As the Grand Slam season begins, top tennis players like Jannik Sinner and Aryna Sabalenka are pushing for better compensation and a greater voice in tournament decisions. Despite a 16% increase in prize money at the Australian Open and a total player compensation of $90m at the 2025 US Open, players feel undervalued. The US Open prize money was over four and a half times more than the most lucrative combined ATP and WTA event at Indian Wells, yet players argue that their earnings do not reflect the tournaments' earnings.

The players' demands include increased prize money, contributions to player welfare, and a say in scheduling. Project RedEye, led by former WTA chairman Larry Scott, proposes that each Grand Slam pay 22% of its revenue in prize money by 2030, with an annual increase of 1.5%. Players also want to form a Grand Slam Player Council to evaluate decisions affecting them. The campaign seeks to match the $40m annual benefits paid by the ATP and WTA, with each Slam contributing $12m by 2030.

The Grand Slams, however, argue that their costs are high and that they invest heavily in infrastructure and player facilities. For instance, the All England Club is currently refurbishing its Millennium Building with enhanced player facilities, while the USTA is building a $250m player performance center. Players receive additional allowances, such as per diems and free racquet restrings, during tournaments. The Slams also support warm-up tournaments and contribute to player development programs.

The negotiations may reach a compromise by the end of the decade, as some Slams are close to meeting the players' initial targets. However, the formation of player councils and the extent of players' influence on tournament decisions remain contentious. Players aim to balance their demands with the Slams' operational needs, seeking a mutually beneficial solution.