Doubles Only Tennis Podcast

Wimbledon Champion Coach Calvin Betton on the Title Run, Champions' Dinner, Return Strategy, & ATP Doubles News

• Will Boucek • Episode 292

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 52:49

I spoke with Coach Calvin Betton after a second Wimbledon doubles title in three years. Calvin coaches ATP #1, Henry Patten, as well as Luke Johnson. We discussed Henry's Wimbledon run with his doubles partner, Harri Heliovaara, as well as return strategy and the recent news about ATP doubles cuts. 

  • Comparing the 2024 and 2026 Wimbledon runs
  • Why “no free points” matters more than any "tiebreaker system”
  • Balancing aggressive returns vs high-percentage returns by matchup and player profile
  • Scouting a recent loss to Arevalo and Pavic
  • Finding the right level of focus so pressure builds for your opponents across a match
  • What the Wimbledon champions dinner is actually like behind the scenes
  • Calvin's philosophy on the returner’s partner positioning
  • How he views his role as a coach - I loved this answer
  • Henry’s speech after winning the Wimbledon Final
  • Reactions on the Wimbledon grounds when the doubles cuts were announced
  • Why framing doubles as a product problem ignores marketing and sport economics
  • Evidence from social media, ticketing, and packed courts that doubles has demand

Calvin is always a joy to have on the show because he brings strong opinions and insights that make you think.

Learn more about Calvin & follow:

-----

**Join the #1 Doubles Strategy Newsletter for Club Tennis Players** 


**Become a Tennis Tribe Member**
Tennis Tribe Members get access to premium video lessons, a monthly member-only webinar, doubles strategy Ebooks & Courses, exclusive discounts on tennis gear, and more.


**Other Free Doubles Content**

SPEAKER_01

You're about to hear a conversation with coach Calvin Betton. Calvin is the coach of World No. Calvin also coaches Luke Johnson, who plays with Jan Zelensky. I had them on the podcast earlier this year at Indian Wells. And obviously, I wanted to have Calvin back on the show to discuss this year's Wimbledon run. Henry and Harry also won the Wimbledon title back in 2024, so we started out comparing the 2026 and 2024 Wimbledon runs. I asked him about tiebreakers. Henry and Harry went 8-1 in tiebreakers this year at Wimbledon. What is it that they did so well? In the final, they faced Arevalo and Pavich, who they had lost to a few weeks earlier in the Queens final. So we discussed that a bit. He talked about the Wimbledon dinner on Sunday night after the men's singles and women's doubles final. You're going to get some interesting insights into what that Wimbledon champions dinner is like. And then we dove into strategy a bit. I asked him about the returner's partner position and what is his philosophy on playing two back versus uh having a really aggressive position as the returner's

Setup And What To Listen For

SPEAKER_01

partner. We talked about return strategy, uh, and then he had some really great advice for coaches. If you're a coach or even if you're a player, I think you're gonna get a lot out of this, and I think you should take this advice to heart. Um I heard it uh first mentioned by Calvin on the podcast uh Control the Controllables with Dan Kiernan a few weeks ago, so I wanted him to elaborate on this point because I think it's so, so important for coaches to hear. And then in the second half of the podcast, of course, we talked about the recent ATP doubles news. I asked Calvin uh when he found out what he his reaction was, what was the experience like on the grounds at Wimbledon. Uh, and then we talk about Henry's speech uh after winning Wimbledon, um which I thought he did a great job of. Uh and then I asked Calvin if he thinks this is actually a business decision from the ATP. Um I personally don't believe it is a business decision. I think that's a bit of a distraction, but we dive into that pretty deep as well. So I appreciate Calvin coming on. He's always uh very honest with his opinions and not afraid to share. Um so I think you're gonna get a lot out of this, whether you're here for the first half listening to the Wimbledon run and the strategy or the second half with the reaction and uh the news from the ATP Tour cutting doubles in 2028. So without further delay, enjoy this conversation with Calvin Betton. Hey everybody, welcome to the show. Today we have Calvin Betton on. Calvin, welcome back.

SPEAKER_00

Thanks, Will. Thanks for having me, buddy.

SPEAKER_01

Uh, thanks for coming back on. Congrats on another Wimbledon title with Henry Patton. Um, I wanted to start with uh the 2024 title. How was this one different in 2026?

SPEAKER_00

Uh it was quite a bit different in that um this time when we went into it last time. Look, Henry and Harry had only been playing together for I think two or three months. Harry had just had the serious shoulder injury. They didn't even know whether he was going to be able to get through matches, they weren't seeded. We knocked out Belali Bavasori, I think it were the fourth seeds in the first round, and things just kept going. And it was like a disbelief, like, I can't believe we keep winning these matches. You know, they'd only actually played one slam before that. That was the French, and they had to retire from that because Harry got injured. So, you know, we'd only going into that, we'd only won two slam matches together. Um, and it you know, it was just kind of disbelief that what was happening. Whereas, you know, coming into this one, they've they've obviously proven themselves to be the number one pair in the world. They've they were the top seeds coming in, and you know, it was kind of a bit more of a

Two Wimbledon Titles Compared

SPEAKER_00

you know, we'd be pretty disappointed if we don't make at least semis, you know, and then you know, we're definitely coming in with the intention of winning, you know what I mean?

