MONTE CARLO, Monaco, October 15, 2026: ATP Chairman Andrea Gaudenzi has proposed a sweeping overhaul of men’s professional tennis from 2028, with total ATP-level player compensation projected to reach $350 million annually, a $50 million Masters 1000 bonus pool and ranking changes intended to reduce the pressure on players to enter additional tournaments. The OneVision proposals, outlined in an open letter Thursday, would also establish a $25 million fund for players finishing inside the world’s Top 250, strengthen pension support and reorganize the calendar around a tenth Masters 1000 tournament in Saudi Arabia.
The proposals arrive during a season in which Jannik Sinner has stopped competing because of a persistent knee problem and Carlos Alcaraz has spent more than four months recovering from a wrist injury. Gaudenzi wants to reward deep runs at elite tournaments more heavily while eliminating ranking incentives that encourage players to chase replacement points at smaller events. The potential financial benefits are substantial, but the approach raises an important question: will players genuinely have more freedom to rest when their rankings and earnings depend even more heavily on success at the biggest tournaments? The ATP has not finalized the reforms, which remain subject to consultation and approval.
ATP 2028 Reforms: What Has Andrea Gaudenzi Proposed?
The reforms form the next stage of OneVision, the ATP’s long-term strategy for reorganizing the men’s professional circuit, increasing commercial revenue and improving compensation.
Thursday’s proposals address several interconnected areas rather than a single rankings adjustment.
Story at a glance
ATP 2028 Reforms: What Has Andrea Gaudenzi Proposed?
The reforms form the next stage of OneVision, the ATP’s long-term strategy for reorganizing the men’s professional circuit, increasing commercial revenue and improving compensation.
How Much More Money Would ATP Players Receive Under the $350 Million Plan?
The most prominent proposal concerns the Masters 1000 bonus pool.
Why the $350 Million Compensation Figure Needs Careful Explanation
The ATP projects that its annual player compensation could reach approximately $350 million in 2028, excluding Grand Slam prize money.
Does the ATP’s Plan Answer the Player Pay Dispute With the Grand Slams?
The ATP proposals arrive after more than a year of public disagreement over revenue sharing, player welfare and decision-making power in tennis.
ATP Rankings Could Change More Than the Prize Money
The proposed rankings reform may ultimately influence player behavior more directly than the financial increases.
| Reform Area | Current Position or Baseline | Proposed Direction From 2028 |
|---|---|---|
| Masters 1000 bonus pool | $21.5 million in 2026 | Increase to $50 million |
| Year-end Top 250 support | Existing Baseline financial-security program | Additional $25 million year-end fund |
| Player pensions | Existing expanded pension program | Approximately $30 million in annual contributions supporting up to 300 players |
| ATP rankings | Certain weaker Masters results can be replaced by qualifying lower-category results | Greater weight for Masters results and removal of the proposed replacement mechanism |
| Masters 1000 calendar | Nine tournaments | Ten tournaments, including Saudi Arabia |
| ATP-level compensation | $269.6 million recorded in 2025 | Approximately $350 million projected annually |
| Calendar organization | Existing Masters, ATP 500 and ATP 250 scheduling structure | Clearer category-specific tournament weeks |
| Doubles competition | Existing draw sizes and prize-money arrangements | Potential changes to draws and allocation of some prize money |
The 2028 figures are proposals or projections, not approved player entitlements. The $350 million estimate includes multiple compensation channels and excludes Grand Slam prize money.
The governing idea is to concentrate more of the men’s tour’s sporting and commercial value around its flagship events while broadening certain forms of financial protection.
The challenge lies in balancing those two objectives.
A structure that rewards successful players more generously must also provide a workable pathway for professionals who cannot consistently reach the later rounds of Masters 1000 tournaments.
How Much More Money Would ATP Players Receive Under the $350 Million Plan?
The most prominent proposal concerns the Masters 1000 bonus pool.
The ATP wants to increase it from $21.5 million in 2026 to $50 million from 2028.
That represents an additional $28.5 million, an increase of approximately 132.6 percent.
The proposed pool would therefore be about 2.33 times its current size.
The distinction matters because descriptions of the plan as tripling the bonus pool are not mathematically precise.
The ATP’s official 2026 bonus-pool standings confirm the existing $21.5 million allocation and explain how players qualify for those rewards.
Under the current system, the Masters 1000 and ATP Finals bonus pool covers the 30 players accumulating the highest qualifying points across those competitions, subject to participation conditions.
