ATP & WTA rankings

[Suliso]

That has been the case since the last stone age. Women mature physically at a younger age. Difference is ca 2-3 years

[Suliso]

Another interesting analysis this time taking all the Slam winners since 2000 AO and looking at what age they first reached top 100, top 50 and top 20.

The numbers are: Slams won (including before 2000), age (in decimal system) in top 100, top 50 and top 20. Active players in blue.

ATP

Roger Federer 20 // 18.1 // 18.5 // 19.6
Rafael Nadal 20 // 16.9 // 17.2 // 18.8
Novak Djokovic 18 // 17.9 //19.0 // 19.4
Pete Sampras 14 // 17.3 // 18.5 // 18.6
Andre Agassi 8 // 16.5 // 17.5 // 17.8
Stan Wawrinka 3 // 19.9 // 20.9 // 23.1
Gustavo Kuerten 3// 19.9 // 20.8 // 20.8
Andy Murray 3 // 18.4 // 18.8 // 19.2
Lleyton Hewitt 2 // 17.8 // 18.2 // 18.9
Marat Safin 2 // 18.4 // 18.8 // 20.3
Thomas Johansson 1 // 20.8 // 22.0 // 23.6
Albert Costa 1 // 19.0 // 19.3 // 20.7
Juan Carlos Ferrero 1 // 19.3 // 19.6 // 20.2
Gaston Gaudio 1 // 20.3 // 21.2 // 24.2
Goran Ivanisevic 1 // 17.5 // 17.8 // 18.9
Andy Roddick 1 // 18.6 // 18.7 // 19.0
Juan Martin del Potro 1 //18.0 // 19.0 // 19.8
Marin Cilic 1 // 19.0 // 19.3 //20.3
Dominic Thiem 1 // 20.4 // 20.9 // 21.9

It's quite remarkable really. Only one multi Slam winner was not in the top 20 before his 21st birthday (Stan Wawrinka) and only 3 Slam winners were not in the top 100 as teenagers. Two of those were kind of flukes, it's still open as far as Thiem is concerned but he'd have to pull of another Stan like career. All the true greats started very early.

By the way that's 19 different winners for 85 Slams which also tells how much certain few have won, albeit that's not the point of this analysis.


Similar WTA analysis to follow at a later date. Need more time for that considering that data available in a less handy format.

[ponchi101]

The top guys went from being outside of the top 100 to inside the top 20 in a little bit over 1.8 years, more or less. Remarkable.

[Suliso]

Of course the other way around is not true, not everyone who starts very bright ends up winning Slams although chances are high. I already mentioned that Thiem is not really on the "right path" statistically, but is anyone younger than Dominic on it? Let's have a look...

Alexander Zverev 18.0 // 19.0 // 19.5
Stefanos Tsitsipas 19.2 // 19.7 // 20.0
Denis Shapovalov 18.4 // 18.6 // 20.0
Felix Auger Aliassime 18.5 // 18.6 // 19.0
Jannik Sinner 18.2 // 19.1 // ??? . Sinner is currently #34 and 19.5 years old, likely would be in the top 20 already if not for covid.

As you see these five fit the mold much better than Thiem. Will they all win Slams? Unlikely, but I'll be very surprised if there are not at least two Slam winners in this group.

[ponchi101]

Once the big three leave, they will. They are very young. Sinner, specially.

[skatingfan]

I'd be curious to see the lost generation stats - just haven't been home to do the work myself.

[ponchi101]

You don't have to go home to do the work:
Grand Slams: 0
Grand Slam finals: 2
Top 4 ranking: 0
MS1000 titles: 0
WTF: 1

They simply had no chance, playing in the middle of the dominance of the three monsters and the Andy-Stan opening acts.

[Suliso]

Who do you count as top representatives of this "lost* generation?

[ponchi101]

I thought we were talking about Grigor, Kei and Milos. Delpo and Cilic did win their USO's, so that is not a career completely void of success.

[skatingfan]

You don't have to go home to do the work:
Grand Slams: 0
Grand Slam finals: 2
Top 4 ranking: 0
MS1000 titles: 0
WTF: 1

They simply had no chance, playing in the middle of the dominance of the three monsters and the Andy-Stan opening acts.

But to make the age statistics more important, or important at all, don't we need to show that players that failed to win Grand Slam titles didn't hit those ranking markers at an early age?

[Suliso]

You don't have to go home to do the work:
Grand Slams: 0
Grand Slam finals: 2
Top 4 ranking: 0
MS1000 titles: 0
WTF: 1

They simply had no chance, playing in the middle of the dominance of the three monsters and the Andy-Stan opening acts.

But to make the age statistics more important, or important at all, don't we need to show that players that failed to win Grand Slam titles didn't hit those ranking markers at an early age?

Yes, we would. Feel free to look them up

[skatingfan]

Yes, we would. Feel free to look them up

I made a spreadsheet but I can't get it to post to this site - clip & paste doesn't work & there doesn't seem to be an option to upload a file from my computer.

So I looked at all the players that have finished in the top 10 in the past 10 years (2011-2020) & only one player fits the pattern perfectly and hasn't won a major, and is also past the point where winning a major is likely, and that is Gasquet.

Richard Gasquet 17.3/18.9/19.0

Alexander Zverev & Stefano Tsitsipas (Reached the top 20 one day after his 20th birthday, so I'm giving it to him.) still have a few years to win a major.

Some players hit some of the milestones - Almagro, Berdych, Monfils, Nishikori, Dimitrov, & Rublev.

Almagro 19.1/20.7/22.7
Berdych 18.4/19.1/20.7
Monfils 18.7/18.9/22.1
Nishikori 18.3/21.3/22.1
Dimitrov 19.7/21.5/22.7
Rublev 19.7/19.8/22.2

Almagro, Berdych, Dimitrov, & Rublev had their progress slowed after reaching the top 50, though Rublev's still got time to win a major title.

Monfils really seems to have lost the plot after reaching the top 50, and needed more than 3 years to find the motivation to reach the top 20, (much longer than other player in this category) and that can really be seen in his ranking history as he bobs around the 20's & 30's for a couple years.

Nishikori's injury issues started early & derailed his career while he was still a teenager. He made the top 100 in April 2008, but did not make the top 50 until April 2011, and that interval includes a few weeks in 2010 where his ranking completely dropped off & he had to start from scratch.

The other players that might be considered to be part of the lost generation (those born in the first five years of the '90's) were Goffin, Raonic, Carreno Busta, Schwartzman, and Sock did not meet any of the age milestones for ranking. Raonic came close to the first two by making his top 100, & top 50 debut shortly after his 20th birthday, but then injuries (hip injury 2nd round Wimbledon 2011) prevented him from making the top 20 for more than a year.

The other two active players who could possibly be seen as slam contenders, Medvedev & Berrettini, have missed all the milestones.

Seems to confirm that making the top 100, top 50, & top 20 before the 20th birthday is a strong indicator of a future slam winner, but not doing so doesn't mean that a player won't win a slam, but the odds start to drop. Might have do this for the another couple of decades & see what it looks like.

[Deuce]

I made a spreadsheet but I can't get it to post to this site - clip & paste doesn't work & there doesn't seem to be an option to upload a file from my computer.

If you'd prefer to show the spread sheet, you could try doing a screen shot (print screen) of the spread sheet, then dragging it into the compose box as a .jpg file.

[skatingfan]

If you'd prefer to show the spread sheet, you could try doing a screen shot (print screen) of the spread sheet, then dragging it into the compose box as a .jpg file.

Print screen on Windows 10 just saves the image to the clipboard & so there is nothing to drag & drop.

[Deuce]

If you'd prefer to show the spread sheet, you could try doing a screen shot (print screen) of the spread sheet, then dragging it into the compose box as a .jpg file.

Print screen on Windows 10 just saves the image to the clipboard & so there is nothing to drag & drop.

Press 'print screen', then open a photo viewing program, right click, and paste. The most recent 'print screen' should appear.

If that doesn't work for some reason, you can do this:
https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/win ... fb0dbfe489

.