Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 9 topics

Thursday, June 15, 2017

John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 15 02:52PM -0700

On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 7:44:20 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
> > between April & June & not won anything before that ...
 
> As I said, with Nadal you never know. He could bomb out in the first week at Wimbledon or with a good draw he could make the final and win the title. First of all, he's mentioning his potential knee troubles on a grass surface already and says the low bending on grass often causes him pain in the knees. But he's also saying if he's playing well he could go far and he'll try his best to do so. So who knows?
 
> Just because he lost early at Wimbledon in the past few years it doesn't necessarily mean that he will do same this year. When was the last time Federer won the AO before 2017? If these ATG players have won something before they can do it again.
 
Federer had a consistent record at AO, he did not lost often to the likes of Darcis, Rosol and Dustin Brown type consistently over a spell of four years.
 
 
> He's playing more aggressively with a better serve so that should help him. Also, Djokovic is out to lunch at the moment and Murray isn't at his best. Look how Murray disintegrated against Wawrinka in the fifth set of the FO. Nadal is in the best form out of the Big Four players (along with Federer.)
 
Clay is not Murray's best surface, I think Murray is getting back to some sort of form over FO.
 
 
> If Nadal made it to the AO final and almost won it when it was on a quicker hc and if he didn't lose a set on the way to his FO title, he's dangerous. You can live in denial or in the past if you wish. I'm just saying the possibility is there for Nadal to do well at Wimbledon again.
 
I see a repeat of 2012.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 15 02:57PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 5:52:47 PM UTC-4, John Liang wrote:
 
> Clay is not Murray's best surface, I think Murray is getting back to some sort of form over FO.
 
> > If Nadal made it to the AO final and almost won it when it was on a quicker hc and if he didn't lose a set on the way to his FO title, he's dangerous. You can live in denial or in the past if you wish. I'm just saying the possibility is there for Nadal to do well at Wimbledon again.
 
> I see a repeat of 2012.
 
So if Nadal was good enough to somehow make it to Murray, you would pick Murray to win in that contest?
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 15 07:21PM -0700

On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 7:57:07 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > If Nadal made it to the AO final and almost won it when it was on a quicker hc and if he didn't lose a set on the way to his FO title, he's dangerous. You can live in denial or in the past if you wish. I'm just saying the possibility is there for Nadal to do well at Wimbledon again.
 
> > I see a repeat of 2012.
 
> So if Nadal was good enough to somehow make it to Murray, you would pick Murray to win in that contest?
 
I would base on recent performances on grass but not their h2h when the last match they played on grass happened 6 years ago. Murray's last five performance at Wimbledon was WSQWF compare to Nadal -2412
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 15 08:45PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 10:21:14 PM UTC-4, John Liang wrote:
 
> > > I see a repeat of 2012.
 
> > So if Nadal was good enough to somehow make it to Murray, you would pick Murray to win in that contest?
 
> I would base on recent performances on grass but not their h2h when the last match they played on grass happened 6 years ago. Murray's last five performance at Wimbledon was WSQWF compare to Nadal -2412
 
Ok, suit yourself. I'm not saying that Nadal will necessarily progress at Wimbledon further than Murray will. What I'm saying is that IF Nadal and Murray meet which would mean Nadal is in good form, I don't think I would have faith in Murray beating Nadal.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 15 09:19PM -0700

On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 1:45:24 PM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > So if Nadal was good enough to somehow make it to Murray, you would pick Murray to win in that contest?
 
> > I would base on recent performances on grass but not their h2h when the last match they played on grass happened 6 years ago. Murray's last five performance at Wimbledon was WSQWF compare to Nadal -2412
 
> Ok, suit yourself. I'm not saying that Nadal will necessarily progress at Wimbledon further than Murray will. What I'm saying is that IF Nadal and Murray meet which would mean Nadal is in good form, I don't think I would have faith in Murray beating Nadal.
 
Fine, you don't even have faith in Nadal making that far.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 15 03:04PM -0700

It was a throwaway match for Federer at a 250! He probably had more important things to do like attend another Royal wedding and thus had to get out of Stuttgart. He let his journeyman German buddy Haas have this one in front of the German fans.
Shakes <kvcshake@gmail.com>: Jun 15 07:51PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 3:04:20 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
> It was a throwaway match for Federer at a 250! He probably had more important things to do like attend another Royal wedding and thus had to get out of Stuttgart. He let his journeyman German buddy Haas have this one in front of the German fans.
 
Is Haas good friends with Fed ? I recall their AO match in 2006 (?) that Haas lost in 5 sets, and, when Courier interviewed him on the court, Haas criticized him for kissing Fed's ass.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 15 08:41PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 10:51:15 PM UTC-4, Shakes wrote:
> On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 3:04:20 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
> > It was a throwaway match for Federer at a 250! He probably had more important things to do like attend another Royal wedding and thus had to get out of Stuttgart. He let his journeyman German buddy Haas have this one in front of the German fans.
 
> Is Haas good friends with Fed ? I recall their AO match in 2006 (?) that Haas lost in 5 sets, and, when Courier interviewed him on the court, Haas criticized him for kissing Fed's ass.
 
I think in those years Haas was envious of Federer and was bitter they were from the same generation but that Federer was so successful and Haas was like a walking injury and couldn't progress.
 
But yes, these days Haas and Federer appear to be friends and their wives are friends. The two couples seem to hang out when they are in the same city. Federer often tweets about being in the company of songwriter/record producer David Foster who is Tommy Haas' father-in-law.
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 02:54PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 11:47:59 PM UTC+2, TennisGuy wrote:
> Hey Icey what do you think about PM May ordering a full public inquiry
> into the disaster?
 
That is a good thing.
 
> Oh and what do you think about the fire officials saying that the
> building was not at risk of collapsing?
 
Why would it collapse?
 
 
Max
TennisGuy <TGuy@techsavvy.com>: Jun 15 09:03PM -0400

>> building was not at risk of collapsing?
 
> Why would it collapse?
 
> Max
 
Well prior to 9/11 fire officials would never even
consider the question for a high rise steel framed building.
 
But since 9/11, fire officials throughout the western world have
been 'instructed' to consider the possibility, however remote.
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 06:20PM -0700

On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 3:04:42 AM UTC+2, TennisGuy wrote:
> consider the question for a high rise steel framed building.
 
> But since 9/11, fire officials throughout the western world have
> been 'instructed' to consider the possibility, however remote.
 
 
What do you mean by a "steel framed" building and which building you are talking about is supposed to be such a building?
 
 
Max
TennisGuy <TGuy@techsavvy.com>: Jun 15 10:28PM -0400


>> But since 9/11, fire officials throughout the western world have
>> been 'instructed' to consider the possibility, however remote.
 
> What do you mean by a "steel framed" building
 
 
Almost every high-rise building you see in the world today is built
with a steel frame.
 
The reason? Best structural support and best fire-resistant material
available.
 
> ... and which building you
> are talking about is supposed to be such a building?
 
The London tower that just had the fire and the WTC towers 1, 2 and 7.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jun 15 07:31PM -0700

> The London tower that just had the fire and the WTC towers 1, 2 and 7.
 
What are you implying? :)
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Jun 15 03:46PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 1:09:52 PM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
 
 
 
> '99 AO .. and while Sampras would have been tier1 favourite for sure....after all he won it "only" twice...and lost to Flipper/Kucera/Martin even during heavy favourite days.... (note fun stat: Sampras AO titles - both times Agassi was not in the draw '94, '97).
 
> .mikko
 
 
Seems worth pointing out that Agassi never lost to Sampras at either the Australian or the French.
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 02:57PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 11:36:43 PM UTC+2, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > You aren't able to put yourself in another person's shoes or mind?
> > Poor boy ...
 
> An entire ethnic group residing in a country isn't "another person." Such characterization is reductionist and insulting. ...
 
 
I almost forgot that you DemocRats were the party of slavery back then. Thank God for the GOP and Lincoln and Grant!!
 
 
Max
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 15 03:03PM -0700


> > > Seems understandable if communities decide they want to use their core public areas to honor something or someone else.
 
> > In its present form, IMO what's taking place is politically motivated knee-jerk pandering more than a sincere desire to honor anything.

> We're not talking about monuments to confederate soldiers but confederate leaders. Big difference. And their placement was just as politically motivated to start with, which is why many were erected in the 1960s after civil rights legislation. So it doesn't make any sense to decry political motivation or cultural issues for their removal when those are the same reasons the monuments are there in the first place. To remove all politcal/cultural motivations around the monuments would mean removal of the monuments, because they wouldn't have been there in the first place. And turning all of them into "teachable moments" is pretty silly IMO...we're talking multiple monuments in many cities...not just one.
 
Why not? If all those cities can tackle taking them down, then they could reorient them. It wouldn't be a monumental task. :>
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 15 03:11PM -0700

> > > Poor boy ...
 
