So I’m a tad confused by what the players are trying to do exactly with the new Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA). A thread on what the ATP actually is:

Before the Open Era, professional tennis was haphazardly organized by various promoters’ tours, the most

successful promoter being Jack Kramer. He would contract with the world’s best players to play in his round-the-world tours, usually 4-6 players per world tour. Kramer was the organizer and the players were independent contractors. When the contract was up, the gig was up unless

renewed. There were no “associations”, other than the ITF (International Lawn Tennis Federation then), which was the de facto ruling body of international professional tennis. In this structure, the promoters and the ITF, which administered the international tournaments at the

time (not the individual “tours” like Kramer’s) had all the power. The only power the players had was at contract negotiation time. Call it the Era of Zero Power.

When tennis became Open in 1968, it also became popular, with young stars like Jimmy Connors & Bjorn Borg coming up.

The players needed a more cohesive, centralized tournament structure/tour. Several competing promotors vyed for the players’ skills, chief among them in the early 70s the WCT, created by a billionaire oil salesman, and the Grand Prix Tour. As the two Tours competed for players,

they began making rules to discourage participation in each others’ tours. This had a negative impact on the players, who still were living in the Era of Zero Power. For instance, Jimmy Connors, amongst many others, was barred from competing in the 1974 FO even though he was a

big favorite to win it bc he had played in the WCT that spring, and the FO was aligned with the Grand Prix.
The players responded to the constant trampling of their interests by banding together and forming the ATP in 1972. The purpose of the ATP was to protect player interest

vis a vis the tours (tournament directors/promoters) and the ITF. It was a union basically. The ATP did not organize the world tour. The Grand Prix/WCT and ITF still did that. But, it collected the players’ interests into one place and gave them a unified spot at the bargaining

table. Let’s call this the Era of 1/3 Power.
International men’s professional tennis was now administered by the Men’s International Professional Tennis Council (MIPTC). The Council consisted of representatives from the ITF, the tournament directors (Grand Prix/WCT), and the ATP.

So power was split into those 3 factions.

In 1988, the players announced that their organization, the ATP, was withdrawing from the MIPTC and forming their own world tour. They would no longer be playing on the Grand Prix Tour & they would no longer be governed by the 1/3 power

split of the MIPTC. In 1990, the ATP World Tour was formed & survives to present day.
The ATP Tour is administered/governed by the ATP Board of Directors, which consists of representatives from the tournaments (3 tournament directors) & the players/ATP (3 player representatives)

Call this the Era of 1/2 Power. The players essentially cut out the ITF and decided to run a circuit with only the players and the tournaments at the table. The ITF, of course, is still around bc they hold 4 considerable trump cards in the slams. But the actual tour was cut down

to two power players. The 7 person ATP Board of Directors consists of the ATP president, 3 players reps which are elected by the Player’s Council, and 3 tournament reps which are elected by the Tournament Council. The Player’s Council is a 12 member panel which acts as the

players’ collective voice. The 12 members are: 4 top 100, 2 51-100 players, 2 top 100 dubs, 2 at large, 1 alumni, 1 coach. The Tournament Council is a 13 member panel consisting of tourn directors from around the world.
So, as it stands now, the ATP World Tour is organized/

administered by the ATP Board of Directors, which consists of equal reps from the tournaments and the players.

Now, what it appears the PTPA is doing is creating a whole new entity separate and apart from the ATP internal governance. It appears what they’re saying with this new

entity is, essentially, the Player’s Council (which elects the player reps to the Board of Directors) and the players’ half of the BoDs, isn’t adequately representing the players’ interests, so they are forming a new entity apart from the Tour’s governance to advocate for those

interests. That’s what this *appears* to look like to me. And it could go one of three ways imo:

1. No significant change in power. The PTPA flops or turns out to be not so powerful/influential.

2. It backfires. The players puts their power into this basket, blows up the

governance structure of the ATP, and are left wishing they’d kept their seat at the table on the Board of Directors.

3. It succeeds, the governance structure remains the same, and the players now have power emanating from their half of the BoD, plus a union to back the players

and the Player’s Reps on the BoD in negotiations. They are essentially trying to create a new era, call it the Era of 2/1 Power where the players, for the first time, would hold more power than any other actors in the game. This is my take on whats happening right now. I could be

WAYYY off. Anyone with more insight and expertise, PLEASE chime in. At the end of the day, there’s no reason why the players shouldn’t do this imo. But it also may not change a ton of things. It depends on how powerful the new union becomes. If it became powerful enough, it

could potentially result in a new Tour, exactly what the ATP did in 1988. What do you guys think? Thanks for reading and discussing!