The proposed increase would make the financial rewards associated with the circuit’s premium events significantly more valuable.
However, Gaudenzi’s announcement does not establish precisely how the future $50 million will be distributed among individual players.
The amount earned by any particular athlete would depend on the eventual formula, performance and applicable participation requirements.
Where Does the Additional $25 Million for the Top 250 Go?
A separate proposal would create a $25 million year-end fund for players finishing among the world’s Top 250.
The objective is to provide broader financial support for professionals who face substantial costs in maintaining their careers.
Those costs include coaching, international travel, accommodation, equipment, fitness specialists, medical support and other expenses required to compete throughout the season.
For players outside the highest-earning group, such expenses can consume a significant proportion of tournament income.
The proposed fund is an aggregate allocation rather than a promise that every Top 250 player will receive an identical payment.
Dividing $25 million equally among 250 players would produce $100,000 per player, but that is only an arithmetic illustration. The ATP has not confirmed such an equal distribution or the complete eligibility formula.
Nor should the fund be confused with the existing Baseline financial-security program, which already provides minimum-earnings protection to eligible players.
The new proposal would develop the ATP’s wider support framework, subject to its final rules.
Why Are Pension Contributions Also Increasing?
Gaudenzi has proposed approximately $30 million in annual contributions to player pensions.
The expanded system is intended to support around 300 eligible players each year.
Retirement funding addresses a different problem from prize money.
Tennis careers can be relatively short, and players may spend years funding coaches, travel and medical treatment before discovering whether they can establish lasting financial security.
Pension contributions can help protect players beyond their active careers.
However, a $30 million pension allocation does not mean $30 million in additional cash prize money will be distributed directly to current players.
Pensions and competitive earnings are different forms of compensation, with separate eligibility requirements and payment structures.
Why the $350 Million Compensation Figure Needs Careful Explanation
The ATP projects that its annual player compensation could reach approximately $350 million in 2028, excluding Grand Slam prize money.
That estimate incorporates central compensation, tournament prize money and profit-sharing arrangements.
It is not an additional $350 million bonus fund.
The existing financial baseline is useful for understanding the scale of the proposal.
According to the ATP’s official OneVision performance report, player compensation reached $269.6 million in 2025, rising to approximately $400 million when Grand Slam payments were included.
| Financial Measure | Amount | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| ATP-level compensation, 2025 | $269.6 million | Recorded historical figure, excluding Grand Slams |
| Masters bonus pool, 2026 | $21.5 million | Current annual premium-event bonus allocation |
| Proposed Masters bonus pool | $50 million | Targeted allocation from 2028 |
| Proposed Top 250 fund | $25 million | Year-end career-support allocation |
| Proposed annual pension contributions | Approximately $30 million | Long-term player retirement support |
| Projected ATP-level compensation, 2028 | $350 million | Wider estimated compensation package excluding Grand Slams |
The difference between the 2025 ATP-level compensation figure and the 2028 projection is $80.4 million.
That represents an increase of approximately 29.8 percent over the historical baseline, assuming the proposed target is achieved.
It is a comparison of nominal totals from different years, not a guarantee of growth for every category of player.
The funding components should also not be added mechanically to the $350 million total. They are parts of a broader proposed financial structure, not necessarily separate amounts outside that projection.
There is a further distinction: the ATP does not control Grand Slam prize money in the same manner as compensation within its own tournament system.
That difference places the new proposals alongside another ongoing financial debate in professional tennis.
Does the ATP’s Plan Answer the Player Pay Dispute With the Grand Slams?
The ATP proposals arrive after more than a year of public disagreement over revenue sharing, player welfare and decision-making power in tennis.
Leading players have argued that the sport’s largest events generate substantial commercial revenue while athletes lack sufficient influence over how that revenue is distributed.
Those concerns led to the formation of a Grand Slam Player Advisory Council.
The Sports Encounter’s investigation of the Grand Slam player-pay dispute examined the demand for a larger share of tournament revenue, including the players’ longer-term target of 22 percent.
Gaudenzi’s October proposals address compensation within the ATP system.
They do not independently settle negotiations involving the Australian Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon and the US Open.
The four majors are separate governing and commercial stakeholders, and their prize-money arrangements must be considered distinctly.
The ATP and Grand Slam negotiations nevertheless share an important underlying question.
How much of tennis’s commercial growth should reach the athletes who produce the competition?
OneVision attempts to address that question through tournament profit-sharing, bonus pools, pension funding and stronger financial support further down the rankings.