SPEAKER_01

So uh the I want to talk about all the tiebreakers. Um y'all went eight and one in tiebreakers uh during this Wimbledon run. What did they do so well in tiebreakers to get that eight and one record? And is there anything different, like either strategy-wise or mental uh from a mentality perspective, that they try to bring into a tiebreaker versus the rest of the match?

SPEAKER_00

I mean, I was I was saying to somebody the other day, always cracks me up with this, because you get some coaches and I've heard them myself that tell me, Oh, yeah, we we have a system for tie breaks, you know, we have we have a system, and and then I'm like, all right, what's the system? And they go, Oh, you know, the system is we just we tell say to ourselves we're gonna raise our game a bit. And I'm like, that's that's not a system. Like it's also like, why would you not raise it before the tiebreak? Yeah, like why are you just raising it if you've got another level to go to, why don't you do it at five all in games, you know, like what and avoid avoid the tiebreaker altogether? Yeah, um, so you know, I'm not gonna sit here and and try and you know blag my way through it and say we have a system for winning tiebreaks. They're just one thing we have done, and and this is not in tiebreaks in particular, this is overall what since we

Tiebreaks And Earning Every Point

SPEAKER_00

said from last year's US Open that we've I think Henry and Harry have really improved, and one thing I was kind of like quite insistent on myself is it's just not giving easy points away. Like we felt kind of around the American summer last year, we kind of like we got into a habit of like we just giving opponents like 30 love in their service games without really having to serve that well, you know, they'd sort of roll a couple of average serves in, we'd miss a couple of returns, and we'll we're you know sort of 30 love down, and we're just never putting pressure on to break. So one of the things that we sort of really try to knuckle down in is like every point is like that opponents don't get anything, they have to work for everything, and I think that's kind of transpired in their games, but also in tie breaks as well. And I think the main thing, Will, is is both guys serve great and both guys return great, and you know that you're you're gonna have to come up against a lot of work if you're gonna, you know, because both of them, there's no like easy points, you know.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, yeah, that makes sense. Uh, I want to ask about returns. Um with returns, I I find like some players have the maybe it's a game style thing, or maybe they choose the strategy of they're gonna unload on returns and try to rip return winners or force surplus one errors. They miss a lot of returns, but eventually in a game, they will land two of them and they get the break, right? Two or three of them that get the break, or I'm gonna make a lot of returns in play, and you're not gonna have any easy service holds. Uh, and I'm gonna let you make the mistake. How do you balance that? Is that player-specific, matchup specific, or surface specific? How do you think about that?

SPEAKER_00

I think it's definitely player specific. Um, you know, it may be sort of matchup specific a lot of the time. If we're playing a guy who we don't think is great on on ball three and that kind of thing, you'd say, look, let's make a lot more this time and put pressure on. Like, for example, if you're playing singles guys, you're gonna go, let's, you know, because we think that the longer the rally goes, then we gives us a bigger chance um that we can sort of pressure with our positioning and return as partner and that kind of thing. So a lot of the time we'll say that, and then you know, against doubles guys, you you might try and do a little bit more damage, but I think a lot of it is kind of

Return Strategy Depends On Matchups

SPEAKER_00

player-specific. Like, you do you definitely do get guys who are like they're just gonna make a lot of balls, you know. Like one who always stands out for me, a classic example of that is Mektich. Like, you know, with with with Mekta that you know, if like it's it's a if it's a 30, you know, you like say if he's playing on the ad and it's it's break point, it's a juice point, you miss your first serve, you know he's he's gonna make you play that ball on the on the on the on the second serve. He's probably not gonna smoke a winner, but he's gonna make you work for that hold at that point. Whereas you're gonna play other guys, probably kind of like what Henry is who can just take the game away from you, you know, as you saw like in the in the in the semi, like his last two returns, they're two great first serves, and he's just you can't account for that, you know. But Kovachevich and Kokinakis, they've hit two great serves at key moments, and he's just a clean winner off both of them. Like, how can you account for that? You know, you know, and it's um I I think it's like different types of player, and then you know, Henry will naturally go through a lot of points where he he doesn't return as well as he did, and I and I kept saying to him during the semi, like when he was I know he was getting frustrated with his return, and I kept saying you only need a couple, you know, that's all you need, you just need a couple, and um I didn't think they'd be the last two returns of the match, I was more thinking get a couple in a game and see what we could do. But um, but yeah, you know, it's one of those things that um um yeah.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, but the um so the semi-finals match 7-6-7-6 and then finals 7-6-7-6. Uh that final match, y'all played Pavich and Arivalo, who you had faced in Queens a couple weeks earlier and lost. How much weight goes into reviewing that match versus kind of focusing on yourselves in the final? How did that prep or what did that prep look like?

SPEAKER_00

Uh it's it's a bit of a con point of conjecture that because we didn't actually review the match in Queens. Um we do always review, but like as it happened, it was like, you know, it was London, and I was actually going to Luke and Jan were playing in in Eastbourne the next day, and um Henry and Harry had like Henry had quite a lot of family there. Um so I'd kind of said, look, I'm gonna Eastbourne, I need to be leaving there by like eight o'clock, I think my train was, or like 7:30. And um, and the lads came off the court and there was some like champagne in there and for for winners and food. And the lads basically tucked into the champagne and beers uh as soon as they came off court. And by the time like I was just hanging around waiting, ready to review, and they'd had a couple of beers by that point, and they were there with their family, so we kind of said, look, let's review it later. But um, we ended up just not reviewing it at all and then beat them next time we played them.

