top of page


Recent seasons on the ATP Tour have revealed a significant shift in the overall dynamic of men’s tennis.

Roger Federer’s retirement, Rafael Nadal’s long-term injuries, and Novak Djokovic’s regular absences from big events have allowed the newer generations to surge into the spotlight.

Although Nadal and Djokovic continue to have their presences felt across the course of a year, there is no denying the evolution away from the Big Three era is continuing to progress.

Consequently, a new cast of protagonists and antagonists have been allowed to dictate the week-to-week narratives of the Tour.

This shift in dynamic has largely centred around a renewed focus on individual personalities, facilitated by several high-profile examples of conflict between the top ranked men’s players.

Tennis media has indulged these moments of tension, embracing the often-polarising players at the heart of the drama.

Daniil Medvedev best exemplifies this phenomenon.

From his initial ascent to stardom at the 2019 US Open where he took on the role of pantomime villain, to his comparatively inoffensive and self-deprecating ‘Clayvedev’ persona on full display over the past month, Medvedev is the full entertainment package.

“Maybe last year of my career I come to [my coach Gilles Cervara] and say…we’re going to only play on clay court this season so I’m going to be able to be better,” Medvedev said during his pre-tournament press conference in Madrid.

The Russian though has not shied away from controversy either, engaging in memorable spats with the likes of Alexander Zverev and Stefanos Tsitsipas.

Tsitsipas is another player whose actions have attracted significant media scrutiny, whether it be his maximisation of toilet breaks (which reached fever pitch at the 2021 US Open), or his infamous post-match remarks about Andrey Rublev beating him with the “few tools” available to him at the 2022 ATP Finals.

Holger Rune’s antics have drawn similar ire, best demonstrated by his controversial match against Casper Ruud at last year’s Roland Garros, as well as some tense exchanges at the net with the likes of Stan Wawrinka and Jannik Sinner.

Personality clashes are not a new element of tennis and are arguably one of its most entertaining aspects as an individual sport.

Yet unlike the years dominated by the Big Three, or even prior to that, several top men’s player are involved in some form of drama or controversy on a regular basis at present.

The explanation for this state of affairs is likely a multifaceted one.

Many of the younger players are particularly active on social media, allowing for a direct communication with fans, media and fellow players which creates more opportunities for disagreement to arise.

Sections of the media are likely doing all they can to generate more drama, such is the nature of contemporary media for which engagement is the primary metric.

The current tension between several top ranked players also highlights an often-overlooked aspect of the Federer-Nadal-Djokovic relationship being its lack of personal animosity, notwithstanding the persistent attempts to stoke such fires by external stakeholders throughout their careers.

Each of these factors could be considered alongside the plain reality that the personalities of players like Medvedev, Tsitsipas and Rune contrast significantly and are inherently divisive on account of their uniqueness.

However, an emphasis on player personalities has not exclusively highlighted negative interactions.

Andrey Rublev’s charming and endearing character has led to several hilarious post-match interviews, as well as prompting feel-good media stories such as the revelation that he was chosen as the godfather of Medvedev’s daughter.

Regardless of whether the spotlight on personalities in men’s tennis stems from positivity or negativity, the focus on these characters is at the core of the narrative.

Whilst some might argue this is a regression away from a discourse prioritising on-court action, the nature of contemporary audiences and entertainment practices may dictate that off-court drama is essential for the ongoing appeal of the sport.

Despite this, the WTA Tour appears to be headed in an almost opposite direction.

Whereas over the last decade rivalries like the one between Maria Sharapova and Eugenie Bouchard would dominate media headlines – no doubt further perpetuated by sexist tropes – the current leaders of the women’s game have demonstrated no such interest in engaging in personal battles.

Iga Swiatek, Aryna Sabalenka and Elena Rybakina appear to have relationships with one another which could at worst be described as amicable, whilst seeming content to allow their tennis to do the talking on an individual level.

Carlos Alcaraz is similarly an exception within the men’s game, steering clear of any conflict whilst exhibiting a model demeanour of maturity and discipline.

Nonetheless, during this unstable period in men’s tennis and at a time when viral content is king, do not be surprised to see plenty more personality-driven drama attracting the headlines.


bottom of page