The expression on PHM's face, just about says it.

Ultimately Pete, Forget wasnt very far off was he? The doubles was a close affair.
Not that Tarpi wouldnt have taken different preventive measures, had France taken the doubles.

But P, if France wins the doubles. . .

How much does Paul-Henri look like Gasquet in that picture??

Pete - since you mentioned Blake and the US - did you catch any of the Bryan Brothers / Spain doubles = the third and fourth set + tie breaker was great fun with both teams dancing around and stepping up.

I found it very enjoyable and think:
1) shows two big serving singles guys can cause anyone problems
2) best of five can add tons to a match
3) these guys had a great time playing Davis Cup - playing or watching.

The game were Bryans saved two match points was a ripper!

and does the fact Davis Cup piles alot on the line in doubles make it more dramatic and interesting than an average tourney (not GSs) where they play two sets and a tiebreaker type thing.

TT - alas, I had to yield the clicker to the golf/Masters fans but one thing is always true: two big guys with big serves makes for a hailacious doubles team!

"The tantalizing story line going in was that France captain Guy Forget wanted his best singles players available for service, even if it meant diminishing France's chance to win the doubles."

Was Gasquet available for service, and Forget decided that his strongest option was to go with Grosjean/Mathieu?

I think Gasquet said his "feet hurt" after his long singles match on Day One (the ITF DC site story has it. . .)

I guess. I dont know that Tarpi had enough go to guys to win both singles the next day.

Who should he have picked? A double specialist like Fabrice or maybe clement?

Pete--did Reeshard's match with Mikhail do anything to change your perception of him as a competitor?

Good question Ryan.

Ryan, it confirmed and made me more feel more confident in my perception - for now. "almost" only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades. But I am always open to the idea that people change, mature, whatever.

Interesting...as a fellow player (of FAR less ability), I greatly admire Reeshard's efforts. Down those match points in the third set he had the choice to lose or keep fighting, with the potential of losing still, even in the 5th. The fact that he was willing to put that much time in just to lose still...that loss has to be hard to swallow.

I'm not sure I agree with your "almost" analysis--so if we have a player who fights as hard as possible but just isn't talented enough to win, is (s)he less of a competitor than, say, Gasquet? I think natural talent is too closely linked to be able to say one way or another. Wouldn't a straight-set loss confirm your beliefs?

Well said, Ryan. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought that fighting hard was part of the whole warrior thing, even if it was in a losing cause.

He took it from the point of certain defeat in the 3rd set to a point in the 5th where his mental fortitude could be debated. That does him credit.

can't you say that Safin choked away the 2002 australian open final against Thomas johansson?

Safin ooh Safin...such talent...such a headcase...I have given up understanding why such a talented player could loose to the likes of Hewitt, Johanson and also beat TMF and Pete...(scratching head in bemusement)

While clay may seem the logical surface to some for the Sweden vs. USA DC tie, clay is essentially the Swedes worst surface as well; Roddick has a better record on the surface than anyone currently on the Swedish DC team.

Actually, Ryan, in a way the particulars aren't that important. What's the bottom line here? Reeshard appeared to step up and take charge in the last tie, and now he's back to Square One. Once again, you couldn't count on the guy to win a winnable match.

All I've said all along is that Gasquet seems to me a much more "ordinary" schmo than "Baby Federer", despite the appeal his game has for some (and I'm not even one who finds his game all that appealing - too many flourishes and flash). I haven't seen much proof otherwise. I keep feeling like I have to apologize for trashing somehow, which isn't my intent, but so far he's been a flawed competitor with a lot more flash than substance. An all-show, no-go kind of guy IF you do him the honor of holding him to a high, exacting standard.

Anonymous: I think most of us have given up on trying to figure out Safin. :-)

I thought Gasquet was fired up to play Safin on the first day. I was a bit surprised that he did not play the final match.

I am not sure whether the rules allowed Gasquet to be substituted for the last match against Safin -- given that he was substituted out of the match against Andreev.

Pete how could you ruin that lovely picture of the beautiful bebeh by involving her in an ode to Safin's prowess? Pete Bodo is clearly NOT for the children.

