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

Saturday, May 13, 2017

bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:20AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 21:09:25 -0700 (PDT), Jason White
>#15 on the slam count, pass Sampras. Incredible 10th French. Gets back to a deficit of three on all-time slam record.
 
>Madrid semi match will be very interesting, a nice preview. Imagine if they play French final this year. Just think if Djokovic prevents Nadal history @ French, then a few weeks later once again prevents Federer history @ Wimbledon!
 
>The conversations and debates would have different tone suddenly!
 
djokovic has a ways to go before either of those will happen. his game
isn't where it needs to be, not close. you're referring to djok of
last year or prior.
 
bob
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: May 13 04:53AM -0700

Op zaterdag 13 mei 2017 06:09:27 UTC+2 schreef Jason White:
> #15 on the slam count, pass Sampras. Incredible 10th French. Gets back to a deficit of three on all-time slam record.
 
> Madrid semi match will be very interesting, a nice preview. Imagine if they play French final this year. Just think if Djokovic prevents Nadal history @ French, then a few weeks later once again prevents Federer history @ Wimbledon!
 
> The conversations and debates would have different tone suddenly!
 
Highly unlikely Djoker stops both Fed and Nadal at this point. If he does he will immediately overtake Rafa and Sampras to #2 open era.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 13 01:07PM +0200

> Win or narrow defeat and you think the old Djokovic is on the way back
 
> easy win for Nadal and Joker's got lot of work to do to win slams again
 
No "easy win for Djokovic"?
:)
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
"rec.sport.tennis" <rec.sport.tennis@gmail.com>: May 13 11:36AM

On Sat, 13 May 2017 13:07:53 +0200, *skriptis wrote:
 
 
>> easy win for Nadal and Joker's got lot of work to do to win slams again
 
> No "easy win for Djokovic"?
> :)
 
Included under "win"
 
Hope that helps
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:43AM -0400

On Sat, 13 May 2017 13:07:53 +0200 (CEST), *skriptis
 
>> easy win for Nadal and Joker's got lot of work to do to win slams again
 
>No "easy win for Djokovic"?
>:)
 
unless djok has done a complete rebound in the past few weeks that i
missed his form is really bad and he likely won't make it to the SF.
 
bob
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: May 13 04:50AM -0700

Op zaterdag 13 mei 2017 13:43:56 UTC+2 schreef bob:
 
> unless djok has done a complete rebound in the past few weeks that i
> missed his form is really bad and he likely won't make it to the SF.
 
> bob
 
You definitely missed something as he already is in the SF starting in an hour.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 13 01:23PM +0300

13.5.2017, 8:12, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 10:55:26 PM UTC-4, RaspingDrive wrote:
 
>> 'out of sorts' Djok should pose no problem for a rampaging Nadal.
 
> Those are my thoughts.
 
Djoko is a bad matchup and his demise is exaggerated I feel. So he could
pose a problem in BO3 high altitude.
 
But yes Rafa is in better form and I also like his recent out-wide serve
on deuce court which should be very effective against Djokovic. Rafa is
the favourite but not a foregone conclusion I think... Rafa should win
IF he's playing as well and being as mentally strong as he has recently
been.
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:42AM -0400


>> Those are my thoughts.
 
>Djoko is a bad matchup and his demise is exaggerated I feel. So he could
>pose a problem in BO3 high altitude.
 
bad matchup, yes.
exaggerated demise, no.
djok's level has been awful this past 10 months.
like nadal previous 2 yrs.
 
>the favourite but not a foregone conclusion I think... Rafa should win
>IF he's playing as well and being as mentally strong as he has recently
>been.
 
rafa should win this tournament, but lots of good players and i don't
think he'll steamroll given his current form. the clay results to date
mean zilch to me. the IW and miami fed matches showed me what he's
about right now.
 
bob
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: May 13 03:50AM -0700

Op zaterdag 13 mei 2017 00:53:51 UTC+2 schreef bob:
 
> nah, it's the last 15. CGS and slam totals together, there's a clear
> line past 12 years in fact.
 
