Originally Posted by pc1
I disagree with your opinion on Borg but let's not discuss that now. What I am curious about is why you have Tilden in the second tier. He won over 160 tournaments, was virtually unbeatable for about a decade and won on every surface. If you include Pro Majors he won 14 majors. If you don't he won 10 majors. He won 98% of his matches during his peak years. How much more dominant can you be? Tilden is overwhelming qualified as a GOAT candidate.
I find it hard to rank players from the 20s. The game wasnt very competitive then, although atleast for the men it was better than the women where Lenglen or Wills won every single match 0 and 2, 0 and 0, 1 and 0. At the U.S Open it seemed he played the same opponent in the final every year, and that opponent is not an all time great at all (not saying he isnt a great player or a weak opponent, just someone you shouldnt play in the finals 5 years in a row), which really calls into question the state of the game back then.