Slasher's Greatest of all Time List - MensTennisForums.com

 123Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:06 PM Thread Starter
Rankings Master
 
Slasher1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 30
Posts: 12,874
                     
Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

As I wanted a more neutral perspective on the idea of The Greatest of All Time than the usual MTF banter, I have designed a mathematical system that takes into account the most popular statistics in order to create my very own trademarked-but-not-necessarily-so-original Slasher's Greatest of all Time list. Now, this is a bit different to @Johnny Groove 's hard-worked list in a sense that I try to create a point system for every stat that can be used.

ATTENTION: This thread needs to be used only for talking about this list. I know, I know, but it's not about praising me, please use constructive criticism and make plausible suggestions (stat additions are no longer accepted). Obviously let me know about mistakes, cause there's bound to be some. But if you want to talk about your idea on the whole GOAT subject, please find this thread: http://www.menstennisforums.com/2-ge...~-vol-3-a.html

The list has the following entry allowance:
- Player has at least one Grand Slam semifinal (only those including and after Wimbledon 1924), final or title (all time), or has won a Pro Slam or got a Pro Slam final.
- Player has been number 1 for at least one week, or noted at least once in the world number 1 pre-open era lists.
- Player has won an open era Masters title.
- Player has won the Olympics [post 1900] or gained a silver medal or who won the Year End Championships [open era] at least once.

The most important stats refer to Majors titles, streaks and records, world number 1, or defeating other Grand Slam champions (or Pro Tours for pre-open era players). The 5 directions of the list are noted above: PERFORMANCE, DOMINATION, LEADER, EFFICIENCY and CAREER. Here they are:

- Grand Slam titles
- Grand Slam finals
- Grand Slam semifinals
- Pro Slam titles
- Pro Slam finals
- Pro Slam semifinals
- Major venue title streak addend - this calculates a total of points based on Grand Slams won at the same venue in consecutive years: streaks are ponderated with x^2.05, where x is the number of slams won in consecutive years inside the streak. Number of streaks for each x is also memorized, but the columns are hidden. The total sum is then divided by 3 to decrease its impact in relation to the Grand Slam streak.
- Surface variation - for this stat the total number of Majors per surface are counted, the highest value on a given surface is used to extract the percentage of Majors on that surface, along with the lowest value and surface count. (1 / (Bst/Wst)) x 15*(Surf Cnt-1.95). The details for this addend are also hidden in the table.
- Grand Slam streak addend - this calculates a total of points based on consecutive Grand Slams won: streaks are ponderated with x^2.05, where x is the number of consecutive slams inside the streak. Number of streaks for each x is also memorized, but the columns are hidden.
- Pro Slam streak addend - this calculates a total of points based on consecutive Pro Slams won: streaks are ponderated with x^1.55, where x is the number of consecutive slams inside the streak. Number of streaks for each x is also memorized, but the columns are hidden.
- All Slam streak addend - where a player switched from Amateur to Pro, they may have continued a Slam undefeated streak from Amateur to Pro Slam, for which this parameter is calculated by using the formula:
(x+y)^(1.55+(x*0.5)/(x+y))
where x is the number of Grand Slams won consecutively before/after the switch and y is the number of Pro Slam won consecutively before/after the switch. The condition is that there should be no Slams missed before/after the switch.
- Weeks at number 1 (Open Era only)
- Maximum consecutive weeks at number 1 (Open Era only)
- Years at number 1 (pre-Open Era only)
- H2H against Top 10 Open Era Grand Slam champions while in the Top 10. The result of any match (victory or defeat) is taken into consideration only if the adversary of the current player was a Grand Slam champion at the time of the match, was a Top 10 player, and the current player was also a Top 10 player. This way, only the matches at the very top are counted. The zero point for this addend is 50%. This stat is only for Open Era matches, and only valid if a player has won at least one Grand Slam in the Open Era.
- Match record at Majors (both Grand Slams and Pro Slams are considered for the percentage). The zero point for this addend is 75%.
- Masters titles
- Important titles (important pre-open era tournaments are included here: World Hard Court Championships, World Covered Court Championships, Bristol Cup, etc.; WCT Finals are also included - after 1983 they value as half the weight; Grand Slam Cup wins are also included - they value as half the weight)
- Career titles (where known)
- Year End Championship titles (where available)
- Olympic medals (Gold, Silver and Bronze in singles)
- Pro Tours (this compensates the players before the Open Era who cannot have the Grand Slam H2H stat).

Here is the full list:
Slasher's Greatest of all Time Score List
Slasher's Expanded Greatest of all Time Score List

Here you can find the results used for the Efficiency at the Top figures:
Players' wins against Top 10 Grand Slam champions while in the Top 10

And here is the top 50 image:

Last edited by Slasher1985; 08-23-2016 at 02:22 PM.
Slasher1985 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:11 PM
Registered User
 
Uncle Latso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Age: 39
Posts: 12,505
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

possibly the most precise GOAT ranking in the interwebz.

Well done

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abel View Post
Dimitrov will never win anything above 250 level.
Rome R1 Zverev def. Dimitrov -
Quote:
Originally Posted by augus View Post
I never wrote this about active player after lost match but seriously - Dimitrov should retire from tennis.
Uncle Latso is offline  
post #3 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:19 PM
Registered User
 
Supercell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Age: 31
Posts: 1,380
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Are Pre-Open Era Grand Slams awarded 4 points? They should be equal to Pro-Slams (2 points). While Emerson was winning grand slams Laver and Rosewall were battling hard at Pro-Slams.
Apophis likes this.

DJOKOVIC = LEGEND

Last edited by Supercell; 06-13-2016 at 07:21 PM.
Supercell is offline  
post #4 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:21 PM
Registered User
 
tennisfan3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 5,777
                     
So Federer making GS champion Roddick his ostrich counts for a lot? Plus GS champions Hewitt and Safin and Agassi and whoever?

GOAT
tennisfan3 is offline  
post #5 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:22 PM Thread Starter
Rankings Master
 
Slasher1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 30
Posts: 12,874
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supercell View Post
Are Pre-Open Era Grand Slams awarded 4 points? They should be equal to Pro-Slams.
Slams are Slams, no matter the era.

- Pre-Open era Slams after 1921 are just as difficult for an amateur as they are for a professional in the open era.
- Early Era Slams (before 1921) are a bit easier in some cases, but the players winning them lose on the GOAT stat because they're unable to count consecutive slams and same venue slams in the same way.

The stat will remain like this because I believe it is accurate enough, but thanks for the suggestion.

P.S.: Do you disagree with Ken Rosewall being 4th?
Slasher1985 is offline  
post #6 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:24 PM Thread Starter
Rankings Master
 
Slasher1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 30
Posts: 12,874
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Quote:
Originally Posted by tennisfan3 View Post
So Federer making GS champion Roddick his ostrich counts for a lot? Plus GS champions Hewitt and Safin and Agassi and whoever?

GOAT
The stat is just as fair for every player who ever played. For instance Vitas Gerulaitis is 0-16 against Borg (13 matches being played after Vitas had won his slam). But I doubt you know who that is, your only objective in this thread is Djokovic. Please leave unless you want to make a constructive post.
daddy, Uncle Latso, Joe H and 4 others like this.
Slasher1985 is offline  
post #7 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:26 PM
Registered User
 
Supercell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Age: 31
Posts: 1,380
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slasher1985 View Post
Slams are Slams, no matter the era.

- Pre-Open era Slams after 1921 are just as difficult for an amateur as they are for a professional in the open era.
- Early Era Slams (before 1921) are a bit easier in some cases, but the players winning them lose on the GOAT stat because they're unable to count consecutive slams and same venue slams in the same way.

The stat will remain like this because I believe it is accurate enough, but thanks for the suggestion.

P.S.: Do you disagree with Ken Rosewall being 4th?
As I said, only part of competition took part in grand slams. For me it's obvious that it should be discounted. Why Pro-Slams are worth less while competition in pro-tour was even stronger in some periods (like 60s)? If you don't change GS points, at lest Pro-slams should be awarded more (Laver and Rosewall lose a lot of points because of it while Emerson is "happy" ).
redshift36188 and Djokerer like this.

DJOKOVIC = LEGEND

Last edited by Supercell; 06-13-2016 at 07:28 PM.
Supercell is offline  
post #8 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:28 PM Thread Starter
Rankings Master
 
Slasher1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 30
Posts: 12,874
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supercell View Post
As I said, only part of competition took part in grand slams. For me it's obvious that it should be discounted. Why Pro-Slams are worth less while competition in pro-tour was even stronger in some periods (like 60s)? If you don't change GS points, at lest Pro-slams should be awarded more (Laver and Rosewall lose points because of it).
Pro Slams were usually a 2, 3 or 4 round competition (in some cases one match or a group). The levels between players were relatively the same in both competitions. As in amateur players are comparable between themselves, and pro players are comparable between themselves.
Slasher1985 is offline  
post #9 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:36 PM
Registered User
 
Noleoleoleole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,330
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Any chance of an open-era only version?
Crvena Zvezda and NSMv1924 like this.