SPEAKER_01

So So

Scouting Arevalo And Pavic

SPEAKER_01

even before the Wimbledon final, you didn't like look back at the the film of that match.

SPEAKER_00

Oh, we looked back. I mean, I watched the whole match numerous times before the final. You know, I'm talking about like straight after the match, we didn't review it, but no, I I watched it. Um and you know, it's not just that match. We've played them, I think, five times in the last eight months. So um, you know, we knew them. That that was the only match that they'd won actually. Um, and they played very well, but it was one of those though, again, it's a strange, strange gig is doubles because I know that like they played very well that day. Pavich in particular played excellent, but the actual breaks we actually we gave them, they didn't really have to do much for the breaks. They returned their best stuff on the games that we actually held, but you know, the games they broke, we kind of played bad games, and uh you know, I know on that day uh Henry wasn't happy with his returning at that Queen's final, so I looked for a couple of things that you know he might want to look to do a bit better on on their serves, and and I looked to myself, and then the next the night before I I showed him a couple of videos, and you know, we kind of just discussed it together and and came up with some ideas of what what he was gonna do, and they actually were quite successful on the day, those things.

SPEAKER_01

How do you you talked about not giving away free points um being something they're better at maybe today than they were last summer, um, especially on the hardcore swing? How do you is that like a mentality thing? How do you convince yourself that every single point is so important? And how do you convince yourself not to give away those free points and avoid these kind of mental lapses?

SPEAKER_00

I think it's kind of a case of like finding the right level of focus. You know, I always say like an example I've used before is you want to have like a rolling boil, like of like if you imagine a pan of water, you don't want it to be not boiling, you don't want to be too switched off, and you don't want it to be feverishly boiling over. You want a nice sort of simmering rolling boil of concentration, and I think that that's where you get it. You don't want to be overly hyped and be going for too much, and I felt like we just weren't really we weren't valuing the points early in games last year, and that's something that even though we didn't break serve in I mean we didn't break serve in the semi or the final, um I think we only we broke serve once in the semi-final and quarterfinal. Um and I think that it's still though, like you know, we still made the opponents

Focus Under Pressure And Dinner

SPEAKER_00

work for their service games as opposed to what was happening a lot last summer, I think. And then when it came to the tie breaks, the kind of the pressure of them having to work for their service games kind of told a bit.

SPEAKER_01

Um so I want to ask about I saw some photos from the the Wimbledon dinner. Talk about that experience. What what is that like and how does it I don't know how to take it take us through it?

SPEAKER_00

It's it's not great, uh to be honest. It's a strange event. You know, we said we weren't actually gonna go, but then Henry like felt like he he should go uh because of like he made his speech after the match with regards to the double situation, and he felt like it would be appropriate for him to actually go, so then we decided to go. Um it's a very strange setup. I mean, it doesn't start until really late. Like it starts, I think you've got to be there from 9 p.m. It's on a Sunday night, you've got to be there from 9 p.m. for the the plan is for the event to start at 10 pm, but then they don't start the single final until 4 pm, and then that goes four set. So basically, like the dinner didn't the first course of the dinner was served at 11:35 pm, and this is the dessert was served at 1.15am. Um and then in the middle of that they've got some speeches, but then they announce that you have a dessert there, and they announce that the transport away from the venue ends at 2 a.m. So, and then you've got what you've probably got like 300 people in there as well. So, you know, it's a strange, it's a strange set of like nobody really knows who it's for either. Like what you know, there's there's very few tennis players there. Like there's probably like interesting, there's probably like 15 tennis players maybe who are there, and then some coaches, and the rest of it is just club members. Um, and then the speeches, they kind of want to talk about stuff that's going on at the club, like various charities that they run, which is great, you know, it's a really nice vocation, but if I'm perfectly honest, I don't want to hear about it at 15 minutes past midnight on a Sunday. Um, and you know, it's yeah, it's it's a strange setup, but uh interesting.

SPEAKER_01

It sounds like it's probably for the members then for them to I think it kind of is, yeah. It kind of is I don't know, be a part of the Wimbledon experience or whatever. Um, all right, a couple of other strategy and kind of coaching questions. Um I remember so this is a question from the 2024 final. Uh, y'all won that one 677676, I believe. And I remember watching that match, and this is this might be like a Louis Kaye thing, but I remember watching that match, and I was thinking that on return there were no breaks of serves across the three sets. And I remember thinking on return, both teams had opposite problems. Uh the uh Purcell and Thompson were playing a lot of two back on return, and they'd rip a good return. Let's say Henry's serving, they'd rip a good return, and nobody's at the net, so they'd allow Henry to just like float a ball high through the middle and just reset right off a good return. And then I felt like Henry and Harry, returner's partner, was so far inside the service box that any serve plus one volley from the server's partner, it was just such an easy target, and they would just hit it right at him and then the point's over. And there was no breaks of serves in the match. I've noticed this with a lot of the British teams, like the returner's partner stands really close. Talk about either that match specifically or why that is, or how you think about that returner's partner position.

