OF RANKINGS YEARS

Impactful, controversial, history-making and heartbreaking, computer rankings have ruled the game since their inception in the men's game in 1973.

By SUZI PETKOVSKI

August 2023 marks 50 years since computer rankings.

Romanian Ilie Nastase made history as the rst No.1, atop the inaugural ATP list of 23 August 1973. Ironically, the showman known as ‘Nasty’ wasn’t a fan of the newfangled o cial pecking order, believing the cold, hard numbers and pursuit of higher rungs had a chilling e ect on player relations.

“I didn’t really have much time to enjoy my top ranking when I had it, because everybody wanted to take it away from me,” Nastase re ected 40 years later, of his 40 weeks at the top.

It’s a refrain from many former No.1s. Enjoyment of the feat is greater in retrospect, partly because the prestige of being numero uno has grown immeasurably over the decades.

Nothing has impacted the game more than computerised rankings, with the arguable exception of tennis going professional in 1968. It’s no exaggeration to say rankings rule the game, and the lives of players. Rankings determine which tournaments players enter, whether they are seeded, or whether they steel themselves for the rigours of qualifying. Aspiring pros literally go to the ends of the earth in pursuit of a precious ranking point.

Rankings Before Rankings

Given the modern obsession with computer rankings, it’s hard to overstate what a groundbreaker the system was in its day. Even the concept of an official No.1 didn’t exist prior to computer rankings.

Year-end subjective rankings lists, compiled by tennis writers, broadcasters, ex-players and national associations, named their season No.1s and top 10s. But there was no consensus. Creation of computer rankings allowed the players to de ne No.1 as a new universal measure of greatness, alongside the majors.

The ATP itself was uncertain of how ‘official No.1’ would be accepted. Fans were accustomed to hailing Grand Slam champions as the game’s greats; for many, the Wimbledon winner was de facto world champion. How meaningful was a No.1 ranking in April or August? And players on the computer could ascend to No.1 anywhere. Nastase’s historic feat came in the off-Broadway locale of South Orange, New Jersey. The top ranking could even fall to a player without taking the court – via the loss of a rival in a faraway event.

The game took some time to warm to computer rankings. The rolling, 52-week report card on the players wasn’t as thrilling or convincing as a stadium-shaking Grand Slam victory. Newspapers, magazines and other pundits continued to issue their annual rankings lists. The International Tennis Federation still names its o cial world champions, giving more weight to majors; its 2022 men’s No.1 was Novak Djokovic, not top-ranked Carlos Alcaraz.

But the No.1 ranking has emerged as one of the ultimate prizes in tennis, an end in itself rather than a byproduct of a Grand Slam title. The pursuit of No.1, once almost an a erthought, is the overarching narrative in the game.

From Snail Mail To Live Rankings

No one had any inkling in the freewheeling 1970s that computer rankings would become so ubiquitous and in uential. Tennis was ahead of the curve – golf didn’t produce o cial world rankings for men until 1986 and unbelievably for women not until 2006. But the ranking system in those pioneering days was far from a slick operation.

Doubles rankings didn’t arrive until 1976, women’s rankings were inaugurated in 1975 and ATP rankings weren’t issued weekly until 1979. In the early years, they were published at irregular intervals, sometimes six weeks apart.

The ATP didn’t even own the computer that produced the rankings. In the mid-70s, ATP employees would take the reams of player statistics to a nearby Los Angeles aerospace company, to run through their mainframe. The rankings would be delivered