tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Lets compare player A and B.
A: 5 slams, 3 WTF titles, 20 Masters, 120 weeks #1
B: 6 slams, nothing else
B > A?
Would you consider Wawrinka a greater player than Murray if he wins one additional slam?
You need to ask 10 more questions and require landing lights before you understand my statement? Which part of "if player A has more Slams than player B then player A is greater by default" is so hard to get?
That of course if all the Slams won by both players have the same value. Becker will still probably be considered greater than Wilander f.e. because Wilander won 2 AO's in the early 80's when 90% of the top guys didn't bother to play it. But from 1987 onwards? All Slams are equal.