AO results tend to not be reflective of the winner’s season

[Deleted member 762343]

We like to think that a player who performs very well at AO will have a great season but that’s not always the case, that’s even offen the opposite.

In 2009, Nadal won AO for the first time after his crazy 2008 season. Then he won a couple of titles and had good results but clearly underperformed for an ATG. He even got defeated at RG in the fourth round because of an injury.

In 2010, Federer won AO for the fourth time after his great 2009 season in which he won RG for the first time. But after 2010 AO, he didn’t even reach any GS final in the rest of the year. That was the end of a series of 4 consecutive RG finals, 7 consecutive Wimbledon finals and 6 consecutive USO finals. That was the beginning of Federer’s first decline.

After his crazy 2011 season, Djokovic won AO 2012 after an epic match against Nadal. That’s the only GS he won that year, he had very good results during this season but wasn’t as strong as he was in 2011.

In 2018, Federer won his sixth AO after his very good 2017 season in which he won AO for the first time since 2010 and Wimbledon for the first time since 2012. Yet his 2018 season was disappointing despite some good results after AO and we don’t know if he can even reach a GS final again.

So the conclusion we can draw is that AO results are often reflective of the winner’s previous season. 2009 AO Nadal was 2008 Nadal in terms of level. AO 2010 Federer was 2009 Federer. 2012 AO Djokovic was 2011 Djokovic. And AO 2018 Federer was 2017 Federer.

Of course it’s not always the case but that’s often the case. So the fact that Djokovic won AO this year doesn’t mean anything, he’s just in his 2018 form. It doesn’t mean his 2019 season will be good.

 

[tennis_pro]

Based on the data it's pretty much 50/50 = anything can happen.

Don't mention it.

 

[Deleted member 762343]

Yes but some people tend to get carried away with AO results and they think the player who won AO will start winning everything after that, even though tennis history taught us that’s often the opposite. That’s why I mentioned this. The big picture is more important than most recent results.

 

[IowaGuy]

 

[Towny]

The Wimbledon champion probably has the strongest correlation to who ends up number 1, although that's likely largely coincidence. It's around 50/50 for the AO. This AO could be a Fed 2010/18 or Nadal 2009 moment, indicating the end of a run of great form. Or else it could be the start of another dominant year. Who knows?

 

[Steve0904]

I imagine this is the case for all the slams if truth be told, but I agree many people (especially here) get too carried away with the result of the AO or any one particular slam in a year span.

 

[BeatlesFan]

. So the fact that Djokovic won AO this year doesn’t mean anything, he’s just in his 2018 form. It doesn’t mean his 2019 season will be good.

Who is going to stop Novak in 2019? He's getting to the age where he will have to reduce his schedule and focus solely on the slams. Winning 20 more Masters 1000's does little for his legacy, it is solely about the slams for him henceforth. He now basically owns Nadal mentally and I believe that will also be the case on clay this year. Fed is way too ancient, Zverev does nothing in slams, Thiem is a mental choke... who else is there? I expect Djokovic to have several early strategic losses in non-slams and obviously peak for the majors. That's the prudent strategy and one he will almost surely follow.

 

[DSH]

Who is going to stop Novak in 2019? He's getting to the age where he will have to reduce his schedule and focus solely on the slams. Winning 20 more Masters 1000's does little for his legacy, it is solely about the slams for him henceforth. He now basically owns Nadal mentally and I believe that will also be the case on clay this year. Fed is way too ancient, Zverev does nothing in slams, Thiem is a mental choke... who else is there? I expect Djokovic to have several early strategic losses in non-slams and obviously peak for the majors. That's the prudent strategy and one he will almost surely follow.

he will lose on rg.
he is beatable in this surface.
he doesn't like the bounce there, ergo, his gestures of frustration.

