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

Thursday, June 15, 2017

Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 14 10:39PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 1:23:32 AM UTC-4, John Liang wrote:
 
> > Truthfully, I doubt the result in a 250 event is indicative of what his result will be at Wimbledon. I get the feeling that Federer probably gifted that match to Haas (who is retiring this year and who was playing in front of his family in Germany.) People shouldn't panic about a 250 result which means zero to Federer at this stage of his career. He probably went to Stuttgart to pick up a nice appearance fee and give the fans there a thrill before he retires.
 
> > That said, I have a strange feeling Nadal may take Wimbledon this year but there's a long way to go for that to happen so we'll see and specifically we'll see how the Wimbledon draw turns out. It may be a Fed-Nadal final.
 
> I have a feeling nadal will bomb out again this year like he did every other year.
 
He may. A lot will depend on his draw. The difference with Nadal this year is that he seems to be playing more aggressively (better serve, bh) and that may help him at Wimbledon. We'll see. Nadal is hard to predict at Wimbledon. He could go out in R2 to a big hitter or he could make the final for the first time in years.
TennisGuy <TGuy@techsavvy.com>: Jun 15 02:05AM -0400

On 6/14/2017 2:43 PM, SliceAndDice wrote:
 
>> 2) Tommy Haas is without a doubt the best looking professional male tennis player ever. So handsome.
 
>> That's all.
 
> Without a doubt? :) How about Borg, Safin, Moya, Philippousis etc?
 
First of all you must be a woman to qualify as a judge.
May we check your credentials? :)
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 14 11:07PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 3:39:12 PM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > That said, I have a strange feeling Nadal may take Wimbledon this year but there's a long way to go for that to happen so we'll see and specifically we'll see how the Wimbledon draw turns out. It may be a Fed-Nadal final.
 
> > I have a feeling nadal will bomb out again this year like he did every other year.
 
> He may. A lot will depend on his draw. The difference with Nadal this year is that he seems to be playing more aggressively (better serve, bh) and that may help him at Wimbledon. We'll see. Nadal is hard to predict at Wimbledon. He could go out in R2 to a big hitter or he could make the final for the first time in years.
 
Actually it is very easy to predict with Nadal on fast surfaces. He will go back to a shell when he faced a big hitter on a fast surface , he will retreat more towards his traditional clay court stand on a grass court. His instinct is not an aggressive player. When the match is tough players do go back to their original mode.
ahonkan <ahonkan@gmail.com>: Jun 15 12:22AM -0700

On Thursday, 15 June 2017 04:57:08 UTC+5:30, Court_1 wrote:
 
 
> That said, I have a strange feeling Nadal may take Wimbledon this year but there's a long way to go for that to happen so we'll see and specifically we'll see how the Wimbledon draw turns out. It may be a Fed-Nadal final.
 
A feeling that follows from his 4 consecutive early losses to Rosol,
Darcis, Kyrgios and Brown, all of them all-time greats on grass!
 
The only thing different between Nadal this year and Nadal of years past
is that he has lost 3 big matches to his perennial doormat Federer.
Apart from that, he has completed his annual harvest of clay titles
between April & June & not won anything before that ...
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 09:17PM +1000

On 15/06/2017 1:00 AM, Court_1 wrote:
> Just took a fast peak at Federer vs Haas to see how Federer's form looks. Two observations:
 
> 1) Federer's form looks pretty good for his first grass-court match.
 
Yes, Still, shouldn't have lost.
 
 
> 2) Tommy Haas is without a doubt the best looking professional male tennis player ever. So handsome.
 
> That's all.
 
My wife thinks I am.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 09:16PM +1000

Not much more to say.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Tuan <phamquangtuan48@gmail.com>: Jun 15 02:59AM -0700

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 9:05:42 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Go play some tennis or whatever. It's getting to you.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 08:52PM +1000

On 14/06/2017 11:22 PM, John Liang wrote:
 
Yes, but FO is still a blue-chip & the ultimate test on clay. Can't
drop it.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 08:57PM +1000

On 14/06/2017 11:25 PM, soccerfan777 wrote:
 
>> , as nobody does nor
>> will regard Lendl as equal to Nadal and greater than Borg and Sampras.
 
