Jon Wertheim has revealed that the biggest fight that Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer ever had was over a proposed change to the ATP’s ranking system.

Despite their fierce on-court battles, Federer and Nadal were known for maintaining a respectful relationship away from competition, becoming closer as the years went by.

The disagreement centred on the ATP rankings system, a topic that has long divided opinion among players. The structure plays a crucial role in scheduling, seeding, and overall career progression.

At the time, there were discussions about potentially changing the system from a 12-month rolling format to a longer-term model, a shift which would have had significant implications across the tour.

Currently, players ‘defend’ points from their results 12 months prior, meaning that – if they don’t do as well – they drop down the rankings.

“The biggest fight I think [Roger] Federer and [Rafael] Nadal ever had, one of their few disputes, was when Rafa and his camp were trying to lobby for a two-year rolling ranking,” he said whilst speaking on the Served with Andy Roddick podcast.

“Whether that was because of injuries or because there were additional points…

“It is a little confusing to the casual fan, seeing he got to the final, why would his ranking drop. And then sometimes you say, ‘That guy lost in the second round, how can his ranking go up?’

“Also, the thing with a rolling ranking over 52 weeks is that it’s a nice way to make sure that players re-enter the tournament they won the previous year.

“It’s a nice way for tournaments to make sure the defending champion doesn’t beg off, and they can build a bit of brand equity.

“I think overall it’s fair. Yes, there are some counterintuitive results sometimes.

“Pete Sampras finished year-end number one six years in a row, which I think is an underrated record of his, because it’s wire to wire.

“Sinner did not play Madrid last year, so he doesn’t have to win the tournament, and his ranking will go up.

“I think on balance, I can’t imagine a better system overall.”

Latest Tennis News

Stefanos Tsitsipas reveals ‘not easy’ schedule shakeup as he falls outside of the world’s top 75

Carlos Alcaraz told he has ‘improved very little’ in harsh verdict from Grand Slam winner

As the long-time tennis commentator mentioned, Nadal had a unique insight into the challenges of a 12-month ranking system, given his long injury record.

Over his career, the Spaniard was forced to miss 18 Grand Slams due to physical discomfort, 15 more than rival Novak Djokovic.

In 2017, after an injury-plagued 2016 season, Nadal had risen back up to the world No 1 spot, but argued that the ranking system should consider results completed over 24 months, rather than 12.

“I’ve said in the past it [the schedule] didn’t work, but it will be better to have a ranking for two years,” he said.

“Two-year ranking, not one-year ranking. That’s going to protect the players and help the players to have periods to find windows for rest.

“Having a one-year ranking, it’s always that if you want to be in a good position in the ranking, you cannot rest much.”

For example, an injured player may not be as likely to participate in a tournament, when injured, if their most recent result still stood for another 12 months.

Meanwhile, six years prior to the Spaniard’s comment, Federer had warned against any change to the rankings system – arguing that it would make it harder for any lower-ranked players to make a breakthrough.

“I’m not a big fan of it, just because I think it would make things rather boring, but that’s my personal opinion,” he commented.

“Other than that, as the president of the player council, I think it’s not a good thing for the lower-ranked players.

“It’s going to be a struggle for them to make a big breakthrough; it’s going to take them multiple breakthroughs, so the dream of having one great tournament and making a move, in my opinion, is never going to happen.

“If we had a two-year ranking, things would be so slow, and nothing would really move.

“I can’t support it as the president of the player council. I have to look at all the players in the eye.

“I know it could be a good thing for me, or Rafa, or other good players, because for us to move down in the rankings, it would take something extraordinary, but for the lower-ranked players, I don’t think it would be a good thing, and that’s why I can’t support it.”