Do other people get to play in finals at all?
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
Court_1 .com> Wrote in message:r
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?
Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players?
Simply because they aren't great players, correct?
Of course age matters and is a variable with many other variables that influence the results.
Alcaraz is still young and will mature by age and by losses but no one said he won't lose to Djokovic again specially in three sets.
Do you think Djokovic would have lost to Medvedev in the US open final if he was five years younger?
Take a look at this h2h below and check their age difference and tell us what started to happen at the end of 1984.
https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/ivan-lendl-vs-jimmy-connors/l018/c044
Before Jimmy turned 32, their h2h was like 13-5 for Jimmy
And after he turned 32 and Lendl 24 or 25, their h2h was like 0-17 for Lendl.
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ yearsolder!Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?
Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players? Simply because they aren't great players, correct?
Of course age matters and is a variable with many other variables that influence the results.
Alcaraz is still young and will mature by age and by losses but no one said he won't lose to Djokovic again specially in three sets.
Do you think Djokovic would have lost to Medvedev in the US open final if he was five years younger?
Take a look at this h2h below and check their age difference and tell us what started to happen at the end of 1984.
https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/ivan-lendl-vs-jimmy-connors/l018/c044
Before Jimmy turned 32, their h2h was like 13-5 for Jimmy
And after he turned 32 and Lendl 24 or 25, their h2h was like 0-17 for Lendl.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of Djokovic,at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post >30 Federer orDjokovic.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of Djokovic,
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer orDjokovic.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 12:29:59 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:way Djokovic did tonight.
Court_1 .com> Wrote in message:r
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?Yes. Djokovic absolutely showed tonight that the age argument is fallacious when you're a GOAT level player.
Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players?
Simply because they aren't great players, correct?
Of course age matters and is a variable with many other variables that influence the results.No, it really isn't a variable when you're an all time great player who is as fit as Djokovic or as Federer was post age 30. A player who is disadvantaged by age wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to the bitter end and storm back to win a match the
worshippers invented in order to keep the fantasy going that Federer>Djokovic.Alcaraz is still young and will mature by age and by losses but no one said he won't lose to Djokovic again specially in three sets.Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
Do you think Djokovic would have lost to Medvedev in the US open final if he was five years younger?Yes. He was under intense pressure to win the CYGS. HIs loss had zero to do with his age.
Take a look at this h2h below and check their age difference and tell us what started to happen at the end of 1984.
https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/ivan-lendl-vs-jimmy-connors/l018/c044
Before Jimmy turned 32, their h2h was like 13-5 for Jimmy
And after he turned 32 and Lendl 24 or 25, their h2h was like 0-17 for Lendl.As I 've said again and again, you can't compare the Lendl/Connors years to present day athletes. It's a dumb comparison. Fitness and technology have evolved.
Listen, the Federer fanatic mantra that Federer suddenly became old and decrepit at 28-30 because he was five-six years older than Djokovic is one of the most cockamamie claims I've ever heard. It's just some kind of coping mechanism that many Federer
I get it, we want a beautiful player like Federer to be the greatest and keep all the records but unfortunately reality has set in and Djokovic has shown over and over again that he is simply better. The age argument was dismantled tonight whenDjokovic came back from the dead to win one of the best matches I've seen in a very long time. If only Federer had that little bit of extra mental resolve like Djokovic has.
Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:rolder!Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years
Haven't you skipped watching AO 2017 final "out of fear"?
So you missed out on one of the greatest Federer's wins in his career.
Does that not qualify you as a Federer lunatic?
Same way whedr skipped Wim 2023 final. But you're worse, he could at least say since his favourite player (Federer) isn't there, he doesn't care about Wimbledon.
Plus he invented "beach" as an excuse. So he's covered himself.
What did you do?
You just said you didn't want to watch as you didn't want to see another Federer loss to Nadal???
Certainly you qualify as a big Federer maniac, and arguably ahead of whekdr.
Do other people get to play in finals at all?
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r> On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 yearsolder than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.Haven't you skipped watching AO 2017 final "out
Yes. He was under intense pressure to win the CYGS. HIs loss had zero to do with his age.
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
Certainly you qualify as a big Federer maniac, and arguably ahead of whekdr.
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes
up the next day and all of sudden he is old?
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of Djokovic,at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer orDjokovic.
Court_1 kirjoitti 21.8.2023 klo 8.22:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
Djokovic, at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of
Djokovic.Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
yes Gracchus is definitely a huge Fedfan! he's trying to deflect from his past threats of violence like all the Fedfans do and always did!!
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?
Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players? Simply because they aren't great players, correct?
Of course age matters and is a variable with many other variables that influence the results.
Alcaraz is still young and will mature by age and by losses but no one said he won't lose to Djokovic again specially in three sets.
Do you think Djokovic would have lost to Medvedev in the US open final if he was five years younger?
Take a look at this h2h below and check their age difference and tell us what started to happen at the end of 1984.
https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/ivan-lendl-vs-jimmy-connors/l018/c044
Before Jimmy turned 32, their h2h was like 13-5 for Jimmy
And after he turned 32 and Lendl 24 or 25, their h2h was like 0-17 for Lendl.
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?
Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players? Simply because they aren't great players, correct?
Of course age matters and is a variable with many other variables that influence the results.
Alcaraz is still young and will mature by age and by losses but no one said he won't lose to Djokovic again specially in three sets.
Do you think Djokovic would have lost to Medvedev in the US open final if he was five years younger?
Take a look at this h2h below and check their age difference and tell us what started to happen at the end of 1984.
https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/ivan-lendl-vs-jimmy-connors/l018/c044
Before Jimmy turned 32, their h2h was like 13-5 for Jimmy
And after he turned 32 and Lendl 24 or 25, their h2h was like 0-17 for Lendl.
On 21/08/2023 9:53 pm, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> > So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes> up the next day and all of sudden he is old?>You're the only one harping about 'age' involving players who are still winning slams and ranking no.1 - insane.Listen to this guy from 12:20 mark, he knows what he's talking about;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tusRF7gUlzMHe says age is not an issue
Yes. He was under intense pressure to win the CYGS. HIs loss had zero to do with his age.In that USO, he had long physical matches including his SF against zverev and this drained him in the final while in this Cinci, he won all his matches easily in this masters and he had a pass in his first match.
They allowed him to disappear from the court for ten minutes after the second set bringing Thanksgiving earlier this year.
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Court_1 kirjoitti 21.8.2023 klo 8.22:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to
explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16
years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting
about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who
hardly ever posts anyway.
I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They
bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with
a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam
finals, dominating the field outside of Djokovic, at times outplaying
Djokovic in their matches, etc.
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only
incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great
player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you
continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or Djokovic.
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
On 8/20/23 9:29 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote:> Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r>> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz;Federer was only 5+ years older!> Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?>> Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players?> Simply because they aren't great players,
Whisper <whi...@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:rYou're the only one harping about 'age' involving players who are still winning slams and ranking no.1 - insane.Listen to this guy from 12:20 mark, he knows what he's talking about;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tusRF7gUlzMHe says age is not an issue
On 21/08/2023 9:53 pm, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> > So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes> up the next day and all of sudden he is old?>
Look age is real, but he wants to blame age when in fact Federer isn't good enough offensive player to (consistently) beat Djokovic in important matches.
He's just too softcock in his mentality, approach etc. He is not a true offensive mindset like Sampras and Alcaraz for example. I always felt that.
In my view, Federer is a fraud if we portray him as an offensive masterclass. He can look great vs Hewitt in 2004 and Roddick but that's not the ultimate test.
It's not just Djokovic, we know that from his earlier matches with Nadal that followed similar pattern.
It's just that on very fast surfaces (YEC, indoors, grass vs young Nadal or vs old Nadal) allowed Federer to overcome it vs Nadal, and vs Djokovic it was much more close on all surfaces once Djokovic sorted out his physical issues.
So it looks like age thing, but in fact it wasn't.
It's very hard to accept that your guy is not good at doing this or that. For example Djokovic sucks in wind, he lost Wimbledon final mostly due to breeze and wind. Alcaraz should be winning clay and most of HC matches already but he's not there yet ongrass. Yet he won on grass, but it's because it was windy and Djokovic's game is not suited for wind, in another words, his alternative style (for wind) is mediocre. He's just not that good.
Federer can't break through defenses of Nadal, Djokovic on a consistent basis.
That's all.
Just as Wawrinka could vs Djokovic.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:rolder!Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years
Haven't you skipped watching AO 2017 final "out of fear"?
So you missed out on one of the greatest Federer's wins in his career.
Does that not qualify you as a Federer lunatic?
Same way whedr skipped Wim 2023 final. But you're worse, he could at least say since his favourite player (Federer) isn't there, he doesn't care about Wimbledon.
Plus he invented "beach" as an excuse. So he's covered himself.
What did you do?
You just said you didn't want to watch as you didn't want to see another Federer loss to Nadal???
Certainly you qualify as a big Federer maniac, and arguably ahead of whekdr. --
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes
up the next day and all of sudden he is old?
On 8/20/23 9:29 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Court_1 ..Wrote in message:r
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here?
Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the other younger players?
Simply because they aren't great players, correct?
Of course age matters and is a variable with many other variables that influence the results.
Alcaraz is still young and will mature by age and by losses but no one said he won't lose to Djokovic again specially in three sets.
Do you think Djokovic would have lost to Medvedev in the US open final if he was five years younger?
Take a look at this h2h below and check their age difference and tell us what started to happen at the end of 1984.
https://www.atptour.com/en/players/atp-head-2-head/ivan-lendl-vs-jimmy-connors/l018/c044
Before Jimmy turned 32, their h2h was like 13-5 for Jimmy
And after he turned 32 and Lendl 24 or 25, their h2h was like 0-17 for Lendl.
I find that the people who argue the loudest and most fervently that age doesn't matter are themselves facing age with some degree of trepidation.
On 21/08/2023 9:53 pm, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes
up the next day and all of sudden he is old?
You're the only one harping about 'age' involving players who are still winning slams and ranking no.1 - insane.
Listen to this guy from 12:20 mark, he knows what he's talking about;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tusRF7gUlzM
He says age is not an issue at all and in fact the younger guy is at a disadvantage - you're on your own PWL lol : )
Just accept the truth, Roger is nowhere near as good as he is in your fantasies : )
Court_1 kirjoitti 21.8.2023 klo 8.22:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
Djokovic, at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of
Djokovic.Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 10:44:30AM UTC-4, Sawfish wrote:> On 8/20/23 9:29 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote: > > Court_1 ..Wrote in message:r > >> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic areimbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older! > > Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here? > > > > Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes
up the next day and all of sudden he is old.
Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are!
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day andall of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal decline by becoming better in other areas and 2) he's obsessed with his fitness and moves incredibly well still. You can't compare Djokovic'
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 10:44:30AM UTC-4, Sawfish wrote:> On 8/20/23 9:29 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote: > > Court_1 ..Wrote in message:r > >> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic areimbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older! > > Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here? > > > > Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 10:44:30AM UTC-4, Sawfish wrote:> On 8/20/23 9:29 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote: > > Court_1 ..Wrote in message:r > >> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bringout to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older! > > Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here? > > > > Why don't
Yes. He was under intense pressure to win the CYGS. HIs loss had zero to do with his age.In that USO, he had long physical matches including his SF against zverev and this drained him in the final while in this Cinci, he won all his matches easily in this masters and he had a pass in his first match.
They allowed him to disappear from the court for ten minutes after the second set bringing Thanksgiving earlier this year.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:39:49 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes
up the next day and all of sudden he is old.
Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are!
Bullshit. I'm not.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 2:12:37 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:he only lost to Murray because of the exhausting marathon against Del Potro.
yes Gracchus is definitely a huge Fedfan! he's trying to deflect from his past threats of violence like all the Fedfans do and always did!!Of course I'm a Federer fan and always will be. But I won't go to insane lengths to excuse every big loss. For instance, he didn't blow multiple match points in 2019 Wimbledon final because of his age. This is different than 2012 Olympics, when clearly
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:39:49 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
Bullshit. I'm not.So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakesDid I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are!
up the next day and all of sudden he is old.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:experiences with great players from the past like McEnroe, Lendl, Connors. Things are completely different and Djokovic and Federer are GOAT level players.
Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.
So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakesDid I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal decline by becoming better in other areas and 2) he's obsessed with his fitness and moves incredibly well still. You can't compare Djokovic's and Federer's age
up the next day and all of sudden he is old?
He can't be too old if he was on his way to a CYGS until he lost the final to Alcaraz at Wimbledon in a tight match which could have gone either way! He's competing point for point with a 20 year old great player! All their matches have been dog fights.
Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:rat all and in fact the younger guy is at a disadvantage - you're on your own PWL lol : )Just accept the truth, Roger is nowhere near as good as he is in your fantasies : )
On 21/08/2023 9:53 pm, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> > So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes> up the next day and all of sudden he is old?You're the only one harping about 'age' involving players who are still winning slams and ranking no.1 - insane.Listen to this guy from 12:20 mark, he knows what he's talking about;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tusRF7gUlzMHe says age is not an issue
Look age is real, but he wants to blame age when in fact Federer isn't good enough offensive player to (consistently) beat Djokovic in important matches.
Court_1 <olymp...@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:rimbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older! > > Djokovic wins a match against the 20 years old makes age not to be issue and brings you back here? > > > > Why don't you say the same when Djokovic beats all the
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 10:44:30 AM UTC-4, Sawfish wrote:> On 8/20/23 9:29 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote: > > Court_1 ..Wrote in message:r > >> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are
Djokovic said this in 2015 (he was 27-28 years old):
"I am at the prime of my career. I am going to use every part of this fact to stay where I am and to fight for as many major titles as possible."
Wondering, what prime means??
Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:rall of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal decline by becoming better in other areas and 2) he's obsessed with his fitness and moves incredibly well still. You can't compare Djokovic'
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day and
This generation of players could be healthier than previous generations of players, but this doesn't mean that a 36 years old professional player now is as explosive and fit as a 30 years old player.
Yes we can argue if you like that 36 years old player now is healthier than 36 years old players thirty years ago, but advancement in every field benefit all ages and won't eliminate age gaps.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 5:46:34 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:Djokovic, at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
Court_1 kirjoitti 21.8.2023 klo 8.22:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of
Djokovic.
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Because mature women prefer Brie over Gouda?
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has,
he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His
preference is another matter.
For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
As for Leo, surely all these beauties weren't 'bears'... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCRc8k7VQAI10tX?format=jpg
...I have to give Leo points for dumping Bar Refaeli at 25 though... she
was then clearly past date. Man's gotta stick to his principles. :)))
grandpa
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach
that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
Court_1 Wrote in message:rall of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal decline by becoming better in other areas and 2) he's obsessed with his fitness and moves incredibly well still. You can't compare Djokovic'
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day and
This generation of players could be healthier than previous generations of players, but this doesn't mean that a 36 years old professional player now is as explosive and fit as a 30 years old player.
Yes we can argue if you like that 36 years old player now is healthier than 36 years old players thirty years ago, but advancement in every field benefit all ages and won't eliminate age gaps.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:49:15 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.
As for Leo, surely all these beauties weren't 'bears'...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCRc8k7VQAI10tX?format=jpg
...I have to give Leo points for dumping Bar Refaeli at 25 though... she
was then clearly past date. Man's gotta stick to his principles. :)))
https://www.dallasobserver.com/film/rushes-6404393
https://twitter.com/Beard_Club/status/809396331324276736?lang=en
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:49:15 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.
As for Leo, surely all these beauties weren't 'bears'...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCRc8k7VQAI10tX?format=jpg
...I have to give Leo points for dumping Bar Refaeli at 25 though... she >> was then clearly past date. Man's gotta stick to his principles. :)))
https://www.dallasobserver.com/film/rushes-6404393
I've missed this film from Leo's filmography... https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114702/
https://twitter.com/Beard_Club/status/809396331324276736?lang=en
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really not... for woke points etc...
grandpa
Very classy Court demeanor, as always, she can't tolerate disagreements. But I think in her mind grandpa is better than Bangali, so you should feel good :)
We should call her Karen :)
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:19:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:and all of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal decline by becoming better in other areas and 2) he's obsessed with his fitness and moves incredibly well still. You can't compare
Court_1 Wrote in message:r
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day
technology. They are able to stay in excellent shape into their late thirties. If you watched Djokovic in that Cinci final vs Alcaraz and came to the conclusion that Djokovic is old and tired, you need glasses and a shrink. Same can be said about FedererThis generation of players could be healthier than previous generations of players, but this doesn't mean that a 36 years old professional player now is as explosive and fit as a 30 years old player.
Yes we can argue if you like that 36 years old player now is healthier than 36 years old players thirty years ago, but advancement in every field benefit all ages and won't eliminate age gaps.You keep dancing around the main issue over and over again. I'm not saying a 36 year old athlete can necessarily be as explosive or as fit as he was at age 30! But, these athletes in today's world have the advantage of better medicine, fitness,
Federer was mopping up all competition for the most part in his late 30's. The only player he couldn't overcome was Djokovic at slams in the past decade. As I've said before, he had a Djokovic problem not an age problem. It's so freaking obvious it isn't funny.
Listen to what Gill Gross says in that match wrap-up of the Cinci final. He says he doesn't accept the age excuse. 20 year old Alcaraz was the one cramping at the FO vs Djokovic. 20 year old Djokovic had terrible stamina and didn't correct that issueuntil 2011. 36 year old Djokovic just fought like a dog to beat a fantastic player 16 years his junior at Cinci. Djokovic is NOT being hampered by age. Just stfu already! You sound ridiculous.
Stop clinging to an outdated notion just because you want to prop up a player you have an obsession with. The stats and records tell the true story. We don't have to listen to some nutty fan.
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really not... for woke points etc...
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really
not... for woke points etc...
Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their management,
Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The bigstars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.
On Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 15:41:12 UTC+1, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:49:15 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:I've missed this film from Leo's filmography...
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.
As for Leo, surely all these beauties weren't 'bears'...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCRc8k7VQAI10tX?format=jpg
...I have to give Leo points for dumping Bar Refaeli at 25 though... she >>>> was then clearly past date. Man's gotta stick to his principles. :)))
https://www.dallasobserver.com/film/rushes-6404393
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114702/
https://twitter.com/Beard_Club/status/809396331324276736?lang=en
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really
not... for woke points etc...
yeah Dicaprio only dated probably the top 10 best looking blondes in the world as they were all set-ups! it not cos he a superstar A-list Hollywood movie star who loves chicks LOL
he had a gang that used to hang around Hollywood in the 90's(that Lukas guy was prob one of them) and they were known as being serious ladies men(was very envious of him for a long time :D) but that was all just made up too!!
On 22/08/2023 12:52 am, *skriptis wrote:
Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:r
On 21/08/2023 9:53 pm, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Eventually Djokovic
will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point
yet.> > So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he
wakes> up the next day and all of sudden he is old?> You're the only
one harping about 'age' involving players who are still winning
slams and ranking no.1 - insane.Listen to this guy from 12:20 mark,
he knows what he's talking
about;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tusRF7gUlzMHe says age is not
an issue at all and in fact the younger guy is at a disadvantage -
you're on your own PWL lol : )Just accept the truth, Roger is
nowhere near as good as he is in your fantasies : )
Look age is real, but he wants to blame age when in fact Federer
isn't good enough offensive player to (consistently) beat Djokovic in
important matches.
Everyone knows age is real, and you can argue it's an excuse. The
only problem is there are disadvantages with youth, so you can argue
Alcaraz lost to Novak at FO due to age disadvantage, ie didn't know
how to handle the tense situation, lack of experience etc. So either
we have an excuse for every single loss, or no excuse. Imo there are
zero excuses for anybody. If you take the court you are fit to play
and expect to win. I give no excuse to any player, so irks me when
fanboys suggest only their guy is allowed excuses. It's very gay.
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:management, PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >> not... for woke points etc...
Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their
stars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big
Yes, image is everything.
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly.
Nobody does that.
TT kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 12.49:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?
IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25?
Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has,
he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His
preference is another matter.
For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
Looks like Leo has as well...
https://youtu.be/IylCzC4054I
(I love this scene)
On Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 15:41:12 UTC+1, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:yeah Dicaprio only dated probably the top 10 best looking blondes in the world as they were all set-ups! it not cos he a superstar A-list Hollywood movie star who loves chicks LOL
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:49:15 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:I've missed this film from Leo's filmography...
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:https://www.dallasobserver.com/film/rushes-6404393
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.
Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25? >>>>>>> Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
As for Leo, surely all these beauties weren't 'bears'...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCRc8k7VQAI10tX?format=jpg
...I have to give Leo points for dumping Bar Refaeli at 25 though... she >>>> was then clearly past date. Man's gotta stick to his principles. :)))
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114702/
https://twitter.com/Beard_Club/status/809396331324276736?lang=enBeard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really
not... for woke points etc...
he had a gang that used to hang around Hollywood in the 90's(that Lukas guy was prob one of them) and they were known as being serious ladies men(was very envious of him for a long time :D) but that was all just made up too!!
On 8/22/23 1:31 AM, Whisper wrote:
Everyone knows age is real, and you can argue it's an excuse. The
only problem is there are disadvantages with youth, so you can argue Alcaraz lost to Novak at FO due to age disadvantage, ie didn't know
how to handle the tense situation, lack of experience etc. So either
we have an excuse for every single loss, or no excuse. Imo there are
zero excuses for anybody. If you take the court you are fit to play
and expect to win. I give no excuse to any player, so irks me when fanboys suggest only their guy is allowed excuses. It's very gay.
That's adolescent stuff, in my opinion.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time).
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard ClubYes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their management,
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really
not... for woke points etc...
And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.stars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.
Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really
not... for woke points etc...
Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or
her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho
action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and
maintaining that image via their management, PR, and lawyers (not the
studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into
his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now
that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all
about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in
"So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big stars know their
every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for
better or worse.
Yes, image is everything.
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly.
Nobody does that.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:02:29 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:management, PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >>>> not... for woke points etc...
stars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big
Yes, image is everything.I agree, it does seem like unnecessary effort and risk too, because any one of them could dish the dirt on him. "Oh, Leo and I just have tea after we go those shows together. He's never even tried to get 'intimate' with me."
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly.
Nobody does that.
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:19:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:all of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal decline by becoming better in other areas and 2) he's obsessed with his fitness and moves incredibly well still. You can't compare Djokovic'
Court_1 Wrote in message:r
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day and
technology. They are able to stay in excellent shape into their late thirties. If you watched Djokovic in that Cinci final vs Alcaraz and came to the conclusion that Djokovic is old and tired, you need glasses and a shrink. Same can be said about Federer
This generation of players could be healthier than previous generations of players, but this doesn't mean that a 36 years old professional player now is as explosive and fit as a 30 years old player.
Yes we can argue if you like that 36 years old player now is healthier than 36 years old players thirty years ago, but advancement in every field benefit all ages and won't eliminate age gaps.
You keep dancing around the main issue over and over again. I'm not saying a 36 year old athlete can necessarily be as explosive or as fit as he was at age 30! But, these athletes in today's world have the advantage of better medicine, fitness,
Federer was mopping up all competition for the most part in his late 30's. The only player he couldn't overcome was Djokovic at slams in the past decade. As I've said before, he had a Djokovic problem not an age problem. It's so freaking obvious it isn't funny.
Listen to what Gill Gross says in that match wrap-up of the Cinci final. He says he doesn't accept the age excuse. 20 year old Alcaraz was the one cramping at the FO vs Djokovic. 20 year old Djokovic had terrible stamina and didn't correct that issueuntil 2011. 36 year old Djokovic just fought like a dog to beat a fantastic player 16 years his junior at Cinci. Djokovic is NOT being hampered by age. Just stfu already! You sound ridiculous.
Stop clinging to an outdated notion just because you want to prop up a player you have an obsession with. The stats and records tell the true story. We don't have to listen to some nutty fan.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach
that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:09:19 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/22/23 1:31 AM, Whisper wrote:The thing is, Whisper has a double standard for this stuff. Why is it OK to excuse any post-1984 McEnroe loss as, "He was doing coke and having kids" or any Sampras loss after late 1990s as, "Pete didn't really care about winning by this time."
Everyone knows age is real, and you can argue it's an excuse. TheThat's adolescent stuff, in my opinion.
only problem is there are disadvantages with youth, so you can argue
Alcaraz lost to Novak at FO due to age disadvantage, ie didn't know
how to handle the tense situation, lack of experience etc. So either
we have an excuse for every single loss, or no excuse. Imo there are
zero excuses for anybody. If you take the court you are fit to play
and expect to win. I give no excuse to any player, so irks me when
fanboys suggest only their guy is allowed excuses. It's very gay.
Yet suddenly "no excuses allowed" when it's not one his pet players. You can't have it both ways.
grandpa
Very classy Court demeanor, as always, she can't tolerate disagreements. But I think in her mind grandpa is better than Bangali, so you should feel good :)
We should call her Karen :)
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
On 23/08/2023 12:13 am, Court_1 wrote:> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:19:50PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Court_1 Wrote in message:r>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old tocompete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day and all of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach
that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had
an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really not... for woke points etc...
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach >> that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never hadWe'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
Whisper <whi...@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:rcompete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day and all of sudden he is old?Did I say that? Of course he's aging, we all are! But, 1)he's compensated for some normal
On 23/08/2023 12:13 am, Court_1 wrote:> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:19:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Court_1 Wrote in message:r>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to
Sure loved and enjoyed his tennis, the same way I love watching Edberg and Laver (and some matches of Pete).
What is that you can't reason with me about?
That Federer isn't the same generation of Nadal and Djokovic?
https://www.perfect-tennis.com/where-are-they-now-federers-generation/
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:you try, it's there staring you in the face.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach
that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had
an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
Whisper is far from a Federer lover but I agree that Federer had a Nadal problem for the first part of his career and then he had a Djokovic problem for the last decade of his career. You can try and dress it up as something else but no matter how hard
I'm sure Federer fanatics have a harder time with this fact than Federer himself. He's off enjoying his billion dollars and is happy with the knowledge that he was beloved by millions and entertained the hell out of fans for 20 years. He was close forthe goathood but slipped. 2nd or 3rd place is pretty unbelievable.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach >>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had
an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
Whisper is far from a Federer lover but I agree that Federer had a Nadal problem for the first part of his career and then he had a Djokovic problem for the last decade of his career. You can try and dress it up as something else but no matter howhard you try, it's there staring you in the face.
I'm sure Federer fanatics have a harder time with this fact than Federer himself. He's off enjoying his billion dollars and is happy with the knowledge that he was beloved by millions and entertained the hell out of fans for 20 years. >He was close forthe goathood but slipped. 2nd or 3rd place is pretty unbelievable.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their management,
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really not... for woke points etc...
Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The bigstars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.
On 23/08/2023 1:54 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:> Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:r>> On 23/08/2023 12:13 am, Court_1 wrote:> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:19:50PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Court_1 Wrote in message:r>>> On Monday,August 21, 2023 at 7:53:27 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > Eventually Djokovic will be too old to compete but he sure as hell isn't at the point yet.> So aging happens suddenly? One day he isn't old and then he wakes > up the next day and all of sudden
On 8/22/23 8:08 AM, Gracchus wrote:management, PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:02:29 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >>>> not... for woke points etc...
stars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big
Personally, I don't get the vibe that DiCaprio is gay. I do kinda getYes, image is everything.I agree, it does seem like unnecessary effort and risk too, because any one of them could dish the dirt on him. "Oh, Leo and I just have tea after we go those shows together. He's never even tried to get 'intimate' with me."
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly.
Nobody does that.
that vibe from Clooney, however.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 10:41:12 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
:)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?Yes. We're talking about millions if not billions of dollars at stake.
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really not... for woke points etc...Which leading men admit they're gay? Few and far between and if they do, they can kiss their careers bye bye.
You need to get your gaydar fixed. Remember back in the day, you said you didn't think he was gay?
https://m.famousfix.com/post/hugh-jackman-in-the-musical-the-boy-from-oz-91262718
On 8/22/23 8:02 AM, TT wrote:
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >>> not... for woke points etc...
Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or
her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho
action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and
maintaining that image via their management, PR, and lawyers (not the
studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into
his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now
that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all
about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in
"So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big stars know their
every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for
better or worse.
Yes, image is everything.With all these beards, he has no time for the bath house.
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly. Nobody does that.
On 8/22/23 7:54 AM, The Iceberg wrote:
On Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 15:41:12 UTC+1, TT wrote:...by Lennie's PR department...
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:yeah Dicaprio only dated probably the top 10 best looking blondes in the world as they were all set-ups! it not cos he a superstar A-list Hollywood movie star who loves chicks LOL
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 5:49:15 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:I've missed this film from Leo's filmography...
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 5.02:
On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 3:14:15 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote: >>>>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 11:50:37 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, August 21, 2023 at 8:46:34 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:For a second I thought you were talking about me. I have! I have!
He's probably never seen a vagina up close in his life or if he has, he was on some kind of wild coke binge where anything goes. His preference is another matter.Yeah, don't you just love that quaint euphemism?IF age is irrelevant why Leo Dicap never dated a woman over 25? >>>>>>> Leo Dicap "dating" a woman? LOL.
As for Leo, surely all these beauties weren't 'bears'...
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FCRc8k7VQAI10tX?format=jpg
...I have to give Leo points for dumping Bar Refaeli at 25 though... she
was then clearly past date. Man's gotta stick to his principles. :))) >>> https://www.dallasobserver.com/film/rushes-6404393
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114702/
https://twitter.com/Beard_Club/status/809396331324276736?lang=enBeard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >> not... for woke points etc...
he had a gang that used to hang around Hollywood in the 90's(that Lukas guy was prob one of them) and they were known as being serious ladies men(was very envious of him for a long time :D) but that was all just made up too!!
On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach >>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had >>> an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
hard you try, it's there staring you in the face.Whisper is far from a Federer lover but I agree that Federer had a Nadal problem for the first part of his career and then he had a Djokovic problem for the last decade of his career. You can try and dress it up as something else but no matter how
for the goathood but slipped. 2nd or 3rd place is pretty unbelievable.I'm sure Federer fanatics have a harder time with this fact than Federer himself. He's off enjoying his billion dollars and is happy with the knowledge that he was beloved by millions and entertained the hell out of fans for 20 years. >He was close
Absolutely. For me no one comes close to McEnroe. Carlos is up there
but Mac was something else. I understand Federer is popular but he just never did it for me. I don't want to admit it but I found his game
pretty dull. He's just missing the x factor for me, prob something to do with all the beatings he took v the elite players. I admire great
players who really dominate the other greats, losing all the time is a
bit of a yawn for me.
