I wonder where you have Ken Rosewall on your Top 10 list, in relation to Poncho (who you have #6). Whatever it is, just don't tell Novak about them. Otherwise, he might play until the 2032 Olympics to break these records, lol.
Rosewall is another underrated guy, for similar reasons to Pancho, and also because people tend to remember the "Old Muscles" that got slaughtered by Connors in 1974. But he was great for a
loooong time, winning Slams over a 20-year period! His first was at 18, his last at 37.
Anyhow, Rosewall is a candidate for #7. It is hard ranking him ahead of Borg, Mac, Sampras, and Lendl, but also impossible to ignore the sum total of his accomplishments. And it wasn't like he was all longevity; he was the bridge between Pancho and Laver, but probably the best player on tour only for one year, in 1963. But he was #2-3 for most of 1956-72, which is rather incredible.
My top 13 all-time would probably be:
1-2.
Laver and Djokovic - Still undecided as they are just two different eras. Novak is tempting, but Laver's greatness spanned three different tours--amateur, pro, Open Era.
3-4.
Fedal - sorry, won't go there. I'm comfortable ranking them 3 & 4, but not against each other. Not only too close, but their respective greatnesses have unique elements that the other doesn't have to the same degree.
5.
Tilden - so dominant for so long. Similar longevity to Rosewall but with a higher peak.
6.
Pancho - His dominance on the pro tour is astonishing, and I think his longevity adds a nice element, even if he didn't win anything Slam related or a big tour after the early 60s.
7.
Rosewall - see above.
8.
Borg - He's the hardest player to be purely statistical about, because we really only have half a career to look at. The greatest What If story of tennis history.
9.
McEnroe - It might be a bit unfair to rank him behind Borg because he sort of surpassed him in 81. But unlike Borg, we actually got the second half (or third) of Mac's career, and it was a far cry from his prime.
10.
Sampras - Most rank him ahead of Borg/Mac because of the 14 Slams, but I think it can't be ignored that the competition was a bit less fierce. The 90s weren't exactly weak, but the field was more even, and with less density of greats at their peak then in the 80s.
11.
Lendl - sort of the red-headed stepchild of the 70s-80s, and another candidate for most underrated great. His best years were comparable to Borg's, but he had greater longevity. I suppose he gets marks off for never winning Wimbledon, which really was the premier tournament up until the Big Three era. 8-11 could arguably go in any order.
12.
Budge - An older player that I think, overall, has the most impressive record of pre-Laver/Rosewall players after Tilden and Gonzales.
13.
Connors - Might be a tad
over-rated, due to the dubious ranking system of the 70s and the fact that such a huge number of his titles were very low level, some more like Challengers. But we shouldn't go too far - he was a great player.
The next ten would probably be Wilding (for a really old guy), Vines, Perry, Riggs, Drobny, Kramer, Agassi, Becker, Edberg, Wilander, and Murray in some order. Again, for the old guys, it was just a different tour, and some of those guys had their careers interrupted by WW2.
