Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 7 topics

Friday, May 12, 2017

Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 12 11:59PM +1000

On 12/05/2017 3:45 AM, Gracchus wrote:
 
>> It really would be something to see Rafa mentally cowered by Fed for a
>> change, & at FO of all places.
 
> The word is "COWED" -- not "cowered." Time for you to go back and get that high school diploma.
 
https://www.google.com.au/#q=cowered
MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net>: May 12 07:12AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 12:46:27 PM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
> Yes, we saw some of that in Rafa beating Kyrgios today 63 61. Tough to
> see Rafa doing that to Nick off clay.
 
I thought all surfaces and players today play same?
 
.mikko
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 12 07:14AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 5:31:23 AM UTC+10, MBDunc wrote:
 
> Noah is officially the last male GS champion with a wood racket. (* note: Connors USO 83 with his good old steel pan)
 
> Last male GS finalist with a wood racket was Curren AO 84.
 
> .mikko
 
Wrong Mikko, didn't Mecir played with a wood racquet in 86 USO ?
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 12 07:22AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 5:31:23 AM UTC+10, MBDunc wrote:
 
> Noah is officially the last male GS champion with a wood racket. (* note: Connors USO 83 with his good old steel pan)
 
> Last male GS finalist with a wood racket was Curren AO 84.
 
> .mikko
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oJRYJv2mRs
 
Have a look at Mecir's racquet at 3:40 mark.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 13 12:39AM +1000

On 13/05/2017 12:12 AM, MBDunc wrote:
>> see Rafa doing that to Nick off clay.
 
> I thought all surfaces and players today play same?
 
> .mikko
 
Same slow speed, just different bounce on clay that gives Rafa the edge.
Rafa is the only guy who can translate that small difference to big
advantage as he hits the ball differently to everyone else.
 
Nick is also a head case & not established big name - wouldn't be a big
surprise to see him beat Rafa on clay next match if Raf ais just a bit
off & Nick hitting the lines.
MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net>: May 12 08:23AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 5:14:52 PM UTC+3, John Liang wrote:
 
> > Last male GS finalist with a wood racket was Curren AO 84.
 
> > .mikko
 
> Wrong Mikko, didn't Mecir played with a wood racquet in 86 USO ?
 
Cool, I did not know that.
 
.mikko
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 12 10:33AM -0500

On 5/11/2017 2:31 PM, MBDunc wrote:
 
>>> Becker said that Noah had strokes of #50+ ranked player
 
>> That BH was not pretty. He would drop his head while hitting it. I also think Noah was one of the first top players to use an OS frame.
 
> Noah is officially the last male GS champion with a wood racket. (* note: Connors USO 83 with his good old steel pan)
 
Cool, i didn't realize that. And kudos for mentioning connors, because
most of us back then thought that the dread T2000 was actually harder to
play with than wood.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: May 12 11:35AM -0500

On Fri, 12 May 2017 23:59:44 +1000, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com> wrote:
| On 12/05/2017 3:45 AM, Gracchus wrote:
|> On Thursday, May 11, 2017 at 5:15:58 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
|>> On 11/05/2017 9:27 PM, Federer Fanatic wrote:
|>
|>>> Yes...that would be funny, even better if Fed won the match...
|>
|>> It really would be something to see Rafa mentally cowered by Fed for a
|>> change, & at FO of all places.
|>
|> The word is "COWED" -- not "cowered." Time for you to go back and get that high school diploma.
|>
|
|
| https://www.google.com.au/#q=cowered
|
|
 
Gracchus couldn't resist slamming you, even though he was mistaken ;-) and frankly he
should have been pleased with your response as you slammed the howler monkey ;-)
 
FF
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 13 02:35AM +1000

On 13/05/2017 1:33 AM, stephenJ wrote:
 
> Cool, i didn't realize that. And kudos for mentioning connors, because
> most of us back then thought that the dread T2000 was actually harder to
> play with than wood.
 