26-23
23-22
24-10
21-4
12 | 29 | 5 | 4

W-F-W-W-W-W

Last edited by Noleoleoleole; 06-13-2016 at 07:38 PM.
Noleoleoleole is offline  
post #10 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:39 PM
Registered User
 
augus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Posts: 759
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

This surface variation thing is right concept but definitely this is not the right way to implement this. I mean when you look at Sampras who sucked on clay big time having higher score than all those CGS guys that's just weird. Especially 2x bigger than Agassi who was definitely more versatile player. I know how it was counted and I know that's just number but that one definitely don't do justice.

You don't call retarded people retards. It's bad taste. You call your friends retards when they're acting retarded. - Michael Scott
augus is offline  
post #11 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:41 PM
Registered User
 
NSMv1924's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Age: 34
Posts: 3,120
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Interesting, thanks for sharing - any reason as to not include Top10 wins/overall titles/masters/YEC/YE#1 etc. I know some of these apply to open era only

NOVAK - DELPO - DAVY - ERNIE G.
NSMv1924 is offline  
post #12 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:44 PM
Registered User
 
Supercell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Age: 31
Posts: 1,380
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Don't you think that these two factors are too redundant?
- Maximum consecutive titles one at a single venue (consecutive years only - missing one year breaks the streak) - (meant to count continuous form at a certain Major).
- Maximum number of majors at a single venue (meant to count dominance at a certain Major).
For example player with 4 USO will have 12 points (equivalent of 3 slams!) more that a player with 2 USO and 2 AO. I think something should be changed here, maybe less that x3 multiplier?
Apophis likes this.

DJOKOVIC = LEGEND
Supercell is offline  
post #13 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:45 PM Thread Starter
Rankings Master
 
Slasher1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Age: 30
Posts: 12,874
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noleoleoleole View Post
Any chance of an open-era only version?
Maybe. I'm not saying no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by augus View Post
This surface variation thing is right concept but definitely this is not the right way to implement this. I mean when you look at Sampras who sucked on clay big time having higher score than all those CGS guys that's just weird. Especially 2x bigger than Agassi who was definitely more versatile player. I know how it was counted and I know that's just number but that one definitely don't do justice.
Do you have an alternate formula for me? Don't be shy, if it's mathematically plausible and neutral enough, it is usable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NSMv1924 View Post
Interesting, thanks for sharing - any reason as to not include Top10 wins/overall titles/masters/YEC/YE#1 etc. I know some of these apply to open era only
Those in bold don't even fully apply to the open era, they are only a minor part of tennis, and there is no way to compensate with a pre-open era stat. Overall titles is next to impossible for before 1970, you simply can't get this exact stat, many tournaments were lost in time.
Slasher1985 is offline  
post #14 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:45 PM
Registered User
 
Apophis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Valles Marineris, Mars
Posts: 1,533
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Quote:
((W* 100/(W-L))-50)/ 50
The formula in excel has W+L (which makes more sense).

Also, players are punished for continuing their career after winning their last slam if their W-L record drops (both against major winners and the field). Maybe use the highest value they reached in their career rather than end-of-career values? Or the value after their last major title or final.

Also, players get a lot of point for winning many slams at one venue (both total and consecutive), but also for winning slams at different venues (which seems a bit contradictory). Federer gets 68 points for his 17 slams directly, and another 45.4 (15+21+9.4) for his slams in different columns (plus 6 for his streak of 3, l agree with the x*(x-1) formula). The 45.4 seems a bit high compared to the 68.

I support Federer, Murray, Karlovic, Nishikori and some others.
11 < 1922 < 4175 < 6132
A weak era is an era that becomes stronger when you remove the strongest players.
Apophis is offline  
post #15 of 401 (permalink) Old 06-13-2016, 07:46 PM
Registered User
 
Orthopedic king's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 93
                     
Re: Slasher's Greatest of all Time List

Great statistics but i can not see Lendal above Borg under any circumstances.
so Do you think Djokovic will take sampras place ?!

Djokovic-Gulbis-Tsonga-Murray-Del Potro-Struff-Thiem-Raonic-Pospisil-Kohlschreiber-
Orthopedic king is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome