The BNP Paribas Open, which began its 2015 event last week, will be awarding the mandated amount of prize money required by the ATP World Tour, but there is a caveat.
The ATP’s top nine events furiously resisted the tour’s move in December to increase prize money by 14 percent annually over four years, threatening legal action that has not yet emerged. The BNP Paribas Open, owned by Oracle founder Larry Ellison, is the first of those nine to occur since the vote took place, and the California tournament is awarding $5.38 million to male players this year, as required by the ATP.
 |
The California tournament is awarding $5.38 million to players at this year’s event.
Photo by: GETTY IMAGES
|
(Because the tournament is an equal-prize-money event, it also is awarding $5.38 million to women players competing in the WTA Tour field.)
Here’s the caveat: The tournament is likely putting less into prize money increases this year, if any amount, than it has at any other time since Ellison acquired the event in 2009.
How is that possible?
Under Ellison each year, the tournament has paid far more than the amount of prize money required by the tour, creating concerns within the sport about disparity between the top events, called the 1000s. Last year, for example, the ATP required Ellison to pay $4.7 million, and he awarded $5.24 million instead.
This year, the requirement is the $5.38 million amount, and that is exactly what the tournament is at. But that 2.7 percent jump from last year almost certainly is not paid by the event itself. That is because to strive to make the 14 percent jump more palatable across the board, the ATP agreed that it would pay 3 percent of the 14 percent increase.
What about the next eight events?
The leader of the ATP did not precisely guarantee compliance.
“As I haven’t heard to the contrary, I’m assuming they will all pay the increase,” said ATP Executive Chairman Chris Kermode via email. “But time will ultimately tell.”
A source close to the Miami Open, owned by WME-IMG and which begins next week, said that event would meet the new ATP rule. The third and final 1000 event in the United States is the Western & Southern Open, which is owned by the U.S. Tennis Association. That Cincinnati event is in August. A spokesman for the USTA did not reply for comment on the event’s prize money intentions.
Former U.S. Open tournament director Jim Curley has been advising the top events. He did not respond for comment.
Of the six other 1000s, four are in Europe, one is in Canada and one is in China. Most of the events are owned by national tennis federations, though the one in Spain is privately held.
It’s unclear if Miami and Indian Wells, Calif., agreeing to the increase means the protest has fizzled. The events had retained noted labor attorney Jeffrey Kessler to examine whether a lawsuit was possible.
The ATP board of directors is structured with three player reps, three tournament reps and a tie-breaking vote cast by Kermode. In December, Kermode voted with the players against the tournaments, which argued they could not afford the prize money increase that passed.
There has been tension since the ATP structure was implemented in 1990, with the players and management being under one roof. Some tennis insiders believed the prize-money increase could be the trigger to scuttle the paradigm, but at least for now, that does not appear to be the case.
