Seles had a massively high PEAK ELO in the 2500 plus range, not sure if she had any women higher than her in that measure? Her career of 14 years was surprisingly long but a bit dormant for a while for obvious reasons, so maybe took her ranking in the GOAT stakes down a few places?
In 11th slot, we have Monica Seles, she was my number 20 but I totally get those who rate her much higher
To me Monica didn't seem to be around long enough for this high rating. She won all the other majors but Steffi was still best at Wimbledon1992.I don't think it would it have made any difference to the result but Monica's cause at Wimbledon 1992 was not helped by Tauziat's protests about her grunting.
>I think only Graf's peak Elo was definitely even higher (Her peak Elo will have been 2600+). But possibly also Navratilova.
Yep, ranked by peak:
1. graf (yep, just over 2,600) 2. navratilova 3. seles 4. serena 5. hingis 6. venus 7. evert 8. davenport
5 through 8 are extremely close.
(that doesn't count Wills and Lenglen ... as I mentioned a bit in the Lenglen piece, I used to alternative approach to get them on the same scale, because Elo doesn't really capture the level of someone on a 100-match win streak. They'd both be at least ahead of Hingis, maybe higher.)
top men are
1. borg 2. djokovic 3. mcenroe 4. lendl 5. federer 6. nadal 7. connors
5 through 7 are pretty close.
-- Edited by jsackmann on Thursday 1st of December 2022 08:35:34 AM
>I think only Graf's peak Elo was definitely even higher (Her peak Elo will have been 2600+). But possibly also Navratilova.
Yep, ranked by peak:
1. graf (yep, just over 2,600) 2. navratilova 3. seles 4. serena 5. hingis 6. venus 7. evert 8. davenport
5 through 8 are extremely close.
(that doesn't count Wills and Lenglen ... as I mentioned a bit in the Lenglen piece, I used to alternative approach to get them on the same scale, because Elo doesn't really capture the level of someone on a 100-match win streak. They'd both be at least ahead of Hingis, maybe higher.)
top men are
1. borg 2. djokovic 3. mcenroe 4. lendl 5. federer 6. nadal 7. connors
5 through 7 are pretty close.
-- Edited by jsackmann on Thursday 1st of December 2022 08:35:34 AM
Thanks Jeff - I noticed the ultimate tennis statistics site linked above has an ELO number as well - their numbers seem slightly higher per player than yours , any idea why they differ in the numbers they produce ? I guess it isnt an exact science !
>their numbers seem slightly higher per player than yours , any idea why they differ in the numbers they produce ? I guess it isnt an exact science !
yeah. the "official" Elo formula has a parameter (the "k factor") that varies depending on the sport. It's possible we're using slightly different numbers for that. I've also added some things, like a penalty for injuries and other absences. I believe they've done the same, but they might not be implemented exactly the same way.