Given that these "I like (insert first player's name), but the only reason he won x slams was because (insert second player's name) wasn't in his era" are popping up all over, I'd like to remind posters that my threads, sometimes maligned by my critics, have generally produced interesting, thought-provoking and yes, comical, discussions. At their best, they've transcended the Boards. How do I do this? Well, in part (and this is only a part), I focus on specifics, on match-ups and moments, as I like to say to my dog. See, while the Historians are so focused on these large-scale "GOAT" debacles, I'm more interested in examining Laver's forehand the type of ball he hit and comparing it with say, Fognini's forehand. Player's enter my time machine and unexpected posts result.