ATP top 100 stats: Effects of age, height, 1hbh, etc.

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by BevelDevil, Jun 17, 2013.

  1. BevelDevil

    BevelDevil Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,544
    I compiled some basic player profile data on the Top 100 from the ATP website and did some number crunching for fun. The data is from last week's (June 10, 2013) Top 100 list, so it's already somewhat out of date.

    There are some facts that we all know, but hopefully there's also some interesting tidbits and angles.

    http://beveldevil.blogspot.com/2013/06/atp-top-100-statistics.html

    If you find the tables confusing/scary/boring, just read the accompanying text, which is hopefully better.


    Some highlights:

    - 25% of the Top 100 are 30 years or older.

    - Younger players turned pro sooner.

    - Younger players are taller.

    - The 1hbh didn't seem to delay turning pro.

    - The Top 50 is taller than the top 51-100, but not younger.

    - The Top 50 turned pro at a younger age.

    - Ranking, in general, is not affected by: 1hbh vs. 2hbh, age or left-handedness. It is affected by physique.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2013
    #1
  2. Russeljones

    Russeljones G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    12,927
    Commendable effort. I must say I wasn''t the brightest in maths class but I think I get the gist of it. Very interesting.
     
    #2
  3. PSNELKE

    PSNELKE Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,134
    Effect of height is mad obvious for Isner.
    That guy is a goddman loser, still being tall as a tree his serve will save his butt on most occasions.
     
    #3
  4. mightyrick

    mightyrick Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    Messages:
    4,863
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Agree. Welcome to the modern game.

    When Isner is considered a successful tennis player... it's gotten ridiculous. All you need to do is have a serve in the high 130s or low 140s... and be able to hit a forehand... and you're Top-20. It's unreal.
     
    #4
  5. TennisCJC

    TennisCJC Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,503
    Yes, but Federer and Nadal are both 6' 1" tall and they have dominated ATP for last 10 years.

    I do think there is definitely something to the taller theory though. I can remember in the wood racket and early graphite racket days with gut strings that shorter players could move tall guys around and make them hit lots of low balls. Tall guys could hit big serves even with wood/gut and early graphite/gut but they could not hit the thundering topspin groundstrokes that stay in the court that modern graphite/co-poly allows them to hit. Get rid of co-poly and restrict racket size and width and I think you would see the tall guys struggle a lot.
     
    #5
  6. Lukhas

    Lukhas Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Messages:
    6,585
    Location:
    France
    Isner's height doesn't explain everything. Del Potro moves way better than him, and Janowicz moves even better and is much more solid in groundies. EDIT: Son of volleyball players it seems, ex volleyball player IIRC. Lacks a more "tame" temper though. Sometimes you'd forget the Polish guy is that tall. Isner can only blame himself for his movement and groundstrokes.
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2013
    #6
  7. citybert

    citybert Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2011
    Messages:
    991
    Those are great points on height. Also its plain physics, taller guys will be bigger and also have longer limbs and can generate more tourque on their backswings for more natural power than shorter players, who need to exert more energy for powerful shots. Its also the same in golf. Obviously too tall is bad for movement and explosiveness and slices.

    Nadal is definitely not 6 1 though in real life he seems much closer to 6 2, 6 3
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2013
    #7
  8. BevelDevil

    BevelDevil Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1,544
    It seems that Isner and Raonic would have done better in the 90s era than today, where they have to be able to win a decent number of baseline rallies.

    The regression analysis in Section 9 shows that weight is also important in determining performance, and that being taller without having the right weight can be detrimental. This suggests a type of optimal physique, a combination of weight and height that works well together. It makes me wonder if the optimal physique has changed over the years.

    If I have some time I'll see if I can find the optimal weight given a certain height, then compare those predictions with actual top pros.
     
    #8

Share This Page