While we are ragging on Gasquet could we spare some vitriol for Kolya and his embarrassing display against PHM. What was that?

I'll grant you that he does have a lot more flourish than seems necessary.
To be fair, Federer himself was on the tour for a full 5 years before he really took hold. I am not saying that he deserves the same kind of respect that Federer commands now. But he atleast deserves the benefit of the doubt, knowing what we know.

Pete: Looks like we agree to disagree on Gasquet. But what did you think of Federer at the same age?

I don't think he'll ever be a dominant player or anything like that, but I'm willing to give him some more time before closing the book on him. He has areas to improve on, and is young enough that he has ample time to do so.

I am not sure whether the rules allowed Gasquet to be substituted for the last match against Safin -- given that he was substituted out of the match against Andreev.

I dont get that either. Did it really matter, considering that his projected opponent was substituted out also?

Mr. Bodo,

I agree with some of the points you made about Gasquet, even though I adore his exciting game. This kid sorely needs a new coach, and it wouldn't be a bad idea to employ the services of a Gilbert type-- a loud, swaggering American who knows a thing or two about competition and gives not two sh^&s about beauty and flash.

--Liron

Oh, Sam, I'm not closing the book on him - just saying what I see now and if we disagree somewhere it's in that I don't see very Federer-esque qualities in the guy. I've seen a lot of brilliant, exciting shotmakers come and go.BTW, I felt entirely differently about TMF when I first saw him. I always did think he had it.

(kick me, disappoint me, shatter my hopes, Marat, I will still always love you like a true Safinista)
This is how I feel about Marat, love him but he drives me crazy!
Also glad the US won, that 3rd and 4th sets of the doubles was fun.
So did Spain not play Lopez in the singles? That seems crazy he
seems to be one of their better players on faster surfaces, seems
pretty obvious to me to play him.

"one of the finest one-match players in the contemporary era"

And *that* is one of the finest descriptions ever of a titanic player who's resume includes more flame-outs than matches of blinding incandescence, written without demeaning him in any way.

Sorry: "whose resume"

Pete: Interesting, wasn't sure if your early impression of TMF was similar to how you feel about Gasquet. Just out of curiousity, how many other players do you see Federer-esque qualities in? I suspect the list would be pretty short.

I would like to see him get a coach like Gilbert as Liron suggested, who can help him better utilize his multitude of weapons.

Marat is heartbreaking to watch - so glad he came through when his team needed him.
And the whip me, beat me line really does apply to him.
Christine- I see your point about Lopez - he is better than some of the others on a fast surface - but that seems to be in his past- lately - he has been pretty disappointing in singles - so I can understand why the captain chose to play the higher ranked players.
Remember Verdasco took a healthy Roddick to 5 sets at the USOpen last year - and they were probablly trying to psych him with that one. Roddick had just beaten Lopez at IW so the pschological edge was not there for him.

"Safin may be an under-achiever, but he's no choker."

Isn't that worse? Wasting talent to me is more damning that getting tight in crunch time.

" could we spare some vitriol for Kolya and his embarrassing display against PHM"

We would, but he's too obscure. :-)

I agree with Pete about France. Bar none, France has the most gifted but wasted team of tennis talent.
I was ecstatic that Seb came through. But Reeshard is not living up to his hype. I would have have had Santoro in the line-up. He's a tricky singles player and a great doubles player.
Imagine what would happen if Monfils and Reeshard both got their heads screwed on right.

And, as much as Safin gets his due knocks, he is a DC stalwart--as much or more so than Roddick, who gets the DC hype but has yet to deliver the trophy.

Pete,

My husband is not a huge tennis fan like I am. He usually plays poker on the computer while I watch the matches and tunes in only when he hears some profanity from me, or loud cheering or hissing from the crowd. But whenever I tell him Marat Safin is playing, he settles into his recliner and actually watches the entire match. You're right, for all his flaws, underachievements and histrionics, Safin has a “champion's aura” and the ability to create magic. Obviously, his opponents feel it too in some of the matches that really matter.

Easter (the non-religious kind) is just way too pastel for me, but all the bunny and egg stuff is the best when you have little ones. Love the photo!

