Touring could be revolutionized in the coming years
Tennis is moving towards a new and different future, but no one yet knows what the final destination will be. As the men’s and women’s tours advance on clay in Europe, the behind-the-scenes political maneuvering hasn’t stopped at all. ATP-WTA, the Slams, the rich Saudi funds, 3 main actors intent on writing the screenplay of a continually evolving film, without knowing what the port of arrival will be but only one certainty: within a few years, perhaps 2027, the tennis season will no longer be as we know it today. There are too many unresolved issues and unresolved issues due to general dissatisfaction. Tennis players want to play less (they are especially pushing for two months of total off-season at the end of the year), ATP and WTA are convinced that the tennis product generates much less money than its potential, with the Saudis ready to bring rivers of dollars as long as the status quo is changed at least in part; the Slams – leaders of the season – are not there, they do not want to passively witness a possible revolution that risks devaluing their sporting and economic power.
It is inappropriate to talk about “war”, given the terrible thing that is really happening in several regions of the world, even a stone’s throw from our home… but it is certain that for months the meetings between tennis leaders have been many and rather agitated. The colleague Russell Fuller returned to the topic with a detailed article on BBC in which he talks about the most recent developments. According to the British man, the situation is still evolving, there is not yet a prevailing plan ready to be approved and implemented, but it seems that the strong tensions experienced at the beginning of 2024 have subsided somewhat. All parties involved agree that a head-on collision is not beneficial to anyoneso the situation would be a little more relaxed, even if the positions are not yet close enough to lead to a next agreement.
The first official step was the announcement of the WTA Finals in the Saudi capital Riyadh for the next three years. During the Madrid tournament, other meetings will take place which could lead to the white smoke of another success for the Saudis: the announcement of the tenth Masters 1000, to be held in Riyadh. The creation of a tenth thousand – originally intended for the first week of the year or on the grass before Wimbledon – has accelerated significantly in recent months. Last month, the ATP issued an invitation for bids to Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Doha, Abu Dhabi and Australia. Fuller reports that the deadline for bids was April 24, hours before the ATP board begins two days of meetings in which it will be possible to identify a winner or opt for a second round of bidding. Once the successful candidate is clear, for an event not starting until 2027, it could take at least 18 months to select a date in the calendar.
It is very likely that this will be between January and February. Holding it in Saudi Arabia in the first week of the year would be considered a hostile gesture by Tennis Australia: It would mean the death of the United Cup and lose its leading male cast in the two weeks leading up to the Australian Open. Holding it in February, in Saudi Arabia, would not cause problems for Tennis Australia but could endanger the existence of traditional European and South American indoor clay court events that take place during that period. The ATP is already facing heavy criticism for the further reduction of Latin American events, and the indoor tournaments in Europe – Rotterdam above all – have a very deep-rooted tradition, also supported by the desire of many European tennis players to return to the old continent for a few weeks after the long trip “down under”.
Another complication comes from the fact that if the Saudis were successful in achieving the tenth annual 1000, they would want to create a combined event. The political power in the country pushes for women’s tournaments and events, to show the world social progress in terms of rights and freedoms. Bait and switch? It may be, but there it is. There are currently no further licenses available for WTA 1000 events and, unless one is sold, existing owners – including those in Doha and Dubai – would be able to veto any expansion plans.
This is the political matter seen from the ATP-WTA and Saudi sides. There are the Slams, with the strength of the 4 most prestigious and richest tournaments of the year, pushing for theirs Premium Tours, launched by Craig Tiley of Tennis Australia and considered very interesting by his three category “colleagues”. A plan defined as “very aggressive”, since it would involve a real revolution of the year compared to the status quo, but also very intriguing for the players who would see the birth of a tour on the F1 model, fewer tournaments, very rich, with good breaks. Play less, play “better”, earn more… it’s difficult not to be attracted by a dish like this. But those who aspire to enter this Premium Tour without having the ranking? A clear, very clear split would be created, which the ATP doesn’t like at all.
After some decent initial meetings between Grand Slam tournaments, including one in London in the week before this year’s Australian Open, all interested parties were invited to a summit at Indian Wells in March. Fuller says that at that meeting ATP president Andrea Gaudenzi revealed an alternative offer of $1.3 billion from Saudi Arabia. That particular offer is no longer on the table, due to the start of the ATP bidding process and the confirmation that Riyadh will host the WTA Finals. But the way he was presented at the meeting was very poorly received by the Slams. Since then, it seems the discussions have become more collaborative and cordial. It is reported that Gaudenzi and the presidents of the four Grand Slams have recently started meeting regularly. Various models of the Premium Tour: the prototype envisaged a season with 10 tournaments in addition to the four Grand Slams, as well as the ATP and WTA Finals and the Davis Cup and the Billie Jean King Cup. All events to be held outdoors, 96-player draws with a duration of 12 days. The novelty would be the creation of a sort of play off and play out with 64 player brackets to determine who can enter (and exit) the Premium tournaments. A second tier, given the provisional name Contender Tour, which would run events currently holding ATP and WTA 500 status. There would essentially be promotion and relegation every season, plus end-of-year play-offs, before an eight-week holiday.
The proposal is tempting for the best, but a very correct criticism was immediately raised: the proposal to prevent Premium Tour players from competing elsewhere (in what are now 500 tournaments) does not hold up since 14 or 15 events in a season not at all they would be enough for players defeated in the first rounds of the major tour, who would risk playing a handful of games in a year. How to get back into shape by playing little or nothing? It can not be done. A middle ground could be to allow access to at least a handful of Contender Tour tournaments as a lifeline. Will it be enough?
If this plan ever comes to light, the current ATP and WTA 250 would effectively be downgraded to Challenger events, with many owners of the current dates who would see their product – paid at a very high price – totally devalued. TOSome have already floated millionaire lawsuits in the case. In short, however you look at it, the waters are and remain rough, finding a solution that satisfies everyone seems impossible. “The players will not agree, because the players need to play. A tennis player ranked 50 or 60 will lose every first or second round, so he will not be able to maintain his ranking position. Their goal is to have the most jobs during the year. The Premium Tour will be reserved for the top 20 players, that’s all,” an unidentified ATP 250 event owner told the BBC. “Tennis is about proximity and diversity. So the diversity is that you can play anywhere; the closeness is that even in a small town you can meet players. It’s the strength of tennis.”
This is what the situation looks like at the moment. There is a desire for change, for greater unity in the governance of tennis. There is the desire to raise the economic turnover thanks to the contribution of Saudi money or the Slam revolution. But there is also the awareness that a frontal war is of no use to anyone. Perhaps we are still far from what the future will be. Reason would lead to a compromise between the 3 major parties involved – Slams, ATP-WTA, Saudis, but with “billions” on the table, will reason prevail? We’ll see. What now seems certain is that from 2026 or perhaps 2027, the tennis season will be very, very different.
Marco Mazzoni
