Truths, Lies and Tennis Statistics / Matthew Walton / 26 September 2008 /

"Magical" Matthew Walton looks at whether it's just in the women's game where players seem to start winning at a younger age all the time.

For the past few decades the popular perception has been that the women's side of the game is where you find the best young talent.

Think back to the likes of Tracy Austin (Portland, 1977) and Andrea Jaeger (Las Vegas, 1980) both of whom were just 14 when they won their first WTA titles. Steffi Graf started her professional career at 13 and won her first title in South Carolina, aged 16. Martina Hingis won the doubles at Wimbledon in 1996 with Helena Sukova, aged 15. And the list continues to grow, soon to be added to by our own Laura Robson, this year's Junior Wimbledon champion, who has just started out on the professional circuit. She's 14.

On the women's tour you were turned out at 16, burned out at 22. A young, short but possibly lucrative career which still affords you plenty of time thereafter to spend your millions. And if you got bored, you could still mount a comeback ... at the ripe old age of 25!

As for the men, the view for many people would be that their development, in stature as much as skill, takes longer to conclude. Guys of 16, 17, 18 were rarely able to compete with their elders (and betters). Yes, the likes of Boris Becker winning Wimbledon in 1985 and Michael Chang taking the French Open in 1989, both at the tender age of 17, occasionally confounded this opinion - but their success was seen very much as the exception and not the norm.

However, as we see in every other facet of society these days - whether political, social, cultural or in the business world - the philosophy of 'if you're good enough, you're old enough' has become the new way of thinking and sport in general, and men's tennis in particular, is no different.

And as backers we should be mindful of this fact. Yes, we'll always have local tournament committees throwing in youngsters as a favour to their own national tennis federations but what we're now witnessing is players aged 17, 18 and 19 not just playing the odd event but competing on the tour for titles and, in the case of players like Rafael Nadal, winning Grand Slams whilst still a teenager.

The inescapable fact is that the previously held view of tennis being a game for men between, say, 22-32 with them reaching their prime around 26 or 27, is in need of some rapid recalculation. In fact, this model is changing not so much by the decade, but almost by the year!

Looking back over the last couple of years on the ATP Tour you'll find that the mid-point when it comes to the age of title winners is around 24/25 - generally depending upon the age of one, Roger Federer.

However, thus far in 2008, we've seen a definite shift towards the younger player. Of the 53 events which have been completed thus far, the mid-point of the winners in age terms is 23. And the signs are that such an average, if anything, will continue to drop.

To some this may well be a phenomenon which simply re-invents itself over time, a self-fulfilling prophecy if you will. Players who start younger will naturally finish younger as factors such as health and wealth curtail their interest in the game at 27 not 32 because they started playing at 17 and not 22. Fair point but we're not so much interested in the cause of this pattern, more the effects of it when taken into the betting arena on Betfair.

Hence we've seen the likes of Kei Nishikori (Delray Beach) winning aged 18, Juan Martin Del Potro (Stuttgart, Kitzbuhel, Los Angeles & Washington) and Marin Cilic (New Haven) at 19 have also won as teenagers.

Then we have Sam Querrey (Las Vegas), Andy Murray (Doha & Marseille) and Novak Djokovic (Australia, Indian Wells & Rome) all winning at 20.

It's perhaps these type of players who we should be earmarking for future stardom, and betting support, a point also raised by Barry Millns in his article about players to watch in 2009 (https://betting.betfair.com/tennis/general/tennis-betting-five-players-who-could-make-the-breakthr-240908.html).

And just as youth marches to the fore, we naturally see a decline in the fortunes of the 'older generation'. In 2006 we saw seven tournaments won by players aged 28 and older, in 2007 that figure was ten but so far this year we've seen just two players aged 28 or over who have won on tour (Ivo Karlovic, 29, at Nottingham and Fabrice Santoro, 35, at Newport).

What does this tell us about the future winning chances of Ivan Ljubicic (29), Guillermo Canas and Tommy Haas (30), Nicolas Kiefer (31) and Carlos Moya (32)? All players who backers would legitimately consider for tournament success. It also suggests that a number of the 28 year olds, such as James Blake, Juan Carlos Ferrero and Marat Safin are possibly going to spend the rest of their careers seeing victories only in their rear view mirrors.

It's a fascinating discussion. Everybody seems to getting younger, except us! But what we should do as backers is trust this youthful promise and to not necessarily side with the experience of elders (who, as we can now see, aren't always betters).

As students of the form we have to be aware of all the prevailing patterns in the game and one which is quite evident is that tennis isn't just a young man's game ... it's now an even younger man's game!

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: