As a laboratory for tomorrow’s tennis, does the Next Gen Masters have a future?
Created in 2017, the Next Gen Masters (or Next Gen ATP Finals) is not just a simple “mini Masters” for the eight best players under 21. For the ATP, it is a laboratory: a space where new rules are tested while putting the spotlight on the stars of tomorrow.
The tournament combines an intense pace, a relaxed atmosphere, and a show designed to capture a contemporary audience. Halfway between tradition and entertainment, it goes beyond the simple quest for a trophy: it questions the future of tennis and showcases the talents destined to dominate the tour.
THE ATP’S FEARS AT THE END OF AN ERA
To understand why the Next Gen Masters generates so much interest, we must first go back to its essence: showing what tennis will look like tomorrow, both through the players and through the game itself. The ATP imagined it as a kind of revealer, an event capable of condensing in a few days the major trends that outline the future of the tour. The format is short, the intensity is maximal, but the ambition is immense.
In 2016, Roger Federer, injured in the knee and then the back, ends his season after Wimbledon. Rafael Nadal, for his part, nurses a wrist injury. And Novak Djokovic, the undisputed boss of the circuit at the start of the season, begins to falter and shows the first signs of a loss of confidence.
Only Andy Murray, who became world No. 1, seems to be at the peak of his powers. Enough to trigger reflection – and a certain anxiety – within the ATP, which sees its superstars showing premature signs of fatigue, even if their decline would in the end only come later.
It is in this climate of uncertainty that Chris Kermode, head of the ATP at the time, decides to launch the Next Gen ATP Finals, a tournament conceived as an essential tool to prepare for the succession of the Big 4.
“The new generation is coming, we must shine a light on these new talents”
So it was on November 19, 2016, that the Next Gen ATP Finals were officially founded, a new competition that would enrich the calendar the following year.
The concept is reminiscent of the ATP Finals, which bring together the eight best players of the season. But this time, it is the newcomers and young prospects (21 or under until 2024, 20 or under thereafter) who get the chance to be under the spotlight.
Eight players, including one wild card (invitation), are invited to Milan, host city of the first five editions of the event.
“The ATP has a responsibility to promote more players to a much wider audience,” explained Chris Kermode, before continuing: “We have superstars who have transcended the sport over the last ten years and have become true global icons. But the next generation is coming and we must highlight these new talents.”
A quest for innovation to win over the young audience
It is no secret: the new generations, and particularly Generation Z (people born between 1997 and 2012), grew up with the rise of screens (phones and tablets), social networks, and an abundance of short, dynamic, and spectacular content.
All of which runs counter to the very essence of tennis, a sport where matches, especially in Grand Slams, can be played over five sets and last more than four or five hours. Under these conditions, it is difficult to hold the attention of young people without them being tempted to check their smartphone.
Starting from the observation of an aging audience — the average age of Tennis TV subscribers was then 61 — the ATP came up with the Next Gen ATP Finals. The idea: offer shorter matches, almost conceived as a show, showcasing young players capable of inspiring the new generation and becoming the champions of tomorrow.
“People like to watch their idols, this won’t increase the audience”
Even though the idea seemed obvious, the creation of this event caused a certain skepticism on tour. Andrey Rublev, a participant in the very first edition, then declared:
“This will not help increase the audience. Maybe only at the very beginning. But tennis itself will not become more popular. In my opinion, it would be better to invite players as iconic as Roger Federer. People like to watch their idols, and no one really cares about the rules.”
While some voices, like Rublev’s, then doubted the real impact of the event, the ATP persisted: to modernize tennis, you have to dare to shake its foundations. And it is precisely in this area — rules, rhythm and staging — that the Next Gen ATP Finals would quickly stand out.
RULES THAT SHAKE UP TENNIS CODES
From its first edition, the Next Gen Masters asserted its status as an experimental laboratory, in contrast with traditional tour events, where every change sparks debate and controversy.
The most spectacular modification concerns the match format: no more sometimes marathon sets, but a best-of-five sets match, each set played to four games only, with a tiebreak at 3–3.
The effect is immediate: more intense starts of sets and constant pressure on both server and returner. Every point matters, or you risk losing a set very quickly.
To reinforce this dynamic, the ATP also decided to remove advantage scoring: at 40–40, a deciding point settles the game, as is already the case in doubles. The let on serve is also abolished. If the ball hits the tape and lands in the service box, the point continues.
ELC, the new king of officiating
When it comes to officiating, the break with tradition is almost total. While the chair umpire remains in place to announce the score, line judges are replaced by Electronic Line Calling (ELC), a system previously used only for challenges (player review requests), but not to officiate matches in real time.
For the first time in the history of an ATP tournament, decisions are therefore automatic, instantaneous and indisputable. A way to reduce interruptions and disputes with officials.
Among all the innovations introduced at the event, this is the one that would later have the greatest impact on the ATP and WTA tours.
Faster between-point pace
Time management is also completely overhauled. The famous shot clock imposes 25 seconds between points. A timer visible to all, placed on the back wall panels, reminds players that there is no longer time to dawdle.
The shot clock also appears as an implicit message to players such as Rafael Nadal or Novak Djokovic, known for taking their time between points and regularly exceeding 30 seconds before serving. A measure likely to please fans tired of these routines, sometimes considered interminable.
The notable arrival of coaching, and movement allowed in the stands
During changeovers, another major change is introduced.
With a simple headset, players and coaches can communicate briefly, like a race engineer in a Formula 1 race, or a team director in cycling races.
Finally, the crowd is granted unusual freedom for a tennis match: entering, exiting and moving around are allowed during play.
Only the area behind the baseline, where players are most often disturbed by movement, remains an exception. An aberration for purists, a sign of openness for those who dream of more vibrant tennis, closer to the codes of other sports.
Beyond its unprecedented format, the Next Gen Masters has been a sporting success: the tournament has genuinely provided a springboard to a new generation capable of challenging the Big 3 and their lieutenants. Over the editions, it has shaped and showcased the new faces destined to dominate the ATP Tour.
A LAUNCHPAD FOR THE NEW GENERATION
In 2017, the first generation expected to take over from the Big 3 was already well known to tennis fans. Andrey Rublev, a quarterfinalist at the US Open a few months earlier, Denis Shapovalov – who had scored a resounding win over Nadal in Montreal – Karen Khachanov, and Borna Coric were among the favorites.
Yet the surprise came from elsewhere: 21-year-old Hyeon Chung emerged as the revelation of the tournament by beating Rublev in the final. A few weeks later, he confirmed that his time in Milan had been a turning point: he reached the semifinals of the Australian Open, at the end of an impressive run highlighted by a victory over Novak Djokovic.
But despite his obvious potential, his progress would later be derailed by recurring injuries.
Between Sinner and Alcaraz, Milan’s rich legacy
The following year, Stefanos Tsitsipas won the title. His attacking game and one-handed backhand, increasingly rare on tour, confirmed his rise: a year later, he triumphed at the ATP Finals in London, proof that Milan revealed much more than just raw potential.
Then it was the turn of 18-year-old Jannik Sinner, ranked only No. 93 in the world, to shine. The former prodigy of Italian skiing dominated the competition and triumphed in front of his home crowd. Five years later, he would become world No. 1 and a multiple Grand Slam champion.
In 2021, another prodigy emerged: 18-year-old Carlos Alcaraz, future standard-bearer of Spanish tennis and Rafael Nadal’s successor, dominated his opponents and established himself as the revelation of the tournament. Less than a year later, he won the US Open and became the youngest world No. 1 in history, perfectly illustrating the springboard role of the Next Gen Masters.
Impressive rises… and some disappointments
Over its eight editions, the Next Gen Masters has revealed numerous talents.
Several now regularly hover between the top 10 and the top 30: Daniil Medvedev, Karen Khachanov, Andrey Rublev, Holger Rune, Lorenzo Musetti, Alex de Minaur, Ugo Humbert, Alejandro Davidovich Fokina, Jack Draper, Jiri Lehecka, and more recently Arthur Fils and Jakub Mensik.
For others, the road has been more complicated. Hamad Medjedovic, crowned in 2023, is struggling to establish himself in the top 50, Dominic Stricker is going through a period of doubt and is considering a break from his career, while Brandon Nakashima, the 2022 champion, is still waiting for his first title on the main tour.
INNOVATIONS THAT HAVE BECOME THE NORM
When the ATP launched the Next Gen Masters in 2017, many imagined a simple experimental playground, a laboratory without real consequences for the tour.
Eight years later, the picture is very different: several innovations tested in Milan have been adopted on a lasting basis, proof that the tournament has, in part, fulfilled its mission.
“We are losing the charm of tennis”
The most notable transformation remains the adoption of full electronic officiating. With no line judges, all decisions are now entrusted to ELC, faster, more reliable and less contested.
