Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 10 topics

Wednesday, May 3, 2017

Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 10:02PM +1000

On 3/05/2017 6:54 AM, TennisGuy wrote:
 
You bastard. That was my fave racket. I had 2 of those back in 1984 -
cost me $200 each back then.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 10:05PM +1000

On 3/05/2017 9:33 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
>> Still can't touch my Dunlop Max 200G that I play with.
> 355 g. :)
 
> I played with it, also played with wood.
 
Me too. I also played with Dunlop Maxply fort & McEnroe fort.
 
200G is prob the best tennis racket ever.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 10:11PM +1000

On 3/05/2017 10:01 AM, Guypers wrote:
 
>> I played with it, also played with wood.
 
> Dunlop Maxply fort?
 
All the old greats played with it - Laver, McEnroe, Hoad, Althea Gibson,
Court etc etc. It's probably the most famous racket ever.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: May 03 05:12AM -0700

> 200G is prob the best tennis racket ever.
 
Sorry, it may have been the best 20 years ago, but you need to live in the present now, there are much better racquets and better tennis players :)
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: May 03 03:02AM -0700

This hilarious, can't believe anyone can be so clueless about tennis as to follow what some idiots journos have written about Fed's bh and let that lead to the conclusion Nadal is now playing at his 2008 peak form! This really is v funny,
Whisper right, rst is Amazing place! It like Fedfan Thicko Land!
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 03 05:12AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 6:02:42 AM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> This hilarious, can't believe anyone can be so clueless about tennis as to follow what some idiots journos have written about Fed's bh and let that lead to the conclusion Nadal is now playing at his 2008 peak form! This really is v funny,
> Whisper right, rst is Amazing place! It like Fedfan Thicko Land!
 
Icey, 18 slams and counting. Will he win Wimbledon this year?
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: May 03 01:11PM +0100

President Donald Trump's interview with "Face the Nation"
 

<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-interview-full-transcript-face-the-nation/>
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: May 03 01:01PM +0100

On 03/05/2017 01:34, bob wrote:
 
 
>>> thankfully you're not his citizen.
 
>> Yeah, because Trump's average "citizens" are so much more thoughtful than Brian :-)
 
> trump has 300+ million citizens. whether some of them like it or not.
 
Interesting terminology. 'his citizen', 'has .. citizens'
 
Aren't they first and foremost citizens of the US of A, who pledge
allegiance to the flag and the Republic, 'one nation, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all'? The President doesn't get a mention there.
Rather than the citizens being his, he is their president - whether they
like it or not. He's supposed to serve all of them - whether he likes
it or not.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 03 07:05AM -0500

> On 4/28/2017 3:14 AM, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> I hear the subscriptions for NYT, WaPo, ... are way up because of the
> Trumpening.
 
Yes, like back in 1993, Bill Clinton's election made Rush Limbaugh's
career. Always happens, meaningless.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 09:46PM +1000

On 2/05/2017 11:34 PM, John Liang wrote:
 
> Rosewall cleaned up your BOAT candidate Hoad when they were in the pro ranks.
 
>> Federer is the modern version of Rosewall when you think about it.
 
> So who is your modern version of Laver ? Nadal ?
 
 
Sampras or McEnroe, at peak.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 09:54PM +1000

On 3/05/2017 12:05 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
 
> Nopes mopes, it's not official. Get real.
 
>> I didn't invent 'ceibs', I just gave the phenomena a name. We all know
 
> It's time you swallowed your pride and came up with this admission. You introduced the acronym, we concede that.
 
 
When I 1st coined 'ceibs' I made it clear it was a phenomena that always
existed. It's normal for us to think the best in any field today are
the best ever.
 
 
 
>> value/prestige. Fed/Rafa/Djoker & just about every player think
>> Wimbledon is no.1 by far.
 
> Stop using abusive words, retard ;) Address the main issue, namely that 7543 is not a big deal. Wimbledon is most coveted, sure. How badly did Djok or Nadal or Federer covet the CGS? After the FO 2016 win, Djok was 'absent' for the rest of the year, including Wimbledon. He didn't think he was missing out on W's fabulous 7 points he he he. The FO must have been the most precious for him in 2016, not Wimbledon of which he already had three. For 10+ slam winners, GOAT contenders, CGS, NCYGS, CYGS are all so significant that one more Wimbledon without any of those would arguably pale into insignificance. Specifically, the sole Wimbledon win, if it were to materialize (for 10+ multi Wimbledon, multi USO, multi FO winners) that year will increase the slam count by 1 and its significance would end there, unless it were the record eighth one. By the way, Nadal > Sampras already. The CGS is THAT important.
 
