.jpeg?width=1200&auto=webp&crop=3%3A2)
In the final weeks of the 2025 tennis season, it seemed as if so many of the sport’s issues were colliding to paint the picture of one unhappy mess. As players melted in Shanghai, Holger Rune asked, “Do you want a player to die on the court?”, stunned by the lack of a heat rule on the ATP Tour. It made for some dramatic headlines, but reflected how several off-court topics dominated the agenda after September’s US Open. Iga Swiatek was critical of the mandatory requirements of WTA tournaments, calling the season “too long and too intense” as several players cut their campaigns short, citing burnout. “Mentally and emotionally I am at breaking point and sadly I am not alone,” said Daria Kasatkina.
At the same time, Jannik Sinner and Aryna Sabalenka went on record, on behalf of a group of leading players from the men’s and women’s top 10s, in calling for more prize money from the grand slam tournaments and criticising the lack of progress in discussions on player welfare. The 22-year-old Rune, who was making a late push for the ATP Finals, tore his achilles tendon, a horrific injury that sparked further concern around the tennis calendar and led to Jack Draper being particularly vocal in calling for change, as the British No 1 continues to nurse his own left arm injury.
And this all came as the four grand slam tournaments, as well as the ATP and WTA, faced legal action from the breakaway Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) , with a lawsuit citing “systemic abuse, anti-competitive practices, and a blatant disregard for player welfare”.
These issues – schedule, player welfare, prize money – are nothing new. Indeed, with the 2026 season now underway and the Australian Open around the corner, the same discussions would have taken place last year, the year before that, and so on. The presence of the legendary Venus Williams in the Australian Open main draw, after the 45-year-old accepted a wildcard into the tournament, is perhaps symbolic of a sport that often takes its time to alter course.
Many point to the fact that tennis has seven governing bodies, in the ATP, WTA, ITF and the four historic grand slam events in Wimbledon, Roland Garros, the Australian Open and the US Open, mean getting everyone around the same table is challenging enough.
But the pressure is on from dissatisfied players. Take, for example, the feeling of “disappointment” as the Australian Open announced record prize money for the 2026 tournament, a rise that was in line with the increase in Tennis Australia’s revenues from the previous year. Players want to be compensated with a greater slice and, in a letter to the grand slams, have outlined their target of reaching 22 per cent of tournament revenues by 2030.
The group of leading players also feel their calls for greater consultation in tournament matters, such as scheduling and the new Sunday starts at three of their four grand slams, as well as contributions to pensions, have been ignored. When speaking to The Independent last season, Draper said that while it may look like players are complaining, they are “advocating for positive change”. But tension is rising.
The grand slams insist they are “always open to having constructive discussions” for the “future success” of tennis, but the ongoing legal case filed by the PTPA was a stumbling block for further talks at the US Open in September, after the four grand slam tournaments were added to the antitrust lawsuit.
Since then, the group, which accused the sport’s governing bodies of running a “cartel” through its “monopolistic control”, reached an agreement to settle with Tennis Australia, the organisers of the Australian Open, the details of which are undisclosed.
Meanwhile, Novak Djokovic has cut all ties with the PTPA, the body he co-founded in 2020, due to “ongoing concerns regarding transparency, governance, and the way my voice and image have been represented”. The ATP and WTA both strongly rejected the PTPA’s claims and have been joined by Wimbledon, Roland Garros and the US Open in filing claims to dismiss the lawsuit.
Frustration around ‘insane’ schedule
“Tennis is a sport where the players are the prize asset,” Draper said last autumn, as star players on both the ATP and WTA were running on empty and frustration around the schedule was once again rising to the surface. In an interview with The Tennis Podcast, Draper was particularly vocal in his criticism of the expanded 12-day Masters events. “I haven’t heard one player say they like it,” Draper said.
Draper, 24, highlighted how “lonely” the 12-day Masters had become, rather than physically demanding. “When you’re out there, five matches in seven days is so much easier than seven matches in 14 days because there’s so much dead time, there’s so much waiting around.”
The head of the ATP, Andrea Gaudenzi, has made the 12-day Masters (currently seven of the nine, with Monte Carlo and Paris the exceptions) a key pillar of the ATP’s OneVision plan. He said tournaments will be able to increase their revenues by selling more tickets, allowing them to invest in infrastructure and for the players to receive a greater share.
While answering questions on the “complex” calendar in an interview published by the ATP, Gaudenzi urged top players to commit to a “smart calendar”, prioritising the top events – the grand slams, Masters 1000s and a few 500s – rather than “playing down”. The ATP has meanwhile cut the mandatory number of 500 events from five to four ahead of 2026. The WTA says player welfare is a “top priority” and says it has listened to complaints from the players on the calendar.
Players are increasingly taking matters into their own hands, however. Aryna Sabalenka has outlined that she will continue skipping some mandatory WTA 500 events, taking a penalty in rankings points in the process, in order to stay fresh for the grand slams and 1000s.
Sabalenka labelled the schedule and mandatory requirements as “insane”, with top players on the WTA mandated to play at least six WTA 500s as well as the four grand slams and 10 WTA 1000 tournaments. Sabalenka, as the No 1 in the world, is at least in a position to be more flexible, while also competing in exhibitions such as December’s “Battle of the Sexes”.
Carlos Alcaraz has also continued to play in exhibitions despite his criticism of the tennis calendar, with the men’s No 1 explaining that he enjoys playing in those events and does not find them physically taxing. The appearance fees undoubtedly help, too, while creating a loophole where stars can be deducted bonuses by skipping mandatory tour events only to recoup it elsewhere, such as October’s lucrative Six Kings Slam in Saudi Arabia. Alcaraz and Sinner began their season with an exhibition in South Korea, rather than playing warm-up events in Australia.
Alcaraz played the most matches on the ATP Tour last season, with 80; unsurprisingly, perhaps, given how regularly he reached the latter stages of tournaments, while Sabalenka’s 75 matches were the most in the WTA. At the other end of the scale, as explained by the ATP chair Gaudenzi, the lower-ranked players will compete in more tournaments, but with a far lower number of matches.
But players who crash out of a tournament early one week are incentivised to enter another the next as they chase ranking points to maintain or improve their position in the rolling 52-week leaderboard. It has been described by three-time grand slam finalist Casper Ruud as a “rat race”. There is a sense that this two-tier split is not benefiting anyone.
Over several years, key stakeholders have been working on solutions to the structural issues identified within the sport’s calendar and schedule.
One suggestion has been a “less-is-more” approach and a “premium” circuit, which guarantees the top stars competing at the top events in between the grand slams and with defined mid-season breaks that allow for players to be fresher for the four most important events of the year. The lower-ranked tournaments would remain, feeding into the top tier.
But as the power in tennis remains so fragmented, any proposed reforms – from the players, the tours, or the grand slams – have lacked the collective backing to be taken forward. Tennis remains stuck in having the same discussions about the same topics.
There has been at least one new move ahead of the 2026 season, however. After the state of Shanghai, the ATP has introduced a new heat rule that will enforce a 10-minute cooling break or the suspension of play if players, spectators or ball kids are at risk of heat stress. Change can happen. It just often takes its time.
This Carlos Alcaraz gamble underlines the biggest question in Jannik Sinner rivalry
How the final years of Novak Djokovic’s career are being shaped by unstoppable forces
Tim Henman sets target for Emma Raducanu ahead of Australian Open and 2026 season
Is the Australian Open on TV? Channel, live stream and how to watch tennis grand slam
Australian Open men’s and women’s seed list and tracker
Ranking Aryna Sabalenka’s Australian Open opponents — from Coco Gauff and Iga Swiatek, to herself
