Doubles Only Tennis Podcast

The ATP Doubles Debate with Ben Rothenberg: Should They Cut Doubles?

• Will Boucek • Episode 289

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 39:59

The ATP is rumored to be shrinking men’s doubles draws and shifting prize money over to singles, part of what has been a slow retreat from doubles over the past few decades.

I don't agree with the decision and wanted to talk with someone who understands the ATP's side. Ben Rothenberg is a journalist who broke the news about the potential plans yesterday. He's also been on the show before (listen here).

Ben shares what he knows about what's happening, and the case the ATP has to make such a decision. I attempt to analyze the business logic, the marketing failures, and what it would take for doubles to grow without relying on singles stars.

We discuss:

  • The reported draw size reductions at Masters 1000 and other ATP events 
  • Product 28 and why 2028 becomes a turning point 
  • Prize money reallocation from doubles to lower-ranked singles players 
  • Crowding, practice court access, and tournament footprint as drivers
  • Why late-round doubles is valued more than early rounds
  • Tennis TV production issues and how the viewing experience shapes demand
  • Singles specialization and why the ATP singles players rarely play doubles
  • The chicken and egg problem of marketing doubles
  • What makes a “star” in tennis
  • Social media and highlight restrictions that limit player promotion
  • Whether a smaller doubles circuit could create more prominence

I'm not exactly satisfied with the conclusion of this conversation, but I want to keep it going to help move tennis and doubles forward.

Feel free to react by posting to Ben (@BenRothenberg) and me (@WillBoucek) on Twitter.

Learn more about Ben & follow:

-----

**Join the #1 Doubles Strategy Newsletter for Club Tennis Players** 


**Become a Tennis Tribe Member**
Tennis Tribe Members get access to premium video lessons, a monthly member-only webinar, doubles strategy Ebooks & Courses, exclusive discounts on tennis gear, and more.


**Other Free Doubles Content**

Why Doubles Is In The News

SPEAKER_00

In this episode, you're going to hear from a previous guest, Ben Rothenberg. Ben is a DC-based journalist and an author who has written for the New York Times, the BBC, CNN and more. He hosts a podcast called No Challenges Remaining and wrote a book called Naomi of Taco, which we came on previously and uh talked about on the show. I wanted to have been on again to talk about doubles, which has been in the news recently and he wrote about doubles has been kind of under fire again. Uh the ATP has not announced, but there have been, I suppose the rumors been will explain it better than I can, um, that they plan to basically cut the ATP double score in half. The 1,000 level events will move from 32 to 16, and then 500 will move from uh 16 to 18s. And the reason I wanted to have Ben on is because not only he wrote about this recently, but he doesn't necessarily see eye to eye with me on this. Um I think ATP's making a big mistake. I think they should be investing in doubles, I think they should be marketing doubles, allowing the players to market themselves. Uh and Ben seems to think that this isn't necessarily a bad decision, but you'll uh get to hear from here for him in a second. And the reason that this is so important for me is because uh I think that we need to be having constructive conversations with people who don't necessarily agree with us all the time, uh, as you'll hear in a moment. So uh I don't want to elaborate on this uh too much. You're gonna hear um about a 20-minute chat with Ben uh at the end. He uh did have to run very quickly. He also had a little bit of a coughing fit um at the end and uh he was at Wimbledon, so he he had or was pressed for time. So um the podcast does end a little bit abruptly. But without further delay, enjoy this conversation slash debate about ATP doubles with Ben Rothenberg. Hey everybody, welcome to the show. Today we have a little bit different of an episode. We're uh talking about ATP doubles and we have Ben Rothenberg on. Ben, welcome.