It's not that important if it's a common achievement. Wawrinka only
needs to win 1 more slam to join Fed/Rafa/Djoker in career slam club.
Murray is a chance to do it too.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 03 04:57AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 5:38:07 AM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> You honestly reckon Sampras was going all out during those 2 years when he didn't win a single tournament, you really reckon he had the same intensity as Fed does against the clowns in every single match?! Oh please, know you're a big Fedfan and so don't like Sampras by default, but you're just talking plain silly or didn't actually watch many Sampras matches.
 
Sampras is a great champion, a GOAT contender. However, Federer, playing the way he plays even against clowns (as you say), and still getting his record 18th slam in his 36th year, beating his arch rival in the 'contest of the century', is a miracle. Acknowledge that! ;)
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 10:04PM +1000

On 3/05/2017 7:21 AM, stephenJ wrote:
>> Rosewall would NOT defeat Fed on any surface, at any time.
 
> I suspect that if they played in 1960 with Rosewall's equipment, he
> wins, and if they played in 2010 with Fed's, Fed would win.
 
Spot on.
 
Too many teens in rst these days makes it difficult to have quality
debate.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: May 03 05:05AM -0700

On Wednesday, May 3, 2017 at 7:54:22 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
 
> When I 1st coined 'ceibs' I made it clear it was a phenomena that always
> existed. It's normal for us to think the best in any field today are
> the best ever.
 
Alright.
 
 
> It's not that important if it's a common achievement. Wawrinka only
> needs to win 1 more slam to join Fed/Rafa/Djoker in career slam club.
> Murray is a chance to do it too.
 
Even then there are the NCYGS and CYGS.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 03 01:15PM +0300

1.5.2017, 6:41, Bharath Purohit kirjoitti:
> Amazing stuff by Rafa.
 
Go for the triple!
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 09:37PM +1000

On 2/05/2017 11:20 PM, John Liang wrote:
 
>> Murray is definitely a legend of the game. 2 Wimbledons, USO, defended
>> Olympic gold (not likely to ever be repeated), Davis Cup.
 
> Tier 4 great at the best below Edberg, Becker and Wilander.
 
Sure, but he's achieved some very big things that guarantee his legend
status, particularly in Britain.
 
If you win multiple Wimbledons, USO, multiple singles gold medals, Davis
Cup you can't be considered a failure in any way.
 
--
"A GOAT who isn't BOAT can never become GOAT if he plays alongside BOAT"
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 03 06:40AM -0500

> no proof needed for that opinion. in fact federer's win over sampras
> makes me believe it even more so, federer should've won that match in
> easy straights the way sampras was playing that year.
 
... but you always fail to mention that even though Sampras wasn't at
his peak, he was closer to his than Fed was to *his*. Sampras played
better that year than Fed did.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: May 03 07:03AM -0500

On 5/2/2017 7:43 AM, Whisper wrote:
> could be the worst player on a soccer team, maybe only play 5 minutes in
> the final, yet you get a gold medal if your team wins. That can't
> compare to an individual gold medal in any sport.
 
I agree that it *shouldn't* compare. But the reality is that it does
compare. The guy on the bench of the soccer team walks around with a
gold medal draped around his neck just like the winner of the 400m
individual freestyle does. In olympic culture, the difference is small.
 
And that's even considering that the comparison here isn't fair, as
tennis doubles means two players not 15 like on a soccer team, and you
have to play the entire time.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: May 03 11:00AM +0100

On 03/05/2017 10:30, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> Whether the media favour Macron and try to pretend he's middle of the road.
 
French media is mostly anti-Marine/FN, so they are bound to favour
Macron, almost by default. En Marche! calls itself centrist, but Macron
was at onetime a PS member, so are you saying he isn't MoR/centrist at
all? What makes you think that?
 
> My fave bit is he's even said the EUSSR must reform else there'll be a Frexit,
> if I was Theresea May I'd whoop all the dumb Remoaners with that in her campaign. Lol
 
Indeed. He brings the idea of Frexit into the campaign, and Le Pen
proposes a referendum on exiting the Euro. Seemingly both are
Eurosceptic, but I expect Macron is just attempting to win voters
to his side.
 
