Men’s Tennis 2016 and a Look Ahead

Men’s Tennis 2016 and a Look Ahead

2016 was a year of two very distinct halves in men’s professional tennis.  Novak Djokovic dominated the first half, and Andy Murray led the second.  Novak won his sixth Australian Open title over five-time unsuccessful finalist Murray.  This ties Novak with Roy Emerson for most men’s AO titles. 

Djokovic then won the Indian Wells – Miami double of 1000-level titles in March.  It was his third consecutive sweep of the titles, one more year than Federer who won both titles consecutively in 2005-06.

Rafael Nadal initially continued his bad form from 2015 but finally began to find his rhythm and took the 1000 in Monte Carlo over Gael Monfils and the 500 in Barcelona over Nishikori.  Djokovic took the clay 1000 title in Madrid over Murray, but Murray reversed fortunes and claimed the Italian 1000 over Djokovic.

Heading into the French, a revitalized Nadal, Djokovic, a newly-clay loving Murray, and defending champion Wawrinka all had plausible shots at the title, and it was claimed by Djokovic over Murray in the final.  It was Novak’s 12^th slam putting him in a tie for fourth on the traditional slam list and eighth on the list that includes pro slams from the 1930’s to 60’s era.

Most significantly, it gave Djokovic four in a row, a non-calendar slam, and made him the only person in the open era, besides Rod Laver in 1969, to hold all four slams at the same time.  Federer fell one match short twice, and Novak had fallen one short four years ago. 

This is probably a bigger accomplishment than Laver’s calendar slam of 1969 given the depth of the tour and the competition that Djokovic now faces.  It is certainly bigger than the calendar slams won by Laver in 1962 and by Don Budge in 1938 when neither faced many of the top players of their day because those rivals were not allowed to play amateur tournaments.

It also marked Djokovic’s first French Open crown, something he has laboured mightily over, finally successful in his fourth final.  But with that mountain now scaled, Djokovic seemed to lose interest and floundered through much of the rest of the year, claiming only one more title (Canada 1000).  His win-loss through the French was a super human 44-3, but afterward ‘only’ a still respectable 21-6.

Meanwhile Murray was 28-6 through the French and a stellar 50-3 afterward, claiming nine titles on the year including a second Wimbledon and a second Olympics gold medal, over a resurgent Juan Martin Del Potro.

Marin Cilic beat Murray for the Cincinnati 1000 title and Stan Wawrinka came out of nowhere to dominate Djokovic yet again in a slam final, at the US Open.  It was Stan’s third slam in as many years.

Murray cleaned up in the fall swing, claiming the 500’s in Beijing and Vienna and the 1000’s in Shanghai and Paris.  After the French crown it appeared this year could only belong to Djokovic.  But, with his fall run, Murray rose for the first time to #1 on the computer, and cemented his position as #1 for the year by taking the World Tour Finals (WTF) over Djokovic.  Murray finished the year on a 24-match win streak.

The year was capped by Argentina’s victory in the Davis Cup over Croatia.  It was Argentina’s fourth trip to the final, the first successful one.  The team was led by Del Potro.  Will he rise to #1 the year after victory in Davis Cup the way Djokovic and Murray both did after their first titles?

Analysis

The computer says Murray is #1, but is this fair?  Djokovic claimed two slam titles and four 1000 tournaments.  Murray claimed only one slam and three 1000’s.  But Murray also took the Olympics and the WTF, posting a higher win ratio for the year and claiming 9 total titles to Novak’s 7.

2016 Player	Win/loss	Win ratio
Murray	78/9	8.7
Djokovic	65/9	7.2
Raonic	52/17	3.1
Federer	21/7	3.0
Nadal	39/14	2.79
Nishikori	58/21	2.76
Kyrgios	39/15	2.60
Monfils	44/17	2.59
Wawrinka	46/18	2.56
Del Potro	32/12	2.50

Only five times since 1987 have two men each claimed at least 7 tournaments in the same year.  It shows the tightness of the race for #1 this year that both men achieved so much.

	2016 Titles
Murray	9
Djokovic	7
Thiem, Wawrinka	4
Kyrgios	3
BautistaAgut, Cilic, Cuevas, CarrenoBusta, Nadal, Gasquet, Karlovic, Klizan	2
24 players tied at	1

This gives Djokovic a career total of 66 titles, only three behind Nadal, and good for 6^th on the Open-era list.  Meanwhile Murray notches up to 44 titles, good for 14^th best.

	Open Era Titles
Connors	109
Lendl	94
Federer	88
McEnroe	77
Nadal	69
Djokovic	66
Borg, Sampras	64

2016 marks the first time since 2001 that Federer did not win a title, bringing to an end a 15 year run, longest consecutive run in the open era ahead of Lendl with 14, and Connors and Nadal with 13.  But this does not necessarily indicate that Federer is fading.  Rather he suffered a knee injury, slipping in the bath shortly after the Australian Open.  He had surgery and returned for five tournaments, making the semis at Wimbledon before slipping on the grass in the fifth set against Milos Raonic.  Unfortunately, that ended Federer’s year.

Nadal fared slightly better, but withdrew before his third round match at Roland Garros with a wrist injury.  He then missed Wimbledon but rushed his recovery to return for the Olympics and the US Open.  But with disappointing results and nagging injuries he pulled the plug on his season, shortly into the fall swing.  But the win ratio table above shows that Federer and Nadal were still fourth and fifth best, and should not be counted out for next year.

Nadal finished the year at #9 on the computer, his lowest yearend since joining the top 10 in 2005.  Nadal failed to make the quarter at a slam in 2016, the first time since 2004.  Federer dropped out of the top 10 for the first time since 2002, a run of 734 consecutive weeks, bettered only by Connors’ 789.  Meanwhile, Nadal owns the fourth best, and Djokovic the sixth best streaks, showing what a rich era we currently enjoy.

Consecutive weeks in computer top 10		Total weeks
Connors	789	818
Federer	734	744
Lendl	620	672
Nadal	611	611
Sampras	565	586
Djokovic	505	505

Djokovic became only the second man after Federer to attain 300 consecutive weeks in the top  two, sixth on the all-time list for total weeks in the computer top two.

	Weeks in top 2	Consecutive
Federer	471	346
Nadal	403	212
Connors	386	293
Lendl	383	280
Sampras	376	183
Djokovic	329	303
McEnroe	308	157

But by far the biggest accomplishment of this year, in my opinion, is Djokovic’s feat of holding all four slam titles at the same time.  This has only been accomplished by two other men, Rod Laver in 1969 and 1962, and Don Budge in 1938.  In 1962 and 1938, many of the top players were not eligible to play the slams, so those feats are greatly depreciated in my eyes.  In 1969 all the top players played, but the depth in the game is so much greater now, that I have to think that Djokovic’s accomplishment in holding all four titles consecutively, is the greatest achievement that men’s tennis has seen.

It is all the more remarkable then that Nole did not finish #1 for the year.  Instead, that honour belongs to Murray.  Much as I am a fan of Murray and think that he thoroughly deserves the #1 ranking for all the titles and 50-3 record he threw down on the stretch, I can’t help noticing that this was largely in the absence of Federer and Nadal, and that Djokovic was not quite himself.

I think Novak fans should be fairly worried.  Nole took on Pepe Imaz as a coach.  Imaz seems to be a bit of a ‘tennis whisperer’ kind of coach, on the touchy-feely side, and generally provoking the suspicions of the hard-nosed, fact-based, mathematical types that dominate the tennis community.  I don’t want to discount Imaz’s methods, but Boris Becker, Djokovic’s other coach, initially cast down the gauntlet saying either he goes or I do, and then the relationship between Boris and Novak was severed.

Novak has been saying things like, there’s more to life than tennis, being #1 isn’t my priority, and Murray’s wife deserves a lot of credit for helping him get to #1.  While these things may be true, the attitude it betrays is not exactly the fierce, obsessive, dominant one required to be #1 and stay there.

Don’t get me wrong.  Nole is immensely talented and he might just be able to stay at or near the top of the game playing his incredible brand of tennis without the steel trap mental intensity that typically goes with a #1 player.  But if he doesn’t right the ship in the first three or four months of 2017, his slam-winning days may be over.  Someone more focussed is likely to displace him.  So far, that person is Murray.  But a hungry Nadal or Federer, or even Raonic, Wawrinka, Del Potro, or Nishikori, could equally get the job done.  If Djokovic doesn’t exhibit a major shift in attitude, I expect him to pull a Wilander and disappear from slam contention.

That said, his talent is so immense, I haven’t counted him out yet, and the shift in attitude is not yet permanent.  Early 2017 will tell us how hungry Nole remains.

In the meantime this is a golden opportunity for Murray.  Djokovic has apparently gone off the deep end, and Federer and Nadal are on the ropes, recovering from injury.  Murray has the opportunity to entrench himself at #1.

But let’s not forget that last we heard, Federer and Nadal both had Murray’s number.  Andy has lost his last 5 matches against Federer, and 4 of the last 6 against Nadal.  Murray could start to turn that around, but if Nadal, and especially Federer come back strong, Murray might turtle to the familiar confines of not-#1, in the face of what he views (rightly or wrongly) as superior talents.

Another, less visible, opponent might be the weight of the crown, and even age.  Just as Djokovic seems to have found the weight of #1 oppressive, and finally, having proved himself with the French title, he has felt the need to wander into a more diversified (healthier?) head space, Murray may reach those same conclusions.  Having reached the pinnacle, the fight is over.  Why continue to battle to hang on to #1?  What is there to drive him when he has realized his ambitions?  Arguably, Wilander and the insanely talented McEnroe faced the same fate, after their magnificent achievements of 1988 and 1984, respectively.  So the pattern is not unprecedented.  And let’s not forget that Murray (and Novak) turn 30 in 2017, which is the onset of old age in the tennis world.  Winning slams after age 30 has been rare of late.  Only six men have won more than two, and none since the 1970’s.

	Slams won after 30th birthday	Player’s birth year
Tilden*	8	1893
Rosewall*	7	1934
Larned	5	1872
Kozeluh*, Laver	4	1895, 1938
AGore	3	1868
Connors, Agassi, Wawrinka	2	1952, 1970, 1985
Sampras, Federer	1	1971, 1981
Nadal	0	1986

*includes pro slams
(This list is not comprehensive at 2 slams or less.  There are 13 men with 2 slams after 30.)

Has Djokovic reached that place of ennui that will preclude future slam success?  Will Murray?  Or do both men see that there is so much more they could do?  Or better, will they reach a healthy place like Federer, who, having finished #1 five times and won everything in sight, still battles on at the top echelon for sheer love of the sport?  We can hope for such happy outcomes for 2016’s two leading men.

Both Djokovic and Murray reached pinnacles in 2016.  Now is the time to celebrate that, for us and for them.

But men’s tennis is not a two-horse race, or even a four-horse one.  Stan Wawrinka has been making that abundantly clear.  He has quite consistently won one slam title in each of the last three years, yet somehow each victory seems like a total surprise.  He finishes the year with the #4 ranking for the 3^rd consecutive time... territory once occupied by Murray.

Looking only at slam titles, it may be tempting to say that Murray and Wawrinka, who each have three slams, are equal as players.  But that is much too narrow a lens.  Murray has two Olympic golds, a World Tour Finals trophy, a yearend #1 ranking, 44 titles to Stan’s 15, fourteen 1000 titles to Stan’s one, and nine yearend top-ten finishes to Stan’s four.

In the face of Djokovic’s magnificent slam, and the superlative play of Murray to reach #1, Stan’s amazing accomplishment at the US Open has all but been lost in the shuffle.  He still seems a long way from becoming #1, but racking up slam titles is sure to get him remembered in history.  And winning at three different slams has only been accomplished by 13 other men in the open era.  He’s starting to make some short lists.  He’ll be 32 soon, but age does not seem to be slowing him down.  Another slam next year would not surprise, especially if Djokovic loses intensity.

Milos Raonic refuses to go away.  He recovered from an injury setback last year and improved on his #9 position from two years ago to rise to yearend #3.  He seems to believe in and fight hard for slow, steady improvement.  But how much higher can he go?  With his amazing serve, a Wimbledon title is not unthinkable, but it would probably require some good luck – I question if he could take out both Federer and Murray there.