 

[IowaGuy]

The Wimbledon champion probably has the strongest correlation to who ends up number 1, although that's likely largely coincidence. It's around 50/50 for the AO. This AO could be a Fed 2010/18 or Nadal 2009 moment, indicating the end of a run of great form. Or else it could be the start of another dominant year. Who knows?

AO is hardcourt.

More ATP points are hardcourt than clay or grass.

Therefore, AO should be more predictive than Wimby or FO...

 

[Deleted member 762343]

The Wimbledon champion probably has the strongest correlation to who ends up number 1, although that's likely largely coincidence. It's around 50/50 for the AO. This AO could be a Fed 2010/18 or Nadal 2009 moment, indicating the end of a run of great form. Or else it could be the start of another dominant year. Who knows?

Yes, it could be a great year for Djokovic. I'd even say it will most likely be a great year. But the future is always uncertain.

Who is going to stop Novak in 2019? He's getting to the age where he will have to reduce his schedule and focus solely on the slams. Winning 20 more Masters 1000's does little for his legacy, it is solely about the slams for him henceforth. He now basically owns Nadal mentally and I believe that will also be the case on clay this year. Fed is way too ancient, Zverev does nothing in slams, Thiem is a mental choke... who else is there? I expect Djokovic to have several early strategic losses in non-slams and obviously peak for the majors. That's the prudent strategy and one he will almost surely follow.

Injuries can stop him like they stopped a 23 years old Nadal in 2009, he could also get demotivated since it happened before. Besides, Zverev, Tsitsipas and possibly other players might improve their level and become serious threats even in slams. But I hope you're right, it goes without saying.

 

[MeatTornado]

AO is hardcourt.

More ATP points are hardcourt than clay or grass.

Therefore, AO should be more predictive than Wimby or FO...

Should be...but isn't.

 

[Jaitock1991]

I have thought a little bit about this myself, especially if we take the year before into consideration. Whoever follows up a great year with winning the AO the following year tend to struggle a bit after that victory.

But then again, considering how dominant Djoker is right now combined with the fact that no players really seem capable of challenging him on a regular basis I kind of struggle to see who's gonna beat him. It's like Fed during his peak. It probably means very little.

 

[Sport]

I have thought a little bit about this myself, especially if we take the year before into consideration. Whoever follows up a great year with winning the AO the following year tend to struggle a bit after that victory.

But then again, considering how dominant Djoker is right now combined with the fact that no players really seem capable of challenging him on a regular basis I kind of struggle to see who's gonna beat him. It's like Fed during his peak. It probably means very little.

Prime/peak Fed was stopped by Nadal sometimes (WB 2008, AO 2009). This Nadal looks too old or simply mentally owned to stop Djokovic outside clay. And even at RG Nole will have huge chances.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

Winning the AO is the most pleasing and disappointing of all the slams. The winner basically starts the year as a slam champion but at the same time it's disappointing to fail at the next three if slams if they don't win any of them.

 

[Red Rick]

And sometimes it really does.

 

[Towny]

AO is hardcourt.

More ATP points are hardcourt than clay or grass.

Therefore, AO should be more predictive than Wimby or FO...

In theory, yes. In practice, no.

Looking at the champions of AO and Wimbledon post 1988 (the year AO started to be on hard court) and their end of year rank

AO
1988 Wilander - 1
1989 Lendl - 1
1990 Lendl - 3
1991 Becker - 3
1992 Courier - 1
1993 Courier - 3
1994 Sampras - 1
1995 Agassi - 2
1996 Becker - 6
1997 Sampras -1
1998 Korda- 13
1999 Kafelnikov - 2
2000 Agassi - 6
2001 Agassi - 3
2002 Johansson - 14
2003 Agassi - 4
2004 Federer -1
2005 Safin - 12
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Djokovic - 3
2009 Nadal - 2
2010 Federer -2
2011 Djokovic -1
2012 Djokovic -1
2013 Djokovic -2
2014 Wawrinka - 4
2015 Djokovic -1
2016 Djokovic - 2
2017 Federer - 2
2018 Federer - 3

