Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 5 topics

Monday, May 1, 2017

Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: May 01 01:30PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 2:04:30 PM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> > > What was Thiem's theme against Rafa? Disappointing to lose it 6-1 in the second.
 
> > Thiem is overrated. I've been saying that for a long while. He's the Simona Halep of the ATP.
 
> have you? thought it was only me! he's not so much as overrated, more he puts so much effort into that fh that he's totally knackered by the end of a tournament.
 
Knackered? He's 23! He shouldn't be knackered playing against 31 year old players in finals! At 23 he should be killing these old geezers and winning tournaments. This kid can't keep his focus in matches. He goes through periods where he can't find the court and overhits shot after shot. He's basically a dumb unpolished ball basher.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 01 02:03PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 4:30:40 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > Thiem is overrated. I've been saying that for a long while. He's the Simona Halep of the ATP.
 
> > have you? thought it was only me! he's not so much as overrated, more he puts so much effort into that fh that he's totally knackered by the end of a tournament.
 
> Knackered? He's 23! He shouldn't be knackered playing against 31 year old players in finals! At 23 he should be killing these old geezers and winning tournaments. This kid can't keep his focus in matches. He goes through periods where he can't find the court and overhits shot after shot. He's basically a dumb unpolished ball basher.
 
He said in another post that Nadal is 'knackered'. When you consider he also said Nadal is 'out of sorts', you tend to come to the conclusion that 'out of sorts' means 'knackered'.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 03:34PM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 22:03:26 UTC+1, RaspingDrive wrote:
 
> > > have you? thought it was only me! he's not so much as overrated, more he puts so much effort into that fh that he's totally knackered by the end of a tournament.
 
> > Knackered? He's 23! He shouldn't be knackered playing against 31 year old players in finals! At 23 he should be killing these old geezers and winning tournaments. This kid can't keep his focus in matches. He goes through periods where he can't find the court and overhits shot after shot. He's basically a dumb unpolished ball basher.
 
> He said in another post that Nadal is 'knackered'. When you consider he also said Nadal is 'out of sorts', you tend to come to the conclusion that 'out of sorts' means 'knackered'.
 
no, they're two different things.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 03:34PM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 21:30:40 UTC+1, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > Thiem is overrated. I've been saying that for a long while. He's the Simona Halep of the ATP.
 
> > have you? thought it was only me! he's not so much as overrated, more he puts so much effort into that fh that he's totally knackered by the end of a tournament.
 
> Knackered? He's 23! He shouldn't be knackered playing against 31 year old players in finals! At 23 he should be killing these old geezers and winning tournaments. This kid can't keep his focus in matches. He goes through periods where he can't find the court and overhits shot after shot. He's basically a dumb unpolished ball basher.
 
I agree, but he puts so much into his shots that he gets tired.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: May 01 11:50AM -0700

Op maandag 1 mei 2017 19:01:03 UTC+2 schreef *skriptis:
> certainly not after that USO final.
 
> He didn't break any rule, but don't paint him a sportsmanship role
> model or I'll vomit.
 
 
So who is a better role model sportsman according to you?
 
To me, it's the sum of all aspects with Federer that makes him stand out as a sportsman.
- incredibly successful in winning over a long period of time.
- good spirited competitor; no gamesmanship, pretty much always graceful and sportsmanlike in his conduct; no time-wasting or unnecessary grunting, injury time-outs or hand gestures to stop the server.
- style of play that is second to none aesthetically, probably ever.
- willing to represent his sport for causes other than himself; the initiatives over the years, from Tsunami disaster relief to his foundation for exhibitions, educating thousands of otherwise helpless poor kids. Nobody has been up to the task in this regard in tennis, probably ever.
 
Show me a player who's never displayed any unsportsmanlike conduct, if he/she/it actually exists... I think you're just a sour being and can't stand Federer.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: May 01 12:00PM -0700

> Show me a player who's never displayed any unsportsmanlike conduct, if he/she/it actually exists... I think you're just a sour being and can't stand Federer.
 