> bob
 
No, there is not. CGS in open era;
1969
1999 (30 year gap)
2009 (10 year gap)
2010 (1 year gap)
2016 (6 year gap)
 
The 30 year gap is what stands out. Indicating a change started in the 90's. Agassi was the first to win all 4 slams. In terms of racking up slams it started with Sampras (as everyone knows). He (Sampras) was the first to win 14+ slams. So these trends started in the 90's... sorry!
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:34AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 19:33:59 -0700 (PDT), Scott <scottl44@yahoo.com>
wrote:
 
>> crushed by Agassi at 2001 USO. Agassi/Henman were Sampras bunnies.
>> That proves peak Sampras would overwhelm Federer.
 
>I promised myself to not respond to your Tier Four commentary but it becomes impossible to ignore.
 
i manage to ignore john liang. you must be weak minded to set your
mind out to ignore whisp and can't follow through! either that, or
whisp is just a lot better than john liang....
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:39AM -0400

On Sat, 13 May 2017 03:50:04 -0700 (PDT), kaennorsing
>2010 (1 year gap)
>2016 (6 year gap)
 
>The 30 year gap is what stands out. Indicating a change started in the 90's. Agassi was the first to win all 4 slams. In terms of racking up slams it started with Sampras (as everyone knows). He (Sampras) was the first to win 14+ slams. So these trends started in the 90's... sorry!
 
agassi's CGS and sampras' venture to "slam counting" both happened
about 1999. last yr of the decade.
 
we've had 3 guys do it (and 1 more is very close) in a 7 year stretch.
we had 1 guy do it in a 40 year stretch before. and we've had 3 guys
who peaked from 05-2012, another 7 year stretch, make 18, 14, 12
slams. unprecedented stuff.
 
something "fishy" in the air. :-)
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:40AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 19:11:43 -0700 (PDT), RaspingDrive
 
>> worried already, eh?
 
>> bob
 
>Nope. Let's visit it when it happens.
 
 
you're already in damage control mode.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:31AM -0400

On Sat, 13 May 2017 10:48:25 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pelle@svans.los>
wrote:
 
>Trump proposed a 5.8B cut. 3 more years of the that, and you would not
>have a NIH. Kimmel might be tacky, but is 100% right: Whoever pulls
>Trump's strings is the real menace.
 
you still don't get the pt: kimmel railed against trump for proposing
a cut, yet obama's 2 terms saw (by your calculations) a 17% decline
and nobody said anything about "killing our children." biased whiny
sore losers. shame on him/them.
 
>So where did you pick the 40% up from?
 
breitbart.
 
bob
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 13 04:10AM -0700

On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 7:26:12 PM UTC+10, The Iceberg wrote:
 
> > W: Rafa Nadal
 
> > By Troll Tennis.
 
> Murray's draw is fairly easy after Fabio, but that won't matter, it's down to him and whether he can be bothered playing.
 
Why don't you feed him one of your special burgers ...
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 13 01:35PM +0300

13.5.2017, 10:13, Bharath Purohit kirjoitti:
> ROME MASTERS 2017 draw analysis
 
Thanks
 
 
> [1] Andy Murray
 
> 1R - Bye
> 2R - Fabio Fognini
 
Fogs has had pretty unlucky draws this clay season.
 
> SF - Stan Wawrinka/David Goffin
> F - Rafa Nadal/Novak Djokovic
 
> Verdict: Tough, tough draw. Murray has been in bad form this year and this draw is not kind on his struggles. Fognini is one of the hardest players to draw in your first match at a clay tournament. Sascha Zverev right after is even harder. Then a quarterfinal which should not be too hard. A semi against an in-form Goffin or a possibly-resurgent Wawrinka will be difficult for Andy in his present condition, and if he makes it all the way to the final, it will most likely be either Nadal or Djokovic in his way.
 
Still, Rafa & Djok are on other side of the draw.
 
> SF - Rafa Nadal
> F - Andy Murray/David Goffin
 
> Verdict: Moderate draw. Novak should have no problems in the second round, but the third round will feature players that have either beaten him already this year or have come very close to beating him. While Kyrgios is not the biggest threat on clay, Simon can be devastating on the surface, and had a deciding set lead against Novak in their Monte Carlo meeting last month. The quarter could be yet another walkover from Nishikori, or perhaps del Potro, who has also given Djokovic problems recently. The semi could be a rematch against Rafa, and if he gets through, a final against Goffin, Wawrinka or Andy is plausible.
 
