WORLD NO. 1 (by year)

Discussion in 'Former Pro Player Talk' started by hoodjem, Oct 30, 2009.

  1. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    I think most would clearly consider Borg as the best player in 1977. Of course we are looking at the top ranking instead, which is not exactly the same thing, but the two are also related. I do think head to head is important as well when the records are this close in terms of pure accomplishment for the year. It's not the only thing to be considered, but it is important to factor in. Now, how much of a factor it is can be debated. Regardless, with Connors, Borg split their two big matches, but Borg's Wimbledon win trumps the Masters loss and he did go 2-1, with wins on grass and clay. You have Borg going 3-0 versus Vilas, including his Masters win. So, if you count the Connors win as significant because it was at a big tourney, you have to also concede that Borg beat Vilas at a big tourney. Borg beat Vilas on both clay and carpet. I think Borg #1, with Vilas at #2, and Connors at #3 would be my order.
     
  2. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    787
    I think again that the question is not "who beated who", but "who had the best results". No doubt it is Vilas.
     
  3. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    On this I will agree.And I´ll say more: while most if not all posters that went through that era consider 1976 Connors the best player in the world, I´d say Borg had by far the best record in 1976 and, similar to Vilas in 77, he deserves being regarded as the best in 76.

    and it is even more evident that Borg was nº1 in 76 than Vilas in 77.Borg won Wimbledon and WCT (over Vilas) and lost to Connors at the USO final.Connors, while having a favourable HtH against Borg (phily and Forest Hills), the same way Borg had vs Vilas in 77, just won a major title.

    as I said, and I am not biassed towards any of the three players, 1976 Borg is a clearer nº 1 than 1977 Vilas.Vilas maybe the 1977 nº1 at the fotofinish while Borg secured his place when he reached the USO final against Connors.win it or lose it, he was already ( only record based) the best player that year.
     
  4. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Kiki, that's a good take on 1976. As for 1977, with all due respect, there is no tournament close to the stature of Wimbledon. Winning that major is a big plus for Borg. That is a significant accomplishment, especially with how Borg prevailed over Connors in five sets to win it back to back. That final really was the match of the year, although the Vilas win over Connors at the US Open was also a classic. Also, the head to head record does play a part in this debate when you have three players with impressive accomplishments that year. You can look at the results at majors plus the Masters, biggest wins, overall record, non-major tourneys, results by surface, and head to head records, etc. in this discussion.
     
  5. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    787
    In 1977, Vilas won more Grand Slams than Borg, played more Grand Slams finals than Borg, won more tournaments than Borg, won more matches than Borg. So, even if Borg won their head to head, I think there is no doubt.
     
  6. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Borg won the biggest major (not all majors are equal), did not play the FO (played under a WTT contract instead) but he beat Vilas twice on clay and once indoors, and also had a winning head to head vs. Connors too including the W win. I'd agree that Vilas may have better total results at all three majors combined, but you then also have to look at Borg's win over Vilas at the Masters. All wins and majors are not equal and Borg while losing to Connors at the Masters, beat him at Wimbledon. Borg also beat Vilas at the Masters, which was a big non-major. So, just total wins at majors is too simplistic. If you said that they are very close I'd agree, even though I'd give the edge to Borg. There is too much dispute for 1977 among many observers for there to ever be an unquestioned #1 for the year, but I understand your perspective Jean Pierre. I understand your view on it, but I must disagree with you on this interesting topic.
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2013
  7. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Things look different depending on the angle you look at them.

    While nobody would dispute that Borg was the best player in 1979, it´s really not that big difference between Borg and Mc Enroe.John won dallas ( over Borg) and Bjorn defeated John at the Masters semifinal.Borg won RG and Wimbledon and Mac took the US Open and the then prestigious Davis Cup.It looks closer than expected if you analise things deeply inside.

    I don´t care much about ( then) ATP ranks.Connors ended 79 ahead of mc Enroe but did not reach one single major final ( he played the semis at the five biggest events of the year and was beaten in all of them)...
     
  8. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    I agree Kiki on the issue of ATP rankings in those years. In 1979, I'd put it at Borg number one, followed by McEnroe at number two and Connors at number three. Vilas did win the '79 AO. The rankings could be strange in those years and the tour was somewhat chaotic, with big WCT and Masters tourneys being played along with three big majors, the AO, and also a heavy schedule of big money unofficial tourneys.
     
  9. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    I think Vilas is the best player of 1977. He proved it with his record that year. Borg, as great as he was in 1977, doesn't have the sheer activity of Vilas. What Vilas did post-Wimbledon in 1977 is quite jaw dropping. He won 72 out of 73 matches in such a short space of time.
     
  10. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Mustard, there' no doubt that Borg had less total activity than Vilas, but best player? That goes to Borg, who proved it by going 5-1 versus Vilas and Connors. Vilas played more and won more in total, but what is the biggest major of the year? If Vilas was the best player, would we favor him to beat Borg at the FO or another major if they played? Borg beat Vilas at the Masters and Connors at Wimbledon, and those were big matches. While I agree that Vilas had more wins in total and he got two majors, Borg was the superior player. Vilas did have a very impressive win streak in 1977, there's no doubt about it, but Borg was still able to hold a 3-0 edge over him. If you look at the range of opinions, there are opposing viewpoints.

    See; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_number_1_male_tennis_player_rankings

     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2013
  11. veco

    veco New User

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    41
    well i went through all the post on this thread before posting my list cause my only source before i found this forum was wiki info.i see many people here have varios info and knowledge that's out of my reach (like tennis books etc.) so i just went with that and tried to be objective overall.
    what i did notice over and over is that Borg fans here are relentless :)
     
  12. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Vilas fans are also mostly without relent.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  13. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    My best player of the year in bold. Players not in bold are the best in the other pro/am code (pre-open era).

    My Best players per year (pre-open era)
    1877: Spencer Gore (amateur)
    1878: Frank Hadow (amateur)
    1879: John Hartley (amateur)
    1880: John Hartley (amateur)
    1881: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1882: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1883: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1884: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1885: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1886: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1887: Herbert Lawford (amateur)
    1888: Ernest Renshaw (amateur)
    1889: William Renshaw (amateur)
    1890: Willoughby Hamilton (amateur)
    1891: Wilfred Baddeley (amateur)
    1892: Wilfred Baddeley (amateur)
    1893: Joshua Pim (amateur)
    1894: Joshua Pim (amateur)
    1895: Joshua Pim (amateur)
    1896: Harold Mahony (amateur)
    1897: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
    1898: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
    1899: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
    1900: Reggie Doherty (amateur)
    1901: Arthur Gore (amateur)
    1902: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
    1903: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
    1904: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
    1905: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
    1906: Laurie Doherty (amateur)
    1907: Norman Brookes (amateur)
    1908: William Larned (amateur)
    1909: William Larned (amateur)
    1910: Tony Wilding (amateur)
    1911: Tony Wilding (amateur)
    1912: Tony Wilding (amateur)
    1913: Tony Wilding (amateur)
    1914: Tony Wilding (amateur)
    1915: Bill Johnston (amateur)
    1916: Richard Norris Williams (amateur)
    1917: Lindley Murray (amateur)
    1918: Lindley Murray (amateur)
    1919: Bill Johnston (amateur)
    1920: Bill Tilden (amateur), Romeo Acquarone (professional)
    1921: Bill Tilden (amateur), John CS Rendall (professional)
    1922: Bill Tilden (amateur), John CS Rendall (professional)
    1923: Bill Tilden (amateur), John CS Rendall (professional)
    1924: Bill Tilden (amateur), Albert Burke (professional)
    1925: Bill Tilden (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
    1926: Rene Lacoste (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
    1927: Rene Lacoste (amateur), Vinny Richards (professional)
    1928: Henri Cochet (amateur), Vinny Richards (professional)
    1929: Henri Cochet (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
    1930: Henri Cochet (amateur), Karel Kozeluh (professional)
    1931: Bill Tilden (professional), Ellsworth Vines (amateur)
    1932: Ellsworth Vines (amateur), Bill Tilden (professional)
    1933: Jack Crawford (amateur), Bill Tilden (professional)
    1934: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Fred Perry (amateur)
    1935: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Fred Perry (amateur)
    1936: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Fred Perry (amateur)
    1937: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Don Budge (amateur)
    1938: Ellsworth Vines (professional), Don Budge (amateur)
    1939: Don Budge (professional), Bobby Riggs (amateur)
    1940: Don Budge (professional), Don McNeill (amateur)
    1941: Fred Perry (professional), Bobby Riggs (amateur)
    1942: Don Budge (professional), Ted Schroeder (amateur)
    1943: Joseph Hunt (amateur), ??? (professional)
    1944: Bobby Riggs (professional), Frank Parker (amateur)
    1945: Bobby Riggs (professional), Frank Parker (amateur)
    1946: Bobby Riggs (professional), Jack Kramer (amateur)
    1947: Bobby Riggs (professional), Jack Kramer (amateur)
    1948: Jack Kramer (professional), John Bromwich (amateur)
    1949: Jack Kramer (professional), Pancho Gonzales (amateur)
    1950: Jack Kramer (professional), Budge Patty (amateur)
    1951: Jack Kramer (professional), Frank Sedgman (amateur)
    1952: Pancho Segura (professional), Frank Sedgman (amateur)
    1953: Jack Kramer (professional), Tony Trabert (amateur)
    1954: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Jaroslav Drobny (amateur)
    1955: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Tony Trabert (amateur)
    1956: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Lew Hoad (amateur)
    1957: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Lew Hoad (amateur)
    1958: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Ashley Cooper (amateur)
    1959: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Alex Olmedo (amateur)
    1960: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Neale Fraser (amateur)
    1961: Pancho Gonzales (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
    1962: Ken Rosewall (professional), Rod Laver (amateur)
    1963: Ken Rosewall (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
    1964: Rod Laver (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
    1965: Rod Laver (professional), Roy Emerson (amateur)
    1966: Rod Laver (professional), Fred Stolle (amateur)
    1967: Rod Laver (professional), John Newcombe (amateur)