SPEAKER_01

Thanks for having me, Ben.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, thanks for coming back on. Um so there was a huge announcement uh in the past 24, 48 hours about ATP doubles. Um, and I reached out to you because you had written about it for uh your um publication bounces. And I also wanted to have someone on who doesn't necessarily agree with me. I think today uh today a lot of us, I mean usually it has to do with like politics and stuff, which we're not gonna talk about here, but people don't like to talk to people who disagree with them on the other side of the argument, right? And I don't think you and I see eye to eye on this stuff. Um, so I think it's important that we share our perspective with each other. Maybe we change each other's mind on certain things, um, but it at least at least give the listener kind of both sides of the argument. So let's start with what was announced uh yesterday

What The ATP Proposal Changes

SPEAKER_00

by the ATP.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I don't know if announce is the word I would use. It was sort of something that was bubbling a bit here at Wimbledon. Okay. Um there were just whispers about it. There had been basically uh a meeting held with basically a lot of maybe like I don't know how far down on them, but like let's say the top 50 doubles players at least were invited. This meeting to meet with their board reps. I think they have two board reps on the ATP player council, two or three, um, who are in the double sort of designated seats at that in that in that board, the player council. Um and they met with them after the players, after the council representatives had met with the ATP earlier, I think most recently in Rome, but maybe some follow-up more recently than that, but initially in Rome anyway, about these proposals that the ATP was doing um to basically reduce a lot of the footprint of men's doubles on the ATP tour and ATP tour events. Um with some pretty, I mean, the most drastic sort of thing, which is which is you know definitely drastic and pretty severe, is uh reducing the draw sizes by half at ATP tour events. So going from 32 to 16 at thousand-level events and going from 16 to 8 at 250s and 500s. Um that's a big, big slash um for sure. Um and so there were we were hearing guys coming out of that meeting or hearing about this meeting who were talking about it, and then so I was trying to chase that down, talking to people who were more aware of specifics of it, and then I got a statement from my story from the ATP just sort of clarifying uh what they were doing, which matched up with most of what I'd I'd been hearing um pretty much. Uh so it wasn't like they put out like an announcement. This is still all provisional, this is all proposals that they're floating internally as part of this overhaul or overview is probably a better word for it, review they're doing of Tor structure, which they're internally calling Project Product 28 for 2028, which is when uh the year when this new 10th uh masters event in Saudi Arabia is being added to the ATP calendar. And so um it's seen as a chance with you know, lots of events are gonna get shuffled around and moved around. Um, you know, a few tournaments will be bought out and taken off the calendar, we think, before this Saudi event happened. So it's seen as kind of a an inflection point, a chance for them to reset some things. And as they're looking at their tour structure, they decided they did not want as much shovels. They want the doubles footprint to be smaller, they want fewer doubles players on site at tournaments. Um and I think that was one of the things that got brought up when I talking to you know people on the ATT side of this, which is the the numbers of people just being so much higher in doubles than they were, you know, when these structures were originally started in the tour decades ago. These are really old standing policies, you know, these sort of draw size type things, those have been in place for a long time. Um but right now doubles players are almost entirely separate group, and so you have a lot more people there. And it's one of the sort of you can call it a cost-cutting measure. You could see it as reallocating things. They were saying that you know this money will be uh that's being taken out of doubles purses for having these draws shrink, um, and also having the overall share of uh prize money shrink. Generally, the ratio at ATP tournaments has been 80% for singles and 20% for doubles. Um, that's the general guideline, and it sticks pretty close to that within you know decimal point here or there, I think, at most tournaments. Um now I think they're looking towards what the slam set, which is closer to to 90-10 in that split. Um, I think it went to like 88, 12 or something. Um, so uh yeah, so it's definitely gonna have an impact on a lot of doubles guys for sure. So I didn't finish my my thought. The money will go towards they were saying sort of singles players lowered down the rankings, like guys outside top 50, maybe who are still ATP level, but guys, you know, between 50 and 150, let's say. Um so that's that's what they're saying. And obviously it's completely expectedly and understandably doubles guys are not happy about this. This definitely threatens their their place on tour. This threatens the viability of the careers for a lot of them. It's gonna shrink the pool, uh, the population a lot, you know, by half. I mean, you really are gonna have to be one of the top um roughly 35, let's say, generously players, you know, to be able to play master's events anymore. Now it's closer to 64. So um it's it's it's definitely going to do a lot of tightening. And there's also we can get to some of this other stuff, there's also, I think, genuine concerns about knock-on effects. If that does happen, like how much would there still be? This is already an issue in doubles, I think, and you can tell me so, and I'll stop rambling if he responded to take whatever bullet point you want to first. Um, but about uh, you know, how tough it would be to break in and move up the rankings, you know, to get into this upper echelon. Um, if it's a really small crew of guys who are who have you know the key into this these uh exclusive tournaments, uh then you'll need one these big points. Um so I think they I think if this does happen, I think they have to really reimagine how the doubles ranking points works. I think they have to make some kind of divorce from the single skylines, you know, like just make it so it is more possible to to move up. Because if you're getting if you're winning one match at a 500 and getting points for making a semifinal, you know, that's a lot of points. And that's it would take many, many challenger wins or something like that to ever compete with that. Um so there'll be work to do for that, but certainly it's kind of a long time coming in a lot of ways, I think, in terms of in terms of the ATP um uh, you know, uh seeing not you can I think things you're probably gonna bring up, like not sort of putting a ton of uh promotion or investment or focus into doubles. Um they they did not they have not seemed to believe in it as a product in a lot of ways, right? And and that could be and that can be debated whether that's fair or unfair, that lack of belief, um whether or not they gave it a fair chance um to be supported, but they're basically now adjusting their sales to what the current wins are, I think in a lot of ways, and just sort of saying like this is not uh something that's actually core to our product anymore, uh what we were trying to present as CATP4. And so let's put fewer of our eggs in these in these doubles baskets.

