Across The Net: Martina Navratilova - The Passing of an Era and Why Top Players Play Less Doubles
Posted by Dan Martin on 09.18.2006
Martina Navratilova won an amazing 41 grand slam doubles titles. At one time top tennis players played singles and doubles, now not so much ... Why you might ask?
Martina Navratilova's mixed doubles victory was lost amidst Andre Agassi's swan song, the coronation of Roger Federer, the glamour of Maria Sharapova and the resurgence of Andy Roddick. At forty-nine years of age Navratilova claims this is her final retirement. I am not sure I trust her since she has retired before and then come back, but if it is her final match it was a fitting way for her to end a sublime career.
If Navratilova's career is over then so is an era in tennis. At one time elite male and female players played doubles and mixed doubles. Navratilova is the last of the elite players to be committed to this course of action. John McEnroe was the last elite male player to have a career long commitment to doubles. He won the 1992 Wimbledon men's doubles title during his final full year on tour.
Navratilova's numbers are staggering. In singles she won 18 grand slam titles including 9 Wimbledon crowns. Navratilova was runner-up in 14 grand slam singles events as well. Her singles career is surpassed only by Steffi Graf's 22 grand slam titles and Margaret Court's 24 grand slam titles. Navratilova also won 31 women's grand slam doubles titles! Add to that Navratilova's 10 grand slam mixed doubles titles, and Navratilova's career total is an astounding 59 grand slam titles. Clearly, Navratilova is the most decorated across the board tennis player of all time.
So this begs the question of why more players do not play doubles today. I will offer several theories, but I fear none exhaustively answer why this change has occurred. Finally, I will discuss how elite players today might benefit from a return to the doubles court.
Why Doubles Fell Off:
1. The Rise of the Baseline Game: While Jimmy Connors and Chris Evert both won several grand slam doubles titles early in their careers, both players tended to win their matches from the back of the court. Given that doubles points are normally won at the net, the utility of playing doubles was reduced for baseliners such as Connors and Evert. Unlike Connors and Evert, Bjorn Borg never played doubles seriously. Once three baseline players had risen to the top of the sport without playing doubles the example was set for other baseliners to skip doubles. Ivan Lendl, Mats Wilander and Steffi Graf all followed their lead.
2. The Decline of the Serve and Volley Game: Fewer men and virtually no women play serve and volley tennis. John McEnroe used to play doubles in order to practice for his singles matches. While serve and volley players Stefan Edberg and Patrick Rafter did not play doubles at the frequency of McEnroe, each did have some significant doubles wins. Edberg won the 1986 Australian and U.S. Open men's doubles titles along with the 1996 Australian Open doubles title. Rafter won the 1999 Australian Open doubles title. Serve and volley players benefit from the reflexes at the net required by doubles. This all may be true, but Pete Sampras was a great serve and volley player and never played doubles seriously. Roger Federer also posses wonderful net play but only plays doubles in smaller tournaments and Davis Cup competition.
3. Compassion for Doubles Specialists: Tennis has a very extensive global junior circuit. Many elite players grew up playing against players who now make their living in doubles events. In the juniors, it may have been unclear who would be elite and who would be a journeyman. Growth spurts and emotional maturation are difficult to predict. Federer, Sampras and others likely have many years of familiarity and camaraderie with players who now frequent doubles draws. While Federer, Sampras and many other elite singles players posses skill sets that would allow them to overwhelm the less talented doubles specialists, elite singles players now have sufficient incomes that they would likely feel guilty about playing doubles and taking bread out of lesser players mouths. Navratilova came of age in an era that did not offer great riches. Doubles and mixed doubles were ways of supplementing income.
4. Fear of Burn Out: Tennis, like many other sports, has become more and more of a science. Nutritionists, personal trainers, and cross-training push elite players to maximize their capabilities with a singles season as the goal at hand. Playing extra matches and tournaments, while fan friendly, runs the risk of wearing down joints, ligaments and muscles. Elite players are unlikely to risk singles glory for doubles success. After all, tennis immortality lies in grand slam singles success.
Having explained why top players play less and less doubles, I still think doubles can play a role in player development. Rafael Nadal is a prototype for tireless baseline play, yet Nadal plays doubles in most non-grand slam events. Nadal does this because his net game, return of serve and approach shots need work. Nadal's game is perfectly suited for slower surfaces, but his 2006 runner-up finish at Wimbledon and quarterfinal finish at the U.S. Open demonstrate that Nadal is improving on faster surfaces. Andy Roddick won the Indianapolis doubles title in July and then played better tennis at the net in winning the singles title in Cincinnati and reaching the U.S. Open final. Doubles is a way to improve tennis skills in match conditions.
Female players could likely benefit even more than Roddick and Nadal from increased doubles play. Many of the top female players hit massive ground strokes and returns of serve that often receive meek responses. These huge shots should set up easy volleys. Many top female players complicate life for themselves by allowing easy floaters to prolong rallies. Increased confidence at the net ought to lead elite women's players to easy put-away shots and shorter points. By shortening points, an elite player can save energy for long matches or later rounds in a tournament. One can imagine Maria Sharapova following her nasty serve, big forehand and powerful backhand to the net and daring the opposition to either lob or hit a ball past her 6'3" frame. The intimidation factor alone would end many points. No one is asking Sharapova to become the next Martina Navratilova, but taking a few pointers from Navratilova might help.
