Why an ATP/WTA Merger is a Logistical Nightmare
There is an inherent irony in the fact that one of tennis’ greatest strengths also forms one of its starkest dividing lines.
Commercial and sporting equity across the men’s and women’s games – at least, relative to most other sports – is a fundamental component of what makes tennis such a powerful global commodity, as well as uniquely compelling sporting theatre. Yet it also shapes one of the sport’s more puzzling predicaments.
WHY ARE men’S & women’S TOURS RUN SEPARATELY?
Currently, the men’s and women’s tours have their own governing bodies – the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP), which runs the men’s, and the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), running the women’s. For their respective tours, these bodies oversee everything from marketing, sponsorship and broadcasting, to ranking points, scheduling and prize money.
The two follow similar paths throughout the course of the season, with frequent moments of convergence, most notably at the four Grand Slams, as well as numerous other joint tournaments across the calendar. But despite their parallel routes through much of the season, the two remain firmly on their own side of the track.
The question of a merger, both if and how, has long been a contentious topic of debate - one that has its roots in the very conception of the WTA itself.
Founded in the summer of 1973 at a meeting of more than 60 players convened by Billie Jean King, the WTA united all of women’s professional tennis under one tour. Before 1970, professional tennis circuits were male-only. The formation of the Virginia Slims Circuit in 1970, which consisted of just nine founding female players, paved the way for the formation of the WTA three years later. Since then, it has gone on to become the global leader in women’s professional sports, earning a high-profile and respected presence on the world sports stage.
IF THE WTA IS SUCCESSFUL, WHY THE MERGER?
And yet, however far the women’s tour has come, there is a sense it is destined to go further. Created on the principle of equal opportunity for men and women in tennis, a full merging with the men’s tour is viewed by many - not least of all, Billie Jean King - as the WTA’s ultimate objective.
The benefits of such a merger from a WTA standpoint are clear. While prize money and commercial appeal are closer across the ATP and WTA than at any point in the past, there remain veritable inequities between the two. A union of the tours is perhaps the best way to ensure total parity across the financial side of the game.
More broadly, unity on issues that pose a threat to the very principles of tennis as a whole are evidently needed. Rarely has this been more glaringly laid bare than in the recent events surrounding Peng Shuai, a Chinese tennis player who disappeared from public view following allegations of sexual assault against the former vice-premier of China. While the WTA announced the immediate suspension of all tournaments in China until Peng Shuai’s wellbeing was proven, the ATP drew criticism for not taking the same stance. It is an oddity that, in the face of such a serious and widely reported issue for tennis, the sport’s governing bodies could have such a dichotomous response.
Yet this is merely symptomatic of a wider trend in the tennis world. Here we arrive at the most fundamental obstacle to an ATP/WTA merger – the very structure of professional tennis itself.
TENNIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY FRAGMENTED
Tennis is a fundamentally fragmented sport. It operates not under one governing body, but instead is comprised of several essential constituent parts – seven, to be exact. The WTA and ATP are two of these parts. The others are the four Grand Slam tournaments, and the International Tennis Federation (ITF). Each of the seven major decision-makers in the game naturally have their own commercial interests to protect, and their own agendas to prioritise. It is no secret that this has hampered the development of the sport as a whole.
“Tennis needs to reduce the amount of fragmentation,” says Mark Webster, chief executive officer of the ATP’s media rights arm. “You can sell the story of the season all the way through. That would be nirvana.”
The fractious nature of the bodies that govern pro-tennis has been a point of contention for some time. It is often described as the primary reason for the painstakingly slow pace of change for many prominent issues in the sport. When change is implemented, it is not often not universal.
Case in point. Recent acrimony over alleged extensive use of the toilet break to throw off an opponent, most notably in the US Open first round match between Murray and Tsitsipas, led to a new rule being imposed by the ATP. This limits toilet breaks to three minutes and dictates they can only be taken once in a match. Problem solved? Well, only partially. These rules, crucially, may not apply at the four most important events of the year, the Grand Slams. Slam rules are governed internally by those tournaments themselves, and are under no obligation to fall in line with the ATP.
Indeed, the Australian Open have already announced they will not adopt the ATP’s three-minute toilet break rule. Given the case that triggered this rule change was at a Grand Slam, and passed precisely because it affected such a high-profile match, its limits might make the change seem somewhat of a hollow victory for those who advocated it. It is pertinent to point out here that the WTA, with their own jurisdiction on the matter, have also not adopted the ATP’s new rule.
What at first glance appears to be constructive progress is in actual fact only an incremental change at best. At worst, it is merely further fragmentation of the rules between tours and tournaments.
IS A Tennis World Cup POSSIBLE?
Another example of the pitfalls of such a fractious set-up was the attempted establishment of a new Tennis World Cup in 2016, one that was to feature both sides of the game. At the time, the international team tennis tournaments came in the form of the Davis Cup for the male players, and the women’s equivalent, the Fed Cup - both of which were run by the ITF.
The ITF’s president, David Haggerty, was considering a proposal to combine the two team competitions into one joint event, in the hope it would one day have the same commercial draw of a Grand Slam.