I don't know why you are discussing facts with zero entities.
He was voted for it, he wins it every year, something must be super special about him.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 01 01:58PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 2:01:50 PM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> > > If he had Nishikori's results nobody would even think of him.
 
> > Many valid points, Skriptis. A recent incident comes to mind: Stan serves an ace at IW 2017 but doesn't challenge a wrong call by the linesman. Federer also signaled the ball as out, which he should not have done, IMO.
 
> Using the F-Word, live in the Wimbledon final, ruining the innocence of millions of innocent children, should be reason enough! Also don't forget that more people were upset that I lost in the final than people were happy that Nadal won! LOL Fed even won this sportsmanship award when he smashed his racquet to bits the other year, that said it all to me. It a funny award, can you imagine if they asked McEnroe, Nastase and Connors to vote on such a thing!
 
I got confused between "sportsman of the year award" and "sportsmanship award".
I think Federer deserves the former. However, he didn't play much really, so it is unclear why he was given that award for 2016.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 01 02:00PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 1:01:03 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
 
> He didn't break any rule, but don't paint him a sportsmanship role
> model or I'll vomit.
> --
 
"sportsman of the year award" and 'sportsmanship award' are different things.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 01 10:52PM +0200

> > Show me a player who's never displayed any unsportsmanlike conduct, if he/she/it actually exists... I think you're just a sour being and can't stand Federer.
 
> I don't know why you are discussing facts with zero entities.
> He was voted for it, he wins it every year, something must be super special about him.
 
 
You of all people after your anti Trump rants shouldn't be talking
about "voting".
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 01 11:09PM +0200


>> Using the F-Word, live in the Wimbledon final, ruining the innocence of millions of innocent children, should be reason enough! Also don't forget that more people were upset that I lost in the final than people were happy that Nadal won! LOL Fed even won this sportsmanship award when he smashed his racquet to bits the other year, that said it all to me. It a funny award, can you imagine if they asked McEnroe, Nastase and Connors to vote on such a thing!
 
> I got confused between "sportsman of the year award" and "sportsmanship award".
> I think Federer deserves the former. However, he didn't play much really, so it is unclear why he was given that award for 2016.
 
Lizard people.
It's bizarre really. I think he'll be getting those even after he
retires.
 
Just like Kim Il-Sung, dead since 1994 and grandfather of current
Kim of Korea is still their official president.
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 01 11:06PM +0200


>> He didn't break any rule, but don't paint him a sportsmanship role
>> model or I'll vomit.
 
> So who is a better role model sportsman according to you?
 
 
The way I perceived those sportsmanship awards are like Pulitzer
or Nobel. Handing out every year to a guy that stood out doing
something extraordinary, promoting fair play.
 
Federer getting it every years has devalued it. It's a personality
cult.
 
 
 
> - good spirited competitor; no gamesmanship, pretty much always graceful and sportsmanlike in his conduct; no time-wasting or unnecessary grunting, injury time-outs or hand gestures to stop the server.
> - style of play that is second to none aesthetically, probably ever.
> - willing to represent his sport for causes other than himself; the initiatives over the years, from Tsunami disaster relief to his foundation for exhibitions, educating thousands of otherwise helpless poor kids. Nobody has been up to the task in this regard in tennis, probably ever.
 
 
That's rubbish sorry. Many other guys have participated in
charities. There are also plenty of guys who are good spirited
competitors.
And aesthetically pleasing game isn't really important in this sense.
 
 
 
> Show me a player who's never displayed any unsportsmanlike conduct, if he/she/it actually exists... I think you're just a sour being and can't stand Federer.
 
 
But I didn't even say Federer showed unsportmanslike conduct. He
obviously did over the course of his career like almost everyone
but I'm not referring to that at all.
This is problem with you fedfuckers. As soon as you're nog kissing
his ass, or worshiping him, you're a hater.
 
I'm saying Federer hasn't showed great sportsmanlike conduct. Or
if he did at some point and deserved such rewards couple of times
he certainly wasn't best sportsman on the tour for the past dozen
years.
 
That's why I singled out hid behaviour in USO final 2015. Nothing
to blame him for, he just played his tennis.
But how can he get a sportsmanship award after that?
 
