Originally Posted by BobbyOne
Rigid Flash, Do you want to make an interriogation? I understand that you want to find an insecure or wrong spot in my argumentation just to blame and discredit me. That's rather nasty, my friend.
Since I have not yet included Nadal you see that's not easy for me to give him a special place in the top ten. But it's clear that it would be a low place yet. But I'm sure Rafa will add to his resume and thus increase his place.
Amateur majors are really majors but don't reach the importance of open or pro majors. Where is the problem?
Emerson never reached a ranking place of the top three or four while all my top ten or 15 were No.1 at least once. I give Emerson (the arguably most overrated player) a place around No.20.
I want to understand your ranking and in order to do so I need more informations. If I find a weak spot in your reasoning, it could be useful to point it to you. You could either correct it, or show me that you have a good reason and convince me that the weak spot is in my reasoning. It happened before that I point something to be corrected by the answer. Of course, that presuppose that we are ready to change our mind with new informations/different angle of view of a same event.
I understand that it is not easy to rank Nadal if you haven't analyzed his resume yet.
And yes I think that it is a problem to claim that someone has won 23 majors, including amateur majors, without specifying that some of these majors should not be taken into account when we are comparing two player's resume.