height of ideal tennis player

bjk

bjk

Hall of Fame
Mark Knowles was asked on the Q-Anderson match what the perfect height for a tennis player was, and he said 6-4. The problem with that is that I can't think of any players who are 6-4. Murray is listed at 6-3. Delpo is 6'6. There is a big gulf between 6-3 and 6-6 - basically the extra height doesn't help on serve until you are able to serve down into the court, beginning at 6-6. So basically there is a kind of trade-off valley between 6-3 and 6-5 where height does not compensate for reduced mobility. This idea is proved out by the statistics. We would expect a steadily increasing line, but in fact there appears to be a step-function increase somewhere around 6-6.

HeightGraph.png


So basically, you want to be 6-2 or 6-6+, not so much in-between.
 
Last edited:
bjk said:
Is he a great server? Does he benefit from the extra inch or two? I would guess no.
Click to expand...

He can serve bombs yes but he's nowhere a server like Raonic, sometimes size is not everything Del Potro's serve is good but not amazing either, Roddick was smaller and was serving bombs (he was around 6.2)
 
I think this can and will change over time. The ideal height probably isn't static.
 
125downthemiddle said:
6'1-6'2...same as regular life ideal
Click to expand...

Well the success of the 6-1 could just be that there are more 6-1 people in the world. Proportionally, there are far more 6-6 tennis players than 6-1. It could also be that 6-6 players have a ceiling on their game at a certain level.
 
Last edited:
125downthemiddle said:
Disagree a little above 6 foot will always be best
Click to expand...

Average height has been generally increasing though over time. Before, Laver was able to produce his own ideal height for tennis along with Rosewall for the best part of 20 years. The average height the athletes in tennis was probably still above the actual average height for just men overall during the time, so in some ways they were anomalies, but they were still extremely well suited to the rigours of tennis at the time and dominated it for well over a decade.

Hasn't the general body proportions been filling out as we as a race have been getting slowly taller and taller? Maybe in 50 years time the equivalent of Federer with precisely the same proportion ratios and qualities would be 6'3 instead of 6'1. Also changes in the game may impact on the ideal height. If all surfaces suddenly became super bouncer (I mean ridiculously bouncy just to paint the picture) then maybe the ideal height would shoot up.

bjk, you are right that it's been largely static for the last few decades, but we'll see for the future. IIRC the average height for pro tennis players was actually taller in the 90's than today?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
bjk said:
Well the success of the 6-1 could just be that there are more 6-1 people in the world. Proportionally, there are far more 6-6 tennis players than 6-1. It could also be that 6-6 players have a ceiling on their game at a certain level.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree...probably easier to be a low level pro with less talent at 6'6 but best to be 6'1if you want to be a legend and have great talent
 
It would be interesting to look at the height(s) of the different GOAT contenders, both in the men's and the women's game. Just to see if any conclusion(s) can be drawn from it.
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
Average height has been generally increasing though over time. Before, Laver was able to produce his own ideal height for tennis along with Rosewall for the best part of 20 years. The average height the athletes in tennis was probably still above the actual average height for just men overall during the time, so in some ways they were anomalies, but they were still extremely well suited to the rigours of tennis at the time and dominated it for well over a decade.

Hasn't the general body proportions been filling out as we as a race have been getting slowly taller and taller? Maybe in 50 years time the equivalent of Federer with precisely the same proportion ratios and qualities would be 6'3 instead of 6'1. Also changes in the game may impact on the ideal height. If all surfaces suddenly became super bouncer (I mean ridiculously bouncy just to paint the picture) then maybe the ideal height would shoot up.
Click to expand...

I think the game in its modern athletic form, say since 1980 clearly suits a player a little on the tall side but not a lot. Bouncier surfaces would also tend to mean slower, typically a taller person would do better on a faster low bouncing surface. Don't think players can move quite as well over 6'2 or have as much oomph and angular momentum under 6 foot
 
ScentOfDefeat said:
It would be interesting to look at the height(s) of the different GOAT contenders, both in the men's and the women's game. Just to see if any conclusion(s) can be drawn from it.
Click to expand...

True, it would. Can anybody be bothered? :)


I honestly expect that the great players of the next eras will generally creep up in height. We had Sampras, Federer and Nadal at 6'1" and Djokovic is 6'2". We need to wait and see but supposing the next two greats are Kyrgios and Coric, well they are 6'4" and 6'2" (I know this probably won't happen and there are more great contenders to come).

So I predict a steady general average creeping up of height, where we''' see guys who are 6'3-4"ish that don't look oversized or disproportionate, but rather very ideal.
 
125downthemiddle said:
I think the game in its modern athletic form, say since 1980 clearly suits a player a little on the tall side but not a lot. Bouncier surfaces would also tend to mean slower, typically a taller person would do better on a faster low bouncing surface. Don't think players can move quite as well over 6'2 or have as much oomph and angular momentum under 6 foot
Click to expand...

I think the super short guys can be nimbler than the Feds and Djokers of the world but they do lack some oomph it seems... look at Kei Nishikori.
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
I think the super short guys can be nimbler than the Feds and Djokers of the world but they do lack some oomph it seems... look at Kei Nishikori.
Click to expand...

I prefer Djokovics speed and movement at least it's very comparable without much loss in movement. Over 6'2 is where it gets bad with the movement which is why I don't think it will be ideal. Andy Murray is really only 6'2, he said so himself and is barely taller than Djokovic. I can't think of any great movers taller than that.
 
125downthemiddle said:
I prefer Djokovics speed and movement at least it's very comparable without much loss in movement. Over 6'2 is where it gets bad with the movement which is why I don't think it will be ideal. Andy Murray is really only 6'2, he said so himself and is barely taller than Djokovic. I can't think of any great movers taller than that.
Click to expand...

Monfils should have been, I mean physically he certainly had the potential to be an unbelievable mover, but not the patience, technique nor mentality. The cases are rare though. Watch out for Kokkinakis—he's unusually nimble and fast for his height (think he's 6'4-5").
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
Monfils should have been, I mean physically he certainly had the potential to be an unbelievable mover, but not the patience, technique nor mentality. The cases are rare though. Watch out for Kokkinakis—he's unusually nimble and fast for his height (think he's 6'4-5").
Click to expand...

Disagree with Monfils. Speed, of course. But not tennis movement. nba and nfl are my two favorite sports, but I always bristle when people say that Kobe would have made a great tennis player etc...tennis movement and speed is very unique...not sure how to quantify it exactly.
 
If we look at the big legends in tennis since Laver and Rosewall (yes seems convenient as Gonzales was tall but I'm going to go Open Era for now):
Laver and Rosewall - below 6 foot, very fast and ideal, dominating the game
Connors - bit taller at 5'10", moved exceptionally well.
Borg and Mcenroe - about 5'11"?? Borg is arguably the best mover and tennis player ever.
Lendl - 6'2" or so and he was the best of his era but not as good as Borg before him or Sampras who followed. He happened to be a great player but he didn't fill out his frame in the manner that Djokovic does... looks a bit less suitably proportioned somehow to me.
Sampras - 6'-6'1" and extremely athletic in almost all departments—looked incredibly ideal.
Federer and Nadal - 6'1"
Djokovic and Murray - 6' 2"

In terms of the very best, I see a general trend for taller legends other than Lendl who sort of upset the progression a bit, but although he was the best he wasn't that tremendous an athlete (certainly good don't get me wrong).
 
125downthemiddle said:
Disagree with Monfils. Speed, of course. But not tennis movement. nba and nfl are my two favorite sports, but I always bristle when people say that Kobe would have made a great tennis player etc...tennis movement and speed is very unique...not sure how to quantify it exactly.
Click to expand...

Have to agree to disagree here. Monfils athleticism with the professionalism of a Djokovic would have yielded great tennis movement imo. Monfils just lacked talent in other areas and the professionalism relatively speaking.

I don't really rate Kobe as that great an athlete in basketball, but his skillset was mindblowingly good (so maybe similar to how you view Federer in tennis). Loads of players from his era had way more hops.
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
If we look at the big legends in tennis since Laver and Rosewall (yes seems convenient as Gonzales was tall but I'm going to go Open Era for now):
Laver and Rosewall - below 6 foot, very fast and ideal, dominating the game
Connors - bit taller at 5'10", moved exceptionally well.
Borg and Mcenroe - about 5'11"?? Borg is arguably the best mover and tennis player ever.
Lendl - 6'2" or so and he was the best of his era but not as good as Borg before him or Sampras who followed. He happened to be a great player but he didn't fill out his frame in the manner that Djokovic does... looks a bit less suitably proportioned somehow to me.
Sampras - 6'-6'1" and extremely athletic in almost all departments—looked incredibly ideal.
Federer and Nadal - 6'1"
Djokovic and Murray - 6' 2"

In terms of the very best, I see a general trend for taller legends other than Lendl who sort of upset the progression a bit, but although he was the best he wasn't that tremendous an athlete (certainly good don't get me wrong).
Click to expand...

Good summary. The difference is you see it as a progression whereas I see it as the modern.athletic game allowing a narrower range of ideally well proportioned athletes with speed, power, strength, and agility to shine and punishing those outside of that range more harshly than those preceding this enlightened epoch. Or not.
 
125downthemiddle said:
Good summary. The difference is you see it as a progression whereas I see it as the modern.athletic game allowing a narrower range of ideally well proportioned athletes with speed, power, strength, and agility to shine and punishing those outside of that range more harshly than those preceding this enlightened epoch. Or not.
Click to expand...

Well I see it as a progression but that doesn't mean I don't think the progression hasn't happened for the reasons you've stated. I agree that changes in the game continue to shift around some imagined demarcations for the ideal band of athlete in the game. That's part of why I think the ideal height won't necessarily stay static; not just reasons pertaining to the natural tendencies of the human race but also how the hierarchy of prerequisites in a sport can change and shift the biases of ideals. You could say the general improvements in the game and the increased physicality continues to make the list of athletic prerequisites for top level (Slam winning level) tennis more demanding, and more exclusive as a consequence as less athletes have the mass amount of qualities needed for success.

In the above list, someone like Borg looks like someone like Federer now, except Federer is taller. What I mean is that Borg and Connors filled out their frames. If you look at Laver and Rosewall, they don't look like short people but they looked like short tall people (:lol:)... they looked like short Federers or Djokovics—guys who filled out their frame in a way that looked like perfect tennis archetypes. Where as Lendl, but to a much greater extent someone like Del Potro, just look a bit too long and disproportionate and not quite ideal for tennis. Nishikori is taller than Laver or Rosewall but somehow he looks "short" and a bit stubby.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nathaniel_Near said:
Have to agree to disagree here. Monfils athleticism with the professionalism of a Djokovic would have yielded great tennis movement imo. Monfils just lacked talent in other areas and the professionalism relatively speaking.

I don't really rate Kobe as that great an athlete in basketball, but his skillset was mindblowingly good (so maybe similar to how you view Federer in tennis). Loads of players from his era had way more hops.
Click to expand...

To me the guys 6'3 and up regardless of how fast or flexible or highlight inducing athletic they are look.a.bit herky jerky moving side to side and backwards. Its the reason cornerbacks in the nfl are rarely over 6'2 even thought they often cover receivers up to 6'5. Richard Sherman is considered unusually tall at a bit under 6'3.
 
Maybe the best height tends to be slightly above the average height at any point in time. If the average height worldwide is 2 inches higher in 40 years time then I'd expect the Djokovics and Federers of that world to be about 6'3-4".

We should revisit this topic in 40 years time.

Good luck brothers. :lol:
 
125downthemiddle said:
To me the guys 6'3 and up regardless of how fast or flexible or highlight inducing athletic they are look.a.bit herky jerky moving side to side and backwards. Its the reason cornerbacks in the nfl are rarely over 6'2 even thought they often cover receivers up to 6'5. Richard Sherman is considered unusually tall at a bit under 6'3.
Click to expand...

That's a fair and true point up to this point in time. There might be a theoretical limit of sorts. It might be useful to look at other sports as you are doing, though the conditions of tennis are very volatile compared to almost all other sports, which means it's going to be more susceptible to possible changes regarding the ideal athlete and such.

We've yet to see a Usain Boltish anomaly, such as someone very tall dominating the game.
 
Nathaniel_Near said:
That's a fair and true point up to this point in time. There might be a theoretical limit of sorts. It might be useful to look at other sports as you are doing, though the conditions of tennis are very volatile compared to almost all other sports, which means it's going to be more susceptible to possible changes regarding the ideal athlete and such.

We've yet to see a Usain Boltish anomaly, such as someone very tall dominating the game.
Click to expand...

Marat Safin seemed the best bet recently. Probably closer to 6'5 than 6'4.
 
I think one thing that will remain consistent regardless of the height of the very very best, is that they will always look correctly proportioned for the rigours of tennis. There's an aesthetic beauty to legends such as Borg, Djokovic and Federer—they all look built for the game. Gonzales was 6'3" but looked like he was created by the Gods to play this game called tennis—far more suited than TheIvan.

Maybe Lendl was the anomaly. He never quite looked right to me.
 
Definitely 6 and above grand slam winners below 6 are rare. Kei came close.

Remember height relates to wingspan and more torque on your strokes which gives natural power. its not just the serve. its the same reason taller golfers can get the long drives in easier and short golfers need to rely heavily on their short game.
 
moonballs said:
Same as Federer's and Nadal's. Djokovic and Murray are both tad taller by half to 1 inch. Basically 6'1'' to 6'2" is empirically the perfect height for a tennis player.
Click to expand...

I think Federer is slightly taller than Rafa. You can see that when they stand next to each other. So it's either 184/185 or 185/186 Rafa/Fed.
 
Tennis is a game of first step speed, agility, and staying injury free. It seems that for most people, once you are taller than 6'2"-ish, you start to lose these things. So I'd say 6' to 6'3".
 
vanioMan said:
I think Federer is slightly taller than Rafa. You can see that when they stand next to each other. So it's either 184/185 or 185/186 Rafa/Fed.
Click to expand...

C'est correct. Nadal and Sampras are about 184 cm. Guess that is the ideal height then, really ;-)
 
One Federer high.

Seems to have worked well for him, Sampras, and Nadal.

And Djokovic squats to get rid of that extra inch.
 
Something to consider: a few decades ago grass court tennis dominated, the ball bounced lower, and the bounce was far more inconsistent.

Taller players are able to handle balls on slow, high bouncing HCs. The ridiculous spin on serves these days makes the balls go higher and higher.

In the time of Laver and Rosewall more height may have been a disadvantage.

Just yesterday I saw Almagro hit a serve at 130 mph, so height these days may be a bigger advantage for returning than serving.
 
Gary Duane said:
Something to consider: a few decades ago grass court tennis dominated, the ball bounced lower, and the bounce was far more inconsistent.

Taller players are able to handle balls on slow, high bouncing HCs. The ridiculous spin on serves these days makes the balls go higher and higher.

In the time of Laver and Rosewall more height may have been a disadvantage.

Just yesterday I saw Almagro hit a serve at 130 mph, so height these days may be a bigger advantage for returning than serving.
Click to expand...

This notion should get easily disproved by looking at the stats for who wins the most points on serve and return.
 
Probably just over 6' as others have stated.
Stan Wawrinka is just on this, and still gets very good serves in.
Andy Roddick looked closer to 190cm, though listed at 6'2, and had a great serve.
Novak is actually 187cm, just under 6'2- but rounded off.
He is only about 1cm taller than Federer, who is probably 186cm.
 
Sysyphus said:
This notion should get easily disproved by looking at the stats for who wins the most points on serve and return.
Click to expand...
The person who would lead that stat would be Nadal on clay, Novak on HCs. But these guys are outliers, as all great champions tend to be. So we are back to the same thing. Are they better because they are taller?

Until we have a another great champion of around Laver's size, we can only go on how things have been for the past few decades.

There are too many factors involved to say for sure why today's players are on average two to three inches taller right now.
 
DerekNoleFam1 said:
Probably just over 6' as others have stated.
Stan Wawrinka is just on this, and still gets very good serves in.
Andy Roddick looked closer to 190cm, though listed at 6'2, and had a great serve.
Novak is actually 187cm, just under 6'2- but rounded off.
He is only about 1cm taller than Federer, who is probably 186cm.
Click to expand...
Novak also has an unusually long neck. When considering height "wing span" is terribly important, but we do not have stats on that. Also, height is rounded off, as you say, so when we see inches 6' 1.3" may be round down, but 6'1.6" may be rounded up.
 
Your conclusion that you want to be 6-2 or 6-6+, sounds good but lacks real world evidence.

In the top 50: Murray (6'3) Raonic (6'5) Berdych (6'5) Dimitrov (6'3) Gulbis (6'3) Monfils (6'4) Mayer (6'3) Tomic (6'5) Rosol (6'5) Seppi (6'3) Muller (6'4) Kyrgios (6'4) Troicki (6'4) Sock (6'3) Granollers (6'3) Stakhovsky (6'3)


There is a lot of variation from player to player, in playing style and serving ability.

For example: Milos Raonic (6'5) is obviously one of the elite servers on tour, but often considered a mediocre mover. Marin Cilic (also 6'5) is a decent but not great server, however is a great mover for his size. Or Bernard Tomic (6'5) not a very good serve, moves well. Another example could be Andreas Seppi (6'3) who has one of the lesser serves on tour despite being the "ideal" height. Yet he moves great. Ernests Gulbis (6'3) has a fantastic serve, so does Feli Lopez. I could go on and on with this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

George Turner
best servers by height; Zverev is the worst!
Replies
27
Views
4K
nolefam_2024
nolefam_2024
T
  • Poll Poll
6 Feet or so possibly the idea height in tennis !
Replies
18
Views
25K
Leublu tennis
Leublu tennis
ClubHoUno
Name the tallest Pro tennis players to i ever play the game - now and back then ?
Replies
21
Views
23K
ivo#1fan
I
conjoshruk
Is there a 'perfect height' for a tennis player?
2
Replies
51
Views
7K
Johnny505
J
G
Who is the greatest player ever above the height of 6 foot 3 inches in terms of talent and records?
Replies
17
Views
1K
RacquetAbuse101
RacquetAbuse101
Back
Top