The Professional Tennis Players’ Association (PTPA), co-founded by Novak Djokovic, was established in 2020 during the US Open amid strict pandemic restrictions. After a challenging start, the association has worked to strengthen its structure, finances, and player support while seeking greater influence in professional tennis. However, despite its efforts, the PTPA is not legally recognized as a players’ union since tennis players are classified as independent contractors rather than employees.
The PTPA has repeatedly attempted to secure a seat at the decision-making table but has faced resistance from tennis’s top governing bodies, including the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), the International Tennis Federation (ITF), and the four Grand Slam tournaments. This ongoing conflict has now escalated into legal action. On Tuesday, the PTPA filed a lawsuit against the ATP, WTA, and ITF, while naming the Grand Slam tournaments as co-conspirators.
The 163-page lawsuit highlights several issues within professional tennis. The PTPA criticizes the lack of financial transparency in the ATP and WTA, as well as the low percentage of revenue distributed to players. It also points out the demanding 11-month season, late-night matches that sometimes extend past 3 a.m., and the expansion of ATP Masters 1000 and WTA 1000 events to 12 days, a move that has been unpopular among players.
A key focus of the lawsuit is what the PTPA calls anti-competitive practices. It argues that the current tour structure limits players’ earning potential. One example cited is from 2012, when Indian Wells tournament owner Larry Ellison was prevented by the ATP and WTA from significantly increasing prize money. The lawsuit also accuses the ATP of suppressing player involvement in the PTPA, even penalizing those who support it.
However, not all of the PTPA’s arguments are as convincing. The lawsuit criticizes the ranking system, pointing to scheduling conflicts like the recent case of Madison Keys, who was unable to play in the Austin Open due to WTA restrictions on top-10 players entering lower-tier tournaments. Additionally, the PTPA challenges the rule preventing players from competing in unsanctioned exhibition events that do not award ranking points. While the association sees this as unfair, critics argue that ranking points should be reserved for official tournaments, not low-stakes exhibition matches.
Another controversial point raised in the lawsuit is the suggestion that players should be allowed to accept sponsorships from betting companies. While the PTPA argues that tournaments can accept such sponsorships, many believe gambling advertisements should be restricted altogether due to ethical concerns.
The lawsuit also makes serious allegations about the integrity of the sport’s anti-doping and anti-corruption programs. However, it includes claims that some critics view as conspiratorial, such as the suggestion that Jannik Sinner received a favorable anti-doping decision because he had not spoken out against the current tennis system.
The PTPA compares its legal action to past landmark cases in sports, such as those in Major League Baseball, the NFL, and the NCAA, which led to major reforms. The lawsuit is being led by lawyer James W. Quinn, known for his role in securing free agency for NBA players in 1976. Hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman is among the financial backers of the PTPA’s efforts.
Now, the ATP, WTA, and ITF must decide whether to engage in what could be a costly legal battle or reconsider their stance on player representation. After more than four years of conflict, this lawsuit could finally force the governing bodies to negotiate with the PTPA. While professional tennis remains deeply divided, one thing is certain—there is never a dull moment in the sport.
Related topics: