When Being The Best Of Them All Gets You No Respect
Exclusive: Doubles giant Siniakova is not backing down against the USTA plan to revamp mixed doubles, snubbing her. Also, Andreescu is learning to let go... to come back stronger.
Welcome back! So what’s on the menu today? Well, I watched Katerina Siniakova win the mixed doubles title at Wimbledon on Thursday, and it finally pushed me to get into that US Open mixed doubles situation. For her specific case, and what that shows about the state of the sport. There are limits, and Siniakova should be one. And I got news for you.
1) Read an EXCLUSIVE about Katerina Siniakova, on the doubles GOATs list, and yet as of now shunned from the US Open mixed doubles. Read what decision she has now made. She didn’t mince her words about how sad and disappointed she feels for her case, but also for all doubles players. Her doubles partner, US player Taylor Townsend, also gave me her thoughts on the situation.
2) After the paywall: Get some news from Bianca Andreescu. The Canadian received a wild card for the WTA 1000 in Montréal, and Tennis Canada set up a Zoom call with her, which turned out to be very interesting. So I’m sharing the best parts of what’s going on in Andreescu’s mind right now here. Inspired by Amanda Anisimova? Feeling betrayed by her body? Having to get used to being away from the top right now? You know her, she spoke her mind.
This publication is supported by readers, so if you like what you’re reading, don’t hesitate to spread the word, try a paid subscription, like this post, or leave a comment, as it helps TSS discoverability. You can also prefer to buy me a cuppa!
US OPEN
When Being The Best Of Them All Gets You No Respect
EXCLUSIVE: Katerina Siniakova, the best doubles player out there, reigning World No.1 and Olympic champion, won’t let the US Open off the hook. Snubbed from the star-studded lineup set up in the controversially revamped mixed doubles, the Czech will ask the tournament for a wild card, making them decide if they really are going to deny her résumé. Putting the ITF and the WTA on notice. Who will she play with? The brainstorming is ongoing and should be solved in the next couple of days. She had said yes to the Cleveland tournament the same week the mixed doubles is now happening, but she is refusing to let it go and wants to play the mixed doubles in NYC. A matter of principle, maybe. Below is the exclusive chat I had with her and Taylor Townsend at Wimbledon, before Siniakova had made up her mind. You’ll also read the USTA's answer to my clarification requests.
Sport is often just another expression of life and the state of the world. Well, it’s proving true again as the revamp (a big paycheck, singles ranking for entry) of the US Open mixed doubles has, for now, left aside the player who’s been dominating doubles for a long time now, Katerina Siniakova. Tennis is sending a message that being the best at what you do doesn’t guarantee you respect or just a spot on an entry list. Skills, results, résumé, or even ranking now are… so passé?
“She's one of the most decorated doubles champions, if not the most decorated doubles champion of our time. So it's an honor for me to be on the same side of the court with her.” That’s what Taylor Townsend, Siniakova’s doubles partner (winner of Roland-Garros and Wimbledon last year, Australian Open this year) told me when I asked her about Katerina Siniakova not being, as of now, on the list circulated by the US Open for its revamped mixed doubles. And this was what Siniakova told me when I asked her how she felt about the situation: “I don't understand why this was allowed. I think it's not fair for doubles players. It's not fair to call the new mixed doubles champions compared to those who have already won it. I am very sad that the decision came.”
“I don't understand why this was allowed. I am very sad…”, Siniakova
And that’s where the red line is for me in this whole affair. At Katerina Siniakova, at what the message sent is and why, contrary to what many of the powers-that-be in tennis might think, it’s damaging to the sport. Whatever the outcome of this situation may be, the fact that the Czech was even put in a position where she might not be able to play is a red flag and a symptom of something bigger. I won’t come back on the uproar and controversy it led to among doubles specialists and even fans of the game, who all say the same thing: Call it an exhibition and leave mixed doubles alone. As of Thursday, Sem Verbeek, winner of the mixed doubles at Wimbledon with Siniakova, told the BBC that his heart was “bleeding” about the USTA decision. You can also read the USTA’s justification of the change of format and entry system here. Oh, and Jannik Sinner, who will play with Emma Navarro, had no idea about her before being asked to play the event.
An event that I’m told is not invitational, and yet it kinda is, as Sinner himself said. “The tournament, they wanted us to kind of play together because certain teams were already set up,” he said. I asked the USTA about that specific quote from Sinner, and here was the answer from Brendan McIntyre, Senior Director, Communication and Corporate Affairs Lead: “We had discussions with players to help educate them on the changes to the event. We also informed them which players had, to our knowledge, not yet formed a team at that point, if they expressed interest.” How many of these stars will really stay committed to it, nobody knows, and also nobody is surprised singles stars didn’t even think a single second about their doubles colleagues. I asked Siniakova if any player had reached out to her, and she just smiled back.
