Originally Posted by Phoenix1983
I'm sorry but this is taking it too far.
Obviously Emerson's 12 slams look far more impressive than they actually are and guys like Gonzales, Rosewall, probably even Hoad should be ahead of him.
But Gimeno? A guy who didn't win a single amateur era slam (or even make a final), or a pro major? No way would Gimeno have won more than 12 amateur slams if he had stayed in those ranks. We can't rank him ahead of Emerson by any means.
I think we have to be careful not to go too far and underrate Emerson i.e. assume he would have won no slams. He's probably worthy of a Courier/Vilas type level IMHO.
Gimeno would have been the favourite in the amateurs to win at Roland Garros for 1963 to 1967 and maybe also for 1961 and 1962.
And don't underrate Gimeno on grass: He reached final of the first Australian Open after a win against Rosewall, he reached, as an old man, Wimbledon SF, he lost at 35 to Smith in five sets in the US Open, he finished ahead of Rosewall in the 1967 Newport tournament, he beat Rosewall in the 1967 US Pro in straight sets and lost to Laver (in Rod's best year) in four...In his peak he was awesome on any surface! Thus he could have won more than 12 amateur majors.