Anybody who could win slams with the T2000 automatically goes into
goat/boat/talent tier 1 category imo.
 
Can you see Fed/Djoker/Rafa winning a slam with that thing?
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 12 10:30AM -0500

On 5/11/2017 12:13 PM, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
>> presidency! 😁👍
 
> All? Has he pardoned or reprieved anyone yet? I'm sure there are several
> other powers as yet unused.
 
Good point, he actually hasn't flexed all his muscles. The best is yet
to come! :)
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
calimero377@gmx.de: May 12 08:30AM -0700

On Thursday, May 11, 2017 at 10:10:36 AM UTC+2, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
> voters around the country will judge the move.
 
> http://time.com/4774551/donald-trump-approval-rating-may-quinnipiac-poll/
 
> Bad. I guess, getting things done didn't sink in too well.
 
 
Quinnipiac?
 
Those guys who gave Hillary a 8% adavantage in Wisconsin just one week before the election ...?
 
Lol ...
 
 
Max
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: May 12 11:26AM -0500

On Fri, 12 May 2017 14:32:36 +0200 (CEST), *skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
| Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid> Wrote in message:
|> On Thu, 11 May 2017 17:51:47 +0200 (CEST), *skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> wrote:
|> | Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:
|> |> What's you guys' opinions as to the significance of these poll numbers?
|> |>
|> |
|> |
|> | Fake news.
|> |
|> | He surely doesn't have 80% approval but the ones who supported him
|> | still support him. He declined somewhat in April which worried
|> | some people but he seems to be peaking now again.
|> |
|> |
|>
|> What is fake news? What is real news?
|>
|> FF
|
|
|
| Nonsense about his poor approval ratings is fake news. Haven't we
| been hearing it during the campaign just as well and how it
| turned out?
|
| It's not so much about fabricating and posting lying facts. Even
| though I'm not ruling it out, but it's more about spins and
| interpretations. That we can see.
|
| By now, you'd have realized media doesn't really like him. Just
| remember the reports of him and Bannon being unable to switch the
| lights in oval office or whatever. Relentless mocking in
| irrelevant matters, and serious attacks, lies, etc by the
| establishment, like New York billionaire being a Russian spy.
| Idiocy.
|
| He has many people that are against him, but has suporters as
| well. Many of them who were silent majority (plurality).
|
| Now that there is no need for them to be vocal, and the media is
| doing their thing, constantly bashing him, is it surprise that
| they'd get some unfavorable ratings for him?
|
| But it doesn't matter.
|
| So in this situation, better test of his true standings would be
| to ask people, would they vote for him in 2020, or some
| democratic candidate.
|
 
Well thought out explanation!
 
FF
 
ps. Many articles on the net are mere click bait. The title says one thing and
then one reads the article and you wonders what the author was claiming. Furthermore,
the articles usually have NO references, no supporting evidence. Utter nonsense.
 
A friend of mine says CNN is trying to position themselves a little to the right
since Fox has become more and more of a nonentity.
 
I am not wild about Trump but I have admit to chuckling to myself
about all the whining people did about it...:-) Hillary was
a terrible candidate. Joe Kennedy might be good alternative for the Dems?
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: May 12 11:29AM -0500

On Fri, 12 May 2017 06:31:44 -0700 (PDT), The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com> wrote:
| yep!
 
 
Err you just got a blow job? Ever hear of following with some including text and offering
some coherent intelligent discourse?
 