Whether the proposals satisfy players will depend on the final distribution rules and the extent to which different groups receive meaningful benefits.
ATP Rankings Could Change More Than the Prize Money
The proposed rankings reform may ultimately influence player behavior more directly than the financial increases.
Gaudenzi wants results at the Masters 1000 tournaments to carry greater weight, with particularly valuable rewards for progressing into the later rounds.
The governing logic is that the strongest performances at the biggest events should have a larger influence on a player’s standing.
However, ranking points also determine practical opportunities.
They influence tournament entry, seeding, qualification and access to higher-profile competitions.
Changing their distribution can therefore affect the entire professional pathway.
What Is the Masters 1000 Result-Replacement Rule the ATP Wants to Remove?
The existing rankings framework allows certain weaker Masters 1000 results to be replaced by better qualifying results from ATP 500 or ATP 250 tournaments.
Contemporary reporting on Gaudenzi’s proposal identifies a provision affecting up to three weaker Masters results.
Its purpose is to allow certain performances elsewhere on the Tour to contribute to a player’s ranking calculation.
The ATP now argues that this flexibility can create an unwanted incentive.
A player who loses early at a major tournament may enter more events later in the season to replace a disappointing result with a stronger one.
In practical terms, a defeat can become the beginning of an extended effort to recover ranking points.
Gaudenzi wants to remove that incentive by making the relevant Masters performances count in full.
The proposed system would place more emphasis on what a player achieves at the premium events themselves, rather than allowing some results to be replaced through additional tournament appearances.
The final counting rules have not been published in sufficient detail to calculate how every player’s ranking would change.
It would therefore be premature to produce a hypothetical 2028 world ranking based on Thursday’s announcement.
Would Deep Runs at Masters 1000 Events Become More Valuable?
Yes, under the direction outlined by Gaudenzi.
The ATP wants later-round performances at its highest-profile tournaments to receive greater recognition.
However, the exact proposed points table has not been finalized.
That distinction matters when discussing players who perform well at ATP 250 and ATP 500 events but struggle to advance deep into Masters draws.
A player could become highly successful at the smaller tournaments yet find it harder to challenge an opponent who consistently reaches the semifinals or finals of Masters 1000 competitions.
That is a plausible consequence of increased weighting, not an established ranking outcome.
The effect will depend on the final point allocations, qualifying rules and number of countable results.
Shanghai Shows Why Ranking Changes Could Reshape the Entire Season
The current Shanghai Masters provides a timely illustration of the importance of the ranking system.
On October 12, Zizou Bergs defeated Carlos Alcaraz in the third round.
The result had consequences far beyond the Belgian player’s progression in the tournament.
It also ensured that Alexander Zverev would finish 2026 as ATP year-end No. 1 after the remaining mathematical conditions in the rankings race were resolved.
Our report on Bergs’ Shanghai victory and Zverev’s ranking milestone reconstructed how individual tournament results settled a season-long contest.
Under a system that places even greater weight on Masters performances, similar results could have a larger effect on future ranking races.
That could increase the importance of individual matches, particularly during the later stages of premium events.
It could also make early exits more expensive in rankings terms if players have fewer opportunities to replace the lost points elsewhere.
This is the central tension within the proposed reform.
Reducing the incentive to chase replacement points might discourage excessive tournament entries.
Increasing the value of Masters performances could simultaneously raise the competitive cost of an early defeat or an injury-related absence.
Whether those effects balance one another will depend on rules that the ATP has not yet completed.
The significance of repeated deep runs is also visible in our coverage of Zverev’s latest Shanghai semifinal qualification, where consistent performance against elite opposition continued to strengthen his position.
Can the 2028 ATP Reforms Prevent Another Sinner or Alcaraz Injury Crisis?
The workload debate has become more urgent because two of the sport’s biggest names have endured serious interruptions during 2026.
Jannik Sinner announced on October 6 that his season was over because of continuing knee inflammation.
He had not competed since retaining Wimbledon in July.
His withdrawal removed him from the concluding Masters tournaments, the ATP Finals and other remaining commitments.
TSE’s examination of Sinner’s decision to end his season traced the progression from missed summer tournaments to the eventual decision to prioritize treatment.
Carlos Alcaraz also spent approximately four and a half months away from competition because of a wrist injury.
He eventually returned and won the Japan Open, demonstrating that his competitive level had recovered sufficiently to win an ATP 500 championship.
Our analysis of Alcaraz’s Tokyo title explained why that victory represented a major milestone in his comeback.
Both cases highlight the importance of player welfare, but neither establishes that a particular ATP rankings rule caused the injury.
Tennis injuries are influenced by multiple factors, including training loads, match demands, surfaces, recovery time and individual medical circumstances.
Gaudenzi’s proposals are designed to reduce unnecessary scheduling pressure.
That objective is meaningful, but it does not establish that injuries will become less frequent.
More Rest Requires More Than a New Points Formula
Rankings incentives can influence scheduling decisions, but players face other pressures.
They may want match practice before a Grand Slam.
They may be recovering from injury and need competitive appearances to rebuild form.
They may have sponsorship arrangements or national-team commitments.
Players outside the elite may also need tournament earnings to fund their professional careers.
A clearer calendar can help them plan those commitments.
However, actual workload reduction will depend on how tournament obligations, protected rankings, injury exemptions and compensation requirements interact.
The ATP has not published a complete 2028 regulatory framework resolving every one of those issues.
There is therefore an important difference between the stated intention to protect players and evidence that the new system will achieve that intention.
Saudi Arabia Will Become the Tenth ATP Masters 1000 Host in 2028
The addition of a Masters 1000 tournament in Saudi Arabia is one of the most significant structural elements of OneVision’s next phase.
The 2026 ATP Tour includes nine Masters 1000 tournaments.
Under the proposed 2028 structure, that number would increase to 10.
The Saudi tournament is already part of the ATP’s announced expansion plans, rather than a completely new event first revealed in Thursday’s letter.
The ATP’s official 2026 calendar announcement provides the existing tournament structure, including nine Masters 1000 events, 16 ATP 500 tournaments and 29 ATP 250 tournaments.
The new Saudi event would strengthen the premium tier that Gaudenzi wants to make more financially and competitively significant.
However, the complete 2028 schedule and all operational details of the new Masters tournament have not been finalized through Thursday’s reform proposals.
Why Is the Saudi Masters More Significant Than Another High-Prize Exhibition?
Saudi Arabia already hosts major tennis exhibitions offering exceptionally large financial rewards.
The Six Kings Slam provides a useful contrast.
That event offers substantial appearance payments and a reported $6 million total reward for its champion, but it does not award ATP ranking points because it is an exhibition.
A Masters 1000 tournament is different.
It forms part of the official ranking system, affects season-long qualification and contributes to players’ competitive records.
Its importance therefore extends beyond prize money.
Saudi Arabia’s existing tennis ambitions have also been complicated by the recent postponement of the Six Kings Slam from October to December 27-30.
TSE’s investigation of the Six Kings Slam postponement examined the effects of recent regional security concerns on event logistics and the tennis calendar.
That postponement concerns a different competition and does not establish that the planned 2028 Masters 1000 has been delayed.
The confirmed distinction is that the exhibition has replacement dates while the future Masters remains part of the ATP’s longer-term expansion strategy.
What Happens to ATP 250 and ATP 500 Tournaments?
OneVision aims to establish clearer periods dedicated to different tournament categories.
That could make the professional calendar easier to understand for players, tournaments, broadcasters and fans.
But the commercial focus on Masters 1000 events raises questions about the future role of smaller competitions.
ATP 250 tournaments serve an important purpose.
They provide opportunities for players to earn ranking points, compete for titles, develop confidence and establish a route toward higher-level events.
ATP 500 tournaments offer another competitive step between the smaller events and the Masters.
Players need different tournament schedules depending on their rankings and circumstances.
An established Top 10 player may concentrate on Grand Slams, Masters and selected ATP 500 events.
A player ranked outside the Top 100 may need a broader combination of ATP 250 and Challenger events to build a sustainable ranking.
The ATP has previously discussed reducing the number of smaller tournaments as part of efforts to organize the calendar.
However, the October 15 proposals do not establish a final list of ATP 250 tournaments that will be removed or a complete replacement calendar.
The practical question is whether category-specific scheduling will preserve enough opportunities for players who cannot obtain direct entry into the biggest draws.
Could Greater Masters Rewards Make Smaller Events Less Valuable?
For elite players, a larger Masters bonus pool and greater rankings weight could reduce the relative attraction of entering additional ATP 250 tournaments.
That might create more recovery time.
For lower-ranked players, however, smaller competitions remain essential sources of points, income and match experience.
Their priorities are different.
The ATP must therefore avoid evaluating the entire professional circuit through the scheduling needs of its highest-ranked players alone.
The proposed Top 250 financial fund could provide useful support, but its effectiveness will depend on eligibility, distribution and the availability of sufficient competitive opportunities.
Doubles Players Face an Unresolved Battle Over Draw Sizes and Prize Money
The most contentious part of the wider reform discussion may involve doubles.
The ATP is considering changes to the long-term structure of doubles competition, including potential reductions in draw sizes and adjustments to prize-money allocation.
The issue has already attracted opposition from doubles specialists concerned about their opportunities and earning potential.
Gaudenzi’s proposed approach would keep any reallocated money within player compensation, with the intention of directing it toward singles qualifying and early-round payments.
That would potentially benefit some singles players who currently receive relatively modest rewards for qualifying or early-round appearances.
However, it could reduce tournament-entry opportunities for doubles specialists if smaller draws are eventually approved.
The ATP has not finalized the draw sizes, affected competitions or precise redistribution formula.
It would therefore be incorrect to report a confirmed reduction in doubles prize money across the entire Tour.
Why Doubles Specialists Have a Different Financial Problem
Many doubles professionals build their careers around competing regularly in their specialist discipline.
They do not necessarily have the option of moving into elite singles competition if their doubles opportunities decrease.
A smaller field at a major event could mean fewer opportunities to enter, earn prize money and accumulate ranking points.
Any financial redistribution must therefore be assessed in terms of both the recipients and the players who might lose access to opportunities.
Continue the Tennis Story
The wider objective of supporting early-round players is understandable.
Whether reducing doubles draws is the right funding mechanism remains a legitimate subject for player consultation.
What Would the Reforms Mean for Fans and Broadcasters?
The ATP’s plans also contain an explicit commercial objective.
Gaudenzi wants the world’s leading players to compete against one another more frequently at events that attract large audiences.
For fans, a clearer calendar could make it easier to follow the main stages of the season.
For broadcasters, concentrating major rivalries within prominent tournament windows could create more predictable programming and valuable matches.
For tournament organizers, stronger participation at flagship events could support ticket sales, sponsorships and broadcast partnerships.
Those are potential benefits rather than guaranteed commercial outcomes.
The actual effect will depend on player participation, competitive quality and the final structure of the calendar.
Can Tournament Innovation Attract New Tennis Audiences?
The ATP is pursuing reform during a period when major tennis organizers are also experimenting with new entertainment formats.
The Australian Open’s planned 2027 One Point Slam illustrates another approach to attracting viewers beyond traditional competition formats.
That exhibition offers a highly condensed contest and a $1 million prize.
TSE’s explainer on the One Point Slam examined how the format works and why its unusual rules could appeal to a broader audience.
The Australian Open event is not part of the ATP’s proposed rankings reforms.
It does demonstrate the wider competitive pressure on tennis to provide engaging experiences in an increasingly crowded sports and entertainment market.
The ATP’s approach is different: strengthen its main competition rather than depend primarily on exhibition formats.
Its success will depend partly on whether those flagship tournaments become more compelling without creating excessive demands on the athletes.
Who Benefits Most From the Proposed ATP Reforms?
The answer depends on which part of the plan is implemented and how the final distribution rules work.
| Group | Potential Benefit | Important Risk or Uncertainty |
|---|---|---|
| Elite singles players | Much larger Masters bonuses and rewards for deep runs | Greater dependence on major tournaments and injury availability |
| Players ranked 50-250 | Additional financial assistance and clearer career planning | Unknown payment formula and dependence on access to suitable events |
| ATP 250 specialists | Potentially clearer scheduling windows | Reduced relative rankings value or fewer tournament opportunities |
| Doubles specialists | Possible improvements in the competition structure | Potential reductions in draw access and specialist earning opportunities |
| Masters 1000 organizers | Greater competitive relevance and stronger commercial profile | Higher delivery expectations and player-welfare requirements |
| Fans and broadcasters | More prominent elite matchups and clearer scheduling | Injuries or uneven draws could undermine expected star participation |
This comparison reveals the central challenge.
The proposals contain benefits for multiple groups, but those benefits will not necessarily arrive in the same way or at the same time.
Increasing a tournament bonus pool does not automatically improve the financial position of every professional player.
Increasing rankings rewards at premium tournaments also does not automatically reduce the workload of everyone competing below that level.
The effectiveness of the reform package will depend on whether those different circumstances are properly accounted for.
When Will the ATP Make a Final Decision on the 2028 Reforms?
