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

Thursday, June 8, 2017

bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:44PM -0400


>Not bitter but slightly amused.
>In which regard has Williams blown past Graf? Number of slams?
>Well, that department wasn't important
 
it sure was important to you when federer got to 15.
 
bob
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jun 08 03:13PM -0700

Op woensdag 7 juni 2017 02:16:42 UTC+2 schreef bob:
 
> why these 3 men would ever give megyn kelly the time of day is beyond
> me.
 
> bob
 
Maybe in exchange for some time at night?
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:43PM -0400

On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 15:13:12 -0700 (PDT), kaennorsing
>> me.
 
>> bob
 
>Maybe in exchange for some time at night?
 
like i said, why these 3 men would ever give megyn kelly the time of
day is beyond me.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:39PM -0400

On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 21:13:01 -0700 (PDT), Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>
wrote:
 
>> > and if he get a zoned stan, will be 50/50 IMO.
 
>> LOL.
 
>+1
 
nah.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:36PM -0400

On Wed, 7 Jun 2017 21:10:31 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
>> > But yeah, stranger things have happened.
 
>> As I said, I hope Stan wins that match.
 
>Yeah, Stan isn't a mope like Murray. The head-pointing thing gets tiresome,
 
you kidding? i'm tuning in just to watch that head pointing! gives me
endless joy, seriously.
 
> but he's Polish so must cut him some slack.
 
bob
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 08 03:22PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 4:04:20 PM UTC-4, undecided wrote:
> > > in all sports too.
 
> > Thiem played well against a Djokovic who was a shadow of his former self and who gave up and tanked the third set. Nadal won't give Thiem that luxury. Betfair is correct. Nadal is the overwhelming favorite vs Thiem in the SF. for Thiem to win he has to ball bash to perfection and do it long enough to take three sets off Nadal on Chatrier. That's a big feat.
 
> 1st Set of Thiem vs Djoker was extremely close. I don't think Djoker played badly so I give Thiem a lot of credit, he played at a very high level.
 
I don't know what match you were watching if you can say that Djokovic didn't play badly. He was terrible. What happened to his incredible backhand? He was making bh error after bh error. He clearly tanked after losing the first set. Every commentator on The Tennis Channel agreed with that. It's a win for Thiem and that's all he should care about but saying Djokovic played well is silly.
grif <griffin_230@hotmail.com>: Jun 08 11:34PM +0100

On 08/06/2017 23:22, Court_1 wrote:
 
>>> Thiem played well against a Djokovic who was a shadow of his former self and who gave up and tanked the third set. Nadal won't give Thiem that luxury. Betfair is correct. Nadal is the overwhelming favorite vs Thiem in the SF. for Thiem to win he has to ball bash to perfection and do it long enough to take three sets off Nadal on Chatrier. That's a big feat.
 
>> 1st Set of Thiem vs Djoker was extremely close. I don't think Djoker played badly so I give Thiem a lot of credit, he played at a very high level.
 
> I don't know what match you were watching if you can say that Djokovic didn't play badly. He was terrible. What happened to his incredible backhand? He was making bh error after bh error. He clearly tanked after losing the first set. Every commentator on The Tennis Channel agreed with that. It's a win for Thiem and that's all he should care about but saying Djokovic played well is silly.
 
Wilander:
"It will be interesting, he obviously has to solve a lot of things Novak. Clearly now he's as far away from his best that we've seen in seven or eight years."
http://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/814135/Novak-Djokovic-French-Open-loss-Dominic-Thiem-Mats-Wilander
 
Come on Clayray!
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 08 03:38PM -0700


> > Rafa's 9 FO is next to this.
 
> Different types of achievement...Graf wins best year hands down. Stats of career accumulation are different and not really comparable.
 
> Though if you could only have one and nothing else, what would you take? 4 slams and the best year, or 9 slams and clay goathood?
 
 
If two players had the same number of slams (say 18) but one has a Golden Grand Slam and all slam wins distributed quite evenly among the four venues while the other one has 9 FOs and only 3 wins at AO, Wim, USO?
I think the answer would be easy.
 
Max
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 08 03:55PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 6:34:38 PM UTC-4, grif wrote:
 
> "It will be interesting, he obviously has to solve a lot of things Novak. Clearly now he's as far away from his best that we've seen in seven or eight years."
> http://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/814135/Novak-Djokovic-French-Open-loss-Dominic-Thiem-Mats-Wilander
 
> Come on Clayray!
 