I dunno Lisa - I can't knock Roddick on his Davis cup resume. The US hasn't won - but its not for lack of dedication or wilanders on Roddick's part. Davis is a team competition - so I can't fault him for the US not winning the entire thing.

They've been not winning for longer than than he's been playing...

But agreed that Pete has perfectly captured the essence of Marat in his 'finest one-match player' label. (Not to mention the beat me, whip me bit!lol!)

Though Reeshard may not have won - I have to give him props for not folding up his tents. I still have hopes for him, and either way - love to see him playing as when he's on, he's great fun to watch.

Pete -

I found your remark, "The tie I found most intriguing was Russia vs. France" rather humourous because of its...rather obvious nature. Aside from this tie, every other one was already decided after day two. And not just in the world group - the Zone groups as well! One of the most uncompetitive Davis Cup weekends in some time. I felt bad for the fans who paid for Sunday tennis - hope they liked dead rubbers.

As for Gasquet, well you know I'm a fan of his, but I will say my hopes for him have definitely cooled since the beginning of this year. So many missed opportunities, I feel (Adelaide, Auckland, Marseille...even the AO). However, he started horribly last year, and then made a nice run in the summer months. I look forward to seeing what he can do on the dirt.

Nice note about Nalbandian too - that's a very good point that I hadn't considered.

The "Marquis de Safin" it will be! Superb. W/all the time he spent out West, I wonder if his agent had the savvy to arrange a screen test for Marat's post-tennis career. If he tests half as well on the big screen as he does on the small screen, he could be a knockout post- Cold War Leading Man. And you can't say he has no emotional range :)

" could we spare some vitriol for Kolya and his embarrassing display against PHM"

That Reeshard, he really sucks doesnt he. :-)

jb: being a Safin and Reeshard fan is pure hail.

But, with the French, at least they lose with flair! I watched theh 02 France-Russia final between Seb and Safin and it was absolutely brilliant tennis.

I don't know about this French-team-as-underachievers thing. The French team of Mathieu, Gasquet, Grosjean, Llodra has a ton of talent, no arguments, but really, who among them do you think should've won a Slam in an era when, say, Blake, Nalbandian and Ljubicic haven't managed one between them? If anything I think the French Davis Cup story in recent years is one of overachievement. They lack a big singles gun - a Nalbo, a Roddick, a Rafa, a Cap'n - but have nevertheless won the Davis Cup more recently than the United States (which boasts two players in the top ten, and what's more, is never without a top men's player for long). In the case of the Russia tie they were outgunned, purely and simply, and it's mostly a testament to Mathieu's rising to the occasion against Kolya that the tie went to a live fifth rubber.

That said, I still think Guy Forget's tactics came back to bite him, as all us armchair DC captains knew they would.

Anyway, I think we can all agree that Argentina stunk up the joint the most this weekend.

My feelings about that fine-azz Safin, are as selfishly muddled and confused as my love for Mary J Blige. I want her to be happy because of all the drama she's been through in her life...but why oh why is it that her best music has consistently been when her life is in the crapper and K-Ci is beating her down or something? She only makes good music when she's sad and depressed, yet I want her to be a happy person. I want my homeboy Safin to have some fun (but not the dirty kind) yet, that's when his tennis game sucks...and then the injuries come. Yet when he's focused on tennis, with a decidedly less interesting personal life, its just magic to watch. Sigh.

pete, a true safinista too ?
what do you think of kapitan von safin, the unsubmersible DC player ???
marat the guy who speaks like drooppy and who makes maratades on court according to my sister, who manadge to saw him beating agassi at the FO on his debut !!!
that year 98, he got me too, ha was almost unstopable...
young, rethless and smocking hott !!!

well, forget had the tricky choice of making a good double team from which he could take a good single player for sunday, because it was obvious that gasquet and youznhy were burn out...
he made the only choice he had.
for me he screw it not picking benneteau iso grosjean, but the thing is if i had to put money on a guy to turn a match in his favor, maybe grosjean was the choice, he's much more experienced than benneteau but his game wasn't there for the doubles...
you can't have it all !!!
but it's true, the french are really hard to beat anywhere, on any surface in DC...
the irreductibles gaulois spirit ;)
safin shows a big heart for his country and it's maybe one of the competions he still enjoys these days... davai russia !!!

lisa - it is pure hail, agreed!