SPEAKER_00

So overall, kind of to step back, is your understanding that the reason for these cuts is to save on both cost in terms of money and then also um regardless of the money, just reduce the number of players at these tournaments because it's maybe too crowded or too just resource heavy. Um I know you know I don't I haven't been to a lot of the 1000 events overseas, but I know at Indium Wells here um Cincinnati is no issue anymore because the new facility is so good. But in Indian Wells, it is very crowded week one, right? Like back in the players area, um the practice courts. I know players have trouble getting practice court time, um, especially the doubles players. Um so is that your understanding in terms of like why they are doing this? Because I'm I'm trying to really understand why before I form an opinion, right?

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I wouldn't say so it's not probably not gonna be overall cost reduction, it's gonna be reallocating the money that is being spent on doubles and doubles players to to singles, largely advanced singles benefiting from doubles is loss. It's kind of roughly zero sum. Um I mean, one of the things that got cited to me was that they project basically that based on current prize money patterns and projections, that by 2028, the total SLAM plus ATP tour level plus challenger tour level, this isn't my bounces story, um, uh purse for the year-long doubles this 2028 season would be about 60 million dollars. And they're just like, that's too much money for us to spend on doubles prize money. So they want to um to reallocate more of that to the singles guys further down. Um, you know, again, this lower parts of the top hundred, probably, not you know, not like challenger guys too much, but guys who are um yeah, maybe a little bit outside the masters direct cuts for these current masters events, um can put it there. Um and then yes, but then so that's that's where the so it's not really overall cost cutting, it's just reallocating, but they're definitely looking to cut the number of players on tour. And there is definitely a crowding issue in a lot of these spaces. You know, these are finite spaces that these tournaments take place in, and a lot of it is down. I mean, certainly like media, we get less access to some player lounges than we used to when I was first coming on tour. Um kind of changed post-pandemic largely. They used that as a sort of excuse for a while, this public health reason to not let us in some of the player areas, and then it became, oh, it's overcrowded. And a lot of these teams have are much bigger. You know, it used to just be for a lot of players either traveling with uh a coach or with nobody, and that was about it. And now people are much more likely to have something others on tour, have a physio on tour. I'm talking singles, especially, but also doubles, other various entourage people. There's just a lot more bodies in these spaces. And so they're looking and maybe

