Poor sport Spaniards

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
How?

They are NOT going to have a surface change. The spaniards know that. I can't believe that they are dumb as to believe that they will get a surface change so late in the proceedings.

But they do make a good point about the surface. The exact same surface(with the whole brand name thing and being customized and all that) is played only in SAP Open. And because the composition(of the court) is sold under different brand names over in Europe and some of the standards differ a bit means that the spaniards don't know which practice courts(HC of course) near them play similar to the one chosen by the US. See the whole "I thought Greenset was similar to Premiere" surprise the spaniards had back in 2007.

The ITF will clear this up and hopefully we won't have such discussions in the future.

I can't believe people are still talking about the court speed. This is not about the speed but about familiarity with the court.

I've made this point before. Spaniards got their ass handed to them by the French on a very fast indoor court and there wasn't any comment about the surface.
The Spaniards are not dumb at all. People are dumb in the past for not noticing the technicality and bringing it forward. They can't be blamed for bringing it up. They are smart to do so, whether or not the surface will be changed. The ITF will now fix this technicality in their rules to avoid future problems.
 

namelessone

Legend
The Spaniards are not dumb at all. People are dumb in the past for not noticing the technicality and bringing it forward. They can't be blamed for bringing it up. They are smart to do so, whether or not the surface will be changed. The ITF will now fix this technicality in their rules to avoid future problems.
Yeah, I agree.

Here's a really good post from tennis.com that pretty much sums the situation:

"The ITF will probably rule that the Hard Premiere surface is OK for the following three reasons:

1. The ITF will probably find that there is enough leeway in the rules to allow the use of any hard court meeting certain ITF general requirements, not just specifically branded hard courts by certain manufacturers;

2. The ITF apparently has allowed use of Hard Premiere or almost identical surfaces made by Premier Concepts, the pertinent Baltimore-based company, in several previous Davis Cup ties, and not allowing use of Hard Premiere now would lead the to the ITF appearing inconsistent in the eyes of many;

3. The ITF very likely wants to avoid, to the largest extent possible, encouraging nations from bringing this type of court-surface issue to the ITF for adjudication in the future. Such disputes would increase the ITF's costs and possibly reduce the ITF's profits. (Sure, the ITF could try to pass the costs on to its member nations, but that would tend to make them grumpy or grumpier.)

If this specific surface by this company has not been used for "three men's pro tour events," as defined by the ITF, the ITF may toss Spain a bone by mandating that the U.S. keep the speed of the court at its "standard" rating, if there is one, or lower. The ITF may insist that the U.S. inform Spain with sufficient notice what the characteristics (speed/bounce/etc.) of the Austin courts will be, so that Spain can prepare similar courts in Spain to use for practice.) However, the ITF will probably be leery of taking such steps, as it probably does not want to set a precedent for micromanaging court surfaces, in light of how many DC ties take place every year.

Even if Spain gets nothing from the ITF in this matter, Costa and the Spanish tennis federation can, at least argue to the Spanish DC players that Costa/the federation stood up for the players. For the federation, this is an important position to be in, considering some recent very poor relations between Spanish DC players and certain top Spanish sports/tennis administrators. (Of course, now that Pedro Muñoz no longer is the president of the RFET, relations between the players and that federation appear to be much calmer than they were while Muñoz was in charge.
)"
 
How?

They are NOT going to have a surface change. The spaniards know that. I can't believe that they are dumb as to believe that they will get a surface change so late in the proceedings.
So why bring it up then? Is it just whining, gamesmanship, early excuse in case they do lose? I don't think any of us know, but the way I see it, if the surface has been approved in the past then why complain about it now? And there's still conflicting reports as to whether the ITF really enforces this list - the same surface US is using has been used in other DC ties by non US countries.

But they do make a good point about the surface. The exact same surface(with the whole brand name thing and being customized and all that) is played only in SAP Open. And because the composition(of the court) is sold under different brand names over in Europe and some of the standards differ a bit means that the spaniards don't know which practice courts(HC of course) near them play similar to the one chosen by the US. See the whole "I thought Greenset was similar to Premiere" surprise the spaniards had back in 2007.

The ITF will clear this up and hopefully we won't have such discussions in the future.

I can't believe people are still talking about the court speed. This is not about the speed but about familiarity with the court.

I've made this point before. Spaniards got their ass handed to them by the French on a very fast indoor court and there wasn't any comment about the surface.
Let's be honest here - the Spaniards are very likely to not practice on the surface. You have clay season, then grass season, then the DC tie right after Wimbledon. You want me to believe that Nadal, Verdasco, Ferrer and the gang are going to take time out to practice on it even if it were available? So that part of the quote is bs.

