Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 6 topics

Sunday, July 2, 2017

"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: Jul 02 05:09PM +0300

On 2.7.2017 13:21, Whisper wrote:
 
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He81C9YjNJk
 
> Yes, I have only ever seen 1 genius in tennis - John McEnroe Jnr
 
He's seen another. "I wish I could play like him ...".
 
--
"Donald Trump is the weak man's vision of a strong man."
-- Charles Cooke
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jul 02 07:17AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 6:28:57 AM UTC+10, undecided wrote:
 
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He81C9YjNJk
 
> > LOL, Mickie had nomfh, worse than Edberg's, push push push, I have a better than, imagine what Rafa would do with that, would beat Mac 61,61,60 on grass!!!!!!!
 
> Totally different kind of game. Mac's was all finesse. To this day, he gives everyone a run for their money on the senior's tour. If he had better mobility he would be winning everything and he plays guys 20 years younger like Roddick, Flipper, etc. His shot selection is totally unpredictable and well placed. I don't think the modern players are used to opponents like that.
 
If he had better mobility, he was not gifted in that area and it is overall package that needs to be considered.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jul 02 07:23AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 8:25:06 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> > Yes. So were Arazi, Bahrami, and the Krishnans.
 
> Those guys won slams, were No.1, dominated all time greats
> Borg/Connors/Lendl?
 
Mac dominated Connors who was 8 years older than him but he did not dominate Lendl or Borg.
 
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Jul 02 09:10AM -0700

Yes Whisper sneaks in BS rather confidently thinking no one will catch him. He did not dominate Connors either. He lost to Connors at both Wimbledon and US open multiple times. Their rivalry at slams was pretty even
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 02 09:50PM +1000

Nadal d Federer 64 63 63
 
Venus d Wozniacki 62 63
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Manuel aka Xax <xamigax@gmail.com>: Jul 02 05:40AM -0700

Le vendredi 30 juin 2017 12:36:54 UTC+2, DavidW a écrit :
> http://home.pacific.net.au/~davidw/tennis/contest/rst_2017sp_WM.html
 
> Entries must be posted before the first ball is struck in London on Monday.
 
> Good luck.
 
Not sure why, but the link from the webpage fails to open the pdf version (the one I like the most when having to pick).
Here is the direct link to that pdf:
http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/draws/ms/msdraw.pdf
For the ladies:
http://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/scores/draws/ls/lsdraw.pdf
 
Will give both a look, most likely before picking four names :-)
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jul 02 06:19PM +0300

Nadal d. Djokovic
Gal Gadot d. Lynda Carter
 
If the latter two don't play then Kerber d Kvitova
"Scall5" <nospam@home.net>: Jul 02 10:39AM -0500

"DavidW" wrote in message news:oj59k2$1u6u$1@gioia.aioe.org...
 
Hello,
 
The draws are out for Hops's former contest:
*******************
 
I'll go out on a limb with:
Marin Cilic over Miles Raonic
Petra Kvitova over Karolina Pliskova
 
Thanks DavidW!!!
-----------------------------
Scall5
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jul 02 08:56AM -0700

> Marin Cilic over Miles Raonic
 
I like your picks but I hope Federer is in the final, and it will be against Cilic.
Bharath Purohit <acebharath@gmail.com>: Jul 02 09:08AM -0700

Oh fuck. Wishper has picked Rafa ! Now Rafa wont even get paas first week for sure :-(
Bharath Purohit <acebharath@gmail.com>: Jul 02 09:09AM -0700

*pass
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jul 02 08:03AM -0400

On Sun, 2 Jul 2017 21:03:52 +1000, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>
wrote:
 
 
>> Klowns.
 
>Not sure why the anger? Lots of tennis experts in the media are
>predicting a Rafa win too.
 
i saw that. i personally think he's going to crash out early, but if
he's into 2nd week i think the beast returns and he wins.
 
>If it happens it doesn't diminish what happened in AO. On that day
>Federer played fearless tennis & prevailed in the end. Gutsy stuff.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jul 02 08:05AM -0400

>intense and the outcome very much in doubt.
 
>If you put a gun to my head and forced me to pick a winner I'd think
>long and hard about it, but in the end probably tip Nadal.
 
IMO fed's wins on HC over nadal from jan-march were against a nadal
just coming back to finding form again, and on fed's fave surface, and
the lone slam was a 5th set come from behind.
 
people are taking that to mean fed is in dominant form over nads. IMO,
nadal will reverse it if he's good enough to get past the 1st week.
 
bob
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jul 02 05:29AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 8:05:34 AM UTC-4, bob wrote:
 
> IMO fed's wins on HC over nadal from jan-march were against a nadal
> just coming back to finding form again, and on fed's fave surface,
 
??? Grass is Federer's favorite surface! IW and Miami are slow hard court surfaces which favor Nadal!
 
