In Monfils’s opening service game, an exaggerated shimmy of the hips as he dodged a stray ball drew a ripple of laughter from the audience. Having held, he engaged in some light-hearted banter, first with his team-mates, then with nearby spectators. Before long, Monfils was mischievously enquiring of the chair umpire whether it was “home” officiating”, then sitting down beside a linesman in mock disbelief after successfully challenging a call for the second time in the space of a few minutes. 

It is not difficult to see why Monfils is so widely loved by the paying public. At 37, the former US Open semi-finalist’s rubber-limbed body is less compliant than it once was, but his persona and his shot-making remain as beguiling as ever. The Laver Cup is many things but, unless you fancy being stuck up in the gods, cheap is not one of them; a decent seat for the opening day in Vancouver would have set you back up to $630. Yet, as Monfils went about his business with his customary sense of showmanship, few in the audience could have felt short-changed. 

The one person not laughing was Auger-Aliassime. And with five games gone, the Canadian world No 14 made his feelings known to Greg Allensworth, the chair umpire – in the process articulating a fundamental question about the nature of the event. 

“Is it a full-on exhibition or are you sticking to the ATP rules?” asked Auger-Aliassime. 

“It’s kind of, er, ATP rules,” replied Allensworth, apparently not entirely sure himself. 

“Are you telling me that’s normal?” demanded Auger-Aliassime. “He sits down for like 30 seconds? I mean, that’s a time violation warning, it’s not, ‘I’m going to talk to him.’ Because I can play games too.”

Allensworth might have retorted that the Laver Cup has never been “normal” – which, of course, is precisely its charm. Inspired by Rod Laver, the greatest champion of the 60s, captained by Bjorn Borg and John McEnroe, two of the biggest stars of the 70s and early 80s, and founded by a modern grandee in Roger Federer, the competition is a monument to the sport’s heritage, a marriage of champions past, present and future. The sight of players who spend most of the year trying to beat seven bells out of each other casting aside their differences to exchange tactical advice and vociferous support never gets old.

Inevitably, though, a competition that marches to the beat of its own drum can hardly be seen as standard ATP fare. Unlike a normal tour event – or, indeed, the Ryder Cup, on which it is broadly based – participation in the Laver Cup is by invitation rather than ranking. The players are well rewarded for their involvement – again, unlike their golfing counterparts – while the use of a 10-point “Laver breaker” in lieu of a deciding set only heightens the sense that, even if it has been part of the ATP calendar since 2019, the tournament bears all the hallmarks of an exhibition.

In truth, this dualism has been embedded in the Laver Cup from the beginning. “Guys coming together, playing for the right reasons, and Rod Laver, and spending a cool week together, and trying our absolute best and just having a good time,” was how Federer characterised his vision for the competition before the inaugural edition in Prague in 2017. And in many ways the Laver Cup has fulfilled that remit, combining spirited battle with spirited camaraderie to forge a spectacle full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. 

But what happens when those twin imperatives clash? What happens when one player is out to have a good time and the other is determined to try his best? A meeting between Monfils, revelling in his first invitation to represent Team Europe, and Auger-Aliassime, desperate to get a disappointing season back on track and understandably eager to deliver a good performance before his home crowd, offered an opportunity to find out. And the answer wasn’t pretty. 

Unhappy about Auger-Aliassime’s remarks to Allensworth, Monfils twice confronted his opponent at the change of ends. “I’m playing, like, serious,” Auger-Aliassime told the Frenchman. As he later explained to his team-mates, Monfils regarded the event in a different light. “They called me, they told me, ‘Oh, the Laver Cup is so nice, you can be free,’” he said. “Me, I’m here to have fun.” At which, Auger-Aliassime seemed incredulous. “What have the people that brought him here told him?” wondered the 23-year-old out loud. “I just think it’s unfortunate for everyone involved.”

The latter point was undeniable, the remainder of an initially promising contest played out with the two men at opposite mental and emotional poles. While Monfils appeared to completely lose interest, Auger-Aliassime remained almost comically engaged, fist-pumping his way to a 6-4, 6-3 victory against an opponent who had long since thrown in the towel. 

Excuses can be made on both sides. Auger-Aliassime did what was necessary and will no doubt have been relieved to claim only his second win of a dismal summer. Monfils, meanwhile, appeared to have been mis-sold the concept. Yet neither man exactly covered himself in glory. Auger-Aliassime’s initial protest seemed disproportionate, and for all that he later explained he was simply trying to stand up for himself and not let his opponent “take too much ground”, it did feel rather as though the Canadian had parlayed a molehill into something rather more mountainous.