> Oh you are talking about adding YEC and slams... no I am not serious about that. I am just saying it is far better than discounting AO.
 
I'm not discounting anything. All I'm saying is when you eg compare
Federer to Borg you need to make the 'AO adjustment' to get a more
accurate picture how they compare to each other. If you take off AO Fed
has 13 slams & Borg 11. Borg quit at age 25, Fed won his last blue-chip
at age 30 - 5 extra yrs to get 2 more blue-chips.
 
I'm not saying Borg gets any extra coulda/woulda points, just
highlighting why many consider him one of the greatest, if not goat.
There are logical reasons for that idea.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 08:59PM +1000

On 15/06/2017 12:04 AM, TT wrote:
 
> It actually makes sense... why should hard court have two slams when
> clay and grass have only one.
 
You just said it was bullshit? Make your mind up.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 15 04:00AM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 8:52:22 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
I know an idiot once claimed Wimbledon and USO are the bluest of blue chip events and his name was also Whisper. Was that you ? I also recall the same Whisper also claimed the status of FO would have been worse than AO if it is not on clay. All grand slam are blue chip but FO is not the bluest of blue chip, it does not hold the same prestige factor as Wimbledon and USO, it is now level with AO.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 09:00PM +1000

On 15/06/2017 12:07 AM, TT wrote:
>>> Borg 11
 
>> Well it's bullshit but got the order right.
 
> So maybe it's not bs after all...
 
 
Apology accepted. You know I never post bs. The people getting angry
at my posts are starfuckers & of no consequence.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 15 04:09AM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 8:58:01 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> accurate picture how they compare to each other. If you take off AO Fed
> has 13 slams & Borg 11. Borg quit at age 25, Fed won his last blue-chip
> at age 30 - 5 extra yrs to get 2 more blue-chips.
 
Sorry, you are making that assumption. The bluest of blue chip event during Borg's era was Wimbledon and USO. Connors did not even play FO between 74-79 but he played both USO and Wimbledon. Clearly FO wasn't the bluest of blue chip slam even back then and it still isn't.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 15 04:11AM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 9:00:54 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
You never post bullshit ? Well, 95% of your posts are bullshit. The people are not getting angry with you for obvious reasons.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 15 08:50PM +1000

On 14/06/2017 11:01 PM, soccerfan777 wrote:
> I have also liked players with power, precision and grace - Graf being a prime example. Mecir, Rios, Ramesh Krishnan, Kaarsten Braasch etc fail the power test. Too many feathery poofters out there who don't win squat. You can feel amused by them, but can't really look up to them. If you want fairy tennis go back to the 1880s
 
Krishan was a phenomenal talent - probably the most naturally fluid
player I've seen. He & McEnroe are 2 net guys nobody would ever find
boring to watch. From the baseline it's Mecir.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: Jun 15 03:36AM -0500

See https://gomovies.to/film/the-putin-interviews-season-01-21051/watching.html?ep=666840
 
FF
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 03:30AM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 10:36:09 AM UTC+2, Federer Fanatic wrote:
> See https://gomovies.to/film/the-putin-interviews-season-01-21051/watching.html?ep=666840
 
> FF
 
Two despicable men.
 
 
Max
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Jun 15 01:35AM +0200


> Yes, if Nadal makes tweaks to his game and it increases his effectiveness against all but one player, it's still an improvement in his game. It's no different than Fed's game back in the day being tuned to beat the field instead of tailored to beat Nadal. I think it's fair to say if Nadal played his previous style built on amazing defense but w/o the needed court coverage abilities, Fed might have beaten him more easily.
 
We're glad you admit Bob's top notch analysis.
 