Maybe Djokovic doesn't like tennis as much and is sick of the grind and I can't say I would blame him for that. $100 million in prize money and ATG status would be enough for most. In fact, Federer and Nadal are the exceptions in terms of players who seem to live and breathe the sport. Most players get sick of the travelling, going to the same tournaments in the same cities year after year, etc.
 
Borg, Sampras, McEnroe, Courier, Agassi, Wilander, Edberg all got sick of the grind after a while and at a much younger age than Djokovic currently is. Also, Djokovic seems to have a lot of outside interests. Who knows what Djokovic will do. The problem for him now will be that finally there are some younger players who can challenge him (unlike in 2014-2016.)
 
As for Murray, dream on! As long as Federer and Nadal are in good form, Murray won't get his paws on slams. God help us all if it's a Murray-Nadal final on Sunday. How many games will Murray win? :)
undecided <costasz@gmail.com>: Jun 08 04:05PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 6:22:42 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > Thiem played well against a Djokovic who was a shadow of his former self and who gave up and tanked the third set. Nadal won't give Thiem that luxury. Betfair is correct. Nadal is the overwhelming favorite vs Thiem in the SF. for Thiem to win he has to ball bash to perfection and do it long enough to take three sets off Nadal on Chatrier. That's a big feat.
 
> > 1st Set of Thiem vs Djoker was extremely close. I don't think Djoker played badly so I give Thiem a lot of credit, he played at a very high level.
 
> I don't know what match you were watching if you can say that Djokovic didn't play badly. He was terrible. What happened to his incredible backhand? He was making bh error after bh error. He clearly tanked after losing the first set. Every commentator on The Tennis Channel agreed with that. It's a win for Thiem and that's all he should care about but saying Djokovic played well is silly.
 
Obviously he dropped off after the 1st set but I saw him battling hard in the 1st.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 08 04:08PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 7:05:16 PM UTC-4, undecided wrote:
 
> > > 1st Set of Thiem vs Djoker was extremely close. I don't think Djoker played badly so I give Thiem a lot of credit, he played at a very high level.
 
> > I don't know what match you were watching if you can say that Djokovic didn't play badly. He was terrible. What happened to his incredible backhand? He was making bh error after bh error. He clearly tanked after losing the first set. Every commentator on The Tennis Channel agreed with that. It's a win for Thiem and that's all he should care about but saying Djokovic played well is silly.
 
> Obviously he dropped off after the 1st set but I saw him battling hard in the 1st.
 
Yes, he battled in the first and then once he lost it, he was done. He admitted such in his press conference, i.e. that the match was decided in the first set. What a bad place he's in that he would tank in a slam.
grif <griffin_230@hotmail.com>: Jun 09 12:21AM +0100

On 08/06/2017 23:55, Court_1 wrote:
 
> Maybe Djokovic doesn't like tennis as much and is sick of the grind and I can't say I would blame him for that. $100 million in prize money and ATG status would be enough for most. In fact, Federer and Nadal are the exceptions in terms of players who seem to live and breathe the sport. Most players get sick of the travelling, going to the same tournaments in the same cities year after year, etc.
 
> Borg, Sampras, McEnroe, Courier, Agassi, Wilander, Edberg all got sick of the grind after a while and at a much younger age than Djokovic currently is. Also, Djokovic seems to have a lot of outside interests. Who knows what Djokovic will do. The problem for him now will be that finally there are some younger players who can challenge him (unlike in 2014-2016.)
 
> As for Murray, dream on! As long as Federer and Nadal are in good form, Murray won't get his paws on slams. God help us all if it's a Murray-Nadal final on Sunday. How many games will Murray win? :)
 
NextGen vs Big 4. Sounds like a war is brewing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzi8xhFGixs
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:32PM -0400

>must play his absolute best - no less will be enough. As it should be
>for possible crowning to own the greatest record in tennis ever, perhaps
>in all sports too.
 
i give rafa about 55% over thiem, at most. and 50% should he get a
zoned wawrinka. the stan who beat beat djok will also beat rafa.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:30PM -0400

On Thu, 08 Jun 2017 13:11:55 +0300, Pelle Svanslös <pelle@svans.los>
wrote:
 
>61% of Americans think he fired Comey for protecting himself.
>http://time.com/4810257/donald-trump-james-comey-firing-poll/
>Damning. "Bye Bye Donald!"
 
makes no difference why. bye bye poor pelle!
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:24PM -0400

On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 11:01:35 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
 
>> Max
 
>It's pretty much the frying pan or the fire. But if the Republicans are smart, they'll cut themselves loose from Trump now instead of binding their own fortunes to him. Even if he survives this current thing, he'll be all the more damaged and vulnerable when the next scandal comes along. And since he has almost no foresight or self-control, it inevitably will, and soon.
 