Bottom line: This issue is being raised and trying to put US in a bad light, when this surface has been approved in the past by the ITF for DC ties. Now there's an issue.

To me, hard courts is hard courts. It's not like the US is bringing in wood, astroturf, etc. They're bringing in a surface that's used on the ATP tour and has been used in the past in DC ties.

And funny that you keep bringing up France - if anything the beating they took last year gives them more incentive to complain this year about having to play on a fast surface again.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
So why bring it up then? Is it just whining, gamesmanship, early excuse in case they do lose? I don't think any of us know, but the way I see it, if the surface has been approved in the past then why complain about it now? And there's still conflicting reports as to whether the ITF really enforces this list - the same surface US is using has been used in other DC ties by non US countries.
Why shouldn't they bring it up? The technicality was noticed and brought forward. If it was not noticed and brought forward in the past who is stupid?
Just because something has been done in the past does not mean it is right. They(Spaniards probably through their legal advisors) noticed this inconsistency in the rules and they are right to challenge it and have the ITF sort it out to avoid future challenges. I am sure this surface will be approved for use just as it has in the past, but you can't blame the Spaniards for trying. Nobody is at fault here except for the ITF.
 

namelessone

Legend
Let's be honest here - the Spaniards are very likely to not practice on the surface. You have clay season, then grass season, then the DC tie right after Wimbledon. You want me to believe that Nadal, Verdasco, Ferrer and the gang are going to take time out to practice on it even if it were available? So that part of the quote is bs.

Bottom line: This issue is being raised and trying to put US in a bad light, when this surface has been approved in the past by the ITF for DC ties. Now there's an issue.

To me, hard courts is hard courts. It's not like the US is bringing in wood, astroturf, etc. They're bringing in a surface that's used on the ATP tour and has been used in the past in DC ties.

And funny that you keep bringing up France - if anything the beating they took last year gives them more incentive to complain this year about having to play on a fast surface again.
So the conclusion is that "they hate 'merica", right? :)

We're not talking about speed, but FAMILIARITY.

It's not generic HC, it's played in ONE MAJOR TOURNAMENT on the ATP tour.

The problem here is that the spaniards didn't know what type of court it is due to the differences with the branding names. They didn't know what type of court to practice on in order to better prepare for this tie. They did get fooled with the european Greenset and found out on site in the US that it played quite different to what the US threw at them.

And yes, you have to be crazy if you have a court similar to the one used in US and not practice on it beforehand.

Hardcourts are not generic. Even in the same category there are differences. See IW which is slow,the ball moves more through the court but in Miami, also slow, the surface is like sandpaper(according to Roddick) and it's quite hard to hit through the court, not to mention the the ball gets more action(spin) on it.

Bottom line: the ITF are looking really bad in this situation and hopefully they will fix it so that they don't have these situations in the future ever again.
 

Gorecki

G.O.A.T.
It's you "genius" who apparently cannot understand what you read, not to say the implications of it.

One thing is the general classification of courts made but the ITF that you are —in a quite simplistic way— presenting as the core argument of the matter. But other thing and the important argument here are the rules of the 2001 Davis Cup competition. This is what the DC rules say:

For all ties in the World Group and Zonal Group I the court surface must be of a type used in a Grand Slam Tournament or in a minimum of three tournaments in the men's professional tour held in the year previous to tie.

That is what applies, the actual DC rules, not just a general list of surfaces you found in the ITF website or whatever, Einstein.
and on what basis are you claiming that there are not 3 tournaments played in such surface smarty pants?

point is... THE LIST THAT I "SIMPLISTICALLY" USE TO SUPPOR MY ARGUMENT IS THE SAME TO WHAT YOUR FELLOW NATIONAL MR COSTA IS USING TO CLAIM WHATEVER HE CLAIMS.

who is the simpleton really?
 

li0scc0

Hall of Fame
Thanks for posting.
Most people seemed to miss the intricacy of the issue. It was not the court surface that was at question, but rather the manufacturer of the surface. The surface is fine, it was the manufacturer that was not on the list of the 91.

As an aside, I think the correct ruling was made. I also think the Spanish Davis Cup team was smart in their dispute.

Now it is time to move on and actually play the matches.
 

namelessone

Legend
Thanks for posting.
Most people seemed to miss the intricacy of the issue. It was not the court surface that was at question, but rather the manufacturer of the surface. The surface is fine, it was the manufacturer that was not on the list of the 91.

As an aside, I think the correct ruling was made. I also think the Spanish Davis Cup team was smart in their dispute.

