If you feel strongly enough about something to stage a protest, one might think you would have a decent handle on the details. Or, at the very least, want to talk about it.As they did in Paris last month, top tennis stars like world No1s Jannik Sinner and Aryna Sabalenka cut short their Wimbledon media duties as part of demands for a bigger slice of prize money.At the French Open, they restricted their press conferences to just 15 minutes, a nod to the 15 per cent of revenue they get at Grand Slams.This time, though, instead of keeping their boycott purely to the pre-tournament media day, those protests will drag into the first week of action at the All England Club and the players’ post-match commitments, which will be most felt by broadcasters such as the BBC, who pay more than £60m a year for the rights but may be left unable to speak to the world’s best players.All of this after Wimbledon bumped up their prize money by 20 per cent – the biggest rise in its history – to £64.2million. If Sinner or Sabalenka seize the singles crown in a fortnight’s time, they will take home £3.6m.Wimbledon said publicly that they were ‘surprised and disappointed’ by the decision of the players’ group, led by former WTA chief Larry Scott, who is acting as chief negotiator, but behind the scenes senior figures are understood to be furious. At the French Open, the players restricted their press conferences to just 15 minutes, a nod to the 15 per cent of revenue they get at Grand Slams Top Wimbledon figures had insisted they were confident of avoiding further protests after constructive talks between the two parties and yet, despite the pay bump, they have returnedDuring the French Open, top Wimbledon figures had insisted they were confident of avoiding further protests after constructive talks between the two parties and yet, despite the pay bump, they have not only returned but been ramped up.Only whenever those protestors, or ‘strikers’ as they kept being referred to by Wimbledon staff, faced questions about it, they were so short on detail. The more anyone tried to dig into it, the less that came back.‘If you look to the prize money over the last 10 years, it’s kind of, like, stayed the same,’ said Sabalenka. Only, that’s nonsense. The prize money in 2016 was £28.1m and the winner got £2m.What she was trying to parrot was the standpoint of Scott’s group that the percentage of revenue given to prize money at Wimbledon a decade ago was 14.9 per cent and now it’s projected to be around 14.4 per cent. They want 16 per cent. If they had got their way, Wimbledon would have upped prize money to around £71m.When asked if the players were unaware that Wimbledon put forward the idea for a players’ council at the start of the year for them to discuss it all, Sabalenka replied: ‘I feel like we are very well informed. Once again, I hope we are going to sit at a table and going to negotiate something and we’ll never have to come back to boycotting media, boycotting any tournament.’ Again, no detail.Sabalenka reiterated again that they are doing it not for themselves but for those players lower down the ladder. ‘I’m sure the crowd understand us,’ she added when asked how their protests might look to a public constantly asked to stump up more for tickets. Let’s see.First-round losers will get £80,000. Sabalenka and Sinner earned more than £25m between them in prize money in 2025.Like in Paris, Sabalenka eventually cut her conference short after eight minutes. ‘Last one, sorry, unfortunately, I have to go. I’m so sorry, guys.’It didn’t feel like many were that well-informed. On the subject of a player council, Felix Auger-Aliassime suggested: ‘That is something we are looking to do in the future, for the players to have a voice at the table with the Grand Slams. I know Wimbledon is ready to do so. You don’t set that up in a day.’ Wimbledon proposed it in December. BBC pay more than £60m a year for the rights but may be left unable to speak to the world’s best playersAt least Daniil Medvedev knew the party line. ‘We’re not accountants, we can just process information that we’re getting from either Wimbledon or Larry. From what we are seeing, the percentage of the revenue is lower than it was 10 years ago, meaning we’re kind of getting even less money. At least that’s the info we’re getting so that’s why we’re pushing for just having something more fair that we think is fair.’Sinner didn’t even want to talk about it. ’This will be a shorter press conference and Jannik will be timing himself,’ announced the moderator as the world No1 sat in the media theatre. They did the same for all the strikers.After admitting the Wimbledon rise was an ‘improvement’, twice he shut down questions that tried to get under the bonnet.Why did the players not take up Wimbledon’s offer of the player council? ‘I think it’s better if we don’t discuss here. I don’t like to talk about this at the moment.’If progress is being made, why continue to boycott? ‘I think we talked enough about this. The Grand Slams know what we ask, then we see how it goes. I’m here now to talk about tennis.’Already, post-Paris, there feels like there’s rifts in the camp. New French Open champion Alexander Zverev spoke to the media for more than 30 minutes after being one of the strikers in Paris. Alex De Minaur did the same at Roland Garros but changed his stance here.‘I thought that Wimbledon made a big step in the right direction and something that should be noted,’ said De Minaur. ‘It felt like it was a way for me to acknowledge their big step, right? We’re still probably hoping as a whole that we eventually get to that number, but this is by no means a small step, right?’This ongoing row overshadowed the start of the French Open, threatens to do the same at Wimbledon, and could rumble on to the US Open where top players consider boycotting the showcase mixed doubles event.It all just added to the sense yesterday that players demands, when you tried to dig into the detail, have largely been drawn on the back of a cigarette packet.Wimbledon believe that using revenue as the barometer is arbitrary as it ignores the hundreds of millions spent on development of player facilities. Some of their revenue is ring-fenced for such things. Unlike regular tour events, Wimbledon gives the lion’s share of its profits to the LTA to help with grassroots tennis.‘Wimbledon gives 90 per cent of its profit away – there’s no one getting rich at Wimbledon,’ former British No1 and now AELTC board member Tim Henman, who was involved in the discussions, told Daily Mail Sport.‘Wimbledon has been around for 150 years, and I think it’s safe to say they’ve done a pretty good job. It’s a business model that works, and I think we’ll continue to work.’