Originally Posted by CyBorg
It is very much a pseudo-argument, assuming a pseudo-argument is one that doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Your analogies are poor. Unlike Wimbledon, none of these stages were devalued by a pro/amateur split, in which certain players were banned from participating.
So either you are engaging in bad argumentation on purpose or out of ignorance.
but who could have beaten the 1970-1971 John Newcombe on fast grass?
It was not Rosewall´s fault that Newk had SUCH peak