tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Ten years ago, Bob and Mike Bryan attempted the riskiest poach of their lives.
During their first title run, at the 2005 United States Open, the twins darted into the middle of a legal fray: They sued the ATP Tour.
The move from a tennis court to a court of law was a bold strategy to save doubles from extinction.
“Our backs are against the wall right now,” Mike Bryan said after he and Bob were named lead plaintiffs in a federal antitrust lawsuit against the ATP, the governing body for professional men’s tennis. The ATP represents both players and tournaments. “If we don’t unite, there may not be a game of doubles.”
A decade later, doubles is an integral part of the men’s game; prize money has nearly doubled; doubles-only players continue to make a decent living on tour.
On Thursday, the United States Open will showcase the doubles semifinals during the day session, which will be free to the public.
Many say without the lawsuit, and the Bryans’ principal role, doubles could now be an afterthought, or worse.
Eric Butorac, right, and doubles partner Scott Lipsky at the U.S. Open. “When I was coming up, I thought I’d be out of a job,” said Butorac. CreditJared C. Tilton/Getty Images
“When I was coming up, I thought I’d be out of a job,” said Eric Butorac, who broke into the ATP circuit in 2006.
The 2005 dispute centered on rule changes that the ATP said would encourage more high-profile singles players to enter doubles. Only players with singles rankings would have qualified to enter doubles events. The ATP also wanted to cut back on the length of matches with scoring changes like no-ad scoring, tiebreakers at 4-4 and a third-set supertiebreaker.
The so-called doubles enhancements, slated for 2008, would have effectively phased out doubles specialists.
“They were threatening to fire a lot people,” said Robert Lindstedt, 38, who is a semifinalist at this year’s Open and was a plaintiff with the Bryans 10 years ago.
The WTA implemented similar scoring changes to shorten matches in 2007, but left doubles eligibility rules intact. Blow back from players was minimal.
After losing in the U.S. Open’s first round to the American pair Sam Querrey and Steve Johnson last week, the top-ranked Bryans will end 2015 without a Grand Slam title for the first time since 2004. But they have a record 16 major titles, an Olympic gold medal and 10 year-end No. 1 finishes in the last 12 years.
They regard their legal action, largely unheralded and often forgotten, as a pivotal moment.
“It was a scary time,” Bob said. “It would have slashed the tour in half.”
The Bryans did not have to stick their necks out. Under the proposed rules, tournament directors were still allowed to grant wild cards to doubles teams otherwise ineligible. The Bryans were told they would receive such accommodation.
“We were going to have some kind of safe haven,” Bob said, “but that wasn’t good enough.”
Instead, they banded together and went to work.
They held a news conference on the grounds of the U.S. Open to announce the legal action. They put in more money than any other team for litigation fees and set up a sliding scale of contributions, some as low as $250.
They were joined by 43 other players in the federal lawsuit filed in Texas, which sought an injunction to prevent the proposed rules from taking effect.
The Bryans barnstormed around the country in exhibitions to raise money for the effort and met with fans, sponsors and tournament organizers.
The subtext to the legal spat asked: Were doubles players legitimate contributors with special skills, or failed singles players depleting limited resources? The argument from the tournament side was that hotel costs and prize money for doubles did not contribute enough to the bottom line in terms of star power or fan interest.
“Tournament directors just wanted to save on rooms, to lower the population of tennis players, and streamline it,” Bob said.
Over the months, many contentious behind-the-scenes meetings took place. It helped, Bob said, that during this period Etienne de Villiers, a doubles supporter, replaced Mark Miles as ATP chairman.
In the end, the tour backed down, and the lawsuit was dismissed on Feb. 28, 2006, according to court records.
But the players had to accept certain concessions. The tour implemented no-ad scoring and third-set tiebreakers. To persuade more singles players to enter doubles, eligibility requirements were tweaked to allow for a team’s best combined singles and doubles ranking.
The changes had intended and unintended consequences.
The tougher entry rules cut the fat out of doubles. It changed the culture. Players became more professional, watched their diet, and hired coaches and fitness trainers.
“Anyone that was wishy-washy and partying or not working hard was eliminated,” Bob said.
