Major champions such as Aryna Sabalenka, Jannik Sinner and Coco Gauff have made headlines recently as they've publicly voiced their "deep disappointment" with the prize money and revenue sharing at the upcoming French Open. Since jointly releasing a statement in early May, which was also signed by a number of other top-10 players, the trio have all mentioned the possibility of a boycott of a future Grand Slam tournament.
"It's more about respect, you know? Because I think we give much more than what we are getting back," No. 1-ranked Sinner told reporters at the Italian Open. "It's not only for the top players, it's for all of us players. Of course, we talk about money [but] the most important [part] is respect, and we just don't feel it."
While labor disputes in sports are nothing new, this scenario is different than those typically seen in team sports, in which players are direct employees of the various leagues and often have a union. Professional tennis players are independent contractors and not part of collective bargaining conversations. Not to mention, every Slam has its own leadership and structure, with differing prize money and revenue splits -- and on top of all that, the ATP and WTA operate separately.
So, what exactly is going on here, and what are the chances of a player boycott in the near future? Here's what we know so far as the French Open gets underway this weekend in Paris.
What exactly are the players unhappy with, and what are they asking for?
The players' displeasure centers largely around prize money at the four Grand Slam events -- the Australian Open, the French Open, Wimbledon and the US Open -- and the percentage of gross revenue share they are receiving. While the prize money for the 2026 French Open has increased by 9.5% from last year to a total of $72.3 million, according to the players, it represents a smaller portion of the projected gross revenue (14.9% compared to 15.5%) and is well under the 22% mark they are asking for and receive at combined ATP and WTA 1000-level events.
Sabalenka, the top-ranked woman, said it was about fairness, when asked at a news conference.
"Definitely when you see the [gross revenue] number and you see the amount the players [are] receiving ... I feel like the show is on us," Sabalenka said. "I feel like without us there wouldn't be a tournament and there wouldn't be that entertainment. I feel like definitely we deserve to be paid more [of a] percentage."
The same group of players sent two letters to the major tournaments in 2025 calling for increased revenue sharing and other reforms, including an increased voice in decision-making, and actions towards long-term health and pensions. They say no meaningful change has yet to happen.
"While other major international sports are modernizing governance, aligning stakeholders, and building long-term value, the Grand Slams remain resistant to change," the recent statement from the players said. "The absence of player consultation and the continued lack of investment in player welfare reflect a system that does not adequately represent the interests of those who are central to the sport's success."
NBA, NFL and MLB players receive around 50% of their respective league's revenue in their most recent collective bargaining agreements. In a landmark and hard-fought CBA negotiation, completed this spring, WNBA players now receive 20% of the league's revenue. (The 2025 season marked the first time the league made enough in revenue to trigger a revenue share.)
Sinner said tennis players "wouldn't even dare" to ask for 50% but insisted "right now we're getting too little."
The French Open singles champions will receive about $3.25 million this year, and those who lose in the first round of the main draw will earn around $101,000. While that money is considerable, for lower-ranked players, who are often playing in smaller tournaments throughout the year, it can often make up a substantial portion of their annual income. Because they also are required to pay for their own travel, as well as the salaries for their various team members, those paychecks can be essential for their ability to remain on tour.
Gauff, who recognized her own privilege and ability to make additional money in sponsorships and other off-the-court activities, noted the disparity in the sport -- and said how she believed the Slams could help narrow the gap.
"When you look at the [players ranked] 50 to 100, 50 to 200, how much money each Slam makes, it's kind of unfortunate where [many of] the 200 best tennis players are living paycheck to paycheck," she said.
Who else signed the statement, and the previous letters, in addition to Sabalenka, Sinner and Gauff?
The initial 2025 correspondence was also signed by WTA players Mirra Andreeva, Paula Badosa, Madison Keys, Emma Navarro, Jasmine Paolini, Jessica Pegula, Iga Swiatek and Zheng Qinwen, as well as ATP players Carlos Alcaraz, Alex de Minaur, Novak Djokovic, Taylor Fritz, Daniil Medvedev, Andrey Rublev, Casper Ruud, Stefanos Tsitsipas and Alexander Zverev. Everyone mentioned above, with the exception of Djokovic, signed the most recent statement.
While not specifically addressing why he didn't sign, Djokovic told reporters in Rome he was "watching more from the side" at this point in time but that his feelings hadn't changed.
"I haven't been part of those meetings and conversations," Djokovic said. "But my position is very clear: I support the players and always will support stronger player position in the ecosystem."
Did the French Open respond?
Yes. Sort of. The French Tennis Federation, which operates the French Open, issued a statement defending the prize money currently being offered.
"In 2026, the Roland-Garros tournament will offer a total prize money of €61.7 million, representing a 9.53% increase compared to 2025 and roughly a 45% increase since 2019. This reflects a sustained commitment to increasing player compensation over time," the organization said.
"The French Tennis Federation has made the choice to focus some of these increases on players who exit the tournament in the early rounds of the main draw and the qualifying stages, with rises exceeding 11%, as to better support players who rely most on prize money to fund their season."
The FFT went on to explain it's a nonprofit organization and stated that "all revenues generated by the tournament are reinvested into the Roland-Garros tournament, as well as the development of tennis in France and internationally."
So, where does the idea of a boycott come in?
When speaking to reporters at the start of the Italian Open, Sabalenka predicted a boycott and said it was the only way she thought the players could be effective.
"I think at some point we will boycott it," she said. "I feel like that's going to be the only way to fight for our rights."
Gauff, the defending French Open champion, said she believed it was possible. "If everyone were to move as one and collaborate, yeah, I can 100% see that," she said. But Gauff also said she hadn't actually heard talk of it. She added she was inspired by the WNBA's recent progress and emphasized the need for working together. Prior to the agreement being reached with the league, WNBA players were prepared for a strike if necessary.
"We have to become unionized in some way," Gauff said. "We definitely can move more as a collective."
Sinner also wasn't sure if a boycott would happen, but didn't rule it out either.
"It's tough to say," he said. "I cannot predict the future in a way. But in the same time I also believe that somewhere we need to start."
Paolini and Elena Rybakina, the 2026 Australian Open champion, both issued their support for a potential boycott when speaking to reporters in Rome as well.
"If we're all in agreement, and I think we are -- the men and the women are united right now -- it's something we could do," Paolini said.
What would a boycott look like?
The players have given no real details, so it's impossible to say at this stage. Would every player receiving direct entry to the main draw choose to participate in such a protest? Would it just be the top 10, or top 20, men and women? Unclear.
But even if all, say, top 20 players in both singles draws opt out of Slam, it's likely that the tournament would be able to find 20 players, ranked outside of the usual cutline, to fill the void. While the tournament would probably go on, the champions would almost certainly be lesser-known names and have an asterisk on their achievement.
Still, a boycott at a major isn't unprecedented. In 1973, 81 men -- including the previous three champions Stan Smith, John Newcombe and Rod Laver -- sat out Wimbledon in support of Nikola Pilic, who had been banned from the tournament by the International Tennis Federation. A full field still remained, albeit missing many of its best-known stars and 12 of the top 16 seeds. There were 29 qualifiers in the draw and 50 lucky losers. Jan Kodes ultimately won the title -- his first and only at the All England Club.
It marked a turning point for the sport.
"It changed the game forever because no one has ever forgotten what happened that year," Cliff Drysdale, who was then the president of the newly created ATP and a key organizer among the players, told the New York Times in 2023. "And we are all aware that it could happen again, depending on how the players are treated.
"Everyone knows that the players walked out once on one of the most important tournaments in the world and no one will ever be sure that they wouldn't do it again."
How likely is a boycott?
Because the tournament begins on Sunday and the vast majority of the players are already on site, it seems highly implausible a boycott will happen in Paris this week. Swiatek, a four-time champion at Roland Garros, even called the possibility, "a bit extreme."
However, the main draw at Wimbledon, the next Slam on the calendar, begins on June 29 and the tournament has yet to announce its prize money for this year. And as evidenced above, it has happened at the All England Club before.
But few have indicated any concrete plans for an actual boycott. Not to mention, the interests and priorities of players in the draws at Slams are often dramatically different.
"I feel like the Dodgers and the Giants hate each other, but when it comes to the [Major League Baseball Players Association] they're completely together," former world No. 11 Sam Querrey told ESPN recently. "They'll put their differences aside. Tennis players -- as much as they talk about it -- Sabalenka doesn't have anything in common with the No. 90-something-ranked woman. It's one thing for Sabalenka to boycott, but for that other woman, you really expect her to boycott a major she's worked so hard to get in and miss out on potentially the biggest paycheck of her year?"
Querrey added he didn't think a boycott would work unless "every player ranked No. 1 to 200 is on the same page" and gave it a "less than 5% chance" of it actually happening. He said it would immediately force change, however, if all of those players were somehow aligned.
Fellow former player Chris Eubanks, who retired at the end of the 2025 season, believed it would be effective but also didn't see it taking place anytime soon.
"I just don't see that many of the top, the biggest names in the sport all coming together simply because it's a competitive space," Eubanks told ESPN. "If you're [three-time major finalist] Alexander Zverev and you hear Carlos and Jannik are boycotting, do you sit out as well or do you say, 'Wow, this could be an opportunity for me?' For guys who are top-20 in the world and seeing all of the top 10 are out, do they say, 'This could be big time for me?'
"It's a dog-eat-dog world and I just don't know if everyone will put aside their individual goals and their goals and their career aspirations to sit out of a Grand Slam. But hey, I could be wrong here."
While a boycott at Roland Garros doesn't appear to be happening, L'Equipe reported on Wednesday that a number of players are planning on limiting their pretournament media appearances in an attempt to raise awareness for their cause. In a statement to The Associated Press, the FFT criticized the decision and said it "penalizes all stakeholders involved in the tournament: the media, broadcasters, federation staff and the entire tennis community that enthusiastically follows each edition of Roland Garros."
The FFT added it had proposed a meeting with players and their representatives for Friday.
Are there any alternatives to a boycott that could be effective?
By simply talking about a boycott, a conversation has been sparked, and it continues to bring attention to the players' concerns.
If the top players continue to have a united front, even without a formal boycott, and reiterate their position when given the opportunity, the issue will remain top of mind.
Pegula, a member of the WTA Players' Council, said she's been trying to organize players in a push for higher prize money. In a news conference at the Italian Open, Pegula said the sheer number of organizing bodies in the sport -- the WTA, ATP, ITF and the four Slams -- was a challenge, but she was optimistic that simply having the vocal support of the top players could effect change.
"That's what makes it so hard, is that our sport is super fragmented. Hard to get everybody on the same page," Pegula said. "That's why it's been huge to actually have the top 10 men and women really come together. I'm hoping that will get the Slams' attention."