Originally Posted by Dan Lobb
Unfortunately, there is only enough glory for one player in each major.
Runnerups are just that; a failure to win.
When we compile achievement records, it looks cheesy to list the runnerup totals, as if there are not enough championship achievements to fill out the list.
I understand that points are given for tournament results less than victories, and these points count for the season.
But the season total is ONE event, albeit a composite of many events.
We should list the season total as one victory, and not list the tournament standings unless there is an absolute win.
Mysterious Dan, Your many words cannot avert my impression that you missed the point.
I give you an example for the importance of finals reached: In 1974 Rosewall did not win any tournaments. Nevertheless he was ranked as high as No.2 in the world by a true expert (Lance Tingay). Why? Because he reached the finals in the two most important tournaments, i.e Wimbledon and US Open. If you don't consider Rosewall's finals you should not rank him at all which would be a big mistake.
In 1975 Muscles won five tournaments but he was not ranked as high as in 1974. Thus we can see that big finals can be more important than victories (of lesser tournaments).