Originally Posted by timnz
In Wikipedia it states"
McCauley's 1964 chapter is entitled: Rosewall Tops Again But Only Just but Robert Geist co-ranked Laver & Rosewall #1 (in his book "DER GRÖSSTE MEISTER Die denkwürdige Karriere des australischen Tennisspielers Kenneth Robert Rosewall").
What is McCauley's or Geist's logic here to consider Rosewall Number 1 or co-number 1? It seems that Laver is ahead in every category of consideration. Why do they think Rosewall was the best that year?
I've just re-read the chapter and honestly McCauley's logic is ambiguous. He really doesn't make much of an argument for Rosewall, nor attempts one.
That said, I see nothing wrong with Rosewall being considered the co-#1 that year. He did win the French Pro and the battles with Laver at the US and Wembley pros were close. Still the h2h is hard to overlook.