 
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
fymido_lenito@yahoo.com: May 01 03:10PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 2:30:03 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
 
> --
 
> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
I was under the impression that the yearly "Sportsmanship Award" is based on votes by active ATP players. Is that correct? If so, why are these players voting for Federer almost every year? I thought they would be voting based on first hand experience rather than "fan following". If this is based on votes by players and fans, then there should be another award that is based on player votes only.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 02 12:15AM +0200


>> ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
>> http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
> I was under the impression that the yearly "Sportsmanship Award" is based on votes by active ATP players. Is that correct? If so, why are these players voting for Federer almost every year? I thought they would be voting based on first hand experience rather than "fan following". If this is based on votes by players and fans, then there should be another award that is based on player votes only.
 
Did I say the vote was fraud?
No. So?
 
If zhey voted the way they voted, it is how it is. I'm saying in
this thread why do I think he doesn't deserve it.

 
Besides, I haven't seen the numbers?
E.g. has he won the absolute majority of votes?
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 03:33PM -0700


> > ----Android NewsGroup Reader----
> > http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
 
> I was under the impression that the yearly "Sportsmanship Award" is based on votes by active ATP players. Is that correct? If so, why are these players voting for Federer almost every year? I thought they would be voting based on first hand experience rather than "fan following". If this is based on votes by players and fans, then there should be another award that is based on player votes only.
 
yes that right, they do - pressure to do so, he's so well known he's the obvious and easiest pick.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 11:21AM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 19:04:45 UTC+1, StephenJ wrote:
 
> That said, yes, any tennis player would rather win gold in singles than
> doubles, but the gap is narrow, tiny, because gold is gold. Whereas at
> Wimbledon, doubles is nothing compared to singles.
 
erm I think you'll find we've discussed this quite thoroughly before and this is why Murray is now a GOAT contender because Olympic Gold is the equivalent of 16 slams and he's won Gold not once, but twice!
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 11:23AM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 17:30:03 UTC+1, *skriptis wrote:
 
> To factor in Sampras being burnt out and out of sorts at the time
> means to realize he probably wasn't at his best regarding mixing
> serve, having idea etc.
 
Sampras didn't even know why he was playing those last 2 years - he'd broken the slam record and invented the slam chase race, he was then pretty much retired, but didn't know what else to do. He lost to George Bastl and Wimbledon and that guy's doubles partner called Federer the year before.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 01 02:09PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 2:07:26 PM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> > > serve, having idea etc.
 
> > Compare Federer of 2005 at USO with Federer of 2008 at USO. The carefree shot making of 2005 was perceptibly replaced with more calculated 'rapier thrusts'. Now move forward to 2015. He has been playing for 12 years from the 2005 instance. Is it likely he lacked the same stamina as in 2005? No? Enter Stan with his carefree approach and he decimates Novak. You fill in the missing blanks.
 
> he decimated Djoker mostly cos Djoker was nervous.
 
Nervous? Is this like 'out of sorts'?
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 01 11:43PM +0200


>> > Compare Federer of 2005 at USO with Federer of 2008 at USO. The carefree shot making of 2005 was perceptibly replaced with more calculated 'rapier thrusts'. Now move forward to 2015. He has been playing for 12 years from the 2005 instance. Is it likely he lacked the same stamina as in 2005? No? Enter Stan with his carefree approach and he decimates Novak. You fill in the missing blanks.
 
>> he decimated Djoker mostly cos Djoker was nervous.
 
> Nervous? Is this like 'out of sorts'?
 
Tennis is so much about h2h.
 
Imo, djoker has done so much more homework to deconstruct games of
Nadal, Federer, Murray than he ever did vs Wawrinka. His "nerves"
might be partially explained with that. When you don't know what
to do on court you become nervous.
 
It's all about effort. These guys are giving their 100% all the
time and at one point you simply can't cover all.

 
I still think Wawrinka is not the guy that should be
insurmountable obstacle for Djokovic. He has neither superior
serve, nor fabulous retern, nor is a great net player.

 
But he matches up well vs Djokovic's standard game from the baseline.
 