FF
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: May 12 11:30AM -0500

On Fri, 12 May 2017 08:30:17 -0700 (PDT), calimero377@gmx.de <calimero377@gmx.de> wrote:
| On Thursday, May 11, 2017 at 10:10:36 AM UTC+2, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
|> Trump has a 36% approval rating compared to 58% who disapprove of him.
|> The number is down from Quinnipiac's April 19 poll, which found a 40%
|> approval rating, and just 1% higher than his lowest-ever rating since he
|> became president.
|>
|> Key among those declines were groups that strongly advocated for his
|> election. Approval among white voters with no college degree fell 10
|> points from 57% to 47% since April 19. White men went from a 53%
|> approval to a 48% approval in that same time.
|>
|> "There is no way to spin or sugarcoat these sagging numbers," Tim
|> Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, said in a
|> statement.
|>
|> "The erosion of white men, white voters without college degrees and
|> independent voters, the declaration by voters that President Donald
|> Trump's first 100 days were mainly a failure and deepening concerns
|> about Trump's honesty, intelligence and level headedness are red flags
|> that the administration simply can't brush away," Malloy added.
|>
|> On Tuesday, Trump fired FBI Director James Comey, a controversial
|> decision that reverberated around Washington. It remains to be seen how
|> voters around the country will judge the move.
|>
|> http://time.com/4774551/donald-trump-approval-rating-may-quinnipiac-poll/
|>
|> Bad. I guess, getting things done didn't sink in too well.
|
|
| Quinnipiac?
|
| Those guys who gave Hillary a 8% adavantage in Wisconsin just one week before the election ...?
|
| Lol ...
|
|
| Max
 
 
Max you devil ;-) You love teasing Ameeericans eh? :-)
 
FF
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: May 12 11:31AM -0500

On Fri, 12 May 2017 10:30:15 -0500, stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net> wrote:
| On 5/11/2017 12:13 PM, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
|> On 11/05/2017 17:00, stephenJ wrote:
|>> > On 5/11/2017 3:10 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
|>
|>>> Trump has a 36% approval rating compared to 58% who disapprove of him.
|>>
|>> Guess what? Trump is still exercising all the powers of the
|>> presidency! 😁👍
|>
|> All? Has he pardoned or reprieved anyone yet? I'm sure there are several
|> other powers as yet unused.
|
| Good point, he actually hasn't flexed all his muscles. The best is yet
| to come! :)
|
|
 
What would be your most fervent wish that he would do? Personally I'd like
to see a solution to North Korea...
 
FF
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 12 10:36AM -0500

On 5/11/2017 6:35 PM, bob wrote:
 
>> No one is denying the current state of the tour is different than the past. That's been true throughout history, though, between surface switches, slam prioritization, equipment advances, training advances, medical advances, etc.
 
>> Really this era is just the full-scale modernization of the slam hunt that Sampras started. Fed/Djok are more or less the evolution of Sampras/Agassi with the benefit of some surface homogenization thrown in (but way less homogeneous than when 3/4 of the slams were grass, so surface similarity can't be the sole reason for high slam counts). The real anomaly is Nadal. We've never really seen anything like him before. He's skewing everyone's analysis and making them look for more than is there IMO, when really he's an aberration.
 
> nadal winning multiple wimbledons is certainly an aberration.
 
Really? Borg was the perfect clay player of his day, doubtless the GOAT
with a wood racket, and he won 5 straight Ws.
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: May 12 07:27PM +0300

On 11.5.2017 22:19, Shakes wrote:
> Besides I don't see how a prime Edberg wouldn't make the last 16 on
> grass. I can easily see him troubling Fed/Djok/Nadal on grass (and
> even HC).
 
I really can't. Edberg's serve is a dream come true for the present
players. Slow and high bouncing. His FH is a mess and the BH is 1-handed.
 
His chances would be limited to grass, wouldn't put a penny on him there
either. The bumrooters that he played were the kind that waited for the
ball to come to them. S&Vers dine on those. Now, he'll be facing an
Agassi round after round. A living hell.
 
 
>> On the contrary. It's S&V that is dead.
 
> Yes, but there are other factors that caused it rather than the
> greatness of the recent batches of baseliners.
 
The recent batch of baseliners weren't doing nothing much when S&V was
already dying. It was well on it's way out even when the circumstances
were still in favour of it, the fast 90s.
 
>> A case in point: Raonic played S&V at the AO up until he faced
>> Nadal. Why do you think he didn't play S&V against him?
 