The reform package remains under consultation.
Gaudenzi intends to continue discussions with the ATP’s player and tournament advisory councils, as well as its governing board.
The ATP is targeting its year-end meetings in Turin for consideration of a more complete package.
The announcement does not mean every proposal will necessarily be approved in its current form.
Important decisions remain outstanding, including:
- The final Masters 1000 rankings-points distribution.
- The precise operation of the proposed removal of replacement results.
- Eligibility and payment formulas for the $50 million bonus pool.
- Distribution of the proposed $25 million Top 250 fund.
- The complete 2028 tournament calendar and category-specific weeks.
- Any approved changes to doubles draws and prize-money allocation.
- The complete operating framework for the tenth Masters 1000 in Saudi Arabia.
The proposals are intended for implementation from 2028, but individual provisions could be modified before approval.
The Biggest Test Is Whether Tennis Can Reward Excellence Without Rewarding Overwork
The financial ambition behind Gaudenzi’s plan is clear.
The ATP wants its leading tournaments to generate greater rewards, while using part of the sport’s commercial growth to support a wider group of players.
A projected $350 million compensation package would represent a meaningful increase over the 2025 ATP-level total.
The new financial support could improve career sustainability for players who struggle with the high costs of international competition.
But the rankings proposals raise a more complicated sporting question.
Players are being encouraged to build their seasons around a smaller group of premium tournaments, while those same events would carry greater financial and competitive consequences.
That could reduce unnecessary additional entries for established players.
It could also make every Masters defeat or injury absence more important.
The experience of Sinner and Alcaraz during 2026 demonstrates why the issue deserves careful attention.
Both have produced extraordinary performances while losing substantial periods of competition to injury.
Changing ranking incentives cannot remove the physical demands of professional tennis.
It can, however, alter the decisions players face when weighing another tournament against the need to recover.
That is where OneVision will ultimately be judged.
The decisive achievement would be a system in which players can protect their health without feeling compelled to enter additional tournaments simply to preserve their rankings or earnings.
Gaudenzi has outlined the financial ambition and the competitive direction.
The final regulations must now demonstrate whether those objectives can coexist.
ATP 2028 Reforms: Frequently Asked Questions
What Are the ATP’s Proposed Changes for 2028?
The ATP is proposing larger bonus pools, additional financial support for Top 250 players, expanded pension contributions, changes to rankings-point calculations, clearer tournament scheduling and a tenth Masters 1000 event in Saudi Arabia. Changes to doubles competition are also under review.
How Much Would ATP Player Compensation Increase?
The ATP projects approximately $350 million in annual ATP-level player compensation by 2028, excluding Grand Slam prize money. The comparable recorded figure for 2025 was $269.6 million.
Will the ATP Masters Bonus Pool Triple?
The proposed increase is from $21.5 million to $50 million. That would make the pool approximately 2.33 times its 2026 size, an increase of about 132.6 percent, rather than a literal tripling.
What Is the Proposed $25 Million Top 250 Fund?
It is a proposed aggregate year-end career-support fund for players finishing inside the world’s Top 250. The ATP has not finalized the individual payment formula.
How Will ATP Rankings Change in 2028?
The ATP wants Masters 1000 performances to carry greater weight, particularly in later rounds. It also proposes eliminating a mechanism that allows certain weaker Masters results to be replaced by eligible results from lower-category tournaments. The final points table has not been confirmed.
Will ATP Players Have to Play Fewer Tournaments?
The objective is to reduce incentives for excessive scheduling, but the ATP has not announced a universal reduction in mandatory appearances for every player. The final participation rules remain subject to consultation.
Where Will the New ATP Masters 1000 Be Held?
Saudi Arabia is scheduled to host the tenth ATP Masters 1000 tournament from 2028. The addition is part of the ATP’s previously announced expansion strategy.
Will ATP 250 Tournaments Be Abolished?
No such decision has been announced. The ATP wants a clearer calendar structure and has previously considered reducing smaller events, but a final 2028 calendar identifying specific removals has not been approved.
What Will Happen to ATP Doubles Prize Money?
The ATP is reviewing possible adjustments to doubles draws and prize-money allocations. Any reallocated money is intended to remain within player compensation, potentially benefiting singles qualifying and early-round players. Final decisions have not been announced.
When Will the ATP 2028 Reform Package Be Approved?
The ATP plans further discussions with player and tournament representatives and aims to bring a more complete package to its year-end meetings in Turin. The proposals remain subject to formal approval.
