Tennis’ biggest names are talking about boycotting a slam. Could they really do it?

The battle over dollars and cents in tennis is one of the sport’s constants, and it could force the unthinkable – a boycott of one of its biggest tournaments by its biggest stars.

It’s already more than 55 years since tennis witnessed the impact of “the Original Nine” – nine women who took a bold stand, signing a $1 contract that ultimately created the foundation for the WTA and shaped the livelihood of top women’s stars for years to come.

But in the freshest battle between the people who put on the show and the bodies that run tennis, some of the sport’s biggest stars are demanding a greater share of revenue, with the next major on the calendar, Roland-Garros, firmly in their sights.

World No.1 Jannik Sinner, No.2 Carlos Alcaraz and Australia’s Alex de Minaur, plus leading women’s players Aryna Sabalenka, Iga Swiatek and Coco Gauff added their names to a statement that highlighted their anger that prizemoney is set to be less than 15 per cent of tournament revenue, well below the 22 per cent they are after to match what is on offer at ATP and WTA 1000 events.

Women’s No.1 Sabalenka said a tournament boycott at Roland-Garros, which starts on May 24, was possible. “I think at some point we will boycott it [the tournament], yeah – I feel like that’s going to be the only way to fight for our rights,” she said in Rome as the clay season ramps up at the Italian Open.

“Let’s see how far we can get, if it’s going to take [a] boycott … some of the things, I feel like it’s really unfair to the players.

“I just really hope that all of the negotiation[s] that we are having, we at some point are going to get to the right decision – to the conclusion that everyone will be happy with.”

Gauff, the world No.4 who lifted the Roland-Garros trophy last year, said she could “100 per cent” envisage players boycotting a slam.

“It’s not about me – it’s about the future of our sport and also the current players who aren’t getting as much benefits, maybe, as even some of the top players are getting when it comes to sponsorship and things like that,” she said.

“We’re making money off court. When you look at the [players ranked] 50 to 100, 50 to 200, [and] how much money each slam makes, it’s kind of unfortunate where the 200 best tennis players are living pay cheque to pay cheque.”

How much do the players get in Paris and at the other slams?

The four grand-slam events – Wimbledon, the Australian Open, the US Open, and Roland-Garros – are the pinnacle of tennis.

They lean on each other for collective strength, but have a real rivalry when it comes to prestige and innovation. January’s Australian Open had a big winner with the hastily organised “1-Point Slam”, with a million-dollar prize issued to the last man or woman standing. Will new US Open chief and former AO boss Craig Tiley bring the concept to New York this August?

This year Roland-Garros has bumped up its prize pool by nearly 10 per cent, with the game’s stars to share in €61.7 million ($100 million).

They are big numbers but must be looked at through the lens of what the majors – some of the biggest annual events in world sport – generate in revenue.

In their statement, the top players said, “The underlying figures tell a very different story”, pointing out that their revenue share has dipped. They say revenue in Paris is tipped to exceed the €400 million mark.

“[The] players’ share of Roland-Garros tournament revenue has declined from 15.5 per cent in 2024 to 14.9 per cent projected in 2026,” the players said.

“According to tournament officials, Roland-Garros generated 395 million euros in revenue in 2025, a 14 per cent year-on-year increase, yet prize money rose by just 5.4 per cent, reducing players’ share of revenue to 14.3 per cent.”

But the prizemoney jump still leaves Roland-Garros trailing its rivals. The US Open offered total compensation of $US90 million ($124 million). They touted it as the biggest prize pool “in tennis history” – up 20 per cent on the previous year. Wimbledon paid out £53.5 million and the Australian Open leapt up to $111.5 million – a year-on-year increase of 16 per cent.

Tennis Australia’s revenue shot through the roof to nearly $700 million, a record-high that is largely driven by the success of the Australian Open. When TA announced its increase, Tiley said the boost demonstrated his organisation’s “commitment to supporting tennis careers at every level”.

“All the players we have spoken to are extremely appreciative and thankful for the effort we have put into serving their needs, including the positive commentary they have made about our ongoing prizemoney increases,” he said.

What does Roland Garros do for the players?

One of tennis’ pitfalls is its brutal calendar of events that can drain players who crisscross the globe with regularity. Competing in the majors is the pinnacle, and why players eye off top-100 spots and direct entry to the main draws.

Roland-Garros organisers are keen to give the players and spectators alike an experience that “corresponds” to “the image of Roland-Garros”. Tournament boss and former player Amelie Mauresmo says, for example, there won’t be a repeat of the “1-Point Slam” in Paris.

“Our ambition is not to repeat everything that’s done elsewhere,” Mauresmo said last month.

Crucially, players have also been promised camera-free privacy (a space of their own to vent freely) after the Australian Open copped criticism from leading players when, in a moment that went viral, Gauff was caught smashing her racquet in a corridor after a stunning quarter-final exit. “Are we tennis players or animals in the zoo,” Swiatek said later.

How likely are the players to boycott this time? Has it happened before?

Strike action is the nuclear option. In advocating for collective strength, Gauff pointed to how things work differently in other sports, especially for top women athletes. “Just taking what the WNBA accomplished – they also have a union, so I think that helps,” she said. “From the things I’ve seen with other sports, usually to make massive progress and things like this, it takes a union.”

Sabalenka’s comments were headline-grabbing. “I feel like that’s going to be the only way to kind of fight for our rights,” the Belarusian superstar said.

But her great rival Swiatek described the idea of a boycott “a bit extreme”.

“I think we’ve been reasonable in terms of our proposal and getting the fair share of revenue,” she said.

“I think the increase of prizemoney is not exactly what we wanted because the percentage of revenue is going down.”

Player strikes have been touted before.

In 2011, when Andy Murray was part of men’s tennis’ “big four” alongside Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, he opened up to the BBC about the grind of a year-long circuit.

”I’ve spoken this week to a couple of guys who work for the ITF. I think they understand now the players are kind of quite serious about doing something,” Murray said at the time.

“It [industrial action] is a long way off, but I know because I’ve spoken to a lot of the players that they’re just serious now about trying to get some changes, because to get another change implemented might take five or six years at the rate it’s going now, and all of us will be done.”

Professional tennis has not been hit by strike action in the past 15 years.

What happens next?

We sit, wait and watch. It’s already five years since four-time major winner Naomi Osaka withdrew in Paris following her controversial decision to boycott mandatory post-match media conferences to protect her mental health. Amid that furore, and delicate negotiations with organisers, Osaka withdrew before her second-round match. Those events were seismic enough. A widespread player boycott, regardless of the motives – like money or conditions – would be a cage-rattler.

With Reuters

News, results and expert analysis from the weekend of sport are sent every Monday. Sign up for our Sport newsletter.