In 2007, the most important battles in tennis will take place in conference rooms rather than on the court.

If you have followed the sport in recent years, you have of plenty reasons to be pleased. Roger Federer offers more artistry per match than anyone since John McEnroe; Rafael Nadal competes as hard, and with as much exuberance, as any athlete in the world, and a number of young players — Marcos Baghdatis, Gael Monfils, Richard Gasquet — promise an entertaining future, rather than the bleak (and once common) predictions of dull serving contests. The same goes for the women’s game, which is more competitive than ever, despite the decline of the Williams sisters. One couldn’t have asked for a more surprising, and satisfying, 2006: The versatile Amelie Mauresmo won two Grand Slam titles; Justine Henin-Hardenne, the Belgian dynamo, reached the finals of all four majors and won one, and Martina Hingis made a fine comeback from retirement. Maria Sharapova won the U.S. Open and, thanks to the exceptional coaching of her father, didn’t forget to eat her bananas.

Yet despite having a good product to sell, tennis, as a business, continues to struggle. The sport’s popularity among recreational fans has improved of late in America but remains far below what it was during the days of McEnroe and Jimmy Connors. The same can be said for American television ratings, though the U.S. Open Series has provided a boost the last two seasons. Federer, who may soon become the greatest player in the sport’s history, receives more attention for palling around with Tiger Woods than he does for his own accomplishments. And while it’s never wise to place much stock in awards, it does say something about tennis as a sport when a man wins three Grand Slam titles, reaches the finals of a fourth, captures nine other titles (including the Masters Cup), and posts a 92–5 record — and doesn’t win either the Sports Illustrated or Associated Press sportsman of the year awards.

Tennis officials and pundits have long bickered about the sport’s problems; this year, one has the sense changes are coming. As the year begins, there is movement on several fronts: the length of the season, the format of tournaments, and television contracts.

The most strenuous conflict at the moment pits the WTA Tour against the United States Tennis Association. The two are in difficult negotiations over the shape of what the WTA calls “Roadmap 2010” — its plan to shorten the season and reduce the number of tournaments players must enter, to 11 from 14, by 2009 (a year early). A first draft of the Roadmap, given to tournament directors last year, disturbed the USTA so much that it set aside $10 million in case it later feels compelled to start its own series of women’s tournaments. The WTA currently has 10 Tier I and 16 Tier II tournaments, the most prestigious events beyond the majors. It wants to reduce those 26 tournaments to a total of 14 “A” tournaments of varying sizes (others will be classified as “B” tournaments). The calculation may make perfect sense, but for the USTA, it might subtract four top-flight tournaments in the United States from the present total of eight. Most imperiled are two U.S. clay tournaments in Florida and South Carolina in April, and the summer swing tournaments — major components of the U.S. Open Series — in Stanford, Calif., San Diego (which is in its last year), and Los Angeles.

For the men, 2007 is the year of the round robin, which tour officials hope will give tournament directors a more predictable product (i.e., fewer upsets). Several top players, including Federer and Andy Murray, oppose the idea. The early returns on the format, which was used in Adelaide last week, were mixed: Lleyton Hewitt was eliminated in round robin play, and the draw sheets — two full pages crammed with eight round robin groups, a main draw, and a qualifying draw — were confusing.

The ATP also has to tinker with a few tournaments, especially in Paris, where last year’s indoor event, in October, was ravaged by pullouts, and in Hamburg, which suffers by being right after Rome in the grueling clay season prior to the French Open. The spring, summer, and fall each have stretches when too many top-level tournaments are held in too little time. Fixing this may require a bold move by the ATP, and bold moves, in tennis, usually meet with incredible resistance (see “Roadmap 2010”).

The chief television question centers on the French Open. The Tennis Channel snatched the American rights last year, prying them away from ESPN in a surprise bid. Few households have access to the channel (including Cablevision subscribers in New York) and TTC will likely resell much of its time to ESPN. In the last two years, ESPN has provided excellent, and extensive, coverage of the French Open. It remains to be seen how many hours fans will receive this year.

All this, and not a word about the sickly Davis and Federation Cup national competitions, or the Australian Open, which begins Monday. The tournament suffered a substantial blow last week: Justine Henin-Hardenne, last year’s finalist, has withdrawn because of the breakup of her marriage. Lindsay Davenport won’t attend, either. The 30-year-old American is pregnant with her first child and says her tennis career is over (in true Davenport style, without fanfare). Venus Williams has also withdrawn, citing a recurring wrist injury. On the men’s side, Hewitt has an injured calf and an increasingly tarnished reputation, after Roger Rasheed, his friend and coach of three plus years, ditched the no. 1 Australian because he had endured one too many of his childish tirades. The season is young, but Rasheed’s our frontrunner for coach of the year. On Monday, we’ll take a look at Rafael Nadal and continue with coverage from Melbourne for the full tournament. Let 2007 begin.

tperrotta@nysun.com