In mitigation, it can hardly have helped that McEnroe was talking of Monfils “hamming it up” as early as the second changeover, or that Frances Tiafoe was warning: “He’s going to be playing games with you all night.” Why pour fuel on a fire that had shown no obvious sign of starting? It was not as though Auger-Aliassime returned to his chair ranting and raving about his opponent’s tactics. Monfils had not been playing particularly slowly, as so many news reports subsequently suggested. The Frenchman’s impromptu sit-down lasted about half the 30 seconds claimed by Auger-Aliassime, and there were no other significant delays. Yet things escalated to the point where, by the end of the first set, Auger-Aliassime could be heard proclaiming: “Tanking in the Laver Cup is crazy,” which risked inflaming the situation further.  

Neither was it Monfils’s finest hour. His subsequent dismissal of the episode as a “trifle” rather ignored the fact that his team-mates were reduced to labouring in vain to persuade him to put a shift in. As the early games demonstrated, a more sustained and determined application of Monfils’s fleet-footed defence and virtuoso shot-making would have posed Auger-Aliassime plenty of problems. Instead, as Rublev sank to his knees imploring, “Gaël, please”, an initially competitive match became a procession. 

Uncompetitive Laver Cup matches are hardly a new phenomenon, of course. Two years ago, when Team Europe clinched a fourth straight victory with a 14-1 rout at Boston’s TD Garden, everyone wondered where the event was going. Team World’s 13-2 victory this year showed that question is as pertinent as ever. The identity of the winning team may have changed, but the underlying issue remains unresolved; plus ça change, as some in Vancouver might say.

ATP tournament or exhibition? This year, the Laver Cup was neither. The lopsided nature of the contest made it unrecognisable as a tour event, while the absence of the big four, compounded by the unavailability of Daniil Medvedev, Stefanos Tsitsipas and Holger Rune, rendered it a shadow of the star vehicle of previous years. With Federer retired, and Nadal and Andy Murray likely to go the same way before long, the event needs bona fide champions if it is to live up to its extravagant billing. Instead, for the first time since the Laver Cup’s inception in 2017, neither team had a grand slam winner in its ranks. 

No wonder Federer expressed hope that Novak Djokovic and Carlos Alcaraz would turn out in Berlin next year. In the absence of the best two players in the world, the watching Swiss remained front and centre in Vancouver, just as he was during last year’s tearful farewell in London. Yet even a living legend like Federer can only do so much to compensate for a lack of competition. Ultimately, people pay to watch good tennis – be it an exhibition match or something more.

The post Is the Laver Cup an ATP event or an exhibition? appeared first on Love Game Tennis.

Shortly after midnight, Gaël Monfils had sent local spirits soaring at Roland Garros with an epic five-set set win over Sebastian Baez that ended with the French veteran lying flat on his back on the Parisian clay, weeping uncontrollably. 

But the emotions of the previous evening had barely subsided before Gallic hearts were split asunder by Anna Blinkova, a 24-year-old Russian ranked 56th in the world, who defeated Caroline Garcia, the fifth seed and the home nation’s only genuine hope of a singles champion, 4-6, 6-3, 7-5.

In an extraordinary finale, Garcia fought desperately to prolong her stay by the Seine, fighting off eight match points from 4-5 down in the decider as she threatened to pull off another wildly unlikely French comeback. Monfils had established the template, recovering from 4-0 down in the final set to subdue Baez, but neither a fiercely partisan crowd nor the incredible attacking bravery of Garcia could divert Blinkova as she homed in on the biggest win of her career. 

“I’m disappointed about the result, and I think I could have played better tennis, but she played very good,” said Garcia. 

“She managed the crowd very well and kept very calm after having so many match points.”

Blinkova might easily have crumbled when Garcia spanked a trio of mighty forehands to deny her as she served for the match for the first time. Yet she knows what it is to defeat Garcia here. Four years ago, Blinkova came from a set down to topple the Frenchwoman at the same stage of the tournament, and she immediately seized a break to give herself a second chance. 

