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

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

Bharath Purohit <acebharath@gmail.com>: Jun 05 09:12PM -0700

Dont know about others but Modi is a fraud, pathetic piece of shit.
 
Check out Truthofgujarat.com to find out all truth of Modi's past.
 
He made fools of us indians and won the PM seat.
Shakes <kvcshake@gmail.com>: Jun 05 09:19PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 9:12:58 PM UTC-7, Bharath Purohit wrote:
> Dont know about others but Modi is a fraud, pathetic piece of shit.
 
> Check out Truthofgujarat.com to find out all truth of Modi's past.
 
> He made fools of us indians and won the PM seat.
 
Well, the other option was Rahul Gandhi !
Bharath Purohit <acebharath@gmail.com>: Jun 05 10:56PM -0700

No. Other option was Arvind Kejriwal.
Bharath Purohit <acebharath@gmail.com>: Jun 05 10:59PM -0700

Against whom there was no charges of Corruption, no charges of Riots, no charges of snooping , no charges of Fake encounters, none of his ministers were convicted for Maas Murdering , none of his ministers were convicted for supplying arms to naxals, none of his party were caught spying for ISI etc
Shakes <kvcshake@gmail.com>: Jun 05 11:36PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 10:59:03 PM UTC-7, Bharath Purohit wrote:
> Against whom there was no charges of Corruption, no charges of Riots, no charges of snooping , no charges of Fake encounters, none of his ministers were convicted for Maas Murdering , none of his ministers were convicted for supplying arms to naxals, none of his party were caught spying for ISI etc
 
But in 2014, Kejriwal was not a PM candidate. Maybe by 2019 ?
Bharath Purohit <acebharath@gmail.com>: Jun 05 11:41PM -0700

Modi will sweep 2019 too. The propaganda spread by Modi's IT cell is toooo strong. Our country is going down :-(
 
 
The country which was rescued , shaped and made independent by Mahatama Gandhi is now ruled by the murderers of Mahatama Gandhi :-(
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: Jun 06 04:18AM -0700

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 1:56:17 AM UTC-4, Bharath Purohit wrote:
> No. Other option was Arvind Kejriwal.
 
LOL. The guy who cannot govern an Union Territory efficiently? Look at the mess he has created.
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 06 09:32AM +0100


> Gallup?
> Those guys who gave Hillary a 96 % chance to win ... ?
 
> Lol
 
They did not.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Jun 06 09:34AM +0100

On 05/06/2017 14:33, TT wrote:
 
> It's just one poll (and not very good at that).
 
> 38,9%:
> https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
 
Why do you say it's not very good? Because 538 adjusts it? Do
you understand why they do so?
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jun 06 12:13PM +0300

Brian W Lawrence kirjoitti 6.6.2017 klo 11:34:
>> https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
 
> Why do you say it's not very good? Because 538 adjusts it? Do
> you understand why they do so?
 
Because it has been constantly off during the years, noticed it
specifically during 2012 US presidential elections. Rasmussen is even
worse. 538 is the best aggregate site, although I feel it always drags a
bit behind, but at least their weighing scheme makes it more accurate
than Realclear aggregate which is screwed by likes of Rasmussen.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 05 04:29PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 4:16:30 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > > Please don't speak in this unbecoming shallow manner! Thanks in advance. :)
 
> > Show me where I ever said that I don't recognize a beautiful woman when I see one. My point here was that she was unrealistically unsullied by the weather. It wasn't a "drooling" post. Geez.
 
> Oh shhh. It was a partial drooling post from a man who criticizes me for judging people too much on the basis of their appearance.
 
And you must know I'm right, or you wouldn't be grasping at straws every time I mention anyone's appearance. Is there really anything left to say about this that we haven't said already? You said yourself the other day that you were sick of it.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jun 05 05:06PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 7:29:49 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 4:16:30 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
 
> > Oh shhh. It was a partial drooling post from a man who criticizes me for judging people too much on the basis of their appearance.
 
> And you must know I'm right, or you wouldn't be grasping at straws every time I mention anyone's appearance. Is there really anything left to say about this that we haven't said already? You said yourself the other day that you were sick of it.
 