    My best players per year (open era)
    1968: Rod Laver (professional)
    1969: Rod Laver (professional)
    1970: Rod Laver (professional)
    1971: John Newcombe (professional)
    1972: Stan Smith (amateur/professional) - turned professional in July 1972
    1973: Ilie Nastase (professional)
    1974: Jimmy Connors (professional)
    1975: Arthur Ashe (professional)
    1976: Jimmy Connors (professional)
    1977: Guillermo Vilas (professional)
    1978: Bjorn Borg (professional)
    1979: Bjorn Borg (professional)
    1980: Bjorn Borg (professional)
    1981: John McEnroe (professional)
    1982: Jimmy Connors (professional)
    1983: John McEnroe (professional)
    1984: John McEnroe (professional)
    1985: Ivan Lendl (professional)
    1986: Ivan Lendl (professional)
    1987: Ivan Lendl (professional)
    1988: Mats Wilander (professional)
    1989: Boris Becker (professional)
    1990: Stefan Edberg (professional)
    1991: Stefan Edberg (professional)
    1992: Jim Courier (professional)
    1993: Pete Sampras (professional)
    1994: Pete Sampras (professional)
    1995: Pete Sampras (professional)
    1996: Pete Sampras (professional)
    1997: Pete Sampras (professional)
    1998: Pete Sampras (professional)
    1999: Andre Agassi (professional)
    2000: Gustavo Kuerten (professional)
    2001: Lleyton Hewitt (professional)
    2002: Lleyton Hewitt (professional)
    2003: Andy Roddick (professional)
    2004: Roger Federer (professional)
    2005: Roger Federer (professional)
    2006: Roger Federer (professional)
    2007: Roger Federer (professional)
    2008: Rafael Nadal (professional)
    2009: Roger Federer (professional)
    2010: Rafael Nadal (professional)
    2011: Novak Djokovic (professional)
    2012: Novak Djokovic (professional)
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2013
  14. veco

    veco New User

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    41
    hoodjem i tried to have just one player as no1 each year but some years are just..pfff (you know)
    each year before 80's kinda has its own ''tune''..:)

    1935,1936,1937,1961 - found it impossible to figure out
    1947 - think if it was amateur/pro joined circuit it would be just Kramer without a doubt
    1958 - i got the feeling that Pancho was all about defending the world series title and that those head to head matches were most important to him in that ''Kramer as promoter'' era so i went with him and Sedgman,not Sedgman alone
    1961 - basically same reason as above mentioned,cant ignore the feelin Rosewall kinda dodged the tour (and Gonzales again destroyed everyone else like in 1960 so..)
    1970 - plenty of reasons to go with Laver only but..it bugged me

    i don't find 1976 and 77 tricky..not a very popular opinion i noticed (and i love Borg)
     
  15. veco

    veco New User

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    41
    1935,1936,1937,1971 / impossible to figure out
     
  16. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    as for 71 it is really almost umpossible.A very thini edge can be put on Rosewall´s behalf since he won the AO ( best AO of the decade) and WCT and reached the semifinals at Wimbledon.But it is very very close.Smith could challenge too with his US open win, Masters and Wimbledon final.it is between both of them even if I consider Newcombe to be the strongest player after Laver´s domination and before the Borg/Connors strenghold.
     
  17. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    Riggs was better than Kramer in the early period of their professional matches. Kramer adapted quickly, though, and preceeded to dominate.

    Those big world pro tours were the biggest events in professional tennis at that time, more important than the big tournaments. In 1958, Sedgman won the Wembley Pro and the big event in Australia, but Gonzales won the world pro tour against Hoad, and also won the US Pro and the Tournament of Champions.

    1961: Gonzales won the world pro tour (the biggest event), so I have Gonzales as world number 1 for the year, but Rosewall was better on the tournament scene that year.

    1970 has to be Laver, because he's way too dominant overall for anyone else to be near him.
     
  18. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    kiki, Therefore I plead since decades to give more tied places. Why must we choose only one player for every year even though in several years two or even three players have about the same record. Best example:1977. Both the Borg followers and the Vilas followers have very good arguments for their position.
     
  19. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard, I cannot agree regarding 1970. We hardly can omit Rosewall and Newcombe who did so well when it most mattered:in the two biggest events. Sorry, just my opinion (and that of others).
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2013
  20. Mustard

    Mustard Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    25,112
    Location:
    Cwmbran, Wales
    How are Rosewall or Newcombe near Laver in 1970 when the whole year is taken into account?
     
  21. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Mustard, The Grand Slam tournaments have a huge weight and usually this one is crowned world champion who is successful there.

    Lance Tingay, the former "tennis pope" had Newcombe as No.1, Rosewall at two. Bud Collins had also Newcombe first, Rosewall second and Laver fourth even though Bud is an acknowledged Laver admirer and good friend of Rocket. After Newcombe had won Wimbledon Jack Kramer said that Newk is now the world's champion.

    So my ranking has more of a Laver affinity than theirs...
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  22. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    787
    Borg was better than Vilas, but Vilas was the n°1, world champion. Like Federer/Nadal a few years ago : Nadal was better than Federer, because he beated him almost every time, but Federer was the n°1.
     
  23. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Since I certainly won' t be called anti Laverian I will say that Laver was the best at second rate events but Rosewall run at the two biggest events of 1970 put him head and shoulders anove him and with Newk and not the Rocket at number 2
     
  24. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    516
    1977 is very tight. It's interesting interpreting that year's results.
    I've always given the top spot to Borg, but Vilas did win more that year. I can change my mind and give it to Vilas purely on tournaments won, but Bjorn was still a better player than Vilas. If only Bjorn had turned up at Roland Garros that year (and fit and healthy).

    Hell, if Jimmy had closed out the last set at Wimbledon, he'd have been clear no.1 along with the WCT and Masters! :)


    The difference with the Borg/Vilas and Federer/Nadal 2006 situation is that Federer won 3 Slams to Nadal's 1, beat Nadal in the Wimbledon final and was clearly better in the Slams
     
  25. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    787
  26. jean pierre

    jean pierre Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Messages:
    787
  27. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    To be a suposed better player or not means nothing to rankings and is subjective
    I see 76 and 77 twin yrs since Connors was a better player than Borg in 76 but Borg record is far better and Borg was better player than Vilas in 77 but Guillermo record is far better

    BORG NUMBER ONE IN 76 AND VILAS IN 77
    End of story ( as far as I am concerned)
     
  28. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    I also worked hard to pare it down to merely one name per year.

    But occasionally, that was next to impossible.
     
  29. veco

    veco New User

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2013
    Messages:
    41
    1938 - Budge or Vines?
     
  30. hoodjem

    hoodjem G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Bierlandt
    Another excellent list.
     
  31. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    So, I think most of us would agree that if you look at the best player for 1976-1980, it would be:

    1976-Connors
    1977-Borg
    1978-Borg
    1979-Borg
    1980-Borg

    Yet, it you look at the record only, perhaps it is:

    1976-Borg
    1977-Vilas
    1978-Borg
    1979-Borg
    1980-Borg

    For 1977, excellent discussion, yet to say that there is a clear consensus is not accurate. How so? Now if these guys disagree, you know that it's a tough question.

    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_number_1_male_tennis_player_rankings

    Regardless, I don't see a consistent justification for saying it's Connors #1 in 1976, but Vilas #1 in 1977. There is some subjectivity involved, even if one to compare records only between Vilas, Connors, and Borg in 1976-1977. How do you weight tourneys won for example? Yet, I don't see a consistent argument for not putting Borg in the top spot for either 1976 or 1977. If you look at record/accomplishments only, one can plausibly argue that 1976 goes to Borg and 1977 goes to Vilas. Yet, I think it's difficult to plausibly argue Borg was not #1 in either 1976 or 1977.

