Wimbledon’s 2026 prize money has risen by 20% from last year, but the increase has not stopped debate about how the tournament shares its revenue or how players have tried to push for more.
Former British player and world No. 4 Greg Rusedski was sharply critical of the boycott-style protest that saw some players in London limit their media obligations to 15 minutes in the days before the tournament. The protest was tied to a wider discussion about prize money, with the players previously reacting after Roland Garros confirmed a 9.5% increase compared with 2025.
Rusedski says players do not understand the business side
Rusedski, who retired in 2006, said the first-round prize money in his final season was £10,000, and he pushed back hard against the idea that today’s figures are not already a major jump. He called the situation “ridiculous” and said he did not think inflation had taken first-round prize money from £10,000 to £80,000 in 20 years.
“That’s nearly an 800% increase in prize money for a first round loss,” Rusedski said, arguing that players should better understand how Wimbledon operates. He described the event as a business, saying most players do not fully appreciate the costs involved in running the tournament, including TV, upgrades and other expenses.
He also pointed to the broader financial structure around Wimbledon, saying the event generates around £100 million in profit, with £50 million going to the LTA to help develop tennis in Britain and the other £50 million going back to players through prize money.
How the protest played out
The players’ action was not a full withdrawal from Wimbledon. Instead, it was a media-obligations protest that limited interviews to 15 minutes. Rusedski questioned whether that was the right approach, saying: “Fifteen minutes to the press — do you want the journalists against you? What is this gonna do? I think you need to educate the players.”
He also noted that seeded players on Centre Court receive 40 tickets for their team, which he said helps their sponsorship value as well. His view was that players want more money, but need to better understand the system before making demands that can backfire.
In the end, the protest did not continue through the tournament. The players ended it after constructive meetings with the All England Club, while Wimbledon moved ahead with what Sally Bolton described as “the largest prize money increase in the event’s history.”
That leaves Wimbledon with a familiar balancing act: reward the players, keep the event financially strong and avoid turning prize-money talks into a public stand-off every year. The 20% rise is a major headline in its own right, but the reaction to it shows how quickly the conversation can shift from numbers to tone, timing and trust.
