Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 11 topics

Sunday, May 14, 2017

bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 14 08:45PM -0400

On Sun, 14 May 2017 13:57:59 -0700 (PDT), RaspingDrive
 
>> don't get pissy cause i was right about 2009-2016. :-)
 
>> bob
 
>Where did you get that ('pissy' part) from?
 
from my keyboard.
 
> Also, you are right about 2009-2016, NOT.
 
i called out the facts, want me to restate them? 3 CGS achieved in 7
yrs. unless you're getting down to months, days, hours, minutes now.
in which case, um, have fun!
 
djok won CGS in 2016.
rfa won CGS in 2010.
fed won CGS in 2009.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 14 08:46PM -0400

On Sun, 14 May 2017 14:02:36 -0700 (PDT), RaspingDrive
 
>> i just said "1 more is very close." and you're going to rant about
>> grammar? how bout a 5 word sentence you misinterpreted?
 
>The recent brouhaha over grammar has you misinterpret me again. I am saying the two may *appear* close but let us wait until it is completed. As Mikko said wasn't Edberg also 'close'? (Thanks, Mikko!). We have to see when the next CGS is completed and then we can revisit this topic.
 
the 1 guys close (stan) was just thrown in for icing. we have already
3 doing it in a 7yr stretch, as i pointed out.

 
>> i would never square a fraction without a calculator, why would i?
 
>> don't get pissy cause i was right about 2009-2016. :-)
 
>> bob
 
bob
calimero377@gmx.de: May 14 02:46PM -0700

> > sure). you need to realize this is a mini war here and nobody is
> > reputable in the media atm.
 
> They are all biased, that's why they all need to be filtered by the reader. But I think that without a doubt Breitbart has more blatant bias. It's a false equivalency to say otherwise.
 
Breitbart is so blantantly biased that they are no real danger. NYT and WaPo are more sophisticated - making many people believe they have no partisan agenda. Exactly that is rhe real threat.
 
Max
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 14 08:43PM -0400

>> > reputable in the media atm.
 
>> They are all biased, that's why they all need to be filtered by the reader. But I think that without a doubt Breitbart has more blatant bias. It's a false equivalency to say otherwise.
 
>Breitbart is so blantantly biased that they are no real danger. NYT and WaPo are more sophisticated - making many people believe they have no partisan agenda. Exactly that is rhe real threat.
 
no partisan agenda? only a biased person himself (agreeing with WaPo,
NYT agenda) would think so.
 
they're just as biased, just more sophisticated in the presentation,
and hence fool more people more easily.
 
bob
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 14 04:16PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 2:09:03 PM UTC-7, Federer Fanatic wrote:
 
> |>How do you know what Whisper's first language is or how many languages he speaks?
 
> | i know english is his 2nd.
 
> When did you last visit him? He's Croatian isn't he?
 
Really? That's pretty funny.
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 14 08:39PM -0400

On Sun, 14 May 2017 16:08:57 -0500, Federer Fanatic
>| i know english is his 2nd.
>|
 
>When did you last visit him? He's Croatian isn't he?
 
i've never been to australia, never met whisper. the only RSTer i ever
met in person was amy cottrell. yrs ago wendy grossman emailed me 1
time to meet at the miami tournament but she sent it to an old email
and i saw it months later. and i'm going to buy max a beer at a
fascist rally in munich this summer.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 14 08:36PM -0400

On Sun, 14 May 2017 13:32:58 -0700 (PDT), Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
 
>> he looks pretty good on clay right now. we'll judge after FO.
 
>> bob
 
>Agreed, looks like Rafa may/will get his 15/10 at the FO! But please God, let Fed, Novak or even Andy win the big W!!!
 
rafa won't be winning wimbledon, rest assured. might be fed, might be
someone else, but won't be rafa.
 
bob
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: May 14 05:26PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 3:32:58 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
> >> Betfair gives Thiem 15% chance for upset.
 
> > I don't think Thiem seems good enough on clay to beat Nadal in his current form.
 
> He sure wasn't far off.
 
How was he not far off? He lost in straights.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: May 14 05:24PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 3:50:59 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
> else but Nadal and each other. (+Goffin lost to Kachanov at Barcelona).
 
> Looks like they're currently playing better than Murray and Djokovic,
> only behind Nadal. I sense a future three way clay rivalry here.
 
How would it be a three way rivalry between Nadal, Thiem and Goffin if Thiem and Goffin can't ever beat Nadal and Nadal has defeated them all in straights in every match at the clay tune-ups? *rolls eyes*
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: May 14 05:22PM -0700

Why would he skip Rome? He has the chance to win all five clay events for the first time in his career and he's been winning the majority of his matches in straights.
Scott <scottl44@yahoo.com>: May 14 04:04PM -0700

Is it:
 
2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS
 
2008 W final, Fed loses to Rafa in five (in fading light)
 
2009 W final, Fed beats Roddick in five, the last set goes 16-14.
 
2012 W final, he beats Murray for Wimbledon #7
 
2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
 
****
 
Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
TennisGuy <TGuy@techsavvy.com>: May 14 07:20PM -0400

On 5/14/2017 7:04 PM, Scott wrote:
 
> 2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
 
> ****
 
> Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
 
Tough call.
But I would narrow the list down to:
 
> 2009, FO final, Fed wins the NCYGS
> 2001 W 4th round Fed upsets Pete in five thrilling, hard-fought sets.
 
