The new format is proving successful in luring big names. The draw features exciting pairings like Carlos Alcaraz and Emma Raducanu, and Iga Świątek and Casper Ruud. Even five-time Grand Slam champion Novak Djokovic and tennis legend Venus Williams are getting in on the action. This shift from a traditional event to a "pseudo-exhibition," as defending champions Sara Errani and Andrea Vavassori called it, is clearly designed to boost fan engagement. As American doubles legend Mike Bryan told the press, "For the excitement levels and for getting the fans to pack the stadium, it is a cool idea to have that star power come out."
The financial stakes are massive. The winning duo will take home $1 million, a five-fold increase from the previous year. This substantial prize money, along with reported appearance fees of over $50,000 for the top players, is a major point of contention. As British doubles star Jamie Murray put it, "It's frustrating. That money is going to players who are making an absolute boatload anyway." He added that the top players aren't participating "because it's an opportunity to win a Grand Slam, they're playing because they're getting a truckload of cash."
The new format is also raising questions about the very definition of a Grand Slam. The matches are best-of-three sets, but each set is a shortened race to four games. Instead of a full third set, a 10-point tiebreak will decide the match. Organizers have confirmed that despite these changes, the event will still count as an official Grand Slam title. This has left many doubles specialists feeling cheated out of a chance for a career-defining title. "A grand slam is neither preparation nor fun," said Kristina Mladenovic, a former world No. 1 in doubles. She called the concept "brilliant" from a business perspective but "problematic" from a sporting one.
The lack of communication from organizers to the players about the changes has been a major source of frustration. Jan Zielinski, a recent mixed doubles champion, said there was "no communication with players" about the change. Sara Errani and Andrea Vavassori, the defending champions, called the change a "profound injustice." American player Jessica Pegula, a member of the WTA council, agreed that the USTA went "rogue" with the decision. "If there was feedback about the format," she said, "then the reaction would be a little different."
While the change has its critics, many believe it's a necessary step for the growth of the sport. The Bryan Brothers, one of the most successful men's doubles pairings in history, see it from a broader perspective. "The US Open is a business," Mike Bryan told CNN Sports. Bob Bryan added that he hopes the move will "kind of trickle down to the popularity of the doubles game itself." Former US Open mixed doubles champion Daniela Hantuchova believes it's a "great opportunity" and that "we are always trying to find new initiatives to make our sport more interesting for the fans."
Even with the huge incentives, the compressed schedule and the timing have led to some issues. Cincinnati Open winner Carlos Alcaraz acknowledged the tough logistics, saying, "The scheduling isn't the best, playing tomorrow." There have already been withdrawals from players like Paula Badosa and Tommy Paul, and even Jannik Sinner and his partner Katerina Siniakova had to pull out after Sinner retired from the Cincinnati final with an illness.
With this being a trial run, all eyes will be on New York to see if the new format is a success. While other Grand Slams like the Australian Open and Wimbledon are reportedly sticking to the traditional format for now, they are closely watching. Bob Bryan believes that if the US Open's gamble pays off, it "could revolutionize mixed doubles for years to come." The outcome in New York could influence the future of mixed doubles at all the majors.
