Originally Posted by John123
I chose analogues based solely on where I estimated each player would be in the respective world rankings of his day. Seppi is ranked #37 now, and I figured that was about right for an old Olmedo. I actually considered using Hewitt as you suggested because his career was a much better fit; but Hewitt's current ranking is #174, so I didn't think that was fair to Olmedo. Of course you're right that Olmedo was a much greater player over the course of his career than Seppi -- no comparison at all. But all I meant was to describe where Olmedo and the others ranked in 1967.
I know -- see my last comment. I'm talking about Ayala's level of play in 1967 only.
Okay I can see where you are coming from with that. However I would always feel that say a Hewitt/Nalbandian/Davydenko type older ranked 37 is better than a Seppi at 37. Sure both are 37 but the first group has shown the ability to play at the highest level and as Goran did in 2001 although a fluke but similar to Safin 08, Hewitt 09, Sampras 02, Connors and McEnroe late career US Open runs showed that they can still relive greatness. I agree though in 1967 Olmedo was a top 20 players and not a top 5.