Roland Garros boycott over pay dispute, Aryna Sabalenka, Jannik Sinner comments

Professional tennis has an issue and as is often the case it comes down to money. The players want more from the four majors – the Australian Open, French Open (Roland Garros), Wimbledon and the US Open. You wonder if they are ever satisfied.

The players want a greater overall percentage share of the earnings from each of the four biggest and most important tournaments in the world. And when you hear that the respective world No.1's, Jannik Sinner and Aryna Sabalenka, are hinting at some sort of boycott at one of the majors (finger is pointing at Roland Garros), there is a sense this can't be right.

The issue is too many players have blinkers on. They have been fed one line of thinking, and they do not place themselves in a position to consider the bigger picture.

Advertisement

Watch grand slam tennis and the WTA Tour on Stan Sport, ad-free, live and on demand

Let's be honest and up front, professional tennis players are selfish. Generally nothing wrong with that. In professional sport you need to have that me, myself, I, attitude to make the grade but at the same time, and way too often, there is a lack of realism.

So much of this talk of a greater percentage share of the takings at the majors has stemmed from the PTPA (Professional Tennis Players Association) which was originally co-founded by Novak Djokovic, who a little more than a year ago stepped away from the body because he no longer liked the direction it was taking.

READ MORE: Moses hits winning field goal in bizarre golden point finish

ANALYSIS: Eye-popping $99m payout figure to grow as heads roll

OPINION: Bosnich: Why my nerves are shredded amid great trophy drought

In an effort to promote their legitimacy, the PTPA (and maybe also by stealth from the two tours) often raised comments about how poorly players were paid at the majors, percentage wise, and things started entering the players' minds.

Advertisement

Sabalenka said: "I think at some point we will boycott it (a major) yeah – I feel like that's going to be the only way to fight for our rights. 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 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."

So far in 2026 Sabalenka has earned well in excess of $4 million of which about $1.4 million came from being the Australian Open finalist.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Players gain most of their attention at the four majors because they are the pinnacle of world tennis, the so-called crown jewels. Does Sabalenka feel that her sponsors would be overly thrilled when she does not walk onto Court Philippe Chatrier at Roland Garros displaying her Nike clothing, or the Gucci bag or the Wilson racquet she uses? Those endorsements along with the numerous other ones she has are worth way more than the prizemoney she earns. And that goes for any top player.

Sinner explains that it's a matter of "respect", that players give more than they receive and that it's not only for the top players, but for all players.

He said: "Of course we talk about money. The most important is respect and we just don't feel it. It's not nice that after one year we are not even close to conclusion of what we would like to have. I do understand players talking about boycott cause it's somewhere we also need to start."

Advertisement

What more do the players want with regards to respect? They are pampered from pillar to post. Their accommodation is paid for, the Australian Open as an example, provides them with a hefty per diem and stringing allowance, they have all the latest facilities from their locker-rooms to training/gym equipment set-ups and on-site restaurants. It is their job to go out on court and play, to entertain.

This year the total prize money pool at the Australian Open was $111 million. The French Open will be €61.7 million euros (over AUD $100 million); Wimbledon and the US Open have not announced their levels at the time of writing. At Roland Garros the new champion will earn €2.8 million ($5.3 million).

The former British player Mark Petchey who has also worked with prominent names and is currently a leading TV tennis commentator, questions if players should be turning their attention to the ATP and WTA about prize money rather than the four majors. And on the face of it he is totally right.

Using round figures, he noted that a champion wins $1 million at a 12-day event like a Masters 1000 run by the ATP/WTA and $5 million for a 15-day event like a major. If you break that down to earnings per day, it's $83,333 for the Masters 1000 compared to $333,333 for the major.

Advertisement

Advertisement

The French Open tournament earnings this year are expected to be over €400 million ($650 million) and the players' share of that is about 14 per cent. Wouldn't the vast majority of everyday workers want to earn a 14 per cent share of a company's earnings? And one wonders how often the players increase fees for those working for them like a coach, a physio, a trainer … would it be 14 per cent? Not likely.

What no player appears to have thought about is the fact that three of the four majors – Australian, French, US, are all owned and operated by their respective national federations (Tennis Australia, FFT and USTA). Wimbledon is a private club but still provide millions of pounds to the British national federation (LTA).

What these federations earn from their respective majors, and which is totally lost or ignored by the players, is the funding that goes towards paying for many of the tournaments they play on the ATP and WTA tours like Brisbane, Hobart, United Cup, The Queen's Club and Eastbourne and the costs for national touring teams like Davis Cup, Billie Jean King Cup and the junior equivalents, for Challenger and Satellite tournaments, grassroots tennis, upkeep of their facilities, training centres, staff and more.

Advertisement

Players often compare the prize money levels to other sports, in particular golf. Enough of these comparisons; it's like comparing apples to oranges. One example – at a golf major like the Masters or the British Open, there is essentially one event.

At a tennis major, there is the men's and women's singles, the men's and women's doubles, the mixed doubles, the four singles and doubles junior events, the wheelchair events, the invitational events.

Consider the housing and feeding of all those athletes, their transportation from airport pick-ups and drop-offs to shuttles to and from the site, the prize money for most of those events and taking care of the number of people with each player. There is no doubt players have not considered any of that and it is ten-fold compared to a regular tour level tennis tournament, which does not stage nearly as many individual events.

Coco Gauff has compared tennis to the WNBA, now that is an even more extreme comparison, that's more like apples to onions. You cannot compare tennis to a team sport. Team sports, especially in the USA are completely different.

Advertisement

Advertisement

She said, "it's not about me (but) it's about the future of our sport", but due to how young she still is, she is part of the present and the future and says there needs to be more benefits. Players already receive benefits for playing their respective tours – the ATP and WTA. They receive benefits such as superannuation, maternity leave, etc.

Why should the majors be made to contribute to those aspects?

The players are independent contractors and are also partners of the respective tours, so gaining such benefits via the ATP or WTA is understandable. The players are not partners with the four majors and the Australian Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon and the US Open are most definitely not administered nor are they part of either tour. The four crown jewels are very much independent.

Advertisement

It is also very curious that the respective heads of the two tours (the WTA really doesn't have one as their CEO recently resigned after barely two years in the job) have not highlighted any public discussions regarding this matter, unlike when the late Australian Brad Drewett who was head of the ATP, helped convince Wimbledon that they should pay equal prize money, which they did.

Maybe the tour bosses have other pressing concerns like accepting Saudi money. The WTA have already lost most of that backing, but that's a story for another day.

Click here to read article