Age distribution of all Open Era major finalists
- Thread starter falstaff78
- Start date
Rosewall won the 72 AO after just turning 37. He also won 2 WCT finals at 37.1 and 37.8
Rosewall also reached the Wimbledon and USO final at 39.8 and 39.10 in 1974
BGod
G.O.A.T.
Fed had the deeper pool.
The Nadal/Novak era is very top heavy while Soderling-del Potro should have been long-term factors but health was an issue.
Fed had:
Hewitt, Roddick, Safin, Ferrero, Davydenko, Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Youzhny, Ferrer,
Robredo and to limited degree Soderling-Ancic and of course Nadal 05-09.
uscwang
Hall of Fame
Good work. Would be more complete if you also mark 22, when Fed started winning GS, and Nadal/Djokovic age.(edit: updated through AO 2018)
Folks
I have plotted below the age distribution of all the finalists of Majors and Season-Finales (i.e. TMC, WTF etc) in the Open Era.
There have been 246 such finals since the 1968 French Open, (plus 2 season finales decided by round robin.) That gives us a grand total of 494 winners and runners-up. What you see in the chart below is the frequency of ages for each of these 494 appearances. So for example, 66 of the 494 appearances were by 25 year olds.
To me this chart is a great visual interpretation of the effect that age has on elite tennis players’ performances. It gives historical context to two questions which are frequently discussed on these boards, and which are important to me as a Federer fan.
1. The extent of the handicap Roger faced while competing with the "big three" from 2010-2016
From 2010-2016 Federer had 27 wins and 32 losses vs. Murray, Djokovic and Nadal. The chart really puts these numbers into perspective.
After 29, players' performances decline precipitously. From 2010 to 2016, Federer was aged 29-35 while his competitors were 23-29. Now take another look at the chart and think about those win-loss numbers for just a few seconds....
2. The extent of the challenge facing Nadal in overtaking Federer's haul of 20 majors and 302 weeks at number 1.
Nadal is 31. Look at the drop-off from 31 to 32.
Few sundry notes:
- You may have a concern that the distribution would be different for the 200 major winners, which is a more exclusive club than the 494 finalists of majors and season finales. So here is the age distribution for only for winners of the 200 Majors in the Open Era. The short answer is, nothing much changes.
- You may also have a concern that the distribution may have changed over time. In a subsequent post I will share the age-distribution of major finalists by decade. Once again, the main message doesn't change. This histogram is very consistent across time.
Enjoy,
Falstaff78
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
@BGod
Does this tell enough about depth?
10 best players born in 1980-84 (by best slam result)
Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Ferrero, Soderling, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Coria:
26 titles, 52 finals, 91 semifinals
10 best players born in 1985-89 (by best slam result)
Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Cilic, Del Potro, Anderson, Berdych, Tsonga, Nishikori:
40 titles, 74 finals, 123 semifinals
Does this tell enough about depth?
10 best players born in 1980-84 (by best slam result)
Federer, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Ferrero, Soderling, Ferrer, Nalbandian, Gonzalez, Coria:
26 titles, 52 finals, 91 semifinals
10 best players born in 1985-89 (by best slam result)
Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Cilic, Del Potro, Anderson, Berdych, Tsonga, Nishikori:
40 titles, 74 finals, 123 semifinals
uscwang
Hall of Fame
Once Nadal, Novak, Murray and company came of age, they cut off the previous gen's prime time. Therefore, Federer's gen had on average much shorter career than Nadal/Novak's.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Nice conjecture but very wrong. Most of those guys were finished by injuries before the Nadal/Djok/Murray gen took over.
uscwang
Hall of Fame
You don't know what you are talking about. Nadal reached #2 in 2005, 19 y. o.; Novak reach#3 in2007, 20 y. o. ; Murray #4 in 2008, 21 y. o., and they stayed top 4 for a decade. Federer's class (born in 1980-85)were in their prime, but only Fed could keep up back then.
NatF
Bionic Poster
Nah guy, you don't know what you're talking about - Hewitt, Safin, Ferrero and Coria were already done as top players due to injuries . Roddick had already slipped a bit as well e.g. 2006.
uscwang
Hall of Fame
This is rich. Are you implying a certain scavenger feasted on that fragile generation? Or that they were not as bad as they looked since they were actually sick around 25?
NatF
Bionic Poster
What's rich is you putting words in my mouth. I've not said anything about anyone scavenging
Honestly some of you people are pathetic, you interpret everything in the worst possible way. No my point was simply that Federer's generation seemed to be particularly unlucky with regards to injuries and their fall wasn't due to the rise of the generation that came after them - which is what you said.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
I can't say I feel sorry for you guys. Djokovic was disrespected the most out of anyone back in 2014 on here. Karmas you know whatWhat's rich is you putting words in my mouth. I've not said anything about anyone scavenging
No my point was simply that Federer's generation seemed to be particularly unlucky with regards to injuries and their fall wasn't due to the rise of the generation that came after them - which is what you said.
NatF
Bionic Poster
You do realise that Federer's been getting "disrespected" since at least 2008? Sadly few people on here able to look at it from the other sides point of you - apparently you're not one of those few.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
All I have ever seen here is Federer be worshiped. To be the point where the admins delete my posts if I say something wrong about him.
Now back in 2008. I assume Nadal fans were annoying.
