Sabalenka shortened her Roland Garros press conference in protest over money distribution
Aryna Sabalenka, the world No. 1 tennis player and one of the most vocal representatives of the group of leading male and female players, shortened her media conference ahead of Roland Garros on May 22, 2026, to 15 minutes, turning the usual meeting with journalists into a public sign of protest over revenue distribution at Grand Slam tournaments. According to a Sky Sports report, Sabalenka ended the conference early as part of a coordinated action in which some top male and female tennis players are limiting media obligations to draw attention to the share of money players receive from the biggest tournaments. The figure of 15 minutes was not chosen by chance: according to players’ statements and British media reports, it symbolizes the approximate percentage of Grand Slam tournament revenue that ends up in prize funds. The Belarusian emphasized that the protest was not directed against journalists, but against a model that some players believe does not keep pace with the revenue growth of the biggest tennis events. Her statement further sharpened a debate that has been going on in tennis for more than a year and that, according to available information, does not concern only the amounts paid to winners, but also the position of lower-ranked professionals.
Message to journalists: “It is not about you”
According to Sky Sports, Sabalenka said at the conference that her action was not a personal demand, but an attempt to secure a fairer relationship for players who are lower in the rankings and find it harder to finance the season. “It is not about me. It is about the lower-ranked players who are suffering,” she said, adding that as world No. 1 she feels obliged to stand up for them. She then pointed out that players respect the media and that the protest is not aimed at the journalists covering the tournament, but at what the participants in the action see as the need for a “fair percentage”. Sabalenka also said that the players wanted to show their position in a dignified way and that “15 minutes is better than zero”, alluding to the possibility of completely avoiding media activities. After the English part of the conference, she thanked those present and continued in her native language, thereby ending the most important part of the appearance that marked media day in Paris.
According to the same report, other prominent players took a similar approach, including Coco Gauff and Jannik Sinner. Gauff also ended her conference after 15 minutes and said it was the first real joint action after numerous discussions, while Sinner again spoke about respect and waiting for a response from the Grand Slam tournaments. Such coordination shows that dissatisfaction is no longer being expressed only through individual comments ahead of tournaments, but through organized pressure during one of the most important events of the season. Roland Garros organizers had earlier, according to Sky Sports, expressed regret over the situation and announced their willingness to hold talks with players. The meetings are particularly important because Grand Slam tournaments have a separate governance structure from the ATP and WTA, so issues of revenue, prize funds and player obligations are not resolved exclusively through the standard tennis tours.
What the players are asking for
The dispute over prize funds did not arise in Paris, but developed through letters and discussions between player representatives and the leaders of the four Grand Slam tournaments. According to an Associated Press report published by Tennis.com, a group of leading ATP and WTA players in a second letter demanded a larger share of revenue, a gradual increase in the share going to players to 22 percent by 2030, contributions for pension, health and maternity benefits, and greater influence through a new players’ council. According to AP, the letter stated that the current share is around 16 percent, and the signatories included Aryna Sabalenka, Iga Swiatek, Coco Gauff, Carlos Alcaraz, Jannik Sinner and Jack Draper. Male and female tennis players argue that they are the central carriers of the tournaments’ value, while organizers point to the costs of staging events, investments in infrastructure, security, broadcasting, fan engagement and the expansion of events. The debate is therefore broader than individual checks for winners and enters the question of governance in professional tennis.
According to The Guardian, the planned protest at Roland Garros was described as a “work-to-rule” strategy, meaning the reduction of off-court activities to the minimum needed for players to fulfill contractual and tournament obligations. This form of protest is designed to avoid direct penalties, while still being visible enough to television partners, organizers and the public. The Guardian states that players plan to limit press conferences and additional interviews with the tournament’s main media partners, while after matches they would still carry out the basic obligations required by the rules. This shifts the pressure onto reputational and commercial ground: Grand Slam tournaments depend on stars in broadcasts, previews and promotional content, and players want to show how important their availability off the court is to the value of the event. At the same time, avoiding a complete media boycott shows that, for now, the aim is to avoid an escalation that would directly threaten the staging of the tournament.
Roland Garros increased the prize fund, but dissatisfaction remains
Roland Garros organizers announced that the total prize fund for the 2026 edition amounts to 61.723 million euros, which is 9.53 percent more than a year earlier. According to the tournament’s official announcement, amounts in qualifying were especially increased, by 12.9 percent, because the organizers say they want to help players who have the hardest time financing the season and maintaining a professional team. The main draw prize fund rose by 10.1 percent compared with 2025, with the greatest emphasis placed on the first three rounds of singles competition, where increases range between 11.11 and 11.54 percent. The tournament also announced that the fund for wheelchair and quad competitions had been increased to 1,018,500 euros, or 14.55 percent more than last year. The winners of the men’s and women’s singles tournaments, according to data from Roland Garros and AP, should each receive 2.8 million euros.
Despite the increase, players argue that nominal growth does not solve the main problem, because their objection concerns the share of total revenue, not only the absolute amount of prize money. The Associated Press states that leading players expressed “deep disappointment” with the French prize fund, claiming that the share of revenue returned to players at Roland Garros had fallen from 15.5 percent in 2024 to a projected 14.9 percent in 2026. This is the key to the dispute: organizers can increase the prize fund, but if the tournament’s total revenue grows even faster, players believe their real share of the tournament’s business success is declining. According to The Guardian, Roland Garros revenue last year grew faster than the prize fund, which further strengthened the players’ arguments. Organizers, on the other hand, emphasize in official announcements the development of the tournament, investments in qualifying and the expansion of support for different competition categories.
