Medvedev proposes shortening the season: only Grand Slams and Masters events retain ranking points

After an easy first-round win in Dubai, former world No. 1 and Russian star Medvedev did not limit his post-match press conference to on-court victories. Known for his frankness, the tennis star called for a complete overhaul of the ATP ranking system, suggesting that only Grand Slams and Masters tournaments should award ranking points to address the long-standing issue of an overloaded schedule for players.

Currently ranked 11th in the world, Medvedev’s proposal is straightforward: future ATP rankings should be based solely on points from the four Grand Slams and nine Masters events. Regarding other ATP250 and ATP500 tournaments, he suggested “maybe they shouldn’t offer any ranking points.”

In Medvedev’s view, this is the only way to genuinely reduce the burden on players. “This is the sole method to shorten the tour schedule,” Medvedev stated. “Four Grand Slams, eleven Masters events (including the ATP Finals), and perhaps the rest without ranking points.”

However, the 2021 US Open champion realistically acknowledged that this ideal plan is unlikely to be implemented. He pointed out the massive commercial interests involved, especially concerning broadcast rights and tournament licenses. “It will never happen because of the licenses; the ATP doesn’t have enough funds to buy them all back. Other tournaments won’t just say, ‘Okay, we won’t hold the event,’ because that would cause them losses. It’s business. With the current ATP tour structure, it will never change, at least not during my playing career.”

Medvedev’s radical proposal stems from his deep understanding of the pressure players face under the current ranking system. The ATP ranking system awards points across various tournament levels, which forces players to compete not only in mandatory Grand Slams and Masters but also in lower-tier events to accumulate points.

He specifically mentioned the case of Danish rising star Rune. Last October, Rune suffered an Achilles injury at the Stockholm Open (ATP250), which severely affected his season. Medvedev recalled, “Everyone said afterward, ‘Yeah, but he didn’t have to play that tournament.’ But the problem is, if he wanted to go to Turin (for the ATP Finals), he had to play, even though it wasn’t a mandatory event.”

Medvedev also shared his own experience. “Last year, I played seven consecutive tournaments. Was I obligated? No. I started the year poorly, so I thought: maybe I can earn 100 points here, 200 points there, to secure a better seed next year.” He explained, “Without ranking points, deciding whether to play would be much easier.”

This statement reveals the survival logic in professional tennis today: in the fierce race to qualify for the ATP Finals and secure high seedings, so-called non-mandatory tournaments effectively become compulsory for lower-ranked players or those needing points.

Although Medvedev’s proposal is unlikely to be realized soon, it accurately targets the persistent issues ATP has faced in recent years: overly long schedules and frequent injuries. Last October, ATP chairman Andrea Gaudenzi defended the schedule, saying that how to arrange it remains the players’ choice. However, players’ demands can no longer be ignored.

In fact, the ATP has already begun tweaking the rules. Starting from the 2026 season, the number of tournaments counting toward player rankings will decrease, and the mandatory ATP 500 events for top 30 players will be reduced from five to four. This is seen as an initial response to players’ calls to reduce pressure.

Meanwhile, discussions about future schedule optimization are ongoing. During last year’s ATP Finals, Gaudenzi revealed plans to further reduce the number of ATP 250 events by 2028, with Saudi Arabia set to host a new Masters tournament then.

Though Medvedev’s vision sounds like a fantasy and has been called “the latest madness” by some media, it undoubtedly offers a powerful perspective on the future direction of professional tennis. When a sport’s core asset—players’ health—is continually threatened by a packed calendar, balancing commercial interests with athlete welfare will be a long-term challenge for the ATP.(Source: Tennis Home, Author: Mei )