Originally Posted by pc1
Phoenix1983 and BobbyOne,
Frankly I don't think either of you are going to change your minds. It's getting rather boring because it's the same statements.
Honestly the key to a great player is the ability to win on all surfaces. Rosewall won on grass, clay, wood, indoor canvas etc.
Tilden technically did not win any of the current recognized majors so technically he did not win by today's standards a clay major but he won so many US Claycourts and other great clay events that you couldn't deny his greatness. However he actually won a red clay major in the World Hardcourt which was the clay court championship of the world because the French was only Open to French people. Does a person deny the greatness of Tilden because he technically did not win a classic major? Just my two cents and considering inflation it's probably negative value.
Guys just switch to another topic. It's really not a discussion anymore because no one is giving in on any points.
Lets elaborate on Newcombe grass peak making him the alfa male in early 70
"Esther,Evonne,Hana,Martina: was it a fairy stick or a tennis racket?"