 
Djokovic was dumb not to mix it up more. I'm not suggesting net
play as he too isn't great at it, but imo if he made it into
hitting winner contest there's huge chance of him crushing
Wawrinka because djokovic could hit winners if not the same or
better but at least almost as well, yet but Wawrinka couldn't
return or defend nearly as well.
 
What he was doing was feeding Wawrinka who only had to set up for
hitting a winner. Stan was given a gift of not worrying that
djokovic could try to hit a winner.
 
Choosing to send deep balls to Wawrinka that bother other guys but
not him is a failed approach and he deserved to lose FO and USO.
That AO wasn't even bad as it was fifth set loss. But instead of
intensifying his game vs Wawrinka in future matches he softened.
Can't feel sorry for him.
 
 
But that's the thing whisper rightly points at when comparing
Sampras vs these modern guys. They get easily discouraged from
attacking.
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 02 12:11AM +0200

>> doubles, but the gap is narrow, tiny, because gold is gold. Whereas at
>> Wimbledon, doubles is nothing compared to singles.
 
> erm I think you'll find we've discussed this quite thoroughly before and this is why Murray is now a GOAT contender because Olympic Gold is the equivalent of 16 slams and he's won Gold not once, but twice!
 
Murray has 7 all time majors!!
3 slams
1 dc
1 yec
2 Olympics (huge and a probably a divine pay off for losing 5 AO
finals)
Both records/achievements are rarities and will remain so probably.
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 02 12:03AM +0200


>> So Federer's 50 big titles in atp era are not something you can
>> use ro compare him with e.g. Cochet.
 
> Does Cochet come out on top after such a futile exercise?
 
No, but it's good to find out Cochet > Lacoste.
;)
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 11:33AM -0700

On Sunday, 30 April 2017 12:45:18 UTC+1, MBDunc wrote:
> > but this is rst where most analysis is off the planet.
 
> Placebo? Any mental thingie can do wonders. You believe, you perform. You believe you have an edge over other - you perform.
 
> Half of steroids use benefit is mental.
 
no it's not, they are used to increase the amount of training you can do and to make you stronger.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 11:38AM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 18:40:46 UTC+1, RaspingDrive wrote:
> > He was injured in his match vs del Potro at USO 09
> > --
 
> Murray did much damage to him at USO 2008 semis. Stan damaged him in 2014. Djok did it at USO 2011. That Italian did it in 2015.
 
Nadal was knackered in the USO 2008 semis, Murray did well as he took advantage of this and it was tough fought, but Nadal was quite tired after that big season. Look it up on youtube and you'll see.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 11:39AM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 18:01:02 UTC+1, *skriptis wrote:
 
> The only time I've seen fully healthy rafa being blown off the
> court was by Tsonga in 08.
> He was injured in his match vs del Potro at USO 09
 
yep, agreed, can't think of another time.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 01 11:46AM -0700

On Monday, 1 May 2017 16:21:45 UTC+1, Carey wrote:
> On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 8:00:10 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
 
> > You will have to think what Icy would have said if it was Murray that won the AO 2017 beating Nadal in the final.
 
> Yes, good thought.
 
Cos I always post what is 100% true, would say it for what it would be, Murray would've beaten an out of sorts Nadal! it like pretending the O2 final, Djoker was 100% full max peak, when he clearly wasn't! all credit to Murray for winning the semis, he played best level from the FO last year to the O2 pretty much since 2013.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 01 02:05PM -0700

On Monday, May 1, 2017 at 2:38:35 PM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> > > --
 
> > Murray did much damage to him at USO 2008 semis. Stan damaged him in 2014. Djok did it at USO 2011. That Italian did it in 2015.
 
> Nadal was knackered in the USO 2008 semis, Murray did well as he took advantage of this and it was tough fought, but Nadal was quite tired after that big season. Look it up on youtube and you'll see.
 
What big season? He won his first Wimbledon and the usual FO title. Two slams is not big enough to 'knacker' a future GOAT contender. So he was 'out of sorts' at USO 2008! Just like I guessed you will say.
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment