The ongoing feud between players and Grand Slam prize money has become quite heated in the past few days. It was earlier this week, on Monday, that the top 10 ATP and WTA players had given a strong statement against the mere 9.5% increase in prize money for the upcoming French Open. Aryna Sabalenka and Jannik Sinner are among the leading voices in this feud, with the Belarusian even threatening to boycott the Grand Slam. While many are in support of the players, others feel that their stance is just imbecilic in nature.

Among them is prominent media personality Simon Jordan, who has launched a scathing attack against the likes of Sabalenka and Sinner. He argued that the players would have nowhere to play if it weren’t for the four Grand Slams.

“If it wasn’t for the tennis tournament, they’d have nowhere to play. If there were no Wimbledon, French Open, US Open, or Australian Open, there’d be nowhere to play, so it’s a two-way transaction,” Jordan said on talkSPORT.

He also feels that the players are acting as “imbeciles” and are making the feud bigger than it should be.

“If we didn’t have a tournament that attracted the world’s media and the best players, and you, being one of them, you’d have nowhere to play, you imbecile. It’s aggravated me because it’s so one-dimensional,” he added.

Notably, this isn’t the first time that the players have voiced their disappointment over the prize money on offer at the Grand Slams. It was in March of last year that the collection of top 10 ATP and WTA players had written a letter to the Slams, demanding higher prize money and a 22% revenue share to match tour standards. While all the Slams have decided to bring an increase in the prize money since then, the players have made it clear that they are dissatisfied with the changes that have been made.

Their recent statement highlighted that Roland Garros had generated $463 million last year, which was a 14% increase in comparison to the previous figures. Despite the massive growth in revenue, the total prize money purse was only increased by 5.4%, reducing the players’ share of revenue to 14.3%.

“As Roland Garros looks to post record revenues, players are therefore receiving a declining share of the value they help create. More critically, the announcement does nothing to address the structural issues that players have consistently and reasonably raised over the past year. There has been no engagement on player welfare and no progress towards establishing a formal mechanism for player consultation within Grand Slam decision-making,” a part of the statement read.

They further pointed out that the Grand Slams do not directly contribute to the schemes that have been made for player welfare, like pension schemes and maternity benefits.

“While other major international sports are modernizing governance, aligning stakeholders, and building long-term value, the Grand Slams remain resistant to change. The absence of player consultation and the continued lack of investment in player welfare reflect a system that does not adequately represent the interests of those who are central to the sport’s success,” the statement further read.

Such pay disputes aren’t anything new in tennis as back in 2021, former ATP pro John Isner had lashed out at the ATP after the Miami Open had cut down its total prize money purse by 60%. The singles champion had received a cash prize of $300,110, which was a steep decrease from the $1.35 million that the winner had received in 2019.

The backlash was so intense that the Masters event would significantly increase the total prize pool by the next year itself. The singles champion took home $1.23 million for that edition, and the prize pool was increased from $6.68 million to $9.55 million.

While most of the players are in favor of the boycott and want the Grand Slams to accept their demands, some have a very different stance on the matter.

Emma Raducanu and Jessica Pegula distance themselves from the boycott

World No. 30, Emma Raducanu, feels that the Grand Slams are a very important part of tennis and represent the sport as a whole. That is why she isn’t in favor of boycotting any of them.

“For me, the Grand Slams represent tennis. They bring something that money can’t offer. That’s what’s most important to me, that’s what I value. I wouldn’t be part of a boycott, but each to their own,” she said.

Jessica Pegula also has a similar view on the matter. While the American does appreciate what the likes of Sabalenka and Sinner are doing, she doesn’t want the Grand Slams to be boycotted unless the situation becomes extreme.

“I’ve been part of the initiative to try and have better communication with the slams to get the prize money revenue higher, to get them involved in player welfare and pensions, all these different things. I think it was great that Jannik and Aryna were both very outspoken about it. I hope we don’t have to get to the point of a boycott. Obviously, that is, like, an extreme measure. I think at the end of the day, the point is that something kind of has to be done,” she said.

Will the Grand Slams give in to the demands and announce an even higher increase in prize money, or will the players unite and decide to boycott the tournaments in the future? Let us know what you think in the comments!