Former Wimbledon champion and ex-world No. 2 Michael Stich has weighed in on the latest shockwaves in the tennis world, taking aim at the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) for its explosive legal action against tennis’ top governing bodies.
Earlier this week, the PTPA filed a headline-grabbing lawsuit in a New York federal court, targeting the ATP and WTA tours, the International Tennis Federation (ITF), and the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA). The players’ union, launched in 2020 by Novak Djokovic alongside former Canadian professional Vasek Pospisil, is demanding a jury trial in a case that could redefine tennis’ power structure.
The lawsuit, sprawling across 163 pages, alleges widespread misconduct within the sport’s administration. The PTPA didn’t mince words in its official statement, declaring: “The lawsuits expose systemic abuse, anti-competitive practices, and a blatant disregard for player welfare that have persisted for decades. The ATP, WTA, ITF, and ITIA operate as a cartel by implementing a number of draconian, interlocking anticompetitive restraints and abusive practices.”
This legal campaign includes 12 named players—both current and retired—with Nick Kyrgios, Reilly Opelka, and Sorana Cirstea among the plaintiffs. The PTPA further claims overwhelming support from the upper ranks of professional tennis, citing backing from over 250 top men’s and women’s players, including a majority from the Top 20.
As the tennis community reels from the lawsuit’s implications, renowned coach Patrick Mouratoglou, who currently guides Naomi Osaka, added fuel to the fire with a thought-provoking post on LinkedIn. He zoomed in on tennis’ skewed revenue distribution, echoing the PTPA’s sentiment that the financial ecosystem in the sport is broken.
“The fight for fair revenue distribution in tennis is one of the topics highlighted by the legal action conducted by the PTPA,” he wrote. “As the PTPA’s recent legal action shakes up the tennis world, the core question remains: how can a global sport generating billions still leave so many of its athletes struggling to make a living?”
Mouratoglou pointed out that while the sport thrives commercially, most of its professional players are barely scraping by. “I do think that only about 100 men and 100 women earn enough to sustain themselves on tour, with a kind of regularity. Meanwhile, a player ranked 200 in the world (an elite athlete by any standard) often loses money just to compete. That’s not sustainable.”
In Mouratoglou’s view, a redistribution of wealth within the game is overdue. “The revenue split is undeniably part of the issue. Right now, the numbers we are introduced to state that only 17% of the sport’s total revenue goes to the players. Compare that to other major sports, where athletes are said to receive between 30% and 50% — it’s clear tennis needs to catch up.”
However, he stressed that it’s not merely about raising the players’ overall share; it’s about narrowing the income gap within the player pool. “These players might not make it to the TV broadcasts, but they’re still dedicating their lives to the sport and competing at an incredible level. They deserve more than survival — they deserve stability. This isn’t about taking from the top players — it’s about creating a healthier, more sustainable ecosystem for the sport as a whole.”
Responding to Mouratoglou’s remarks, Michael Stich offered a nuanced, yet critical perspective on the issue. The former German star acknowledged some of the points raised but argued that the top-tier players themselves must take initiative if lower-ranked pros are to benefit more.
“Dear Patrick, as a former player I can agree with some of the things you write,” Stich began.
“I was on the Players’ Board in the 90s and we tried to get more share of the money. It is a constant process over the last 50 years.”
Stich highlighted that today’s elite players earn far more than any generation before them, noting that responsibility should lie with those at the top. “But no generation has made so much money as the current. Look at the prize money of top players singles and doubles. So it has to come from those players to support the rest as you write. They have to give. It’s not up to the system.”
Drawing on his experience as a tournament promoter, Stich pointed out the financial strain faced by event organizers, especially when top players demand appearance guarantees that are, in his view, unreasonable.
“As a promoter for the Hamburg tournament, I can tell you that is difficult to generate profit for such an event. And I believe there are many tournaments that are not getting rich doing it. But they love the sport and the environment.”
He continued, “But top players [are] asking for guarantees that are not reasonable and that creates big problems for tournaments. So start by having a limit for guarantees. Then promoter could even raise prize money.”
For Stich, the problem lies not in the system alone, but in the expectations of modern players who, he feels, want the best of all worlds. “But the players want all. More money, less obligations to play, no commitment to tournaments. They have to understand that the promoters give them jobs and are a valuable partner on tour.”
He concluded his statement with a pointed criticism of the PTPA’s recent move, expressing a sense of personal disappointment. “But in my ten years there was no discussion between players and tournaments. It’s all about expectation. The PTPA is hurting the sport with their move and it makes me very sad.”
As the legal proceedings unfold, the tennis world finds itself at a crossroads. With battle lines drawn between institutions and advocates for reform, the debate over power, profit, and fairness in professional tennis seems far from over.