Siniakova isn’t just any kind of great doubles player; she’s the gold standard
Here, I’ll focus on the fact that the World No. 1 and uncontested doubles master, who also happens to be a great singles player (Top 30 last year, winner of Zheng Qinwen at Wimbledon this year), is being totally discarded without anyone moving a finger. Show me another sport that would let its World No. 1 be left resigned over being unable to play a Major event. Siniakova isn’t just any kind of great doubles player; she’s the gold standard and has been for a decade: World No.1, Olympic doubles champion in Tokyo and in Olympic mixed doubles champion in Paris, 10 Grand Slam titles in doubles, 1 Grand Slam mixed doubles title, 1 Fed Cup, 1 Tour Finals. She’s also one of the rare top singles players willing to play it all, with Mirra Andreeva, Diana Shnaider, Elise Mertens, or Jasmine Paolini. These are great examples for young people wanting to see how they can build a professional career. This is grassroots tennis. This is how you grow the foundation of the game. And, FYI, the top of anything relies on its base.
Yet, Siniakova’s name was left out of the US Open greatly promoted release about their new mixed doubles event. Asked for comment, the USTA told me that Siniakova could still enter because:“This is not an invitation-based event, it is via entry. Eight teams will gain entry via direct acceptance, eight teams via Wild Card.” That Siniakova could still enter and that other doubles players had entered (her agent confirmd to me she’d need a WC and will now ask for one). Sorry, but you’re already circulating a list of these 16 teams, including those who would need a wild card to play. Confusing. If they weren’t already guaranteed these WCs, why would they be on the list? If doubles players can still have a chance to get in, why only communicating on how much you want the singles ones?
“That was the initial list of players that had entered, as of that date. Since that point more teams have entered,” was the answer I got when I asked for clarification. Yet, Townsend, entered with Shelton, has no doubt she’ll get in. Has the USTA underestimated the demand? And even then, you’ve still built that pre-list without the doubles World No.1s even in mind. Without even reaching out. Damn, Siniakova with her résumé should have been told to pick whoever she wanted in the who’s who of men’s singles players.
Townsend, like many others, doesn’t understand how the list was built. “I honestly don't know what the criteria were to play and what the criteria were for them to select who they wanted to select. Obviously, I'm a little bit fortunate because I'm American, so I was able to get the pick. And I'm world number two, so it's kind of an obvious choice for my home slam. But yeah that it is tough. I really don't know what the criteria were when they were trying to find the matchups and the teams and who they were deciding to play with. And if they considered who she could play with. I don't know how they decided on the partnerships when the announcement came out. That was my first time seeing who was in the field. So I didn't have any prior information on that.”
How do you build a doubles event without making sure the best doubles player is in? Easy, you don’t build a doubles tournament: you’re building an exhibition for US fans and broadcasters with some of the biggest names in the game. If any of these singles men players were serious about wanting to win this competition, they’d have done what every other doubles player does: Calling Siniakova. Not Emma Navarro and her #505 doubles ranking, Ben Shelton (#125), Daniil Medvedev (#334) Belinda Bencic (#664) playing with Alexander Zverev (#343), or Naomi Osaka, who doesn’t even have a doubles ranking. So it’s not about the win, it’s about the show.
“This is something very new and very foreign and groundbreaking. It's a trial. It's something you try and just see how things go,” Townsend
Which, fine! Great! Let’s have some fun with the Stars. I get it. “It's easy to be skeptical and kind of critical of something that we don't understand and we've never experienced before. And this is something that literally has never happened in the sport. So that's just that. It's never happened. And this is something very new and very foreign and groundbreaking. It's a trial. It's something you try and just see how things go,” Townsend told me. And I agree. I just feel formidable for a sport to be able to say, “Hey, we’re gonna try to toss the World No.1, or have them ask for a WC, or have them struggle to find a way in, and just see how it goes.” And people shrug.
What’s next? Where is the line?
But what I don’t get is what the WTA and the ITF win there, by letting their best doubles players be made to beg for a wild card or to beg a top singles player to play with them to find a way in. What do they win in letting the US Open push aside Siniakova, sending the obvious message that they don’t have to follow rankings or rules? The moment you accept one of the active legends of your game isn’t worth fighting for, you open a really tricky Pandora's box. Like, what’s next? Where is the line then? Where’s the governance?