Compressed scoring, initially decried by players, prolonged careers.
Many top doubles specialists are in their late 30s or early 40s. No. 9 Nenad Zimonjic of Serbia is 39. The 2013 U.S. Open doubles winner Leander Paes of India is 42.
“The scoring change extended my career,” said Daniel Nestor, who turned 43 Friday.
Shortened matches did not alter the hierarchy of results, as many players had feared. The better teams still won — even against top singles players. The Bryans are a combined 9-2 against Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.
For players trying to make it on tour like Butorac, doubles was a lifeline.
Two years out of tiny Division III Gustavus Adolphus College, Butorac remembers hearing in 2005 that doubles might be canceled. He asked two ATP veterans if he should bother toiling away on the lower-tier Challenger circuit.
Last week, Butorac came off the practice court and marveled that the two doubles teams hitting next to him each had coaches and physical trainers on court.
“Could you imagine an era 10 years ago where guys ranked No. 8 could afford to bring a whole team with them?” said Butorac, who has earned more than $1.5 million exclusively in doubles.
Players say there are still issues to fight, including lack of TV coverage, court placement and marketing efforts.
On balance, things are better. More singles players compete in doubles at tour-level events. The level of play is higher. Broadcasters breathe easier. Purses are up.
Total ATP prize money has climbed to $17.7 million this year from about $9.6 million in 2005. Including the four majors, it has grown to more than $28 million from $16 million.
The Bryans’ profile has soared since the lawsuit ended. Their faces are plastered on buses in New York. They regularly appear in commercials for a leading insurance company. They have been the subject of numerous magazine covers and were featured on “60 Minutes.”
The Bryans’ popularity in the United States is not matched in the ATP’s other big markets in Europe or Asia. They are now 37, and some wonder when they retire if the doubles fortunes they fought to boost will dry up.
For now, doubles regulars like Horia Tecau of Romania, who arrived on tour about seven years ago, say they owe their livelihood to the Bryans.
“We have to thank these guys for doing it,” Tecau said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/10/s...ch-to-bryans-for-standing-up-for-doubles.html
During their first title run, at the 2005 United States Open, the twins darted into the middle of a legal fray: They sued the ATP Tour.
The move from a tennis court to a court of law was a bold strategy to save doubles from extinction.
“Our backs are against the wall right now,” Mike Bryan said after he and Bob were named lead plaintiffs in a federal antitrust lawsuit against the ATP, the governing body for professional men’s tennis. The ATP represents both players and tournaments. “If we don’t unite, there may not be a game of doubles.”
A decade later, doubles is an integral part of the men’s game; prize money has nearly doubled; doubles-only players continue to make a decent living on tour.
On Thursday, the United States Open will showcase the doubles semifinals during the day session, which will be free to the public.
Many say without the lawsuit, and the Bryans’ principal role, doubles could now be an afterthought, or worse.
Eric Butorac, right, and doubles partner Scott Lipsky at the U.S. Open. “When I was coming up, I thought I’d be out of a job,” said Butorac. CreditJared C. Tilton/Getty Images
“When I was coming up, I thought I’d be out of a job,” said Eric Butorac, who broke into the ATP circuit in 2006.
The 2005 dispute centered on rule changes that the ATP said would encourage more high-profile singles players to enter doubles. Only players with singles rankings would have qualified to enter doubles events. The ATP also wanted to cut back on the length of matches with scoring changes like no-ad scoring, tiebreakers at 4-4 and a third-set supertiebreaker.
The so-called doubles enhancements, slated for 2008, would have effectively phased out doubles specialists.
“They were threatening to fire a lot people,” said Robert Lindstedt, 38, who is a semifinalist at this year’s Open and was a plaintiff with the Bryans 10 years ago.
The WTA implemented similar scoring changes to shorten matches in 2007, but left doubles eligibility rules intact. Blow back from players was minimal.
After losing in the U.S. Open’s first round to the American pair Sam Querrey and Steve Johnson last week, the top-ranked Bryans will end 2015 without a Grand Slam title for the first time since 2004. But they have a record 16 major titles, an Olympic gold medal and 10 year-end No. 1 finishes in the last 12 years.
