Until 1914, all world champions were professionals which goes a long way to explain the peculiar challenge format once used. It used to be the case that the world champion had no obligation to accept a challenge. He was in fact able to determine the place, time and opponent without restrictions.  

This strange practice was largely because, as a professional, the potential earnings of the challenge match had to justify taking time off to play the match. This seems to have required two “sponsors” to back their chosen professional in a large bet, a percentage of the sponsor’s winnings then going to the winning professional.  

And so only if the promised purse was large enough could a world champion be persuaded to accept a challenge, and only a challenger with a realistic chance of winning could find a sponsor to produce such a purse. As a result challenges were few and far between.  

Administering the world championship also became fraught with diplomatic difficulties in the 20^th century. The national governing body of the current world champion took responsibility for the world championship in 1959, and made sure that the existing world champion and home team player continued to have every advantage.  

A particular lowlight was in 1974. Challenger Howard Angus beat Jimmy Bostwick four sets to love on the first day of the world championship at New York in April, but recorded a temperature of 102 that evening. Angus requested the second day be postponed. Not only was this refused, the United States Court Tennis Association (USCTA) declared the first day’s play to be void. There was little Angus could do. After a few rounds negotiating, the world championship match was rescheduled for May (saving amateur Angus an expensive round trip across the Atlantic which a proposed August rescheduling would have required). Angus was then forced to change the shape of his racket which, despite being legal under the USCTA’s regulations, was deemed to be too wide. He lost the rematch seven sets to five, but took the title two years later in a somewhat happy ending. 

Problems about reluctance to deem a challenger worthy continued, so in 1980 it was agreed that players must have won a national open to submit a challenge. Yet when defending world champion Rob Fahey won every national open in 2000 and 2001, he was left without an opponent for the 2002 world championship. James Male, winner of the British Open in 1999, was the only eligible player, but he withdrew his right to challenge. 

The Australian Real Tennis Association (ARTA) was responsible for ensuring a world championship match be played 10-25 months after the last match (which was in 2000) and so tried to fill the gap with some of the national open finalists from 2000 and 2001. This caused great consternation with the USCTA and T&RA who refused to comply with this proposal. 

With Rob Fahey’s support, the IRTPA stepped in to create a new structure for the world championship which has survived to this day with only tinkering around the edges. Crucially, the world champion would no longer get to choose where, when or against whom he defended his title. And an impartial ball maker would make balls, negating the advantage a professional could give himself if he used balls he himself had made. The IRTPA executive now oversees a bidding process for the venue of the world championship, and a points based system is used to determine the best four players who compete with each other for the right to challenge the world champion. 

Past champions