And I’m back to tennis and storytelling. It’s easy to say now that mixed doubles doesn’t bring enough money, that doubles in general don’t, that people don’t know these players, that the product is a tough sell. First of all, please all hit the replay button on Wimbledon’s doubles finals through the years, or even last year’s men’s doubles, and pause on the “nobody cares and it’s not fun” narrative. Then, sorry, but we’re back at You Didn’t Build It And So They Didn’t Come. Tennis failed to promote its doubles star and now complains that they don’t fill stadiums. Townsend and Sinakova are a blockbuster; they do get people to watch, and yet their coverage is a fighting task.
“All my career, it was like this. I'm Number One, and no one cares,” Siniakova
So, now, because the sport was unable (again) to promote itself, to get the stories out about players who make a life out of doubles, and for some like Siniakova who plays every day of the two weeks of a Grand Slam, which is crazy and is worth of being talked about, now you’re just dropping the ball. And, again, decide that if you replace genuine stories with a marketing stunt, that will do the job. Should I again bring up Netflix’s Break Point fail? “Definitely, it's because of the marketing. And it will show the people those top players,” said Siniakova. “That's how it is. They're showing just the Top players in singles, and that's why they don't know the names in doubles. And they don't want to change it. So it's just sad because I don't think the doubles players are working less hard. Definitely, doubles players are in shock. They don't understand, but they know they have no chance. All my career, it was like this. I'm Number One, and no one cares. Just because you are four on the court, they think you're just not so good. It's not going to change because then you would need to turn around everything.”
It is a no-brainer that singles players stars bring a lot more people in when they play doubles together. I still remember how Martina Hingis and Anna Kournikova against Serena and Venus Williams would bring down the house. And Coco Gauff, Siniakova, and Townsend, Mirra Andreeva and Diana Shnaider, or even Jelena Ostapenko and Elise Mertens, prove it again. But do you think the way Siniakova and the rest of the doubles players are treated is encouraging singles stars or aspiring singles stars to commit? When you keep devaluating a product, it’s pretty rare to have people running for it, no? Maybe, if you had put work into building Siniakova’s profile…
“Doubles players are fighting, but it needs to change. Everything from the beginning. But there is no chance of doing it. USTA made that choice, and no one knew about it. So, I mean, what can we do? I am number one, and I have no idea. I think we will try. We speak up. Every time doubles players are doing something, I’m trying to be on their side. So, we will try, definitely,” said Siniakova. That is surely the worst here: to have found a way to make such a player with such a résumé doesn’t feel worthy enough, and to make her resign to be treated like this.
How is the next Siniakova supposed to land? How is Siniakova supposed to promote the doubles to the next generations? Do you see how tennis is creating its own problems again here? Are we sitting on Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, John McEnroe, Serena and Venus Williams, Evgeni Kafelnikov, or Martina Hingis’ legacy? Tennis had, one more time, a fantastic tradition and DNA to rely on, and instead of building on it, they let it dry up, complain, and start to destroy it.
It also doesn’t help when the Doubles World No.1 on the men's side praises the US Open for… cutting doubles players. I had to laugh at the fact that when he said he’d ask for a wild card and play with anyone, it took Tracy Austin to tell him that maybe he could call Siniakova because, like, that’d be the fair thing to do. It’s overall another Jerry McGuire, “Help Me, Help You situation.
“What’s the long-term vision here? What’s the end game?”
But, really, if you can get to build multiple great products, multiple great player profiles, aren’t you in a better position? Isn’t it key to rely on several blockbusters? If doubles were such a lost cause, they’d have been cut by now. But they’re useful to fill up an event’s schedule and give something to watch to the people you’re asking to pay a lot of money to come and see tennis. They’re useful to provide jobs. They’re useful for growing the singles players’ games. Doubles is also a key part at the club level. With doubles, we’re not at if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, we’re at you know it’s broken and still refuse to fix it the right way.
The cost of trying harder for a Siniakova or a Townsend, for example, is miles and miles below how much the whole Alcaraz/Raducanu PR stunt is surely costing. For what, a summer of headlines? And then? That’s where I think again the Siniakova situation is damaging to the sport: what’s the long-term vision here? What’s the end game? Please, tell me the goal so maybe I’ll be less “meh to wtf” about it.
Again, tennis, what do you want? Because Alcaraz, Sinner, and Osaka ain’t starting to commit to doubles every qualification week of the Majors. Also, the Australian Open already said they wouldn’t touch their mixed doubles event. “Mixed doubles is a fantastic showcase for tennis, and one of the only opportunities in world sport where men and women can compete alongside and against each other. Our whole summer of tennis - culminating with the Australian Open - is about creating more job opportunities for the players, providing more competition on the biggest stage, and more prize money." I’ve reached out to Wimbledon about it and was told, “We have no plans to change the format of the Mixed Doubles.” A few days after the first version of this post was published, I received an official answer about the topic from Roland-Garros, saying, “At this point, we’re not planning to change anything to the format of the mixed doubles competition for the 2026 edition of Roland-Garros.”
