Originally Posted by pc1
Whatever you want. Let's me ask you a question. Let's say I shoot free throws in basketball and I make 99 free throws. Let's say another person makes 98 free throws. Looks like I'm better, doesn't it? What happens if you found out that I made 99 out of 200 free throws and the other guy made 98 of 100? By your logic I'm better in free throw shooting.
No more mention of this from me.
Incidentally I never wrote Connors was better than Sampras.
What you are both ignoring is the question of opposition.
If I win 99% of my matches, and the opponents are Arkinstall, Palafox, Cawthorn, Bonetti, Huber, Worthington, Bottke, Fiala, Pero, Morton, Pottinger, Balestra, Lavanchy (all of whom were respected professionals from the early 1960's), and compare it to someone else's record of 70% against Gonzales, Rosewall, Sedgman, Trabert, Segura, Anderson, Cooper, Rose, Giammalva, Hartwig, McGregor, I would claim that the 70% is better than the 99% record.