Like I've been saying all along. Take a tip from the American Sports Leagues. Completely separate the tour and the Challenger level. Just basically make a cutoff at the end of the year of 100 players that will play ONLY tour level tourneys. They get decent money from participating in the 1st rounds of Masters and slams anyway, doubles etc... plus there's the 250's which are a decent source too. Too help tighten the calendar just compress some of the tournaments and have like 2-3 minor 250s taking place every week so that everybody can play and have realistic chances of getting match wins.
And after 6 months or so, make that cutoff again based on the rankings. Whoever performed the worst drops to the challenger level. Whoever won the most points in challengers advances at tour level.
It's super simple and it will make things that much interesting.
The current rankings are flawed imo.
that's an awful idea.
current system is mostly fine although can be a bit weighted in favour of challengers.
I think there should be more points for wins in qualies. It pains me to see guys who have the balls to try and qualify for bigger events end up with nothing while the guys who never bother can pick up easy points in challengers.
I have done zero analysis on this but qualie draws seem to be getting weaker and weaker and it's not surprising with the way points are weighted.