The French do play with such flair. I realize as i type this - i like a lot of the french players. Grosjean, clement, santoro (love him), gasguet. I dont know that much about benneteau or PHM but yeah, France usually does well with a solid team of players and not 1 'star'.

Russia has just an embarrassment of choices, as does argentina. And agreed - argentina definately underperformed the most. (To say the least. I sooo didn't call that one.)

That's what I'm sayin', JB. The French team's success (such as it is) has come from versatility and all-around solidity rather than having David Nalbandian or Marat Safin coming through to save its collective hiney. I think that deserves some recognition. DC isn't about stars, or at least, not the usual stars.

The Russian and Argentinian teams are both ridiculously deep, agreed. And the US has two top players and a top doubles team, so depth is not an issue.

"We would, but he's too obscure"

Poor Kolya, he tries his best to attract some attention by tanking spectacularly and he still gets upstaged as a choker by someone who saves a couple of match points. Does he have to set himself on fire to get some attention?

Lucy
The problem the US faces is, that sooner or later they have to go play an away tie, invariably on clay.

It is good to have you back to close of the DC discussion by the way.

Yeah I know Ptenis. Oz has the same issue, except nobody notices anymore because our singles players suck nowadays. But the US is doing a pretty good job of avoiding that this year. USA! USA! Clay is for teams that can't handle the fast stuff!

I still cannot BELIEVE Guy Forget underplaying the importance of the doubles rubber. Was he not present for all those years of Delaitre/Santoro DC heroics?

jb: I LOVE Santoro's legs. He's got the best ones in the game.

Hey Lucy - I think you need to give some extra 'team wmb's' to France for their repeated 'team effort'; and managing to play consistently above the level of their individuals. A case of the sum being greater than the whole.

ptenisnet - that's exactly the issue with the americans, they eventually have to play on clay. Though with Sweden - they may not pick clay....

What kills me is they US SHOULD be able to play on clay. Roddick truly isn't as bad as some think on clay. and the Bryan's are very good on clay. Yeah, they're going to get blanked when they play a clay powerhouse - but they can get through with the non- elite clay countries. (Not quite sure how to phrase that, but y'all know what I mean.)

this year though - depending upon if they can get by Sweden, they actually have a pretty good shot at taking the Cup.

Love the description of Marat as one of the finest one match players. Spot on.

And I think Misha deserves some major props for really gutting out a win in the second match of the France/Russia tie. From accounts I have read- he was really physically hurting during the match but kept going when some other players may have been dismayed at losing the 2 to 0 match lead.

Well they did go and beat Berdy on clay. It might really be their year.
It would be fitting that the US wins the DC at home and once again the Fed gets cheated out of an SI Sportsman of the year award.

Welllll, Lisa - have to admit, though I'm definately a fan of the Magician's legs, I gotta go with Fed as best legs......

Were you one of the TW-er's who just recently realized Santoro had great legs? I remember some posts where light struck on that fact - it somewhat derailed a match call for a bit I think!

I meant a 2 to 0 set lead in the match of course. Sigh...is there a possiblity of getting an edit feature one day for morons such as myself. :)

I think it would behoove Sweden to play fast indoor. Robin is very good at that surface and this could really be important for him.

Oh man. I can see it now. The Bryan brothers chest-bumpting on the SI Sportsman of the Year cover.

Beating Berdy & co was no mean feat, granted.

Last week, on my other tennis site, I called Tarpishev an "evil genius" because of his uncanny way of knowing exactly when to put difficult (as in quirky) players like Tursunov and Safin into the lineup -- at times when most people would never think of doing so. (I shouldn't call him "evil" just because of that face and look of his, but...!)After the Davydenko loss, I thought that his charm/genius was disappearing, but then he did it again -- with Safin for the final crucial rubber.