I thought you said you were going to Germany and wouldn't be able to post?
 
*rolls eyes*
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jul 02 07:05AM -0700

> But I happen to think if Rafa can reproduce the same FO final form he's
most likely to beat Fed in straights, even if Fed played the same as he
did in AO final.
 
If Fed is in the final it means you can't really use the 'he wasn't at
his best' excuse can you? Especially if he waltzes in barely losing a set.
 
When Nadal destroyed Federer in the FO some year, still he didn't win in str8 sets and they played probably the longest five sets final.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jul 02 07:11AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 9:08:57 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> > he did in the AO fifth set. Eight BH winner in that set alone, not to mention
> > the two huge FHs at 4-3, one after a 26-shot rally. A screamer down the line.
 
> Yes, but Rafa still led 3-1 & had many break points in the latter games.
 
But Nadal was under the pump right from the beginning of the fifth set, he was down a break points practically in all his service game in the fifth. He broke Fed in the first game of the set and had a chance in the last game of the set but apart from those two games Federer held serves pretty easily.
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jul 02 07:12AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 10:05:42 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
 
> If Fed is in the final it means you can't really use the 'he wasn't at
> his best' excuse can you? Especially if he waltzes in barely losing a set.
 
> When Nadal destroyed Federer in the FO some year, still he didn't win in str8 sets and they played probably the longest five sets final.
 
In the dark, Fed was sick, should have won in 3 sets and 7 Ws in a row, greatest record in tennis for 100 years!
"Pelle Svanslös" <pelle@svans.com>: Jul 02 05:29PM +0300

On 2.7.2017 17:11, John Liang wrote:
>>> the two huge FHs at 4-3, one after a 26-shot rally. A screamer down the line.
 
>> Yes, but Rafa still led 3-1 & had many break points in the latter games.
 
> But Nadal was under the pump right from the beginning of the fifth set, he was down a break points practically in all his service game in the fifth. He broke Fed in the first game of the set and had a chance in the last game of the set but apart from those two games Federer held serves pretty easily.
Yes. How did Whisper make Tier 1?
 
--
"Donald Trump is the weak man's vision of a strong man."
-- Charles Cooke
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jul 02 07:54AM -0700

On Monday, July 3, 2017 at 12:29:52 AM UTC+10, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> >> Yes, but Rafa still led 3-1 & had many break points in the latter games.
 
> > But Nadal was under the pump right from the beginning of the fifth set, he was down a break points practically in all his service game in the fifth. He broke Fed in the first game of the set and had a chance in the last game of the set but apart from those two games Federer held serves pretty easily.
> Yes. How did Whisper make Tier 1?
 
Counting from the bottom.
 
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jul 02 08:34AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 10:29:52 AM UTC-4, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
 
> --
> "Donald Trump is the weak man's vision of a strong man."
> -- Charles Cooke
 
Tier 3, like his hero mickenroe
Pelle Svanslos <pelle@svans.los>: Jul 02 02:42PM +0300

President Trump is more than his own worst enemy. The damage he has
inflicted during his first five months in office has undermined
Republican congressional leaders, frustrated members of his Cabinet,
exasperated top advisers and strained relations with some of the
nation's most important allies. This week's case study is health care.
 
The most significant domestic initiative of the Trump presidency and the
Republican Party is the fulfillment of a promise to "repeal and replace"
the Affordable Care Act. That Republicans are struggling to find an
alternative to Obamacare is plain to see. But as congressional leaders
scratch to find the votes to pass a bill in the Senate, the president
has demonstrated that he is an unreliable partner in the battle.
 
On Friday morning, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was
trying to balance potentially irreconcilable demands of hard-line
conservatives and more moderate conservatives, the president decided to
offer his own solution with a tweet: If the Senate can't get there, why
not just repeal now and replace sometime in the future?
 
Never mind that earlier in the year, he took the opposite position. At
that time, McConnell and some others preferred to move with an immediate
repeal vote that included a trigger for implementation sometime in the
future, giving elected officials the ability to say they kept a promise
and enough time to try to find a replacement. But the president overrode
that idea, demanding that replacement had to accompany repeal.
 
Now, at the worst possible moment, Trump seemed to have shifted again,
leaving Senate lawmakers frustrated and baffled.
 
The idea of going to repeal now, replace later was not originally the
president's. His tweet came minutes after Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) made a
similar statement on "Fox and Friends." Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), a
holdout, has been saying the same thing.
 
The president appears to have no commitment to an explicit strategy for
getting a health-care bill to his desk, only a desire for victory and
limited patience for the legislative process. He also has no fixed views
on the substance of health-care reform, having made contradictory
statements about the topic throughout his campaign and since.
 