Return Partner Position And Coaching

SPEAKER_00

I mean, I think also in that match you've got to remember, I guess similar to this one, like you also had four excellent servers on the call who were all serving very well. I think I can't remember, but I think in that match against Purcell Thompson, I think everybody was over 70% first serve as well. Okay, which is um, or he was definitely up and around there. Um Purcell Thompson, I know well, Purcell tends to him personally has a big thing about always having two back. Like his thing is like you don't give a target, but and teams that you know people have asked me about that. I I'm a I'm not opposed to I it's never my first point of call to go two back. I'm not opposed to reverting back there if if if I see something in the match, but my way of thinking is I I want to be ready because in doubles you don't get many good returns, and I want to be ready for the good ones. The likelihood is to be honest that like if it if the return is isn't that great and it comes to serve as partner, they're probably finishing the ball anyway. So I want to be there ready if if we make the good returns. Um and um you know, and Henry and Harry in particular are both excellent returns partners, and that would if we went two back, it would take a big thing away from that. And it's basically like I don't think we necessarily start um any further forwards than anyone else. We start in a you know, we have a set position where we where we do start, but we tend to put, you know, it's one of the things that we do do, we like to pressure as returners partner, and we're ready for the good returns. It certainly is something that we work on.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah. Yeah, I guess I was thinking more like rather than inside the service, like well inside the service line, maybe like at the service line, just to give yourself that extra two or three feet of space to defend.

SPEAKER_00

No, because that's gonna be like you're in you're in the worst of both worlds there. You're probably not defending like the the the the split second that it comes at if someone stood on the service line and some do, it's still way too easy to just finishing that off, and you're too far back to actually take advantage of the good returns. So it's not something that the this the service liner for me is a terrible position to start for a service partner. It's it you know, it's like I think you've got to commit to one or the other. Like it's weird, like I saw Kokonakis was was standing kind of like like two steps inside the baseline, and I was like, that's just like a nothing position. Like what you know, kind of what is that? You're not getting anything there.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I feel like I see it more on the women's tour. Um, I think ATP's yeah, certainly different. Like the server's partner is a lot better on ATP and obviously the serve relative to the return too. So yeah. Um another question, uh, this time about coaching. So I I heard you chat with uh Dan on control to controllables during one of the Wimbledon Live podcasts. And one of the things you said that stood out to me, um you'll have to rephrase this because I don't remember the exact words, but you said something like it would be arrogant of me to think I'm smarter at strategy than Henry and Harry. And you talked about your role as a coach. So elaborate on that a little bit because I think this is really good advice for coaches, because a lot of coaches think that they always know more than their players.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, and I think that's a perception also that other people have. Like, I know my dad always has this constant argument with my dad. My dad's like, you know, whatever like I remember whenever Federer like hired a coach, my dad'd be like, why is he hiring him? Like, what can he tell Federer about tennis? Like he's he's way better than him at tennis, and you know, but that's kind of not what a coach is, you know, at this level. It's you know, we really are there as like kind of a sounding board and also as an extra pair of eyes, and to be able to analyse what's going on in the court that they can't. Equally, they can see things on the court that we can't just because of their involved in it and they're like the angle that they're at. I mean, you know, especially if coaching button, if I'm on the side of the court, I I don't, you know, the whole geometry is off. I can't really see what's going on in terms of positions or what have you. So, but I can see stuff from the side. So, whereas they're seeing it from a first person point of view, I'm seeing it from kind of a third person point of view, I can I can see so it's mainly just it's not me telling them. I'd never go like, do this, do you know, do this, or unless I'm absolutely certain of anything. But what I can tell them is some things that I've noticed that they may not have noticed within the course of the match. And same, like whether that be technically or tactically, or or that kind of thing. You know, it's but like I say, I would never imagine that like I would never be like you say, I'd never be so arrogant to think like I've seen something that like I know what's happening here and they haven't figured that out.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I think it probably builds a lot more trust between you and the players too, right?

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, and also you know, that they haven't got that, they haven't got there by not being able to manage a tennis match. And that goes for all my players, it goes for Luke and Jan as well. You know, it's like they you know that they're they're exceptional tennis players, and and part of that is is having exceptional strength. Strategy and that kind of thing, but there are certain situations that you know, like I say, in the in the heat of the moment they may not have noticed. And you know, I think it was like like you know, one of the matches, I forget what the match was, but they hadn't served to Harry's backhand at all in the whole match, and and he was still covering like both, like as if it could go one way or other. I think it's maybe the second match, second round match, and they'd basically like, or maybe like once they'd they'd served like once to Harry's backhand in like at that stage, like two hours of tennis. And Boris and I, who's Harry's coach, were like, you know, then we were like, look, you know, you might want to consider this. They they've only done that, but he didn't notice that at the time, you know, he's in the he's in the heat of the moment. He's and and bear in mind at doubles you're only returning once every other point. So, you know, and especially if the service games are flying through on the ad side, you know, you so you know, you you're only getting two points per game sometimes. So you know, so it wasn't something that in the heat at the moment he hadn't registered, actually. Yeah, they're they've they've they've only served like once there, but um, all match, but you know, so it's more stuff like that rather than like us thinking like we can tell them stuff that they wouldn't possibly be smart enough to know.

unknown

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01

Um, so I want to move on to the uh doubles news. Uh to start Henry's speech at the end of the match or after the the match on the court. Um is that something that he had planned out, or did he do that kind of off the cuff, um just off the top of his head? I I thought it was really well said and very kind of I I don't know, it didn't sound bitter at all, which I I'm certain it could could have if if it had been said the wrong way.

SPEAKER_00

I I I think no, I I listen, I don't think for a second he had it planned out word for word. I think I don't think he knowing Henry as I do, I don't even think he'd have thought about it uh because in order to think about it, he'd probably have to think about winning the match. And I don't think he'd be so arrogant to think we're definitely going to win the match, but I think then probably when he won, he probably thought, you know, this is an opportunity that I really have to take advantage of because you know it's it's a it's a big stage, and and and as always, he speaks so well and he's so smart that he can articulate those things exceptionally well. And like you say, I think he it was it was almost perfect how he did it, and that I think he he kind of went on the offense but without offending anybody. He he said only factual information,

Doubles Cuts News Hits Wimbledon

SPEAKER_00

everything he said was facts, and you know, I think what was right was that he said we're we're talking about we're constantly talking about growing the game, and here we are trying to reduce opportunities in the game.

SPEAKER_01

When did you find out the news and what was your reaction? And talk about the kind of experience on the grounds.

SPEAKER_00

We found out about it, I think probably maybe the day before the tournament started. I can't be certain of that, but it was either you know, maybe the Sunday before the tournament started, they basically, you know, said this is what's gonna be happening. I think they put a release out and then the the doubles players all met um and had a discussion about the best way to in how they were gonna sort of deal with it from that point. But it was quite there'd been rumors, but it was quite a shock that the severity of it all I would say.

SPEAKER_01

Do you think that this is a business decision?

SPEAKER_00

No, not in I I well for stars. I think there's there's two ways to answer that, Will. I think that we should always remember, and I've said this on Twitter, that this is a sport, it's not business, it's sport. And if we approach it's quite a soulless way to look at it, if we approach everything to do with sport as a business decision. No sport at the high level makes complete sense from a business point of view. It's it's it's a trickle-down situation. Like if like if you look at, I guess, in the in in America, like you look at Major League Baseball, Major League Baseball finances the A-leagues. Like there are no A-leagues without Major League Baseball. And if we're perfectly honest, like in in Premier League football, the Premier League finances the whole of British football. And to be honest, probably the the top six teams in the Premier League finance the whole of the Premier League. But we don't go, we need to get rid of all these because that you know these are not bringing in any money, because we we look at it from a point of view of this is the sport that we're dealing with. We have to maintain this sport, so I think there's that element of it that we shouldn't always look at everything through the prism of a business. It's not a business, it is a sport. Of

Is ATP Treating Sport Like Business

SPEAKER_00

course, every element of the sport wants to make money, but you want to make money to reinvest into the sport. It's not a business, it's something that's trying to make a profit. Now, tournaments can try and make a profit, which they do, players can try and make a profit, but the sport, the governing body, the ATP, is not a business. It is a governing body. It's the association of tennis professionals, and that should never be forgotten. It is a governing body, not a business. Um, the second part of my answer on that is I don't think even from that point of view, it's it's ridiculous to say this is a this is a business decision because any business, if it if you take doubles as a product, you market a product, you promote a product, you try and get the best from the product, and I'd find it difficult for anybody from the ATP to come in here and tell us that they've actually tried to market, promote, and get the best out of this product. Some of the things that what that's the figures that come out are shameful.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I saw um somebody, it was some publication in Australia. Um, this guy went through like the last thousand posts on Instagram and Twitter. Did you see this from ATP and then also from the uh I think from some of the majors as well. I think the highest percentage of posts being related to doubles was like 3.6%. Um a lot of them, I think all of them from the ATP were under like 1.5% of all the most of them were under 1%.

SPEAKER_00

I think the most prominent one was 0.6% of posts on posts on tennis TV, I think, was 0.6% on doubles.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I'll link to that in the show notes. Um and I've talked enough about like my ideas for marketing and why they or the fact that the ATP doesn't market, it's clearly something they need to do.

SPEAKER_00

Um I think it's like, you know, I mean, I I you know I grew up, my dad was a car salesman and he had a car showroom. And I think it's kind of like if I put it through that kind of analogy, it would be basically like my dad's got a load of cars in the showroom, and then there's three or four cars in the back that never see the showroom, they're out back in the yard, and so the customers never see them. They never see them and we never get them out. But they're good cars, but we just never get them out, and then we go, oh, send those to the scrappy because nobody's buying them. Like, how would anybody buy them? They're in the back in the yard, like they're never in the showroom. So, you know, but you wouldn't do that. Nobody business would do that. They'd go, look, we need to we need to try and get some money out of these cars. Let's put let's put them in the showroom. But we're not doing that, and not only that, Will, we're doing the opposite of it. It really feels like it's it's kind of uh actively pursuing to not promote it. I'll give you, you know, a couple of examples. So semifinals day, the fry uh Thursday of men's doubles, Thursday of men's doubles. There was the Thursday of Wimbledon, sorry, second Thursday. There were no men's singles matches that day. None at all. There was only two men's doubles matches, so there's no new singles to show on that day. Tennis TV. I went on it to have a look. So two great doubles matches were played that day. They had zero posts about any of the doubles. What they did have was they had a feature of best tennis matches of 2006, best tennis matches of 2011, and they had a clip of Nick Kirrios talking about playing FIFA when the World Cup was on. Now, I mean, come on.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, that's comical. I mean, that's it's insane.

