Imagine cheering for a match only to find out the result was pre‑decided; suddenly, every point feels hollow. Sometimes, the integrity of the game is tested in ways that shock even the most seasoned fans, and that’s exactly why two young Chinese tennis players were recently suspended.

Li Wenfu and Zhang Jin, both just 21, became the center of a controversy that rippled across the tennis community. In 2024, they admitted to match-fixing in exchange for money. And when the International Tennis Integrity Agency reached out, neither player responded to the accusations, nor exercised their right to appeal. That silence left the ITIA with no choice but to act decisively.

Li Wenfu, whose highest singles ranking was 1,572 in July 2024, was suspended for two years and 3 months and fined  $20,000, though $15,000 of that is suspended. Zhang Jin, who reached 1,285 at his peak, received a two-year ban and a $15,000 fine, with $10,000 suspended. Both are currently in provisional suspension since July 31, 2025; this time is counted in determining their penalties.

Their prohibitions will officially end in October 2027 (Li) and in July 2027 (Zhang), although the damage to their reputations may not cease there.

During their suspension, both players are not allowed to compete, coach, or attend any event approved by ITIA-affiliated bodies, including those of the ATP, WTA, or ITF. From Wimbledon to the U.S. Open, all of the major tennis tournaments are closed for them.

In addition to being punitive, the sanctions serve as a warning to anyone who might think about going too far. However, the story didn’t stop there.

Another Chinese tennis player faces suspension

Lu Pengyu, 23, also became part of the ITIA’s investigation. He reached a career-high ranking of 896 in June 2025.

He was first suspended on August 19, 2025. Unlike Li Wenfu and Zhang Jin, he chose to appeal the decision, exercising his right on October 3, 2025. The outcome of his appeal set a precedent for how the agency handles challenges.

A remote hearing took place on 29 October 2025 before independent Anti-Corruption Hearing Officer Raj Parker. After reviewing the case, the appeal was dismissed on November 10, 2025, confirming that the suspension would remain in place. The decision underscored the seriousness of ITIA’s enforcement and the principles underlying the TACP.

The suspension is based on sections F.3.b.i.4 and F.3.b.i.1 of the TACP. These rules basically state two factors.

First, there is a strong likelihood that the player committed a serious offense, and allowing him to compete could harm the integrity of tennis. Second, the player failed to comply with an ITIA demand during the investigation.

In short, provisional suspensions are designed not as punishment alone, but as a protective measure to preserve the integrity of the sport.