Top tennis players will limit their post-match media appearances to 15 minutes throughout the first week of Wimbledon, which begins on 30 June, as part of an ongoing dispute over how Grand Slam revenues are shared with players. The move extends a protest that began at the French Open in May and puts the All England Club — one of the most powerful institutions in world sport — on a collision course with the athletes who are its main attraction.
The 15-minute limit is deliberately symbolic. Player representatives say it reflects the approximately 15% share of Wimbledon's projected revenues that currently flows to players as prize money. In practice, it means the world's best players will be significantly less accessible to broadcasters, journalists, and — indirectly — the global audience that follows the sport.
A record increase that did not end the dispute
Earlier this month, the All England Club announced a 20% rise in its total prize fund, bringing it to £64.2 million (around $84 million) — the largest in the tournament's 149-year history. Singles champions will collect £3.6 million each. The club's chair, Deborah Jevans, said at the time that she hoped the increase would satisfy players' concerns.
It did not. Player representatives, working through an advisory firm, acknowledged the raise as a genuine step forward but said issues remain unresolved. Their core argument is a financial one: despite the record increase, they say players' share of Wimbledon's projected revenues for 2026 stands at 14.4% — actually below the 14.9% share they received a decade ago in 2015.
“"Players will limit their contractual media commitments at the tournament to 15 minutes — reflecting that Wimbledon currently pays slightly below 15% of revenues to players as prize money." — Player advisory firm statement”
What players want — and why Wimbledon disagrees
The players' position, supported by representatives from both the ATP and WTA tours, is that prize money should rise to 16% of revenues as an immediate interim measure, with a longer-term target of 22% — in line with leading ATP and WTA Tour events — by 2030. That 22% figure would place the Grand Slams on a comparable footing with the regular tour events that players compete in for most of the year, and where the revenue-sharing model is more established.
The All England Club rejects that benchmark. Wimbledon's organisers argue that, unlike regular tour events, they bear a far greater responsibility to invest in facilities and the long-term development of the game. Jevans has stated publicly that using raw revenue as the basis for prize money calculations simply does not make sense given the scale of that investment, which includes hundreds of millions of pounds in a multi-year overhaul of player facilities.
“"We are surprised and disappointed by this action. Wimbledon puts the players at the heart of all our decisions." — All England Club spokesperson”
A dispute with roots at Roland Garros
The protest first took shape at Roland Garros in May, where world number one Aryna Sabalenka, Coco Gauff, Iga Świątek, and men's number one Jannik Sinner were among those who cut short their press conferences to signal their dissatisfaction with the prize-money structure across Grand Slams. Notably, Novak Djokovic — a 24-time Grand Slam champion and historically one of the most outspoken advocates for player rights — did not participate in that protest.
The All England Club has confirmed it has agreed to meet player representatives after Wimbledon concludes to address the outstanding concerns in full. Whether that promise is enough to prevent the dispute from escalating further — into the second week of the tournament, or beyond — is the question now hanging over one of sport's most prestigious events.
This article is free to read. It always will be — no paywall, no account, no tracking.
