The cold war between tennis players and the sport’s integrity authority grew several degrees hotter this week, as the leading but nascent organizing body for tennis players directly questioned the methods by which tennis polices doping and corruption.

In a letter addressed to Karen Moorehouse, the chief executive of the International Tennis Integrity Agency (ITIA) and seen by The Athletic, Ahmad Nassar, the executive director of the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA), alleged that ITIA investigators have on occasion seized the personal mobile phones of players, harassed their families and threatened players with sanctions and suspensions unless they immediately do what is being demanded of them.

“The reports we have received demonstrate that the ITIA’s investigative process is broken, and that ITIA investigators are abusing their roles,” Nassar wrote.

“While we would hope that these incidents violate the ITIA’s investigative protocols, given the prevalence of complaints, we believe there are flaws at the core of how the ITIA conducts itself,” he added.

Nassar, who leads the PTPA alongside Djokovic, told The Athletic that more than 10 players have contacted the PTPA in recent months to allege aggressive treatment by ITIA investigators.

One player alleged that investigators demanded he turn over his phone and threatened to provisionally suspend him if he contacted a lawyer before doing so. Other players alleged that they were threatened with public disclosure of a provisional suspension without any clear, established grounds for a sanction. These players cannot be identified as doing so would reveal their being under ITIA investigation.

The PTPA did not disclose whether these allegations related to anti-doping offences or anti-corruption offences, and a footnote in Nassar’s letter characterized an investigator as “all individuals acting under the control of the ITIA.”

In a statement to The Athletic issued through Adrian Bassett, the chief spokesperson for the ITIA, the agency characterized the allegations as “serious, yet generic,” and said that it would investigate any specified allegations of improper behavior.

“It is currently our belief that ITIA investigators work according to the rules, with respect and reflecting our values,” it said.

The agency added that the procedures for issuing a provisional suspension are clearly described in its list of rules regarding anti-doping and anti-corruption, and said that it does not take lightly the decision to take a player’s mobile phone. “It must be necessary, proportionate and lawful. We will not request a device without full consideration of both the intelligence received, and the impact it will have on an individual.”

According to people involved in crafting the letter to the ITIA, who spoke on condition of anonymity to outline the process, the letter marked a change in the PTPA’s strategy in how it engages with the most powerful organizations in tennis.

Nassar copied law firm Weil, Gotshal and Manges, which has acted on behalf of the N.F.L. Players Association and the National Basketball Players Association, on the letter. The PTPA has now retained the firm to represent the organization and to explore potential litigation and other challenges to the governing bodies that have controlled tennis for the past half-century — the ATP and WTA Tours, and the four Grand Slam tournaments, all of which were copied on the letter. It has also hired James Quinn, a former Weil partner and sports antitrust attorney.

Ahmad Nassar has been executive director of the PTPA since summer 2022. ( Ilya S. Savenok / Getty Images for PTPA)

The challenges to the sport’s power structure could take many forms according to Quinn and the involved with crafting the ITIA letter. They include possible antitrust lawsuits, and pleas to the U.S. Congress and other governmental entities.

“You look at tennis and how it treats players and it’s basically pre-Neanderthal,” Quinn said in an interview Thursday. “This is an antitrust fire zone.”

GO DEEPER

Inside tennis’ corridors of power: A fractured hall of mirrors where nothing is as it seems

Nassar’s letter to the ITIA, which requested an initial response by October 15, includes questions about the qualifications and compensation of investigators and doping control officers charged with collecting urine from players for drug tests.

It also asks how the ITIA balances the legal principle of presumption of innocence with its suspension system, in which a player who does not successfully appeal the provisional suspension that comes with a positive doping test is named and banned from the sport while the full ITIA investigation into their test is conducted. 

Nassar also asked for clarity on the nature of the evidence the ITIA requires to begin an investigation, whether into doping or anti-corruption, which can include match fixing and spot betting by players or umpires.

“Players sign up to these to be part of events run by our funders (ATP, WTA, Grand Slams and ITF),” the ITIA said.

“Provisional suspensions cannot be issued without due cause, there is a strict process which is adhered to, and an independent appeal process for players.”

The letter comes on the heels of two significant developments for the ITIA.

Last Saturday October 5, the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) announced that it would appeal the ITIA’s decision not to suspend men’s world No. 1 Jannik Sinner for two anti-doping violations.

GO DEEPER

Jannik Sinner’s doping case explained: What WADA appeal means and what is at stake for tennis

Advertisement

Sinner twice tested positive for clostebol in March, but an independent hearing convened by the ITIA found that Sinner bore “no fault or negligence” for those positive tests. The tribunal accepted his explanation that he had been contaminated by a healing spray purchased by his trainer, Umberto Ferrara. Sinner’s physiotherapist, Giacomo Naldi, used the spray on a cut on his hand and then subsequently gave Sinner a massage on his back and applied treatments to his feet, through which Sinner was contaminated.

WADA, which sits above the ITIA is seeking “a period of ineligibility of between one and two years,” in which the two-time Grand Slam champion would be banned from playing tennis. The WADA appeal is now being overseen by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

On Thursday October 10, CAS released the written reasons for its decision to reduce the ITIA’s banning of former women’s world No. 1 Simona Halep from four years to nine months. The large discrepancy between CAS and the ITIA’s conclusions, and perceptions of Sinner’s treatment being favorable, have further roiled players’ impressions of the body that governs integrity in their sport.

Simona Halep earlier this month played in Hong Kong after her return to tennis was derailed by injury. (Yu Chun Christopher Wong / Eurasia Images via Getty Images)

“It’s quite obvious that we have a system that is not working well,” Novak Djokovic, the 24-time Grand Slam champion, said during a news conference in Shanghai. “There’s way too many inconsistencies, way too many governing bodies involved, and, you know, just this whole case is not helping our sport at all.”

Djokovic is a founding member of the PTPA, the organization he and others created four years ago to give players a united voice independent of the two tours, the ATP and the WTA.  He is among many players, not all of them PTPA members, who have grown frustrated with the tennis status quo, despite the existence of ATP and WTA player councils which are designed to engage the players with the machinations of the sport which they show off to the world.

“We acknowledge it is not pleasant for players to be under investigation for alleged wrongdoing; however, it is our job to investigate matters thoroughly – to protect everyone in the sport, including PTPA members,” the ITIA said.

Nassar’s letter concurs — to a point.

“The players want a game defined by fair play and integrity, but they do not deserve to be subject to arbitrary and overbearing investigative mistreatment,” he wrote.

(Top photo: Hector Ratamal / AFP via Getty Images)