With only Fed Cup and Davis Cup left as the only major tennis competition, either most tennis players have packed their bags and zoomed to their vacation spots, or they plan to appear in a few exhibitions in order to pocket some extra dollars. Heck, some may even decide not to take a break, head down to Australia early, and begin working on their game.
This is a good moment to reflect back on some major trend changes in the worlds of professional tennis in terms of rankings. If you have done this at the end of last season or at the end of two seasons ago, you may find yourself observing the same things all over again. You may get the feeling nothing has changed after a full season.
Except one small change: the ATP and WTA have traded places.
Two seasons ago, Lleyton Hewitt finished the year ranked No. 1. Was Hewitt dominant during the year? Absolutely not. However, he was a consistent performer, won Wimbledon and a few other titles. It also helped that he capped the year with a victory at The Masters Cup.
Two players came out of nowhere to win two of the Slams, Thomas Johansson in Melbourne and Albert Costa in Paris. Pete Sampras came out of the hole he has been hiding for two years to win the U.S. Open only to decide he wants to move to a new phase in his life, which does not include tennis tournaments, but rather this other aspect of his life called "his family."
Simply put, it was a season during which not a player or a few elite have dominated, but rather parity dominated.
2003 provided more of the same with four different players winning Slams and Roger Federer finishing the year ranked No. 1 only by virtue of winning the Masters Cup.
On the women's side, it was a totally different story. In 2002, the Williams sisters were the story, followed by the two girls from Belgium in 2003. Nobody else came in the picture. Nobody came even close to contending for the number one spot.
Then came the 2004 season. It started all too familiar when Justine Henin-Hardenne and Kim Clijsters clashed in the finals of the Australian Open.
However immediately following the first Slam, something strange happened.
Women's tennis returned to the world of parity and depth in the rankings. Three different winners emerged in the remaining Slams, all from Russia. Suddenly, Kim Clisters acquired a nagging injury that ... well ... nagged her all year. Justine Henin-Hardenne promptly descended the stairs back down from the world of invincibility, and the Williams sisters' athleticism and power were no longer one-way ticket to Slam titles. Such was the depth and parity in women's tennis, Lindsay Davenport finished the year ranked No. 1, despite not reaching the finals of a single Slam.
On the men's side, the return to form of Hewitt and Marat Safin from mediocre 2003 campaigns promised for the playing field to be even more leveled then before. Juan Carlos Ferrero, Andy Roddick, Marat Safin, Hewitt, Tim Henman, Andre Agassi, Carlos Moya and a few others were shooting for the top, some having been there previously in their careers.
Then, all of a sudden, the strange thing that happened on the women's tour occurred on the men's tour also, except the other way around.
Federer decided that parity may be good for tennis, but had suppressing qualities for his overwhelming potential. He decided he wanted to see how far above everyone else he could go.
Did he ever...
Federer won three of the four Slams, 11 titles, and finished the year ranked No. 1 by a large margin. However, let's take a look beyond sheer numbers.
Here are some out of this world statistics for the reader:
Federer is 18-0 against top 10 players. He won tournaments consecutively on three different surfaces, a feat last accomplished by Bjorn Borg in 1979. Along with Jimmy Connors in 1974 and Mats Wilander in 1988, he is the only player in Open era to win three Slams in one season. In two Masters Cup tournaments, where he faces the best competition the game has to offer, he has not lost a match, in fact, not even a set.
Federer's lead in the rankings is so wide that he is guaranteed the number one ranking until Wimbledon, assuming he takes up space traveling until that time.
Two years ago, I felt trends changed for the worst in women's tennis, and for the better in men's tennis. Although the roles have reversed from two years ago, I find them both refreshing. Perhaps, it will be exciting to see on the men's side, which of the rest of the pack can rise up and challenge Federer to form a rivalry for the ages. It will also be exciting to watch the Russian armada on the women's side lay it all out with the familiar faces of Jennifer Capriati, Lindsay Davenport, Williams' sisters, and the Belgian girls.
Sheer numbers become exciting to analyze when they indicate a trend change, in this case, reversal of roles on both tours.
December 7, 2004
Tom kosinski:
Nice article Mert. I agree that the women’s game has incredible parity, and that for the first time it is a good thing.
Mert, are you a member of the US Tennis Writers Association? If not its only $20 and worth the price.
Tom Kosinski
December 11, 2004
Brian:
One little note: Laver’s 2nd Grand Slam was also in the Open Era, so he should be added to the list of 3+ single season winners.
December 25, 2004
Mert Ertunga:
Brian you are right. I guess when I commented on the list of 3 Grand Slam winners in one year, I was referring to those who accomplished that but did not win all four. Thanks for the feedback regardless.
My friend Tom, I have been thinking about joining the US Tennis Writers Asst. for a while. Thanks for reminding me. If you could email me on how to do that I would appreciate it.