The Monte Carlo Masters has been an exceptional tournament, laden with thrilling matches daily.
And, in the end, we got the much-anticipated Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner match-up in the final, which never disappoints.
It’s no surprise that Andrea Gaudenzi, the chairman of the ATP, was keen to visit this prestigious event as it reached its climax.
However, as he sat through semi-final day, his huge mistake has surely been laid bare for all to see.
Monte Carlo proves that two-week Masters 1000 events are pointless
Monte Carlo Masters is one of the two Masters 1000 tournaments that has yet to be polluted by Gaudenzi’s two-week initiative.
He saw that seven of the nine Masters 1000 tournaments were expanded to 12 days, with those being Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid, Rome, Canada, Cincinnati and Shanghai.
If you were in charge of tennis, what is the first rule you would change?
The thinking behind this huge alteration was to increase revenue for tournaments and players, expanding the tournament draw sizes, and, in turn, allowing more recovery time between matches for athletes.
However, what it has instead done is dull the competition, dragging out what used to be quick-fire and enthralling tournaments that previously promised action every single day.
This year’s Monte Carlo Masters has proven just how effective the one-week format is, as the last week has flown by. Every day has been laden with quality match-ups, starting from the first round all the way through until the final.
But this isn’t just an issue that pundits or supporters are sharing. The players aren’t really fans of it either.
What have the players said about two-week Masters 1000 events?
Although these changes have supposedly been made to benefit the players, their response over the last year has been telling.
Stefanos Tsitsipas arguably reserved the most scathing assessment, adding to the idea that the ATP have made a grave mistake with their new schedule by noting: “If the goal was to ease the calendar, extending every 1,000 to two weeks is a backwards move.”
Carlos Alcaraz shared that standpoint, adding: “The one-week ones are better. Some will think that in two weeks there are days of rest, but that is not the case.
“You train, you have to mentally prepare for the game, prepare for it… You’re not resting, really. It’s two full weeks. That’s why I prefer the one-week Masters 1000. For me, it’s better for tennis.
Alexander Zverev, seemingly speaking on behalf of his fellow players, would also claim:“I have not heard a single player say that they love the two-week Masters events. I don’t even think the fans like that.”
Would people watch more or less tennis if the best-of-five format was scrapped?
This is clearly an idea that looked good on paper, but in practice has stifled the sport and upset the players.
