RP,
See, here's where you really get me peeved. I like having what I say evaluated in accurate context which you don't do. You state that I put Vince's fh in the Sampras, Agassi, Rios category, I didn't say that. I said the style with which he hits his fh is similar to their's, but Vince actually as a junior played with a big western grip, so maybe that's why he falls off of his fh too much. I didn't say Vince had as good of a fh as those guys.
Vince played Blake 8 times, he beat him 6 times, five in a row at one point, and in those matches, three times Blake only got one game in sets, and once Vince bageled him. I don't know about you, but when a guy beats me five times in row, in dominant fashion, I say to myself, "That guy's better than me. I might beat guys he doesn't beat, but head to head, this guy has my number."
Now, craftily, you compare Vince's dominance over Blake with Hrbaty and Federer, who only played twice, once when Fed was 19, and the other time in 2004 in Cincy, where Fed often dumps matches before the US Open. So you can't say Hrbaty is better than Federer, you don't have enough matches to evaluate and judge.
Then you take Stich and Sampras, Stich beat Pete 5 times, Sampras won 4. That's not domination, especially b/c Stich beat Pete twice on clay, and since Stich reached the French Open finals, I'd say Stich was a better player than Pete on clay. Credit goes to Stich for beating Pete more times than he beat him, but it's only one more time so you can't say he's better than Pete.
I can say that Vince was better than Blake (2004-05) when he beat him five times straight, but is he better than him now? No way. Was he better than him in 2002 when they split matches, and Vince was recovering from dropping to #237, no, he wasn't better than Blake then either.
Did Vince and I write a more humorous, engaging, real-life expose of pro tennis and one player's career than Blake and his co-author did? Hell yeah!.