Money Shifts And Crowding Claims

SPEAKER_01

they're maybe they're allowing too much of that sometimes in terms of letting various other entourage in these spaces. Um, but that's maybe tougher to heart to you know uh push back on when you're dealing with you know big star players who want to have a coterie of like 10 people with them. Um, maybe that's the high. But it can be a lot of people basically picking this up. And so they're just seeing the doubles players there. Um, again, especially early on in tournaments. So, like you said, it's a bigger problem earlier on. And so what they're really doing essentially is cutting like the first round of doubles tournaments. You know, when you cut a draw from 32 to 16, you're taking out the whole first round. You're taking just half the teams. Um and the thing they said too is that doubles when doubles does have the most value to tournaments, uh tournaments are contending, is at the end of tournaments when it's you know, late rounds, when tournaments are especially vulnerable if something happens, uh, like a withdrawal in a marquee singles match, to have a double smash to put on court to still get the fans flying to watch. Um uh, you know, just even just have uh you know, you know, if there's a uh someone rolls their ankle in the first set of a singles final on a Sunday and there's no other match, like having had doubles there is is meaningfully, I think they think an important part of the ticket, right? But first round and there's still, I don't know, eight singles matches on the cards, they're saying to add another four or six, eight, whatever just doubles matches also in the order of play is not something they think is as valuable, would basically be their argument. So I mean that the end of the tournaments what they're saying is really where doubles they think still has a place, but it's just but it's just making it shorter. Yeah, like I said, just basically cutting in half the amount of matches, the amount of uh the first rounds basically taking out first rounds as we currently know them.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, it's interesting to me because like early they've moved these doubles tournament starts at a lot of the 1000s to like a Friday start or even a Sunday start, right? Um and that second week of the 1000 event, like Monday, Tuesday, there's just not that many singles matches. So there is a lot of doubles first round. And those ground pass holders are attending the doubles first round because that's like what's available. Uh I don't want to get into the specifics on this. I'd be interested to see like they'd probably have to look at the numbers on like all of the 1000 level events, ground pass sales, how much time is on court for singles versus doubles matches, and and so on. I mean, that seems like a math problem to me.

SPEAKER_01

I could try to break everything down into a math problem, but um I bet the ATT certainly has data on matches, or if not a tennis, certainly TV ratings, and that's another thing that like you know, they've been, and I know it's not completely everywhere, every single tournament, but they are producing, I think, nearly the big majority of doubles matches at poor level for uh tennis TV or for other broadcasts. Um, and they're saying they haven't seen necessarily a return on the investment they want from that. Those costs, that's one of the other costs that is involved with producing these matches. Um and there's something else I was gonna say. Um I'm trying to think of what you were saying. I had some response. Um the yeah, basically I I might I might blake on what it was. Sorry.

SPEAKER_00

But um yeah, yeah, I think I think the I mean the it would be nice for some like transparency on some of this stuff because it makes sense that tennis TV doesn't get a lot of viewers for doubles. Um I'm not sure the last time you logged in and tried to watch doubles on tennis TV, but the viewer experience is terrible. Like it makes sense that people wouldn't come back for doubles because there's typically no announcers. A lot of times, especially for the early rounds, like they're on the outside courts where the camera quality is like not great.

SPEAKER_01

So it's a good idea.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, go ahead.

SPEAKER_01

The other the other, I think sort of big part of this is uh you want to say, I don't know, resignation or conceding some giving up a bit on this, is they're kind of giving up on this notion that they can get singles players, the top singles players, I mean even like top hundred singles players to play meaningfully more doubles. Like that's just they they've they've decided that's that was something they wanted, certainly. And it's something they're kind of just saying is not proving feasible, it's not proving realistic. Like these guys just don't don't want to do it. Um they're they're so focused on singles, singles is where the money is and that could be changed, but singles where the the relevances and their careers are and trained for that and just having them play a meaningful amount of that. I mean, there's only you know, like, and I did this with myself, but there's only like four players right now who are even top hundred in both. None of the top 50 guys in doubles right now are ranked even within the top two fifty of singles. Like it's like it's just like a total like it just doesn't, it doesn't, it's not conducive for whatever reason. The specialization is happening for both both sides. Um, and so that was something that like I think this is a bit of a uh another turning point, whatever it is, but sort of like them saying, like, this is not this thing we wanted to do where we would love to have the doubles guy, the singles guys play more, and that would be how we, you know, bring eyes to doubles and and relevance to use that word to doubles. Um they just kind of like a little bit giving up on that. They're just saying that just wasn't working.

SPEAKER_00

That seems like obvious from the outset to me, just based on the prize money allocation, right? Like these singles players are making so much more, like every second that's taken away from them, like taking care of their body for the singles match or working on single specific skills, like is uh potential lots of potentially lots of money off the table, right? Um, and then of course, separately from the or sort of separately from this, the majors, you've got the best of five, obviously, and like it just it's you just can't do both.

SPEAKER_01

Like, no, and that's why it's a much more precise issue for the men and the women. I mean, it's the major best of five thing. That's like a that's a big issue. Yeah, women still have, I think it's 12 women who are currently both top 50 in both singles and doubles, who are like really viably being world-class players in both dens and women, sorry, both singles and doubles for the women. Men just don't have that. And that I think the top the the the slams best to five presents that, prevents that, excuse me. Also would say I Jeff Cagula was was asked about a couple times. I was with her in Berlin and and here, and she asked kind of similar questions like why you just doesn't play as much doubles anymore. And she said, I'd love to, but basically when you play um doubles at an event where you're also playing singles, the days just get really long. You know, you play your singles match and you just have to stay on site for many, many more hours waiting for your doubles match, and it just it just makes the whole thing more exhausting. And you know, that's something too that as players are trying to manage their days more, that's just sort of pulling that double duty. Um and and we said that you know, with some regret, like she she enjoys doing it, she likes doing it. She knows Coco, they used to be a very frequent team that played together for the first time in quite a while in Berlin uh a couple weeks ago. They they sort of you know lamented not being able to do it more, but just said like the realities of trying to manage their days. Um it just became kind of a not headache wasn't the word she used, but just became sort of a drag on her weeks. It's you know, because as a player, you don't want to spend 10 hours a day or whatever turned out being, you know, on the term insight. You want to gang it out and and rest and have a life.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I mean I I would uh my argument would be like they shouldn't have to do both, like long term if done the right way, the double tour doesn't necessarily need the singles players to play. Um that's my opinion. But if we step back at this and kind of look at it from a higher level uh perspective, and just look at it from like a business perspective, right? Um they've got a part of their business that they're viewing is a cost and not producing uh viewers, not producing money, not producing ad revenue, all this stuff. Then why are they like half-assed cutting it? Just cut it all together or do it right.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, you know, I I this is them kind of saying cut it all together or some or maybe at least, you know, a three-quarter measure towards cutting it all together in some ways. Like this is kind of them saying it wasn't working. And this is obviously something that doubles players argue, or doubles advocates argue all the time. Like there's you know, this sort of chicken egg thing going on, right? Where if you don't promote it, then it won't succeed. But they don't it's not succeeding. Um, but there's they say it's not popular enough to promote, and if it's

TV Value And Singles Specialization

SPEAKER_01

if it be promoted, it's more popular.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01

I I I just think that I think that I think double players can have men's double players particularly, I think, have responsibility in this. I think, and we talked about this, I think, when we last talked. I think that there's um uh um there's not the level of hustle or or work being put into it by these guys to bring new eyes to their sport to make the sport captivating, to entertain, to do tennis sports is an entertainment business. Ultimately, you're selling tickets to make people watch something, it's competing with other entertainment products. It's not just because you're good at it that you deserve to make a living, right? You have to have a product you want to watch that people want to um to to pay to watch, whether it's on TV or whether it's in person. Like it's not that's what that's what the business of sports is. And so I think there's just in the I can't, and I'm curious for you, like I said, something I've been asking other guys, like I think there's this huge lack of developed characters or personalities, and you could and you could punt responsibility on this if you're a doubles player and say, but what about the tourists doing this for us? But like, and there has to be some initiative and not just feeling entitled to have someone else make this for you. I'm just I'm curious to ask you, and this is not to put you on the spot, but like I'm curious who you would say is like the biggest star in men. doubles right now. Like who's the guy you gotta see? Like, is I don't know who that is as someone who's working in tennis pretty full time. I don't know who the compelling characters in men's in men's doubles are. I just don't know.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I mean I I think you do kind of so you're right the players need to be doing this more but it's also like it's the tour's product. I I don't think that doubles players are uh less able or less capable of like promoting themselves or ha have like more vanilla personalities than the singles players. The singles players just don't have to do it because they've got the marketing dollars behind them right like they're invited to all of the stuff. So I I think that I don't I don't think it's I don't think it's that simple.

