Why don't they count Wildings consecutive clay court wins from Mid-1910 to Mid-1914 which must be of that order of magnitude as well. (Around 25-28 tournaments around 4 to 5 rounds a tournament?)
Didn't you just discover that info on Wilding a year or 2 ago? you really think anyone in 1981 knew that? or what surfaces he won on? There wasn't nearly as much known about pre Open Era records back then as there is today(besides the famous streaks of Tilden, Lenglen etc)
The internet has really been a game changer as far as tennis history. In 1981 the only thing most fans knew about Laver was that Laver won 2 Grand Slams(I highly doubt anyone, including Laver, was aware of his 200 career titles then, some which were recently discovered. Pro Grand Slams weren't in any record book then as far as I know. Commentators surely didn't talk about them. No wikepedia. So where did fans or writers not named Bud Collins get their info?)
Was just watching the '79 AO Final recently. The Australian commentators were talking about how rare it was for anyone to repeat there. They were going through the champion lists & said, "wow, I'm surprised Laver never repeated." Not one mention of his being banned from majors from 6 years, just 'surprise' that he never repeated!
I see this in a lot of old matches(70s/80s) commentators didn't mentioned the bannings of so many great players from the majors when any of their names came up. They would just say what they won, not what they could have won. TV Commentator Jack Kramer didn't say anything about Rosewall being banned from so many US championships when he won the USO in '70, just 'isn't that great, Kenny wins this title 14 years after he last won it.'
The way the media(even Dan Maskell who's seen it all) covered Borg winning 4 straight Wimbledons ("he's passed Perry!" not the disclaimer that Perry, Laver etc were banned from some Wimbledons) and Mac equaling Tilden with 3 straight US Championships in '81 sort of show how differently pre Open era history was presented at the time.