Players point to Coco Gauff as the model before a potential Grand Slam revolt

The real reason tennis players are considering Grand Slam boycotts

There has been a lot of confusion about exactly why tennis players want to boycott Grand Slams.

Last week, women’s world number one Aryna Sabalenka raised the possibility of players boycotting majors over disagreements about prize money at the sport’s four biggest tournaments: The Australian Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, and the US Open.

Sabalenka, along with several other top players from both the men’s and women’s tours, recently released a statement pointing out that while this year’s French Open prize pool is up overall, players will actually take home a smaller percentage of the tournament’s revenue.

Coco Gauff has backed the idea, saying she can understand why a boycott might happen and outlined her reasons for supporting it.

“There are current players that aren’t getting as much benefits as even some of the top players are getting when it comes to sponsorship and things like that. We are making money off court.

“When you look at the 50 to 100, 50 to 200, how much money each slam makes, it’s kind of unfortunate where the 200 best tennis players are living pay check to pay check”, Gauff said.

But Patrick Mouratoglou pointed out that not every player has been as clear as Gauff in their reasons for considering a boycott.

Patrick Mouratoglou commends Coco Gauff for directness

He said: “On the debate about prize money at Roland Garros, this is what I want to hear: A big percentage of the extra money we will get as players will go to the players who really need it, to make sure that everybody can live out of tennis and that a player who’s ranked 300 in the world can make a living instead of losing money every single week.

“I think it’s important for all of them to be as clear as Coco Gauff, for example, who said this very clearly.

“But they have to be even clearer by saying, listen, we would like to get this extra percentage, and this extra percentage will go to the players that are in the qualifications; 100% of that money.

“Otherwise, people will think, okay, they’re prepared to boycott a Grand Slam just for them, who already make millions and millions, to make extra millions. It’s not really cool for the fans to think like that.

“Maybe another percentage will be for all the other players, but a substantial percentage of the extra money they would get should go to those players, and they have to say it clearly.”

Mouratoglou has been vocal on a number of topics lately and recently criticised Rafael Nadal after being forced out of his match with Alexander Zverev at Roland Garros due to injury.

What players hope to achieve from Grand Slam boycotts

Players have outlined three key areas they want addressed at the four Grand Slams. The first is prize money, with calls for a larger share of tournament revenue to be distributed to lower-ranked players.

Player welfare is another concern, particularly regarding how much Grand Slams are contributing to pensions, healthcare and maternity support.

The third issue centres on consultation. Players are asking for a greater voice in scheduling decisions and late-night match finishes.

Currently, Wimbledon is the only major that enforces a late-night curfew, stopping play at the All England Club by 11 pm.

Read more: