Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 11 topics

Sunday, July 16, 2017

Jason White <infiniti_g35_guy88@yahoo.com>: Jul 16 04:10PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 9:25:18 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
 
> It happens to big guys like that, and it also shows the big advantage
> Federer had over not over Cilic but also Murray and Nadal by skipping
> the clay events avoiding that kind of wear and tear.
 
He was overcome with emotion because he knew the injury would prevent him from fully competing. That's understandable. After all the hard work, to be dealt bad luck on the biggest occasion is unfair. From what I see, he's a great guy and deserves better. He has the game to win the biggest titles.
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jul 16 11:12PM

On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 16:10:44 -0700, Jason White wrote:
 
> work, to be dealt bad luck on the biggest occasion is unfair. From what
> I see, he's a great guy and deserves better. He has the game to win the
> biggest titles.
 
Apparently it takes more than "having the game" to actually win them
though. I'm a fan of Cilic and have been for a long time, but this was a
bad showing for him, blisters or no blisters.
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:21PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 12:42:42 PM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
Surprised Sampras never did it. Anyone know what was the least number of sets he lost en route to a Wimbledon title?
Makarand Patil <sportsfan123@cooltoad.com>: Jul 16 04:06PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 3:21:50 PM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
> Surprised Sampras never did it. Anyone know what was the least number of sets he lost en route to a Wimbledon title?
 
IIRC, Sampras lost only 1 set (to Todd Martin) in 1994. Back then it was more surprising that Sampras lost that set like 6-3 or 6-4, not in a tie-breaker. That was the least number of sets he lost at Wimbledon.
 
Fed should have had a straights sets victory in 2006 Wimbledon as well.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jul 16 03:56PM -0700

Op zondag 16 juli 2017 17:04:34 UTC+2 schreef Whisper:
> That would be an amazing way to cap an amazing yr. 2 slams each for the
> old guys?
 
This is eerily similar to your dumbass prediction of Rafa beating Fed at Wimbledon in straights this year, based on the FO and their h2h history... Just ignore all the 'irrelevant' stuff that happened this year (like Roger totally owning Rafa this year on less favorable surfaces than grass).
 
Both destined to fail, epically, although I hope they do meet in the USO final.
undecided <costasz@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:59PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 6:56:59 PM UTC-4, kaennorsing wrote:
> > old guys?
 
> This is eerily similar to your dumbass prediction of Rafa beating Fed at Wimbledon in straights this year, based on the FO and their h2h history... Just ignore all the 'irrelevant' stuff that happened this year (like Roger totally owning Rafa this year on less favorable surfaces than grass).
 
> Both destined to fail, epically, although I hope they do meet in the USO final.
 
I also had Rafa beating Fed in the final in Hops Contest. I was hoping for a 5 set thriller though. It would have been a glorious match, the #1 and #2 both in great form meeting in the final. Rafa had to go and fuck it all up for me.
reilloc <reilloc@gmail.com>: Jul 16 05:21PM -0500

...if he hadn't lost to Muller on July 10th. He would have won last year
but didn't play. He would have won in 2015, but lost to Dustin Brown on
July 2nd. He would have won in 2014, but lost to Kyrgios on July 1st.
2013, he would have won but was beaten by Steve Darcis on June 24th.
His 2012 defeat to Lukas Rosol prevented his winning that year. Losing
the final in 2011, to Djokovic, stopped him from starting the seven-year
winning streak you suggest he might have--except that he lost. All.
Those. Years.
 
LNC
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jul 16 10:25PM

On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 17:21:45 -0500, reilloc wrote:
 
> winning streak you suggest he might have--except that he lost. All.
> Those. Years.
 
> LNC
 
He'll win next year, unless someone beats him!
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jul 16 03:39PM -0700

Op maandag 17 juli 2017 00:21:49 UTC+2 schreef reilloc:
> winning streak you suggest he might have--except that he lost. All.
> Those. Years.
 
> LNC
 
If only Rafa can avoid that one guy that beats him at Wimbledon every year... But then another one shows up, so unlucky!
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jul 16 10:40PM

On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 15:39:39 -0700, kaennorsing wrote:
 
> If only Rafa can avoid that one guy that beats him at Wimbledon every
> year... But then another one shows up, so unlucky!
 
And this guy has beaten him twice at Wimbledon...
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:46PM -0700

On Sunday, 16 July 2017 23:39:41 UTC+1, kaennorsing wrote:
> > Those. Years.
 
> > LNC
 
> If only Rafa can avoid that one guy that beats him at Wimbledon every year... But then another one shows up, so unlucky!
 
yeah well everyone just retires or doesn't bother vs Fed! he'd prob win then!
alinefx@alinefx.com: Jul 16 03:48PM -0700

19 > 15.
undecided <costasz@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:58PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 6:21:49 PM UTC-4, reilloc wrote:
> winning streak you suggest he might have--except that he lost. All.
> Those. Years.
 
> LNC
 
Of course. But really, other than Rafa, who else could have given Fed trouble in the final today? Did you guys enjoy one of the ugliest slam finals I have ever seen?
undecided <costasz@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:56PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 2:36:49 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
 
> > > : (
 
> > I had the same discussion with a friend after Cilic's awful performance in the final. If Rafa were there we would have been treated to another thriller,probably 5 sets.
 
> The tournament already had a 5-set Rafa thriller--his 4th-round loss to the titan Gilles Müller.
 
Yeah, he shouldn't have lost that one. He basically fucked around for 2 sets before he got serious.
CQ Huang <nick@devx.co.nz>: Jul 16 03:25PM -0700

It wasn't Nadal's ass Federer whipped in the final.
alinefx@alinefx.com: Jul 16 03:47PM -0700

What're you smoking? You do realize the fed has beaten Nadal 4 straight times going back all the way to 2015, don't you ? If not, you're a moron .
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Jul 16 03:21PM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 3:06:51 PM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> > usually much more productive post-Wimbledon than Nadal. It'll probably
> > come down to who plays more events.
 
> Depends on how much he decides to play post-USO. I get the feeling that number 1 is no big deal for him anymore.
 
 
Fed said in mid-June that he'd be playing a full schedule for the rest of the
year, though I guess interpretations of that can vary. My take is that he
*does* want the YE #1.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jul 16 03:30PM -0700

Op maandag 17 juli 2017 00:06:51 UTC+2 schreef SliceAndDice:
> > usually much more productive post-Wimbledon than Nadal. It'll probably
> > come down to who plays more events.
 
> Depends on how much he decides to play post-USO. I get the feeling that number 1 is no big deal for him anymore.
 
But it would be weird if the GOAT doesn't end up with most YE #1, wouldn't it? Only be fitting if Fed ends this year as #1. It's going to be hard to stop him anyway if he plays a regular schedule from here on. Only likely candidate is Rafa, but we know his 2nd half of the year is usually dreadful.
 
So the road to YE #1 for Fed shouldn't be that hard. He should just focus on Cincy and USO, hopefully win at least one of them and then play Basel and really go after the wTF trophy.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jul 16 03:43PM -0700

Op maandag 17 juli 2017 00:21:18 UTC+2 schreef Carey:
 
> Fed said in mid-June that he'd be playing a full schedule for the rest of the
> year, though I guess interpretations of that can vary. My take is that he
> *does* want the YE #1.
 
He also said something like 'Only being #1 matters, any other ranking is pretty much irrelevant'. No doubt he wants it!
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:46PM -0700

On Sunday, 16 July 2017 23:06:51 UTC+1, SliceAndDice wrote:
> > usually much more productive post-Wimbledon than Nadal. It'll probably
> > come down to who plays more events.
 
> Depends on how much he decides to play post-USO. I get the feeling that number 1 is no big deal for him anymore.
 
he knows the most important record is beyond him.
kaennorsing <ljubitsis@hotmail.com>: Jul 16 03:36PM -0700

Op maandag 17 juli 2017 00:07:59 UTC+2 schreef Breeder:
 
> > Sweet? It would be mindblowing. Winning 3 out of 3 slams played in a year after knee surgery, 6 months off and virtually written off as a 36 year old?
 
> > It already is more than sweet right now. It's hard to comprehend. Now if he also wins the USO let's just make him king of the world or something. :))
 
> Were this anybody else, I'd be very suspicious of the results and start looking for chemical explanations. The fact that I don't believe PEDs are a factor--and I don't think anyone else does either--speaks very highly of how Federer is regarded.
 
Agreed, although I wouldn't say anyone (there is one around here). It's because it's clear to see how his backhand is technically better this year, which has helped his entire game become more offensive and efficient. Then his confidence was built up from the start of the year... And so a fit, well rested Federer full of confidence is just something else.
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:33PM -0700

On Sunday, 16 July 2017 23:15:13 UTC+1, SliceAndDice wrote:
> > and final. Really boring Wimbledon I must say.
 
> > But congrats Fed(fans) for the Wimbledon record.
 
> I thought the French Open was a lot worse to be honest. Just 2 five setters post the 3rd round. Result never in doubt.
 
lol yeah never in doubt despite hundreds of posts about how Stan was going to slam Nadal!
The Iceberg <iceberg.rules@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:34PM -0700

On Sunday, 16 July 2017 16:00:12 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 7:58:24 AM UTC-7, soccerfan777 wrote:
 
> > You guys deserve a drink for all your trolling efforts for last 15 years
 
> They need more than one drink right now. Give them a case of whisky.
 
Cool! Thanks! :)
SliceAndDice <vishalkn@gmail.com>: Jul 16 03:24PM -0700

Federer on Nadal winning Roland Garros:
https://twitter.com/rogerfederer/status/874020937322168320
 
Nadal on Federer winning Wimbledon:
https://twitter.com/RafaelNadal
 
Both historic happenings..interesting responses :)
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Jul 16 10:24PM

I'm not sure that I'd call him a genius by any means, but "Dawn of the
Dead" is definitely one of my favorite movies.
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