Why the position of lower-ranked players is at the center of the debate
Sabalenka’s message is especially directed at players who are not among the biggest stars and who, unlike those at the top of the rankings, cannot count on major sponsorship deals, appearances in the final stages of tournaments or steady income from exhibitions. A professional tennis season is financially demanding: travel, accommodation, coaches, physiotherapists, equipment and preparations fall on the players themselves for most of the year, especially in the lower part of the rankings. That is why increases in the first rounds and qualifying have practical significance, but player representatives argue that the problem cannot be solved solely through one-off adjustments. According to AP, the demands from the letter to the Grand Slam tournaments also include health, maternity and pension contributions, showing that the debate is moving toward the long-term security of professionals, and not only toward rewards for the best results. Such an approach carries particular weight in a sport in which injuries, travel costs and early defeats can quickly threaten the financial sustainability of a career.
Sabalenka is speaking from the position of a player who, according to her official WTA profile, finished 2025 as world No. 1 for the second consecutive year and set a WTA record for earnings in a single season. That is precisely why her claim that she is not fighting for her own position carries political and symbolic weight inside the locker room. The highest-ranked players have the greatest room for public pressure because their sporting and commercial status is stronger, while lower-ranked players are more exposed to the risk of penalties, loss of opportunities and damaged relations with organizers. In such a balance of power, statements by Sabalenka, Gauff, Sinner and others serve as a protective umbrella for a wider group of professionals. At the same time, the fact that the debate is taking place during a Grand Slam tournament ensures the greatest possible visibility, but also carries the risk that the sporting focus will shift from competition to the conflict over money.
The tournament begins under pressure
According to the Associated Press guide to Roland Garros 2026, the main part of the tournament begins on Sunday, May 24, at 11 a.m. local time in Paris. The women’s final is scheduled for June 6 and the men’s for June 7, while the defending champions are Coco Gauff and Carlos Alcaraz. AP states that Sabalenka is the top seed in the women’s competition, while Jannik Sinner is the top seed in the men’s draw, because seedings are based on the WTA and ATP rankings. The tournament is played on the clay courts of the Roland Garros complex in southwest Paris, and this year it is also introducing several new features, including the trial use of approved devices for tracking players’ biometric data. Such changes show that Grand Slam tournaments are trying to develop the product and attract audiences with new content, but at the same time they are facing pressure from the main actors on the court.
The sporting context further increases interest in Sabalenka’s performance. According to Sky Sports, the Belarusian said ahead of the tournament that she had physically recovered after problems at the start of the clay season, when she complained about her lower back and hips, and that she was ready to fight in Paris. The same source states that she has played only six matches on clay this season and recorded four wins, which is a weaker performance compared with her dominant start to the year before the clay-court part of the season. Still, Sabalenka said she knows how to play on clay and that the most important thing is to be physically and mentally healthy. Her sporting challenge is thus intertwined with her role as one of the leaders of the protest, bringing her additional media attention before the first ball is struck at the tournament.
Possible effect on Wimbledon and the other Grand Slams
The debate in Paris does not end with Roland Garros, because the same demands apply to all four biggest tournaments: the Australian Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon and the US Open. The Guardian states that player representatives have been in a dispute with the Grand Slams for more than a year and that additional talks with representatives of Wimbledon and the US Open are expected during the tournament in Paris. Wimbledon is particularly important because its prize fund is traditionally announced ahead of the summer, and every decision by the All England Club will be viewed through the prism of the current protest. If players conclude that there has been no progress, a continuation of limited media activities or new forms of pressure during the season is possible. For now, however, there is no official confirmation that there will be a complete tournament boycott, although some players previously mentioned the possibility of tougher measures if negotiations do not move forward.
Tennis is therefore facing the question of whether the current Grand Slam model can remain unchanged at a time when players are increasingly openly demanding a share in revenue growth and a greater voice in decision-making. Organizers have the argument that tournaments finance enormous operating systems, infrastructure, staff, security, audience development and national tennis programs. Players, however, respond that without them there are no ticket sales, television rights, sponsorship deals or global attention. Sabalenka’s shortened appearance in Paris is therefore more than an unusually brief media conference: it is a signal that the top of professional tennis wants to fight for a change in the balance of power. How Roland Garros and the other Grand Slams respond to that pressure could set the tone for negotiations throughout the 2026 season.
Sources: - Sky Sports – report on Aryna Sabalenka’s shortened press conference, players’ statements and the context of the protest at Roland Garros (link) - Roland-Garros / official tournament website – official data on the prize fund for 2026 and changes in prize distribution (link) - Associated Press – guide to Roland Garros 2026, tournament schedule, seeds and the context of the prize-fund dispute (link) - Tennis.com / Associated Press – report on the letter from leading ATP and WTA players to the Grand Slam tournaments and demands for a larger share of revenue (link) - The Guardian – report on the plan to limit players’ media obligations at Roland Garros and the broader dispute with Grand Slam tournaments (link) - WTA / Aryna Sabalenka’s official profile – data on status, results and finishing the 2025 season at No. 1 in the WTA rankings (link)