Series
Blogs
The Backcourt is our regular update on the latest legal, regulatory and policy topics in tennis. Each edition shines a spotlight on the issues covering all levels of the game – with implications for tournaments, players, officials and others within the sport.
In September, at a hot and exceptionally humid Flushing Meadows, Jannik Sinner and Aryna Sabalenka bookended their years with the hard court double – having both also won the Australian Open in February.
With the ATP and WTA tours rumbling on ahead of their respective Tour Finals in November, in our second edition of the Backcourt we recap on what’s been happening off court.
ATP-WTA commercial merger rumours intensify as future direction of professional tennis becomes clearer
Earlier this year, reports emerged of negotiations between the four Grand Slams, the WTA, ATP and other stakeholders on the future direction of tennis. The plans proposed by the Grand Slams were understood to have included a new Premier Tour model – dissolving the WTA-ATP tour structure and overhauling the calendar to include the four majors slams; ten other 96-player tournaments; an international team event; and year-end finals for men and women.
These more substantive plans appear to have been put on ice – in the short term at least – with details emerging that a commercial merger of the ATP and WTA could be finalised as soon as 2025. The proposals are understood to bring together the tours’ media, sponsorship and data rights; whereas scheduling, prize money and player and tournament relations would remain unaffected.
While not nearly as seismic as a full merger of the ATP and WTA, the proposals would potentially be a transformative moment for the tours and their ability to deliver a more attractive and lucrative product in the future.
As the tennis world navigates how to position itself for future success, there are important lessons to consider from golf. Chief among them is the outsized role that US antitrust law may play – whether through private enforcement actions or government intervention.
When the world’s leading professional golf tours, the Professional Golfers Association (PGA), the European Tour, and LIV Golf announced plans to merge, it gave rise to investigations both in Congress and from the Department of Justice (DOJ) around potential antitrust impact; and whether such a merger would constitute an impermissible monopoly that eliminates necessary competition.
Golf’s merger plan itself was a compromise, reached in part because of the vigorous private antitrust litigation between the PGA, LIV Golf, and several players, which included allegations that PGA Tour bylaws precluding LIV Golf participants from PGA Tour events violated US antitrust law. The DOJ Antitrust Division investigated these potentially anticompetitive practices, with that probe including numerous golf tournament hosts, including the Augusta National Golf Club, which runs the Masters, and the United States Golf Association, which runs the U.S. Open Tournament. Notably, both tournaments permitted LIV Golf players’ participation, and largely avoided litigation that focused on the PGA Tour.
If the past is prologue, similar antitrust challenges could be in store for tennis, though applying the lessons from golf may lessen any impact. For example, if the commercial merger lays the groundwork for a full tour merger down the line, significant questions may arise around the selection of events (and any whittling down from the existing jam-packed schedule).
In the nearer term, the commercial merger has its own issues to navigate, not least improving equity between the men’s and women’s games. It has been reported that the asset split starting point will be 80-20 – which at first blush might suggest more of the same disparity between the tours. However, it is also understood a ‘synergy windfall’ (any profit over and above what the tours would have likely earned on their own) will be divided evenly.
Further details of the merger plans are likely to follow in the coming months – and it will be interesting to see how players, including those affiliated with the PTPA (who are separately advocating for change – see below), respond. The proposals variously bring opportunities for evolution and new challenges in antitrust law and beyond that will shape the future of the sport.
Spotlight remains on anti-doping and anti-corruption activity as ITIA sets out strategy for next three years
The International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) has published its 2024-2027 strategy – its first as an independent entity – setting out its key priorities over the next three years.
The ITIA’s five priorities for the period straddle education; support and engagement; risk and evolving landscape; process; and case management. In particular, on the third of these priorities, the ITIA has signalled that it will increase the number and types of intelligence sources it relies on, as well as the quality of intelligence it receives (including from the betting industry).
Against this backdrop, the ITIA’s most recent quarterly report underscores the importance of quality data – particularly given the comparatively larger caseload of anti-corruption matters (as compared with anti-doping matters) and that the number of reported match alerts received in 2024 is tracking below the figures in 2023.
*Players and officials (excluding accredited persons).
Despite anti-corruption matters taking up more bandwidth than anti-doping matters – of particular note, five Mexican and Ecuadorian players have recently been sanctioned under the TACP in relation to a match-fixing syndicate in Belgium – the independent tribunal ruling in relation to Jannik Sinner’s positive test for the prohibited anabolic agent clostebol has garnered the headlines.
An extensive ITIA investigation and referral to an independent tribunal ultimately found that the player bore no fault or negligence (a decision which, at the time of writing, WADA is appealing to CAS). The matter has brought into sharp focus – in addition to broader questions around transparency (the player was notified of his first positive test on 4 April) – the implications of certain substances being more commonplace in particular countries.
Here, for example, the prohibited substance is understood to have derived from a medical spray, which unlike in most other countries, is available over-the-counter in Italy. The Sinner case follows on the heels of cases such as Marco Bortolotti (no fault or negligence), and Stefano Battaglino (four-year suspension) – two other Italian players who returned adverse analytical findings for clostebol.
Such is the “quite extended” use of creams containing clostebol in Italy that WADA opened a study in 2020 as to its presence in urine after accidental contact. It remains to be seen if the Sinner case, having thrust the issue firmly into the spotlight, will drive any change – from the availability of such substances to anti-doping processes at a local and international level.
Doubles trouble – ATP player unrest follows proposed changes to tournament entry criteria
In April this year, the ATP announced it would trial a package of innovative changes to the doubles game – in a bid to boost its viewing experience and, in turn, reinvigorate its popularity. Among the changes was a proposal to overhaul the availability of places in doubles draws to allow for more teams to enter via their singles ranking (the flipside being that fewer double specialists would be able to enter).
The changes have been reflected in the ATP Rulebook, with the ATP Rules Committee given authority to:
modify the rules pertaining to player entry, selection, and competition for the duration of [the 2024 season].
However, it was reported in July that a letter – signed by 49 players – threatening legal action was sent to the ATP, who is understood to have withdrawn its entry restriction plans for the tournaments in which the trial had been planned.
It remains unclear which, if any, of the proposed changes will be carried forward and what other transformative changes may await in 2026; and if the WTA will take similar steps to reignite interest in the doubles game. What is clearer from the modifications made this year is that the tours will need to carefully navigate making any rulebook updates with ensuring there is broad support from the player community.
The second serve – in case you missed it
- What next for padel? – in July, we took a look at some of the legal and regulatory issues facing padel – including how it is governed at a national and global level, and the overlap between padel and tennis federations. See our blog post here.
- Wimbledon expansion plans given green light – in September, London’s Deputy Mayor for Planning approved an application from the Al England Lawn Tennis Club (home of the Championships) to transform the adjacent Wimbledon Park golf course – plans that will ultimate see qualifying for Wimbledon brought on-site. See more about the plans here.
- PTPA sets out strategy to overhaul tennis – in October, the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) – formed in 2019 to advocate on behalf of players – launched its proactive strategy to push for radical changes to the tour structure. Framed as an ‘ultimatum to tennis authorities’ areas of focus include overhauling the tour structure; governance and rulemaking; and compensation. See the PTPA’s announcement here.
Sign up to SportingLinks for more dedicated legal opinion on topical issues in the sports sector.