SPEAKER_01

I think like there's something about doubles right now that's just not not enough of a show. I think it's not like I mean this is minor but I was watching like Wimbledon did actually put out like a on their Twitter they haven't done much uh clipping of highlights or anything at this tournament fans have noticed but they put out a doubles highlight shot I don't know if you've seen it yet it was of uh Neil Skobsky Skopje. Yeah behind the back shot and it was like a cool shot and Skopsky like barely celebrates it. He like pumps his fist to his box and then he like turns back to Christian Harrison and they start talking again. Like and and honestly if that's like if you want to like have people care about you you gotta like sell you got to put a big exclamation point on that on that shot somehow, right? Celebrate a little bit, whoop it up, make it clear like this was something cool that happened. It was like so low key and so locked in that it just for me it like it kind of fails as a clip because you see this saying it's like kind of like blinker you miss it amazing shot. And it is an amazing shot to be clear it's a lucky shot but it's an amazing shot and it just it for some reason it did didn't it didn't engage the crowd in the way that it it he didn't engage the crowd in the way it could have. And I think that there is responsibility you know you see singles guys hit that kind of shot and they would they would do something bigger to the crowd. I think there's this sort of structural issue with doubles where the guys are increasingly now sort of pointing their personalities towards their partners and their energy and their communication towards their partners and they're not as reliably and you watch more doubles than me so I'm sure you can argue this that I'm wrong but like uh that they're not as engaging with the crowd as they were before. Certainly like obviously we'll mention the Brians haven't come up yet as people who really did do a lot of promotions, who went did go the extra mile, who did do every possible sponsor meetup and pop-up event and pro am and meet and greet and engage with the crowd all this stuff all that sort of hustle and energy the Brian is exemplified and we talked about that before I remember on on your show that's missing in this generation. And so there's and there's lots of ways to capture that but I just don't see it happening.

SPEAKER_00

And again I don't see I'm curious I'm curious if you can actually answer my question like who is the star right now in men's doubles who should who is the show who is the person who's the player to watch right now at Men's doubles I do you have an answer I think there's team I think there's teams to watch like it in the US last year at the US Open for example um cash and Tracy made a deeper under the semifinals they were they were electric like they were pumping up the crowd they were getting into it they were sharing everything on social media um Raboul and Doumbia a French team are really entertaining and fun to watch um Marcella is great to watch um I don't think Pavich quite has those qualities who Arevolo plays with but um I mean he's still a fantastic player but I I think one of you know we'd have to ask Neil but like one one of the issues with a lot of these like behind the back shots um and Wimbledon's different but I know this is true of like the ATP events is the players can't post their own highlights right so like not only is the tour not marketing their their doubles part of their product they're not allowing the players to do it themselves. So that's that's a big problem. And like I don't understand TV rights. Like I'm not an expert on this stuff but it just makes no sense to me like you're telling them we're not going to market you and it's like well can we do it ourselves and I know they've tried like they've tried to create their own Instagram accounts and the tours shut it down. So it's like that's not that's not on them right like that's not fair.

SPEAKER_01

I've heard of that complaint but I still think there can and should have been and maybe this is a wake-up call that comes too late or something just again more initiative more energy more work put into selling the game and selling themselves and telling their stories right because you look at like I mean I wrote about Claire Lou on bounces yesterday Claire Lou is like a substack where she writes her battery posts. I know like Helio Varra has a Finnish language blog actually that he does regularly and and maybe there's some other stuff happening but it's not like I just don't see the effort and the hustle. I see them sort of clocking in clocking out to these matches without going above and beyond without sort of saying yes to every possible ask of them without you know um without going above and beyond and I think there just needs to be more effort when you're marginal in the sport on in the in the in the view of the sport honestly mean right because they're not like they're not like getting in TV time. It's not like they're getting these big even like you said spotlights on the main social media accounts so there could have been I think more initiative more work and I I I was thinking yeah a lot of people don't find to be professional athlete in order because they want to make an Instagram you know account and and make vlogs or whatever right and they want to just be professional athletes and and be serious about that um and and and you know very focused and tunnel vision yeah but I think I mean I just I just think that I just think that the market and the market for this is was eroding and you know again I don't think the the ATP would be cutting it if it was if it worked right I don't think there's just and maybe there is I I understand people think there's some uh you know disdain certainly the rally of publicism of the world that's increased in the last uh few years in terms of the openness and the disdain um for some of the single skies towards the double skies um and Boglick is I talked to him he had a lot to say too um but I just I think that they it there's no reason why the ATP would have intentionally tanked this product. I do think they tried I do think whatever investments they were putting in promotions were not yielding returns uh in terms of the couple they mentioned a couple you know campaigns they had done in the past and it just wasn't moving the needle. And the other thing is too with doubles that they've and I and I gotta go relatively soon uh but the other thing the doubles is it's it's not new right doubles has been in the market has existed at on the ATP level as just say

Stars, Storytelling, And Social Media Limits

SPEAKER_01

for more than 50 years um as a pro sport. Doubles is doubles is is people know what it is. Fans have been exposed to doubles people have had the chance to see it. Yes it could be more constant exposure but it's not like you're inventing one point slam or pickleball or something that's like genuinely novel or new like doubles has had a lot of chance in the market to grab this audience and just hasn't hasn't done it.

SPEAKER_00

I just don't know like I keep searching for these and maybe you had they showed you like these promotional or marketing campaigns that the ATP has done um and I I can't find them like I don't think I'm looking for research I'm looking for real effort. Yeah like Eric well I someone told me once that back in like 0809 they made a big campaign for like two years. Today it's very different in terms of marketing than 0809 um and social media and like yeah again just the suppression of like not allowing even I I spoke with a social media uh employee of a 1000 level event um within the past year and this person was literally posting for the tournament account. And I said why don't you post more doubles and they said we're only allowed to post three highlights a day for ATP and it's only the videos they give us which is always the singles it's like even if they have access to a video this is the tournament itself some epic doubles point or like they can't do it. So it's not this is not even like it goes beyond for me a lack of marketing it goes to suppression like intentional suppression. And it's like they've got to and the doubles players can do more to promote themselves. Sure.

SPEAKER_01

Like should they have to no but should they yes like they absolutely should I think that you know I I get the frustration with the suppression I definitely get the frustration with you know the doubles guys the story I've heard I'm sure you've been your reference the same story they offered to like pay for their own social media manager to run a double specific Instagram account or social media platforms under an ATP doubles umbrella and that got shut down. And that's frustrating and that's obviously um uh something that uh yeah I think it's is tough to to defend probably from the way that it's been I haven't heard the ATP side of that that incident I don't think but it's it it seems like something reasonable for them to do. However, I do think the ATP as a for-profit business like has enough as which has had date which has doubled under its umbrella for 50 plus years again now like knows what this product is doing in the marketplace and what it isn't doing and has has has can sense like if we put money into promoting it whether even if it was most recently 17 years ago like and I imagine it was more recent than that but I I think when it made a big effort 17 years ago um was there any did this move the needle at all? And and the answer is is no and maybe they don't see anyone in the players you mentioned you know who is who is who is elevating beyond that who's transcending do they see as a possible star. And this is a star driven sport. And they don't see that. Like I mean even like here at Wimbledon um I was really struck in the midst of doing this story that uh Henry Patton who's in the top seeded men's doubles team did his opening is British very famously did his opening round match on court 16 which is you know a one of the smaller courts that has three rows of seats on each side like he's the number one team in the world and he's British and God knows Britain has starved for success in this tournament. And even still Wimbledon didn't think that it was a thing to do to put him on even you know a medium sized court. So I'm just struck that this is this is what what people who who have more information than I do have have decided to do with this. Again I don't think that it's and I don't think there was like outcry and I don't think there's like any um I don't think that he's as as any sort of you know celebrity rock star status in Britain among British tennis fans. I don't think people are are really excited about him that I've seen funny. So it's just it's just it's just not working. So yeah so then it's good question and then I do have to wrap up soon but like if if doing this this half this halving measure is the right thing. And you know maybe it can be because I think that when you when you reduce the number of of characters it will suddenly the ones who were left and it's you know give me I don't know roughly uh 20 30 players who are playing all these tournaments in theory if they all play the full schedules those guys are gonna get really well known. Right? It'll be they'll take a much bigger space of the double footprint be almost like F1 which has like I think like tw 20 something drivers who are in the circuit um and it's a pretty small closed closed club. And so the fans get to know all of them. Right? This will these people who are left in this halving will suddenly have twice the relative prominence as they did before with the double space. And so it's a chance to to call to her to make the remaining ones have more space to grow and shine and get attention.

