Originally Posted by BobbyOne
Dan, ranking along achievements, while still not easy, is more reasonable than ranking along peak play.
But in Hoad's case it's yet rather easy to rank him regarding achievements because his record is not worthy of a top ten player!
I regret to always tell you how poor Lew's record is but you should accept tennis history and be brave therein...
It's again exposing: You belittle the category "achievements" in order to push Hoad since he cannot compete with other players' achievements.
You show your old strange game: Firstly you claim Hoad is the best regarding achievements. Then, secondly, after people have disproved your claim, you claim that achievements are questionable: Please come out with a new game of honesty!
I challenge only "questionable" achievements, for example, Emerson's long domination of the amateur game. Or Kramer's inflated victories over an injured Gonzales or an injured Sedgman.
It is important to put achievements INTO CONTEXT, and not simply regurgitate numbers as if all major wins are somehow identical, regardless of the strength of the field.
That is why I rate Hoad's achievements so high, the quality of his opposition was the highest ever.