Want more from Front Office Sports
in your search results?
The latest volley in pro tennis’s civil war was fired in federal court Monday night.
Two different entities are claiming control over the Professional Tennis Players Association—the player advocacy group backed by billionaire Bill Ackman—and its commercial arm, Winners Alliance.
The newest suit was filed by an entity that calls itself the real PTPA against Wajid Mir.
Depending on what side of the lawsuit one is on, Mir is either the current PTPA general counsel and interim executive director, or the terminated top legal adviser. The litigations are engulfing the organization and possibly its antitrust lawsuit against five of tennis’s governing bodies.
Mir did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The lawsuit filed Monday accused Mir of orchestrating a coup, and it asks the court to block him from passing himself off as working for PTPA. Winners Alliance is a for-profit entity created to support the PTPA.
The lawsuit filed last week in D.C. district court—also filed by an entity claiming to be the PTPA—named Winners Alliance, former executive director Ahmad Nassar, and player board members as defendants. It, too, asks for an injunction: to declare Mir the rightful lead executive of PTPA and hand control over to him.
Which PTPA is legitimate is already causing confusion.
“ATP Chairman Andrea Gaudenzi recently informed members of the ATP’s tournament council that the ATP was progressing towards a settlement of the Antitrust Action,” last night’s federal court lawsuit charged. “However, the PTPA has had no recent settlement discussions with the ATP. Therefore, upon information and belief, Mir may be communicating, directly or indirectly, with the ATP about resolving a litigation in which Mir has no role.”
The PTPA group that sued last night encompasses WA, Nassar, and several board members, including PTPA cofounder Vasek Pospisil; the only named plaintiffs are PTPA and Winners. They allege Mir was on shaky ground performance-wise, and knowing he would be demoted or dismissed, tried to orchestrate a coup. This PTPA says it remains in charge of the organization, which includes bank accounts and its public-fronting messages.
The PTPA that Mir ostensibly runs—the plaintiffs in the D.C. court case—says the real board of directors met on June 3 and dismissed Romain Rosenberg as executive director and approved Mir investigating Nassar, Pospisil, and Winners for conflicts of interest. But the next day a different player board fired Mir and accused him of trying a coup.
The particulars of which board is legitimate will come down to a judicial decision that relies on interpretation of the PTPA’s bylaws and the tax-exempt legal framework. The D.C. court has scheduled a July 16 preliminary injunction hearing; how the new lawsuit affects that timeline is unclear.
“Mir’s object was control,” the federal lawsuit declares. “He sought to direct the PTPA’s finances, its personnel, and its litigation, and to be recognized as its de facto leader. Control of the Antitrust Action was central to his plan. On information and belief, Mir sought to use that litigation, and any settlement of it, as leverage to secure funding for himself independent of Winners Alliance and to entrench his own position.”
Mir is also accused in the federal case of creating fake social media handles “to disseminate false, misleading, and disparaging statements about the PTPA, Winners Alliance, and their respective leaderships.”
Pospisil and Novak Djokovic formed the PTPA in 2020 because they contended players were not being served by the ATP Tour and WTA Tour, which are co-owned by management and labor. The PTPA has struggled to be taken seriously; the biggest contribution so far is the antitrust case against the tours, Wimbledon, and the French and US opens.
These entities recently wrote the court overseeing their case, citing the split in the players’ group, to push again for PTPA’s removal as a plaintiff.
