Average height of top10

IowaGuy

Hall of Fame
Yeah, and that's called evolution, which is synonimous of improvement.

Evolution is not necessarily improvement.

Organisms adapt to a changing environment (evolution). Survival of the fittest.

Rackets, strings, courts, and balls have changed. Taller players have benefitted more than short players.

Bring back wood rackets and you'll see Schwartzman winning slams like Borg did :)
 

thrust

Legend
Rod Laver's midget self wouldn't even qualify as a ballboy in today's era. Any of the big 3 would annihilate him like a college level joke no matter what racquets are used.
NONSENSE! Schwartzman is 5-7 and has defeated players nearly a foot taller than him. Also, Laver was far more talented than Diego and most of the other top 20 players today.
 

ewiewp

Hall of Fame
2003 - 183.3
2004 - 183.0
2005 - 181.7
2006 - 184.3
2007 - 182.7
2008 - 186.9
2009 - 188.2
2010 - 187.2
2011 - 185.9
2012 - 187.1
2013 - 187.4
2014 - 187.5
2015 - 185.4
2016 - 189.3
2017 - 187.9
2018 - 192.6
2019 - 190.4

There was sudden drop down of top 25 average heights 2003-2006.
That's when the surfaces slowed basically.
 

ewiewp

Hall of Fame
Then got fast?

No surfaces stayed more or less same since then.
New breed of tall baseliners emerged.
Before that most tall players were attacking S&Vers, did not engaged in much of rallies. Maybe exception was Todd Martin.
There were quick demise of these tall attacking players early 2000s.
 

Lew II

G.O.A.T.
No surfaces stayed more or less same since then.
New breed of tall baseliners emerged.
Before that most tall players were attacking S&Vers, did not engaged in much of rallies. Maybe exception was Todd Martin.
There were quick demise of these tall attacking players early 2000s.
So players got short because of slow surfaces but then even taller players emerged because yes :rolleyes:o_O
 

ewiewp

Hall of Fame
So players got short because of slow surfaces but then even taller players emerged because yes :rolleyes:o_O

There were quite a few tall players who got drop out earlier or tried to retool their game with baseline one.
It was very tough to change to baseline game, re-enforcing defense game in their mid-career.
Not just surface. Ranking system. Tournament seeding system and so on made it more difficult to get back to top 25 game.

But new breed of tall baseliners started to emerge, growing up on already slowed surfaces.
Most of tall players, over 6'3" couldn't really engage in long rallies on 90's fast surfaces.
We now have many over 6'4", who can play baseline, do defense.
I think slow surface helps.
 

Gary Duane

Talk Tennis Guru
No, it isn't. The metric system is much more accurate and thus allows to avoid confussion.

With the imperial system, a person measuring 1.74 m can claim to be 5' 9", and a person measuring 1.76 m can also claim to be 5' 9". That would be ridiculous. 2 cm is a lot and highly noticeable, yet two people with 2 cm of difference would claim to have the same height only because the imperial system is not preciese enough.
In practical terms this means that the ATP heights can be off about an inch, since .499 rounds to 0 and .50 rounds to one. Cm measurement can also be off by 1, but the error is much less because cm is smaller.

My height in cm is 179, to the closest cm. That is 70.47 inches, making me 5'10". But my official height is 5'11" because I'm a tad taller than 5'10 and 1/2. Someone 181 cm will be 71.3 inches, which also rounds to 5'11".

That's a huge rounding error and explains why ATP heights, given in inches, are so imprecise.

Americans are very linked to 6 foot and 200 pounds as rough measurements. Europeans most likely have different boundaries, perhaps 180 cm (round number) and 90 kg (also round.
 

d-quik

Hall of Fame
Why is the imperial system still used in a few countries?
mohubedu-ralphium-americans-will-measure-with-anything-but-the-metric-61202632.png
 

jussumman

Hall of Fame
Thta's why the imperial system looks more like an obsolete one.How about measuring Mt.Everest's heigh in feet ? It's ridiculous :D
As ridiculously outdated as it sounds, one can easily measure things literally just using his feet, if has no measuring tape. I do this as my size is roughly 12 inches.

Have to know both here, but on the other hand, Americans only have to know one universal language at least lol
 

jussumman

Hall of Fame
2003 - 183.3
2004 - 183.0
2005 - 181.7
2006 - 184.3
2007 - 182.7
2008 - 186.9
2009 - 188.2
2010 - 187.2
2011 - 185.9
2012 - 187.1
2013 - 187.4
2014 - 187.5
2015 - 185.4
2016 - 189.3
2017 - 187.9
2018 - 192.6
2019 - 190.4

187-190 or 6'2 - 6'3 looks like optimal tennis height for men today. I wonder if it's going to be 6-4+ in 10 years. When does it stop? I'm 1.83, past the golden age of 6ft dominance.
 

Sunny014

Legend
Promote powerful racquets
Promote high bouncing courts
What else you expect?

Tennis is now filled with these ugly 6'5-6'6 tall guys who cannot even move properly, it is so ugly to watch them play, some of them have slow hands and also move on court in a very awkward way
 

JustBob

Hall of Fame
The old ideal height "rule" of 6'-6'2" is now antiquated. I remember times when 6'4" guys were told to do something else because they were too tall for tennis. The ideal height is now 6'2" to 6'4". And the main reason for that is we now have 6'4" guys who are just as athletic as 6' guys 20+ years ago. I remember talking about Felix (6'4") to a Tennis Canada coach and he said he's the prototype of the modern tennis player, perfect combination of height and athleticism.
 

Ray Mercer

Hall of Fame
Height is definitely an advantage when it comes to serving and ground strokes when the majority of the tour courts are high bouncing. In the past the really tall guys were usually terrible movers and movement is so important in tennis. Medvedev moves extremely well for a tall guy.
 

TennisLurker

Professional
I'm old enough to remember the late 90s, and even though players have gotten a lot taller, tennis feels a lot less serve dominated than back then even though tennis players are a lot taller.
In the late 90s we used to think the top tennis players of the future would all serve like Rusedski or Philippoussis. When Andy Roddick appeared, I thought that was the tennis player of the future I had read about in science magazines and their articles about serve speed.

The matches of Medvedev, Felix, Zverev, Kachanov, Del Potro etc don't feel like acefests the same way Rusedski Philippoussis Roddick matches felt, only Opelka gives me that late 90s feel (I didn't enjoy).
Perhaps because of the bigger balls, slower surfaces, and tennis players being so tall gives them a greater wingspan to return what otherwise would be a serve.
 

sredna42

Hall of Fame
2003 - 183.3
2004 - 183.0
2005 - 181.7
2006 - 184.3
2007 - 182.7
2008 - 186.9
2009 - 188.2
2010 - 187.2
2011 - 185.9
2012 - 187.1
2013 - 187.4
2014 - 187.5
2015 - 185.4
2016 - 189.3
2017 - 187.9
2018 - 192.6
2019 - 190.4
2020 - 191.5
2021 - 192.8
2022 - 194
2023 - 197.3
2024 - 199.5
2025 -210.1
2026 - 212.6
2027 - 217.1
2028 - 220.4
 

timnz

Legend
2003 - 183.3
2004 - 183.0
2005 - 181.7
2006 - 184.3
2007 - 182.7
2008 - 186.9
2009 - 188.2
2010 - 187.2
2011 - 185.9
2012 - 187.1
2013 - 187.4
2014 - 187.5
2015 - 185.4
2016 - 189.3
2017 - 187.9
2018 - 192.6
2019 - 190.4
So not much of a change - approx 6' to 6' 3" range.
 
D

Deleted member 770948

Guest
So the height of the Top 10 hardly changed from 2008-2019, with the exception of 2018.
 

Sunny014

Legend
The old ideal height "rule" of 6'-6'2" is now antiquated. I remember times when 6'4" guys were told to do something else because they were too tall for tennis. The ideal height is now 6'2" to 6'4". And the main reason for that is we now have 6'4" guys who are just as athletic as 6' guys 20+ years ago. I remember talking about Felix (6'4") to a Tennis Canada coach and he said he's the prototype of the modern tennis player, perfect combination of height and athleticism.

First it was Monfils
Now it is Felix
 

Sunny014

Legend
I'm old enough to remember the late 90s, and even though players have gotten a lot taller, tennis feels a lot less serve dominated than back then even though tennis players are a lot taller.
In the late 90s we used to think the top tennis players of the future would all serve like Rusedski or Philippoussis. When Andy Roddick appeared, I thought that was the tennis player of the future I had read about in science magazines and their articles about serve speed.

The matches of Medvedev, Felix, Zverev, Kachanov, Del Potro etc don't feel like acefests the same way Rusedski Philippoussis Roddick matches felt, only Opelka gives me that late 90s feel (I didn't enjoy).
Perhaps because of the bigger balls, slower surfaces, and tennis players being so tall gives them a greater wingspan to return what otherwise would be a serve.

Is it safe to say that Peak Felix would beat Peak Rod Laver ?
 
Top