The ATP Conundrum: Will Tennis Cannibalize Itself?

Tennis is one of the most popular sports in the world, and it doesn’t take a genius to understand why.

While it may not be the most popular sport in any single country, it enjoys a devoted following worldwide thanks to one defining characteristic: its truly global nature.

Whether you’re in Argentina or Australia, Stockholm or Sao Paulo, you’ll get the chance to see the world’s best tennis players compete in person. That’s not something many other sports can offer. Football fans in Buenos Aires will never see the Premier League come to town. Basketball fans in Manila won’t be able to watch the NBA play regular-season games on their home courts. But tennis? Tennis comes to you.

This global reach is the sport’s greatest asset, its unique selling point in an increasingly competitive sports entertainment landscape. Which makes it all the more baffling that ATP leadership seems intent on systematically dismantling it.

The Worldwide Sport

Tennis will always retain some level of global presence simply because the calendar demands it. You can’t play outdoor tennis in the same location year-round, thanks to the seasons and the climate. Events will naturally span different continents. But the ATP is actively moving away from what makes tennis special, and the reason is, sadly, simple: money.

Any sport in this era is fundamentally a business, and when significant money is involved, decisions get made based on projected revenue rather than tradition or fan experience. The players are complicit in this, too. Sure, you’ll get the occasional player like Casper Ruud who will travel to Stockholm because his heroes played there, but those sentimental choices are increasingly rare. Most players, beyond caring about their legacy, care about making money. If they can earn more playing in one place, that’s where they’ll go.

There are very few players from countries like the USA or Australia who would complain about playing their entire season at home if the compensation were right. The reality is that most wouldn’t miss traveling to the Czech Republic or Croatia if the financial incentive disappeared. Taylor Fritz recently hinted that he wouldn’t oppose a premier tier of tennis where only the elite compete, similar to golf’s top 120 players on the PGA Tour. If the money is right, the top names will follow. That’s just how it works.

How has the ATP Tour responded?

So what’s actually happening on the ATP Tour, and how is the sport undermining itself? ATP Chairman Andrea Gaudenzi recently stated that the Tour is looking to reduce the number of ATP 250 events, explaining that there are too many.

“In recent years, we have reduced ATP 250 events from 38 to 29,” Gaudenzi said. “With the new Masters event in Saudi Arabia coming in 2028, the goal is to cut them down even further. They are important, but we have too many.”

Let that sink in. The Tour has already shut down smaller events, tournaments that lack the financial resources to compete with a Saudi-backed event, regardless of how controversial or unpopular it might be among fans. If the money is substantial enough, it will happen because everyone from the ATP to the players will support it. Why wouldn’t they? They benefit directly.

But here’s the problem that should concern every tennis fan: the fundamental nature of the sport is being altered. In 1995, there were 59 ATP 250 events, giving fans around the world numerous opportunities to see elite players compete. Those tournaments were spread across the globe. Now we’re down to 29, reduced from 38 just a few years ago, and the number will shrink further.

The danger to tennis

The result is that professional tennis will become increasingly concentrated in specific locations, leaving fans in many parts of the world without access to live professional tennis. Their favorite players won’t travel to their region anymore. Fans will be forced to travel themselves, and most can’t afford that, especially not repeatedly.

What makes this even more troubling for passionate tennis communities is that stretches of the calendar with genuine fan enthusiasm, like the Australian summer swing or the South American clay season, risk being replaced by events in countries where tennis has virtually no following. One glance at recent tournaments in the MENA region reveals mostly empty stands, a dispiriting sight that speaks volumes. But those benefiting most from these changes won’t care because it doesn’t affect their bottom line, which is ultimately what matters.

The calculus is straightforward but shortsighted. Tennis is trading its global identity, the very thing that makes it unique and popular, for short-term financial gains concentrated in fewer locations. The sport risks cannibalizing itself in a genuinely tragic way.

In 1995, tennis offered 59 opportunities for fans worldwide to experience the sport live. By 2025, that number will have been cut in half and will continue to decline. The sport is becoming less accessible, less global, and less special. When it comes to money, everything else gets sacrificed: history, sentimentality, tradition, and the connection between players and diverse fan bases around the world.

Tennis became globally popular because it was genuinely global. If the ATP continues down this path, prioritizing concentrated wealth over widespread access, it may discover too late that it has destroyed the foundation of its own appeal. The irony would be almost poetic if it weren’t so damaging to the sport and the millions of fans who love it.