Originally Posted by kiki
I canīt understand having a guy with just 3 majors ( and a very weak opposition in 2 out of 3 finals) to be considered GOAT.Vines is a marketing product while Kodes was a real thing...
He had eight majors
including the pro majors, not three. won a lot of amateur and pro tournaments, won a number of tours over great players like Perry, Tilden. Had plus records over just about everyone (and perhaps some I'm not familiar with) but Budge and he played Budge close in the first tour. He never lost to Cochet in the pros or amateurs.
Kodes won two weak French Opens much the way Vilas won the Australian and he won a weak Wimbledon. Did anyone ever consider Vilas the best grass player in the world? I don't believe people in general thought Kodes was the best clay player in the world or the best grass player.
Vines was the best player in the world, not just the best grass or clay player. He was the best player in the world for years.
Vines wasn't a product of marketing. How much marketing could he have in the 1930's?