Novak Djokovic's players' association sued the groups that run tennis. Why and what do they want?

MIAMI GARDENS, Fla. (AP) — Ons Jabeur is a three-time Grand Slam finalist with more than $13 million in prize money by age 30, and as she looked out at the main court used for the Miami Open this week and next, she rattled off a lengthy list of things she thinks could be fixed in professional tennis to help all players.

“We need to improve the structure that we have. ... We can do better about the scheduling. The times of matches. There are a lot of tournaments, and health-wise, for the players, I don't think that helps. The balls changing every week is not a good thing. Players deserve to be paid better,” said Jabeur, a member of the executive committee of the , a group co-founded by several years ago. “Definitely a lot of things to work on.”

Those issues Jabeur mentioned were among those raised in in federal court in New York on Tuesday, calling the groups in charge of the sport — the women’s (WTA) and men’s (ATP) tours, the International Tennis Federation (ITF) and the agency that oversees anti-doping and anti-corruption efforts (ITIA) — a “cartel.”

“The players really do demand to be heard, to have their issues taken seriously, to address these structural issues that plague tennis and really choke it as an international sport,” said PTPA executive director Ahmad Nassar, "and to create a system that brings balance and equality and fairness to really the entire business of tennis.”

Here is a look at the lawsuit — and there are similar actions moving forward in Brussels and London — and what it could mean for tennis:

What is the PTPA?

The PTPA was and announced to the world just before the 2020 U.S. Open. The aim was to represent players who are independent contractors in a largely individual sport; tennis does not have a full-fledged union that negotiates collective bargaining agreements as in team sports.

The PTPA said it met with more than 250 players — women and men, and a majority of the top 20 in the WTA and ATP rankings — before going to court.

Why did tennis players sue those in charge of the sport?

The lawsuit seeks more money for players, yes, and lays out a series of other complaints about the way the sport is run.

That includes criticisms related to giving too little of the sport's revenues to players, limiting prize money each tournament can offer, preventing competition from rival tours or events, a “45-week-per-year schedule,” the increased number of combined WTA-ATP events that last 12 days apiece, match schedules that sometimes keep players on court well past midnight, a rankings system that restricts which events the athletes enter, and a “heavy-handed approach” by the International Tennis Integrity Agency that the lawsuit termed “arbitrary and selective.”

“Player welfare is completely disregarded in everything, from the tour schedule to anti-competitive practices, to abusing our rights around name, image, likeness,” Pospisil said.

Why were the Grand Slam tournaments not named as defendants?

The PTPA classified the four major events — Wimbledon, U.S. Open, French Open and Australian Open — as co-conspirators that fall under the ITF, rather than making them separate defendants.

According to the filing, those four Grand Slam tournaments “generated over $1.5 billion collectively in 2024, while only paying between (10% to 20%) of revenue to players."

But, Nassar said, "The Slams can’t unilaterally fix the schedule. They can’t fix anti-doping. They can’t fix the medical issues. They can’t fix the prize money conspiracy and price-fixing that exists at every other level at every other tournament."

Why is Djokovic not a plaintiff? Who are some of the players named?

Pospisil is listed as a plaintiff — 2022 Wimbledon runner-up Nick Kyrgios, Sorana Cirstea, Varvara Gracheva, Reilly Opelka and Tennys Sandgren are some of the others — while Djokovic is not.

“This is about much more than one player,” Nassar said, noting that Djokovic, as a member of the executive committee, is ”very involved, very up to speed."

What was the response from defendants such as the WTA and ATP?

The WTA called the filing “regrettable and misguided.” The ATP said the case is “entirely without merit,” and added: “The PTPA has consistently chosen division and distraction through misinformation over progress. ... The PTPA has struggled to establish a meaningful role in tennis, making its decision to pursue legal action at this juncture unsurprising.”

What could the lawsuit mean for tennis in the short term and the long term?

As with many a lawsuit, it is hard to know what the long-term effects could be, of course, although this certainly puts in black and white the schism that exists between the sport's leaders and many of its athletes.

Maybe there will be a settlement? Maybe the players will get nowhere and nothing will be different? Maybe there will be a court ruling that forces change?

If the latter happens, PTPA lawyer Jim Quinn predicted, “It’s going to require a restructuring."

___

Howard Fendrich has been the AP’s tennis writer since 2002. Find his stories here: . More AP tennis: