Tennis burnout is on the rise as the grind of the long season brings stars to their knees

Elina Svitolina just couldn’t go on. Her hopeful start to the 2025 season had given way to despair as the mental and emotional strain of constant competition, travel and stress left its mark. The 31-year-old understood that participating would only make matters worse and in September Svitolina decided to end her season early, citing burnout.

The world number 14 is not the only one who feels suffocated by her sport. This has been another year full of incredible achievements and gripping matches, but the past eleven months have also been marked by the physical and mental challenges that have plagued many of the sport’s stars.

Jack Draper, Zheng Qinwen, Holger Rune and Arthur Fils have been forced off the field due to significant long-term injuries. Others, like Ons Jabeur (who subsequently announced her pregnancy), Daria Kasatkina and Svitolina, felt they had no choice but to step back due to their mental issues. Being a prominent tennis player comes with significant privilege and wealth, but their challenges are undeniable.

Injuries are part of elite sport, with athletes constantly pushing their bodies to the limits in search of success, but many believe tennis has not done enough to protect its athletes. In recent months, the growing list of absentees from the tour has revived discussion around an old topic: the sport’s long and punishing calendar.

This year, the low season that started Monday officially lasts just five weeks and four days, from November 24 to January 1. Not every male player saw action in the Davis Cup, the final event of the season, but even the nail-biting ten-and-a-half-month season is longer than that of most other sports.

Complaints about the scheme date back decades and there have been a few attempts to address the problem over the years. However, fresh ideas tend not to last long in a fractured sport held together by seven official bodies: the Men’s Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), the International Tennis Federation (ITF), the Australian Open, French Open, Wimbledon and US Open. Each organization fiercely defends its own interests, which are not necessarily aligned with the players or with each other.

Meanwhile, the schedule has become even more restrictive in several ways. Many top players claim that the extended 12-day ATP and WTA 1000 events are further exhausting them. Attempts to encourage more frequent competition through financial and ranking point penalties are also a source of consternation.

A lucrative 10th ATP Masters 1000 event in Saudi Arabia will be added to the calendar as early as 2028. Not only is the season long, it is also incredibly busy. The picture is also complicated by how players’ interests differ: lower-ranked competitors who are more likely to lose, play fewer matches per week and earn less money often need more playing opportunities.

This is a charged period in sports. The Professional Tennis Players’ Association, co-founded by Novak Djokovic, remains embroiled in a class-action lawsuit with the ATP, WTA, ITF and grand slams, accusing them of operating as a “cartel” by holding an unfair monopoly on the elite game.

At the same time, most of the world’s top 10 players have signed letters and held meetings with representatives of the grand slam tournaments, which are so powerful that they operate by their own rules and often without input from the players. They have begged the grand slams to share a greater share of their revenue through prize money and to actually contribute to player benefits. Jannik Sinner, Iga Swiatek and Draper have expressed their frustrations publicly.

At the ATP Finals just over a week ago, ATP President Andrea Gaudenzi gave an insightful press conference in which he discussed many of these issues. Gaudenzi, a former player himself, expressed sympathy for players’ complaints but insisted the solution was for them to plan more intelligently. That is, we should focus on the most important tournaments and ignore the temptation to charge fees for appearances at smaller events or exhibitions.

Those who complain about the grind of playing in exhibitions during the off weeks are particularly vulnerable to criticism. Carlos Alcaraz had to withdraw from the Davis Cup due to a hamstring injury sustained during the ATP Finals after playing 81 official matches this year.

In addition to his regular schedule, the Spaniard had taken part in the Laver Cup, the Six Kings Slam in Saudi Arabia and an exhibition in Puerto Rico. The world number 1 will contest at least three lucrative exhibitions in the US and South Korea before the Australian Open in January.

Alcaraz is one of those players who claim that exhibitions require minimal effort for much more money than most regular tour events, making it logical for them to play in them.

Gaudenzi, whose ATP OneVision plan is behind the expansion of the ATP and WTA 1000 events, also made it clear he has no interest in shortening the duration of those events. He believes that the revenue generated by the expanded Masters 1000 tournaments, and especially the much larger number of tickets on sale, clearly justifies their increase. It is certainly hypocritical to patronize players for making financially motivated scheduling decisions while maintaining an unpopular tournament format for the same reason.

The sport’s cluttered, inefficient and broken calendar simply hasn’t changed enough over the past thirty years. Ideally, the various governing bodies would work together to tear it down and start from scratch, making player health a priority with a more logical flow in the planning and timing of the events around the world.

Other issues that need to be addressed include ensuring players are as protected as possible from extreme weather conditions and enforcing stricter controls on court speed, balls and playing conditions.

These decisions should be made with more input from the players, addressing legitimate concerns about their workload while providing ample earning opportunities for rank-and-file professionals. However, as long as the sport’s governance remains so fragmented, nothing will change.