Digest for rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 5 topics

Monday, August 7, 2017

RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: Aug 07 07:38AM -0700

On Sunday, August 6, 2017 at 8:24:43 PM UTC-4, Carey wrote:
> What is this new 'achievent GOAT' bidness?
 
> I think Fedal are done winning Majors, but we'll see.
 
The real goat grazes high on the slope of the Andes :)
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Aug 07 10:53AM -0500

>On 8/6/2017 9:35 AM, RaspingDrive wrote:
 
> All players including Rafa will say Rafa is the achievement GOAT when he gets to 19 slams, even with the >four more needed being on clay. Provided Federer doesn't get any more.
 
Given the Wimbledon gap, Rafa will need to get to 20. Unless those four
slams are all Wimbledon.
 
Rafa has H2H on Federer so that's a tie-breaker in his favor, but he has
to close the W gap or that will trump it.
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Aug 07 11:06AM -0500

> - Master series/Super nines
 
> Sampras' part of the scale looks a bit heavier.
 
> .mikko
 
IMO, you make those kinds of comparisons when the slam total is the
same. I had Sampras > Nadal based on Wimbedons until Rafa won this past
RG, because in the end 15 > 14, there's no substitute for actual slam
trophies on the mantle, and Rafa has more.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Aug 07 11:13AM -0500

On 8/6/2017 7:57 AM, bob wrote:
 
> the 2 wimbledons is a flaw for rafa. it's what would prevent him from
> overtaking fed, even with 19 slams IMO. he needs more. and i hope he
> gets it and the 19 slams.
 
Bottom line is that if Fed and Rafa both finish with 19 slams, neither
will be undisputed GOAT, and partisans of each will shout endlessly at
the other side, Fed's talking about W and #1, Rafa's talking about RG
and H2H. But nothing will be resolved and the consensus will be co-goats.
 
The undisputed GOAT will be the guy with the most slams, and nothing
short of that will make someone undisputed GOAT.
 
Rafa needs 20 slams to be undisputed GOAT. There's no other way it can
happen for him.
 
 
 
 
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 09:27AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 9:13:26 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
 
> short of that will make someone undisputed GOAT.
 
> Rafa needs 20 slams to be undisputed GOAT. There's no other way it can
> happen for him.
 
 
So, five more.
 
Not happening.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: Aug 07 09:34AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 12:13:26 PM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
> short of that will make someone undisputed GOAT.
 
> Rafa needs 20 slams to be undisputed GOAT. There's no other way it can
> happen for him.
 
Good post! I happily endorse the criterion proposed.
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Aug 07 11:35AM -0500

On 8/7/2017 11:27 AM, Carey wrote:
>> happen for him.
 
> So, five more.
 
> Not happening.
 
If i was forced to bet something important on it, I'd agree with you,
but I'd also be worried I'd lose the bet. Rafa does have 5 full years on
Fed, and in tennis things can change quickly. I use the Serena example -
in August 2014, right before the USO, Serena was 5 slams behind Graf and
almost 33 years old. Hadn't even made the QF in any of the three slams
played that year. Looked like her chances of catching Graf were zero.
But just 11 months later, she was just 1 slam behind Graf and at that
point everyone who gave her zero chance to catch Graf in August 2014
were now saying passing Graf was inevitable. Rafa could go on a similar
tear. IMO unlikely, but also within the realm of possibility.
 
 
PS-I should have said "at least 20" for Rafa to be clear-cut GOAT,
because 20 assumes that Fed doesn't win any more.
 
 
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: Aug 07 09:36AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 12:27:36 PM UTC-4, Carey wrote:
> > happen for him.
 
> So, five more.
 
> Not happening.
 
You never know with GOAT contenders. They keep winning. As has been opined before he has three or four more years, if not more.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 07 05:22PM +0300

TT kirjoitti 7.8.2017 klo 17:08:
 
>> Yes, it's been discussed before. First mentioned by TT I believe.
 
> Yeah, when I was going through the IMDB top 250...
> Ah, the good old days... :)
 
P.S. A Hollywood version was also released in 2015, starring Kidman &
Julia Roberts. No one seen it though and it has relatively low 6,1 at IMDB.
MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net>: Aug 07 07:25AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 4:53:25 PM UTC+3, TT wrote:
 
> > http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1305806/
 
> Yeah, I've seen it and loved it (gave it a 9). We discussed it here and
> Gracs also had liked it a lot. Pretty memorable ending...
 
Agree, that was pretty great.
 
.mikko
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 07:26AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:06:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
 
 
> Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion (1970)
 
It looks good.
 
> My Man Godfrey (1936)
 
Yeah, I've heard/read a lot about this one but haven't managed to see it yet.
 
> Yi Yi (2000)
 
I've heard good things about it and it sounds interesting to me.

> IMDB crowd who've seen it (14 000 votes). It's definitely well made but
> I found it being rather boring and overlong slice of life soap where
> almost nothing happens. Gave it a 4.
 
I might like it?
 
I also saw a Dario Argento movie I liked overall! "Trauma" (1993.) It isn't an Argento film that's talked about a lot and it's the first Argento filmed in the US but aside from Argento's normal cheesiness factor, I thought it was a decent story and well-paced effective thriller with Piper Laurie in an integral role. It's more of a psychological thriller than giallo.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 07:29AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:22:13 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
> > Ah, the good old days... :)
 
> P.S. A Hollywood version was also released in 2015, starring Kidman &
> Julia Roberts. No one seen it though and it has relatively low 6,1 at IMDB.
 
I think I'll stay away from that version! I'm sure they butchered it. :)
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 07:32AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:25:54 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
> > Gracs also had liked it a lot. Pretty memorable ending...
 
