No matter how the ATP tweaks men's doubles, the Bryan brothers are sure to be in the way of any challengers. Clive Brunskill/Getty Images
	MAILBAG Jon Wertheim will answer questions from SI.com users in his mailbag every Wednesday. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

And we're back ...

Let's get right on to the questions.

As much as I love doubles, I understand the need for a fresh look. They don't bring in cash and can't sustain a tournament on their own. Do you agree with the potential changes (i.e. allowing singles in with no dubs ranking, changing the third set to a tiebreaker)? Should the Bryan brothers be worried and go back to get that degree on the farm?
-- John M., New York

We'll leave it to you, gentle readers, to infer the identity of this doubles enthusiast from New York. It's no secret that men's doubles simply was an untenable situation. (Go here to read the specifics of the "doubles enhancements," as they're being comically spun.)

But it would have been nice if the ATP had played the role of "players union" and not "tournament-directors union" and figured out creative ways to boost the product. The notion of fining events for not putting doubles on show courts was a good start. Measures like the super-tiebreak to help with scheduling and time certainty isn't so objectionable either. More player promotion would have helped as well. And what if the tour had made a real push to sell a doubles specific corporate sponsorship? Instead of taking the high road, the ATP caved to the skinflint promoters who got tired of paying for Leos Friedl's hotel room.

As far as the effectiveness of the changes go, the proof is in the proverbial pudding. If Andy Roddick, Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer and Andre Agassi play doubles week-in, week-out, great. Maybe doubles will experience of a surge of popularity and the promoters will milk twice as many matches out of the stars. Personally, I'm skeptical. The top players are withdrawing from events left and right, as it is. (Since Wimbledon, each of the four aforementioned has pulled out of tournaments.)

Are they really going to play doubles as well? Especially when the five-game sets and gimmicky rules give the impression the results are not be taken seriously? My guess: This will be a bonanza for the 40-60 players -- Jurgen Melzer, Karol Beck, Ken Carlsen -- who can pick up some extra cash for little effort. Promoters will still be frustrated with their return on investment and eventually doubles will be euthanized altogether.