Doubles players sign open letter opposing ATP's 2028 cuts to draws and pay

The ATP board is due to review the proposal at its year-end meetings in Turin, on the sidelines of the ATP Finals [1]. The measures have not been adopted [1].

The cuts are the sticking point. Masters 1000 doubles draws would fall to 16 teams from 32, and about $20m would move out of doubles and into singles [1][2][3]. Players say that means fewer paydays for the specialists who make their living in doubles [1][2].

Who signed the letter

According to the BBC, the letter carries 137 current players, 28 former stars and 20 national federations [1]. Britain's Henry Patten, the world No. 1 in doubles, signed it [1]. So did Bob and Mike Bryan, the American twins widely regarded as the best doubles team in the sport's history [1]. The signatories accept that professional tennis has to evolve, but argue the proposed measures go too far [1]. "Commercial success matters. Fairness, player welfare and the long-term health of tennis matter just as much," the letter says [1].

A separate statement shared on social media and amplified by Italy's Andrea Vavassori made the same case: doubles is "a format that deserves greater visibility, not less" [2].

"We risk losing a discipline of tennis that is historic, but that also has a great future," Sem Verbeek, one of the players behind the campaign, told the BBC [1].

What the ATP wants to change

The reform sits inside the ATP's OneVision package, which is mooted for the 2028 season and remains subject to consultation and approval [4]. Below Masters 1000 level, ATP 500 and ATP 250 doubles draws could be limited to eight teams [3]. The doubles share of prize money would fall from 20% to 10% [1][3]. The players' statement says the $20m involved would go to player compensation and to qualifying and first-round singles prize funds [2]. On the singles side, the Bonus Pool for the top 30 at Masters 1000 events and the ATP Finals would rise to $50m from $21.5m, a 133% increase [4].

The top 30 currently share $21.5m [4]. Players only get their full share if they compete across the eight mandatory Masters 1000s, with Monte Carlo the sole optional one [4]. Under the plans, payments would be tied to a player's ranking at each mandatory Masters 1000 rather than his end-of-season position [4].

Why players call it a threat

The signatories' argument is about the pipeline as much as the top end. Shrinking draws would remove spots for players who treat doubles as their main professional activity, the letter says [1]. The statement argues that a healthy sport cannot rely exclusively on a small group of superstars [2]. It must offer pathways that let players develop, compete and earn a living [2]. It also notes that doubles is the form of tennis most club members play, which the players call the sport's easiest entry point [1][2].

Patten has acknowledged the players face an uphill battle but says he remains optimistic about counter-proposals the ATP could accept [1]. The letter's authors also want the ATP to invest in promoting doubles rather than cutting its exposure [1]. Mike Bryan called the changes "anti-competitive" [1]. His brother Bob said the ATP, which he considers to be in a strong financial position, should instead "create more opportunities" for specialists [1]. The twins have been here before. In 2005 they joined legal action against the ATP over a doubles reform, and they have not ruled out backing new legal action if talks deadlock [1].

The board vote in Turin

The board that will decide includes chairman Andrea Gaudenzi, four tournament representatives and four player representatives [1].

Discussions between the ATP and player representatives have continued since Wimbledon and more recently at the Shanghai Masters [1]. Sources close to the tour believe a compromise remains possible [1]. The specialists say they do not oppose modernising tennis, only reform that comes at the expense of their discipline [1]. Gaudenzi has said doubles will remain part of the ATP Tour and that the review must find a model that is sustainable for tournaments, fans and players [3]. For the players, the Turin review is the decisive step, and they say they will keep up the pressure until the board meets [1].