Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 8 topics

Monday, June 5, 2017

John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 04 10:09PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 10:23:06 AM UTC+10, Shakes wrote:
 
> > > Yes, me too. He had a better serve and a great BH. He was tall enough to deal with the bounce.
 
> > He was 6'3 and I don't think that is tall enough to deal with the bounce Nadal was able to generate. Safin and Del Po probably were probably the only guys weren't be bother by the bounce as they both are well above 6'4, have two handed backhand.
 
> It's not just the physical height. He also had a BH that could come over the ball at or near shoulder height. He could also hit it pretty flat, kind of like Wawrinka.
 
I just don't think that will be enough, Guga is not what I called strongly build, he is taller but much thinner, on the backhand side Wawrinka can probably flat out this shot with unmatched power, I don't think Guga can match the sort of power that Wawrinka can generate, Guga's backhand is more on par with Federer but with a lot less variety. I don't see him troubling Nadal at all with his game on clay or on any other surfaces.
Shakes <kvcshake@gmail.com>: Jun 04 10:23PM -0700

On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 10:09:49 PM UTC-7, John Liang wrote:
 
> I just don't think that will be enough, Guga is not what I called strongly build, he is taller but much thinner, on the backhand side Wawrinka can probably flat out this shot with unmatched power, I don't think Guga can match the sort of power that Wawrinka can generate, Guga's backhand is more on par with Federer but with a lot less variety. I don't see him troubling Nadal at all with his game on clay or on any other surfaces.
 
His BH was more consistent than Wawrinka's and his strokes were better suited to clay than Fed's. We'll never know, but I see him troubling Nadal on clay more than Fed or Djok did.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:40PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 5:08 AM, Carey wrote:
> I woulda loved to have seen this. Nadal would win of course, but Muster would get into it big time,
> and not be intimidated at all. Courier-Nadal would be fun too, but Muster... as Connors said, "that
> guy's a goddamn Marine!". Quite the comment considering the source.
 
It would be fun to watch for the physical aspect alone - Muster was an
animal & just kept going, impervious to fatigue/injury. The guy was run
over by a car & soon after was back training in a wheelchair!
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:52PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 6:40 AM, undecided wrote:
>> and not be intimidated at all. Courier-Nadal would be fun too, but Muster... as Connors said, "that
>> guy's a goddamn Marine!". Quite the comment considering the source.
 
> I would have liked to see Guga vs Nadal at the FO....Guga had a very fluid clay court game.
 
Perhaps if we compare the FO matches featuring Rafa v Fed & Guga v Fed?
That may give us an idea what the matches would be like?
 
Rafa tended to beat Fed in 4 routine sets at FO on average, except for
that 61 63 60 rout in 2008 final.
 
At 2004 FO Guga crushed Federer 64 64 64. In 2004 Fed won the other 3
slams, but was easily dismissed in 3rd rd of FO by an old & well past it
Guga.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:54PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 8:31 AM, bob wrote:
> played throughout the 90s he'd still win many FOs, but struggly far
> harder to do it. courier, bruguera, guga and muster.
 
> bob
 
Yes, I can see all these guys giving Rafa much stiffer competition than
any current player.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 06:53PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 12:02 AM, Gracchus wrote:
 
> When "you" think of...?
> "You get" the same names?
 
> Who is "you" and from where do those names "come up" to form a list that conveniently excludes the guy with the most impressive records ever and includes certain players with (a) far few titles (b) a resume with two-thirds of the majors on clay? Professional tennis journalists? A wide survey of tennis fans? Whisper and a tiny handful of online cronies? Ah! Looks like I've stumbled upon the answer: Number 3.
 
Don't be coy. You know exactly what I mean.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:28PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 4:26 AM, bob wrote:
 
> wawrinka in 3 or 4. monfils is a nice clown, but not a serious tennis
> champ.
 
> bob
 
Monfils & Dimtrov are brothers from different mothers. This is dad;
 
 
http://www.officialpsds.com/images/thumbs/ronald-mcdonald-psd51748.png
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jun 05 02:45AM -0700

We should still respect Fed a bit for exploiting the situation when the other better players are out of sorts though and having the best clown thrashing record ever seen!
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:14PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 2:04 AM, Gracchus wrote:
 
>> Bootard is not good enough for week 2, being a journey woman and all
 
> Imagine how that post will haunt you if she wins Wimbledon '17.
 
......especially if she dumps Sharapova in the final.
 
: )
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:13PM +1000

I can't recall a slam draw where there were no slam winners still alive
by q/f?
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Jun 05 05:57AM +0200

>> physical marks that are typical of their ethnic and racial
>> groups.
 