SPEAKER_00

Um men's five men's um finals, the final of the doubles, no posts. Yeah, and you know the thing what frustrates me about that is it doesn't cost them anything, it doesn't cost them a single thing to to just put on there, just put a post on there, a few points from the final. What's it gonna cost? They've got no tennis to show that, they've got no content, they have to find content, they've got people there trying to find content. So to me, that seems like it's somebody going, do not put this on, rather than because even if you're working in social media, you think this is easy content. We can clip up some points, some great points here. Let's clip it on and put you know, that's it's just easy for us. But it makes me think that there's somebody saying, Don't do that.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I I don't know much about tennis TV.

SPEAKER_00

I I see their lack of doubles posts on social media, um, but I don't know much about like who runs it or um well it's run by the it's the official it's the media outlet of the ATP, so it's it's interlinked with the ATP, it's not independent of it. It's um but I mean we were told, I mean, we have been told previously that they've been told not to put doubles on. But what I find interesting about that, and again, I think I knew this anyway, but I think it was in that article that you just referenced that when they occasionally do put some doubles on, and what what really annoys me is like when the singles guys play doubles, they put doubles on. So when that yeah, when you're saying that there's like 1.5%, I'd love to know what percentage of that 1.5% is singles guys playing doubles, yeah.

SPEAKER_01

Um it's got it's gotta be most.

SPEAKER_00

Oh, I think it it would be 90% of those, I think. Yeah, but when they do occasionally put some doubles players doubles on, the numbers that they get are the same as the numbers that they get for the singles posts, it's almost no different. So that's where I find something that that makes me think there's something underhand going on here because the numbers that then they keep talking about, like you know, the numbers don't, you know, the numbers are not great for doubles and that kind of thing. Right. So let's look at when you do post on social, you never bother.

SPEAKER_01

I know I know I know some journalists are saying it, but who from are people from the ATP actually saying this? Like the doubles isn't it?

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I think it's been thrown about there. Okay. Um in the I've not been in the meetings, but I think it's been said in the meetings, but I can't be certain of that. But um, but even the journalists that say, which again, I don't really get why they're so keen to get rid of this, because I'll come I'll come back to that in a minute, but I've got go back to my original point of like when they say like the numbers don't add up, like where do they not add up? Because the po when they put when they do post, the likes and the views are the same as the singles posts. There's no disparity in it, they're the same. So, right, it's not there. When you go to the tournaments, if anyone, if any of your listeners want to go on my Twitter or my X account, there's a whole thread of that I've I've just a whole thread of videos and pictures where I've put nobody wants to watch doubles sarcastically because that's what the ATP keeps saying. Nobody wants to watch doubles.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, I saw that I didn't put it on uh Instagram.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, I think there's probably 15 videos I've taken in the last year of when I've been at tournaments and when I've been at events, and I don't take videos of every match that I'm at because it's my job and I can't be taking videos all the time and pictures, but the stadiums around the world are packed with with this kind of thing. So where I want to know from the ATP where particularly, what specific tournaments does no one want to watch doubles? Um, and that's what I find quite off-putting. And then when we talk, and when when they say again the numbers don't add up, we still the ATP have not produced any numbers. You know, and I know that the players have asked, right, okay, can you show us those numbers so we can get a an idea of this? They haven't produced any yet, but what I do know is it's it's gonna be almost impossible to quantify. And again, I see people like John Wertheim keep saying they're paying 20% of prize money, but they're not bringing in 20% of income. Like that, that's just not a way, that's such a reductive way to look at this. Like, like it's it's such a bizarre way to look at it. Like, so okay, if we're doing that then, let's make the only way we can if we're gonna do it that way then, then every single player who's playing tennis should only be paid the prize money that they're pulling in. And I and I don't think anyone's gonna get paid a whole lot other than two or three players, if that's the case. Like, I don't want to, I don't want to be the guy who's like, and I I'm only gonna pull this out of you know thin air, but I I don't want to be Alex De Manor. Because Alex De Menor's prize money is gonna go down a whole lot if you're only paying players the amount that they pull in in ticket sales, right? You know, so uh at grand slams and that kind of thing. So it but what I will say and it's the same for any player and anything to do with tennis, other than centre court, there's no way of quantifying the amounts that doubles can bring in. Because let's take for any tournament, how are you quantifying how much doubles, how much revenue doubles pulls in? Because there's only once you get past kind of the first two or three days of a tournament, of a of a of a tour-level tournament, there's only doubles on the outside court. So everybody that's buying grounds passes, they're paying anywhere from around the world, they're paying anywhere from between about 50 bucks to about 300 bucks for grounds passers. While they're in the grounds, there's only doubles to watch in the grounds. They're gonna buy probably a t-shirt, they're gonna buy a cap each, they might buy a little bit more merchandise, they're probably gonna get a couple of beers, they're probably gonna get a couple of they're gonna get a burger and some hot dogs and some fries. Yeah, if you don't have anything on those outside courts, how are you selling grounds passes? And if you're not selling grounds passes, how are you selling all that stuff? And how are you gonna actually quantify? Because I'm not saying everybody who gets a grounds pass is there thinking we're gonna watch specifically doubles players, but what they are doing is they're going, we're gonna watch some tennis, we're gonna watch some tennis, and I don't overly care who's in it, but there simply are not enough singles matches to fill the week.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, one of the the the sense I get um cu because I posted some photos of court one that day during the semi-finals, and said, you know, here's nobody watching doubles, and court one was packed.

SPEAKER_00

You know the thing about court one that day though, well I didn't realize court one, so it's only doubles on that court. There's two doubles matches. I think there was a wheelchair match after that. The tickets for that were was when Tylly ticketed, you couldn't get in with the grounds pass, they were £110 a day. £110 a ticket. So, and it was I'm gonna say it was I'm gonna say it was at least 90% full. And I think it's 9,000 seats court was.

SPEAKER_01

It's it's it's 12 something. I looked it up. 12, okay. So it's 1.0 million. If they had 10, yeah, if they had 10,000 people, it's 1.2 million. Yeah, exactly.

SPEAKER_00

Yeah, now they know in advance, those people know in advance when they buy the ticket, there is only going to be two doubles matches on the watching doubles, yeah.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah, so the the the the rebuttal I guess I got from people on on Twitter and Instagram um when I posted that photo is but they're there to be at Wimbledon, they're not there to watch doubles, so it I guess it doesn't count. But I kind of think that they're kind of proving my point, right? Like that should be the goal of every tennis tournament, right? You're buying a ticket to our tournament, you're not buying a singles ticket, you're not buying a doubles ticket, you're buying a ticket to be at Indian Wells, you're buying a ticket to be at US Open, you're buying a ticket to be at our tennis event. We have singles, we have doubles, we have food, we have drinks, we have TVs outside where you can hang out and watch from there.

SPEAKER_00

Well, if they want it, I I 100% take your point. 100% you're you're you're you're correct. They just want it to be at Wimbledon, they get a grounds pass for 40 quid. This is close people to it, they get a grounds pass for 40 pounds. You can go outside the outside course, some juniors on, some junior events on, you can go get your get your strawberries and that kind of thing. Fort I think it's th 37 pounds, I think, for a grounds pass. Yes, you can do that, but it's like you say, people are going to watch tennis, and while they're watching tennis, they're buying shit. It's secondary sell. This is what I don't get when we're talking about this business thing. It this doesn't make sense on any level from from a business point of view, because you think we we could we can keep this stuff for for a relatively minuscule amount that we pay back in prize money and the other stuff. I've seen people talking about you know it's it's it's the other costs, the expenses. Like again, things that have been thrown around there, like you know, the physios that they need. The physios are salaried by the ATP, they're there anyway. Singles players get priority on physios. Like the the doubles players only use the physios if the singles players don't need them, right? So they're there, they're gonna be there anyway. They have a they work a standard shift, they're going to be there anyway. So doubles players are not you're not hiring physios to work for doubles players. There's some hotel routes, but again, for them the the cost of those hotel rooms is minuscule compared to what this is, what the amount of money that these tournaments are making from having them there.

SPEAKER_01

Well, it seems again.

SPEAKER_00

I'll say the last I'll say the last thing as well, Will, about about this business thing, right? If you go each of these tournaments, most of these tournaments have they have like pro-ams in the early stages or just before the tournament starts, you know, and they get it's basically where the the sponsors who throw a lot of money at these tournaments in sponsorship, they want to come and they want to hit some balls. Now, let me tell you something. I've been around them. Those singles guys are not turning up to those priams. If you go to the proams, 95% of the guys who are there are doubles players who are spending their time on a Tuesday morning in Dallas playing a pro-am with two guys who chucked a load of money at the tournament.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

When that when they have kids' days, when they have media days, it's not the singles guys who are going, it's the doubles guys who are going to go and earn that money. So again, that's making money for the tournament. How do you quantify that? Because when those people, when those guys, when those rich guys from Dallas want to throw money at the Dallas Open, they're not just doing it for the goodness of their heart. They probably want a bit of pro-am action as well. Try getting the singles guys to go out there and do some pro-am at 9 a.m. on a Tuesday morning.

SPEAKER_01

Yeah. So I think like this idea that it is a business decision that you know Wertheim has mentioned and and other journalists and people on Twitter, it seems like it's a like to put it nicely, a distraction, and then to put it harshly a lie.

SPEAKER_00

Um it seems like John's I don't think John Wertheim is lying. I think he actually that, but I mean a lie from the ATP. What I have a problem with, yeah, no, I agree from the ATP. I think it's kind of a stitch up. I think they're trying to, I think they're attempting a transfer of wealth. Um and I don't I think that that's the worst part, because I think it's it's kind of bullshit in the fans and bullshitting the fans in in their messaging, but also at tournaments. They're basically going, we still think you'll come and pay the same amount, even though we're gonna be offering a lot less tennis. Um, and and that this is not to by the way, this is not for the tournaments when we're talking about business model. This is not for the tournaments to make any more money. That money's still gonna the tournaments won't keep that. That money's just gonna go to the singles guys who are already making a fortune.

SPEAKER_02

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00

Like, you know, like do you I think there's there's guys out there who there's guys out there who've won six tennis matches this year and they've made over half a million dollars singles place. And we're sitting here going, they need more money. So how can it be a business decision, Will? If at the end of the day, there's no more money actually comes in. It's just gonna, it's just gonna be transferred somewhere else.

SPEAKER_01

It seems like it's not a business decision. I think that's kind of my point. I think that's a distraction or a lie, and it's really like an ego thing from some of the people making the decisions. On we've talked about like older players who aren't make or who didn't make as much money in their career as some of the doubles players do today, or like singles players um today, some of them, not all of them, but some of them don't respect the doubles specialists because they never reached top hundred in singles, right? So they're they only value singles players as good tennis players.

SPEAKER_00

So well again though, again though, like I saw the guy, the French guy making the ridiculous comment that like doubles guys are only like two, six or four six. I don't even know what that level is anymore. But I had a look, I think by my count, I was look at the rankings rankings yesterday. I think 24 of the top 100 doubles players currently have been top 100 singles players. So are we counting those players who are who are only at that level? Like, because I know, like, for example, I know uh Andre Vavasori has this year he's qualified and won rounds. in singles tour events oh is is he uh is he a an average club player is simone belelli an average club player because he's like i'm pretty sure he's been 23 in the world in singles what about adam pavlisek he's been 70 in the world singles guido andreosi i think 60 in the world singles uh are we counting these players so are we not all right so we're not counting those players so what about the players who are ranked higher than them what about henry and harry are we are are we saying that they're not very good even though they're ranked higher than those guys who have beat top 100 singles like what what what's it doesn't doesn't add up all this yeah i i mean i think that the it's just a lack of respect for the fact that it's it's just a different variation of the same sport right like listen right like if if you're better at singles that doesn't make you a better person or better whatever than somebody who's awesome at doubles like doubles is certain certainly less endurance more skill and tactics and strategy right like but that doesn't make it better or worse it's just different right the thing what listen people enjoy sport and have done since time immemorial because they like the drama that it comes it consumes you a great friend of mine one of my best friends who's a brilliant journalist brilliant writer he said that sport great sport and uh great sport and misery are the only two things that will fully consume you and it and it's true and you you know when when you're there in you know if if if you're unlucky enough to have total misery it fully consumes you you can't find a way out of it and the same in sport I know that Henry and Harry were playing that match I think it was their their quarterfinal match let's say last week on court two and it was packed by the way all all ticketed as well packed uh doubles only that day um and I don't think anyone in that stadium thought about anything else for the last 30 minutes of that match it was it was all just just sport so the product and that kind of thing when we hear the product's not good it's sport people will pay to come and watch sport and you can't get away from that people have always done it we saw it there it was in evidence last week go on my Twitter account look at that thread you can see it's in evidence there but this business thing it just doesn't it doesn't add up to me because you're not trying every you're not trying your best to get anything out of it and you would always try your best to get something out of it um right but again listen the the the point I want to make on this is when people go somebody said to me last week I think it might have been Rothenberg not not said it to me but I think he saw well something has to change and my response is why why does anything have to change what if what if it doesn't what if everything stays the same if everything stays the same right all the singles guys will make absolute fortunes out of tennis the doubles guys the tournaments will make absolute fortunes out of running the tournaments and some of them that don't if we want to get into business models let's talk about those 250s that have to be propped up let's talk about the grass 250s that have to be propped up by Wimbledon financing them because they don't make money themselves. Should we get rid of those as well? No, because people we want the sport makes a fortune the sport the tournaments and the sport make a fortune and it's there to be reinvested in stuff like that. The Stuttgart open the Hotoganbotch open doesn't make business sense but absolutely we have to keep it because it's there it's sport that the sport is making millions tens and hundreds of millions needs to reinvest in stuff like that. But as I was saying nothing changes singles players will make an absolute fortune and so they should they're they're greatly talented they provide people with huge amounts of entertainment they're the stars of the sport the doubles guys they know they're the supporting act and they'll get paid a bit on the side for doing that. Not fortunes no one's making you know unless you're winning everything I think listen that I think Julian Cash and Lloyd Glaspool last year that no one it people would struggle to win more than they won. And I think they made 1.2 million dollars yeah while I I think that you know that that's the most you can really win in a year realistically on tour Yannick Sinner gets paid four million for winning Wimbledon for one one tournament yeah so so if everything stays the same singles players make a fortune tournaments make a fortune fans they pay their to come and see their tennis they have a great day out they see loads of tennis doubles players they make a bit of money on the side who's not happy yeah who's not happy apart from it's the one thing that comes into it it's greed that comes into it because somebody thinks I can make more money there if I can have his share and that that's that's the concerning thing but the idea that well you know it can't stay the same yes it can 100% can stay the same because it's the model that it's always been run with in tennis and you know what it works.

SPEAKER_01

Last question for you um what do you think is going to happen? How likely is this to come to fruition?

SPEAKER_00

I don't know I don't really want to speculate because I I don't um I think there's going to be I know the doubles guys are going to fight it I I don't really know the way um you know I don't know I know that there's probably they're probably speaking some you know I don't know if they're getting legal advice or not but you know it's um I think it's probably gonna it might have to go that way there's there may be an argument for restriction of trade or something like that. I think it I I really hope that there's some sense that comes into it. You know that there is some really smart business minds in tennis. Craig Tiley in particular I think Craig Tylie's the he's an elite sporting executive in any sport. I know Craig doesn't think we should get rid of doubles and I know there's some other really smart business execs involved in tennis. Speak to them ask them if they think that they should get rid of doubles and none who I've spoken to think that but some tournament directors of some tournaments that have gone bust have contrary opinions so you know make of that what you will yeah awesome

Predictions And Final Thoughts

SPEAKER_00

all right well this was a fun conversation Calvin um I appreciate you coming on and we will talk to you again soon. Cheers mate