While the Rolex Paris Masters ended on November 2 at the Paris La Défense Arena, another clash is playing out behind the scenes: more and more voices led by the Italian Jannik Sinner (once again world number 1 following his victory in the final in Nanterre against the Canadian Félix Auger-Aliassime), denounce the too low share of the winnings paid to the players during the four Grand Slam tournaments (Australian Open, Roland-Garros, Wimbledon and US Open). The demands go beyond the simple financial question: they also concern the contribution to a social protection fund and support for pensions, health care and maternity leave.
It all started on the sidelines of the Roland-Garros tournament, in the spring of 2025, when players, including Jannik Sinner, Belarusian Aryna Sabalenka (1D world) and the American Coco Gauff (3e) met the organizers of the four major tournaments. Following these discussions, a letter presenting a series of reforms was sent in August. The response, considered insufficient, provoked the anger of players, who demanded the organization of new meetings during the US Open (from August 24 to September 7). A request refused by the organizers, citing ongoing legal litigation, brought by the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), an organization created by Serbian Novak Djokovic in 2021.
In March, the PTPA actually took the ATP and the WTA to court, denouncing the poor redistribution of revenue generated by the tournaments and also of “anti-competitive practices” and a “blatant disregard for player well-being”forced to compete one after another in sometimes difficult conditions. At the beginning of October, the episode of the Masters 1000 in Shanghai, where the humidity rose to 80%, left its mark, resulting in several illnesses and the abandonment of Jannik Sinner, victim of cramps.
Currently, only 13 to 15% of the revenue generated by the four major tournaments is paid to players, compared to around 22% for the ATP and WTA tournaments (the two governing bodies of the men’s and women’s circuits). “If we consider the share of revenue allocated to players, tennis is lagging behindrecalls American player Ben Shelton (6e worldwide), in the columns of the British daily The Independent. The NBA, NFL and other leagues pay out almost 50% of their revenue to players, while in Grand Slam tournaments we are talking about averages of around 10%.” He adds that this battle is not the one “top 10 players”but that of less well-ranked athletes who depend on the bonuses won during the first rounds to cover their expenses for the season.
And yet, allocations are increasing
This year, the US Open offered players the biggest financial windfall in the history of the Grand Slam: prize money jumped by 21%, to reach around 77 million euros. Victorious in New York, the Spaniard Carlos Alcaraz (currently 2e world) thus won nearly 4.3 million euros, a record, compared to 2.5 million during his success at Roland-Garros, according to RMC Sport. At Wimbledon, the prize money increased by 7% in one year. In this context, are the players’ demands legitimate?
“It’s not just about the moneyretorts American tennis player Taylor Fritz (No. 4 in the ATP). But to consult the players on decisions that concern them such as the financing of pensions and health care. The ATP and WTA pay around $80 million per year (nearly 70 million euros) to cover athletes’ pensions and maternity and health benefits. Grand Slam tournaments are exempt.
Added to this is an increasingly dense tennis calendar. This year, the ATP implemented the reform of the Masters 1000 – the highest category of men’s tournaments after the four Grand Slam tournaments – without involving the players. The duration of the majority of Masters 1000 has been increased from seven to twelve days, with a field expanded to 96 players (instead of 56). Result: longer tournaments, more matches and fewer recovery periods, an explosive cocktail. Little yellow ball specialists are now calling for a longer offseason to facilitate recovery and avoid exhaustion.
Questioned by The Independent, a spokesperson for the All England Club, organizer of the Wimbledon tournament, tried to ease tensions: “Our position remains unchanged. We are open to constructive discussions to achieve the best outcome for the future of our sport and in the interests of players and fans alike..” It remains to be seen whether these promises of dialogue will translate into real progress.
