Ever the entertainer, Gaël Monfils, was out to enjoy himself at the Laver Cup. That much was evident from the early stages of the French veteran’s debut appearance against Felix Auger-Aliassime in Vancouver.
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.