A Grand Slam champion’s cheque is now worth millions, but that was not always the case. For much of tennis history, the biggest tournaments paid no official prize money at all—and even after payouts began, men and women could receive very different amounts for winning the same event.
The story of Grand Slam prize money is a story of professional tennis becoming a global business. It also helps explain why a tournament’s headline winner’s cheque is only part of the picture: the total purse, the money paid to early-round players, and the value of those amounts over time all matter.
Before prize money: the amateur era
The first Wimbledon Championships were held in 1877, but for decades Grand Slam tennis operated under amateur rules. Players were not supposed to earn money for competing. That did not mean elite players had no financial support: travel expenses, equipment, and other benefits could be covered in various ways. But official prize cheques were not part of the tournament as they are today.
That changed in 1968, when tennis entered the Open era and professionals were allowed to compete alongside amateurs. Wimbledon’s 1968 Championships offered a total purse of £26,150. The men’s singles champion received £2,000; the women’s champion received £750. Those figures capture two important turning points: prize money had arrived, but pay between the men’s and women’s draws was far from equal.
The other majors also began paying players as the Open era took hold. Their early figures were set in different currencies and under different tournament arrangements, so simple comparisons can be misleading. The broader pattern, though, was clear: prize money grew as the sport attracted more spectators, sponsorship and television coverage.
How the prize pools grew
Grand Slam purses did not climb at a steady, identical rate. Each tournament made its own decisions, influenced by local revenue, commercial deals and the costs of staging the event. Over time, however, the sums rose from thousands to millions. Television helped turn matches into valuable international broadcasts, while sponsorship and larger audiences expanded the tournaments’ financial reach.
For a sense of the scale, consider Wimbledon. Its men’s singles champion earned £2,000 in 1968. In 2025, the singles champions each received £3 million. That is a striking increase even before accounting for inflation. The same comparison also shows why it is useful to look beyond the winner: a modern tournament’s total purse is spread across far more players and events than a champions’ cheque alone suggests.
Recent figures give a snapshot of the modern scale. The 2025 amounts below are in each tournament’s local currency, so they should not be read as a direct ranking of which event pays the most.
| Tournament | 2025 singles champion’s prize | 2025 total prize fund |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Open | AUD 3.5 million | AUD 96.5 million |
| French Open | €2.55 million | €56.35 million |
| Wimbledon | £3 million | £53.5 million |
| US Open | US$5 million | US$90 million |
Exchange rates change, and so does the cost of living in each host country. A higher number in one currency does not automatically mean a champion has earned more in comparable terms. Inflation matters too: £2,000 in 1968 had much greater purchasing power than £2,000 today. Yet the modern Grand Slam winner’s prize has grown far beyond inflation alone, reflecting the sport’s much larger commercial footprint.
The long road to equal prize money
Equal prize money was not introduced at all four majors at once. The US Open led the way in 1973, after a campaign by players including Billie Jean King. King had already helped establish the Virginia Slims circuit for women, and she argued that women deserved equal pay when they were competing at the same major tournament. The US Open’s decision made it the first Grand Slam to offer equal singles prize money.
The other three tournaments followed much later: the Australian Open in 2001, the French Open in 2006 and Wimbledon in 2007. Today, men and women receive the same singles prize at each stage of the main draw at all four majors. In 2025, for example, the Australian Open’s men’s and women’s singles champions each received AUD 3.5 million.
That milestone concerns the singles draw. Doubles, mixed doubles and other competitions have their own prize structures, and payouts are not necessarily identical across every event or category. It is worth checking a tournament’s published breakdown if you want to compare specific rounds or disciplines.
Why the champion’s cheque is only part of the story
A champion’s payout attracts attention, but most players leave a Grand Slam well before the final. A main-draw player who loses in the first round still receives prize money, and the amount generally rises with each round won. Qualifying rounds, doubles, wheelchair tennis and junior events also have their own payouts, though the amounts differ.
Those early-round payments matter particularly to players outside the top tier. A player ranked far below the stars may need to cover flights, accommodation, coaching, physio, equipment and taxes. Prize money is gross income, not take-home pay. One first-round cheque can help, but it does not necessarily leave a player with a profit after a season’s expenses.
Grand Slam increases to early-round payouts can therefore have a practical impact beyond the headline figures. They may help players manage the cost of competing at the highest level, even as the biggest share of attention—and money—still goes to the later rounds. To understand how a tournament distributes its purse, compare the full round-by-round schedule rather than looking only at the champion’s prize.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which Grand Slam first offered equal prize money?
The US Open was the first to award equal prize money to men and women in singles, doing so in 1973. The other three majors adopted equal singles prize money between 2001 and 2007.
How much did the Wimbledon champion earn in 1968?
The men’s singles champion received £2,000, while the women’s singles champion received £750. Wimbledon’s total prize fund that year was £26,150.
Do Grand Slam prize figures account for inflation?
No. Published prize amounts are nominal figures—the actual amount awarded in that year’s currency. To compare purchasing power across decades, you need to adjust for inflation, and comparisons between countries also need to account for exchange rates.
Does a player keep the full prize money?
Not necessarily. Prize money is generally a pre-tax amount, and players may also have substantial travel, coaching, training and other costs. The amount left after those expenses varies widely.
Final Thoughts
Grand Slam prize money has changed from nothing in the amateur era to multimillion-dollar singles prizes today. The biggest milestones include the start of Open tennis in 1968, the gradual rise of tournament revenues and the long campaign for equal pay. For a fuller picture of what a major pays, look at its history, the round-by-round distribution and the effects of inflation—not just the winner’s cheque.
