Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 13 topics

Monday, July 17, 2017

Shakes <kvcshake@gmail.com>: Jul 17 12:42AM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 6:10:18 PM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> > I did not get the sense that Shakes hates Federer. He is just more of a Sampras/Djoker fan who once was a Fed fan but gave up on him for some reason. Right?
 
> He can love or hate whoever he wants but he has his own preferences and wishes as well and one of them was he didn't want Federer to win the 8th wimbledon, and having his own preferences is no different than others that favors one player or another.
 
Don't you think love and/or hate are too strong words to use when it comes to players ?
 
In any case, I don't know why you called me out for hiding, because I wasn't. I hardly posted on any of the matches this whole fortnight. That was what I had posted in response to Court_1 in another thread before Wim even started - that I don't really care who wins, though I would be pulling for Djok (but I knew Djok wasn't ready to win anything major yet).
Shakes <kvcshake@gmail.com>: Jul 17 12:53AM -0700

On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 1:40:25 PM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
 
> > Correct.
 
> So you stopped watching when Djokovic got out. What does it mean?
> You have a player that you like the same I do.
 
Yeah. :) Glad you realized that. It's not because I wanted him to derail Fed.
 
 
> Why did you express many times that you don't want Federer to win
> his 8th Wimbledon?
 
You are taking my statements more seriously than they are meant to be. As a Sampras fan, I would've loved for him to share the Wim record. It's not like I am practicing voodoo or praying to stop Fed from winning.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:47PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 3:31 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
>> And once Djok lost, I kind of lost interest in the tournament.
 
> This shows it all ;)
 
I only lose interest when both Fed & Rafa are out.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 08:59PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 1:45 AM, rec.sport.tennis wrote:
> "Muscles" won slams in 1953 and 1970 - so Federer has some way to go yet.
 
slam wins;
 
1953 & 1972 - 19 yrs apart.
 
 
 
slam finals;
 
1953 & 1974 - 21 yrs apart
 
 
 
slam semis;
 
1953 & 1977 - 24 yrs apart
 
 
 
slam quarters;
 
1952 & 1977 - 25 yrs apart
 
 
That's a quarter of a century. He was making slam semis at age 43.
 
He came very close to winning slams in his teens, 20's, 30's & 40's.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jul 17 04:46AM -0700

On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 8:59:42 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Completely different scenario comparing 1950s grand slam to open era.
John Liang <jliang70@gmail.com>: Jul 16 11:20PM -0700

On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 1:59:20 PM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
> > > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
> > Cilic got taken apart like the big serving clown he is. I think most of the top players would have taken him apart.
 
> Cilic is more than a big server but he does have a terrible record vs all of the Big Four players. He got lucky Nadal and Murray lost earlier IMO because I doubt he would have made it past both.
 
Murray may be able to defuse Cilic's big serve but Nadal I doubt it specially considering his recent record on grass against this type of players.
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Jul 17 06:46AM -0500

On 7/16/2017 10:24 PM, Court_1 wrote:
>> match is underway. But then again, your lack of integrity has shown on
>> numerous occasions these past couple months, so no surprise.
 
> Your reading comp skills are once again faulty.
 
Once again? You mean never. You're the one who has shown a complete
inability to understand the meaning of words, and have proven to be a
Clinton-level dissembler. And no, picking Federer to win the tournament
isn't the same as making a match prediction with scoreline.
 
You are deeply delusional, about multiple things.
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 08:38PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 1:17 AM, Guypers wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 5:35:06 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
 
>> Whisper, you jinxed him lol. Cilic found his inner Lisciki today.
 
> Cilic played like shit, what happened?
 
Cilic had breakpoint to lead 3-1 & then serve for 4-1. A few minutes
later he was down 3-6 0-3 & panicked, realized the match could be over
63 60 60 in 5 minutes. Just overwhelmed that something so precious to
him could be demolished so quickly.
 
I reckon Conchita Martinez woulda helped him a lot mentally. She did an
amazing job with Muguruza.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 08:40PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 1:18 AM, John Liang wrote:
 
>> I actually like Cilic and his no-nonsense aggressive tennis. He seems like a nice guy and apparently he's extremely well-liked on tour but I would like the graceful Federer to prevail tomorrow!
 
> True, there is nothing to dislike Cilic.
 
Yes, but there is a lot to be critical about in terms of being a tennis
champion. You don't cry mid match ffs. Never saw Krajicek, Flipper or
Stich behave like this.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Jul 17 04:45AM -0700

On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 6:40:26 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
 
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
 
Yes, but now we know a little bit more about why he did cry. He had the blister injury before the match and I guess he went out there to try his best but realized his mobility was compromised and thus couldn't give his all. Once he realized it, he became emotional. In his press conference post match he said he had put so much work into this grass season and was playing some of his best tennis so it was some bad luck that the blister became as bad as it did right before the final. He said he began to feel the blister in his match vs Querrey and it worsened.
 
Shit happens.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:29PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 2:49 AM, stephenJ wrote:
> After today's match, Mac said that Pete thought that after he won
> Wimbledon #7, nobody would catch him in a million years.
 
> This has to be just about as tough as the day Fed won slam #15. Brutal.
 
Makes you wonder how he would have finished his career if he were
chasing Fed's 8 titles? Obviously he'd have plenty of motivation to
keep 'tying up his laces'.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:36PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 3:04 AM, kaennorsing wrote:
 
> Nobody will forget Pete's amazing reign though; 7 out of 8 years will probably never be done again. Nor will 8 over 14 years. Both incredible, out of this world type of achievements. We've been spoiled with the caliber of champions in the last few generations and it seems like we're paying the price with the current and next era (19-29 year olds) of talent... or lack thereof.
 
> So I don't think Pete's in pain much - if at all. He's probably enjoying it actually, as he's a Federer fan as well... Like the rest of the world. I would like to hear from him though. Just to get his opinion.
 
His opinion would be what all of us would think in his position. He'd
say if he knew these guys were coming & would rack up these numbers,
then he most certainly would have played on with a burning desire to win
more slams. It's always more real/tangible when you're chasing an
established record, rather than trying to further your own lead.
 
It's not like he was too old or lacked ability to win slams. He just
lacked the desire & he was already on top of the pile.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:44PM +1000

>> Wimbledon #7, nobody would catch him in a million years.
 
>> This has to be just about as tough as the day Fed won slam #15. Brutal.
 
> Nah, Sampras made his peace when Fed got to 14 and had the career slam. He just miscalculated given his own struggles to first top 12, and then finish with 14. That was a monumental >feat.
 
Well he only 'miscalculated' in hindsight right?
 
It's like if Fed quits now & some guy wins 9 Wimbledons in 15 yrs - he'd
be thinking 'man if I knew this was going to happen I woulda played on'.
 
 
 
> The last guy before him to get into double digit slams was Borg, and he quite with the pressures at 26.
 
> The only ones who keep getting gutted are mindless fanatics who swore by 7543, then switched from GOAT to BOAT to H2H to considering 2014, 2015 Federer to be "PEAK", then WEAK era, ...
 
Presume you're referring to me? I'm not gutted in any way. Fed's 8th
Wimbledon is phenomenal, & imo the greatest achievement of his career.
 
 
> And are still sucking wind or dick, as they project a Fedal final at the USO '17 which somehow is going to leave the year tied with TWO SLAMS each.
 
 
er, yeah that's what would happen if Rafa wins. What am I missing?
 
 
 
> That being the same ass, who claimed that you win Wimbledon and one more slam, and that is the best for the year.
 
