Getting to the top: an analysis of 25 years of career rankings trajectories for professional women’s tennis

Abstract

Official rankings are the most common measure of success in professional women's tennis. Despite their importance for earning potential and tournament seeding, little is known about ranking trajectories of female players and their influence on career success. Our objective was to conduct a comprehensive study of the career progression of elite female tennis talent. The study examined the ranking trajectories of the top 250 female professionals between 1990 and 2015. Using regression modelling of yearly peak rankings, we found a strong association between the shape of the ranking trajectory and the highest career ranking earned. Players with the highest career peak ranking were the youngest when first ranked. For example, top 10 players were first ranked at age 15.5 years (99% CI = 14.8-15.9), 1.2 years (99% CI = 0.8-1.5) earlier than top 51-100 players. Top 10 players were also ranked in the top 100 longer than other players, holding a top 100 ranking until a mean age of 29.0 years (99% CI = 27.8-30.3) compared with age 24.4 years (99% CI = 23.7-25.2) for top 51-100 players. Ranking trajectories were more distinct with respect to player age than years from first ranking. The present study's findings will be instructive for players, coaches, and administrators in setting goals and assessing athlete development in women's tennis.

Predicting elite success: Evidence comparing the career pathways of top 10 to 300 professional tennis players

“…In the past few years, speculation regarding the potential of using career ranking benchmarks in predicting player future success has attracted great interest amongst researchers in tennis. 13–16 Some studies highlighted certain career benchmarks based on the career trajectory of the top 100 professional players, suggesting the age at which specific rankings should be attained by potential talents. 13 , 16 , 17 Some studies highlighted the common characteristics regarding ranking trajectory of the top 10 professional tennis players from the last few decades.…”

“…13–16 Some studies highlighted certain career benchmarks based on the career trajectory of the top 100 professional players, suggesting the age at which specific rankings should be attained by potential talents. 13 , 16 , 17 Some studies highlighted the common characteristics regarding ranking trajectory of the top 10 professional tennis players from the last few decades. 14 , 18 Whilst junior success may be an indicator of later professional success in tennis, the majority of variance in professional rankings remains unexplained.…”

“…14 , 18 Whilst junior success may be an indicator of later professional success in tennis, the majority of variance in professional rankings remains unexplained. 13 , 16 , 17 Li et al. 14 revealed that age at the major career ranking milestones was moderately correlated with a player’s career peak ranking among top 10 players from 2007 to 2017, with 61% of the top one players correctly predicted to be top one players.…”

“…19 Conjecture exists between practitioners and the literature is inconclusive as to what is the optimal starting age for facilitating future high-performance success, given it is a complex skill-based sport, commonly characterized by long-playing careers and with many top players playing into their thirties. 13–16 Such knowledge is relevant as it is closely related to the key question regarding whether young players need to specialize early, 20 , 21 or whether it is more beneficial for players to follow the path of early diversification (i.e., sampling of other sports) prior to specialization in tennis. 22–27 A study showed that elite tennis players began intense training and specialized later (i.e., age 13–15 years) than their less successful counterparts (i.e., age 11 years).…”

The Relationship Between Age and Divisional Rank in Professional Mixed Martial Arts

“…With the aim of tracking long term success and achievement, global competitor rankings are often used, particularly in individual sports where league structures are not used to determine competition winners or champions (Kovalchik, 2014;Kovalchik, Bane, & Reid, 2017). Whilst the de facto MMA world championship organisation, the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), do publish their own rankings, these are voted on by members of the media and only include competitors contracted to their organisation (UFC, 2018).…”