He said to a journalist something along the lines of, "if you were told that you were the seventh best journalist in the world would you think you were a failure, or if a doctor was the seventh best doctor in the world would he be a failure?"
It's not really a good comparison, is it?
If you were the 1000th best doctor, or 1000th best journalist then you are still making a valuable contribution to society. If you the 1000th best tennis player in the world, then you are cleaning up at your local tennis club and doing something else with the rest of your time.
People go on the tennis circuit with the hope of becoming the best in the world. That's not why most people become doctors or anything else. There is no way of determining the best doctor in the world (or indeed the best vascular surgeon or whatever) because it's not a competition, it's real life.
(This doesn't mean it's OK to criticise someone for coming in fourth. It's not. But it's still a poor analogy.)