> Probably because he knew his S/V game wasn't good enough ?
 
Or that he would, even with his serve, start seeing too many balls whiff
past him.
 
>> half, a S&Ver will almost invariably be playing with weaker
>> groundies.
 
> Doesn't matter.
 
The weaker groundies will lower their chances of breaking == winning.
 
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter how you hold serve. A 1.5-skill
Roddick had no trouble holding on grass. But to win you still have to
break every once in a while.
 
> It's easier playing an entire tournament knowing that
> nobody is going to ...
 
That's a pretty big hypothesis. It could be correct or it could of not
be. The tour is much more competitive than it was when 25 years ago. It
could just as well be that the S&Vers thrived because of that.
 
But the present guys would not lose their bearings simply because
somebody suddenly does a triple Lutz in front of them. Federer beat the
best S&V had to offer on first try.
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: May 12 09:22AM -0700

On Thursday, May 11, 2017 at 4:27:30 PM UTC-7, bob wrote:
 
 
> he definitely lost his aura, he's lost most matches he played past 2
> years. and to nobodies..
 
> bob
 
 
bob, can you help me out with the part of your post above which says "...he's lost most matches he's
played past 2 years..." ? Having a hard time understanding what you're saying there. TIA.
 
And yes, you *did say* you lost a bet on the 2012 W Final, at that time.
calimero377@gmx.de: May 12 08:34AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 1:23:57 AM UTC+2, jdeluise wrote:
 
> > he got confirmed a supreme court justice. and obamacare is on the way
> > out. 3 months...
 
> He didn't.... the republicans had to change the rules to get him in...
 
No, they applied the Schumer rule. And Schumer is a DemocRat!
 
 
Max
calimero377@gmx.de: May 12 08:37AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 2:37:23 AM UTC+2, bob wrote:
> favor necessarily of whom will be chosen, but don't say "he didn't get
> anything done." it'll come back to bite you very hard.
 
> bob
 
Generally Trump is a useless clown. But him changing the face of the Supreme Court is a very valuable contribution. Evens out a lot of blunders he has already made and will surely make in the next 4 years.
 
Max
calimero377@gmx.de: May 12 08:32AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 8:48:43 AM UTC+2, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> SAN FRANCISCO — Masayoshi Son, the Japanese technology billionaire, has never been known to think small. That includes leading enormous investments in fledgling software companies.
 
> Mr. Son's company, SoftBank, said on Thursday that it was leading a $502 million investment in Improbable, a British start-up focused on creating expansive virtual worlds.
 
> The investment, which will be for a minority stake, will value Improbable, which is five years old and has offices in London and San Francisco, at more than $1 billion.
 
 
 
Lol, there will ba a lot of soft banks in the UK quite soon ...
 
 
Max
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 13 12:03AM +1000

On 12/05/2017 4:47 AM, Gracchus wrote:
>> match vs fallen great and does trash talking. Predictable. And
>> immensely boring.
 
> I wouldn't call Sharapova a "great."
 
 
A player who wins career slam is not 'great'?
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 13 12:26AM +1000

On 12/05/2017 11:17 AM, bob wrote:
>> small thing for these females.
 
> she's reasonably attractive, but no kournikkova. serena, in
> particular, despises sharapova's income.
 
Serena has said she feels responsible for Shara's popularity for letting
her beat her in '04 Wimbledon final at age 17. That's when endor$ements
really took off.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 12 07:50AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 7:26:19 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
 
> Serena has said she feels responsible for Shara's popularity for letting
> her beat her in '04 Wimbledon final at age 17. That's when endor$ements
> really took off.
 
And Sharapova returned Serena's act of charity by saying she "played with her head." Russian ingrate deserved to lose 18 in row.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 12 04:56PM +0200


> perhaps she had legal right, probably did, but in a sue happy society
> i don't care for it. lots of corporations, etc settle just to make it
> go away.
 
 
Sue happy society you say? :)
 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axtnTiuEVTY>
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
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