Top Tennis Tours Face Major Lawsuit Alleging ‘Rigged’ System That Hurts Players

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit accuses the ATP, WTA, ITF, and other tennis organizations of forming a cartel to fix wages, restrict player freedoms, and engage in other anticompetitive practices.

Consumers Affected: Professional tennis players who have competed in tournaments run by the defendant organizations.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Twelve professional tennis players—including past stars and current tour regulars—are suing the sport’s top governing bodies, claiming they’ve rigged the game not on the court, but in the boardroom.

In a sweeping antitrust lawsuit the players, alongside the Professional Tennis Players Association, accuse the ATP, WTA, International Tennis Federation (ITF), and the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) of forming a cartel. 

According to the complaint, these organizations work with tournament operators, including the Grand Slams, to suppress player pay, block rivals from entering the market, and impose abusive restrictions and discipline to keep athletes in line.

Tennis Tours Accused of Anti-Competitive Practices

The plaintiffs include some familiar names—Nick Kyrgios, Reilly Opelka, and Sorana Cîrstea—as well as doubles specialists, journeymen, and retirees. Together, they allege that athletes must navigate brutal schedules, invasive investigations, and contracts that severely limit their ability to earn.

They allege that players are routinely penalized for skipping tournaments, even for reasons like injury or family emergencies, and that the relentless travel demands—up to 45 weeks a year—make it almost impossible to pursue outside playing opportunities or build sustainable lives off the court.

Lawsuit Details Alleged System of Control and Exploitation

The lawsuit centers on a simple accusation: price fixing. The players claim that tennis’s top governing bodies illegally coordinate with tournaments to cap prize money and block efforts to raise it. One example cited is the rejection of a proposal by Indian Wells owner Larry Ellison to increase payouts. 

Despite the event’s deep pockets, both the ATP and WTA reportedly vetoed the move—citing rules that prevent any tournament from offering more than the Grand Slams, the lawsuit says.

Players also say they're required to give up valuable name, image, and likeness rights, often without compensation, and face restrictions on who they can partner with for endorsements—especially when it comes to companies that might compete with official tour sponsors.

According to the plaintiffs, this system isn’t about preserving tradition or ensuring fairness—it’s about preserving power. The lawsuit describes a web of restrictions designed to keep players locked into ATP and WTA tournaments while excluding any outside competition. That includes a strict “ranking points” system that makes it nearly impossible to qualify for top events without playing in the defendants’ ecosystem.

The complaint also claims that tournaments don’t have to compete with each other for top players or dates, thanks to exclusive scheduling rules and non-compete agreements. And, with no rivals in sight, organizers can get away with offering less prize money, ignoring players' health and safety concerns, and enforcing harsh penalties without fear of players leaving for better opportunities.

The result, the players argue, is a system that hurts not only their earnings and working conditions, but also fans and the sport itself—denying tennis the dynamic, competitive marketplace it needs to grow.

Tennis Lawsuit Joins Growing Trend of Athlete Antitrust Cases

The lawsuit adds to a stack of legal challenges aimed at how major sports institutions structure competition and control athlete earnings. In one recent case, former Kansas basketball stars Mario Chalmers and Sherron Collins joined a class action lawsuit accusing the NCAA of running an “illegal profit scheme” by using players’ names, images, and likenesses to promote March Madness without compensation.

Meanwhile, a federal judge in Tennessee just gave preliminary approval to an $82.5 million settlement resolving claims that Varsity Brands and others conspired with the sport’s governing body to inflate the cost of participation through exclusive deals. 

In the ATP tennis antitrust lawsuit, the players and association want to represent anyone who has competed in any tournaments run by the defendants. 

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Pospisil, et al. v. ATP Tour, Inc., et al.
• Case Number:  1:25-cv-02207 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York 

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• James W. Quinn (Jw Quinn Adr LLC)
• Luna N. Barrington, Zachary A. Schreiber, Nicholas J. Reade, Andrew S. Tulumello, and Meagan Bellshaw (Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP)

What do you think about the power dynamics in professional tennis? Share your thoughts below.