> That thing about sneaky little eyes seems to have really stuck with you. I wonder why.
 
 
I always considered it was kinda classless and pointless to insult
Nadal due to his looks, and I didn't pay match attention when you
were doing just that. Even though you've been especially nasty in
connecting his looks with supposed personality deficiencies.

 
Many other players have been bashed around here for their looks,
but no one, not even Raja went that far to connect the looks with
behavior and personality characteristics.
 
He said Sampras was a hairy ape, but that was no different than
stepenj mocking Graf's nose or Max saying Sharapova is flat
chested. People comment, like different thing, etc. No big deal.

 
But you are a level above everyone else, you've been attributing
personality traits to Nadal, and also later to Sharapova based on
her typical Russian appearance, both in looks and behavior. We
discussed that several times that if I'm not mistaken. So if
something "got me", that would have been it, as that's the time
when I first engaged you, no?
 
Remark about Cilic eyes, or mentioning Whisper's background while
discussing movies only came later.
 
Me mentioning Khan's background when discussing immigration and
identity issues, isn't chauvinism/racism. He's an example of
increased level of openness of British society, something few
trolls claimed it wasn't the case.
 
Otoh you mentioning Whisper's background during movie discussion
is, like I said, at least weird. As a one off incident, it's not
even noticeable. But there's an extremely long and proven pattern
of your digs at Europeans of all sorts, and linking ethnicity or
physical features with supposed personality flaws.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
--
 
 
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Jun 04 11:05PM -0500

On 6/4/2017 1:49 PM, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
 
> We need to be smart, vigilant and tough. We need the courts to give us
> back our rights. We need the Travel Ban as an extra level of safety!"
 
> So he's on record as saying IT IS a travel ban. Not smart.
 
The problem Trump has had in the courts wasn't the notion that it's a
"travel ban", rather that it is a "Muslim travel ban". There's nothing
wrong with a travel ban vis a vis our 1st amendment, so your comment
would hold merit only of he'd included "Muslim" in the tweet.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 04 09:19PM -0700

On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 9:01:03 PM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> Nadal due to his looks, and I didn't pay match attention when you
> were doing just that. Even though you've been especially nasty in
> connecting his looks with supposed personality deficiencies.
 
"Supposed"?
 
> discussed that several times that if I'm not mistaken. So if
> something "got me", that would have been it, as that's the time
> when I first engaged you, no?
 
So is it typically Russian to have a cold unfriendly demeanor or act like a pouting bitch? I never said that. Most of the Russian players are nothing like her. Same with Nadal and Spaniards.
 
> identity issues, isn't chauvinism/racism. He's an example of
> increased level of openness of British society, something few
> trolls claimed it wasn't the case.
 
You said he was a Muslim, not a Brit. That implies that his religion/ethnicity invalidates his citizenship even though he was born in the UK. Plenty of people would take issue with that.

> Otoh you mentioning Whisper's background during movie discussion
> is, like I said, at least weird.
 
Again--why do you care?
 
> even noticeable. But there's an extremely long and proven pattern
> of your digs at Europeans of all sorts, and linking ethnicity or
> physical features with supposed personality flaws.
 
Not Europeans of *all* sorts.
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 05 09:57AM +0100

On 04/06/2017 19:59, bob wrote:
 
> brian, the usa is a divided nation right now. we're not 1 america
> anymore unfortunately. sooner you realize that, sooner you'll
> understand what's going on.
 
When was the US ever a united nation?
 
>> So he's on record as saying IT IS a travel ban. Not smart.
 
> if a pro trump judge (or court) heard the case, it's a ban. if not,
> it'll be "unconstitutional."
 
Did you miss the bit where Trump called it 'a travel ban'? His tweet is
a matter of public record, permissable as evidence in a court.
 
> judges are just as biased in many cases as the press.
 
Well if you and other Americans believe that I'm afraid you are all in
serious trouble. Not that any judge is always neutral, but the Judiciary
is supposed to be exactly that, and they take oaths to be that. The fact
that a significant percentage of Americans distrust the press is also
worrying. A free press is vitally important to any democratic nation,
they may not always get everything right, but it's part of their job
to hold people to account - but it seems that in the US if they do so
it's dismissed as bias, or their all Dems, or all liberals, etc.
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 05 10:00AM +0100

On 04/06/2017 20:28, *skriptis wrote:
 
> That would be too ridiculous even for any comedy show that
> explores irony and sarcasm.
 
> Sick.
 
Classic.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 07:05PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 12:59 AM, Bharath Purohit wrote:
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
 
> Brian , Rafa has lost only 20 games in first 4 matches of this year's FO , is this a record of some kind?
 
He's doing better than 6-2 average per set played.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 04 08:54PM -0700

On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 8:41:04 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > i can give on golden pond a nod only for addressing the issue, but if
> > they were going to do it - which is fine - why not make a good movie?
 
> OGP wasn't a "good" movie, it was an "excellent" movie.
 
So that's the final word? Well there we have it. This proves that you're most qualified poster on rst to judge films. It logically follows that you've seen 110% of all the films ever made...even the ones burned up in the vault fires at 20th Century Fox and MGM.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 04 09:32PM -0700

On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 11:54:30 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > OGP wasn't a "good" movie, it was an "excellent" movie.
 
> So that's the final word?
 
It sure is! ;)
 
 
> Well there we have it. This proves that you're most qualified poster on rst to judge films.
 
If you say so! :)
 
 
>It logically follows that you've seen 110% of all the films ever made...even the ones burned up in the vault fires at 20th Century Fox and MGM.
 
I think you've got the wrong poster. Shouldn't this be directed at StephenJ? ;)
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jun 05 06:57PM +1000

On 5/06/2017 12:16 AM, Gracchus wrote:
>>> viewing.
 
>> Oh gosh no. I doubt I could sit through it again.
 
> Me neither. Not unless I feel the need for self-flagellation. Some films do blossom upon a second or third viewing, but in those cases, usually I feel there's an extra layer of complexity that begs to be explored further. Not so with "45 Years." It banks heavily on attempted poignancy, and IMO falls short. But if Whisper sees more to it, maybe he can tell us what changed for him the second time around.
 
I rarely watch any movie a 2nd time. I'm just thinking if I was going
to watch this again it would be interesting, if for nothing more than
the acting skills. The story is incidental, though interesting concept imo.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 05 08:52AM +0100


> About 95 % of NYT, WaPo, AP, CNN, ABC, NBS, CBS, NSNBC journalists vote Democrat.
 
And we know this how?
 
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 05 09:33AM +0100

On 04/06/2017 19:36, bob wrote:
> accords" to begin with. the senate had to give that authority and
> didn't. trump "pulling out of it" was just following the law.
 
> oops, sorry, CNN probably didn't tell you (or brian) that yet.
 
I'm aware that some say the Senate should have approved or rejected the
Paris Accords. However, AIUI the Senate is required to approve (by a 2.3
majority) any treaty 'signed' by the president. Article II, Section 2,
Clause 2 of the Constitution says 'to make treaties'.
 
The Paris Accords is not a treaty, it's an international agreement
between most countries of the world which is nonbinding and has no legal
requirements attached to it. Individual nations are free to decide for
themselves how much or how little action they are willing or able to take.
 
What is with CNN? I don't watch it, I don't use their website, I
occasionally check their Breaking News Twitter feed - which is normally
ancient history when I look, mostly because of the time difference.
And yes, I recall that you said you use it to mean all of the MSM.
 
And what has this topic to do with the 'Trump facts' I mentioned in my
original post? I didn't need CNN or any other media source to tell me
that he was presenting 'facts' with little basis in truth. He's got
form.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 05 01:51AM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 9:52:22 AM UTC+2, Brian W Lawrence wrote:
> On 04/06/2017 23:05, calimero377@gmx.de wrote:
 
> > About 95 % of NYT, WaPo, AP, CNN, ABC, NBS, CBS, NSNBC journalists vote Democrat.
 
> And we know this how?
 
Say, can't you read and listen?
 
 
 
 
> > ---
> > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> > http://www.avg.com
 
Max
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jun 05 04:28AM

On Sun, 04 Jun 2017 18:15:56 -0500, stephenJ wrote:
 
> Agreed, really poor form.
 
I doubt his physical presence means much of anything. At any rate, do
you want and expect Trump to fade into the wordwork like a good little ex-
president when he's out of office? No more tweeting, etc?
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 05 09:39AM +0100

On 04/06/2017 23:43, bob wrote:
> reflecting sunlight, they turn to water which absorbs sunlight, and on
> and on.
 
> i'm not sure i believe people's contribution is the main problem.
 
And I agree with you. It's one factor, but not necessarily the most
significant one.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 05 09:45AM +0100

On 04/06/2017 20:00, bob wrote:
 
>> Why is this an irony? Trump is the master of fake news!
 
> what is fake about obama sticking around buying a home in DC being bad
> form? did he not buy the house after all?
 
Surely Obama, or any US citizen, can live anywhere they choose? It's not
like he has a 'home state' to return too - he has ties to Hawaii and
Illinois, but neither has a particular draw for him.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
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