His biggest ranking-point gains of the year were the 1200 from being Wimbledon runner-up, 600 as runner-up in Indian Wells, and 720 for the semis of Australia.  The last two happened early in the year so he will be vulnerable to slipping down the rankings if he doesn’t defend those points.  Perhaps I am pessimistic, but I think we may have seen peak Milos in 2016.

Kei Nishikori had his most consistent year to date.  He made the US Open semis and finished runner-up at two 1000 events, in Miami and Canada.  He did not lose before the round of 16 at any of the slams or 1000’s he played.  But his nemesis seems to be Djokovic to whom he lost six times.  If Novak does fall away as a top player in 2017, that could be just the opening Nishikori needs to rise higher in the rankings and maybe even contend for slams.

Marin Cilic also claimed his best yearend ranking so far, #6, copping titles at the 1000 in Cincinnati and the 500 in Basel.  I still believe he has an excellent game for Wimbledon grass, and look there as the most likely place for him to add another slam crown to his 2014 US Open victory.

In the category of ‘player who is finally living up to his talent’, we have Gael Monfils.  He reaches #7 at yearend, and looked something like consistent this year.  In addition to a semi-final run at the US Open, he made the quarters at the Australian, was runner-up at the 1000 in Monte Carlo, and won the 500 in Washington.  And he achieved all this without playing his historic best tournament, Roland Garros.  He’s 30 years old now so perhaps wisdom and better choices will appear more frequently in his shot selection.  He’s capable of almost anything on a tennis court it seems, although he has squandered his best althletic years.  But he may yet make up for lost time.

The rise of Dominic Thiem to #8 is not something I foresaw.  He started the year with such tremendous results that top 5 seemed possible.  But he came back down to earth and #8 seems like a very good accomplishment.  He still shows some consistency problems and his game lacks polish at times.  If there should suddenly be an exit of top players, say the Big Four plus Wawrinka, then Thiem might have an outside chance at a slam some day.  He’s only age 23, but I think that there are bigger talents like Nishikori, Raonic, Kyrgios, and possibly A Zverev, whose influence he will not escape, agewise.  However, the Big Four may hang around for a while yet.  If Thiem can consolidate at #8 next year, Berdych-like, he will have done well, I think.  That said, Thiem has consistently halved his ranking (or better) for five straight years.  If he can do it again, he’ll be #4 next year.  But I don’t expect it.

Yearend Ranking	Thiem born 1993	Kyrgios born 1995	AZverev born 1997
2011	#638
2012	#309	#838
2013	#139	#182	#809
2014	#39	#52	#136
2015	#20	#30	#83
2016	#8	#13	#24

Age 19

Nick Kyrgios continued his dramatic rise up the rankings and may have gone even higher had he not had to pull the plug on his year after being fined for lack of effort at the Shanghai 1000.  He would seem to have the talent to win multiple slams and maybe even make #1, but he has given himself a rocky ride with some bad public behaviour like taunting Wawrinka during a match.  He also seems to display a love/hate relationship toward tennis, not unlike what Andre Agassi confessed to.  I believe that he can become #1 if he decides to be disciplined, focused, and put in the hard physical training now demanded to excel.  If he doesn’t follow that path, his career will more likely resemble Monfils or Dolgopolov, who couldn’t seem to harness their massive talents.  With more focus and discipline, Kyrgios could go very, very far.

Alexander Zverev, brother of journeyman pro, Mischa Zverev, is another exciting talent who could rise to the pinnacle of the sport.  He’s been ranked even more highly than Kyrgios at the same age, achieving #24 at age 19, compared to Kyrgios’ #52.  Among non-slam winners, only Richard Gasquet has been more highly ranked at age 19 and failed to achieve a slam title.  This means that Zverev’s current ranking is a very strong indication he is likely to win a slam some day. My population for the following table includes all ATP-computer era men (since 1973) who either won a slam, spent at least 50 weeks in the top 10, or finished in the yearend top ten twice. 

Age 19 yearend ranking category	Highest yearend ranking achieved by age 19
#1-10	Becker #2, Nadal #2, Borg #3, Agassi #3, McEnroe #4, Wilander #4, Edberg #5, Sampras #5, Chang #5, Hewitt #7, Ivanisevic #9, Cash #10
#11-20	Roddick #14, Gasquet #16, Djokovic #16, Murray #17
#21-50	Lendl #21, Safin #23, AZverev #24, Courier #24, Noah #26, Bruguera #28, Leconte #28, Federer #29, Robredo #30, Teltscher #42, Del Potro #44, Coric #44, Haas #45, Ferrero #45, Berdych #45, Muster #47
#51-100	ACosta #52, Kyrgios #52, Gomez #61, Soderling #60, Moya #61, Nishikori #63, Cilic #71, Ancic #74, Corretja #76, Korda #87, Enqvist #88
101+	Mecir #101, Kafelnikov #102, Rios #107, Krajicek #129, Gerulatis #131, Davydenko #133, GMayer #144, Grosjean #145, Teacher #158, Rusedski #161, Tipsarevic #161, Tsonga #163, Wawrinka #168, Norman #170, Ferreira #173, Verdasco #173, Jarryd #182, Kuerten #188, Ferrer #209, Kriek #278, Clerc #278, Rafter #293, Ljubicic #293, Thiem #309, Henman #372, Raonic #373, Gonzalez #415, Mayotte #420, TJohansson #486, Stich #564, Gaudio #639, Blake #682

Players in bold have not won a slam title.

Some observations from this list: 

-          Federer was the lowest ranked at age 19 of players who went on to win at least four slams

-          Most players who went on to multi-year tenures at #1 were ranked in the top 10 by age 19 – Djokovic, Lendl, and Federer are exceptions.

-          Chang, Ivanisevic, Cash, and Roddick are the only players in the top 20 at age 19 who won only one slam, except for...

-          Gasquet is the only player in the top 20 at age 19 who never won a slam

-          Wawrinka and Kuerten, both in the lowest category, went on to win 3 slams each (so far) so there is always hope for late bloomers

-          In the 51-100 category, slam winners are about equal to non-slam winners.  Below that non-winners predominate, and above that winners are the majority.

So the future looks bright for young Zverev.  Statistically, he seems to fall in the category of one- or two-slam winners, but has a lower likelihood of getting to #1, (with Federer being the notable exception).  Kyrgios would fall slightly behind that trajectory, and Thiem even further behind.

Other young talents to watch are

-          19-yearold Taylor Fritz who rose to #53 during the year and finishes at #76

-          Frances Tiafoe who finishes at #108 at age 18

-          Stefan Kozlov, #116, age 18

-          Duckhee Lee, #149, age 18.  Interestingly, he’s deaf and that may provide another whole level of motivation to succeed.  I’ll be watching him with interest.

-          Casper Ruud, #227, he’s about to turn 18 (22 Dec), and is the highest ranked 17 year-old

-          Denis Shapovalov, #253, is the highest ranked player born 1999 or later.  The young Canadian grabbed the world’s notice by defeating Kyrgios in Toronto in July.

-          Felix Auger Aliassime, #619, is the highest ranked player born 2000 or later.  Another Canadian, his early trajectory looks promising, but he has heart issues (physically) that may slow him down.

Tomas Berdych just managed to retain his position in the yearend top ten (at #10), a distinction he has held for seven straight years – a record he shares with Tom Okker.  David Ferrer also finished seven years in the top ten, but not consecutively.  Ferrer drops to #21 this year.  Tsonga finishes at #12 this year and has been at least top 13 for nine straight years.

David Goffin finished the year at #11, continuing his steady improvement.  It is a result of which he should be very proud.  He was #16 last year, #22 the year before, #110 at the end of 2013, and #46 after 2012.  He might break in to the top 10 at some point, but he seems a little underpowered in today’s game.

Lucas Pouille, came out of nowhere to get to #15.  The 22-yearold made QF at both Wimbledon and the US Open, upsetting Nadal.  Last year he finished at #78, and at #133 for 2014.  It’s hard to say what fire burns within, but at this point I place him with Goffin and Thiem as a potential future top-ten fixture, if unlikely slam champion.

Roberta Bautista-Agut has to be one of the most ignored achievers in tennis.  The age of his success has been quite late, he’s 28, but his ranking at #14 is significant.  His run to the Shanghai 1000 final was shocking, as were the upsets of Tsonga and Djokovic along the way.  Nevertheless, it would surprise me if he made top ten one day, but it is not impossible.

Grigor Dimitrov showed some signs of life after a disastrous 2015, and regains the top 20 at #17.  His highlights were the 500 final in Beijing, having taken out Raonic, and the Cincinnati SF, taking out Wawrinka along the way.

John Isner #19 completed the singular accomplishment of seven straight years in the yearend #11-20 range.  Fellow tower, Ivo Karlovic finishes at #20 at the considerable age of 37, the oldest to be so highly ranked since Connors (#14 in 1989), Laver (#10 in 1975), and Rosewall (#3 in 1971), all age 37.

Kyle Edmund (age 21, #45) had a career best year, as did Jack Sock (age 24, #23), Pablo Carreno Busta (age 25, #30), Andrey Kuznetsov (age 25, #46), Diego Schwartzman (age 24, #52), and Karen Kachanov (age 20, #53), among others.  They’ll all be worth watching in 2017.

Juan Martin Del Potro made a significant comeback after most of two years away and finds himself at #38.  But when he takes the court he still seems like a top 10 player.  In addition to leading his country finally to Davis Cup, he claimed the 250 in Stockholm, handed Murray one of only three losses in the year’s second half, made QF at the US Open, and claimed the silver medal in Rio after taking out Djokovic and Nadal.  If he can stay healthy I will expect big things from him in 2017.

The Year Ahead

I expect Federer will come back to something like full steam in 2017, for his 35-yearold incarnation.  If Djokovic flounders the way I expect, it could open the door to slam titles for Roger.  But there is the newly crowned #1, Murray, to consider as well.  And then there’s Nadal, who showed signs he could regain good clay form and threaten again at Roland Garros.  So the Big Four is far from dead, in my opinion.  If Djokovic should happen to regain good but not top form, we could have a repeat of 2012 in which each member of the Big Four won one slam title.

Into this mix, Wawrinka could throw a spanner, and another slam title for him would hardly be considered a surprise.  Similarly, Del Potro may insert himself into the highest echelons of the game, provided he manages his schedule and body judiciously.  Marin Cilic has the game to win another big one, although if the top gets very crowded I expect he will likely get bumped from contention.

Turning to non-slam champions (yet), Raonic and Nishikori are probably the most likely to break through.  That could very well happen if Djokovic fades, Federer and Nadal fail to re-find their top games, Del Potro is not completely healthy, and Murray does not maintain the insane level he established at the end of 2016.  That’s a lot of conditions, but they are not perhaps unreasonable, so the mental determination and patience of the lost generation may yet pay off. 

And then there’s the Next Gen to consider.  Kyrgios or AZverev could very well rise above the fray if clear leadership is not being established, and start the march to immortalhood with a slam title.  I would guess that there’s a 25-50% chance one of them claims a slam in 2017 or 2018.

At the end of the day, seeing Murray as #1 again, for 2017, seems well within reason.  Maybe he will finally claim that elusive Australian title if he makes his sixth trip to the final.  But the biggest question is what will be Djokovic’s head space.

Rankings

Like last year, my rankings this year are identical to the ATP rankings.  As usual, there were some significant deviations from my predictions at the end of last year.  I thought Federer would be #3 and that Ferrer, Tsonga, and Kyrgios would make the top 10.  Kyrgios got close, so maybe next year.

(My predictions from last year are in brackets)

Top 10 Predictions for 2017

If Djokovic regains the hard edge of his winning mentality, he should be #1 again next year.  But I have my doubts.  In all honesty, I could see him falling out of the top 10.  So I’m hedging my bets with Murray at #1 and Djokovic at #2.  I expect Federer to come back strong and put him in at #3:  a Wimbledon title is not unthinkable.  After three years at #4, Stan seems to have found his level.  He may even hang onto that spot without a slam title.  I keep expecting big things out of Nishikori, but with the density of talent at the top it’s hard to see him above #5, and it could be even lower.

