Originally Posted by Phoenix1983
I appreciate the effort you put into this weighting system but there is no way Lendl ranks above Sampras, Borg and Nadal.
In assessing a player's legacy, Masters series count for far less than slams. The ATP has to assign points to them for the ranking system but that doesn't mean that they are half as important as slams, i.e. a guy who wins 2 Masters series events is not as great as a guy who wins 1 slam, and the history books will certainly not remember him in the same way.
I had the same subjective feeling as you. However, i wanted to create an objective ranking system. Regarding the weightings, they are not mine, the atp says Masters 1000s re worth half a slam. I personally feel that slams should be much more....but that is just my opinion. The fact is they aren't according to the ATP.
So I just put these out there using the current ATP weightings.
Just as an exercise, if you made slams 4 x masters 1000s instead of the ATP 2x and made wtf and slam finals the same proportion larger, Lendl is still ahead of Sampras
Lendl (8 x 4) + ((5 + 1) x 2.
) + (11 x 2.4) + (22 x 1) = 97.2
Sampras (14 x 4) + (5 x 2.
+ (4 x 2.4) + (11 x 1) = 90.6