The 11 minutes that followed were desperately fraught. Two double faults, either side of a magnificent forehand pass by Garcia, saw three more match points come and go. Two more opportunities were passed up with errors off her previously reliable backhand. Meanwhile, Garcia twice missed chances to break. Had she done so, it would surely have been a disappointment too far for Blinkova, but it was not a possibility the resolute Russian was willing to entertain. A deep first serve flew off the line, and Blinkova was through to the third round of a major for only the second time.

“I cannot even describe how much it means,” said Blinkova. “Playing on this court, on Philippe Chatrier, it’s been my dream, and to play against a top-five player is always something special. 

“When I won my first round and then my coach told me that I’m going to play against Caroline Garcia on the Philippe Chatrier, I couldn’t think about anything else.

“I was just thinking and dreaming how I will play and how I will win. So it’s a very special day for me. I will probably never forget it. Also, because 7-5 in the third, having so many match points, and very tough end of the match, and I finally did it. It’s an unbelievable feeling.”

Questions were raised afterwards about Garcia’s shot selection and tactics, particularly her decision to keep pressing in the final game, when Blinkova understandably became nervous. Garcia made a whopping 50 unforced errors, and certainly there were times when a more conservative approach might have reaped dividends. 

Yet it was Garcia’s derring-do that enabled her to save the first cluster of match points she faced, and renewed faith in her aggressive instincts has been a key factor in her renaissance over the past 12 months. Ranked 79th this time last year, the 29-year-old has won titles in Warsaw, Cincinnati and at the WTA Finals, all by playing bold, first-strike tennis. It is a fine line she walks, but Garcia has never been one simply to push the ball back into play and wait for a mistake. Her chief disappointment afterwards was that she hadn’t gone after her shots with greater conviction. 

“I know what I have to do on court, but then I get afraid that I will not make it, that I will fail in unrolling my game plan,” said Garcia. “I start to make mistakes. Then my balls are too short on my opponent. It’s tough to lose after playing like this.

“It’s a dilemma that I shouldn’t even have. Had I needed more evidence after last year’s season, I shouldn’t need any more. What I mean is that I could have winners, and on the flip side I can also make unforced errors.  

“Sometimes when I’m on the court, I don’t dare go to the net. I don’t dare pummel through my balls. And the greatest regret I have is that I don’t up my game when I should.  When I won in the past, then I would actually go to the net, I would actually take the balls even when they are short. That means that I actually seized all the opportunities when they were there.  

“But this is not the case here. My backhand is bad. Everything is bad. And this is what is tough to digest right now.”

These are difficult times for French tennis. With 11 players ranked in the top 100, the depth in the men’s game is there, but no one has yet assumed the mantle of Monfils and Richard Gasquet, both of whom are former top-10 players and grand slam semi-finalists. The pick of the bunch right now is Ugo Humbert, the 24-year-old French No 1, who is ranked 40th in the world and lost in straight sets on Wednesday to Italy’s Lorenzo Sonego.

Garcia aside, things are little better on the women’s side, where France has just four top-100 players. In fairness, the cavalry may be coming, not least in the shape of a pair of former junior world No 1s: Diane Parry, a richly gifted 20-year-old, and Clara Burel, 22, who reached the semi-finals in Strasbourg last week. For the men, the charge is led by 18-year-old Arthur Fils and Luca Van Assche, 19. Both are ranked in the top 100, and both were been beaten this week by Spain’s Alejandro Davidovich Fokina. For the time being, though, the French production line has stalled.

There was further bad news for the French game late on Wednesday night when Monfils withdrew from the tournament with a wrist injury. The 36-year-old was scheduled to face Holger Rune, the sixth seed, in the night session. Monfils said he had recovered well after battling through cramp to defeat Baez, but was advised to pull out following medical evaluation of damage to the triangular fibrocartilage complex, an area of ligaments and cartilage that attaches the forearm to the wrist.  

“I was quite happy this morning, I woke up quite good,” said Monfils. “But I have the problem with my wrist that I cannot solve. I felt it during the whole match.

“The doctor said it was not good to play with that type of injury. Yesterday was actually very risky, and then today definitely [he said] I should stop.

“I’m not really sure what I feel, but it’s more than being disappointed. How many [more] Roland Garroses will I play? That’s the question. I don’t know what the answer is. How many will I play?”

The post Home hopes dashed at French Open as Garcia falls to Blinkova appeared first on Love Game Tennis.