Anyway, the changed rules that seem to allow random substitutions on the third day, regardless of illness/injury or whether the rubbers are live or not, give a huge advantage to teams with depth in the singles (maybe deservedly so). The new rules would also probably make captains less willing to use up two of their four spaces on the team with a proven doubles team whose players could not be -- winningly -- put in as singles players on the third day.

I enjoy the important role that the doubles match plays in DC, and I do not like the current situation at all, mainly because it discourages captains from choosing good doubles players (who might not be strong singles players) for DC. Remember how PMac didn't include the Bryan brothers on the USA team, much to the chagrin of many fans (including me), until he was pretty sure that their presence on the team guaranteed one point?

I'd like to see DC return to the time when the two players who played on the first day were required to play the reverse singles on Day 3 unless they were seriously injured. Let the typical DC team consist of a country's two best singles players and its two best doubles players who (as with the Blacks of Zimbabwe) are sometimes the same two players!

It was mostly just Berdy but still.

I'd like to see DC return to the time when the two players who played on the first day were required to play the reverse singles on Day 3 unless they were seriously injured. Let the typical DC team consist of a country's two best singles players and its two best doubles players who (as with the Blacks of Zimbabwe) are sometimes the same two players!

I sort of agree with this. Otherwise it is just a chess game between Shamil and Guy.

Carrie - that's sort of what I was thinking. If you go with clay, Sweden also hampers their own team, perhaps too much. Fast courts may be their best shot at beating the US.

It will be a tough choice though. Can't wait to see what mats picks!

I sort of think Mats will roll the dice and select clay, if only to unnerve the Americans and make a big deal about his own wilanders. Soderling is serviceable on clay. TJ not so much. Sweden are pretty much outgunned no matter what, on paper. Then again, as Pete says, stranger things have happened...

Joachim Johansson may be back by September from shoulder surgery...that could unnerve the Americans more than clay. (Blake is 0-2 vs JoJo and Roddick is 1-1 vs JoJo).

Sorry to interrupt, I've just read your scribblings Jay, very funny. I liked your line about Justin Gimelstob.

Sampras is as good a player as Federer says Justin Gimelstob -ranked 73. That just about takes the cake. No, the proverbial cake. You havent actually got a cake Justin.

lol so cruel, so cruel but very funny. How much do they pay you for each contribution?

Someone was suggesting that they should play on grass and have young jonas play singles as well as doubles.

But what are joachims's results on clay? Sweden probably has a better chance to on hard courts, I would think.

*off to look up joachim's results.*

Mr. Bodo! I have an answer to your question!

"The tie I found most intriguing was Russia vs. France, even if you keep in mind that France is capable of stinking up the joint against anyone, anywhere, anytime. Does any nation produce comparable numbers of gifted players who can't win squat?"

Yes! That nation is today's Spain outside of Rafa Nadal and the workmanlike Tommy Robredo. So much talent...so little to show for it outside of Paris. If you want to add another set of talent-laden yet little to show for it...Argentina is a logical choice (1 grand slam title by..Gaston? Yep, G squared.) Russia's squad looks very U.S.-like: an uber-talent surrounded by workaholics who probably get more out of their games than anyone could predict. Russia and U.S. are looking more and more like: "hey we are doing the best with what we got. We are earning our dollar the hard way, but dont expect much!"

A fully recovered JJ is unnerving, but shoulder surgery... well, it's iffy.

Roddick would federer Bjorkman on grass. Sweden are damned if they do, damned if they don't. I say bring back Vinciguerra, put the tie on clay, and try to scare PMac with his Latin-sounding name.

Andrew M, I agree on both counts. And France did not stink up the joint!

They could make it clay and bring back Borg.

Good idea Ptenis. Borg and Mats have nine French Open titles between them. What have they got to lose?

See, unlike Forget, Mats knows how to really make the doubles inconsequential.

jb: I *may* have made some complimentary comments about Santoro's legs. Now, Roger has the best hair of the tour. He's got good legs, too but of a different variety. Santoro's legs scream POWER!

Mats & the swedes have until september to make their choices for CLAY! Joachin Johansson is rested until then! If USA is to win DC it must stay healthy during clay season & hard court season.If ARod still healthy ,he would play until the end! The same goes for BB brothers but my doubts resides in James Blake.Is he really authentic or is an ilusive image? Anyway,after september the Tarpichev teams awaits for the winner!

