Gaudenzi defends two-week Masters 1000: "This model needs five years"

Carlos Navarro | 19 Aug 2025 | 19.23

Gaudenzi, during the last ATP Finals. Source: Getty

Streaming M25 Uriage live tennis

🎾 Tristan Berard vs Andrea Brignacca

Sign up with Bet365 here
Make your first deposit of at least €5
Go to the “Live” section and watch every match

Watch the match on Bet365

Andrea Gaudenzi arrived at the ATP presidency with a clear objective: to make the tennis ecosystem evolve and improve the position of power within the organization that structures the men's professional circuit. His plan was structured under a name, One Vision, and that label has allowed players and coaches to share a pie with more sustenance... but at the same time, suffer the consequences of a grueling calendar.

The straw that broke the camel's back for many was seen in the past two weeks. Canada and Cincinnati, two unavoidable Masters 1000 events that are part of the pre-US Open tour, have for the first time lasted a week and a half, compressing in the calendar to the extent that their finals took place on Thursday and Monday, respectively. The lack of rest for many players, the number of days competing, and the lack of quality in the finals have led to the frustration and outrage of many: no one better than Andrea Gaudenzi himself, as the main proponent of this new format of Masters, to defend its advantages and confirm that they are here to stay.

- Gaudenzi talks about the impact that the two-week Masters 1000 have on the calendar, presenting pros and cons and defending the current model

"It is true that the new format extends the time you spend at the facilities, and that is an important aspect. It also, however, unlocks the potential earnings we need for the entire circuit to evolve. Reforms such as this were thoroughly discussed, along with the ATP Council and the Player Council, for several years. One of our strategic objectives is to generate more money for more players. We have achieved this with the player pension, which has expanded from 165 to 300 players, and also by doubling the prize money in Challengers since 2022. All this is achieved through the big events, with big rounds and larger draws."

"Look at what is happening: there is a record of bonus earnings, nine-figure projects to renew infrastructures in Rome, Madrid, Shanghai, and Cincinnati. None of that would happen without the breather of a 12-day window. It has allowed entrepreneurs to reinvest the generated earnings, and that is money that goes straight to the locker room. Certain aspects of the current tension underlie different views on time. We must think long-term. We must give this model five or ten years: if successful, I believe the Masters 1000 will have grown exponentially across all metrics, and we will look at this movement as the cornerstone of that change."

- Gaudenzi aims to extend the preseason... but without impacting the duration of the Masters 1000

"In many sports, the trend is towards more competition: for example, in soccer, with the new Club World Cup. Our calendar is complex. The season is long, and going far week after week is very demanding. However, it is also an individual sport: one player could be out in the first round and another lifting the trophy. Finding a solution that works for both sides of the scale is never easy, and you cannot build a calendar around a single group of players: all must be considered."

"Our goal is to extend the preseason. Adequate rest benefits everyone: players, fans, and competition. But we cannot do it alone. Tournaments have their own licenses, and every structural change needs all of us to be aligned. There is an aspect that goes unnoticed: players choose their own roadmap. That freedom rarely occurs in professional sports. With it, however, comes a responsibility: knowing when to push and when to recover."

Finally, we must be clear: the ATP does not control the entire calendar. We work alongside the Grand Slams, Davis Cup, and other events. That is why this model, OneVision, proposes unified governance, with all stakeholders at the same table making the same type of decisions, such as those concerning the calendar."

- Gaudenzi reaffirms the commitment players must have regarding the Masters 1000: for him, they are non-negotiable and the mainstay of the ATP... and criticizes ATP 500 and 250 and the contracts they offer to players

"We always try to find the right balance. Right now, there are 19 tournaments that count towards your ranking: they will become 18 next year. The mandatory list remains at eight Masters. I do not think it is excessive. These are key events, they give structure to the season, and create earnings that end up in the players' hands, all through record prize money, end-of-season bonuses, and profit sharing."

"In addition, these events create the backbone of the season for fans. Our job is to make those big tournaments strong and trustworthy. When the best compete in them, fans and sponsors respond, and the entire sport moves forward. Numbers can be adjusted, but the principle of having a clear backbone throughout a season is non-negotiable."

Players also need time to adapt to the changes we have implemented. The expansion of certain ATP Masters 1000 tournaments equates to around 15 extra days at tournaments throughout the year. Those days must be taken into account when planning calendars: it would be logical for players to reduce commitments in other areas. Doing so requires discipline and willpower to overlook the money other events pay these players. And of course, if a player is eliminated early from a top-level tournament, they have the flexibility to choose new tournaments to have more matches. It is a top-down, cascading vision."

Yes, I know that the contracts that tournaments offer to players are part of the tennis ecosystem. They are not talked about much, but they move a lot of money at ATP 500 and 250 levels, where entrepreneurs spend millions to secure big names. For top players, it is guaranteed money: I understand the appeal. However, players and their teams must consider the potential consequences. These financial incentives do not always align with what is best for ranking, recovery, or a player's career."

This news is an automatic translation. You can read the original news, Gaudenzi defiende a los Masters 1000 de dos semanas: "Hay que dar cinco años a este modelo"

Andrea Gaudenzi