A fascinating thought is that whoever becomes president may not have
much backing from the National Assembly after the June elections,
depending whether EM! and/or FN win seats.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 03 12:57PM +0200


> BTW you'd maybe be surprised to know that many people here in 'Murrica like Putin. What is amazing though- never thought I'd live to see this-
> is that most of them are on the Right. And we have what passes for a center-left screaming "OMG Russia, Russia, Russia!"
 
> Strange times here in the late-capitalist dystopia (as elsewhere, of course).
 
I've seen the polls and the charts of republican voters'
approval/disapproval of Putin rising in the past year, and
democrat voters's falling. So they've switched their position,
but in both cases total sum remained negative, so no big
difference. But even that little change caused panic. (E.g. Putin
rising from -60 to - 40 among republicans)
 
MSM blamed it on Trump, Giuliani, etc who were not using him as a
bogeyman all the time. Imagine that? You start a dangerous trend
when you're kinda objective?
 
What a wonder, he gained some popularity when he stopped being
constantly vilified. Acording to conspiracy theorists it's his
ploy to undermine th US, lol.
 
No chance it might be some natural process where socially
conservative forces are gathering, even on a global scale,
finding common ground, recognising each other. Of course
different countries will keep having different interests. But if
part of Trump voters like Putin, it's because of what he stands
for, not because he's Vladimir Putin.
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 03 01:33PM +0200


>> Strange times here in the late-capitalist dystopia (as elsewhere, of course).
 
> Why would that be amazing?
> Today's Russia is a fascist state. America's - and also Europe's - extreme right is fascist, too.
 
 
But hey what's so wrong with fascism?
 
Italy was fascist and Mussolini built that beautiful Foro Italico?
Spain was fascist for nearly 40 years and was a US ally with
Franco welcoming president Eisenhower. Many south American
countries were fascists too. Neither of these countries committed
atrocities or killed Jews like the Germans.
Of all the fascists countries, Germany was the worst, inhumane and
gave all the fascists a bad reputation.
 
 
Same with communism. When Soviets imported communism to eastern
Europe, guess which country had most brutal, most perverse
communist regime? Poland? Czechoslovakia? Hungary?
No, Germany with secret police and torture chambers.
 
 
Even in imperialist era of the 19th century they were the worst.
They were outside of colonial grabs in the past centuries and once
they united, they wanted to make up for it at once, Kaiser
wanted to achieve naval supremacy over Britain, basically they're
guilty of ww1 and since ww2 is a consequence of ww1, and
communism is a consequence of ww1 and ww2, you could say the
Germans are guilty for most of the misery Europeans went through
in the past century.
 
 
Whatever ideology Germans touch they go to the extremes and make
it unbearable for normal people.
 
Today, they're doing it with liberalism. They decided to end this
political system and EU. Choking on Greece, importing millions of
migrants against other EU members' wishes, the British have
already departed etc.
 
Total freaks and destructive force. In every era. Don't listen to
them.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.los>: May 03 02:45PM +0300

Obama-Trump voter = one who voted Obama in 2012, Trump in 2016.
Drop-off voter = one who voted Obama but did not vote in 2016.
--
 
Top Democratic pollsters have conducted private focus groups and polling
in an effort to answer that question, and they shared the results with me.
 
One finding from the polling stands out: A shockingly large percentage
of these Obama-Trump voters said Democrats' economic policies will favor
the wealthy — twice the percentage that said the same about Trump.
 
"[Hillary] Clinton and Democrats' economic message did not break through
to drop-off or Obama-Trump voters, even though drop-off voters are
decidedly anti-Trump," Priorities USA concluded in a presentation of its
polling data and focus group findings, which has been shown to party
officials in recent days.
 
The poll found that Obama-Trump voters, many of whom are working-class
whites and were pivotal to Trump's victory, are economically losing
ground and are skeptical of Democratic solutions to their problems.
Among the findings:
 
- 50 percent of Obama-Trump voters said their incomes are falling behind
the cost of living, and another 31 percent said their incomes are merely
keeping pace with the cost of living.
 
- A sizable chunk of Obama-Trump voters — 30 percent — said their vote
for Trump was more a vote against Clinton than a vote for Trump.
Remember, these voters backed Obama four years earlier.
 
- 42 percent of Obama-Trump voters said congressional Democrats'
economic policies will favor the wealthy, vs. only 21 percent of them
who said the same about Trump. (Forty percent say that about
congressional Republicans.) A total of 77 percent of Obama-Trump voters
said Trump's policies will favor some mix of all other classes (middle
class, poor, all equally), while a total of 58 percent said that about
congressional Democrats.
 
"If you felt like your life wasn't getting better over eight years, then
you might draw a conclusion that Democrats don't care about you," Guy
Cecil, chairman of Priorities USA, told me in an interview. "Certainly a
subset of these voters were responsive to what Trump was selling them on
immigration. But you had a lot of consistency with the Obama-Trump
voters … in terms of the severe economic anxiety they face."
 
A similar dynamic was in place with the drop-off voters. Priorities
USA's polling found that 43 percent of them said their income is falling
behind the cost of living, and another 49 percent said incomes were
merely keeping pace. "There's a lot of commonality between these
drop-off voters and the Obama-Trump voters," Cecil said.
 
Skepticism about the Democratic Party was echoed rather forcefully in
the focus groups that I watched. In one, Obama-Trump voters were asked
what Democrats stand for today and gave answers such as these:
 
"The one percent".
 
"The status quo".
 
"They're for the party. Themselves and the party".
 
One woman, asked whether the Democratic Party is for people like her,
flatly declared: "Nope".
 
When it comes to communicating a message of economic opportunity that
wins over both "communities of color" ... Democrats "clearly have a lot
of work to do".
 
Cecil pointed out that Democrats favor far more in the way of Wall
Street accountability and oversight than Republicans do. But he
acknowledged that Democrats must do more to take on Wall Street and said
the party should represent a substantially more ambitious economic agenda:
 
"The deck is stacked against most Americans in many ways. Pharmaceutical
companies that gouge consumers, for-profit prisons that abuse inmates
and do nothing to reform them, for-profit colleges that offer false
hopes and incredible amounts of debt (my brother went to one). Democrats
must take on these systemic problems and we must name names.
 
"The second part of the argument must include a real, forward-looking
economic plan that does more than rehash the same four policy proposals
from the last 20 years. How do we deal with automation and huge company
mergers? What do we do to address opportunity deserts in rural and urban
areas where real investment is almost impossible to find?"
 
Ultimately, though, Cecil said that all this research and polling
suggested to him that Democrats have an opportunity. The polling also
shows that, among the Obama-Trump voters, large percentages of the more
cautious supporters of Trump are concerned that he will go through with
deep cuts to social programs and the repeal of Obamacare.
 
"To win back cautious Trump supporters, we should tie Trump to GOP
policies that put the interests of the wealthy/businesses before the
middle class and programs they rely on".
 
Cecil noted that winning back Obama-Trump voters would be key in 2018 to
defending vulnerable Democratic senators and winning the many
gubernatorial contests that are taking place in big swing states
currently controlled by Republicans. But he also cautioned against too
narrow a focus on those voters.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/05/01/why-did-trump-win-new-research-by-democrats-offers-a-worrisome-answer/?tid=hybrid_experimentrandom_1_na&utm_term=.588432073470
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 03 01:13PM +0300

2.5.2017, 2:01, bob kirjoitti:
> that's ok by me, because he's an intense competitor trying his hardest
> to win.
 
> bob
 
Let's be honest: the guy is a complete egotistical arsehole.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: May 03 09:42PM +1000

On 2/05/2017 11:22 PM, John Liang wrote:
 
>> --
>> "A GOAT who isn't BOAT can never become GOAT if he plays alongside BOAT"
 
> Yes, a lot of people don't have any concept of history like you. And they don't repeatedly making the mistake of judging old players base on 3 minutes youtube loop like you do with Hoad.
 
So when guys like Laver, Rosewall & Pancho say Hoad at his best is the
best ever, that means fuck all to you?
 
 
 
--
"A GOAT who isn't BOAT can never become GOAT if he plays alongside BOAT"
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 03 01:06PM +0300

2.5.2017, 13:49, Brian W Lawrence kirjoitti:
> Also of interest, 57% who voted for Trump did so because they were FOR
> him, while 43% did so to vote AGAINST Clinton.
 
All were still morons regardless of the reason.
 
Besides, that 93% would hint that the latter group lies.
(Or are unable to admit being wrong/don't know what Trump does etc)
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