Mhm - I'll give you that much, Lisa. Santoro's are more the tree trunk variety...

oops - this is OT. mhm.

I think Blake is the real deal, but he hasn't figured out clay yet. Though now that I think of it - he was doing pretty well last year at the french. With his power and speed, he really SHOULD do better at clay.

OK, big news. Americans should do better at clay. *rolls eyes*
NOT one of my more discerning statements.

Please move the Santoro's leg conversation to the MNP. Thanks.

PimPim??!!! Ah, how I forgot about him. Oh, Mats is gonna be very, very hungry for blood when the tie arrives. I guarantee youu that he'll work out a strategy to win. Goooo Sweden!!!

Lucy's points about the French being over rather than underachievers is a good one; maybe I should re-think my position. On the other hand , to produce so many good players of TT calibre yet have not a Slam among them is an 800 lb gorilla. . .

Whomever said that Safin choked in the Australian Open 2002 Final does not know Safin. Safin does not choke. He is either brilliant, or he implodes seemingly without provocation, but I've never seen him succomb to nerves. As for AO 2002, all of us true Safin fans know what went down. Safin wasted all his energy the previous night on vodka and those three scantily-clad blonde chicks (the "Safinettes", as the media dubbed them).

Gotta love him. =)

Pete, you just made my day.

Seriously, as you say, it is quite glaring that despite their obvious aptitude for producing top-quality players, the French can't boast any recent male Slam champions. But I sort of think of that as a different issue. Given the players that they HAVE produced, I don't think there's much you can say against their Davis Cup team. They always show, and they always show to play. Gasquet is still spotty under pressure and ridiculous underconditioned for a 20-year-old athlete, sure, but I'm hoping that will change.

BTW I forgot to say I loved your shout-out to Nalbandian. He's definitely a mold-breaker of the highest order. His performance this weekend was muy disappointing, considering how he performed against Russia last year.

Kirsten: Well, if you're gonna lose a Slam final, that is as a good a reason as I can think of. :-)

Sam, you're too easy, dude!

And Luce, The difference between Russia and France is that the former has churned out some GS champs (Safin, Kafelnikov), and in a way that is the end-all and be-all (as it should be, to me). Imagine if France could swap, oh, Grosjean for Hewitt; now we're talking dynasty. Speaking of which, how about Oz, giving us Hewitt and Rafter and the the Six Dwarfs plus Pou. That's success of which the French can only dream (or they can go all Cartesian on you and reject the premis, which may be their problem).

This borders on the Gasquet discussion a little, in that I'm starting to think that you can divide TW into two halves: those who believe winning is all, and those who think playing nice or attractive or spectacular tennis is what it's all about. I'm in the former camp.

At the end of the day, France is a dynasty lacking a great king, and that's never a successful or historic dynasty.

"Sam, you're too easy, dude!"

Well, the smarter thing would have been to save the extra-curricular activties for after the final, but Safin marches to his own drummer.

Also, I think there's a middle ground in the winning is all/playing attractive tennis debate. I consider myself in this group.

Point taken, Pete. France is no Russia. Although I think a French Rafter (not that I can imagine it) would be better for dynasty-building than a Hewitt, the latter's slightly more successful career notwithstanding. Hewitt is too much of a self-absorbed jack to build a dynasty around. Personality counts.

I don't think Grosjean is that much of a wasted talent. He's done okay for a 5'9" dude with no outstanding weapon. He went top 5, won a Davis Cup and a Masters title, made a bunch of Slam semis. That's a resumé a lot of today's top-tenners would kill for. It only looks like underachievement compared to Hewitt, who really went nuclear with his talent (and that is absolutely to his credit).

Arnaud Clement got waxed by Andre Agassi in a Slam final nobody expected him to make. Fabrice Santoro, in his own inimitable way, has made a very successful career of sorts. PHM has been hampered by injury. As for Monfils and Gasquet, they are still very young, so I don't think we can discount them just yet. (Monfils' tennis is more dashing than pretty anyway.)

