ATP vs Top 10 and Vs top 20

[jimlosaltos]

This compilation by 'Oleg S', using Tennis Abstract data shows the best records since August 2020 vs the Top 10 and vs the Top 20.

The only players with dominant records vs the Top 10 are Djoko and Medy. Even Rafa is "only" 58.5% vs Top 10 despite his blazing start to the year (was it 21-1?). Five players have winning records vs the Top 10, but only 3 of them are in the top 10.

Alcaraz is 53.8% vs Top 10. Sinner is only 31.2 % vs top 10 but even vs top 20 in 28 matches.

Perhaps the biggest outlier is RBA, who is only ranked 19 but has a better record vs the top 10 than Zverev at 3.

And several players are in the top 10 despite having losing records vs the top 10.

filedata/fetch?id=97056&d=1649092780&type=thumb

filedata/fetch?id=97057&d=1649092780&type=thumb

#

[stroke]

Jim, to me this is why stats to me sometimes are just stats. If I had to choose 1 stat to rank the players, it would be their results at Masters 1000's. There are several of those every year, and all participate.

[jimlosaltos]

Jim, to me this is why stats to me sometimes are just stats. If I had to choose 1 stat to rank the players, it would be their results at Masters 1000's. There are several of those every year, and all participate.

I agree. Rankings can be more a reflection of volume of play than quality. That's why the top 10 and top 20 matchups are, to me, meaningful stats.

I believe old rankings used to weight points according to the rank of the player you beat? Seems more logical.

On the other hand, rankings are there to motivate top players to participate in tournaments that might not otherwise be financially viable.

The PTPA would be very unhappy at reducing incentives that subsidize the sub-100 players.

Business reality is that if tennis returned to something more akin to the old barnstorming days -- say nothing but men-and-women at a dozen Masters 1000 events plus majors -- the industry and the top 100 players would all make more. But I digress.