Sunshine Double: Slam Equivalent Or Just Rubbish?

[Drob]

I have been hearing for years about the Sunshine Double, of winning Indian Wells and Key Biscayne in the same year. Bud Collins even listed it as a special achievement in the last edition of his Tennis History.

But what justification does it have?

I realise that IW is a kind of first-among-equals within the Masters 1000 group. Miami has tried to argue that it has the same kind of special status as IW, but I don't think it does. Miami is glamorous and all, but it kind of follows in the wake of IW's clout.

But my point is that there is no special designation, laurel or even phrase to connote winning The Rogers Cup and Cincinnati back-to-back. And I would say that that is a bit tougher to do than the Sunshine Double because the time is more compressed and the weather is more brutal. That it is more difficult is shown by the fact it has been done far less often. On the men's side, the Sunshine Double has been achieved 13 times since 1990, 40-percent of the time, roughly. The Rogers/Cincy double has been achieved four times during the same period (I may be missing one, but I think Agassi '95, Rafter '98, Roddick '03 and Nadal '13). (I know in some years there has been a week between the events, but lately they have been literally back-to-back. But even w a week between, it ends up being the same number of matches in the same number of days as the Sunshine Double).

Nor is there a special designation for winning Madrid and the Italian Open, which are played over a mere fortnight. Since Madrid became a clay Masters, this has been done twice by Nadal and once by Djokovic. Prior to that, I believe Rome and Hamburg were played within a fortnight, although I am not sure, and I think scheduling varied at times.

Finally, there is never mention of an "Super Indoor Double" of Paris Bercy and ATP Finals. Now that is a tough one to pull off, notwithstanding the one-week break, because of the ruthless, almost suffocating competition at the ATP Finals. But it has been done. Since the renewed Paris Indoor, it has been done by Becker '92, Sampras '97, Federer '11, and Djokovic '13, '14 and '15. This seems much trickier than the Sunshine Double.

Is there a justification for even talking about a Sunshine Double?

If there is justification, what does it mean? Where does if fall among tennis accomplishments?

Thanks for any analysis

 

[ibbi]

It's obviously not a slam equivalent. I think maybe media wise considering both events take place in the United States, and placement in the year wise given that unlike all but maybe Shanghai they are not just lead up tournaments for a larger event, but sort of sit in their own little world they have built this big reputation for themselves.

Why it's been done so often probably has to do with relatively similarish playing surfaces, and the fact that it's early in the year and everyone is fresh.

 

[Chanwan]

It's simple US bias

 

[ChrisRF]

I have been hearing for years about the Sunshine Double, of winning Indian Wells and Key Biscayne in the same year. Bud Collins even listed it as a special achievement in the last edition of his Tennis History.

But what justification does it have?

I realise that IW is a kind of first-among-equals within the Masters 1000 group. Miami has tried to argue that it has the same kind of special status as IW, but I don't think it does. Miami is glamorous and all, but it kind of follows in the wake of IW's clout.

But my point is that there is no special designation, laurel or even phrase to connote winning The Rogers Cup and Cincinnati back-to-back. And I would say that that is a bit tougher to do than the Sunshine Double because the time is more compressed and the weather is more brutal. That it is more difficult is shown by the fact it has been done far less often. On the men's side, the Sunshine Double has been achieved 13 times since 1990, 40-percent of the time, roughly. The Rogers/Cincy double has been achieved four times during the same period (I may be missing one, but I think Agassi '95, Rafter '98, Roddick '03 and Nadal '13). (I know in some years there has been a week between the events, but lately they have been literally back-to-back. But even w a week between, it ends up being the same number of matches in the same number of days as the Sunshine Double).

Nor is there a special designation for winning Madrid and the Italian Open, which are played over a mere fortnight. Since Madrid became a clay Masters, this has been done twice by Nadal and once by Djokovic. Prior to that, I believe Rome and Hamburg were played within a fortnight, although I am not sure, and I think scheduling varied at times.