No actually, I don't think you're right. I think I'm right. :)
 
Razzing somebody never gets old. All in good fun.
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: Jun 06 03:11AM -0500

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 00:17:53 +0300, TT <ascii@dprk.kp> wrote:
| Watched...
|
| The Lady from Shanghai (1947)
| Essential Noir from Welles. Stunning atmospheric noir visuals,
| complicated confusing but interesting script, luminous blonded Rita
| Hayworth... and finally, lol, porky Orson Welles as the hero with most
| horrible Irish accent I've ever heard. Also probably the first mirror
| house shooting scene? A must see for cinephiles and noir fans. 7/10
 
 
See https://gomovies.to/film/the-lady-from-shanghai-17201/
A typo in the description as it says the film is released in 1964.
 
 
One can identify with the sentiments of Orson's character when he sees
the Rita's character...brain shuts off...
 
 
 
 
|
| Funny Games (1997)
| Haneke's disturbing and terrifying story about a couple young men
| terrorizing a family. Simple and sick but very effective horror. I
| thought the lead actor did a terrific job on portraying snobbish
| monster. 8/10
 
 
There appears to be a remake in 2008?
 
FF
Federer Fanatic <TheRelentlessTide@nospam.invalid>: Jun 06 03:13AM -0500

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017 01:22:07 +0300, TT <ascii@dprk.kp> wrote:
| Gracchus kirjoitti 6.6.2017 klo 1:07:
|> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 2:17:46 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
|>> Watched...
|>>
|>> The Lady from Shanghai (1947)
|>> Essential Noir from Welles. Stunning atmospheric noir visuals,
|>> complicated confusing but interesting script, luminous blonded Rita
|>> Hayworth... and finally, lol, porky Orson Welles as the hero with most
|>> horrible Irish accent I've ever heard. Also probably the first mirror
|>> house shooting scene? A must see for cinephiles and noir fans. 7/10
|>
|> I loved the mirror house scene. Funny how Hayworth remained perfectly gorgeous, unsweaty, and "Gilda-like" even in the tropical sun. Was Welles really already fat in that film? I don't recall that.
|>
|
| Nah, a bit roundfaced I thought. And damn Hayworth looked probably even
| better than in Gilda, helped by perfect lighting etc.
|
| https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/49/7c/09/497c095887220b12c2ecf549d5538db6.jpg
|
|>> Funny Games (1997)
|>> Haneke's disturbing and terrifying story about a couple young men
|>> terrorizing a family. Simple and sick but very effective horror. I
|>> thought the lead actor did a terrific job on portraying snobbish
|>> monster. 8/10
|>
|> So now you're a Haneke fan? What a turnaround. ;)
|>
|
| Tomorrow Federer fan.
 
 
That will be the day....NOT...;-)
 
FF
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jun 06 11:48AM +0300

Court_1 kirjoitti 6.6.2017 klo 1:42:
>> horrible Irish accent I've ever heard. Also probably the first mirror
>> house shooting scene? A must see for cinephiles and noir fans. 7/10
 
> What did you think about Orson's laughable Irish accent? That didn't knock the film down a bit for you? Orson wasn't fat yet in that movie but he was well on his way--bloated face.
 
As I wrote above, most ridiculous attempt at Irish accent I've ever
heard. I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. I laughed.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jun 06 11:59AM +0300

Court_1 kirjoitti 6.6.2017 klo 2:11:
 
> "This is a fast-paced thriller/horror with some disturbing images (i.e. the dead kid with blood all over the surrounding walls.) It has a lot of flaws in the story though. For example, no phone in the summer home, the husband and wife taking their time doing this and that in the house after the bad guys left for a bit instead of getting out of the house and finding help, the fact that the husband didn't call the police when he dried out the cell phone (why on earth would he call a friend first and not the police?) The wife asked him what the police phone number was. Don't they have 911 in Austria? Also, the fact that the mother just sat there staring into space when her kid was brutally shot was weird. The husband seemed awfully passive the entire time as well as these two creeps took over his home.
 
> This is a home invasion movie gone terribly wrong. Another thing which was annoying was the directors use of long drawn out paused shots which seemed to last for an eternity. He would pause the camera on the characters after their son was blown to pieces as if time had stopped (I guess in a way for the parents it had.) Another annoying gimmick was the characters would talk into the camera as if talking to the audience. A violent and disturbing film with some very strange decisions made by the lead characters which IMO further put their live in jeopardy. Not a bad film and as I said fast-paced but some aspects made it questionable. I also saw the US remake with Naomi Watts and that was worse than this film. I think this film was better paced and more suspenseful." 6/10
 
> TT, what say you about my comments?
 