> > An entire ethnic group residing in a country isn't "another person." Such characterization is reductionist and insulting. ...
 
> I almost forgot that you DemocRats were the party of slavery back then. Thank God for the GOP and Lincoln and Grant!!
 
I don't belong to any party and I wasn't raised in the South. Try again, Madcap Maxie.
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 03:19PM -0700

On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 12:11:49 AM UTC+2, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > > An entire ethnic group residing in a country isn't "another person." Such characterization is reductionist and insulting. ...
 
> > I almost forgot that you DemocRats were the party of slavery back then. Thank God for the GOP and Lincoln and Grant!!
 
> I don't belong to any party and I wasn't raised in the South. ...
 
 
Don't they all say that?
 
 
Max
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 15 03:24PM -0700


> > > I almost forgot that you DemocRats were the party of slavery back then. Thank God for the GOP and Lincoln and Grant!!
 
> > I don't belong to any party and I wasn't raised in the South. ...

> Don't they all say that?
 
Just as all Germans insist they aren't Nazis?
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 03:33PM -0700

On Friday, June 16, 2017 at 12:24:26 AM UTC+2, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > > I don't belong to any party and I wasn't raised in the South. ...
 
> > Don't they all say that?
 
> Just as all Germans insist they aren't Nazis?
 
Not all do that.
But there are less excuses for Nazism in Germany than for slavery in the USA.
And less monuments for Nazi generals (actually none) than for slavery generals in the USA.
 
Max
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 15 03:33PM -0700

On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 8:45:35 PM UTC+2, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > Nadal was always honoured when meeting the King as was Murray I
> > believe meeting his Queen.
 
> That's a very different thing. First of all, kings and queens aren't elected officials. They come from a line of succession with deep cultural roots in their country. Second, the USA has very different origins than those countries. We were borne of dissent, rebellion, and a tradition of individuality. Americans as a rule don't automatically kowtow to kings, queens, or presidents. And last but not least, unlike many statesman who have spent a lifetime cultivating respect, Trump in a mere five months as president has devalued and desecrated the office he holds. In America, respect for officials isn't an entitlement, it is something earned. Our less-than-illustrious "leader" simply hasn't earned it.
 
 
http://piv.pivpiv.dk/
 
 
Max
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 15 02:50PM -0700

On Thursday, June 15, 2017 at 1:41:59 AM UTC-4, John Liang wrote:
 
> 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.
 
All I'm saying is that IF Nadal and Murray meet at Wimbledon(meaning Nadal is good enough to get there), I wouldn't have faith in Murray in that match-up.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Jun 15 09:12PM +0200


>> Imagine Kim gets so amazed with Trump's book and capitalism as a
>> whole so he changes the course of his country?
 
> Why would a cult leader want to change course in this manner?
 
To become most successful capitalist in north Korea, owning
license for Trump hotels?
 
I'm sure he's pretty much aware it's more difficult to held onto
power in this manner, instead of allowing crony capitalism to
develop with him taking most of the cake, and sharing it with
some of the associates.
 
Much more comfortable personal position. If he's crooked. We'll see.
--
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Jun 15 02:16PM -0500

Universal Studios is trying to create a "connected universe franchise"
featuring some of the characters from the classic monsters movies, so
they can cash in like Disney is with their Marvel universe films. The
first entry is The Mummy. I saw this in IMAX 3D and ... save your $$$,
LOL, this flick is a stinker. Nothing about it works: The story is a
mess, Tom Cruise's talents (and he does have talent) is wasted, the SFX
are pedestrian. It's dull. This is one case where TT, Courtie, et al.
are correct to shun a Hollywood blockbuster. This film busted my block, LOL.
 
D+
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Jun 15 02:10PM -0500

Enjoying this album right now, the 1984 first-gen CD version, which has
glorious sound dynamics' about equal to the original vinyl.
 
IMO, even though Candy-O was always a popular album, and nobody has ever
accused it of being a 'sophomore slump, at the same time, it's also
always been underrated, because the consensus has always been that it
isn't equal to their classic debut record.
 
That view is a mistaken. Candy-O is every bit as good as their debut,
it's a 10/10 record just like the first one. Every single song - Let's
Go, Since I Held You, Candy-O, Lust For Kicks, etc. is a winner.
 
Really, the Cars didn't inflict a bad, or even mediocre, song on the
public until their 3rd album. Very few bands can say that.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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