Ohhhhhhh Ben!! How can you do us fans (and the doubles specialists) dirty like this?? Maybe go over to r/tennis on Reddit and see the HOWLS of protest in several threads against the US Open’s decision? We all *hate* it, and you’re welcome to peruse the many comments to find out why!
The problem with making so many changes at once is that it isn't clear which are necessary and would actually enhance the competition and which would not. Mixed had already been shortened substantially with no-ad and match tiebreakers. Was it really necessary to shorten it even more?
It’s not even recognizable or enjoyable tennis in this format. Why not have them play on the 8-and-under courts or use pickleball paddles while they are at it?
Strongly disagree with you Ben. Bring a grand slam champion should count for something more than a 2 day exo
Yes, it would be nice to see big names take part as at the United Cup or Olympics but it should not just be about the eyeballs. If it was you would be part of the ‘why are we paying women equal prize money when men’s is more popular’ amd do we really want to go there again?
I'm for the scheduling change along with the focus on singles players, but I do NOT like the 4 game set change. Is playing an extra 2-4 games really that hard? I'm not really a fan of no-ad scoring either, but I can live with it. I don't mind the 10 point 3rd set tiebreaker either. But 4 game sets? Nope.
Ben wrote, "If this comes off as harsh toward doubles specialists, it’s meant to: I think they’ve had their chance to prove themselves as attractions for years now." To me, it's a chicken and egg situation. How do we expect people to care about doubles teams if doubles matches are almost never broadcast by mainstream media like Tennis Chanel and ESPN? But how do we expect those channels to broadcast doubles when people don't care about the doubles specialists? (To me, the streaming options don't matter. Diehard fans will find those. People who we hope to grow the sport for won't.) I don't see this situation being resolved.
Note: Some of the best professional tennis matches I've seen have been doubles matches featuring doubles specialists. But I can see why the casual fan might not be interested.
Fully agree. There are plenty of charismatic doubles specialists that i've always enjoyed watching when a game happened to be broadcasted - usually they would sometimes show parts of matches at the Grand Slams at least. Mahut, Herbert, Purcell, Heliovaara... what's not to like? It's just that the average spectator doesn't know those players and doesn't appreciate their craft and what it means to be a journeyman on the tour.
Yeah, have to disagree on this one. I also don't think it's entirely balanced. Doubles--no doubles--are marketed, but there are some great stories and personalities there. I heard from another podcast that the doubles guys asked to create their own social media but were told no.
Love this piece. Consider that so many of us tennis hobbyists play mixed doubles, relish the tactical lessons such matches can convey -- looking forward to more $$ leading to more active singles stars playing MD.
Those tactical lessons can be conveyed just as well, if not better, by doubles specialists. Remember Tommy Paul at the Olympics? Great guy, great athlete, has recently embraced the net game, but was clearly the weakest player on the court. It takes practice and confidence, which can only come with reps. Throwing money at these players who won't commit to it regularly, and only taking singles rankings into account is not cool in my opinions. Proven regular doubles players basically at the mercy of the USTA handing them wildcards when it should be the other way round.
I get the reasoning for the hand-wringing. Change is hard. But what is being changed lost popular relevance a l-o-n-g time ago. Yeah, it's really "showing them" when a regular doubles team defeats two singles players who are teaming together. However, the crowd that is watching is 10x bigger because of the attention that the high ranked singles players bring to the match. And if tennis can get the truly top players to participate more willingly in doubles, the entire product will be enhanced. And we may even get to see more volleying skills on display in singles matches as a result.
We know that this will be a good revenue raising activity for the USTA during Fan Week, so I will put that dynamic to the side. I fall into a straight forward camp. If top singles players participate, then this has great potential to engage fans and increase doubles' visibility. Primetime on ESPN is a great opportunity for doubles. If top singles players don't participate and we get a smattering of US wildcards coupled with some less notable singles players, it becomes a UTS-like event. We already have that somewhat with the Fast4 scoring prior to the finals, but I think it would be much harder to stomach that change if the players participating aren't top names.
We've seen examples where doubles has been elevated. As Ben notes, the Olympics has been tennis's main place recently, with the Hopman Cup/United Cup somewhat as well. We can even point to a prominent example of doubles-specialists beating singles stars in 2024 (I.e. Ram/Krajicek beating Alcaraz/Nadal). NBC certainly paid more attention to them for the rest of the tournament. I am assuming the entire draw will not just be filled with singles players, so could we see something similar for the doubles specialists that participate? I realize that is not the point of the change nor its likeliest outcome, but do highlight it as a spot of hope for doubles fans/specialists.
My last thought is the future state of professional doubles. These changes feel like a trial balloon. I'd be interested in learning more about what other decision makers at the top of the sport think about doubles' future. I also wonder what groups like the PTPA think about the changes. I checked their website and a few of its executive members (Townsend, Mattek-Sands, Zheng, and Pospisil) have either had some of their most notable success playing doubles or are primarily doubles-specialists today. These changes could be a one-off but I think it is likelier we start to see more discussions about doubles changing across pro tennis.