“Anytime you bring men and women together, it’s the highlight of the year”, Haggerty said at the time. “Just look at the Grand Slams, and you can see the benefits.”
But such an audacious move required the approval of the WTA, ATP and ITF, something which was, and remains, an unlikely feat. Due to the crowded tennis calendar comprising many different tournaments, there would need to be substantial compromises made on the part of each to accommodate a new event of the calibre of a Tennis World Cup.
The talks came to a swift stalemate.
As the prospect of a joint Tennis World Cup sailed out of view, the ITF announced their own plans for a revamped two-week Davis Cup. The ATP then brokered an independent deal with the Australian tennis federation for the ATP Cup, a male tennis team tournament of almost identical structure to the Davis Cup. Negotiations that began with the aim of creating one male/female tournament had resulted in two near identical male team competitions.
This sequence of events demonstrates the problem that fragmentation poses for any ATP/WTA unification. In order for the WTA and ATP to merge, they would first need to navigate an extremely narrow and convoluted path through the needs, priorities and schedules of the other five powerhouses of pro-tennis. All this before needing to compromise long-standing and lucrative elements of their own calendars.
Opposition
But fragmentation is not the only challenge to a potential merger. For all the player support that merging the tours receives, there is also sizeable and vocal opposition to the idea. This chiefly comes from the male side of the game.
The ATP generates more than three times as much revenue as the WTA, and some male players have long believed that a merger would benefit women more than men. The true depth of some male players’ reluctance to approve a merger became abundantly clear during an interview CNN did with Andy Murray (a long-time advocate for unification) in spring 2020.
“Let’s say the first-round loser’s check for the men went from $8,000 to $10,000 and the women went from $6,000 to $10,000,” Murray said. “I spoke to some of the male players about that who were unhappy because the prize money was equal. And I said, ‘Well, would you rather there was no increase at all?’ And they said to me, ‘Yeah, actually.’”
Despite a merger likely meaning a larger pay-check for male players, some are still against the idea because the rise in pay would be greater for female players, rather than an equal percentage increase for both sides. This seems to be a somewhat self-defeating logic.
Weller Evans, who served as a player representative on the ATP board in 2019, gives a further insight on the issue. “They look at sharing a venue with their WTA brethren as a drain on the tournament resources that would normally be available solely for them.” Consequently, some male players are reluctant to support a merger, and any plans for one become further impeded.
Then there’s the issue of the PTPA (Professional Tennis Players Association). Founded by Djokovic and Pospisil for the purpose of “building an equitable and sustainable competitive environment for players”, the PTPA’s primary aim is said to be about giving players a greater amount of control over how the game is run. Open to all, yet still overwhelmingly male-dominated, it also cites closer collaboration with the female players one of its core principles.
This sentiment does appear to be genuine. However, it is difficult to shake the feeling that the formation of yet another breakaway faction only pushes any realistic prospect of unification further away.
THERE ARE SOME signs of progress
So is any prospect of a union simply idealistic? As it happens, not entirely.
Despite the considerable challenges facing a potential merger, there are encouraging signs for those who advocate unification. The effects of the pandemic has forced many aspects of the game to be re-examined, forging closer links between the governing bodies and breathing new life into the conversation around a unified tour.
Roger Federer brought the issue back into sharp focus soon after the pandemic took hold, tweeting, “am I the only one thinking that now is the time for men’s and women’s tennis to be united and come together as one”. Andy Murray, as well as several female players, was also quick to voice his support for the idea.
Steve Simon, chairman of the WTA, said at the time that only through a merger do you “truly have the business and the strategic principles all aligned, which is what you need to do. Obviously it’s a long and winding road to get there, but I think it makes all the sense in the world.”
Andrea Gaudenzi, the current ATP chairman, has also shown support for the idea since the pandemic wreaked havoc on the tennis calendar. “Crisis inevitably requires collaboration,” he says. “Once we are somehow all in trouble, we tend to stick together”.
As such, in December of 2020, the WTA announced it would rename its tournament categories to align with the ATP’s, something which came into effect this season. It has since been followed by further alignment in marketing between the ATP and the WTA, announced this August, something that’s given fruit to new initiatives and joint commercial partnerships.
“It's one of our sport's unique selling points that we have such a strong product on the men's and women's side," Gaudenzi told Reuters in an interview in August, adding that a unified sport was key to his plan. "Our biggest events are combined, and fans see us as part of the same storytelling throughout the season.”
Indeed, just this month came an announcement that the WTA and ATP had hired financial advisers to negotiate the terms of a merger of their commercial arms, marking the single most significant move towards a merger that the sport has made.
Movement has been stirring, and the signs of progress are there. But even if plans go full-steam ahead, any simple path forward remains elusive.
Tennis has successfully navigated its way through difficult roads before. But it seems evident that a full ATP merger with the WTA would be the longest and most arduous road yet traversed by the world of professional tennis.
Perhaps, though, it may one day prove to be the road most worth following.
Jamie Smith writes for The Slice from London, England.
