After a couple of more Masters tournaments ditched the old one-week format, only two events from such category finish in a week – Monte Carlo and Paris.

The reactions to the format have been mixed. Some players love the expanded format because it gives them more chances to rest between matches. On the other side, some argue that it made a loaded schedule even worse and that there’s no need for a Masters or any other tournament besides Grand Slams to be taking more than a week.

In the past, Novak Djokovic directly admitted he was not a fan of the new format. Carlos Alcaraz said that the Masters tournaments should be one-week tournaments. At this past Cincinnati Open, Jannik Sinner revealed he also prefers one-week tournaments. Meanwhile, Alexander Zverev recently said that Monte Carlo and Paris are “the best” Masters tournaments right now.

Gaudenzi hits back at the new Masters format criticism

“The move to a 12-day format has given tournaments the time, stability, and confidence to think big, and what’s happening in Cincinnati is a perfect example. They’ve embarked on a multi-phase, $260 million redevelopment project that will improve every aspect of the event. And these aren’t just cosmetic improvements. The revenue generated by these improvements goes directly to the players through the profit-sharing model,” Gaudenzi said.

“This is exactly the kind of long-term, structural investment our sport needs, and it’s only been possible because of the new format. Such reforms have been discussed extensively with the Player Council and the Board of Directors for several years. One of our strategic goals is to increase revenue for more players. We’re doing this by expanding the pension fund (from 165 to 300 players) and doubling the Challengers prize pool from 2022 to today.”

With the format expanding, more players have a chance to compete in the 1000-category tournaments since draws have expanded from 56 do 96 players.