    I've got a few questions for my fellow posters here. Do we know the exact formula and weightings used for rankings in those years (not just the final results but the exact methodology?). If we are aware of it, how cognizant were the players back then of how the rankings were actually being determined and how the top players were stacking up from month to month? Was the "horse race" being followed closely and being debated with full knowledge of the established methodology?
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  32. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    veco, I would go for a split No.1
     
  33. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    borg number one, I agree with most you write here.

    It could be for 1977 that Borg felt he was No. 1 and Vilas too felt he was No.1.....I'm sure both players (and other players for other doubtful years) did not bother as much as we do now to speculate who was tops.

    Probably the players tried to win the Grand Slam tournaments more than to be undisputed No.1.
     
  34. Xavier G

    Xavier G Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    516
    Rankings-wise, Connors was number one 1976 and 1977. Can't change it now, deal with it.

    As for 1976, well, Connors won 12 titles to Borg's 6, they both won a Grand Slam tournament, Jimmy beat Bjorn 3-0 in head to head matches on different surfaces and had a far superior match record percentage. Bjorn even lost in the quarters of Paris that year.

    I'm surprised you brought up 1976 again, Kiki, I thought we had gone through this before.
    Connors definitely number one for 1976, end of story about it as far I'm concerned too.
     
  35. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    The ATP definitely ranked Connors #1 in both 1976 and 1977. They used a computerized system, but I wonder what the exact methodology was that could have produced a top ranking for Connors in 1977 in particular ahead of both Vilas and Borg?

    For example, the ranking these days are calculated in this manner:

    Yet, what was the ATP's methodology in 1977? I know that they were relying on a computer, but what was the agreed upon formula that caused Connors to be ranked #1 in 1977?
     
  36. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    borg number one, I believe ATP Computer has considered the win/loss record of a player. ATP has Connors first with 59.80 average points, Vilas second with 57.50 and Borg third at 53.29. Every losing match decreased the percentage.

    Tennis statistician, Rino Tommasi has Borg first with a .936 percentage, Connors second at .915 and Vilas third at .912.

    It seems that Connors had only few early losses, obviously less than the other two players. He only played 15 tournaments (Borg 17, Vilas 28).
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  37. elegos7

    elegos7 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Messages:
    100
    I highly doubt that the players knew in the 1970s how the rankings worked in detail. The exact rules (how many tournament and bonus points were awarded for a win) are not explained anywhere, not even in the Wolrd of Tennis Annuals.
    I only know that in the 1970s a player was awarded tournament points (that varied according to the amount of prize money and the size and difficulty of the draw(how many Top10 or Top20 players are entered)) and bonus points (for beating players in the Top24: 6p for a Top1-8 player, 4p for a Top9-16, 2p for a Top17-24).
    Even the official ATP website lists computer points only from the second half of 1984. I highly doubt we will ever know how exactly the ATP rankings worked in the 1970s.
    I read a book about the early history of the WTA tour (John Dolan's Women's Tennis Guide), and it mentioned how complicated the WTA computer system was in the 1970s. Noone (not even mathematicians) had an idea what the rankings will be next week. And often the rankings were updated only in a biweekly basis.
    So my hunch is that the players were not aware how the ATP computer rankings worked. And back in the 1970s they were not as important as today. The computer rankings were not designed to name the No.1 player, but to determine entries in tournaments. Do not forget that some of the most important events (Masters, WCT finals) awarded no computer points at all. And the top players played a lot of exhibitions where they could earn much more money than in official Grand Prix tournaments.
    Tennis experts were the one who published Top10 rankings at the end of the year. I think these were regarded more important than computer rankings.
    I miss those expert rankings, especially the WTA rankings produced some weak No1 players for recent years. At least we have the ATP/WTA and ITF awards, but unfortunately they only name the best player in a calendar year.
     
  38. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    Thanks BobbyOne and elegos7, good posts. I agree with all of the above about those mysterious rankings and this all makes sense to me. The expert rankings coupled with the computer rankings made for lots of interesting discussion, that's for sure. I tend to agree with the general sentiment that back then, players tended to focus on the majors and prize money more than attaining the #1 ranking and I suppose that all the chaos in those years eventually produced the more consistent and logical ranking system we have today. As far as counting weeks at #1 or year end rankings, for an apples to apples comparison, it's very difficult to compare the current top players to top players before Pete Sampras. Of course the same is true with the number of Masters titles won as well.
     
  39. urban

    urban Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    4,372
    Due to the percentage system, it was often better, to play less tournaments. If you won 8 out of 10 tournaments, it was better than to win 15 out of 20 tournaments. This was the problem of Vilas in 1977 regarding the computer ranking, that he played amost double the amount of tourneys, which Connors and Borg played. On the other hand, Connors would be close to the top even under the modern points system. There were 3 tournaments, where all 3 top players competed. Connors finished second at Wim and USO and won the Masters (at early 1978). In a points race of these 3 tournaments, he would top both Borg and Vilas. Crucial for Vilas is, how one ranks the FO without Borg and Connors. In my view it was not his fault, and he won it. Personally i think, that Vilas was Nr. 1, with 2 majors and especially his 50 straight wins.
     
  40. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    This info from Wiki quoted above is interesting. See:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_number_1_male_tennis_player_rankings

    The fact that ATP rankings during the 1970's-1980's that did not include Davis Cup, WCT finals, or the Masters is a huge disconnect and a core problem.
     
  41. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    borg number one, It's really curious: For the years 1970 to 1973 we don't have a clear and undisputed No.1 in man's tennis.

    Here my rankings for those four years:

    1970: tied Rosewall, Laver and Newcombe
    1971: tied Smith, Newcombe and Rosewall
    1972: tied Nastase and Smith
    1973: tied Nastase and Newcombe

    Maybe the first written players are a tiny shade ahead of the other players.
     
  42. Phoenix1983

    Phoenix1983 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2012
    Messages:
    2,540
    If we say that the No 1 in those years is the player with the best performance in the grand slams, it would be:

    1970: Ken Rosewall
    1971: Stan Smith
    1972: Ilie Nastase
    1973: John Newcombe

    However, I know that non-slam tournaments were very important in those years as well, more so than they would be today.
     
  43. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    What do you see here?
    Newcombe 3 mentions (could have 5 mentions through 1975, a more logical end date)
    Laver 1 mention
    Rosewall 2 mentions (could be 4 through 1975)
    Nastase 2 mentions
    Smith 2 mentions

    Looks like Newk with the most in this period.
     
  44. Dan Lobb

    Dan Lobb Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,978
    I would say rather:

    1970: Newcombe
    1971: Newcombe
    1972: Smith
    1973: Newcombe

    Again, Newk with the most in this era.
     
  45. borg number one

    borg number one Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Messages:
    7,640
    Location:
    Houston, Texas
    BobbyOne, so in 1970-1973, you had three great Aussies, with Nastase and Smith in the mix too. Then, Jimmy Connors played great in 1974 at the age of 22, with Newcombe turning 30, Laver turning 36, Rosewall turning 40, Nastase still quite able at 28, and Stan Smith at 28 as well. By 1974, you also had Vilas and Borg making some headway, so I suppose we saw a real changing of the guard by 1974 with Connors, Borg, and Vilas setting the stage for their battles in the years to follow.
     
  46. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, it's a list of the No.1 player or players. Thus Newcombe and Rosewall through 1975 are irrelevant here.
     
  47. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    Dan, are you Lance Tingay's son? Tingay usually ranked the Wimbledon winner first, but not always reasonably.
     
  48. BobbyOne

    BobbyOne Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    7,773
    borg number one, Of course you are right. Nevertheless the three oldie Aussies were still excellent in 1974. Tingay even ranked Rosewall second.
    But yes, there was a change of the guard, best to watch in the two big finals of Connors vs. Rosewall who were born 18 years apart.
     
    Last edited: Mar 25, 2013
  49. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    I know you are a hard to die Connors fan.Well, that was my analysis, nothing else.Connors, I agree, was better than Borg on the H to H but not when it mattered most, that is, winning big titles

    OK, Borg won W and WCT and Connors won FH and Phily , and in both finals, he beat Borg.That just proves he was having the hold on Borg.Borg lost at the Paris QF (Panatta) while Connors was tumped by Tanner at the W qf...still, what Borg won looks better than what Connors won back in 76...
     
  50. kiki

    kiki Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2010
    Messages:
    18,714
    Borg nº1, I just love the swing Bjorn is taking on his Fh right in your photo...Can we imagine a current star doing so?

    Wonderful photo...great era.
     

Share This Page