Author Topic: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)  (Read 7067 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #80 on: August 09, 2013, 01:34:10 AM »
The ATP Rankings were all based on prize money, no matter the Grand Prix ranking of a tournament.

Australian Open and Indianapolis were ranked by the GP according to tradition, but they had prize money totals of 27000 and 90000, that is why they are 25K and 75K respectively.

This is the first season Philadelphia does not hold special status. Until now, it was the biggest WCT event. Now, it all became concentrated on the finals, and any event after the finals was removed.

Salisbury and Hampton would not have been counted if they were not previously GP. Fact is that the USLTA Indoor was a main rival of WCT, so their tournaments were the primary target to being absorbed by the two rival tours. They let the European Circuit live for a while though.

Med events. Do you mean the European Circuit? So, would you class them all at C level?

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #81 on: August 09, 2013, 01:45:18 AM »
I switched all European Circuit events to 25000, because I found Valencia prize money equal to Monte Carlo (20000). So, they most likely, didn't have business above the 25K class.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #82 on: August 09, 2013, 03:16:03 AM »
The two exceptions were the Australian Open which was an A not a C and Indianapolis which was a B not an A.

I wonder if the Aussie Open was rated for more Grand Prix points on tradition rather than prize money?

And then I came back to this. Fact is that Newcombe cannot be YE #2 unless this is 75K. I tried all scenarios possible. Newcombe cannot outrun Connors unless this is 75K. So, despite prize money, I think ATP went with the GP classification and classed this as 75K. Updated my calendar.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #83 on: August 09, 2013, 07:27:33 AM »
I switched all European Circuit events to 25000, because I found Valencia prize money equal to Monte Carlo (20000). So, they most likely, didn't have business above the 25K class.

Well, that went wrong !!!

It appears that counting these as 25Ks will lead to disastrous results straying too far away from the official rankings of August 23. Correcting them to 50K closes the gap, and Indianapolis to 75K as well. I don't know by how much yet, because I have to restart from after USO 1972.

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #84 on: August 10, 2013, 11:51:36 AM »
I switched all European Circuit events to 25000, because I found Valencia prize money equal to Monte Carlo (20000). So, they most likely, didn't have business above the 25K class.

Well, that went wrong !!!

It appears that counting these as 25Ks will lead to disastrous results straying too far away from the official rankings of August 23. Correcting them to 50K closes the gap, and Indianapolis to 75K as well. I don't know by how much yet, because I have to restart from after USO 1972.

Singles prize money at each of the Rothmans Spring Mediterranean Circuit events from World of Tennis '74 page 330

 1     x    $4,000    =   $4,000
 1     x    $2,000    =   $2,000
 2     x    $1,200    =   $2,400
 4     x    $600    =   $2,400
 8     x    $300    =   $2,400
 16     x    $200    =   $3,200
 32     x    $100    =   $3,200
            
      Total      $19,600

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #85 on: August 11, 2013, 07:53:23 AM »
Looking at  the 72 calendar, there are a few discrepancies with the Grand Prix grading:

Roland Garros   AA   TC   OK
Wimbledon   AA   TC   OK
US Open   AA   TC   OK
Johannesburg   A   75K   OK
Rome   A   50K   ???
Indianapolis   A   75K   OK
Toronto   A   75K   OK
Los Angeles   A   75K   OK
Barcelona   A   50K   ???
Stockholm   A   75K   OK
Salisbury   B   50K   OK
Madrid   B   50K   OK
Hamburg   B   50K   OK
Paris   B   50K   OK
Los Angeles   C   25K   OK
New York   C   25K   OK
Hampton   C   25K   OK
Washington   C   25K   OK
Brussels   C   25K   OK
Bournemouth   C   25K   OK
Bristol   C   25K   OK
Bastad   C   25K   OK
Gstaad   C   25K   OK
Cincinnati   C   50K   ???
Seattle   C   25K   OK
Sacramento   C   10K   ???
Albany   C   25K   OK
London   C   50K   ???
Monte Carlo   D   25K   ???
Nice   D   25K   ???
Kitzbuehel   D   10K   OK
Columbus   D   10K   OK
Tanglewood   D   25K   ???

According to World of Tennis 73, WCT put on 22 regular $50,000 tournaments. Why do you think some were $25k?

As for tying up August 73 ATP rankings, that gets fiddly with what tournaments were counted in the list. What did you start with? Did you count Merion 72 and South Orange 72? Did you go up to Toronto 73? Some of your 73 dates seem a little out.

Indianapolis GP Aug 7-13
Cleveland WCT Aug 7-13
Toronto GP Aug 14-20
Fort Worth WCT Aug 14-20
South Orange Aug 21-27
Merion Aug 21-27

Wouldn't it be easier to try to nail down December 73 as it is clear where the cutoffs are and then work backwards?



Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #86 on: August 11, 2013, 01:00:14 PM »
Let me start by saying that nothing in 1972 is yet final, otherwise they would have been online.

It's terribly difficult to do this, as I have to patch a lot of missing information, and I don't have World of Tennis anything, like you seem to have. :)

If you know my ATP Live Rankings, you know that this thing only goes forward. You have question-marked 1972 D-Groups. If C-Groups were 25K, D-Group were how big?

The rest were already corrected (including C-Groups), and 1972 is already half recalculated.

Offline foaquin

  • Tennis Pro
  • *****
  • Posts: 455
  • Gender: Male
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #87 on: August 11, 2013, 01:25:47 PM »
cool...
 so ..was Vilas right in his claim?

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #88 on: August 12, 2013, 03:32:19 AM »
cool...
 so ..was Vilas right in his claim?

We don't yet know for sure. The next month will help us finish the investigation and know for sure.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #89 on: August 12, 2013, 07:12:40 AM »
Looking at  the 72 calendar, there are a few discrepancies with the Grand Prix grading:

Roland Garros   AA   TC   OK
Wimbledon   AA   TC   OK
US Open   AA   TC   OK
Johannesburg   A   75K   OK
Rome   A   50K   ???
Indianapolis   A   75K   OK
Toronto   A   75K   OK
Los Angeles   A   75K   OK
Barcelona   A   50K   ???
Stockholm   A   75K   OK
Salisbury   B   50K   OK
Madrid   B   50K   OK
Hamburg   B   50K   OK
Paris   B   50K   OK
Los Angeles   C   25K   OK
New York   C   25K   OK
Hampton   C   25K   OK
Washington   C   25K   OK
Brussels   C   25K   OK
Bournemouth   C   25K   OK
Bristol   C   25K   OK
Bastad   C   25K   OK
Gstaad   C   25K   OK
Cincinnati   C   50K   ???
Seattle   C   25K   OK
Sacramento   C   10K   ???
Albany   C   25K   OK
London   C   50K   ???
Monte Carlo   D   25K   ???
Nice   D   25K   ???
Kitzbuehel   D   10K   OK
Columbus   D   10K   OK
Tanglewood   D   25K   ???

According to World of Tennis 73, WCT put on 22 regular $50,000 tournaments. Why do you think some were $25k?

As for tying up August 73 ATP rankings, that gets fiddly with what tournaments were counted in the list. What did you start with? Did you count Merion 72 and South Orange 72? Did you go up to Toronto 73? Some of your 73 dates seem a little out.

Indianapolis GP Aug 7-13
Cleveland WCT Aug 7-13
Toronto GP Aug 14-20
Fort Worth WCT Aug 14-20
South Orange Aug 21-27
Merion Aug 21-27

Wouldn't it be easier to try to nail down December 73 as it is clear where the cutoffs are and then work backwards?

Good, so now I covered up all discrepancies, but I don't get which 73' dates I have off. The dates you mentioned there apply to 1972 surely. But in 1973, GP bought the WCT summer swing, and clustered weak and good tournaments together. So, Cincy played with Tanglewood, Indianapolis with Merion and Montreal with South Orange.

It is also interesting to point this out.

No matter how much you try, Orantes and Panatta can't even be close to the ATP official ranking, unless the Med circuit counted for more. Specifically, it seems that some tournaments classed as B events, and Madrid classed as an A event. Seems like ATP used more than prize money to class these tournaments, even if they were all under 25K prize pots. If Madrid is not A, but the rest are B (including Nice), Orantes is not 2nd in August, no matter where you place the cutoff.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #90 on: August 12, 2013, 08:15:50 AM »
So, now, I'm gonna blow all your minds. :))

ATP made a huge one in 1973. Get ready. Look at the Top 10 of August 23, 1973 for assistance.

1. It is when I collected in all the data from tournament types that I realized this mishap. To get Orantes in front of Smith, placing Madrid at 75K was simply not enough. It helped, but Orantes was still short a few decimals. Panatta was entering Top 10 at last. So, this is when I realized that the weak GP events from 1972 were not counted (Seattle, Sacramento and Albany). Take them out, and Orantes slides in front of Smith. Not only that, but it also helps Rosewall move in Top 10, as well as other key positions.

2. Although, the Top 10 was looking close to the real one, I had to place all WCT events at the end of 1972 to 50K to make it even closer. But there was one thing missing.

3. Kodes... Kodes... Kodes... However you put this, Kodes was #4 (official being 11). It was so wrong, something was definitely amiss here. But how? One logical solution triumphed over all. 1973 Wimbledon (which Kodes won) was boycotted by 13 out of the Top 16 players because of the Pilic incident. Not only that this explained Kodes' position, which became 11 after I took out Wimbledon, but it was also explaining Connors' tournament count of 17. :gleam:

ATP DID NOT COUNT WIMBLEDON 1973. At all... :rofl_2:

Although, now I'm gonna have to count Calgary, as the only logical tournament Nastase played and Connors didn't to make it 23 for Ilie once more.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #91 on: August 12, 2013, 08:21:49 AM »
1973 will now definitely be different than the official rankings, but they will be the correct rankings.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #92 on: August 12, 2013, 08:58:58 AM »
Although, now I'm gonna have to count Calgary, as the only logical tournament Nastase played and Connors didn't to make it 23 for Ilie once more.