They regard their legal action, largely unheralded and often forgotten, as a pivotal moment.
“It was a scary time,” Bob said. “It would have slashed the tour in half.”
The Bryans did not have to stick their necks out. Under the proposed rules, tournament directors were still allowed to grant wild cards to doubles teams otherwise ineligible. The Bryans were told they would receive such accommodation.
“We were going to have some kind of safe haven,” Bob said, “but that wasn’t good enough.”
Instead, they banded together and went to work.
They held a news conference on the grounds of the U.S. Open to announce the legal action. They put in more money than any other team for litigation fees and set up a sliding scale of contributions, some as low as $250.
They were joined by 43 other players in the federal lawsuit filed in Texas, which sought an injunction to prevent the proposed rules from taking effect.
The Bryans barnstormed around the country in exhibitions to raise money for the effort and met with fans, sponsors and tournament organizers.
The subtext to the legal spat asked: Were doubles players legitimate contributors with special skills, or failed singles players depleting limited resources? The argument from the tournament side was that hotel costs and prize money for doubles did not contribute enough to the bottom line in terms of star power or fan interest.
“Tournament directors just wanted to save on rooms, to lower the population of tennis players, and streamline it,” Bob said.
Over the months, many contentious behind-the-scenes meetings took place. It helped, Bob said, that during this period Etienne de Villiers, a doubles supporter, replaced Mark Miles as ATP chairman.
In the end, the tour backed down, and the lawsuit was dismissed on Feb. 28, 2006, according to court records.
But the players had to accept certain concessions. The tour implemented no-ad scoring and third-set tiebreakers. To persuade more singles players to enter doubles, eligibility requirements were tweaked to allow for a team’s best combined singles and doubles ranking.
The changes had intended and unintended consequences.
The tougher entry rules cut the fat out of doubles. It changed the culture. Players became more professional, watched their diet, and hired coaches and fitness trainers.
“Anyone that was wishy-washy and partying or not working hard was eliminated,” Bob said.
Compressed scoring, initially decried by players, prolonged careers.
Many top doubles specialists are in their late 30s or early 40s. No. 9 Nenad Zimonjic of Serbia is 39. The 2013 U.S. Open doubles winner Leander Paes of India is 42.
“The scoring change extended my career,” said Daniel Nestor, who turned 43 Friday.
Shortened matches did not alter the hierarchy of results, as many players had feared. The better teams still won — even against top singles players. The Bryans are a combined 9-2 against Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.
For players trying to make it on tour like Butorac, doubles was a lifeline.
Two years out of tiny Division III Gustavus Adolphus College, Butorac remembers hearing in 2005 that doubles might be canceled. He asked two ATP veterans if he should bother toiling away on the lower-tier Challenger circuit.
Last week, Butorac came off the practice court and marveled that the two doubles teams hitting next to him each had coaches and physical trainers on court.
“Could you imagine an era 10 years ago where guys ranked No. 8 could afford to bring a whole team with them?” said Butorac, who has earned more than $1.5 million exclusively in doubles.
Players say there are still issues to fight, including lack of TV coverage, court placement and marketing efforts.
On balance, things are better. More singles players compete in doubles at tour-level events. The level of play is higher. Broadcasters breathe easier. Purses are up.
Total ATP prize money has climbed to $17.7 million this year from about $9.6 million in 2005. Including the four majors, it has grown to more than $28 million from $16 million.
The Bryans’ profile has soared since the lawsuit ended. Their faces are plastered on buses in New York. They regularly appear in commercials for a leading insurance company. They have been the subject of numerous magazine covers and were featured on “60 Minutes.”
The Bryans’ popularity in the United States is not matched in the ATP’s other big markets in Europe or Asia. They are now 37, and some wonder when they retire if the doubles fortunes they fought to boost will dry up.
For now, doubles regulars like Horia Tecau of Romania, who arrived on tour about seven years ago, say they owe their livelihood to the Bryans.
“We have to thank these guys for doing it,” Tecau said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/10/s...ch-to-bryans-for-standing-up-for-doubles.html
Long live the Bryan Brothers!