 
Yes, & I also said Wim/AO is worth 10pts while FO/USO is worth 9, so not
much in it. I said if that happens then the no.1 ranking can decide it.
Nobody is going to complain about their ranking if they win Wimbledon
& AO believe me. It's a dumb argument.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
steveh_forums@yahoo.com.au: Jul 17 04:42AM -0700

...that the young meek-will-inherit-the-earth generation of male players has seen the fall of Djokovic and Murray at last, only for Federer and Nadal to make spectacular comebacks in 2017 to keep it all in the big four/five family.
steveh_forums@yahoo.com.au: Jul 17 04:39AM -0700

On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 1:45:11 AM UTC+10, Tuan wrote:
> Not taking 6 months off in 2013. If he did he would have > 20 majors by now. It's now clear that he was getting stale. His freedom from serious injury, ironically, kept him from achieving even more.
 
Maybe, maybe not. In 2014, he still has to deal with Djokovic and Nadal before they fall off cliffs. And he's never had the type of bad run that suggests total burnout (eg Nadal 2015-2016).
 
On the other hand, his two slams this year are because he's always hanging around at the end of the big tournaments and everyone else blinked when he never has. Could just as easily happened in 2015 whereas, in hindsight, 6 months off in 2013 wouldn't have had him beating Djokovic then.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:27PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 2:42 AM, stephenJ wrote:
 
> Anyway, just some trivia on two great accomplishments. Hard to believe
> that with all the great W champs the past 40 years, nobody could match
> Borg until Roger did it this year.
 
McEnroe was close in 1984. He had match points to win in straights in
rd 1 but lost 3rd set in t/b. That's the only set he lost. I think
Sampras had 2 titles where he lost only 1 set?
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:01PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 1:47 AM, stephenJ wrote:
> undisputed Open Era Greatest, Bestest, Peakest, Longevitiest, and every
> other superlative that a player can have.
 
> That's just the way it is, as of right now, July 2017.
 
There's not a lot to be critical about. It's blasphemous to disrespect
the Wimbledon king.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:22PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 2:26 AM, Jason White wrote:
 
> Incredible achievements and wins. Not many of them have come against the top rivals, which is also true. #8 came against a sobbing opponent. Conquering the tougher opponents, ones on similar historic level, is the only true "blemish." 8th win was great, but the match itself is forgettable.
 
Not from Roger though. He was superb.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:24PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 2:29 AM, Makarand Patil wrote:
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
 
> Haters gonna hate, no matter what. Fed haters, essentially the two resident Sampras fanboys, continuing to stay the same (and say the same trash "clown era, H2H" ), no matter what Fed achieves, is one certainty in RST. They are essentially hardwired that way. If they could have changed, they would have changed after 2009 Wimbledon or 2012 Wimbledon.
 
 
I change when the evidence changes. Fed has been stand alone Wimbledon
king for only a few hours, not 5 or 8 yrs.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:20PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 2:16 AM, stephenJ wrote:
> overall achievements across men and women. Really, he's so out-distanced
> the other men of the Open Era that if you want to challenge him, you
> have to mention Serena, as silly as that kind of comparison is.
 
18 was such a big number when Evert/Navratilova ruled. Hard to believe
a man has won more than that.
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 08:46PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 1:31 AM, Federer Fanatic wrote:
 
> Yes. At least that's what the BBC commentator said.
 
> FF
 
Wilander's ex.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
steveh_forums@yahoo.com.au: Jul 17 04:19AM -0700

On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 1:16:49 AM UTC+10, Court_1 wrote:
 
> For sure good genes. All of that sun damage after years on the tour has made most of the players look 10 years older but not Edberg (and he has fair skin!)
 
Quite possibly *because* he has fair skin - there's a good chance he's taken better care in the sun.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:16PM +1000

Djoker needs 1 more AO to be stand alone AO king. What are the odds
this could happen in 1 era?
 
What does it tell us about the state of current day tennis?
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jul 17 03:46AM -0700

> I'd like to, but there is absolutely no reason to trust you
 
I am trying to help instead of the nadal beating Federer in straight sets in wimbledon.
Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com>: Jul 17 09:13PM +1000

On 17/07/2017 1:55 AM, SliceAndDice wrote:
>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
>> http://www.avg.com
 
> You seem to have decided Nadal would win? :)
 
You missed the '?'
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