"Fabrice Santoro, in his own inimitable way, has made a very successful career of sorts."

I think you put the case of France in a nutshell there Luce, right down to a preternaturally telling choice of phrase; if I had to boil down my view, I'd say they've produced a raft of successful and interesting players, but no great ones. I'm just a sucker for Greateness, I'll be the first to cop to that.

Fair enough. Likewise I am a sucker for French tennis players. They really are an intriguing bunch. I'd rather be Fabrice Santoro than Nikolay Davydenko, that's for sure.

I'm positive the French tennis establishment will produce a men's GS champ EVENTUALLY. Law of averages and all.

I think that Gasquet's main problem is that he's too French in his style. I remember TMF one time saying that he used to like to try beautiful/crazy shots during the point instead of playing solid and WINNING the point. He eventually changed this and was able to take the next step (now he just does both). Sure Gasquet can hit screaming winners from anywhere on the court, but he rarely does them on the big points. This almost always tends to be his downfall. And has anyone else seem noticed that there is something very strange about Gasquet's forehand grip? I just can't put my finger on it.

Man, Kolya is taking a beating tonight! I think we've found his natural calling: scapegoat. I can just see good postman Nikolay, beloved to children, being reamed out by the third assistant manager of the local Post Office for failing to adequately document the addresses of the deceased in his bi-monthly dead letter report . . .

10isNole - Fed was quoted as saying he made a conscious choice to go for hard work vs depending upon sheer talent. Once he did that, he sacrificed the 'beautiful' shots, but was able to put together a consistent record.

I do think Gasguet has yet to make that choice, to not depend upon his undeniable talent and have something concrete to fall back on when his game isn't hitting guite on the money. I still have hopes he'll get to that point. At 20, he's got time. Monfils, I simply don't know WHAT to think about.

Last Friday, Gasguet came from 2 sets down to take it to a 5 set. I can't just say Pfft to that effort, win or lose. Same with Roddick after that 5 setter against Tursonov. So I guess to me, winning isn't everything.... yet a beautiful game isn't a necessity either.

The realist in me says that if you're going to survive match points and stretch it to five, you had better win the bloody danged thing or what the hail use is it?

Night everyone! Same place same time tomorrow. . .

It's enforced cardio if nothing else. The realist in ME says Gasquet needs some of that.

Monfils is going to break both his legs if he keeps sliding the way he does on hard courts.

*hugs Kolya*

ahhhh Pete, see the optimist in me says that once you stretch it - you're bound to win one; you'll get over the hump. And its a hail of a lot easier thinking you can can win if you take it that far, than if you folded up at 3. And it seems that once you fold up, its easier and easier to just say uncle.

At least i think so. I don't have the mental make-up of a world class athlete, so maybe its not so.... (for that matter, don't have the talent or physical makeup of one either, so what the heck am I talking about!)

Lucy - seems like better conditioning will give Gasguet the confidence to grind a bit more, so he can make that choice for substance over flash.

And on that note - I'm taking my armchair analyst self up to bed! 'nite!

What I most admire about Marat is that he seems to have found his tennis-heaven and that for him is DC. I love sports and so many of my favorite athletes seem to chafe under the team and coach management style, but not Marat. He seems to thrive in a team, and seems to like rooting on his teammates.

I'm not a huge Gasquet fan, but the beauty of fighting off the match points in the 3rd and stretching it to 5 is COMPETING, not just folding your tent and going home. I am not a "win or go home" sports fan. I like the journey and the competition aspects of sports. I give it up for anyone who stands in and fights like hell. If you eventually go down, there is no shame in that in my mind. I have never been down on a player or team of mine who has lost, as long as they were competitive. The players I love watching all have that quality (I don't put Gasquet into that category after 1 such match, but time will tell). Pete once had a line about worshiping at the altar of effort, which is obviously speaks to Nadal fans, among others. But I don't see that certain something in James Blake, for example. The guy has never won a 5 set match, and he has far too many losses where he just disappears, leaving barely a blip on the radar.

Good night, everyone. Sam - I will be sending you the stats on the GS Semifinalists. Thanks, Pete and others for the suggestions on where to research.