Now it is time to move on and actually play the matches.
Well duuhhh. Most people here are blinded by their "patriotism" so to speak and actually think Spain were trying to play mind games with the US or get them to change to a slower surface for this tie when speed was never a issue in this appeal. Costa was looking out for his team's interest and in his mind, did the right thing by appealing and now he got his OFFICIAL answer.

Hope no major guys(I'm thinking Andy and Rafa) get injured before this tie.
 

babbette

Legend
"the committee said it's the type of acrylic that is used in more than 30 tour events and two Grand Slam tournaments"
more of an advantage for spain then as more spaniards go further in slams than Americans. Woohoo vamos spain
 

billnepill

Hall of Fame
Well duuhhh. Most people here are blinded by their "patriotism" so to speak and actually think Spain were trying to play mind games with the US or get them to change to a slower surface for this tie when speed was never a issue in this appeal. Costa was looking out for his team's interest and in his mind, did the right thing by appealing and now he got his OFFICIAL answer.

Hope no major guys(I'm thinking Andy and Rafa) get injured before this tie.
Players don't get injured when it comes to DC. They get "injured" :lol:
 
So the conclusion is that "they hate 'merica", right? :)
Yes, because that's totally what my post said. :roll: Jeez.

We're not talking about speed, but FAMILIARITY.

It's not generic HC, it's played in ONE MAJOR TOURNAMENT on the ATP tour.

The problem here is that the spaniards didn't know what type of court it is due to the differences with the branding names. They didn't know what type of court to practice on in order to better prepare for this tie. They did get fooled with the european Greenset and found out on site in the US that it played quite different to what the US threw at them.

And yes, you have to be crazy if you have a court similar to the one used in US and not practice on it beforehand.

Hardcourts are not generic. Even in the same category there are differences. See IW which is slow,the ball moves more through the court but in Miami, also slow, the surface is like sandpaper(according to Roddick) and it's quite hard to hit through the court, not to mention the the ball gets more action(spin) on it.

Bottom line: the ITF are looking really bad in this situation and hopefully they will fix it so that they don't have these situations in the future ever again.
I think it's bollocks. All HC aren't the same, just like all CC aren't the same. You really think that the CC teams use for DC ties is the same and that teams are able to practice for them ahead of time before going there? You can practice all you want but if you get there and the clay's been watered down or is crappy like the one US had to play on in Austria a few years ago - I think they called it the worst court in tennis history, not sure though - then it doesn't matter.

US still won that tie BTW.

And yes I still think it was much ado by nothing by Costa and Nadal, which is made even more clear by the unanimous decision by the ITF. My whole point in this entire thing is that Spain was making it like the US was bringing in some unknown surface, when that's clearly not the case.
 

namelessone

Legend
Yes, because that's totally what my post said. Jeez.
Sorry, couldn't help myself :)


US still won that tie BTW.

And yes I still think it was much ado by nothing by Costa and Nadal, which is made even more clear by the unanimous decision by the ITF. My whole point in this entire thing is that Spain was making it like the US was bringing in some unknown surface, when that's clearly not the case.
I doubt Nadal looked at the surface composition by brand name one day and said "Hey Costa, look what I found!". He was just echoing his team captain's thoughts.

These are the words of the vamosinator before the court ruling: " if at the end (the surface) is not among the official ones, it should be ruled out or stiff fines should be applied, because for tournaments like that $50,000 is peanuts.”

Notice the IF.
 
Last edited:

Dilettante

Hall of Fame
I can't see how the ITF will say the surface can't be used now since it has been used and approved by the ITF in the past.
In all sports regulations change by time, and some materials are approved at some point of time and then aren't approved at another point of time. So the materials must be used are the ones approved at this particular point of time, not the past.

Also, the DC rules are very specific about the surfaces to be used as I quoted earlier in this thread. So the past "ITF approved" label, even a current "ITF approved" label is not enough if the surface is not according to DC rules. It could be a currently ITF approved surface but also not a DC compliant surface.

If the USA is not happy with this DC regulation, they can propose an alternative regulation or even fight for a change or what's their prerrogative, but as long they agree to enter the DC with the current rules, they have to act under those rules.

The letter of the law in this case is quite simply really.

Nobody is at fault here except for the ITF.
If the surface is not according to DC rules like it seems to be the case, but if it's really 100% according or not it's a technical discussion I'm not getting into, then the USTA would be also at fault.

The rule might seem stupid or non important to you, that's ok, everyone has his opinion and I could even agree with that, but that's not the question. Your opinion, my opinion don't make the rule less worthy of obedience. If all teams start to not obeying the rules they don't consider important, that would be chaos, because who decides which rules are important enough to be obeyed?

This will probably solved by a mere technical decision based on subtleties, but the rules are quite clear. Tha distintion between surfaces is not that clear and that would be the deciding factor, but that's technicism, not part of the rule.
 
Last edited:

Manus Domini

Hall of Fame
I'm not a patriot either, but this sounds like a fragrant abuse of the rules. Why am I not surprised?

Looks like the Americans were the cheats. Probably thought Costa wouldn't say anything. Good on him. Play by the rules.
he was reffering to my suggestion of indoor wood...

reading comprehension at its best :roll:
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, because that's totally what my post said. :roll: Jeez.



I think it's bollocks. All HC aren't the same, just like all CC aren't the same. You really think that the CC teams use for DC ties is the same and that teams are able to practice for them ahead of time before going there? You can practice all you want but if you get there and the clay's been watered down or is crappy like the one US had to play on in Austria a few years ago - I think they called it the worst court in tennis history, not sure though - then it doesn't matter.

US still won that tie BTW.

And yes I still think it was much ado by nothing by Costa and Nadal, which is made even more clear by the unanimous decision by the ITF. My whole point in this entire thing is that Spain was making it like the US was bringing in some unknown surface, when that's clearly not the case.
You are missing the point. The manufacturer of this HC was not on the approved list by the ITF, a fact that was missed in the past or ignored because DC ties have been played on that surface and the ITF approved it in the past.

Do you really think it was Costa or Nadal that read through the ITF and DC rule books to find this inconsistency? They are tennis player not lawyers. Somehow I think their legal advisors brought the whole issue up and the team decided to run with it. In any case, you cannot blame Costa and his team for bringing this up just because it was not brought up in the past. That is an ignorant analogy and if people had that opinion with everything, nothing would ever move forward and improve in life and everything would stay in the past. Costa had nothing to lose by bringing this technicality up and in the process an inconsistency in the rules by the ITF was clarified for the future.
Of course we knew the ITF would decide in favor of the US especially since they approved the surface in the past.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
In all sports regulations change by time, and some materials are approved at some point of time and then aren't approved at another point of time. So the materials must be used are the ones approved at this particular point of time, not the past.

Also, the DC rules are very specific about the surfaces to be used as I quoted earlier in this thread. So the past "ITF approved" label, even a current "ITF approved" label is not enough if the surface is not according to DC rules. It could be a currently ITF approved surface but also not a DC compliant surface.

If the USA is not happy with this DC regulation, they can propose an alternative regulation or even fight for a change or what's their prerrogative, but as long they agree to enter the DC with the current rules, they have to act under those rules.

The letter of the law in this case is quite simply really.



If the surface is not according to DC rules like it seems to be the case, but if it's really 100% according or not it's a technical discussion I'm not getting into, then the USTA would be also at fault.

The rule might seem stupid or non important to you, that's ok, everyone has his opinion and I could even agree with that, but that's not the question. Your opinion, my opinion don't make the rule less worthy of obedience. If all teams start to not obeying the rules they don't consider important, that would be chaos, because who decides which rules are important enough to be obeyed?

This will probably solved by a mere technical decision based on subtleties, but the rules are quite clear. Tha distintion between surfaces is not that clear and that would be the deciding factor, but that's technicism, not part of the rule.
I think you are missing my point and what I have said in 3 or 4 posts now. I never said there was no issue. I said Costa can't be blamed for bringing the subject up. There was a technicality or inconsistency whereby the manufacturer was not listed as an approved manufacturer on the ITF rules, yet this same surface was played on in DC ties in the past. Costa brought this forward and the ITF made its decision that the surface was ok. Now this issue will be cleared up in the future. As for the rest of your post, honestly, I have no idea what you are talking about. I just explained the issue in a nutshell. Plain and simple. Read my prior posts as I was very clear on the issue from the get-go and am not one requiring any explanation unlike perhaps others.
 
Here's the tie I was referring to earlier - Austria put a court in place the week of the tie in 08.

"It was terrible but at least it was terrible for both sides," Roddick told a news conference. "Is it the worst I've played in the Davis Cup? Absolutely."

The court was only put in place at the start of this week and Roddick believes that did not give the Americans enough time to get used to it.

"I'm not sure why they were granted special permission by the ITF (International Tennis Federation) to do this. I tried asking the referee and didn't get an answer. I don't know who I should ask next."
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=tennis&id=3237235

This is what I was saying about Costa making it seem like US is putting in some foreign unknown surface that's never been seen before, when that's clearly not the case as there are courts w/ similar characteristics all throughout Europe, even if they're not by EXACTLY the same manufacturer.