Losing to someone [Rafa in five (in fading light)] is not important for
your legacy! Was it an important match? Yes.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 15 01:12AM +0200


> ****
 
> Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
 
AO 2009 and 2017 are also very important.
 
 
Also, he's been literally matching peak Djokovic in 2015, reaching
Wimbledon and USO finals without losing a set and without losing
a serve.
 
A potential win in either of those matches there would have huge
consequences. E.g. extra wim/uso for him and no ncygs for Novak.

 
No boat title for Djokovic, and he gets wim/uso open era record.
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Scott <scottl44@yahoo.com>: May 14 04:49PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 7:30:03 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > Which match is most important for Fed's legacy?
 
> AO 2009 and 2017 are also very important.
 
Great reply. I agree this year's AO was a huge legacy boost. It gives Fed #18 and he defeated Rafa in the fifth set after being down 3-1.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 14 02:58PM -0700

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 6:01:02 AM UTC+10, *skriptis wrote:
> his parents were a bit loud, but can you even comprehend the
> audacity Federer had to publicly humiliate his opponent's
> parents? It's a gamesmanship.
 
If you don't know what exactly happened that time in Monte Carlo then how do you Federer's reaction to what Djoker's parents behavior during the match wasn't appropriate.
 
> b) saying it to umpire
 
> I don't know if it's cultural thing, or he's a true asshole, but
> it's something that can't be tolerated in our culture.
 
Calling someone an asshole when you don't know what really happened, is that part of your culture ?
 
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 14 11:54PM +0200


> You're obviously biased and a clear fan of Djokovic. I fail to see why
> you feel the need to extend this to his parents. It's about the tennis
> after all?
 
 
One of the biggest misconceptions in rst is that I'm a Djokovic fan.
 
Overall, and judging by his character Rafa is much more my kind of
guy in this era. As was Sampras before him.
 
However like Nadal, Djokovic too showed his best is better than
Federer's best, and he achieved some boat stuff surpassing even
Nadal so I appreciate him a lot.
 
 
Regarding incident in Monte Carlo it was Federer who was an
asshole. No bias there.
 
You don't try to intimidate your opponent by attacking his parents
in the middle of the match.
 
Whole stadiums cheer all the time but he had/has trouble with two
middle aged persons? Give me a break.
 
Like I said, he could have told Novak, if they were really
bothering him and Novak would have told them whatever it was
needed.
 
The way he approached it was classless and whole thing was nothing
more than an assault on his opponent and gamesmanship during an
important match.
 
 
It's kinda fake news narrative. "Oh Djokovic's parents misbehaved
so Federer had to put them in check." Sneaky.
 
Well, we haven't seen anything. The only one we know for sure was
an asshole, was Federer.
 
Whatever, it's one of the things that people would never forget
about him, at least here. He'd always be considered arrogant
classless asshole because of that incident.
 
 
E.g. you have that weird person court1 saying Djokovic's parents
are trailer trash. Proofs? Links?
 
Saying something like that doesn't make it true, doesn't it?
 
Why not say Federer is trash for being first player ever to attack
his opponent's box trying to influence the course of a
match?
 
 
 
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 14 03:10PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 2:01:02 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> southeastern Europe but totally different from eastern Europe.
 
> I don't find it being eastern European is anything shameful, you
> obviously do, so it's your shame.
 
(b) "Umpire, could you please teach my opponent's relatives the manners they never learned in Southeast Europe and should have known before attending their first tennis match?"
 
**fixed!**
 
> him.
 
> So yes, tell Novak, first, he would have told them to be more quiet.
 
> Or you think he wouldn't have told them?
 
It might have worked had Novak and Roger been friends, but they weren't. No, realistically I doubt very much if Djoke would have responded by quieting his hooligan family down.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 15 12:52AM +0200


>> So yes, tell Novak, first, he would have told them to be more quiet.
 
>> Or you think he wouldn't have told them?
 
> It might have worked had Novak and Roger been friends, but they weren't. No, realistically I doubt very much if Djoke would have responded by quieting his hooligan family down.
 
 
Yup, cultural differences. Does it matter if they're friends or
not and he's asked something that is generally a reasonable
request?
 
By implying Djokovic wouldn't have told his parents to tone it
down you make him a savage of sort. Very rude of you.

 
 
I can't even consider your point of view as I've seen no proof or
evidence, whatever word fits better, of his parents actually
doing something wrong or vocal.
 