So, again, how can the sport suddenly have a Grand Slam coming up with a different format and entry criteria? So, in the end, what is tennis gaining by sabotaging a part of itself? The moment you accept a player like Siniakova is presented as unmattering, and the moment that you, as a sport, can’t even make it mandatory for a World No.1 to be in a Major’s draw is a game-changer. It’s just not the right one. The US Open has gone rogue on the mixed doubles, trying to see how much they can push and so get away with. The buck should (at the very least) stop at Katerina Siniakova, World No.1. Deadline is July 28, it’s still not too late, tennis.
[For the record, I asked the ITF for comments about this and was told, “This isn't something we'd provide a comment on.” I’ve also asked the WTA for comment and will update this piece when/if it comes. I also have good reasons to believe there will be new developments in Siniakova’s case, so this space will be updated if/when it happens.]
Townsend, on fighting the stigma
Taylor Townsend found the perfect words to describe how it felt for doubles players out there. And also the perfect words to describe what she was determined to change about it as both a singles and a doubles player, and as someone who always found a safe place at the net.
“I think that people are enjoying it (seeing her and Siniakova compete). And that was one of my main goals as a player: to get people excited about watching doubles. I feel like the stigma with tennis in the tennis world, and it always has been, is that doubles is less of a game, and it's easier, and it's not. So that was one of my goals. I really enjoy playing doubles. Kat really enjoys playing doubles. She's one of the best to ever do it. She's one of the most decorated doubles champions, if not the most decorated doubles champion of our time. So it's an honor for me to be on the same side of the court with her. It's something that I want to do, and I want to inspire people just to pick up a racket, whether it's singles, doubles, whatever it is. It's a fun game. It's challenging. It's physical. It's mentally tactical. There are a lot of very small nuances that go into it. I think that we are definitely elevating it within ourselves as a team. Kat, in her own right, has had so much success, so she's kind of already had that. But I think us coming together has brought a new, different type of crosses in different communities. I think that's really cool.”
“When I first started playing tennis, I loved being at the net more than the baseline. I think it shows. So naturally, when I started playing, I really enjoyed it. And I'm also a leader, so I enjoyed the team aspect because tennis is very individual, but then it comes together as a partnership. I've always enjoyed playing doubles. It's been an integral part of my game from the time that, honestly, I started playing tennis just because it really kind of shaped my game and helped me to get confidence in the singles game as well.”
A WEE HUMBLE BRAG BREAK:
A huge thank you for reading and engaging with my newsletter, as on Friday, TSS reached its best ranking on the “Rising” list. TSS also spent most of the Wimbledon event in the Top 100 and a good half of it in the Top 40. I don’t intend to get into the numbers game because I know better, but I take it as a good indication that TSS has found its path. You absolutely did this, so let’s keep going ;)
“I Do Have To Let Go Of 2019 And Stop Chasing 2019,” Andreescu
You know that here we have a sweet spot for Canadian star Bianca Andreescu. The game, the personality, the journey: She’s something else. And so we, of course, jumped at the chance to talk to her when a virtual round table spot opened a few days ago.
From what she learnt about the game and the state of the Tour since her comeback this year, to how she mentally prepares for a WC rejection at the US Open and very honest answers about how she emotionally copes with her injury history and how far she found herself from the top of the game now: Andreescu said it all. And it’s going right back at you here.
Looking forward to the hardcourt season:
“It's always very exciting. I definitely love the hardcourts. I feel like I have some good matches under my belt going into it. I know I did start my season late. So, in a way, my goal was to, in a way, peak for the hardcourt season. So, I'm glad that I was able to get matches in before. But I'm feeling good. I'm healthy.”
“I have to keep doing the things I know I need to do, focusing on the things that I can control, for instance, let's say I don't get a wildcard into the US Open. Those are the things I can control, right? So having that mindset really helps. I did that pretty well this season so far. We'll see what the next few weeks bring.
“Now I've figured out a way to not get into that darkness.”
Clay to grass, what did she learn?
“I think it was a good test to see where my game is at. I had some really great matches. I mean, I'm putting in the work on and off the court. And I do know that this is a patience game. I know that I also want it now. I want everything now. But I've definitely learned to take a step back sometimes. And my goals,