Simon is expected to play well but not great, as normal. Meanwhile
Kyrgios was slaughtered by Rafa and Nishikori is injured as is probably
Delpo. Should be pretty easy until semis.
 
> SF - Novak Djokovic
> F - David Goffin/Andy Murray
 
> Verdict: Easy draw. This is not the easiest draw in the world, but in Rafa's current form, it looks like it won't be much trouble. Rafa has a straightforward route to the quarters. Neither Seppi nor Schwartzman are truly capable of beating him on clay, even if they can trouble him. Thiem in the quarters could be a challenge, with Thiem having beaten Rafa on clay before. However, Rafa crushed him in their most recent meeting, the Barcelona final from last month. A semi against Novak beckons, and if Rafa can get through that, the final doesn't seem too hard, against guys he is very comfortable playing on clay.
 
Easy early draw but QF+ is tough. Thiem is apparently in excellent form.
 
> SF - Andy Murray
> F - Rafa Nadal/Novak Djokovic
 
> Verdict: Hard draw. Poor Stan's bad luck continues with a miserable draw. First up is Paire, who just beat him in Madrid. Right after is Monte Carlo finalist Ramos-Vinolas, who is having a great run this clay season. If he gets through them he has to face Goffin, another guy in great form. After all those struggles, a semi against the World No. 1 and a final against either the King of Clay or the World No. 2... poor, poor Stan.
 
Not a hard draw at all imo. He's on other side of the Nad/Djok and the
only potential problem should be Goffin... but he doesn't necessarily
play every match as well as he did yesterday.
 
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:18AM -0400

On Sat, 13 May 2017 00:13:18 -0700 (PDT), Bharath Purohit
>F - Rafa Nadal/Novak Djokovic
 
>Verdict: Tough, tough draw. Murray has been in bad form this year and this draw is not kind on his struggles. Fognini is one of the hardest players to draw in your first match at a clay tournament. Sascha Zverev right after is even harder. Then a quarterfinal which should not be too hard. A semi against an in-form Goffin or a possibly-resurgent Wawrinka will be difficult for Andy in his present condition, and if he makes it all the way to the final, it will most likely be either Nadal or Djokovic in his way.
 
>[2] Novak Djokovic
 
don't think djokovic will make it to nadal. could lose in 3R or QF.
 
 
>QF - Kei Nishikori/Juan Martin del Potro
>SF - Rafa Nadal
>F - Andy Murray/David Goffin
 
 
bob
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 13 01:10PM +0200

> David Goffin v/s Rafa Nadal
 
> W: Rafa Nadal
 
> By Troll Tennis.
 
Wish we had more trolls like you.
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 13 04:13AM -0700

On Friday, May 12, 2017 at 11:48:40 AM UTC+10, RaspingDrive wrote:
> > dumbo.
 
> > bob
 
> You may want to look up his recent comment about FO, stupid. The goal is to win.
 
Of course, Federer enters a tournament to win, he certainly wasn't Sampras who his mind reader like bob often said Sampras could be half assed any time when he did not win the match.
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:29AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 19:51:49 -0700 (PDT), RaspingDrive
 
>> ahahahha. sure.
 
>> bob
 
>Plays two tune-ups before W 2017. Did not play FO in 2016, yet reached semis of W 2015 based on tune-ups prep.
 
W 2017 only has 2 tune ups. :-)
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:28AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 19:45:44 -0700 (PDT), RaspingDrive
>> 5th. so it really tells me little of who would win in 1995 conditions.
 
>> bob
 
>Something else tells you that Sampras would win though:
 
yes: IMO sampras' game was best suited to normal fast grass (as was
mcenroe's and becker's). IMO that game, at that level, would beat any
baseliner at that venue. too much inherent advantage. just an opinion
though, just like yours.
 
>i'll take sampras (plus mcenroe or becker) over federer or djokovic or
>nadal majority of the time, i don't even hesitate to think it.
>no proof needed for that opinion."
 
bob
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: May 13 12:57PM +0200


>> So what if Bouchard advocates a lifetime ban for Sharapova? I say that as somebody who actually likes Sharapova. I certainly respect what Sharapova has achieved in the game a lot more than what Bouchard has achieved.
 
