Carlos Alcaraz’s Shanghai Masters campaign ended with a surprise defeat to Zizou Bergs, but the Belgian’s victory also sparked a debate away from the court. Bergs took an extended toilet break after winning the opening set, and tennis journalist José Morón questioned why the ATP’s rules did not appear to result in a warning. Brad Gilbert joined the discussion on X, where Coco Gauff’s former coach called for clearer regulations and a penalty system that would leave little room for confusion.

“You should lose points every 30 seconds after 5 mins then, ridiculous they don’t have clearer rules or penalties for going over the time,” Gilbert wrote in response to Morón. His proposal was direct: once the permitted break expires, players should face a point penalty for every additional 30 seconds they take to return. Gilbert also argued that toilet breaks should be allowed only at set breaks, with three minutes for a regular break and five minutes if a player changes clothes.

Morón had highlighted the rule that allows players three minutes for a toilet break, with two additional minutes if they change clothes. He reported that Bergs took nine and a half minutes after the first set and received no warning. The journalist then questioned the purpose of a regulation if chair umpires did not enforce it. His post put the focus on the difference between having a rule on paper and applying it during a match.

Former British player Jamie Murray also expressed frustration at the delay. “Over 8mins for a toilet break. Still not started back. Prob takes 20 secs to walk from centre court to the changing rooms in Shanghai. How is that acceptable/allowed?” he wrote. The reactions turned Bergs’ break into a wider discussion about how the ATP handles lengthy interruptions and whether players face meaningful consequences for exceeding the permitted time.

Bergs went on to complete a 7-5, 7-6(4) win over Alcaraz, but the controversy surrounding his break raised questions about enforcement rather than the result itself. Morón’s account reported the duration and lack of a warning; the available reports do not establish an official finding that Bergs violated the rule. Gilbert’s proposed penalties would make the consequences more explicit, but it remains a suggestion rather than an announced ATP change.

What Alex de Minaur’s Proposal Says About Tennis’ Rule Debate

Gilbert’s frustration with tennis regulations has also surfaced in a separate debate about serving routines. Alex de Minaur recently suggested introducing a shot clock between first and second serves to stop players from taking excessive time. The Australian also proposed allowing only one ball toss, with a fault if a player throws the ball into the air but chooses not to serve.

“Once you throw the ball, you’ve got to serve, no matter what. If you decide not to, it’s a fault,” de Minaur said. He argued that players can use a poor toss to restart their entire serving routine, which adds time without necessarily violating the existing rules.

Gilbert strongly supported the proposal. “He’s 1000% right I’ve been saying for 40 years, that it’s ridiculous you can get as many redos on ball toss as you want,” he wrote on X. He followed that comment with another blunt assessment: “Should have happened years ago, worst rule in tennis.”

The serving debate is separate from the Bergs incident, but it shows that Gilbert has repeatedly called for changes to rules he considers too permissive. De Minaur wants to restrict repeated ball tosses, whereas Gilbert’s response to Morón centred on clearer time limits and penalties for lengthy toilet breaks.

As of now, neither discussion amounts to a confirmed change in ATP regulations. Gilbert’s point-penalty proposal remains his own suggestion, and de Minaur’s serving ideas have not been established as adopted rules. Both debates, however, raise a similar question for tennis authorities: how can they ensure that time limits are clear, consistent and properly enforced?