He has said he wants a health-care system with heart, one in which
everyone is covered. But he embraces legislation that would leave 22 to
23 million additional Americans without coverage by 2026, according to
the Congressional Budget Office. When the House passed its health-care
bill in May, he showered it and GOP leaders with praise. Later he called
the measure "mean." He campaigned against cuts in entitlements —
Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. The congressional legislation
would revamp Medicaid, significantly slowing the growth in spending.
 
The president's suggestion to repeal now and replace later begs the
larger question for Republicans. GOP lawmakers have spent years
campaigning against Obamacare, and over the past months, in both houses
of Congress, hours and hours of granular discussions have been held.
 
The problem is not one of needing more time to come up with a perfect
solution. It is the question of whether Republicans are prepared to
stand behind their criticisms of Obamacare and the political
consequences that could come with significantly revising it.
 
Republican elected officials have campaigned as the party of smaller
government, lower taxes and less federal spending. The result of that
appears to be a health-care bill that would knock millions and millions
off the coverage rolls, including many lower-income Americans now on
Medicaid. To date, the outlines of that solution have found little
support from the public.
 
McConnell will plunge ahead with a repeal-and-replace effort, despite
the president's interjection. Republicans now have a choice. Either they
support that kind of package or they don't. They can't look to the
president on this: He has provided limited help and little political
cover. If anything, he's made their task even more difficult as the past
week showed.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-proves-to-be-an-unreliable-ally-to-republicans-in-the-health-care-fight/2017/07/01/907ca906-5dd4-11e7-9fc6-c7ef4bc58d13_story.html?utm_term=.55debd484475
 
Once an Apprentice, always an Apprentice.
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jul 02 05:41AM -0700

On Sunday, July 2, 2017 at 7:43:00 AM UTC-4, Pelle Svanslos wrote:
> week showed.
 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-proves-to-be-an-unreliable-ally-to-republicans-in-the-health-care-fight/2017/07/01/907ca906-5dd4-11e7-9fc6-c7ef4bc58d13_story.html?utm_term=.55debd484475
 
> Once an Apprentice, always an Apprentice.
 
You can be rich and still be white trash!
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jul 02 07:59AM -0400

On Sat, 1 Jul 2017 21:20:04 -0700 (PDT), Gracchus
>> (health, education maybe) that can help them help themselves - but
>> that's only for those willing to do the work.
 
>Makes sense. A higher tax burden on the wealthiest is by no means a total solution in itself. But in order to make things more equitable in ways we've discussed, those tax rates inevitably will go up.
 
and i've no problem with that. the only thing though, is that the end
result should be the main goal. what i think we have now is many
politicians pandering to the lower income folks just to get their
votes, promising gov't help for things that never materialize to
anywhere near what would help them move to a middle class. sure a guy
will vote for something small and free over nothing, but that never
helps him long term.
 
OTOH, if (rather than just jacking taxes, or instead of raising taxes)
they also changed the corporate climate and structure such that a many
could work hard at even a low level job not requiring much/any
education, but still feed his family, no debt, buy a car and modest
home or decent apt, then he'd have a lot more motive to do it rather
than say "heck, i'll just stay home."
 
easier said than done, i'm sure, but gosh, gov't doesn't seem to even
want to approach this. maybe those big CEOs are in their pockets too
much, eh? yep, another thing that badly needs fixing. that's something
bernie talked about a lot, and i had hoped trump would be immune to -
big interests.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jul 02 08:00AM -0400


>> Makes sense. A higher tax burden on the wealthiest is by no means a total solution in itself. But in order to make things more equitable in ways we've discussed, those tax rates inevitably will go up.
 
>Hell, I heard that Trump's latest Trumpcare proposition would drop now
>30 million people off health insurance, not 20 any more.
 
TT, you don't know jack about our health insurance situation so why
don't you stick to europe's.
 
 
and i'm here talking about solutions and you just want to whine about
trump. c'mon, you're better than that, aren't you?
 
>Then Trump diverted the attention by attacking Morning Joe and haven't
>heard about it since... Maddow speculated that that's why Trump did his
>outrageously stupid tweets... a diversion.
 
oh big sigh. come live here a while and watch what's going on.
 
bob
bob <bob@nospam.net>: Jul 02 07:51AM -0400

>> ScarJo, Samuel Jackson and about a half dozen other big names. think i
>> might be seen in an extra scene running carrying a DD coffee.
 
>So freaking envious! :)
 
they film a movie about once a month outside this 1 atlanta office,
couple months ago the rock was there, clint eastwood and tom hanks
filmed part of sully there, etc. but i never saw a setup like they had
friday: 4 big "star trailors" with security guards outside each one,
cranes all over the park, lots of security for filming. apparently
robert downey jr. zoe saldana, chris pratt, hemsworth, mark ruffalo
and renner are also in the movie. walking back from my usual DD coffee
run, guy says wait here - unless you want to be an extra. just run
with everyone else when i say run, i did a jaros "spill the coffee."
lol.
 
bob
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