a single upset loss by Indians (perhaps one by Fazal once against China?).   Under LP, "raising the level" happened in the very first match that RB played against Johansson, but since then it has been downhill and our players got worse in their ability to rise above the ordinary.  My suspicion is that the Indians are having trouble responding to LP.   Perhaps they are pushing themselves too hard, knowing the captain's superb record in the past, and perhaps are folding under the pressure of "doing it for the gipper" ..  It is unfortunate, and not LP's fault, even if we get criticial in retrsospect and say he has contributed to it with some borderline hasty decisions to play himself.

LP needs to really look at what is going on, and make a decision.   Perhaps groom a doubles team quickly and turn himself into a non-playing captain.  I think LP could turn out to be a pretty damn good captain if he simply turns "non-playing".   We will clearly lose a big ace up our sleeves if LP is not playing, but probably the next set of players like Karan and Somdev can develop that way - looking at themselves as the ones to do the job and not the captain, when the chips are down.  It's subtle but the mental aspects of looking at oneself as the ones charged to do the job, makes a difference, and some men respond to that better.

Jay

[arjun2761]

Agree with Kujo on the Hopman cup issue.  The guaranteed money is far more than that guaranteed in Chennai open and the ATP points (5 for an expected first round loss) is just not that big a factor.  Furthermore, Hopman cup just does not have the tradition of a national event in the sense that the Davis Cup is.  In other words, you show your patriotism by playing Davis Cup, Olympics, Asian Games and not by making money at the Hopman Cup.

[arjun2761]

One thing is there though - in 8 ties under Leander Paes, no Indian has been able to play even marginally above expected in nearly 30 singles matches, and we have seen at least 2 or 3 matches where our players played below par.   Under Ramesh Krishnan, we at least had RB taking sets off Verkerk, and HM taking sets off Arthurs and taking Hewitt to a tiebreaker - and I don't remember a single upset loss by Indians (perhaps one by Fazal once against China?).   Under LP, "raising the level" happened in the very first match that RB played against Johansson, but since then it has been downhill and our players got worse in their ability to rise above the ordinary.  My suspicion is that the Indians are having trouble responding to LP.   Perhaps they are pushing themselves too hard, knowing the captain's superb record in the past, and perhaps are folding under the pressure of "doing it for the gipper" ..  It is unfortunate, and not LP's fault, even if we get criticial in retrsospect and say he has contributed to it with some borderline hasty decisions to play himself.

LP needs to really look at what is going on, and make a decision.   Perhaps groom a doubles team quickly and turn himself into a non-playing captain.  I think LP could turn out to be a pretty damn good captain if he simply turns "non-playing".   We will clearly lose a big ace up our sleeves if LP is not playing, but probably the next set of players like Karan and Somdev can develop that way - looking at themselves as the ones to do the job and not the captain, when the chips are down.  It's subtle but the mental aspects of looking at oneself as the ones charged to do the job, makes a difference, and some men respond to that better.

Jay

How about RB taking Thomas Johansson to 3 tie breaker sets.  On the one hand, you hold that as an example of how well RB has performed but on the other hand the captain gets no credit for any performance of the players.

Also, all these players have had a steady stream of mediocre results on the tour -- whose fault is that?  The fact that in an individual sport like tennis -- it is player who rises to the occassion.  LP has raised his level in Davis Cup play (and olympics) numerous times with many different captains or colleagues  (so too have Hewitt, Roddick and others who show up for Davis Cup play).  It is the players that is responsible for the largest share of their performance with the captain playing a relatively small role.  Among our middle aged crew, Rohan and Prakash have generally failed to answer the call (that is, raise their level of play) and Harsh has done the same the few times he has been called on.

BTW, I am not convinced that our decline has ended.  It is upto the next generation to stem the rot.

[jayakris]

How about RB taking Thomas Johansson to 3 tie breaker sets.  On the one hand, you hold that as an example of how well RB has performed but on the other hand the captain gets no credit for any performance of the players.

