114. “BANK JOB”

There are 3 main types of pro doubles players:

(i) Those who only play doubles.

(ii) Those who play predominantly doubles, but also play singles when they can get in the draw.

(iii) Those who play predominantly singles, but will also play doubles if they can get in the draw.

And then there is the fourth type……

(iv) Those who only tend to play doubles at Grand Slams.

This year’s Australian Open Women’s Doubles competition, had a good collection of this fourth group of players!

Now I can understand why certain players decide to play doubles (pretty much only) at the Grand Slams – the reason being, to collect the prize money of course. After all, who would turn down A$40,000 (per pair) just to turn up and play a match. Yes, that sum was guaranteed for a first round loser in the women’s doubles at this years AO. But spare a thought for those pro players out there, who work day in day out, all year round, to earn a living by playing either doubles specifically, or singles and doubles, who did not get into the draw because a handful of singles players decided to enter the doubles event solely for the cash, as permitted by the current entry system?

The table below tells the story. Of the 128 players at this years AO women’s doubles event, there were ten pro’s who I would put into this fourth group of players. Of these ten players, two of them only played one doubles event in 2024! Another player only played two doubles events in 2024; two more played three events; and another played four doubles tournaments last year. This doesn’t really show a commitment to doubles, in my opinion.

Now I know some people will say that these players must be highly ranked and therefore media attractive, but I would argue that only two of the ten were likely to draw any kind of crowd. The other eight were not ‘household names’. So in effect, eight players took places in the draw from eight other players who were more doubles players than they were. I know this for a fact as some of the Alternates for the doubles event were doubles specialists (ranked inside the top 100), or regular doubles and singles players, and they didn’t get in because the places had been filled by players who only play doubles at the Slams.

So how does this happen? Well there is, in my, and many others, opinion, a flaw in the entry system for Grand Slam doubles events. Ordinarily players enter doubles events online and a certain number are ‘accepted’ based upon the combined doubles ranking of each pair of players. Then a small number of pairs will be accepted into the event from players who sign in on site at the start of the tournament. These on site acceptances can take account of the players singles ranking if it is higher than their doubles ranking.

In Grand Slam events however, it is different. Entries are submitted online and the acceptance list is drawn up using the combined rankings of the entered pairs, but in this instance, the higher ranking (between singles and doubles) of each player is used. So in the case of the players highlighted above, they got into the doubles draw at AO based solely on their singles ranking, regardless of any evidence at all that they actually play doubles. As a result, some ‘true’ doubles players missed out on the Grand Slam opportunity and of course, the prize money, which in many instances, would have been of huge significance to them, in terms of the funding of their costs throughout the year. This seems wrong. Surely doubles entrants, in a Grand Slam in particular, need to be able to prove that they have some kind of commitment to the doubles side of tennis? Proof that they have actually played some doubles events in the proceeding 12 months? Or, if they have not, then they need to be a top twenty five say, singles player if the organisers are interested only in the media interest side of things.

To be honest, I was court side at some of the women’s doubles matches at AO this year, and I watched some of the (Grand Slam only) doubles players perform. Some were fine, but some seemed to have very little idea how to play doubles and it showed. It made a bit of a mockery of doubles and the skills involved in this sector of the game. I really felt for the more committed doubles players who had not got into the draw because of this ‘fault in the system’.

On a final note, there is also the issue of re-pairing. So, if a player who is already in the draw, decides to withdraw (due to injury), prior to the cut off deadline, then her partner can re-pair. However, she doesn’t have to re-pair with someone from the alternate list, she can re-pair with a singles player (even one who never plays doubles and also one who didn’t even enter the doubles event in the first place). This again seems a little unfair on those doubles players who entered but just didn’t make the cut.

Maybe it’s time for a re-think about doubles event and the entry procedures, especially at Grand Slam events. How can doubles players, who are ranked within the top 100 in the world, not get into a Grand Slam event? The draw has room for 128 players (114 if you allow for Wild Cards) so surely someone ranked within the top 100 should be able to play?

#realitytennis

******************************************************

If you have enjoyed this blog, please follow, share and read more at http://www.realitytennis.WordPress.com and subscribe to receive e mail notification of upcoming blogs as they are released. Follow also at:

Twitter: @realitytennis

Instagram: realitytennis

If you have similar stories to share, please feel free to e mail the author at: sallyappleton64@gmail.com