On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach >>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had >>> an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
hard you try, it's there staring you in the face.Whisper is far from a Federer lover but I agree that Federer had a Nadal problem for the first part of his career and then he had a Djokovic problem for the last decade of his career. You can try and dress it up as something else but no matter how
for the goathood but slipped. 2nd or 3rd place is pretty unbelievable.I'm sure Federer fanatics have a harder time with this fact than Federer himself. He's off enjoying his billion dollars and is happy with the knowledge that he was beloved by millions and entertained the hell out of fans for 20 years. >He was close
Absolutely. For me no one comes close to McEnroe. Carlos is up there
but Mac was something else. I understand Federer is popular but he just never did it for me. I don't want to admit it but I found his game
pretty dull. He's just missing the x factor for me, prob something to do with all the beatings he took v the elite players. I admire great
players who really dominate the other greats, losing all the time is a
bit of a yawn for me.
On Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 16:27:04 UTC+1, Sawfish wrote:management, PR, and lawyers (not the studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
On 8/22/23 8:08 AM, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:02:29 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and maintaining that image via their
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >>>>>> not... for woke points etc...
stars know their every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for better or worse.Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in "So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big
the Clooney is gay thing isn't PR at all designed to promote him to a gay audience LOLPersonally, I don't get the vibe that DiCaprio is gay. I do kinda getYes, image is everything.I agree, it does seem like unnecessary effort and risk too, because any one of them could dish the dirt on him. "Oh, Leo and I just have tea after we go those shows together. He's never even tried to get 'intimate' with me."
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly.
Nobody does that.
that vibe from Clooney, however.
On Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 16:25:12 UTC+1, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/22/23 8:02 AM, TT wrote:you've just hugely upset Raja and Pelle!
Gracchus kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 17.59:With all these beards, he has no time for the bath house.
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 7:41:12 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:Yes, image is everything.
Court_1 kirjoitti 22.8.2023 klo 16.55:Yes, there's a lot of that going on now. But if an actor built his or
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really >>>>> not... for woke points etc...
her image as a heartthrob for the opposite sex (primarily) or macho
action star, they still may have a strong interest in cultivating and
maintaining that image via their management, PR, and lawyers (not the
studios, as in Rock Hudson's time). And remember, Gouda is well into
his 40s, not a Gen Z actor.
Although I've never heard this rumor before, we should know by now
that Hollywood--and the entertainment industry in general---is all
about selling illusions. It's gullible to put much credence in
"So-and-so is dating supermodel so-and-so." The big stars know their
every public appearance will be scrutinized and gossiped about, for
better or worse.
But it really doesn't make much sense to swap your beards on the fly.
Nobody does that.
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 2:09:29 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:> On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote: > > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote: > >> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: > >>And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt. > >> > >>> Fed was
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote: > >>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach > >>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'. > >> > >>>>
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 10:41:12 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
:)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?
Yes. We're talking about millions if not billions of dollars at stake.
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really
not... for woke points etc...
Which leading men admit they're gay? Few and far between and if they do, they can kiss their careers bye bye.
You need to get your gaydar fixed. Remember back in the day, you said you didn't think he was gay?
https://m.famousfix.com/post/hugh-jackman-in-the-musical-the-boy-from-oz-91262718
Court_1 kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 6.13:> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 10:41:12 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:> >> Beard Club>> Are you a member? :)> > :)> > > >> So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?> > Yes. We're talking about millions ifnot billions of dollars at stake.> >> Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really>> not... for woke points etc...> > Which leading men admit they're gay? Few and far between and if they do, they can kiss their careers bye bye.>
You need to get your gaydar fixed. Remember back in the day, you said you didn't think he was gay?> > https://m.famousfix.com/post/hugh-jackman-in-the-musical-the-boy-from-oz-91262718> >Exhibit one:https://youtu.be/kuV-i3yK9gI?t=32Gay!
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt. > >> > >>> Fed was
Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 2:09:29 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:> On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote: > > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote: > >> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: >
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote: > >>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach > >>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'. > >> > >>>>
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in czech.
On Wednesday, 23 August 2023 at 04:13:41 UTC+1, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 10:41:12 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
Beard Club
Are you a member? :)
:)
So he dates all these women because studio tells him to?Yes. We're talking about millions if not billions of dollars at stake.
Isn't it nowadays that celebs tell they're gay even when they're really not... for woke points etc...Which leading men admit they're gay? Few and far between and if they do, they can kiss their careers bye bye.
You need to get your gaydar fixed. Remember back in the day, you said you didn't think he was gay?
https://m.famousfix.com/post/hugh-jackman-in-the-musical-the-boy-from-oz-91262718you mean Hugh "been married for 20 years" Jackman, such a hugely gay man!
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 2:09:29 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: >>>>
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach
that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had >>> an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
hard you try, it's there staring you in the face.Whisper is far from a Federer lover but I agree that Federer had a Nadal problem for the first part of his career and then he had a Djokovic problem for the last decade of his career. You can try and dress it up as something else but no matter how
for the goathood but slipped. 2nd or 3rd place is pretty unbelievable.I'm sure Federer fanatics have a harder time with this fact than Federer himself. He's off enjoying his billion dollars and is happy with the knowledge that he was beloved by millions and entertained the hell out of fans for 20 years. >He was close
McEnroe admitted "paralyzed" him with his power. Interesting how your mind works, Whisp.Absolutely. For me no one comes close to McEnroe. Carlos is up thereBut apparently it's OK for McEnroe--with his grand total of seven slams--to be past his prime and his game looking outmoded by the time he was 26 and getting whomped regularly not only by his contemporary Lendl, but by up-and-comers like Becker, whom
but Mac was something else. I understand Federer is popular but he just never did it for me. I don't want to admit it but I found his game
pretty dull. He's just missing the x factor for me, prob something to do with all the beatings he took v the elite players. I admire great
players who really dominate the other greats, losing all the time is a
bit of a yawn for me.
Feel free to dredge up the argument that McEnroe was more concerned with drugs, kids, and a bad marriage by the time he was 25. But that would be making excuses. And we don't believe in excuses, do we?
So he let some huge titles slip through his fingers and stalled out at a paltry 20 slams. Boo hoo.
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 8:49:06 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:hard you try, it's there staring you in the face.
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 2:09:29 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote:We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :)
On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>
Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach >>>>>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'.
And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt.
Fed was never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had >>>>>> an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem.
Whisper is far from a Federer lover but I agree that Federer had a Nadal problem for the first part of his career and then he had a Djokovic problem for the last decade of his career. You can try and dress it up as something else but no matter how
for the goathood but slipped. 2nd or 3rd place is pretty unbelievable.
I'm sure Federer fanatics have a harder time with this fact than Federer himself. He's off enjoying his billion dollars and is happy with the knowledge that he was beloved by millions and entertained the hell out of fans for 20 years. >He was close
McEnroe admitted "paralyzed" him with his power. Interesting how your mind works, Whisp.
Absolutely. For me no one comes close to McEnroe. Carlos is up thereBut apparently it's OK for McEnroe--with his grand total of seven slams--to be past his prime and his game looking outmoded by the time he was 26 and getting whomped regularly not only by his contemporary Lendl, but by up-and-comers like Becker, whom
but Mac was something else. I understand Federer is popular but he just
never did it for me. I don't want to admit it but I found his game
pretty dull. He's just missing the x factor for me, prob something to do >>> with all the beatings he took v the elite players. I admire great
players who really dominate the other greats, losing all the time is a
bit of a yawn for me.
Feel free to dredge up the argument that McEnroe was more concerned with drugs, kids, and a bad marriage by the time he was 25. But that would be making excuses. And we don't believe in excuses, do we?
Ha, ha. Yes, he makes every excuse in the book for McEnroe. Totally overrates that nauseating narcissist, McEnroe.
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired.
He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in czech.
On 24/08/2023 6:31 am, Gracchus wrote:never washed up, he just kept better as he aged. He never had > >>> an age problem, just Rafa/Novak problem. > >> We'll count this among the "many times" you've defended Federer. You defend him so often, it's easy to lose track. :) > > > > > > Whisper is
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 9:41:22 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:And what should he have said when still active and pursuing titles? "I'm a washed-up old fuck whose best days were ten years ago"? A player's public assessment of his own abilities should always be taken with a huge grain of salt. > >> > >>> Fed was
Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r
On Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 2:09:29 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:> On 23/08/2023 1:30 pm, Court_1 wrote: > > On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 3:22:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote: > >> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 8:39:23 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:On 23/08/2023 12:14 am, Gracchus wrote: > >>>> On Tuesday, August 22, 2023 at 2:11:05 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Federer said he was a better player at 34 than 24, said he could teach > >>>>> that 'young punk a thing or 2'. > >> > >>
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in >> czech.
7-3 Lendl in slam meetings. Lendl won 10 of their last 11 matches. Yet Mac "dominated" his competition. Hmm...
Digging deeper, McEnroe-Borg h2h was 7-7. Oh, but Mac won their last 3 matches, so that means he "dominated" Borg too and drove him into retirement.
Truth is, the only serious rival he eventually achieved dominance over was Connors. The guys coming up in the mid-80s like Becker and Agassi were routinely stomping him. No wonder he cut his schedule so he could snort more coke.
I'm a huge McEnroe fan, incidentally. He was a wizard with a wooden racquet. But the legend of Mac the Untouchable dissolves quickly when you look at his career with a clear head instead of starry eyes and weak excuses.I went through a period where I questioned Mac's greatness, but then I
got to watch some more matches he played and I think I underrated him.
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player
ever. He was certainly better than all the players of his era. I would
love to see how he'd match up v peak Laver and Hoad. I suspect 1 of
these 3 guys is the real goat, could be any of the 3 not sure which.
On 24/08/2023 2:41 am, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired.
He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in czech.
That's not reality rather misguided fantasy. Lendl was a fine tennis
player but not in goat/boat class.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:34:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 24/08/2023 2:41 am, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. >>>> He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in
czech.
That's not reality rather misguided fantasy. Lendl was a fine tennis
player but not in goat/boat class.
Lendl beat Mac seven times in a row in the latter's supposed "prime" of 1981-82. A second-rate player did this to the BOAT?
On 25/08/2023 12:45 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:34:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 24/08/2023 2:41 am, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. >>>> He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in >>> czech.
That's not reality rather misguided fantasy. Lendl was a fine tennis
player but not in goat/boat class.
Lendl beat Mac seven times in a row in the latter's supposed "prime" of 1981-82. A second-rate player did this to the BOAT?Mac was depressed because Borg quit. You call yourself a tennis fan and
you don't know the basics?
If Lendl was better why did he lose 10 of 12 matches in 1984? Mono?
Got temporarily old before being reborn?
On 25/08/2023 12:45 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:34:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 24/08/2023 2:41 am, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. >>>> He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in >>> czech.
That's not reality rather misguided fantasy. Lendl was a fine tennis
player but not in goat/boat class.
Lendl beat Mac seven times in a row in the latter's supposed "prime" of 1981-82. A second-rate player did this to the BOAT?
Mac was depressed because Borg quit. You call yourself a tennis fan and
you don't know the basics?
If Lendl was better why did he lose 10 of 12 matches in 1984? Mono?
Got temporarily old before being reborn?
On 24/08/2023 6:31 am, Gracchus wrote:
I went through a period where I questioned Mac's greatness,
but then I
got to watch some more matches he played and I think I underrated him.
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player
ever.
He was certainly better than all the players of his era.
I would
love to see how he'd match up v peak Laver and Hoad. I suspect 1 of
these 3 guys is the real goat, could be any of the 3 not sure which.
On 25/08/2023 12:45 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:34:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 24/08/2023 2:41 am, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. >>>> He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in >>> czech.
That's not reality rather misguided fantasy. Lendl was a fine tennis
player but not in goat/boat class.
Lendl beat Mac seven times in a row in the latter's supposed "prime" of 1981-82. A second-rate player did this to the BOAT?Mac was depressed because Borg quit. You call yourself a tennis fan and
you don't know the basics?
If Lendl was better why did he lose 10 of 12 matches in 1984? Mono?
Got temporarily old before being reborn?
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of Djokovic,
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer orDjokovic.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 10:22:33 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:Djokovic, at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of
Djokovic.Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or
Djokovic is 2-2 against a 20 year old.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player ever.
LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player ever.
LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 7:52:22 PM UTC-4, arahim wrote:Djokovic, at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 10:22:33 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
Djokovic.
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or
Djokovic is 2-2 against a 20 year old.
Yes. And?
All their matches have been tussles and have gone the distance. Djokovic has finally come up against a great younger player and they're dead even so far. That great 20 year old player isn't beating the snot out of the old man yet. Age is not an issuehere at this point.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player ever.LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "McEnroe
The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to bolstertheir favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 7:52:22 PM UTC-4, arahim wrote:Djokovic, at times outplaying Djokovic in their matches, etc.
