Submissions have been edited for brevity and clarity.
Hey everyone …
• Here’s the latest Served podcast.
• Welcome to Greenland:
• The legal match between PTPA and ATP is underway (see below). Daniel Kaplan filed this dispatch. Note the alleged union-busting by the ATP, Vasek Pospisil’s surprise at Novak Djokovic’s retreat and the projected $50 to $100 million in legal fees. (Where does the WTA in particular have these kinds of funds?)
Onward …
Lots of questions and chatter this week about the latest in the PTPA lawsuit, especially after the aforementioned Dan Kaplan piece.
• It pains me to write this because I am—fervently, unreservedly, unswervingly—in favor of more player rights, player pay and player voice. I hate to be the person who starts sentences this way, but in 25 years of covering this wonderful and maddening sport, the lack of player empowerment is a persistent throughline. We should support a movement and association that unites players and attacks the collective action problem that has depressed the wages and rights of the talent doing the hardest work.
I am also sympathetic to the PTPA’s frustration, which led them to this point. You feel unheard and unseen and not taken seriously. Your overtures to negotiate are not met with the courtesy of a response. If you can’t go the legislative route, you go the legal route—especially if your finances, while opaque, seem to include a Bill Ackman-backed war chest. (And if, in fact, the ATP is engaging in the equivalent of union-busting tactics, there must be consequences.)
And yet, this lawsuit? As the kids say: This ain’t it. It’s sloppily drafted. It’s sloppily reasoned. It’s ventilated with holes and contradictions. It doesn’t make a convincing case of illegality or collusion, nor, maybe more critically, does it offer a solution that would benefit the players. In keeping with the times, it’s all flamethrowing, no problem-solving remedy. Ready. Fire. Aim. Weaken the institutions first; deal with solutions later.
This isn’t just me talking. Outside the plaintiff’s highly invested—and highly compensated—lead counsel, I have heard no sports lawyers offer optimism, approval or admiration for this effort. Speaking of silence …
There are literally no top players—i.e., those with the most leverage—who have spoken in support. That Djokovic, who co-founded the entire enterprise, is now backpedaling like a college tour guide, tells you plenty. (How do you file a splashy lawsuit without first getting the sign-off of the most important members of the enterprise?
One imagines an equivalent: Musicians are really mad at Ticketmaster. Eddie Money, Sugar Ray and Lou Bega are ready to throw down in court!
Cool. But what about Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé and Taylor Swift?
No, they want nothing to do with this.
And when the top players write their own letter to the majors, rightly, asking for more money, how does that not erode the PTPA’s position even further?
There’s been a lot of backlash, and it’s easy to bag on the PTPA. But I commend them for the effort. And, ultimately, they’re on the right side here. Yet, this salvo was an unforced error. Best case scenario: This lawsuit—a big legal nothingburger, as it is—gets them in the room. Together with the top players, they negotiate a wage increase, a rights increase, a loosening of restrictions, an injection of sanity into the punchline that is tennis scheduling … and the sport ends up in a better place. And if the ATP—and, more importantly, the less financially secure WTA—can avoid $10 million in billable hours, all the better.
Jon I saw the [reference] to Andre Agassi being a French Open broadcaster. How do you think he will do? I don’t know how closely he’s been following tennis lately, but personally I can’t wait!
Cat, PA
• The usual disclaimer and disclosure that I have zero objectivity here. I’ve done media and corporate work with Andre, and I like him personally. With that out of the way, I think this has the potential to be groundbreaking (No pressure!). Think that’s an overstatement? Let’s look back at the 2007 U.S. Open, when he slapped on a pair of headphones and, with no preparation, offered a masterclass.
As was the case when he played, Agassi sees a different game, he thinks a different game, he views (and articulates) tennis—not just the X’s and O’s but all of it: the thermodynamics, the social interactions, the risk-reward calculus—on a different plane.
(I’ll bore you with my full theory another time, but I always wanted to write a think piece about how Agassi’s Las Vegas origins—his native familiarity with odds, with incremental house advantages, with boom-bust cycles, with bluffs, with strategic plays and ploys … how profoundly it all impacted his tennis. His discovery about Boris Becker’s tongue movement presaging the direction of his serve? What was that if not a poker player at the Horseshoe discerning a tell at the table?)