> Agree, that was pretty great.
 
> .mikko
 
SPOILER AHEAD!!!!!!!
 
 
At the end, I thought that they were going in the direction that the husband did it or was somehow involved with the other guy and then the twist came!
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 07:35AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 9:54:43 AM UTC-4, grif wrote:

> Yes, it's been discussed before. First mentioned by TT I believe.
 
Have you seen it Grif? I think you'll like it.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 07 05:36PM +0300

Court_1 kirjoitti 7.8.2017 klo 17:26:
>> I found it being rather boring and overlong slice of life soap where
>> almost nothing happens. Gave it a 4.
 
> I might like it?
 
Well if you like watching a Taiwanese normal family going through their
daily life for 3 hours. I had to bail out midway through. Having said
that, lots of people do seem to like it a lot.
 
> I also saw a Dario Argento movie I liked overall! "Trauma" (1993.) It isn't an Argento film that's talked about a lot and it's the first Argento filmed in the US but aside from Argento's normal cheesiness factor, I thought it was a decent story and well-paced effective thriller with Piper Laurie in an integral role. It's more of a psychological thriller than giallo.
 
Ok. Argento films seem to pop a lot here. :)
You need to watch Suspiria.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 07:51AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 10:36:13 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
 
 
> Well if you like watching a Taiwanese normal family going through their
> daily life for 3 hours. I had to bail out midway through. Having said
> that, lots of people do seem to like it a lot.
 
I didn't realize it's a 3 hour movie!


> Ok. Argento films seem to pop a lot here. :)
> You need to watch Suspiria.
 
Yes, I need to see Suspiria. There's also a remake coming out soon which Dario Argento was involved in?
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 07 05:54PM +0300

Court_1 kirjoitti 7.8.2017 klo 17:51:
>> daily life for 3 hours. I had to bail out midway through. Having said
>> that, lots of people do seem to like it a lot.
 
> I didn't realize it's a 3 hour movie!
 
And feels like it...
 
>> Ok. Argento films seem to pop a lot here. :)
>> You need to watch Suspiria.
 
> Yes, I need to see Suspiria. There's also a remake coming out soon which Dario Argento was involved in?
 
Be a good girl and see it before the remake. :)
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 07 05:55PM +0300

TT kirjoitti 7.8.2017 klo 17:54:
>>> that, lots of people do seem to like it a lot.
 
>> I didn't realize it's a 3 hour movie!
 
> And feels like it...
 
Might have been much better with cutting at least 1 hour of
nothinghappens away.
 
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com>: Aug 07 03:19PM

On Mon, 07 Aug 2017 17:55:53 +0300, TT wrote:
 
> Might have been much better with cutting at least 1 hour of
> nothinghappens away.
 
People also watch big brother live feeds
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 07 06:29PM +0300

jdeluise kirjoitti 7.8.2017 klo 18:19:
 
>> Might have been much better with cutting at least 1 hour of
>> nothinghappens away.
 
> People also watch big brother live feeds
 
Mystery solved.
griffin_230@hotmail.com: Aug 07 08:53AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 3:35:54 PM UTC+1, Court_1 wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 9:54:43 AM UTC-4, grif wrote:
 
> > Yes, it's been discussed before. First mentioned by TT I believe.
 
> Have you seen it Grif? I think you'll like it.
 
Yeah, it's very good. I saw it back when I thought I could trust TT's judgement :p
 
Sorry, I'm a bit distracted. Look at this:
"Listen: a fourworded wavespeech: seesoo, hrss, rsseeiss, ooos. Vehement breath of waters amid seasnakes, rearing horses, rocks. In cups of rocks it slops: flop, slop, slap: bounded in barrels. And, spent, its speech ceases. It flows purling, widely flowing, floating foampool, flower unfurling."
 
This is a character, Stephen, taking a piss in "Ulysses". From the wiki:
 
"Episode 3, Proteus
Stephen finds his way to Sandymount Strand and mopes around for some time, mulling various philosophical concepts, his family, his life as a student in Paris, and his mother's death. As Stephen reminisces and ponders, he lies down among some rocks, watches a couple and a dog, scribbles some ideas for poetry, picks his nose and urinates behind a rock. This chapter is characterised by a stream of consciousness narrative style that changes focus wildly. Stephen's education is reflected in the many obscure references and foreign phrases employed in this episode, which have earned it a reputation for being one of the book's most difficult chapters."
 
What have I gotten myself into o.O The good news is that I've gotten past "Ulysses" intro, lol.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Aug 07 07:18PM +0300


>>> Yes, it's been discussed before. First mentioned by TT I believe.
 
>> Have you seen it Grif? I think you'll like it.
 
> Yeah, it's very good. I saw it back when I thought I could trust TT's judgement :p
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zs1NmsA-n-Y#t=1m7s
 
10/10
 
:)
 
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 08:25AM -0700

//
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Aug 07 08:12AM -0700

> Yeah What is sick is when Fed strolls to finals
cos the clowns just roll over for him, the Fedfans take it as proof that Fed's better than Nadal!
 
Poor Nadal can't get to the finals.
Carey <carey_1959@yahoo.com>: Aug 07 07:35AM -0700

On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 7:11:45 AM UTC-7, Guypers wrote:
> On Monday, August 7, 2017 at 9:54:34 AM UTC-4, The Iceberg wrote:
> > Why would anyone re-watch an out of sorts Nadal? Oh yes the Fedfans
 
> Fantastic, fifth set, tore rafalito a new asshole, great job fed!!
 
 
Humbalito didn't know what hit him. The poor dear.
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