Can someone explain to me why the French have never used Santoro against Safin? Fabrice has a 7-2 record against Marat, who is on the record as saying he absolutely, positively hates to play against him.

Why doesn't the USTA take a little US Open ticket money and each year give some 14 yr old juniors, whose best surface is clay, scholarships to go train in Spain at the famous tennis center (Arantxa Sanchez' family?) that Safin & Kuznetsova went to.

The deal is that they would have to go there until junior training is done (18?). Yeah that's away from home, but many players like Safin & Ljubicic did it so why not American juniors.

Hopefully every 5 years there would be an American emerge who is a threat to win RG, and then could play the clay court DC matches.

I don't know if the only dividing line is between winning and playing spectacularly.

Appreciating tennis is more like gastronomy, or enjoying wine, than a sport such as football (of either variety). Like some foods and wines, we can watch some players for facets of their games, enjoy them for what they are, without ascribing greatness to them or feeling they're beneath our notice just because they don't make the 10 Best Ever list.

I wouldn't swear to it, but I sense that no one watches an Eagles or Man U game for that unexpected, but wonderful, soupcon of flavor Leconte, Forget or Gasquet bring to the tennis table. In the big team sports, and many of the individual ones, too, style takes a seat so far behind results that it's not even in the same vehicle. No so with tennis.

Winning is the ultimate arbiter of a player's greatness, of their ability to show us transcendence. It's the perfect application of potential. Shotmaking is only the promise, but is can be a thrilling window onto the realm of possibility.

Greatness can be applied to Santoro, or else it can never be applied to everyday Joes and Jills like us, Pete. Tough as nails, never backs down, maximizes his abilities in a way someone like Safin can't even dream of, enters every match believing he can win, and has posted consistent and big results in a long career in the stratosphere of tennis, if not the ionosphere.

If he hasn't had a great career, then I can't be a great person unless I establish world peace singlehandedly, and I don't believe that's true.

I have to love this quote from the Marquis de Safin: "It was a pure accident. I have not been playing for a long time and won quite unexpectedly."
http://sport.scotsman.com/tennis.cfm?id=545872007

What would poor rabbit-in-the-headlights PHM have given for such an accident? I saw the replay of the first set of the Safin-PHM match, and it was quite obvious who had all the confidence and swagger.

A good question regarding why France has not used Santoro against Safin, though.

I think Pete knows that I am in the camp that thinks winning is more important than beautiful tennis. Which no doubt explains why I am not much of a Gasquet fan. I didn't see this match, though, so have no way of judging his performance other than by the comments here.

Two things made my weekend: the doubles match in the UK-Netherlands tie (where Jamie Murray made a winning DC debut and 13-year DC warrior Greg Rusedski did himself great credit in his last professional match, after months of not playing following injuries) - and also the doubles match in the USA-Spain tie (where "my" Spaniards gave the Bryans a run for their money in the final two sets). I love Davis Cup doubles. Doubles matches that really matter.

What a great moniker..."The Marquis de Safin." CLEVER! I'm thrilled that Marat got some DC glory again. I miss him so much on the GS stage. I hope we see him there soon. What a charming tribute to Safin from highpocket's hubby...easing into his recliner to watch the mighty Russian play. That was sweet to the nth degree.

Lisa, I love Santoro's EYES. They are crystal and so expressive...so very, how do you say.....French? As for the leg department, TMF has that sewn up all right. In fact, the hair, the eyes, the lips, the GAME...uh-oh. I'll stop now, Steggy.

Hope you all have a grand day.

Put as an either/or question, I, too, believe winning is more important than beautiful tennis.

Well, maybe not more important, but more meaningful.

Which is not to say I can't appreciate the pleasures of the other side of the question, hence my gastronomic metaphor.

Put as an either/or question, I, too, believe winning is more important than beautiful tennis.

Well, maybe not more important, but more meaningful.

Which is not to say I can't appreciate the pleasures of the other side of the question, hence my gastronomic metaphor.

There was a call earlier for a return to a two man Davis Cup singles team, with no substitution short of real injury. I'd second that motion, with the added benefit that it only strengthens the value of the doubles, which is tremendous even with today's substituting of reverse players.