>If Pence takes over, it's still a Republican administration for the next 3.5 years, and he'd be far more focused and competent in advancing his agenda. Not a good thing from my perspective, but at least Pence is as close to sane as a Christian far-right politician can be. Trump OTOH is just a loose cannon pointed in a different direction every day. The chaos he's brought hasn't been the crucible I hoped it might be.
 
i believe half of it is trump. and half of it is the hatred the
opposition has for him, including biased media, to the pt he's been
and will be nitpicked to death.
 
remember, he's not a lifetime polished and practiced politician
carefully measuring every word and action to the nth degree. so if
you're at attacking hyena, he definitely leaves some openings. but why
is the country full of attacking hyenas? we frankly aren't acting like
1 nation.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:25PM -0400


>On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 8:06:50 PM UTC+2, The Iceberg wrote:
>> Why is it the end for Trump? What's going to happen?
 
>Hopefully the Deep State and the neocon elites will join forces and push him out. He was useful to prevent all those nasty DemocRat women, yes. But now he isn't useful anymore but harming the GOP brand.
 
the "gop brand"? which brand is that? the one of romney? or mccain? or
bush II?
 
bob
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 08 02:47PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 11:26:04 PM UTC+2, Guypers wrote:
 
> > Max
 
> Moron, know who J Turley is??
 
 
 
And why exactly would I care, dickhead?
 
 
Max
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jun 08 04:05PM -0700


> And why exactly would I care, dickhead?
 
> Max
 
You just quoted him, you nazi piece of cocksukking shit!!
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:18PM -0400

On Thu, 8 Jun 2017 12:14:12 -0700 (PDT), Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>
wrote:
 
>On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 12:04:04 PM UTC-7, Carey wrote:
>> https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/06/07/comey-testimony-no-obstruction-no-impeachment-jonathan-turley-column/102603050/
>I forgot to mark this 'OT'. Apologies.
 
"We do not indict or impeach people for being boorish or clueless ..."
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jun 08 07:13PM -0400


>UK voters seem to have buyer's remorse.
 
voters? or press?
 
> Now better stay in the EU and prevent economic decline?
>Max
 
bob
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 08 03:43PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 2:30:03 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
 
 
> The fact someone doesn't like, or doesn't enjoy watching certain
> player, doesn't mean he should make a fool out of himself with
> braindead analyses like you constantly do.
 
Listen you despicable freak, normally I don't read any of your posts and if I do read them I quickly bleach my eyes and forget them but once in a while I will read a post of yours and feel the need to answer you.
 
Murray is not an ATG so forget about him in the comparison. Djokovic is 12-9 in slam finals, Federer is 18-10 and Nadal is 14-7. Clearly, Djokovic is behind those two in that category and has lost way too many slam finals in his prime that he should have won. He is the closest thing to Lendl there is out of the Big Three in this generation both in slam final stats and in his lack of popularity.
 
Now I'll resume my usual occurrence of ignoring your posts.
undecided <costasz@gmail.com>: Jun 08 04:11PM -0700


> Tilden won his first slam at 27, last at 37.
> Rosewall won his first at 18, last at 36.
 
> Age is no excuse.
 
Let's not write Djoker off yet. Fed came back from a long slump and Rafa has as well. If Djoker is a true champ (12 slams says so) then we should expect a resurgence at some point.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 08 03:19PM -0700

It was never in doubt that Halep would beat Pliskova on clay. Pliskova is super annoying to watch. She can hit around six good shots in a row and then she hits the next shot about a foot out.
 
Now that I watched a bit of Ostapenko for the first time, I think she may hit Halep off the court in the final.
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Jun 08 03:47PM -0700

Court1 you are such a star fucker it's not even funny
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 08 04:05PM -0700

On Thursday, June 8, 2017 at 6:47:59 PM UTC-4, soccerfan777 wrote:
> Court1 you are such a star fucker it's not even funny
 
Which player am I star fucking? I'm simply telling the truth that Pliskova had no chance vs Halep on clay and that Pliskova is annoying to watch because in every match that I've ever watched her in, she hits about 6 incredible shots and then that's it, the next shot is an error.
 
Ostapenko I think may have a greater upside than Pliskova. Somebody on here posted that Ostapenko reminds him of Seles and that's a pretty good comparison.
 
I fear that Ostapenko may hit Halep off the court in the final. I hope I'm wrong and that she will be able to absorb Ostapenko's power because this is Halep's best shot at a FO title.
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