British Tennis Forum - Celebrating 20 Years!

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Doubles - ATP reforms to downgrade the importance of doubles

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

I don't like it, but I would say that, wouldn't I, & what can the fans do to thwart the ATP, if that's what it's decided to do? furious

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

"Julian Cash and Lloyd Glasspool, last years historic all-British mens doubles winners, have threatened legal action over ATP proposals to halve doubles draw sizes and shift the singles-to-doubles prize money split from 80:20 to 90:10 by 2028. They argue the changes will make it nearly impossible for players to sustain a career solely in doubles. Fellow Brit Henry Patten criticised the move as odd and elitist, claiming decisions were made behind closed doors without proper consultation."

I don't know what legal grounds they have - no one has the right to a specific career - otherwise we'd have people queuing up demanding to be paid for being chimney sweeps and candlestickmakers

If there were representations made, that might be a different point

And the 'trade union' arguments of proper consultation has some weight

But it's not 'odd' at all, Henry - it's because no one watches it

And elitist is a daft comment, as I'm sure he realises in hindsight

indiana · Tennis legend

Yes, surely the only legal case can be against process, such as what consultation is required.

Lots of folk love doubles, doubles players love doubles, but I have to agree with CD that they have no right to a doubles career, as it is just now, or at all.

Personally I would prefer it to continue as it is and that these changes were not introduced..

Blue_Belle · Pro player

Sigh like SC I feel it will happen regardless but I'm not happy about it.

Helen40 · Grand Slam Champion

I guess that tennis, like everything else it seems is all about making money, and more people watch singles, even if they play more doubles at club level.
For me it's no different to any other career. Supply and demand dictate market value, and some people get to make a living from something they enjoy, which is a real privilege. (And lets face it most tennis players have come from a privileged background) The rest of us have to just get on and make ends meet. So although I find it a bit sad that money is ruling in tennis, it is a sad fact of life.

christ · Challenger qualifying

There are almost no televised doubles, so no-one watches doubles, so even fewer doubles matches are shown, so the spiral continues. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The same could be said of women's football (or pretty much any women's sport) - "hardly anyone watches it, so we shouldn't waste our time on it", but there is a gender divide there that can be characterised as "discrimination", so the broadcasters and bureaucracy are encouraged to swim upstream and continue to broadcast things that no-one wants to see in order that they can try to re-educate the audience; doubles players don't, unfortunately, have an "-ism" that they can blame.

The general (non-anorak) audience, thus the broadcasters, thus the ATP Tour doesn't care about anyone outside the top 100 (or even, really, the top 10 plus exceptions), so it is not a huge surprise that this nonsense gains traction.

I think that it is sad that the big name tennis players are campaigning vociferously to take a higher percentage of the gross, but they aren't fighting to broaden the base for distributing the money that they are hoping to win. The big names (which, as above, are the "draws" for the TV audience and therefore for the broadcasters) seem to be snuffling at the trough to extract more for themselves, not to the benefit of the sport: if only they could be persuaded into the sort of altruism that leads to equal pay for women and apply that to the rest of the sport that made them what they are.

If these players are "working to rule" to benefit the players rather than profiting the administration, then should be saying that they will "work to rule" until the lower ranked players get more, doubles players get more, wheelchair players get more, but they can afford to keep what the singles winner gets the same - even as "the pot" massively expands - indicating that they are interested in the sport, not themselves. But they aren't.

It is mildly ironic that the administration say that they want to encourage more participation in the sport, most participation in the sport is through doubles, but the people that run the sport seem to want to stamp that out. "We need more black/ gay/ asian/ disabled/ whatever star players" to encourage - and act as role models for - young black/ gay/ asian/ disabled/ whatever players to get into the sport. But doubles is wasting our oxygen.

We all saw this coming when they screwed with the mixed at the US Open: after that it was only a matter of time before doubles got the bullet.

wolf · Tennis legend

What christ said.

It's greed, pure and simple.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

christ wrote:
There are almost no televised doubles, so no-one watches doubles, so even fewer doubles matches are shown, so the spiral continues. Talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The same could be said of women's football (or pretty much any women's sport) - "hardly anyone watches it, so we shouldn't waste our time on it", but there is a gender divide there that can be characterised as "discrimination", so the broadcasters and bureaucracy are encouraged to swim upstream and continue to broadcast things that no-one wants to see in order that they can try to re-educate the audience; doubles players don't, unfortunately, have an "-ism" that they can blame.

The general (non-anorak) audience, thus the broadcasters, thus the ATP Tour doesn't care about anyone outside the top 100 (or even, really, the top 10 plus exceptions), so it is not a huge surprise that this nonsense gains traction.

I think that it is sad that the big name tennis players are campaigning vociferously to take a higher percentage of the gross, but they aren't fighting to broaden the base for distributing the money that they are hoping to win. The big names (which, as above, are the "draws" for the TV audience and therefore for the broadcasters) seem to be snuffling at the trough to extract more for themselves, not to the benefit of the sport: if only they could be persuaded into the sort of altruism that leads to equal pay for women and apply that to the rest of the sport that made them what they are.

If these players are "working to rule" to benefit the players rather than profiting the administration, then should be saying that they will "work to rule" until the lower ranked players get more, doubles players get more, wheelchair players get more, but they can afford to keep what the singles winner gets the same - even as "the pot" massively expands - indicating that they are interested in the sport, not themselves. But they aren't.

It is mildly ironic that the administration say that they want to encourage more participation in the sport, most participation in the sport is through doubles, but the people that run the sport seem to want to stamp that out. "We need more black/ gay/ asian/ disabled/ whatever star players" to encourage - and act as role models for - young black/ gay/ asian/ disabled/ whatever players to get into the sport. But doubles is wasting our oxygen.

We all saw this coming when they screwed with the mixed at the US Open: after that it was only a matter of time before doubles got the bullet.

Well said, Chris. The ATP is turning into tennis's answer to FIFA, only it's aiming to shrink the accessibility (if that's the right word) of doubles rather than bloat, sorry, expand it - cf. the World Cup 2026.