Despite the gains of 2016, I slot Raonic in to #6.  Rafael Nadal could well be in the top five and even make #1 if he can figure out the mental yips that have plagued him the last 3 years.  How one of the fiercest competitors of all time became such a choke artist is still a mystery.  I won’t expect him to do worse than this year and put him in at #7.  Marin Cilic at #8 seems about right because I believe he can improve his consistency and still rise up for the occasional hot run at a big tournament.

Getting down to the last two spots, there are seven or eight good candidates, but only two can make the top 10.  It wouldn’t be much of a stretch for Goffin to rise one spot to #10.  Tsonga has finished top 10 six previous times, and still has a powerful, relevant game.  Berdych has made top 10 the last 7 straight years and could well lengthen that to eight with his smooth, powerful stroking. Dominic Thiem has been a sure bet to rise up the rankings the last five years and is already at #8, but I suspect he will not make ranking gains this year, even if his game improves, largely because of the density of talent at the top should Federer, Nadal, and Del Potro all make successful returns.  Lucas Pouille made massive gains in 2016 to finish at #15, but I think the road higher will be much slower.

Alexander Zverev, now #24, could well climb into the top 10 in 2017.  Doing so would confirm his slam-winning potential.  But I think he is more likely to finish in the teens of the rankings.  He may need another year of polishing to make the first ten.  I believe Del Potro is a top ten player in all but name, and will make good on that claim in 2017, so he gets my #9 spot.  The last spot I award, like last year, to Nick Kyrgios.  He came close in 2016, and I believe he has the talent, and hopefully the growing maturity, to foster the professionalism that will see him gain the #10 spot.

Slam Predictions 2017

Each year since 1996 I have attempted to predict the top 12 finishers at each of the slams.  There are some ups and downs in my predictive accuracy, but overall the trend is slightly upward, rising from 72.5% in 1996 to 77.3% this year.  My best year was 2007 in which I got 79.7%.  My predictions for 2017 are as follows.

Aus Open

After six titles, Djokovic should be a shoo-in for a seventh, but his end of year slump has me gun shy.  Regardless, I still place him no lower than second, but give the nod to Murray.  I might place Federer higher if he’d had more time to get used to competition tennis again.  Wawrinka seems to thrive on hard courts and won here only three years ago, so cannot be discounted.  I’ll also be curious to see what Nishikori, Raonic, and Del Potro can do, even if this is the only slam Delpo has not yet made SF.  Perhaps Kyrgios will give the home crowd something to cheer for.

Roland Garros

Djokovic has been the best player at the French the last three years, making three finals and claiming one title.  But Nadal actually has a better win-loss record: 13-1 (Novak is 19-2).  I’m guessing that Djokovic will have lost some mental toughness and Nadal will have regained his, so I’m predicting Nadal for the win.  If they’re both shaky, Murray is probably the favourite slightly over Wawrinka.

Wimbledon

In the last nine years, each of the Big Four have won two Wimbledons, except Djokovic has three.  But Nadal hasn’t won since 2010 and Federer since 2012.   Each of Djokovic, Murray, and Federer have made three of the last five finals.  If Djokovic is unfocused and Murray is sated with slam victory (at the Australian, say), the door may be open for Federer to claim a record eighth title.  I expect Federer to be especially sharp a few months after his return, and the timing for Wimbledon might be perfect.  Of course some big hitters like Raonic or Cilic could throw a wrench in the works, or even Berdych or Tsonga.  All things considered, I pick Federer for the title.

US Open

Perhaps Djokovic will be back in a winning headspace by the US Open, so I think he is most likely to claim the trophy.  Murray hasn’t been particularly strong at the USO in recent years, but he is so consistently good I think he’s got the next best shot.  Wawrinka is the defending champion and has his best winning percentage at the USO, so he must always be given good odds.  Federer and Cilic both have titles there and Nishikori’s only two slam semis were at the USO, one won and one lost.

Betting Odds

Odds are from bet365.com on 15 Nov 2016.

The bookies are wise perhaps to favour Djokovic at every tournament he plays.  The evidence of his decline has been rather fleeting, so perhaps I have over-reacted in my own prognostications.  They are also more generous to Del Potro than I have been.  How they think Kyrgios should be 5^th at the French is a mystery to me.  It seems clear they expect Djokovic to dominate the year, but I do not, giving a slight edge to Murray.