Kristina Mladenovic, one of the great references of the circuit in doubles and triple Grand Slam champion in the mixed modality, has shown her indignation at the new approach of the tournament. In statements to Eurosport, the French player criticized the approach.
Some statements went viral to Tennis Actu(“When you hear Alcaraz and others… it’s embarrassing”) that the player later confirmed that this was not the case, but what she actually said was: “That all the participants say that they want to have fun to prepare for the US Open is embarrassing. A Slam is not a preparation or an amusement”.
A controversy that continues
The US Open has ignited intense debate in the tennis world after announcing a major transformation of its mixed doubles tournament. What was until now a traditional event within the Grand Slams becomes this year an elite exhibition during the “US Open Fan Week”, the week before the official start of the main draw. With a prize fund of $1 million for the winning pair, a compressed format and the participation of illustrious names from the singles circuit such as Carlos Alcaraz, Emma Raducanu, Novak Djokovic and Aryna Sabalenka, the tournament is clearly aiming for spectacle. However, behind the spotlight, many see it as a betrayal of the history of this discipline.
The US Open decision means that only 16 pairs will participate: eight classified by individual combined ranking and eight others by direct invitation. The matches, all played in the large stadiums of the New York complex, will be played in short sets of four games, except for the final (six), with tiebreak without advantage and super tiebreak as the third set. The event will take place on August 19 and 20, coinciding with the week in which the preliminary phases of the tournament are traditionally held.
The list of participants already announced has generated great expectation due to the presence of media and unprecedented couples. But for the specialists, the new format is a flagrant exclusion.Kristina Mladenovic, one of the great legends of mixed doubles with nine Grand Slam titles – three of them in this modality – was one of the first to raise her voice.
“From a commercial point of view, it’s a brilliant idea. It guarantees the US Open a much more lucrative third week in terms of tickets, consumption and television rights. But from a sporting point of view, it’s problematic because it touches the essence of tennis. A Grand Slam is history. And this is not. Don’t call it a Grand Slam”
Mladenovic, hampered in recent years by a chronic injury, finds herself out of a tournament that was long part of her competitive schedule. “Nobody consulted us, that’s the scariest part. This is not an evolution, it is a unilateral decision that sidelines those who have devoted their careers to doubles,” she adds bitterly
The crux of the matter, critics point out, is not only the form of the event, but the message it sends: millions are awarded to players who do not need it, while the real specialists on the circuit continue to struggle to stay afloat. “As children we dreamed of winning a Grand Slam, even in doubles. What we didn’t dream of was that our sport would become a show put on just for money,” Mladenovic laments. The controversy continues.
Read the full article here
