I think everyone acknowledges that Rosewall was a great player but I do believe that just about all experts consider Rosewall to be below the ultimate top levels. There is nothing against Rosewall if a person puts him at number 7 or 11 or number 13. The person or expert considers Rosewall to be fantastic in any of these cases. What bothers me is that one poster will ignore any negatives (like when I wrote that Butch Buchholz said in 2016 that there was no World Championship Tour in 1964) and continue saying the 1964 Tour was a World Championship Tour when he knows full well that one of the participants in the tour said it wasn't. He then continues to write about the 1964 article by Buchholz, which he claims is definitive proof the 1964 Tour was a World Championship tour. However when I and some others read it, I find no evidence Buchholz wrote it was a World Championship! Things like that, which is not uncommon for this poster is misleading. If you do things like that can you really call yourself an expert? I can live with some different opinions. I don't mind if someone says Rosewall is the GOAT. I like Rosewall. However the constant incessant pushing of Rosewall does tend to be a broken record. It's like the old water torture where water drips on your face only in this case it's a huge waterfall. With me I feel in some ways he's like my child and I do get more upset when my children disappoint me. The poster has good knowledge of tennis history. I believe his analysis of tennis history leaves something to be desired however. I wish he would discuss more non-Rosewall topics on tennis.