Yet there is a sweet spot between youth and wisdom that can yield unexpected treasures and, at the age of 35, Gaël Monfils may just have found it. Over the course of a career that has seen the gifted Frenchman rise as high as sixth in the world and reach semi-finals at the French and US Opens, there has always been a lingering sense that he might have achieved even more had he been able to combine his natural showmanship with a more ruthless edge. Facing Daniil Medvedev at Indian Wells, Monfils did just that, fighting back from a set down to claim a 4-6, 6-3, 6-1 victory that ends the Russian’s brief reign as world No 1 for the time being. 

On the one hand, the contest offered everything one might expect from a Monfils match. There were lung-busting rallies, leaping backhand returns, vicious forehand winners. There were variations of spin and pace, thrilling feats of athleticism, audacious underarm serves loaded with sidespin. There was also, inevitably, humour. When Medvedev demolished a racket early in the decider, Monfils kept the crowd entertained by grabbing a towel and hammily emulating the sweeping motion used by the court attendants to wipe away the shards of graphite. 

Yet there was also grit, determination, purpose. On a searingly hot afternoon in the California desert, Monfils stuck doggedly to his task, shrugging off the single lapse of concentration that cost him the opening set to claim his second victory in three meetings with Medvedev. It was only the second time in 20 attempts that the Frenchman had beaten a reigning world No 1, his previous victory having come 13 years ago in Doha against Rafael Nadal. 

“It hasn’t been easy, you know,” said Monfils when asked to identify the most significant win of his career. “I feel like I’m old. So I have many, but I don’t remember exactly which one. But of course, many matches. When you beat the best player in the world, [it] is always a great moment.”

The result continues what has been an encouraging start to the year for Monfils, who said after reaching the last eight at the Australian Open in January that he had not given up hope of one day winning a major. “Who knows?” he reflected after a five-set defeat to Matteo Berrettini. “This year it might click.” While the stars would need to align for that ambition to be fulfilled, this performance offered a pertinent reminder that, even after almost two decades in the professional game, Monfils is still evolving as a player. Even his showmanship is not without motive these days, as his account of the court-sweeping incident indicated.

“[Medvedev’s racket] has a lot of carbon, and I know myself, I can cut easy,” said Monfils, who will play Carlos Alcaraz in the last 16 after the Spanish teenager demolished Roberto Bautista Agut 6-2, 6-0. 

“I can put my hand or have a slip on it. It looked [like] fun, but it was actually [done] to make sure that I won’t cut myself, you know? I make it fun in a way, but I knew exactly what I was doing too.”

The outburst of frustration from Medvedev that necessitated the French veteran’s impromptu clean-up operation was, felt Monfils, a turning point. Medvedev went off court for a change of attire at the end of the second set but, despite a lengthy delay, he quickly became agitated when his opening service game began to slip away, gesticulating animatedly towards his box. When the Muscovite drove a forehand long on Monfils’ second break point, his racket bore the full brunt of his disappointment.

“After the first break in the third set, I felt something was a little bit different,” reflected Monfils. “He was a bit off, complaining. He broke his racket, complaining about his forehand a little bit. And of course, when you have this information you try to press a little bit more on it and be more aware about it. I gave him more forehands to play, and [started] moving him more towards the forehand.”

Medvedev reserved warm praise for Monfils while expressing frustration at his own lack of consistency, which he attributed partly to misplaced confidence after winning the opening set.

“Gael played good and it was enough for him to win today, and second and third set was not that close, to be honest,” said Medvedev, who will cede the No 1 ranking to Novak Djokovic next week after failing to make the quarter-finals. 

“I just couldn’t find my rhythm and completely lost it in the third set because, I think actually first match and first set maybe played even a little bit bad, bad thing with me because I felt like I was playing not bad. So I think I got a little bit too confident in that, okay, I’m starting to feel my rhythm. 

“Maybe I should have paid more attention to small details. In the third set [it was] really tough to get it back, and it was going easy for him.”

The decider was a far cry from the opening set, in the ninth game of which Monfils bookended two consecutive double faults with a pair of wayward forehands to drop serve to love. No doubt many onlookers rolled their eyes heavenwards at that point, but nowadays the Frenchman is less susceptible to the frailties of old. A rifled forehand winner secured a break in the eighth game of the second set, and from there he never looked back.

The post Resurgent Monfils ends Medvedev’s reign as world No 1 in Indian Wells appeared first on Love Game Tennis.