>> There are plenty of WTA players complaining about Sharapova and her return to the game, her getting wildcards, etc. but the difference is nobody cares what those women have to say whereas Bouchard because of her looks has a bigger audience. People like the catfight between two attractive women.
 
> like skrip said, nobody minds other players moaning/disagreeing about Sharapova being given wildcards, that's fair enough, but Bouchard turned it into some personal tirade, even lying about other players looking up to her. It obs just feminine rivalry cos she's envious of Sharapova's popularity and success. They're both competing to be hottest on tour!
 
Nailed
it.
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: May 13 01:26PM +0300

13.5.2017, 8:33, Gracchus kirjoitti:
 
>> I may have a peek at it. Although I'm not a big Sarandon fan I do think she's been good in a few things I've seen. Plus, I do like Jessica Lange's work and the story sounds like something I may like.
 
>> Are they equally good in their roles? Sounds like they will be the darlings at the Emmy awards. There are a lot of other good actors in it as well I believe, i.e. Kathy Bates, Stanley Tucci, etc.
 
> Sarandon's big eyes give her a head start. I've heard that when Bette Davis was still alive, she thought Sarandon would be a good choice to play a younger version of her. I was less convinced by Lange initially, but she hit her stride as the series went on and both of them capture the essence of the stars while wisely avoiding flat out imitation. Plus it helps that the writing is so damn good and it's very well-researched. Sometimes I wondered, "Would Davis/Crawford really have done that?" But whenever I checked, usually they did! It's a blast, and yeah, the supporting actors are excellent too--especially Tucci, Judy Davis, and Alfred Molina. If I had known Murphy could make something this good, I would have watched the O.J. Simpson thing you recommended. Even while watching "Feud," I thought it was something you'd appreciate. Make sure to watch at least two eps before deciding how you feel, because a lot of ep 1 is set-up. It's still a very good ep, but the rest IMO are great.
 
Speaking of Sarandon, watched finally 'Rocky Horror Picture Show' where
she's semi-nude lots of the time. Best part of the film.
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:22AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 18:53:02 -0700 (PDT), soccerfan777
 
>Dude bob...chill...she was just joking. She obviously loves both USA and Russia. You will never get Eastern/Oriental sense of humor.
 
nothing to chill over, i never minded sharapova, still don't. if i
knew she intentionally doped, that would change.
 
"oriental sense of humor?" ????
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: May 13 07:24AM -0400

On Fri, 12 May 2017 22:50:12 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
 
>> > I'm a little worried about the clay season with Rafa in form. Trying to brace myself for the possibility of him getting another slam--albeit the grinder one. ;)
 
>> What if Federer steals the show instead at the FO? Can you imagine if that unlikely possibility occurs? But I agree with you that it looks like this clay season will be the Nadal Show. I figured you would stay hidden and off RST until Wimbledon! :)
 
>Well there's still ample time to duck out. ;) My attention is very divided on various things this year, and I usually don't spend much time here during the FO anyway. It's always been my least favorite slam, well before Nadal even entered the scene. Although I'm thrilled with Federer's AO and other recent wins over Nadal, I seriously don't see him taking 3-of-5 from the howler monkey on red clay. Seems like too much to hope for.
 
nadal could lose before playing fed. fed's not the FO favorite,
particularly since he's skipping all clay preps, but his chance is one
of top 4 guys still. if nadal were to drop out early, i think fed
would likely take it.
 
bob
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: May 13 04:09AM -0700

On Saturday, May 13, 2017 at 7:27:03 PM UTC+10, The Iceberg wrote:
> > > With Federer playing a very limited schedule (wisely so for the almost 36 YO body), and Nadal's impressive form so far this year, I think Nadal has a better chance of becoming No.1 again compared to Murray/Djokovic/Federer. It is almost guaranteed that he will have a massive lead in the ATP points race by the end of FO, and he has nothing to defend in Wimbledon. All he needs to do is perform decently (equivalent to what he had done in the early hard court season), and he is almost guaranteed to end the year with #1.
 
> > The French Open is what will make or break for Nadal. Even in some of the years when he won FO in the last few years he did not do well at W and USO.
 
> yeah! you always said he couldn't ever scientifically possibly win the USO!
 
I never said anything in tennis that is remotely related to science. In fact I never used the term scientifically possibly because I don't believe there is a science in winning tennis matches. It is however scientifically proven you are an idiot.
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