The acceleration of this transition dates back to the Covid-19 pandemic, which temporarily forced line judges off the courts. Since then, the entire tour has shifted to all-electronic line calling.
This use of technology does not convince everyone, as illustrated by Arthur Fils, who is nostalgic for line judges on clay:
“We are losing the charm of tennis. When I was young, there was more life on the court. On hard courts it’s fine, but on clay, the line judges really are missing.”
Only Roland-Garros is still holding out: the tournament will keep line judges for its 2026 edition.
Coaching pods installed in Melbourne
Another change that has become essential: the introduction of the 25-second shot clock.
Since 2020, the timer between two serves has become the norm on both ATP and WTA tours. A rule that, since its adoption, has resulted in numerous time violations — sometimes considered justified, sometimes much less so by the players.
Less visible but just as important, another evolution has taken hold: the authorization of on-court coaching. But no need for headsets: starting with the 2025 season, players can speak freely with their coach without fear of a penalty.
The Australian Open, inspired by this new freedom, even decided to go one step further: “coaching pods” were installed in a corner of the center court to facilitate exchanges between players and their teams.
A novelty that did not fully win people over: “All sports evolve and innovate, and tennis is no exception. That’s how it is,” said Alexander Zverev, for example. Stefanos Tsitsipas admitted he “laughed” when he saw this new creation imagined by tournament director Craig Tiley.
A PIONEERING PROJECT IN SEARCH OF A SECOND WIND
The future of the Next Gen Masters now seems uncertain. While some innovations have eventually taken hold, others remain simple experiments: four-game sets, the removal of advantage scoring or the abolition of the let on serve have not been carried over.
The ATP also appears to be looking for renewal: in 2025, two rules will be modified. The break between sets will be reduced from 120 to 90 seconds, and spectators will enjoy complete freedom of movement during the first three games. Adjustments that give the impression that the governing body is running in circles, as if it had almost reached the end of its ideas for reinventing tennis.
At present, the appeal of the tournament seems mainly sporting — and increasingly limited. In 2024, the ATP even lowered the age limit to 20 and scrapped the local wild card, which rarely paid off.
The relocation of the tournament to Jeddah (2023–2025), in the middle of December, has reduced its appeal: many players prefer to rest or prepare for the following season. Withdrawals are multiplying, and even participants sometimes struggle to motivate themselves.
In 2024, Arthur Fils said he was approaching the event “like a training week”, while Joao Fonseca, despite winning it, decided not to return the following year.
The Next Gen label used as a development program
Beyond the absence of the most high-profile prospects on tour, other doubts remain. The ATP, for example, terminated early its agreement with the Saudi federation, leaving the tournament without a host city for 2026. The contract between the two bodies was originally set to run until 2027.
And in an attempt to extend the legacy of the term “Next Gen”, the ATP announced in 2024 the creation of a system to support the progress of young players: those in the top 350 under the age of 20 receive eight direct entries into Challenger 125 or 100 events, and those in the top 250 also receive one wild card into an ATP 250 and two invitations into qualifying draws.
But this broader reorientation also highlights a change of era. At a time when several innovations have been adopted and others remain in the testing phase, the Next Gen Masters finds itself at a crossroads.
Weakened by its position on the calendar, the declining interest of players and uncertainty around its future, the tournament seems to be drifting away from its initial ambition to become a simple development tool. The question now is what it really represents for modern tennis — and whether it still has a role to play in the years to come.
A STRONG LEGACY, A FRAGILE FUTURE
Eight years after its creation, the Next Gen Masters leaves behind a mixed legacy. Conceived as a laboratory to modernize tennis and prepare for the post–Big 3 era, it has made it possible to test major innovations, from the shot clock to electronic officiating, and to reveal some of the players who now dominate the tour, such as Sinner and Alcaraz.
But its place in the calendar, the lesser involvement of players and the changing priorities of the ATP have gradually weakened its role. With the lowering of the age limit and the development of a broader “Next Gen” program, the tournament now seems to be searching for meaning.
Time will tell whether it can reinvent itself… or whether it already belongs to the past.
As a laboratory for tomorrow’s tennis, does the Next Gen Masters have a future? 
Tennis: the little-known truths about the offseason, between rest, stress and physical survival 
What if tennis lost its soul? The case of robotized officiating, between tradition and a dehumanized modernity 
Features - Saudi Arabia, injuries, war, and business: the fascinating underbelly of tennis revealed by TennisTemple 
