Originally Posted by Carsomyr
Which experts? I have already extolled the virtues of some of the better posters here, but they hardly qualify. I'd need a source.
Besides, that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. When Laver wins a Slam event, it comes at the expense of Rosewall winning one, and vice versa. If you're not counting the majors they already have in the bank before becoming pros, you're creating a situation in which no major comes easily. I don't a scenario in which ALL of them end up with 18+ major wins. You're also discounting the possibility of upsets by other players who would have been around at the time, such as Ashe, who won right away after the start of the Open Era, Newcombe, who proved his worth as a post-Amateur Era pro, winning 5 major titles after the start of the Open Era.
Carsomyr, You just should go to the record books and look at the pro majors won by Laver, Rosewall and others. That's a good measure for hypothetical open majors.
It's true that Laver and Rosewall would "steal" major titles from each other but they were so strong and steady that they still would have won enough to reach that 18 majors mark. In fact Laver has won 19 majors and Rosewall 23.
If you consider both amateur and pro majors you can see that very seldom an outsider has won a major. Only Mal Anderson is an example for a winning outsider.
Newcombe won open majors only when Laver and Rosewall were on decline. And yet Laver and Rosewall plus old Gimeno won eight out of the first ten open era majors where they participated!
This from a non-open-minded poster....