New angle at the performance in the slams

[mick1303]

Recently I looked at the player's slam performance from the different angle. I wanted to analyze each year for each player using the metric of a worst performance. The better the worst performance - the better the player's year. As a limiting number I took reaching a 2nd week (R16). Turned out it is not that frequent that player reaches R16 at all 4 slams in a year. Overall 99 cases for the 56 years of Open Era (2020 is excluded because there was no Wimbledon). It is below two players per year.
Not a lot of players who have multiple years with such result:
Djokovic - 11
Federer - 10
Nadal - 8
Lendl - 6
Murray - 6
Agassi - 4
Edberg - 4
Ferrer - 3
Zverev - 3
Newcombe - 2
Courier - 2
Sampras - 2
Medvedev - 2
Sinner - 2

What is notable that JMac is not on this list (only managed it once). Alcaraz so far has zero (it did not help that he missed Australian in 2023). Surprised by low number for Sampras - it's not like he played in early years like Borg, when the trip to Australia was a rarity (in 1968 only two players PLAYED in all 4 slams). Djokovic is in the lead despite involuntarily missing Australian and US Open in 2022. Connors is punished for missing lots of French Opens. Overall this list is more interesting for modern players, when all slams are equally attended. There are two slamless players on this list - Ferrer and Zverev, reinforcing their status as the best players, who never won a slam.

[ponchi101]

I like these stats. And, indeed a very good metric.
How about the women? You have time for that?

[mick1303]

I like these stats. And, indeed a very good metric.
How about the women? You have time for that?

The code is ready, so I will just feed another set of data to it. Will do.

[mick1303]

For women there were 150 cases when a player reached at least R16 in all slams for a year - against 99 for men. This convinces me even more that bo3 slams are not the same.
The leaders with multiple years are:
Navratilova, Martina - 9
Sanchez Vicario, Arantxa - 7
Davenport, Lindsay - 7
Williams, Serena - 7
Graf, Steffi - 6
Goolagong, Evonne - 5
Williams, Venus - 5
Court, Margaret - 4
Evert, Chris - 4
Sukova, Helena - 4
Sharapova, Maria - 4
King, Billie Jean - 3
Casals, Rosie - 3
Mandlikova, Hana - 3
Shriver, Pam - 3
Sabatini, Gabriela - 3
Seles, Monica - 3
Martinez, Conchita - 3
Hingis, Martina - 3
Mauresmo, Amelie - 3
Clijsters, Kim - 3
Henin, Justine - 3
Radwanska, Agnieszka - 3
Durr, Francoise - 2
Reid, Kerry - 2
Turnbull, Wendy - 2
Wade, Virginia - 2
Kohde-Kilsch, Claudia - 2
Jaeger, Andrea - 2
Capriati, Jennifer - 2
Jankovic, Jelena - 2
Dementieva, Elena - 2
Swiatek, Iga - 2

[ashkor87]

Awesome ! Great analysis...nice to see Serena and Venus higher than Court...

[ponchi101]

For women there were 150 cases when a player reached at least R16 in all slams for a year - against 99 for men. This convinces me even more that bo3 slams are not the same.
The leaders with multiple years are:
Navratilova, Martina - 9
Sanchez Vicario, Arantxa - 7
Davenport, Lindsay - 7
Williams, Serena - 7
Graf, Steffi - 6
Goolagong, Evonne - 5
Williams, Venus - 5
Court, Margaret - 4
Evert, Chris - 4
Sukova, Helena - 4
Sharapova, Maria - 4
King, Billie Jean - 3
Casals, Rosie - 3
Mandlikova, Hana - 3
Shriver, Pam - 3
Sabatini, Gabriela - 3
Seles, Monica - 3
Martinez, Conchita - 3
Hingis, Martina - 3
Mauresmo, Amelie - 3
Clijsters, Kim - 3
Henin, Justine - 3
Radwanska, Agnieszka - 3
Durr, Francoise - 2
Reid, Kerry - 2
Turnbull, Wendy - 2
Wade, Virginia - 2
Kohde-Kilsch, Claudia - 2
Jaeger, Andrea - 2
Capriati, Jennifer - 2
Jankovic, Jelena - 2
Dementieva, Elena - 2
Swiatek, Iga - 2

I would not jump so quickly to the conclusion that it is because of the BO3 format, but with a 50% difference, something must be at work. That is a significant jump indeed.

[mick1303]

Awesome ! Great analysis...nice to see Serena and Venus higher than Court...

Don't forget that big portion of Court's career was before Open Era and is not included in this exercise. In Open Era she won only 11 of her 24 slams. The same goes for BJ King.

[mick1303]

I would not jump so quickly to the conclusion that it is because of the BO3 format, but with a 50% difference, something must be at work. That is a significant jump indeed.

You are probably correct that bo3 is not a single factor. In the early days of WTA tour, the elite was a small group of players, comparing to the ATP. So they had easier time to go deep in slams consistently, regardless of the format. I think only in the 90s WTA reached comparable depth with ATP.

[ashkor87]

There were several years when the AO was the last major, and many players did not bother to play it. If you drop the AO, maybe the results would be more meaningful?

Evert gave the AO a miss 13 or 14 times..

[ashkor87]

Navratilova said recently that the number of majors won is not the metric to judge a player by .she deliberately did not play many AOs..she won 18, would surely have passed Court, in my opinion..

[ashkor87]

If you drop the AO, of course the numbers reported will go up, maybe more for the women. Though the men also gave the AO a miss several times
In any case, it may give us a more accurate picture

[ponchi101]

Navs did not play the Aussie several years.
Chriss missed the French two years in a row (I think 75 & 76).
And Borg went only once, because it was too far away. At that time, it was like three planes if you flew from Europe.
So yes, all slams were not the same for a while.

[ashkor87]

Navs did not play the Aussie several years.
She missed the French two years in a row (I think 75 & 76).
And Borg went only once, because it was too far away. At that time, it was like three planes if you flew from Europe.
So yes, all slams were not the same for a while.

At least 13, possibly 19, according to wiki, years she skipped the AO.

[mick1303]

I said upfront that this metric is more meaningful for modern players. BTW Navratilova did play AO 10 times, which allowed her to get a top spot on this list. Also a disclaimer: for the years 1977 - 1986 I considered December Australian Open as a part of next year calendar. This allowed me to avoid 1977 as a year with 5 slams and 1986 as a year with 3 slams. And the order of slams within the year is always the same in my calendar.

[ashkor87]

since you have the data, though, what happens if you dont consider the AO, that is, only 3 majors?