Ohhhhhhh Ben!! How can you do us fans (and the doubles specialists) dirty like this?? Maybe go over to r/tennis on Reddit and see the HOWLS of protest in several threads against the US Open’s decision? We all *hate* it, and you’re welcome to peruse the many comments to find out why!
The problem with making so many changes at once is that it isn't clear which are necessary and would actually enhance the competition and which would not. Mixed had already been shortened substantially with no-ad and match tiebreakers. Was it really necessary to shorten it even more?
It’s not even recognizable or enjoyable tennis in this format. Why not have them play on the 8-and-under courts or use pickleball paddles while they are at it?
Strongly disagree with you Ben. Bring a grand slam champion should count for something more than a 2 day exo
Yes, it would be nice to see big names take part as at the United Cup or Olympics but it should not just be about the eyeballs. If it was you would be part of the ‘why are we paying women equal prize money when men’s is more popular’ amd do we really want to go there again?
I'm for the scheduling change along with the focus on singles players, but I do NOT like the 4 game set change. Is playing an extra 2-4 games really that hard? I'm not really a fan of no-ad scoring either, but I can live with it. I don't mind the 10 point 3rd set tiebreaker either. But 4 game sets? Nope.
Ben wrote, "If this comes off as harsh toward doubles specialists, it’s meant to: I think they’ve had their chance to prove themselves as attractions for years now." To me, it's a chicken and egg situation. How do we expect people to care about doubles teams if doubles matches are almost never broadcast by mainstream media like Tennis Chanel and ESPN? But how do we expect those channels to broadcast doubles when people don't care about the doubles specialists? (To me, the streaming options don't matter. Diehard fans will find those. People who we hope to grow the sport for won't.) I don't see this situation being resolved.
Note: Some of the best professional tennis matches I've seen have been doubles matches featuring doubles specialists. But I can see why the casual fan might not be interested.
Fully agree. There are plenty of charismatic doubles specialists that i've always enjoyed watching when a game happened to be broadcasted - usually they would sometimes show parts of matches at the Grand Slams at least. Mahut, Herbert, Purcell, Heliovaara... what's not to like? It's just that the average spectator doesn't know those players and doesn't appreciate their craft and what it means to be a journeyman on the tour.
Yeah, have to disagree on this one. I also don't think it's entirely balanced. Doubles--no doubles--are marketed, but there are some great stories and personalities there. I heard from another podcast that the doubles guys asked to create their own social media but were told no.
Love this piece. Consider that so many of us tennis hobbyists play mixed doubles, relish the tactical lessons such matches can convey -- looking forward to more $$ leading to more active singles stars playing MD.
Those tactical lessons can be conveyed just as well, if not better, by doubles specialists. Remember Tommy Paul at the Olympics? Great guy, great athlete, has recently embraced the net game, but was clearly the weakest player on the court. It takes practice and confidence, which can only come with reps. Throwing money at these players who won't commit to it regularly, and only taking singles rankings into account is not cool in my opinions. Proven regular doubles players basically at the mercy of the USTA handing them wildcards when it should be the other way round.
I get the reasoning for the hand-wringing. Change is hard. But what is being changed lost popular relevance a l-o-n-g time ago. Yeah, it's really "showing them" when a regular doubles team defeats two singles players who are teaming together. However, the crowd that is watching is 10x bigger because of the attention that the high ranked singles players bring to the match. And if tennis can get the truly top players to participate more willingly in doubles, the entire product will be enhanced. And we may even get to see more volleying skills on display in singles matches as a result.
We know that this will be a good revenue raising activity for the USTA during Fan Week, so I will put that dynamic to the side. I fall into a straight forward camp. If top singles players participate, then this has great potential to engage fans and increase doubles' visibility. Primetime on ESPN is a great opportunity for doubles. If top singles players don't participate and we get a smattering of US wildcards coupled with some less notable singles players, it becomes a UTS-like event. We already have that somewhat with the Fast4 scoring prior to the finals, but I think it would be much harder to stomach that change if the players participating aren't top names.
We've seen examples where doubles has been elevated. As Ben notes, the Olympics has been tennis's main place recently, with the Hopman Cup/United Cup somewhat as well. We can even point to a prominent example of doubles-specialists beating singles stars in 2024 (I.e. Ram/Krajicek beating Alcaraz/Nadal). NBC certainly paid more attention to them for the rest of the tournament. I am assuming the entire draw will not just be filled with singles players, so could we see something similar for the doubles specialists that participate? I realize that is not the point of the change nor its likeliest outcome, but do highlight it as a spot of hope for doubles fans/specialists.
My last thought is the future state of professional doubles. These changes feel like a trial balloon. I'd be interested in learning more about what other decision makers at the top of the sport think about doubles' future. I also wonder what groups like the PTPA think about the changes. I checked their website and a few of its executive members (Townsend, Mattek-Sands, Zheng, and Pospisil) have either had some of their most notable success playing doubles or are primarily doubles-specialists today. These changes could be a one-off but I think it is likelier we start to see more discussions about doubles changing across pro tennis.
And BOOM goes Ben's dynamite