Finally, there is never mention of an "Super Indoor Double" of Paris Bercy and ATP Finals. Now that is a tough one to pull off, notwithstanding the one-week break, because of the ruthless, almost suffocating competition at the ATP Finals. But it has been done. Since the renewed Paris Indoor, it has been done by Becker '92, Sampras '97, Federer '11, and Djokovic '13, '14 and '15. This seems much trickier than the Sunshine Double.

Is there a justification for even talking about a Sunshine Double?

If there is justification, what does it mean? Where does if fall among tennis accomplishments?

Thanks for any analysis

IMO you are right, "Sunshine Double" is just a name while the other combinations don’t have a special name.

The Indian Wells and Miami double has two more matches for top players though (at least since the introduction of 56-player-fields at the other Masters in 2007). But you are right that it doesn’t matter because there is more time between them. At Madrid/Rome and Canada/Cincinnati you have to play the last 5 days of the week in a row both times (with 2 days between the first final and beginning of the second tournament), compared to for example Miami where there is even an off-day before the final.

 

[Red Rick]

Equivalent of two M1000s.

 

[Drob]

IMO you are right, "Sunshine Double" is just a name while the other combinations don’t have a special name.

The Indian Wells and Miami double has two more matches for top players though (at least since the introduction of 56-player-fields at the other Masters in 2007). But you are right that it doesn’t matter because there is more time between them. At Madrid/Rome and Canada/Cincinnati you have to play the last 5 days of the week in a row both times (with 2 days between the first final and beginning of the second tournament), compared to for example Miami where there is even an off-day before the final.

Thanks. You are right, if you are in the top eight seeds, you are given a "freebie" so to speak at Madrid/Rome and Canada/Cincinnati. That would be 10 matches over 14 days versus 12 over 21. Novak played six matches at Cincy last year because he was just outside the top eight. Had he not lost to Tsitsipas at Toronto he would have played six there to win, for a total of 12 matches in 14 days. But it is not likely anyone outside the top eight is going to win both those tournaments, or make finals of both, although if one these young guns starts blazing of a sudden, I guess you could see it.

 

[Djokodalerer31]

Why it has to be two extremes??! If its not major equivalent, then its just rubbish? LOL My answer is - its NEITHER of two! Its more prestigeous than other masters tournaments, but much less prestigious than grand slams (obviously!) If i had to come up with some sort of scale/tier, it would be this: Grand Slams ----------> ATP Finals --> IW-MI ----> Other Masters...

 

[NatF]

Well they have an extra round compared to normal masters and obviously before 2008 they had a BO5 final as well, so back to back it's probably worth a little more than two masters IMO but not a major still.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Certainly not rubbish

 

[Your Hero]

Slam equivalent when Fed wins it and glorified 250s crapola when someone else does.
I try to be objective about these things.

 

[DSH]

2000 points (like winning a sole major) and more than 2 and a half million dollars in prizes for the champion of both tournaments.
rubbish?.
absolutely not!.

 

[KG1965]

I have been hearing for years about the Sunshine Double, of winning Indian Wells and Key Biscayne in the same year. Bud Collins even listed it as a special achievement in the last edition of his Tennis History.

But what justification does it have?

I realise that IW is a kind of first-among-equals within the Masters 1000 group. Miami has tried to argue that it has the same kind of special status as IW, but I don't think it does. Miami is glamorous and all, but it kind of follows in the wake of IW's clout.

But my point is that there is no special designation, laurel or even phrase to connote winning The Rogers Cup and Cincinnati back-to-back. And I would say that that is a bit tougher to do than the Sunshine Double because the time is more compressed and the weather is more brutal. That it is more difficult is shown by the fact it has been done far less often. On the men's side, the Sunshine Double has been achieved 13 times since 1990, 40-percent of the time, roughly. The Rogers/Cincy double has been achieved four times during the same period (I may be missing one, but I think Agassi '95, Rafter '98, Roddick '03 and Nadal '13). (I know in some years there has been a week between the events, but lately they have been literally back-to-back. But even w a week between, it ends up being the same number of matches in the same number of days as the Sunshine Double).

Nor is there a special designation for winning Madrid and the Italian Open, which are played over a mere fortnight. Since Madrid became a clay Masters, this has been done twice by Nadal and once by Djokovic. Prior to that, I believe Rome and Hamburg were played within a fortnight, although I am not sure, and I think scheduling varied at times.

Finally, there is never mention of an "Super Indoor Double" of Paris Bercy and ATP Finals. Now that is a tough one to pull off, notwithstanding the one-week break, because of the ruthless, almost suffocating competition at the ATP Finals. But it has been done. Since the renewed Paris Indoor, it has been done by Becker '92, Sampras '97, Federer '11, and Djokovic '13, '14 and '15. This seems much trickier than the Sunshine Double.

Is there a justification for even talking about a Sunshine Double?

If there is justification, what does it mean? Where does if fall among tennis accomplishments?

Thanks for any analysis

On the particular meaning of the Sunshine Double I can not help you.
What I can say is that the two big tournaments differ from the other 7 Masters for a reason essentially: the Top players do not identify them as warm up.
They mentally prepare and train hard 100% to win.
Obviously they are also involved in the others 7 Masters but in the background there are slam and YEC.

 

[itrium84]

I don't give this m1000 pair any special significance over any other m1000 pair.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

 

[junior74]

Equivalent of two M1000s.

Might be worth 2.14 M1000s "adjusted for difficulty"

 

[BeatlesFan]

Equivalent of two M1000s.

Exactly. Someone could win 20 Sunshine Doubles and it wouldn't be equal to one slam, legacy-wise. Would Chang, Roddick or Cilic trade their sole slam for a ga-zillion Sunshine doubles?

 

[Red Rick]

Exactly. Someone could win 20 Sunshine Doubles and it wouldn't be equal to one slam, legacy-wise. Would Chang, Roddick or Cilic trade their sole slam for a ga-zillion Sunshine doubles?

I would hate to believe Roddick lost another Slam final by losing that IW final to Ljubicic

 

[DSH]

Exactly. Someone could win 20 Sunshine Doubles and it wouldn't be equal to one slam, legacy-wise. Would Chang, Roddick or Cilic trade their sole slam for a ga-zillion Sunshine doubles?

$.

 

[BeatlesFan]

$.

I said "legacy wise." Money is a different matter entirely.

 

[DSH]

I said "legacy wise." Money is a different matter entirely.

What do you prefer in this case, a lot of money or sports glory?.

 

[Rattler]

For me...I’ve always loved IndianWells...incredible tennis (especially from the 2nd round on)...great atmosphere. Top players rarely miss this event...was a pleasure to work.

Miami, now that it’s moved I don’t know, but the matches were sometimes alittle flat...the days seemed longer working the event...and those no-see-um bugs are a holy terror.

 

[BeatlesFan]

What do you prefer in this case, a lot of money or sports glory?.

It's immaterial what I prefer, I'm not a professional tennis player.

 

[Drob]

On the particular meaning of the Sunshine Double I can not help you.
What I can say is that the two big tournaments differ from the other 7 Masters for a reason essentially: the Top players do not identify them as warm up.
They mentally prepare and train hard 100% to win.
Obviously they are also involved in the others 7 Masters but in the background there are slam and YEC.

Interesting take.

 

[bjk]

The Euros hate it because they have to come all the way over to the US, get two tournaments out of it, and it takes an entire month. There should be another tournament for the losers of IW during the 2nd week of IW.

 

[BGod]

I really wish people looked at it less on how many times it's been done and more about how many players did it.

Courier
Chang
Sampras
Rios
Agassi
Federer
Djokovic

That's 7.

The prestige comes from being 6 round tournaments for seeded players. I believe Sampras and Federer were the only ones who won both in a Bo5 final format though.

Yeah it's obviously harder to do than winning a Slam since there's only 1 yearly opportunity and only 7 have done it in 30 years. By comparison the USO has been won by 7 different players in the last 11 years.

As for the USO series double, Canada gets skipped a lot and is 5 rounds. The USO triple is the big one but the AO triple has only been done by 5 players.

 

[NaomiKonjuhPotapova]

That's just because (Almost) for the whole month that player is unbeatable.

 

[King No1e]

it definitely looks impressive, but i will say the Summer slam is harder because of the weather conditions.
winning it 3 in a row however, now that is a serious achievement.