Apart from perpetuating the thread and keeping your Rios book talked about, itself a legitimate goal obviously (at least for you), I've no idea the point of these JMG quotes from your book (which, as I said previously, is circular or maybe a tautology is more precise -- I defer to the logicians) to support your present argument concerning Rios' alleged "greatness." This quote doesn't help your argument, the contrary. Gambill says, essentially, greatness is measured by Slam results (I would agree post some date, which I would put around 1990 but others might put earlier) not raw talent. So Gambill points out that Rios won't get the [proper] credit because he didn't do squat at Slams. I agree and I agree. And Gambill infers that Gambill didn't do squat at Slams so despite his self-described good career no one remembers him either. I agree there as well. If talent were the measure of tennis greatness we'd be discussing Monfils as a GOAT candidate. And, yes, reaching number 1 even for a split second like Rios did or Moya is a great achievement but it doesn't by itself equate to being one of the great players throughout the years or even of a particular generation. There, I helped keep the post alive. Your welcome.