Author Topic: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)  (Read 8864 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #240 on: September 18, 2013, 06:34:32 PM »
Ross Case didn't participate at Merion as it is shown on the ATP draw version, but who played there in his stead?

Times has Case losing to McNair.

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #241 on: September 18, 2013, 06:41:30 PM »
Parun is in the same pot as Fairlie. He was at the Davis Cup against Romania, so no, he didn't play Washington

WoT has the full Washington draw and says Parun did lose to Tanner.

It also says Fairlie lost to Delaney!

Lists Fairlie as no. 10 seed and says that Nastase was no.5 but withdrew due to Davis Cup commitments.

Double-checked Mundodeportivo archive which confirms Amaya not Fairlie, but I can't find Tanner's first round result.

I guess WoT has both wrong through not correcting the original draw. Still a mystery who replaced Parun.

Offline JonG

  • Tennis Player
  • **
  • Posts: 57
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #242 on: October 17, 2013, 04:35:50 PM »
Any more findings in the last few weeks?????

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #243 on: October 18, 2013, 01:33:17 AM »
I had and will not have time for a while to continue the research. Life is currently extremely busy.

I apologize and will let you know once I resume.

Offline Tennisarchives

  • New Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #244 on: October 19, 2013, 01:37:29 PM »
Im Alex from Tennisarchives.com
Just found this site, very interesting!

keep up the great work!

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #245 on: October 19, 2013, 02:01:55 PM »
I guess you are idzznew. Welcome Alex, and thanks for stopping by. Work here couldn't be so accurate without the correct results, some of which I was pointed to your site for them. You do an extremely good job on tennisarchives. I really hope we could exchange information, as the ATP site has a few errors in their draws and the correct draws are a must to get the right rankings and correct what was wrong in the original.

Offline Tennisarchives

  • New Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #246 on: October 19, 2013, 03:51:14 PM »
Thanks for your welcome! Yes Idzznew is my name at Tennisarchives. Glad you like the site.
Its growing rapidly but still tons of work to be done, and so little time!
We surely can exchange info, look forward to it!

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #247 on: October 23, 2013, 06:58:45 AM »
Although I still lack the time to do precise calculations, I took several looks at how bonus points would combine in 1974, and I keep getting too few if I score only by seeding, but interestingly enough, scoring by seeded Top 24 (6-4-2) reaches pretty close.

Still, no way to be 100% sure without a list similar to the Aug 23 rankings Markus procured. Any way we can get one for a random 1974+ rankings date?

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #248 on: November 05, 2013, 06:58:15 AM »
Had a bit more time, so I took another look at the 1974 rankings.

Since there is no easier way, I'll have to hard-find the bonus points. I started with players ranked 91-100 in the year-end 1974. I used the following bonus point schema: 6p for momentary 1-8, 4p for momentary 9-16 and 2p for momentary 17-24 (all with the added condition of being seeded for CAT-D or lower) + 1p for unseeded 1-24 at CAT-D or lower.

Surprisingly, 9/10 worked perfectly, and a tenth has a 4p error.



And this is the ranking system I find 99% accurate:


Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #249 on: November 06, 2013, 06:36:16 AM »
You can follow my progress with 1974 here:

Historic 1974

You will notice everything strange I find (like for instance Brown: he didn't count WCT since he was not part of any group - just like Lloyd for instance, and instead of it he counted 2 tournaments which are not counted for anyone else - Omaha and Jackson. These 2 should not count for anyone, yet, if we take them out, he's nowhere near the correct value for his points).
« Last Edit: November 19, 2013, 07:52:09 AM by Slasher1985 »

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #250 on: November 19, 2013, 07:51:55 AM »
Well, I progressed a little.

I find the whole thing a mess. Either I made multiple mistakes, or ATP made multiple errors. I added my comments inside the sheet you can find accessing the link above.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #251 on: November 21, 2013, 06:16:59 AM »
Started a new set of calculations from the top and here are the rules I managed to discover:

- 1974 year end rankings were emitted on January 17, 1975. So, AO from December 21, 1974 counts for those rankings, not the one from December 1973.

- WCT events were counted only for players participating in one of the 3 groups (28 players each group). Other players were allowed to request these tournaments to count if they wanted it.

- USLTA events didn't count for the rankings, except for Salisbury and Hampton, or maybe Omaha too. Some players counted Omaha, some didn't. Again, it may have been non-mandatory (optional).

- Bonus points were like this: 6p for beating a player ranked 1-8, 4p for a player ranked 9-16, 2p for 17-24. These were given according to momentary rankings. ATP may have given them according to rankings AFTER a tournament, making mistakes.

- Bonus points were also given to seeded players outside 1-24. 2p for defeating one. For instance, ATP may have made a mistake by not giving 2p to Vilas for beating Mottram in Madrid 1974 (seeded 16). Vilas total for 1974 year end would have been 778, not 776.

- The most important mistake ATP made is creating the bonus point system. If it applied in weekly calculated rankings, all rankings will have differences to the original. The corrections will come to most of the players, and I have no idea which direction it will all take. A bonus system used in a rankings that is not edited on a weekly basis, will be very volatile and subject to countless mistakes. That is because a Top 24 may be more dynamic when calculated every week, shifting bonus points.