Wimbledon
1988 Edberg - 5
1989 Becker - 2
1990 Edberg - 1
1991 Stich - 4
1992 Agassi - 9
1993 Sampras - 1
1994 Sampras - 1
1995 Sampras - 1
1996 Krajicek - 7
1997 Sampras - 1
1998 Sampras - 1
1999 Sampras - 3
2000 Sampras - 3
2001 Ivanisevic - 12
2002 Hewitt - 1
2003 Federer - 2
2004 Federer - 1
2005 Federer - 1
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Nadal - 1
2009 Federer - 1
2010 Nadal - 1
2011 Djokovic - 1
2012 Federer - 2
2013 Murray - 4
2014 Djokovic - 1
2015 Djokovic - 1
2016 Murray - 1
2017 Federer - 2
2018 Djokovic - 1

YE number 1 AO: 11 Wimbledon: 19
YE number 2 AO: 7 Wimbledon: 4
YE number 3 AO: 6 Wimbledon: 2

About even correlation with being top 3 but far greater correlation between number 1 and Wimbledon champion than with the AO champion

 

[helterskelter]

In theory, yes. In practice, no.

Looking at the champions of AO and Wimbledon post 1988 (the year AO started to be on hard court) and their end of year rank

AO
1988 Wilander - 1
1989 Lendl - 1
1990 Lendl - 3
1991 Becker - 3
1992 Courier - 1
1993 Courier - 3
1994 Sampras - 1
1995 Agassi - 2
1996 Becker - 6
1997 Sampras -1
1998 Korda- 13
1999 Kafelnikov - 2
2000 Agassi - 6
2001 Agassi - 3
2002 Johansson - 14
2003 Agassi - 4
2004 Federer -1
2005 Safin - 12
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Djokovic - 3
2009 Nadal - 2
2010 Federer -2
2011 Djokovic -1
2012 Djokovic -1
2013 Djokovic -2
2014 Wawrinka - 4
2015 Djokovic -1
2016 Djokovic - 2
2017 Federer - 2
2018 Federer - 3

Wimbledon
1988 Edberg - 5
1989 Becker - 2
1990 Edberg - 1
1991 Stich - 4
1992 Agassi - 9
1993 Sampras - 1
1994 Sampras - 1
1995 Sampras - 1
1996 Krajicek - 7
1997 Sampras - 1
1998 Sampras - 1
1999 Sampras - 3
2000 Sampras - 3
2001 Ivanisevic - 12
2002 Hewitt - 1
2003 Federer - 2
2004 Federer - 1
2005 Federer - 1
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Nadal - 1
2009 Federer - 1
2010 Nadal - 1
2011 Djokovic - 1
2012 Federer - 2
2013 Murray - 4
2014 Djokovic - 1
2015 Djokovic - 1
2016 Murray - 1
2017 Federer - 2
2018 Djokovic - 1

YE number 1 AO: 11 Wimbledon: 19
YE number 2 AO: 7 Wimbledon: 4
YE number 3 AO: 6 Wimbledon: 2

About even correlation with being top 3 but far greater correlation between number 1 and Wimbledon champion than with the AO champion

Wimbledon being in the middle of the year makes it more likely the Wimbledon winner will be on form for other events than the Australian Open winner, who has time to cool off before other big events. What about US Open champs and year-end rankings?

 

[Deleted member 688153]

Hmm, there's plenty of examples of where it has meant a good season though as well.
We'll have to see.

 

[GabeT]

Who is going to stop Novak in 2019? He's getting to the age where he will have to reduce his schedule and focus solely on the slams. Winning 20 more Masters 1000's does little for his legacy, it is solely about the slams for him henceforth. He now basically owns Nadal mentally and I believe that will also be the case on clay this year. Fed is way too ancient, Zverev does nothing in slams, Thiem is a mental choke... who else is there? I expect Djokovic to have several early strategic losses in non-slams and obviously peak for the majors. That's the prudent strategy and one he will almost surely follow.

