Aryna Sabalenka said on Tuesday players will "at some point" boycott one of the four Grand Slams if their demands are not met, turning a longstanding dispute over prize money and influence into an explicit threat of action.
Sabalenka's warning follows a push by the top 10 men and the top 10 women who are demanding a higher percentage of the revenue generated by the four Slams, benefit contributions and a greater say in areas such as scheduling.
The group believes they are entitled to 22% of tournament revenue and has pressed Grand Slam organizers for benefit contributions; they have made no progress on that last point despite meetings with Grand Slam representatives.
Numbers underline why the players are angry. The French Open announced last month that overall prize money would increase by about 10% to 61.7 million euros, a rise of 5.3 million euros from the previous year. The French tournament this month offered a 9.5% increase in prize money, which several leading players called insufficient. By contrast, the US Open prize fund rose by 20% last year and the Australian Open's prize fund was nearly 16% higher in January.
Jannik Sinner, speaking in Rome ahead of the Italian Open, said he found it "tough to say" whether he would ever boycott a Slam but made clear why the threat is on the table. "It's more about respect," he said. "Of course we talk about money. The most important is respect, and we just don't feel it."
Sinner said the top 10 men and top 10 women had written a letter and that after one year "we are not even close to a conclusion for what we would like to have." He compared the pace of tennis authorities unfavorably with other sports: "Talking in other sports, if the top athletes, they send important letters, I truly believe that within 48 hours you have not only a response but you also have a meeting."
Behind the meetings and the public statements is a legal complication that limits how far Grand Slam executives can move. Executives are currently constrained in what they can discuss among themselves or with the players because of a lawsuit brought by the Professional Tennis Players' Association that accuses Grand Slam executives of "monopolistic control." That lawsuit is one reason the players rejected a meeting in Indian Wells in March to discuss the formation of a Grand Slam player council.
The dispute has produced mixed signals from inside the sport's top ranks. Novak Djokovic said players know that they’ll always have my support and added, "I do like the fact that there is more conversations happening on this." He also warned that "It needs to be because players' position is not where it needs to be with slams, with tours."
Meetings between players and Grand Slam representatives have taken place, but progress has been limited, particularly on benefit contributions that players say must accompany any long-term deal. The lack of movement on benefits, the modest percentage increases announced by some Slams and the legal limits on executive discussions together create the tension fueling talk of a boycott.
Sabalenka made the most direct statement yet on Tuesday, and Sinner echoed how the issue feels to players: unequal returns for work that sustains the sport. Djokovic's public backing complicates the Slams' calculations; with multiple top players aligned, a boycott would be difficult to dismiss as idle threats.
Unless Grand Slam organizers can produce a meaningful offer on revenue share and benefits that addresses both the top players' call for 22% and the broader demand for respect and input, Sabalenka's warning shifts from rhetorical pressure to a plausible plan of action. The coming weeks will test whether talks can bridge the gap or whether the sport will face a first-of-its-kind stoppage at one of its four biggest tournaments.