I did mention that above! .. That was the first match RB played under LP.   He did seem to raise his level there.  What happened after that? -- it seemed to go only downhill from there.  That *was* my point!

I admit though, that it is based on scant data.  Look, I am as puzzled as the next guy about what is going on, and all I can do is to guess that whatever Lee has been trying has not been working.  I can only guess that his wards have not been able to respond to Leander (RB and HM specifically; Prakash has never done anything above his level in Davis Cup and LP never seem to let that affect anything ) .. I am just hypothesizing that it could be because of the larger-than-life stature of LP in Davis Cup and how the "threat" of Lee himself showing them that he is much better than them (which he could well be, even now) is also not helping ..   All just guesses.

Something needs to be done.  I don't know what.

I did not vote in Bhushan's poll about whether Lee should step down.  I don't know who else can take over, and I am not convinced LP should step down.  I would rather have LP do some introspection, figure out what is going wrong and take steps to correct them.   If the way he talks to the players and takes them into confidence is not working, he must change something.   He should avoid whatever happened with HM and RB repeating with Karan and Somdev.   I supsect he is puzzled too, at how things have gone - as I am sure in his mind he has been trying "whatever it took".

.. and I agree with you that our decline has NOT ended.  The rot has to be stemmed, and I think LP will need to be a part of that work.

Jay

[arjun2761]

Actually, your analysis of RB (match against Verkerk excepted) and especially HM ever raising their level is flawed.  You base it on winning a few extra games in matches in which they are generally comprehensively beaten.

Often the far superior player (Roddick, Johansson etc.)  will take such players very lightly and do what it takes to win knowing full well that they can win at any time.  To draw any conclusions from such a performance is largely meaningless.  You can better judge someones level on who they beat or play close enough so that they almost won.

For example, Istomin beat Karan 7-6, 7-5, 6-1 and may simply have played well enough to win without any fear of losing.  To say that Karan is anywhere near close to Istomin on clay is a non-sequiter.  In these situations, often a weaker player may actually win more games simply because they are not a threat.  Likewise, if you read the description of Nadal v. Rastogi, it is pretty clear that Nadal played well within himself (looking like a butcher according to a correspondent) before lifting his level and toying with Karan later in the match.  Therefore, your analysis that RB and HM ever raised their level based on matches in which they were probably completely outplayed does not make sense.

[sameerph]

This is the news item in outlook regardin India having to travel to Kazakhstan :-
http://www.outlookindia.com/pti_news.as ... &id=450381

That article mentiones only about Prakash's fitness but does not mention anything about Rohan & Harsh.

[jayakris]

Arjun - stop taking all the tangents just to argue.  Did you see me say it was no big deal already, that they had some tiebreaker sets etc? .. The only thing I was saying is that they were able to do a few things extra under Ramesh Krishnan.  I never thought RK was a great motivator or anything, so I felt it was just that they felt free enough to give it a go (by their own standards), which the guys seem to be not doing under LP, except in RB's first match under LP.  That seemed to force a helpless LP to consider playing himself, which in turn probably only added to the problem - that is my guess.

OK, I will play your game of picking nit, anyway.

Often the far superior player (Roddick, Johansson etc.)  will take such players very lightly and do what it takes to win knowing full well that they can win at any time.  To draw any conclusions from such a performance is largely meaningless.  You can better judge someones level on who they beat or play close enough so that they almost won.

Now you are contradicting yourself.   Play close enough to almost win? .. Isn;t that what RB did against Verkerk, losing 10-12 in the 5th set.  He was 2 points away from winning a couple of times there, and served second, facing defeat some 5 times before losing.  He had set points in two of those tiebreaker sets against Johansson too.   If that does not satisfy your own criteria, then I don;t know what is.  You are saying RB did not raise his level against those two players?  [I am not the one who said that matvch was such a big deal; YOU did]

#550 ranked Mankad was 76() 20 on #250 Motomura against Japan in 2001, before bad cramps did him in, losing 12 of the next 15 games.  #850 Mankad lost 46 63 57 against #50 Arthurs in 2002, and he was 2 points away form winning that match too.  Yeah, dead rubber matches, but he showed something at least under no pressure.  I don't think Motomura and Arthurs were playing to lose.

We are just arguing round and round, and I don't know what about

Jay

[wrestlinglife]

Quite simply the bottomline is this -- none of the players in the recent times have been able to raise their game. Nobody has  a win against a higher ranked player. Most have lost to even lower ranked players (notwithstanding excuses like, well, Aisam is great, this one was ranked as a junior, that one had potential, etc.) -- those are all excuses made to mollycoddle the new bunch. Leander or anyone can't do much if these players can't perform to even their own potential (and by perform I mean beat players).

Now, to come back to Leander Paes. Jay, you seem to be arguing that he should show complete trust in RB and co. and only be non-playing captain. But why? He still has a few years of tennis left in him. On one hand you say RB and co., hold him in high estimate. If they do, then why such big drama when LP decides to jump and play matches? Why shouldn't the best player in the team play at will?

[Insider]

Well, the assertion that Leander is the best singles player on the team is quite arguable.

[arjun2761]

Now you are contradicting yourself.   Play close enough to almost win? .. Isn;t that what RB did against Verkerk, losing 10-12 in the 5th set.  He was 2 points away from winning a couple of times there, and served second, facing defeat some 5 times before losing.

Actually, I had excepted RB's performance against Verkerk.  That is the only live performance in which our player exceeded expectations.  Prakash beating Istomin in Jaipur was probably the second best performance of the in-between generation in a live tie.

As far as LP being our best singles players -- that is certainly arguable but very few would rather see any of the others in a crunch tie in davis cup or asian games. 

[jayakris]

Now, to come back to Leander Paes. Jay, you seem to be arguing that he should show complete trust in RB and co. and only be non-playing captain. But why? He still has a few years of tennis left in him. On one hand you say RB and co., hold him in high estimate. If they do, then why such big drama when LP decides to jump and play matches? Why shouldn't the best player in the team play at will?

I don't think any of the payers have earned the right to be completely trusted by the captain.  All I am asking for is for LP to be a bit more careful in showing *distrust*.  In my view (my guess only) it affects the players quite strongly, especially as it comes from LP whose opinion does seem to matter for the players - perhaps mopre than they would even admit.  I am not sure if LP can change the way he is, though - he is what he is.  

There is also another angle which I have not mentioned - that is the way LP approaches Davis Cup.  To put it simply, there is a lot of emotional "rah-rah" in how LP "does" Davis Cup.  He thrives on the drama that sometimes he creates to motivate himself.  Heck, it worked for him, and you can make an argument that it rubbed off on MB too and he responded well in some ties in mid/late 90s (remember the drama of MB's Silberstein win against Chile? I doubt if MB had ever been as animated on court as he was in the 5th set of that match) ..  I don't know if the current crop of players are in that mould.

LP probably prefers a bad grass court where everything is up in the air and he can just go out there and summon up all his focus on against the bad bounce, believing that he will be better than the guy across the net at that.  The players who have grown up thinking the steady and calculating pro tour where one is about as good as your game and there ar limits to how much you could raise the game, find it tough to do it that way.

LP himself found it hard to do it that way in pro ATP tour, but with Davis Cup it is different.  He probably does not believe in all that much of planning and all that.  Not the cold-and-calculating type.  Even against teams we should just be beating just playing our game, Lee seemed to have drama in his matches, and he invariably came through (except a few notable exceptions like the 99 loss in Korea, which Lee blamed on not feeling the love - the team-mates and captain Jaideep not with him in what he was trying to do)

I have heard from some sources that many opposing captains and players find a lot of the stuff from LP very amusing.  They wonder what possesses this man, in Davis Cup.   His approach is quite unique and he knows all the tricks of his trade when it comes to that.  Like he and SKS disappearing before the 5th set this weekend.  What did LP do to motivate themselves for the 5th set? -- Anybody's guess.  I assume he simply wound himself and Sunil up, as theugh the sky was about to fall if they lost the doubles match.

One guy who seemed to buy into that approach, is probably Prakash.  He likes the rah-rah and really appreciates that approach from LP.  It is questionable whether it has helped Prakash to do better in Davis Cup - but at least he *thinks* he can do better with that.  To some extent, I think this is what endeared PA to LP.  Kash probably trusts what LP is saying and goes out there trying to do that.  On the other hand, HM (and ostensibly RB too) probably had trouble dealing with that approach, and would prefer just going there and playing a lower-key match, trying to do their best.

Just another hypothesis from me.  Don't take it as LP bashing; I am trying to put forth these things for discussion, more than as truth.

Jay

[BSharma]

. . . The guaranteed money is far more than that guaranteed in Chennai open and the ATP points (5 for an expected first round loss) is just not that big a factor.  Furthermore, Hopman cup just does not have the tradition of a national event in the sense that the Davis Cup is.  In other words, you show your patriotism by playing Davis Cup, Olympics, Asian Games and not by making money at the Hopman Cup.

Arjun is entitled to his views and he may not agree with mine, but I can express my views to challenge his contentions. 

Rohan was a doubles finalist at Chennai Open in 2006 and at Mumbai Open in 2006 and it is likely that he could have done better than a first round loss in Chennai (5 ATP points).  The point distributions at Chennai Open were: R1 – 5 points; R2 – 15; QF – 40; SF – 75; Finalist 120; Winner – 175.

Rohan is at that stage of his career where he probably wants to become another doubles specialist and make a decent living by being a part of a top 10 doubles team.  Winning 75, 120, or 175 points in Chennai and recognition among his peers as a good men’s doubles player could have helped him more in the long run than the money he earned at Hopman Cup.  Graduating from Challenger level to ATP level in doubles is a lot more difficult than in singles and several decent doubles players (Rajeev Ram, Bobby Reynolds, Scott Lipsky, Sonchat Ratiwatana) have not made that transition despite good results at the Challenger level.  There is no qualifying doubles tournament at ATP level and unless some top 20-30 doubles player takes Rohan as a partner, he has hardly any scope of making the ATP doubles tournaments.

Hopman Cup does not have the tradition of Davis Cup since it is fairly new (started in 1989), but a player still shows his or her patriotism for the country by participating in it.  Arjun appears to feel that earning money at Hopman Cup makes a player less patriotic (that is how I read his comment although I may be wrong in my interpretation), but Davis Cup also pays significant amount of money to players in the World Group.  Rohan and Sania played at the highest level of Hopman Cup and it is similar to playing in the World Group of Davis Cup. 

[BSharma]

The Leander-Rohan issue can be viewed from two angles – captain’s and Rohan’s.

If I was the captain of the Indian Davis Cup team, I would be ticked off at Rohan for the manner in which he informed the team about his unavailability for the DC tie.  If I was the captain in the mold of Leander, I would have a very hard time to excuse Rohan for this indiscretion.  Leander is the type of Davis Cup player who expects his players to show the same type of fire in their bellies as he does himself at Davis Cup. 

If I was a tennis player similar to Rohan, who has to watch out for my career and I was getting an opportunity to play somewhere which could possibly help me move from Challenger level to ATP level, I could have opted out of the DC tie especially if my presence on the team would not have significantly affected the team’s results.  I would have taken the captain into confidence and sought his help and advice.  It is likely that the captain would have agreed with my plans or he might have asked me to play against Uzbekistan with a stipulation that he would help me at another ATP doubles tournament.  What I do not know is how Leander, the captain of Davis Cup team, reacts to such news from his players.

[prasen9]

There is not much point in keeping on debating these things.  It is really hopeless unless we get a top-200 level player.  With any of these folks we have today, we are not going to win much to move up to the World Group.  Unless we do that, it really does not matter whether we win or lose against Pak or Kazakh or Uzbek.  Follow women's tennis.

-pm