Some legit, some not. Your phone claim doesn't make sense as they did
have a cell phone. I agree with talking to the camera thing (&remote
control scene), which almost took it down to a 7. There may be some
minor flaws but I don't recall feeling this invested/disturbed with a
horror film for a while so my rating is simply because it worked for me,
plus for the lead performance which was both amusing and terrifying.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jun 06 12:02PM +0300

stephenJ kirjoitti 6.6.2017 klo 2:19:
 
> No thanks, too many ads/videos going through all those pages. Besides,
> I've done enough 'lists' around here, LOL. Mine, this one, TT's 250,
> seems enough to show I top all the lists.
 
What lists have you topped except the one about popular movies for 2000s?
bmoore@nyx.net: Jun 05 05:44PM -0700

"Londoners will see an increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days," Mr. Khan said. "No reason to be alarmed. One of the things the police, all of us, need to do is make sure we're as safe as we possibly can be. I'm reassured that we are one of the safest global cities in the world, if not the safest global city in the world, but we always evolve and review ways to make sure that we remain as safe as we possibly can."
 
Trump: "At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is 'no reason to be alarmed!'"
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/us/politics/britain-attack-trump-twitter-storm.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
 
But that's OK, right? Trump won, after all. It's OK if he's a POS. Hillary lost!
calimero377@gmx.de: Jun 05 11:37PM -0700


> Trump: "At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is 'no reason to be alarmed!'"
 
> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/us/politics/britain-attack-trump-twitter-storm.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
 
> But that's OK, right? Trump won, after all. It's OK if he's a POS. Hillary lost!
 
 
Are you dense or what?
 
What did the mayor mean by "no reason to be alarmed"? That people should not be afraid of the POLICE????
 
 
Max
reilloc <reilloc@gmail.com>: Jun 05 10:57PM -0500

On 6/5/2017 4:01 PM, stephenJ wrote:
> the kid in everyone. After a dry spell that almost killed it, Dreamworks
> Animation is quietly finding their marks again.
 
> 672/1000
 
Is that 672 Doritos out of 1,000 in the bag? How many Mountain Dew Code
Reds?
 
LNC
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jun 05 09:10PM -0700

> Is that 672 Doritos out of 1,000 in the bag? How many Mountain Dew Code
 
Hahahaha
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jun 05 04:53PM -0700

On Tuesday, June 6, 2017 at 3:23:35 AM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Guga was probably weakest player mentally to win 3 grand slams in the last 30 years, he was only marginally ahead of Kafelnikov in that regard. If Guga plays Nadal it would be like hitting against a back wall both mentally and game wise, Nadal would get balls back with a lot of spin, Guga would be forced to hit a lot of balls and yet seeing them coming back, time after time Nadal's superior movement would allow him to turn defense into offense and frustrate Guga.
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Jun 05 06:22PM -0500

On 6/3/2017 10:15 AM, Guypers wrote:
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
> Delpo gave up after the first set?
 
When someone wins by a score of 7-5, 6-1, there's typically too much
talk about 'giving up'. Give credit to the winner for breaking the other
player's spirit, hard to do given that they are a professional and by
nature highly competitive.
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jun 05 04:37PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 7:22:47 PM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
> talk about 'giving up'. Give credit to the winner for breaking the other
> player's spirit, hard to do given that they are a professional and by
> nature highly competitive.
 
My ass, most of them do, Monfils today in the third set, Fed at 08 FO final, Borg tanked routinely!
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jun 05 04:47PM -0700

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 4:37:42 PM UTC-7, Guypers wrote:
 
> My ass, most of them do, Monfils today in the third set, Fed at 08 FO final, Borg tanked routinely!
 
I didn't see today's match and don't know it he tanked, but Montfils is a mental flake and idiot who never learned to pace himself in a 3-of-5 set match. That accounts for a lot of his losses. Borg also tired himself out in matches early in his career, but I don't remember that being an issue or him ever tanking in prime years of '77-81. I've no doubt that Federer did tank the FO '08 final. That's an isolated case for him though.
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