With more than 1,000 matches to his name, Jamie Murray has seen it all in 20 years of professional tennis. A doubles specialist from the get-go, the elder Murray brother holds the impressive record of the most mixed doubles grand slam titles out of any active player on tour. That’s five in total, including three consecutive mixed doubles triumphs at the US Open from 2017-2019.
But this year, with the introduction of a revamped mixed doubles event starting on Tuesday in New York, Murray and many more doubles players alike have been robbed of the opportunity to compete for a prestigious title.
The controversial, 16-pair event sees a host of top singles players compete in a quickfire format on the two main show courts at Flushing Meadows. Among the star-studded pairs are Carlos Alcaraz and Emma Raducanu, Jack Draper and Jessica Pegula and Naomi Osaka and Gael Monfils – all competing for a prize of $1m for the winning team, an increase of $800,000 from 2024.
“People are obviously excited, because it’s the best men and women on court together, which is a cool product,” 39-year-old Murray told The Independent, last month at Wimbledon.
“But a lot of doubles players are annoyed. The prize money gap is so big because that money is going to the very top end of the game. Of course, they deserve it, but it’s like ‘come on, give us a chance to win.’ It’s only four times a year we get to play mixed doubles.”
When this new-look competition – moved from the US Open’s final week to qualifying week – was announced in February, the exciting prospect of the world’s top male and female players competing alongside one another was quickly matched by uproar among doubles specialists.
Defending champions Sara Errani and Andrea Vavassori of Italy – the only doubles-specialist pair in this year’s draw, courtesy of a wild card pick – labelled the radical changes a “profound injustice” in a joint statement, while former doubles world No 1 Kristina Mladenovic decreed the event a “super exhibition.”
As for Wimbledon mixed doubles champion Sem Verbeek, unable to target consecutive titles in New York, he was rather more sombre: “As a doubles athlete, my heart is bleeding.” Ironically, his partner Katerina Siniakova is a late replacement and is set to partner Jannik Sinner.
The disregard for doubles specialists was evident from day-dot. Eight teams have been decided by their combined singles ranking, while the other eight have been chosen by a wild card committee. Aside from Errani and Vavassori, no pairs of doubles specialists have been included.
“They’re trying to merge sports and entertainment together and I’m sure it will be a success,” Murray added, summarising the two main gripes of the doubles locker-room.
“But I think for a lot of doubles players, there’s a feeling that this money could have gone to the wider player group, rather than to the stars who are already being paid a fortune.
“It’s taken away both a potential earning opportunity and a chance to win a Grand Slam.”
Away from financial exasperation, it’s difficult to shake the thought that this event has the feel of an exhibition, not unlike previous editions of ‘Fan Week’ on Arthur Ashe Stadium prior to the official US Open start date, and in deep contrast to the tradition and prestige which usually is the hallmark of any Grand Slam event.
Four rounds over two days will see a quickfire scoring system being used: best-of-three sets, first-to-four games, with sudden death deuce, a tiebreak at 4-4 and a 10-point championship tie-break instead of a third set. The final will be the same, but with normal six-game sets instead.
“It’s a shame that the format is very short and the draw is really diminished,” says world No 5 doubles player Henry Patten, last year’s Wimbledon champion, who repeats Murray’s criticisms, while also acknowledging that the event will be a “massive success.”
He adds: “I don’t know why they didn’t just do the event anyway and keep the mixed doubles separate. I think to be calling it a Grand Slam is ridiculous.”
Recent withdrawals and scheduling concerns play strongly to this theory. American stars Coco Gauff, Emma Navarro and Tommy Paul have all withdrawn in recent days, as has world No 1 Aryna Sabalenka.
And as for Alcaraz and Sinner – the two biggest draws – their participation is in doubt given they contest the final of the Cincinnati Open at 3pm ET on Monday, less than 24 hours before both would be expected on court in the Big Apple.
Wimbledon champion Iga Swiatek has an even worse turnaround, playing in Cincinnati at 6pm ET tonight and scheduled to be on Arthur Ashe at midday on Tuesday. Eighteen hours (probably less) to play a singles final, cool-down, fulfil media commitments, fly two hours to New York and be present on-site at Flushing Meadows to play potentially two matches in a day. It feels somewhat farcical.
Yet the actual product will be fascinating viewing. How seriously will it actually be taken? Most players will have their main sights set on the singles tournament, starting on Sunday, but the staggering prize pot means matches will undoubtedly be competitive. The final is effectively a $600,000 contest, $300,000 per player.
Added to that, the concept of top men’s and women’s players competing on the same court is one underutilised in professional tennis, given its unique selling point in comparison to other sports. On this, the executives at the US Open have made a bold, innovative change, with thousands of spectators expected to attend in a week which would usually see sparse crowds across Flushing Meadows.
Yet to call it a genuine Grand Slam title, written into the history books despite the obvious pitfalls, feels disingenuous.
“I just don’t see why they couldn’t have had both this as an event and still have the main mixed doubles,” Murray sums up. “All the conditions are changed to get the stars’ buy-in and sign-up. If they made it three or four days, they were not going to play.
“Do I think it’s worthy of a Grand Slam title? Absolutely not.”
