The Daniil Medvedev manifesto for a modern Tennis revolution

There is a particular look Daniil Medvedev gets when he is about to dismantle a tennis ball, and an entirely different one when he is about to dismantle a status quo.

It is a look of cool, clinical detachment — the gaze of a man who has seen the numbers, calculated the trajectory, and found the current logic lacking.

Following his clinical 6-1, 6-3 victory over Shang Juncheng at the Dubai Duty Free Tennis Stadium, the former World No. 1 sat in the press room and did what he does best. Speaking the uncomfortable truth.

Amidst a mounting chorus of player complaints regarding the grueling 11-month ATP calendar, Medvedev offered a radical, surgical solution to save the sport’s stars from themselves.

“I would think the players would agree, from what I’m hearing, to making more let’s say even more mandatory tournaments,” Medvedev began, leaning into a proposal that sounds paradoxical until you hear the Russian explain the “points trap” that ensnares the modern pro.

Under the current system, the world rankings are a relentless treadmill.

While the Grand Slams and Masters 1000s are the crown jewels, the sheer volume of 500 and 250-level events creates a situation where rest feels like a luxury no one can afford. For Medvedev, the solution is to trim the fat by stripping away the incentive to overplay.

“I would say make four Grand Slams, I don’t know, 11 Masters, and that’s it,” he proposed. “The other tournaments, maybe make them without points or something. Not like exhibitions, but without points or something.”

It is a “Manifesto of Fifteen.” By narrowing the ranking currency to just 15 mandatory, high-stakes events, Medvedev argues you would finally give players the permission to go home.

Currently, even if a tournament isn’t “mandatory” on paper, the mathematical pressure of the ATP Finals race makes it mandatory in practice.

The Russian pointed to the cautionary tale of Holger Rune, who recently suffered a significant injury in a late-season ATP 250.

“Last year, like, Holger got injured in Stockholm, everybody was like, ‘Yeah, but you don’t have to play it.’ If he wants to be in Turin, he has to, even if it’s not a mandatory tournament. That is where it is borderline. Players don’t even know.”

Medvedev admitted he isn’t immune to the siren song of the rankings. Reflecting on a personal stretch where he felt the strain, he shared, “Last year I played in seven tournaments in a row. Did I have to? No. I played bad in the beginning of the year, maybe I can get 100 points here, 200 points here, be higher seeded next year, et cetera, et cetera. If there would be no points there, at least it is an easier decision.”

The logic is vintage Medvedev — protect the players by removing the choice. If the points aren’t there, the physical risk becomes impossible to justify.

However, the “Octopus” is also a realist. He knows that the very tournaments he suggests “stripping” are the lifeblood of the sport’s economy. These smaller events hold licenses, pay for stadiums, and provide the platform for the next generation.

“It’s never going to happen because there are licenses, and basically ATP won’t have enough money to buy all of them,” Medvedev conceded with a shrug of resignation. “The other tournaments, they won’t say, ‘Yeah, okay, we’re out,’ because they would lose the money. It’s business.”

Still, as the tour moves deeper into 2026, the conversation feels different. With more players vocalizing the toll of travel — the constant changing of balls, surfaces, and time zones — Medvedev’s idea of a streamlined, elite-focused circuit is gaining intellectual weight.

For now, the tour remains a marathon with no finish line in sight. But if the powers that be ever decide to prioritize longevity over volume, they might find that the most impactful blueprint was already laid out in a Dubai press room by a man who is tired of chasing points at the expense of his body.