No I won't. Gonna use his Wimbledon result as #23. Defying ATP here... :rofl_2:

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #93 on: August 12, 2013, 09:36:12 AM »
Alright, I'm putting this to a vote here and on MTF. Do I count Wimbledon 1973, despite the ATP boycott?

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #94 on: August 12, 2013, 03:54:57 PM »
Good, so now I covered up all discrepancies, but I don't get which 73' dates I have off. The dates you mentioned there apply to 1972 surely.

Yes sorry. I was looking at the wrong year! The dates I said were 1973 were 1972.

I hope you didn't waste too much time on this.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #95 on: August 12, 2013, 04:08:18 PM »
Yes sorry. I was looking at the wrong year! The dates I said were 1973 were 1972.

I hope you didn't waste too much time on this.

Don't worry. Other things don't really add up and I'm trying to figure out why. Obviously, I don't have the correct rankings proportions. So, I will need to test this with several passes, using no bonuses. The pass that gets me the most loyal approach to the official rankings of August 23, 1973 is the winner, it will have the right proportions, since it is clear that ATP never used bonus points before that date.

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #96 on: August 12, 2013, 04:26:34 PM »
Alright, I'm putting this to a vote here and on MTF. Do I count Wimbledon 1973, despite the ATP boycott?

It depends if you are trying to recreate the ATP rules or make your own - I think the first task is to do the former, although it is then interesting to calculate alternatives.

It seems improbable that anyone would come up with a ranking system without including Wimbledon.

But Holmes used to say "when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".

We are talking about rankings produced by the ATP.

It was the ATP that boycotted Wimbledon. The ATP told all its members not to compete. The three members who defied the ban (Nastase, Taylor and Keldie) were heavily fined by the ATP.

So, having reprimanded these three and fined them, would the ATP then have rewarded them for ignoring ATP instructions by awarding them ranking points?

Impossible surely. So after eliminating that, the improbable becomes the most likely.

It would be interesting to look at Sandy Mayer's points. Semi-finalist at Wimbledon and world ranked 134???? Surprising if Wimbledon counted, but possibly not if it didn't.

He dropped from 44 in the August list - which would probably be explained by his good 72 US Open dropping out.


« Last Edit: August 12, 2013, 04:32:27 PM by JonG »

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #97 on: August 12, 2013, 05:30:43 PM »
unless the Med circuit counted for more.

Would draw size come into play? I think they were all 64s rather than 32s.

Or does your Wimbledon revelation change everything anyway?

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #98 on: August 13, 2013, 09:19:04 AM »
Wimbledon changed a lot. I was able to reconstitute a lot of the actual system, yet there are some unpolished edges which I don't think I can ever fine tune.

Here is a look at the YE 1973 with this reconstituted system, which may lead to me redoing 1970-1973 altogether:

Code: [Select]
1 Ilie Nastase 27 ROU 239 10.391 23
2 John Newcombe 29 AUS 146 8.588 17
3 Jimmy Connors 21 USA 135 7.941 17
4 Tom Okker 29 NED 198 6.828 29
5 Stan Smith 26 USA 156 6.783 23
6 Ken Rosewall 39 AUS 114 6.000 19
7 Manuel Orantes 24 ESP 140 5.833 24
8 Rod Laver 35 AUS 115 5.750 20
9 Jan Kodes 27 CZE 95 5.278 18
10 Arthur Ashe 30 USA 124 4.828 28
11 Adriano Panatta 23 ITA 67 3.722 18
12 Tom Gorman 27 USA 95 3.519 27
13 Nikola Pilic 34 CRO 94 3.357 28
14 Roy Emerson 37 AUS 54 3.176 17
15 Marty Riessen 31 USA 71 3.087 23

Notice that only Panatta and Pilic ruin the exact positioning, and it's by few decimals. It's very close and all the Top 10 are in the right position. This is the closest match to the real thing I came up with until now. Given a few more years, I think I can find the exact replica.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 565
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #99 on: August 13, 2013, 09:20:56 AM »
Would draw size come into play? I think they were all 64s rather than 32s.

Or does your Wimbledon revelation change everything anyway?

It would, but now I did this with the exact Grand Prix grading + prize money dependency. AO is at 25K (it had prize money of 30000), Indianapolis is at 50K (according to GP grading).

To note that a Johannesburg-2 and Rome WCT from 1972 have been counted as well. It seems that Newcombe and Pilic needed them for their tournament count.