SPEAKER_00

So that's I mean I mean they're they're gonna do this they're gonna start marketing doubles it's gonna work and they'll they're gonna be like see we told you so that's what's going to start marking doubles I don't know if they're gonna start I don't know if this is I don't know if this is a half step towards eventual extinction honestly I don't know I I can't say this is go anywhere but I but I do but I do that's one silver lining right like if suddenly you're the number 12 dullest guy in the world you're suddenly in the quarterfinals automatically at every tournament that you play yeah it's fine to work with it goes back to like the suppression we talked about but the other thing we haven't mentioned is like vision and like for me you have to think outside the box which tennis isn't good at generally to see a world in which like a double tour can exist and be profitable and uh you know do well on its own and that means you know things that tennis has always been bad at like allowing fans to move around in the stadium playing music during the points who cares the doubles players will deal with it right like allowing people to you know make it kind of a fun party I mean I don't know experiment with that and have a vision and put some marketing dollars behind it. And I I watched the I'll end with this I know you gotta run like the the Australian Open Men's doubles this year. I watched a a good bit of it from home and the tournament was fantastic. The points were great the crowds were good. When I go to Indian Wells every year I've been to Australia a few times like I hear people say oh we should watch more doubles right and I know this is just me one person in some of these stadiums but I've been attending these matches for almost a decade now and it's it's over and over I hear it and they're like why don't they put it more on TV more and that's just like my tiny marketing people are messaging me about it. You know again I I think with the right vision and the right dollars and marketing behind it it it can. And that's that's where I think maybe you know we don't know because I don't I still don't believe they've done it. Like I don't think they've put forth a valiant real effort to do it.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah I mean that the I understand that feeling and I also understand obviously

A Smaller Tour And A Bigger Vision

SPEAKER_01

you you exist and your feelings are valid and your preferences and your love of doubles I'm not going to tell you that you know stop watching doubles like I'm or caring about doubles. I would never say that. And there's and you're not alone there's lots of people who are doubles fans and I've been hearing from them a lot in these last 48 hours since the story kind of percolated out um but I do think that it is must be a numbers game and things like Tennis Channel have numbers on what their ratings are when they're showing a doubles match on their on their air versus when they're showing some singles match and it must be drastic enough to make them have the habits they've developed. And there can be exceptional circumstances like obviously Venus and Serena for example are playing doubles here we'd think unless they pull out um uh tomorrow as if we're recording this and that's gonna be get big ratings for whoever shows it certainly in the US um but generally that's the exception to the rule and it's not doing that.

SPEAKER_00

So I understand that's frustration I understand that you know people want to watch the stars right like people want to watch the stars and the question is are they stars because they play singles or are they stars because they get marketing dollars behind them? I think it's more the latter.

SPEAKER_01

I don't think so I don't think so I think singles is a much better vehicle to meet a character to make a star like watching Mochizuki make the fourth round today he's had no marketing dollars behind him but he's been very captivating and sing him out on court just resonates more clearly than these doubles matches where he's on TV more notifiers. Yeah but it's also but I think that I think that's on T More because it's a more excuse me compelling product. I'm choking for some reason I gotta go.

SPEAKER_00

You're good. Alright thanks a ton ben for coming on I appreciate it uh we'll chat again soon thanks man sorry you're good bye