So just say it. The only difference is, you being pleased with the
Nadal that's less dangerous to Federer.
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jun 14 11:57PM -0700

On Monday, 12 June 2017 16:41:02 UTC+1, TT wrote:
 
> > Now that it's confirmed beyond any doubt that Fed beat Nadal three times during Nadal's best Jan-June ever...
 
> Desperate fedfan stuff. Nadal came from long break etc and it appears he
> timed his best form exactly at RG final...
 
yep!
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jun 14 11:58PM -0700

On Monday, 12 June 2017 11:50:32 UTC+1, Court_1 wrote:
 
> " if rafa wins 3 easy sets i'll admit i read it wrong. but if it's
> close, i think i read it right."
 
> So Bob, come clean. We're waiting with bated breath for you to admit your mistake. If you don't admit it, you are a lost cause/weasel. :)
 
bob has already said this in that other thread.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jun 15 12:00AM -0700

On Monday, 12 June 2017 19:26:45 UTC+1, TT wrote:
 
> Rafa has played whole year well, but his form and confidence have
> improved gradually. He wasn't nearly as strong mentally at AO as he was
> at RG.
 
this is totally right, anyone who actually watched him play the past 3 years should be able to see it. At the AO he was very nervous or out of sorts.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jun 15 12:01AM -0700

On Monday, 12 June 2017 15:58:32 UTC+1, Carey wrote:
 
> > So Bob, come clean. We're waiting with bated breath for you to admit your mistake. If you don't admit it, you are a lost cause/weasel. :)
 
> C1, you seem to be working from the assumption that the RST poster in question has a bit of integrity.
 
> An interesting notion.
 
she seems to think she's our boss too!
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jun 15 12:03AM -0700


> > IMO, you've equated his game changing with it declining. But change
> > doesn't necessarily mean decline, it can mean improvement.
 
> Yes, if Nadal makes tweaks to his game and it increases his effectiveness against all but one player, it's still an improvement in his game. It's no different than Fed's game back in the day being tuned to beat the field instead of tailored to beat Nadal. I think it's fair to say if Nadal played his previous style built on amazing defense but w/o the needed court coverage abilities, Fed might have beaten him more easily.
 
except Fed is still "at peak".
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 14 10:35PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 1:27:21 AM UTC-4, John Liang wrote:
> > > It massively different playing on grass, it's much lower and takes a while to get used to, Nadal being sensibly careful with that! Also Murray will be playing so that a tough one.
 
> > Andy Murray is a tough one for Nadal on a grass surface? Isn't the grass h2h 3-0 for Nadal? *rolls eyes*
 
> Keep rolling. How was Nadal's general performance on grass since 2011 compare to Murray's ? Murray won 2 Wimbledons out of the last 4 and how many did Nadal win during the last four years ? Did Nadal get through even QF in the last four years ?
 
I'm not talking about that though. I'm talking about IF Nadal is good enough to get to Murray, I'd bet on Nadal since their W h2h is 3-0 for Nadal.
 
This is 2017, a new year with a new set of circumstances and Nadal is in better form than Murray is unlike the past few years.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 14 10:41PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 3:35:31 PM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > Andy Murray is a tough one for Nadal on a grass surface? Isn't the grass h2h 3-0 for Nadal? *rolls eyes*
 
> > Keep rolling. How was Nadal's general performance on grass since 2011 compare to Murray's ? Murray won 2 Wimbledons out of the last 4 and how many did Nadal win during the last four years ? Did Nadal get through even QF in the last four years ?
 
> I'm not talking about that though. I'm talking about IF Nadal is good enough to get to Murray, I'd bet on Nadal since their W h2h is 3-0 for Nadal.
 
Well, you selectively choose their head to head record when the last match they had on grass was 2011. I don't think a match five years ago was a reliable indicator of how they did on grass beside Nadal also won FO in 2012/2013/2014 but he still bombed at Wimbledon in those years.
 
 
> This is 2017, a new year with a new set of circumstances and Nadal is in better form than Murray is unlike the past few years.
 
On clay may be but on grass we haven't seen anything from either of them.
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