genetics, skill, ability, mindset. sure more money translates to better coaching probably, but it seems that ceteris paribus better players can spend many year

genetics, skill, ability, mindset. sure more money translates to better coaching probably, but it seems that ceteris paribus better players can spend many years being better. so basically rising players have an logarithmic curve with an asymptote. and sure they are getting better and higher, but they should estimate their peak. especially because even if current top players retire younger ones can easily take the spot from more experienced players. all in all the current ranking system is very efficient (lots of data points, it's not like boxing where matches are organized after some initial success to maximize the money made, slowly take on opponents that seem beatable or otherwise lucrative, etc.) tennis and other very athletic individual sports are mature (progress is mostly due to technology, dietary know-how, better data-driven coaching), and there's just no big chance of an underdog beating the numbers. (especially considering that the numbers are much better, again due to more and better data and compute)