Anyway, ah, yes, Agassi on TNT. He’ll be great. He’s spoken openly about this, so I don’t feel like I’m violating any confidences. If there’s been trepidation for TV in the past, it’s that he’s such a deep and singular thinker, the rhythms of tennis on TV can be problematic. Sometimes, analysts have 15 seconds to offer a quick pop of insight before the ball is in play (and, per the rules of engagement, there must be silence in the booth during the point). Agassi is barely clearing his throat in 15 seconds. Once he gathers his thoughts, this is someone who can offer an exquisite, never-thought-of-that-before soliloquy on the kick serve or the role of fear or a shift in playing conditions only he has discerned. But he needs a hell of a lot more than 15 seconds to do so.
My prediction: Warner Brothers (TNT et al.) will put Agassi in the best position to succeed. He’ll arrive in Paris early and digest the tennis, getting up to speed not just on players but the venue, the vibe of the tournament—the micro and the macro. He’ll step up to the baseline for the final few rounds. And the audience—fans of all intensity levels—will be in for a treat.
We had a handful of questions about the Billie Jean King Cup and the value of team competitions in general. (We talked a bit about this on Tennis Channel last week as well.)
My hottish take, which includes the Davis Cup as well: In this globalized, borderless world, we are beyond the concept of a nation vs. nation competition. In tennis, players live and train all over the world. (And so many have moved out of their country of origin.) Kazakhstan is open for business. Just last month, we saw a top player seamlessly switch nationalities. We think nothing of Aryna Sabalenka setting up shop in Miami or Naomi Osaka representing Japan.
How many fans go to tournaments, follow players or fabricate rooting interests based on country code? (Said no one ever: I used to like Grigor Dimitrov, but then saw he is from Bulgaria and playing an American. Boo Bulgaria!) Nation vs. nation is just a weird and out-of-step (if not altogether irrelevant) distinction in 2025.
Team competitions can work. Like college tennis, where players declare fealty to their schools and then return together to the same campus. Or Laver Cup, which attracts the best players with its cosmopolitan vibe (and big payday) and at least nods to the artificiality of nationhood by pitting Europe vs. The World. We all know that, for instance, the Czechs, Italians and Serbs are tennis powerhouses, punching above their weight. Whether they win or lose team competitions, it doesn’t change much.
Then, there is the scheduling issue. The calendar is already over-crammed. Ten pounds of gear for a five-pound bag. On top of the tournaments, we’re asking players to go from places like Charleston, S.C., to outposts for an event with no points and little money? Even players who didn’t have to travel begged off, citing the unnecessary wear and tear—see: Iga Świątek in Poland.
Wait, there’s more … after the U.S. Open, players head to China, where—in addition to the distance—the WTA recently pulled up its tent because the government failed to address a former WTA player’s account of sexual assault. Literally and figuratively: What are we doing here?
A mailbag theme: Fans take their cue from the players. This could be for issues. (When players gripe about the brand of ball, it’s a good indication that we should believe it’s a serious concern.) It could be for talent. (When players gush over João Fonseca, it goes a long way toward legitimizing him.) This could be for appearances. Laver Cup is legitimized less by pageantry and press releases than by the A-list players who prioritize it. Conversely, when so few top players commit to the BJK Cup and Davis Cup, fans say, If they don’t care, why should we?
Shots, Miscellany
• For the New York crowd:
Award-winning Latino playwright Raul Garza’s timely new play Men in Shorts, inspired by David Foster Wallace, will have its world premiere at Playwrights Downtown in May. Straddling the tennis and literary world, the limited run plays from May 8 to 24, with opening night slated for May 8.
• Derron Donaldson has been appointed as the director of racquets at the John McEnroe Tennis Center at Baha Mar.
More Tennis on Sports Illustrated
This article was originally published on www.si.com as Tennis Mailbag: The PTPA’s Legal Match With ATP Heats Up.