This is a table with the 1974 Year End players calculated with the rules I identified. They match exactly, except Vilas (probably because ATP missed Mottram).

https://skydrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=29EC224593D363F0!1720&app=Excel&wdo=2

I will be starting the iterations for 1974 these days and will let you know.

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #252 on: November 21, 2013, 01:29:17 PM »
JonG, if you are still around, can you provide me with the 1974 Richmond WCT draw?

The ATP version here doesn't really seem correct to somehow. Missing seeds...

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #253 on: November 28, 2013, 07:43:21 AM »
The ATP rankings have been a tremendous effort ever since they were invented. Their elegance and simple nature have made it possible to create an objective system to show us the leaders of the tennis world.

Ever since the important data has been lost or forgotten, a quest has begun to check if ATP got the facts right with their own system. They did in most of the part, but there have been a few mistakes which will soon show as turning ugly.

It all starts rather simple and it involves luck. For instance, how lucky Newcombe should be that ATP decided to publish the post-Wimbledon 1974 rankings on July 29th. He managed to score 3 extra weeks as World Number 1. Although ATP's publication of the rankings once in a few weeks is completely justified, because of the difficulty of calculations, this has caused the rankings to be not as objective as they were intended, for you see, many tournaments were played and dropped in-between publications, and each change could show a different World Number 1 just for a few weeks, or one week, without ATP seeing it or telling us about it. The Wimbledon 1974 example is just one of the examples I could find right now, but I have not yet moved beyond 1974. Connors should objectively have scored 3 extra weeks as World Number 1 in July 1974.

Now comes the difficult part. Not knowing of the consequences, ATP decided to create a Bonus Point system completely dependent on the rankings just before a tournament is played. With it, beating Top 24 players would award you points. The bonus point system had two factors: a static one (points for eliminating seeds) and a dynamic one (points for eliminated ranked players). Once we try to calculate the rankings weekly, the dynamic factor plays havoc and inserts a chain error into the official rankings, since we are discovering that if we try to be objective and calculate rankings as per week of tennis played, which was a measure back then, we discover that the much faster modifications of the Top 24 lead to larger and larger differences, creating a Chain Error.

The chain error extends beyond 1974, because points start to drop out having different values than the original, and new ones are added depending on the altered rankings. In a way, the bonus system completely butchered the objectivity of the rankings. It's not ours to judge though, because as I said, ATP was completely justified, but it's ours to correct what once went wrong, and without altering the original system in any way, view the rankings as they should have been.

You can find my 1974 repaired rankings in the rankings database.

Offline elegos7

  • New Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #254 on: January 30, 2014, 08:05:46 AM »

You can find my 1974 repaired rankings in the rankings database.

Hello Marian,

Let me congratulate once again to your fantastic work with these rankings.

Can you give me a link to the 1974 repaired rankings you mention?

I have two comments
1) In 1972 Las Vegas was a regular WCT tournament with 50K prize money, like all the other WCT events. I read about that prize money in google news archives. I think the ATP database made a mistake by listing it with 250K prize money.

2) I think some of your tournament dates (which you obviously took from the ATP archive) is wrong. In  the fall of 1973 I noticed many deviations from the dates published in the World of Tennis Yearbooks. It is usually only a 1-week difference, but still, if you want to create precise weekly rankings, you should check the exact dates as well. I haven't checked the dates in other years. Of course, the year-end rankings will not be affected by this.

Keep up your wonderful work.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2014, 07:09:35 AM by elegos7 »

Offline elegos7

  • New Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #255 on: January 30, 2014, 08:30:58 AM »


This is a table with the 1974 Year End players calculated with the rules I identified. They match exactly, except Vilas (probably because ATP missed Mottram).



I took a look and have a comment to this:
3 week after Wimbledon Connors gets 50 points, 10 bonus and 40 tournament points. I think the 10 bonus points belong to 2 weeks later (for Indianapolis). But then what is this 40 points? To which event does it belong?
Could it be an event from the USLTA winter indoor circuit (probably Hampton that Connors won)?
« Last Edit: January 30, 2014, 02:34:59 PM by elegos7 »

Offline Slasher1985

  • Global Moderator
  • Tennis God
  • ******
  • Posts: 572
  • Gender: Male
  • Rankings Wizard
Re: Full Open Era Rankings (RESEARCH PHASE)
« Reply #256 on: February 25, 2014, 09:12:55 AM »
Dear elegos,

Thanks for the kind remarks.

I have 1973 confirmed and 1974 confirmed dates right now. And I have made breakthroughs regarding 1974-1977 bonus system, this time confirming it for good.

I am missing a few tournaments from 1974 though, specifically played by Tom Okker, Harold Solomon, Raul Ramirez and Jan Kodes only, and no other top players. I have found proof they were counted for the rankings.

Alas, the 1968-1972 needs a little redoing, but I'm confident the calendars I have are good for 1973 onwards. They are not from the ATP website. And yes, you are right about that one, the 10 points are from Indianapolis. If you go to MTF, you can see the database there.