I'm pretty sure no DC teams get to practice on courts with EXACTLY the same characteristics until they actually get to the tie, so from that perspective it does seem like much ado about nothing from Costa. Again, read his quote.

"It's a court that we are not familiar with because it doesn't meet the criteria," Spanish Davis Cup captain Albert Costa said at a press conference in Barcelona. "So the problem I have right now is to explain to the players what kind of court they will encounter, because even if we wanted to train on a similar one we could not install it because it is not approved."

Costa tried to make it like US is bringing in some alien surface, when the fact is there are several courts w/ similar characteristics as the one the US is using, even if it's not EXACT.
 
Last edited:

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Originally Posted by TheTruth
I'm not a patriot either, but this sounds like a fragrant abuse of the rules. Why am I not surprised?

Looks like the Americans were the cheats. Probably thought Costa wouldn't say anything. Good on him. Play by the rules.


he was reffering to my suggestion of indoor wood...

reading comprehension at its best :roll:

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Dilettante

Hall of Fame
I think you are missing my point and what I have said in 3 or 4 posts now. I never said there was no issue. I said Costa can't be blamed for bringing the subject up. There was a technicality or inconsistency whereby the manufacturer was not listed as an approved manufacturer on the ITF rules, yet this same surface was played on in DC ties in the past. Costa brought this forward and the ITF made its decision that the surface was ok. Now this issue will be cleared up in the future. As for the rest of your post, honestly, I have no idea what you are talking about. I just explained the issue in a nutshell. Plain and simple. Read my prior posts as I was very clear on the issue from the get-go and am not one requiring any explanation unlike perhaps others.
If I miss you point and you don't know that I'm talking about, there's no point in discussing.

I think I explained myself the most clearly I could, though, even if you think what I said was unrelated to your quote. But it could be just an idiomatic mater so let's move on.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
If I miss you point and you don't know that I'm talking about, there's no point in discussing.

I think I explained myself the most clearly I could, though, even if you think what I said was unrelated to your quote. But it could be just an idiomatic mater so let's move on.

Agreed. Truce! :)
 

Gimmick

Semi-Pro
Next thing you know they'll be whining that the humidity wasn't controlled properly and they couldn't find a practice court with the same conditions.
 

TheTruth

G.O.A.T.
he was reffering to my suggestion of indoor wood...

reading comprehension at its best :roll:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aldeayeah
The current DC rules says that the surface must be currently used in at least (1) a Slam, OR (2) three ATP tournaments with prize money > $350,000.
Good luck finding three such wood tournaments.



On the other hand, he reached the final...

I'm not a patriot, but I find the knee-jerk reaction in this thread laughable. If the Spanish team is being a poor sport, then the American team is blatantly cheating by ignoring the rules of the competition, if I've understood it right.

I'm not a patriot either, but this sounds like a fragrant abuse of the rules. Why am I not surprised?

Looks like the Americans were the cheats. Probably thought Costa wouldn't say anything. Good on him. Play by the rules.

My post had nothing to do with your point. I don't even know what side of the fence you're on. I believe the Americans were trying to pull a fast one if this has become an issue. I also agree that such opinions should not be based on patriotism, but on the rules that were already in place.

I don't see how you figure into this.
 

cc0509

Talk Tennis Guru
Here's the tie I was referring to earlier - Austria put a court in place the week of the tie in 08.


http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?section=tennis&id=3237235

This is what I was saying about Costa making it seem like US is putting in some foreign unknown surface that's never been seen before, when that's clearly not the case as there are courts w/ similar characteristics all throughout Europe, even if they're not by EXACTLY the same manufacturer.

I'm pretty sure no DC teams get to practice on courts with EXACTLY the same characteristics until they actually get to the tie, so from that perspective it does seem like much ado about nothing from Costa. Again, read his quote.

"It's a court that we are not familiar with because it doesn't meet the criteria," Spanish Davis Cup captain Albert Costa said at a press conference in Barcelona. "So the problem I have right now is to explain to the players what kind of court they will encounter, because even if we wanted to train on a similar one we could not install it because it is not approved."

Costa tried to make it like US is bringing in some alien surface, when the fact is there are several courts w/ similar char--acteristics as the one the US is using, even if it's not EXACT.
I understand your point but Costa brought forward a technicality--i.e. the manufacturer was not on the listed approved manufacturers by the ITF. It does not matter if the surface was similar or had similar characteristics. That particular manufactuer was not listed. End of story. Costa was not wrong in bringing the issue forward. As a team leader you need to look for every advantage for your team. It is not his fault if the manufacturer was not listed. It was an oversight by the ITF.
 
Top