Do you think that’s what he did end of 2018 up to the AO? Can a player really plan it so precisely?

After WTF, and then with Qatar, I began wondering if his 2018 streak was over. Then he played oK, but not great at the beginning of the AO, raising some doubts again. And then, somewhat out of the blue , he has an very strong finish at the SF and Final. All planned that way?

 

[Julian Houston]

The theory makes sense, AO is reflective of last year's form. For Nadal is always a warm up for RG.

Djokovic tend to burn out in 2nd half and lose to young players, it will happen again.

 

[uscwang]

I thought it was the way he won it that really got people talking, especially in the final against a hot Nadal.

 

[RaulRamirez]

In theory, yes. In practice, no.

Looking at the champions of AO and Wimbledon post 1988 (the year AO started to be on hard court) and their end of year rank

AO
1988 Wilander - 1
1989 Lendl - 1
1990 Lendl - 3
1991 Becker - 3
1992 Courier - 1
1993 Courier - 3
1994 Sampras - 1
1995 Agassi - 2
1996 Becker - 6
1997 Sampras -1
1998 Korda- 13
1999 Kafelnikov - 2
2000 Agassi - 6
2001 Agassi - 3
2002 Johansson - 14
2003 Agassi - 4
2004 Federer -1
2005 Safin - 12
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Djokovic - 3
2009 Nadal - 2
2010 Federer -2
2011 Djokovic -1
2012 Djokovic -1
2013 Djokovic -2
2014 Wawrinka - 4
2015 Djokovic -1
2016 Djokovic - 2
2017 Federer - 2
2018 Federer - 3

Wimbledon
1988 Edberg - 5
1989 Becker - 2
1990 Edberg - 1
1991 Stich - 4
1992 Agassi - 9
1993 Sampras - 1
1994 Sampras - 1
1995 Sampras - 1
1996 Krajicek - 7
1997 Sampras - 1
1998 Sampras - 1
1999 Sampras - 3
2000 Sampras - 3
2001 Ivanisevic - 12
2002 Hewitt - 1
2003 Federer - 2
2004 Federer - 1
2005 Federer - 1
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Nadal - 1
2009 Federer - 1
2010 Nadal - 1
2011 Djokovic - 1
2012 Federer - 2
2013 Murray - 4
2014 Djokovic - 1
2015 Djokovic - 1
2016 Murray - 1
2017 Federer - 2
2018 Djokovic - 1

YE number 1 AO: 11 Wimbledon: 19
YE number 2 AO: 7 Wimbledon: 4
YE number 3 AO: 6 Wimbledon: 2

About even correlation with being top 3 but far greater correlation between number 1 and Wimbledon champion than with the AO champion

A bit surprising, but well done in researching this.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Lol it's the Mummy, we already know how this will end.

 

[aman92]

Who is going to stop Novak in 2019? He's getting to the age where he will have to reduce his schedule and focus solely on the slams. Winning 20 more Masters 1000's does little for his legacy, it is solely about the slams for him henceforth. He now basically owns Nadal mentally and I believe that will also be the case on clay this year. Fed is way too ancient, Zverev does nothing in slams, Thiem is a mental choke... who else is there? I expect Djokovic to have several early strategic losses in non-slams and obviously peak for the majors. That's the prudent strategy and one he will almost surely follow.

His clay form is still a huge unknown.... Let's see how he does in the clay masters

 

[Towny]

A bit surprising, but well done in researching this.

Yeah, it's not what you might expect although as @helterskelter said, it may somewhat to do with it's placement in a season. The AO is too early so form can often have declined significantly by the end of the year (Fed 2010, 2018 etc)

Wimbledon being in the middle of the year makes it more likely the Wimbledon winner will be on form for other events than the Australian Open winner, who has time to cool off before other big events. What about US Open champs and year-end rankings?

I think this is definitely part of it. There are probably other factors at play as well.

US Open
1988 Wilander - 1
1989 Becker - 2
1990 Sampras - 5
1991 Edberg - 1
1992 Edberg - 2
1993 Sampras - 1
1994 Agassi - 2
1995 Sampras - 1
1996 Sampras - 1
1997 - Rafter - 2
1998 Rafter - 4
1999 Agassi - 1
2000 Safin - 2
2001 Hewitt - 1
2002 Sampras - 13
2003 Roddick - 1
2004 Federer - 1
2005 Federer - 1
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Federer - 2
2009 Del Potro - 5
2010 Nadal - 1
2011 Djokovic - 1
2012 Murray - 3
2013 Nadal - 1
2014 CIlic - 9
2015 Djokovic - 1
2016 Wawrinka - 4
2017 Nadal - 1
2018 Djokovic - 1

YE number 1 AO: 11 Wimbledon: 19 USO: 18
YE number 2 AO: 7 Wimbledon: 4 USO: 6
YE number 3 AO: 6 Wimbledon: 2 USO: 1

Very similar correlation to world number 1 as the Wimbledon champion, although Wimbledon champion slightly ahead (not really enough to be significant). Identical correlation to top 3

 

[RaulRamirez]

Yeah, it's not what you might expect although as @helterskelter said, it may somewhat to do with it's placement in a season. The AO is too early so form can often have declined significantly by the end of the year (Fed 2010, 2018 etc)

I think this is definitely part of it. There are probably other factors at play as well.

US Open
1988 Wilander - 1
1989 Becker - 2
1990 Sampras - 5
1991 Edberg - 1
1992 Edberg - 2
1993 Sampras - 1
1994 Agassi - 2
1995 Sampras - 1
1996 Sampras - 1
1997 - Rafter - 2
1998 Rafter - 4
1999 Agassi - 1
2000 Safin - 2
2001 Hewitt - 1
2002 Sampras - 13
2003 Roddick - 1
2004 Federer - 1
2005 Federer - 1
2006 Federer - 1
2007 Federer - 1
2008 Federer - 2
2009 Del Potro - 5
2010 Nadal - 1
2011 Djokovic - 1
2012 Murray - 3
2013 Nadal - 1
2014 CIlic - 9
2015 Djokovic - 1
2016 Wawrinka - 4
2017 Nadal - 1
2018 Djokovic - 1

YE number 1 AO: 11 Wimbledon: 19 USO: 18
YE number 2 AO: 7 Wimbledon: 4 USO: 6
YE number 3 AO: 6 Wimbledon: 2 USO: 1

Very similar correlation to world number 1 as the Wimbledon champion, although Wimbledon champion slightly ahead (not really enough to be significant). Identical correlation to top 3

Another reason, I guess, is that not only is the AO the earliest in the season, but there's a long gap between the AO and the FO, which is almost as long as the gap between the previous USO (and AO).

 

[RaulRamirez]

I'm too lazy to tally it, but wonder - during that same time frame - what the most common double is. Of course, some would have multiples in 3-slam seasons.

 

[Lew II]

AO winners tend to have a better season than AO non-winners, so I'm quite confident.

 

[RaulRamirez]

Here's a little stat that kind of supports the OP, and my supposition that one reason for (the main point of the OP) is the time difference between the AO and the next "slams'.

Using @Towny's time frame (from 1988):

The AO winner has won that year's US Open 6 times: 1988- Wilander; 2004-06-07 - Federer; 2011, 2015 - Djokovic
(but) the previous year's US Open winner has won the AO 9 times: Sampras (2) in 93-94 and 96-97; Agassi (2) in 94-95 and 99-2000; Fed (2) in 2005-06 and '06-'07 and Novak (3) in 11-12, 15-16 and 18-19.