A battle that could decide the future of men’s tennis is under way in a U.S. federal court.

Facing off in front of Judge Gregory M.Sleet will be representatives of the German Tennis Federation which is suing the ATP Tour Inc. over its decision to downgrade the status of the Hamburg Masters Series clay court tournament, starting next year.

If the ATP loses, the consequences will be felt well outside the Rothenbaum Sport stadium in Hamburg. Because lawyers for the German Tennis Federation are challenging the ATP under U.S. anti-trust laws which would seriously affect its ability to control the tour.

In papers filed with the court, the ATP admitted that if it loses the "ATP is nothing more — and likely far less — than a roseter and a rule book."

So far all attempts to resolve the suit, including a meeting between the two sides in Boston in May, have failed. And the German Federation last month upped the ante by declaring that it is seeking $76.6 million in damages – more than the total reported assets of the ATP.

Ivan Ljubicic, who is the chairman of the ATP player council said: "We are at the most critical moment for our sport in 20 years. The next two to three months are critical. If the ATP wins, the ATP presumably stays as is. But if Hamburg wins we donlt really know what happens. It could change the whole sport."

In the suit, filed in U.S. court in Delaware, the German Federation claim the ATP has been "hijacked by a majority of its board of directors and by certain executive officers."  And CEO Etienne DeVilliers and board members Charles Pasarell and Graham Pearce, among others, are named as defendants.

What’s got the Germans so angry is not just the ATP’s decision to alter the calendar next year and cut the number of Masters events (Hamburg would lose its place as a top tier tournament two weeks before the French Open) but they say the fact the ATP has "monopolistic control" over players means it would be impossible for a non-ATP event to attract top talent. And without top players they would be unable to attract the same crowds or collect the same TV revenues.

The lawsuit accuses the ATP of having "appropriated the property rights which formally belonged to competing tennis tournaments, while simultaneously eliminating the ability of those tournaments to compete with one another or with the ATP....It has done so to establish a favored class of tournaments in which the ATP has a significant proprietary interest."

The German Tennis Federation tournament dates back to 1892 and has been played in Hamburg since 1901.  It is now 49 percent owned by the Qatar Tennis Federation, which is a co-plaintiff in the suit. When the ATP announced it was taking control of the tour in 1988, the Hamburg tournament was one of the original members. 

They claim to have invested "tens of millions of dollars" in the tournament, including adding a state of the art retractable roof.

The trouble started in the winter of 2006 when the ATP held a series of board meetings in London, Shanghai and New York and created the "Brave New World" plan to reorganize the men’s tour.

Under the plan the Masters Series would be renamed the Masters 1000 and there would be two fewer tournaments. One of the tournaments would be sold to China for "millions of dollars which will go to the ATP," says the lawsuit.  

Players would be compelled to take part in all of the Masters 1000 events and at least four of the next series down, the Masters 500.   The suit quotes DeVilliers saying: "There are no options for these events. Its eight of eight for the players. If you don’t show up you will be fined and suspended." But the suit claims the ATP uses other "sticks and carrots" to force players to participate in favored tournaments.

• Top 50 players must give the ATP a written commitment before the end of the year to be eligible for the following season. They agree to play all Masters 1000 events; the Grand Slams and if they qualify the ATP Master’s Cup.
• The ATP runs the rankings and awards twice the points for Masters 1000 events as any other ATP tournament. Players who miss the tournaments will get zero points and they cannot be made up at other tournaments.
• Funds will be set aside from individual tournaments for a bonus program, with amounts reaching into the millions of dollars,  for players who play all the tournaments and get the most points. The Germans see this as a a means to share a "small portion" of the monopoly profits to ensure the players "compliance in the ATP’s illegal, anti-competitive scheme."

All of which makes it harder for any other tournament to attract top class players. Which, say the Germans,  boosts the value of those tournaments owned by what they describe as the "ATP cartel" and damage the rest, which would only be allowed to apply for Masters 1000 Series status after ten years. 

Under the plan, as of next year Hamburg would lose its slot two weeks before the French Open because the ATP wants to give that date to a new combined men’s and women’s tournament in Madrid. 

Several top players, including Roger Federer , have sided with the Germans. But the ATP is sticking to its guns.

In a filing with the Delaware court the ATP says the German Federation’s complaint is simply about keeping their place on the calendar. "They make this demand without any regard for whether they merit that status or whether that schedule is sensible…(they) ignore the question of whether their self interest will harm the greater interests of the ATP members, the tour and the sport."

 The ATP says: "Evidence will show that the popularity of tennis in Germany has been declining" and the Hamburg did not warrant its spot in the highest tier as a lead up to the French Open.

"Stripped of all distractions, the lawsuit challenges the core right and authority of thea professional sports league or circuit to structure and conduct its operations — to determine where, when and what type of events are played and where its players shall play and to do so in a manner that responds to the competitive demands of the marketplace."

The ATP says that they plan to show written evidence that the German Federation has previously acknowledged the ATP’s authority to control the tour. The German federation "chose to be ATP members and to operate the Hamburg tournament as part of the tour and therefore, to enjoy the benefits of being part of the tour."  

Despite all the tough talk, both sides have been looking for a way out. The German Federation says the ATP has approached them to discuss paying for their "downgraded status." 

DeVilliers is reported to be anxious to find a settlement. The ATP’s legal costs have reportedly, already topped $7 million.  And the German Federation’s chief, Georg von Waldenfels told Deutsche Presse-Agentur, "We want to look into every chance for a settlement."

De Villiers may also be under pressure from his own board. The ATP has a unique structure in sports as  a joint venture between tournaments and players with a six member board of directors — three elected by the players council and three by the tournaments. The players council, which recently elected Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djovik, has made no secret of the fact that it is unhappy with DeVilliers and many of them support the Hamburg tournament.

As king of the clay courts Nadal obviously has an interest in the future of Hamburg. "Our complaint is that we have representatives on the board who do not represent the players. They’re representing the head of the ATP."