NatF
Bionic Poster
You must be blind. There's legit so much Fed bashing on here, it's a two way street.
davced1
Hall of Fame
Federer also had Nadal from 2005 onwards. It doesn't matter if he was supposed to be peak age or not.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
Yes now. Because of the emergencr of all these new Djoko trolls. But I remember being shocked at how much Djokovic was being disrespected when I joined this forum.
NatF
Bionic Poster
The Nadal fans were the worst when I joined you guys quickly jumped up to join them in 2015 though...nothing new about these trolls.
Noleberic123
G.O.A.T.
Nothing new. But there are way more of them now
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
@falstaff78 Any chance you could update the OP through AO2019? Just to make it quicker, here's what you need to add:
three to the 32 column (Nadal at RG 2018, Anderson at WI 2018, Nadal at AO 2019)
three to the 31 column (Djokovic at WI 2018, UO 2018, AO 2019)
one to the 29 column (Del Potro at UO 2019)
one to the 24 column (Thiem at RG 2018)
24 and 25 now neck and neck again. But I think 25 will pull ahead over the next few years. I also suspect that in the next decade or so 26-28 will pull closer to the top.
three to the 32 column (Nadal at RG 2018, Anderson at WI 2018, Nadal at AO 2019)
three to the 31 column (Djokovic at WI 2018, UO 2018, AO 2019)
one to the 29 column (Del Potro at UO 2019)
one to the 24 column (Thiem at RG 2018)
24 and 25 now neck and neck again. But I think 25 will pull ahead over the next few years. I also suspect that in the next decade or so 26-28 will pull closer to the top.
Spencer Gore
Legend
NatF
Bionic Poster
Maybe. Anyway, I don't want to argue over who has the worst fanbase lol. Just feel like things aren't so black and white.
ollinger
G.O.A.T.
In order to make the point the OP thinks he's making, it would be necessary not to just show the number of finalists in each age cohort but rather to show the number as a percentage of how many in that age cohort were initially entered in the tournament. Cumulative injuries, family pull, weariness of constant travel, other opportunities cause many to leave the tour by the time they reach 30 or older. So the absolute number of, for example, 33 year olds in the draw will be very small. If the percentage of them reaching the finals were in fact larger than the percentage they comprise of the total draw, then one has NOT shown that they're level falls off, only that the number of them still active falls off, and for various reasons. And in fact I think we've seen recently in some tournaments that the percentage of 30-somethings going deep in the draw is probably higher than the percentage they comprise of the total field.
falstaff78
Hall of Fame
I suspect it won't change that much. In order to disprove my point, as you seem to think you are doing, I invite you to do the work and collect the facts.
falstaff78
Hall of Fame
Done. Comprehensive update of all charts through AO 2019.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Nope. That was karma after all the weak era talk Djokovic fans themselves had propagated towards Federer.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
If you don't know much about Federer's generation, don't speak about it. Simple.
BGod
G.O.A.T.
This is a more appropriate breakdown:
80-82 vs. 86-88
Any other concentration pool will garner skewed stats. There's no notable born in 83 and only Soderling for 84 while Wawrinka 85 was a late bloomer hard to group.
Those 3 year windows have by far greatest concentration. The 86-88 gen is extremely top heavy. Novak/Nadal/Murray but in the 2nd tier the 80-82 gen blows it away. del Potro, Nalbandian and Soderling dealing with illness/injury has inflated Nadal/Novak's majors number.
Nadal_Django
Legend
The 86-87 generation is by far the best generation in the history of tennis. The 70-71 is probably the second best.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
What inflated their numbers are the generations after Delpo/Cilic.
upchuck
Hall of Fame
Like to broaden this to 85-89, a generation that includes Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Wawrinka, Del Potro and such second tier guys as Berdych, Cilic, Tsonga, Anderson and Kei Nishikori.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Thank you. When I get time, I'll try to do a decade by decade breakdown. I think it'd be interesting to show how teenagers got phased out after about 1990, having done very well indeed in between 1975 and 1990.
falstaff78
Hall of Fame
I'm confused. Have you seen the charts?
tennisfanboy
Rookie
10 best players born in 1990-94 who are complete crap has anything to do with this? Err what?
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
I believe that of the 15 teenage Slam finalists in the open era, only one of them (Nadal at RG 2005) has been since the start of 1991, and I believe that all of the other 14 were in between around 1974 and the end of 1990. Perhaps there was one in the 1968-73 period - I'll have to check.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
10 best players born in 1975-79?
falstaff78
Hall of Fame
You can see all the charts in post number 2
Zhilady
Professional
Thank you for those facts.
So, clearly, the 1985-1989 generation is better than the 1980-1984 generation, going by their results. Also, clearly, Federer is better than Djokovic, going by their results.
After all...
26 titles, 30 finals > 15 titles, 24 finals.
Zhilady
Professional
Can you argue against these cold, hard facts?
Federer: 20 titles, 30 finals.
Djokovic: 15 titles, 24 finals.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Better results against worse opponents, yes.
helterskelter
G.O.A.T.
Thanks, I hadn't noticed them. Anyway, I am right: while there was one teen Slam finalist in the 1990s and one since the start of 2000, the one in the 1990s was Sampras at the US Open 1990. So, since the start of 1991, there has been one teen Slam finalist (Nadal at RG 2005), whereas there had been 10 in the previous decade or so.
Zhilady
Professional
Which could well be the case for Djokovic’s generation, as well. You’re burying your own argument. LOL
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
1972-79 generation isn't better than 1990-97
Zhilady
Professional
If it achieved more, it’s better.
Lew II
G.O.A.T.
Similar threads