Otoh we've seen Federer's box showing their manners in London.
That I've seen and heard.
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: May 14 04:29PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 4:01:02 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> doing something wrong or vocal.
 
> Otoh we've seen Federer's box showing their manners in London.
> That I've seen and heard.
 
Look at it this way...imagine neighbors that had obnoxious music cranked up so loud it's impossible to ignore. From my point of view, it's reasonable to go over and ask them to turn it down. And if I do so politely, there's no good reason for them not to respond respectfully to a neighbor's request.
 
But a lot of people don't think this way at all. A surprising number of them would think the request is way out of line and encroaching on their "right" to play the obnoxious music. Instead of being considerate, they respond with defiance, either ignoring the request or turning the music up even louder to show that nobody is going to "tell them what to do." Such people can't be fixed because their worldview is so self-centered and childish.
 
The Djokovic clan strikes me as these kind of people--raucous dirtbags that think admission to the match entitles them to behave however they please. Had Federer ask Djoke to have a word with them, he probably would have just gotten pissed off and the situation might have escalated. I expect that Roger contained himself for a long time before he snapped and flatly told the family to shut up as a last resort. Sadly, it's the only language these types understand.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 15 01:02AM +0200

>> audacity Federer had to publicly humiliate his opponent's
>> parents? It's a gamesmanship.
 
> If you don't know what exactly happened that time in Monte Carlo then how do you Federer's reaction to what Djoker's parents behavior during the match wasn't appropriate.
 
 
We know what "supposedly" happened. Djokovic's parents were
allegedly too loud. We know it only because Federer says so. Are
we to trust him?
 
Isn't there an umpire who's in charge of the match and the crowd?
If the umpire hasn't heard and seen anything it mustn't have been
that bad, right?
 
Who the fuck is Federer as a player to do empire's job? But even
if true that Novak's parents were overly vocal the course of
action he took is wrong and classless. They were not some usual
no name fans.
 
It's an outright attempt to humiliate and destabilize your
opponent by going after his parents. It's a form of mind game.

 
The classy way would be to tell Novak to tell them, and the cold
professionalism would be to complain to the umpire.

 
He did neither.
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
calimero377@gmx.de: May 14 02:41PM -0700

On Sunday, May 14, 2017 at 11:30:03 PM UTC+2, *skriptis wrote:
 
> > Max
 
> Links?
 
I don't think you are dumb enough to post that on YouTube.
 
 
Max
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 15 12:43AM +0200


>> Links?
 
> I don't think you are dumb enough to post that on YouTube.
 
 
 
Soviet flag in modern Russia is remembered only as a victory
banner that was raised over Reichstag in 1945.
 
It's a historical flag, similar to US flag with 13 stars, used
only on special occasions and memorials.
 
You're silly troll.
 
 
 
Modern Russia made synthesis of its history. Uses:
 
1. Imperial monarchical double headed eagle as a coat of arms
2. Bourgeoisie tricolor flag as national flag
3. Ex Soviet anthem tune with new lyrics
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
calimero377@gmx.de: May 14 04:24PM -0700

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 1:01:02 AM UTC+2, *skriptis wrote:
 
> 1. Imperial monarchical double headed eagle as a coat of arms
> 2. Bourgeoisie tricolor flag as national flag
> 3. Ex Soviet anthem tune with new lyrics
 
"Modern Russia" is something like "intelligent Trump" or "honest Hillary" ....
 
Max
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): May 14 09:46PM

At the OBOR summit, Xi kept Putin waiting; so Volodya killed time by
playing Xi's horribly out-of-tune piano
 
https://qz.com/983358/vladimir-putins-piano-playing-stole-the-show-at-chinas-xi-jinpings-signature-foreign-policy-event/
 
OBOR = One Belt One Road
 
Vladimir Putin is a man of many talents. The Russian president
recently showcased his skills on the ice in an annual exhibition for
his amateur hockey league. This weekend, he played piano while waiting
for a meeting with Chinese president Xi Jinping.
 
But back to the piano. The New York Times reported that Putin "sat
down at a grand piano and played two tunes" while waiting for Xi at a
state guesthouse. The songs were "Evening Song" by Vasily
Solovyov-Sedoi and "Moscow Windows" by Tikhon Khrennikov. They are
both typically performed with lyrics, but Putin played them solo. The
Times added that Chinese officials were not pleased to see Putin steal
the show.
 
"The official Chinese news media pointedly made little mention of the
piano performance", it noted.
 
Putin has previously been spotted playing the piano at a theatre in
Moscow in 2011, and at a charity fundraiser in 2010. Piano is a softer
skill for the Russian leader, whose other stunts and talents include
diving in the Black Sea, hunting tigers, and generally doing things
shirtless.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 15 12:50AM +0300

15.5.2017, 0:46, lo yeeOn kirjoitti:
> skill for the Russian leader, whose other stunts and talents include
> diving in the Black Sea, hunting tigers, and generally doing things
> shirtless.
 
Did he also invent hamburger?
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