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 10:22:33 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 9:54:02 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 20, 2023 at 5:35:42 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:I don't necessarily mean here but everywhere on social media. They bleat on and on about how Federer past 30 was too old to compete with a five+ years younger Djokovic even though Federer was making slam finals, dominating the field outside of
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!
Where is this legion of Federer fanatics you're always ranting about? The only ones here saying that stuff are PWL and RzR, who hardly ever posts anyway.
Djokovic.
Djokovic just proved tonight that the age argument is not only incorrect but foolish and Djokovic beat a potentially all time great player who is 16 years his junior. Age is irrelevant when you continue to play as well as well as a post 30 Federer or
here at this point.
Djokovic is 2-2 against a 20 year old.
Yes. And?
All their matches have been tussles and have gone the distance. Djokovic has finally come up against a great younger player and they're dead even so far. That great 20 year old player isn't beating the snot out of the old man yet. Age >is not an issue
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player
ever.
LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "McEnroe
The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to bolstertheir favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:46:22 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player >>>>> ever.LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "McEnroe
their favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to bolster
I'll never understand the time and energy investment either. I wanted Federer to end up the best and enjoyed all the back-and-forth debate over the years. But in the end, it didn't turn out that way, and that's life. Somebody like >Whisper wants tohave it both ways. He'll bash posters like PWL for propping up Federer while doing the same kind of stuff with his own "pet" players. It's half-trolling, half genuine hypocrisy.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:46:22 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:McEnroe was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis playerLOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
ever.
We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "
bolster their favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to
I'll never understand the time and energy investment either. I wanted Federer to end up the best and enjoyed all the back-and-forth debate over the years. But in the end, it didn't turn out that way, and that's life. Somebody like Whisper wants to haveit both ways. He'll bash posters like PWL for propping up Federer while doing the same kind of stuff with his own "pet" players. It's half-trolling, half genuine hypocrisy.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each
other on to best slam record.
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikkoOh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again because
But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to-back. Thissupposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?
Mac had a lot of help reading Borg’s serve, Trabert and others watched Borgs service and could predict if he served down the middle or not! Collins claimed Rosewall read Lavers service motion too? Who knows?
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 11:45:33 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:45:47 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:Oh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again because
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
other on to best slam record.
.mikko
supposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?
But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to-back. This
Mac had a lot of help reading Borg’s serve, Trabert and others watched Borgs service and could predict if he served down the middle or not! Collins claimed Rosewall read Lavers service motion too? Who knows?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:37:02 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
Oh, you must be referring to the "boring" game of one of the most dazzling shot-makers who ever played the sport.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
other on to best slam record.
.mikko
Oh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again because
But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to->back. Thissupposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?
On 25/08/2023 11:51 pm, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:37:02 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
Oh, you must be referring to the "boring" game of one of the most dazzling shot-makers who ever played the sport.Problem is he shriveled into his shell against the elite players. His
play was very introverted when he stood up against the guys with bigger cocks.
On 25/08/2023 11:45 pm, Gracchus wrote:because by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Oh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again
supposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to->back. This
It's hard to take these arguments seriously. Anyone who can't see
McEnroe was at least better than Lendl is not worth engaging. You're
either blind or trolling. And Borg admitted McEnroe's rise to no.1 made
him lose motivation and drove him into retirement. Most of us knew this before he admitted it. For the people who still don't get this today, I don't know what to say. It's pointless, like arguing with drunks. I
prefer to leave them alone and let them sleep it off, hopefully come to their senses in the morning.
On 25/08/2023 10:46 am, Court_1 wrote:> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:>> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:>>> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:>>>>>> Ithink he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player>>>> ever.>>>>> LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.>> Whisper's
On 25/08/2023 11:51 pm, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:37:02 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
Oh, you must be referring to the "boring" game of one of the most dazzling shot-makers who ever played the sport.Problem is he shriveled into his shell against the elite players. His
play was very introverted when he stood up against the guys with bigger cocks.
On 25/08/2023 11:45 pm, Gracchus wrote:because by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Oh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again
supposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to->back. This
It's hard to take these arguments seriously. Anyone who can't see
McEnroe was at least better than Lendl is not worth engaging.
either blind or trolling. And Borg admitted McEnroe's rise to no.1 made
him lose motivation and drove him into retirement. Most of us knew this before he admitted it. For the people who still don't get this today, I don't know what to say. It's pointless, like arguing with drunks. I
prefer to leave them alone and let them sleep it off, hopefully come to their senses in the morning.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 7:42:14 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:because by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On 25/08/2023 11:45 pm, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Oh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again
supposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to->back. This
rooted for him vs. Lendl. But 15-21 match record including 3-7 in slams is the tale of the tape and all the excuses or attitude in the world won't change it.It's hard to take these arguments seriously. Anyone who can't seeSame old Whisper playbook. Lacking evidence or the ability to construct a valid rebuttal, try to bluff your way out of it via phantom social proof, support from nonexistent external authority, or simple posing. I loved watching McEnroe play and always
McEnroe was at least better than Lendl is not worth engaging. You're either blind or trolling. And Borg admitted McEnroe's rise to no.1 made him lose motivation and drove him into retirement. Most of us knew this before he admitted it. For the people who still don't get this today, I don't know what to say. It's pointless, like arguing with drunks. I
prefer to leave them alone and let them sleep it off, hopefully come to their senses in the morning.
Aside from that, you need to write some new lines for yourself. Your canned attacks are so old they've grown mold.
On 25/08/2023 10:46 am, Court_1 wrote:McEnroe was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player >>>> ever.
LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "
bolster their favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to
It's not the same, very different context/era. McEnroe was visibly past
it from 1985, played part time essentially and ranking around 20+. He
wasn't like the big 3 still ranking top3 and winning slams into late
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each
other on to best slam record.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
McEnroe was never in the league of the Big Three players whether or not Borg quit early and McEnroe lost motivation or whatever. What the Big Three did is an anomaly. People looking to find the next Big Three will likely be disappointed.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 12:20:14 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
McEnroe was never in the league of the Big Three players whether or not Borg quit early and McEnroe lost motivation or whatever. What the Big Three did is an anomaly. People looking to find the next Big Three will likely be disappointed.
The "losing motivation" thing was always a McEnroe invention to seal the leaks in his legacy.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 5:42:53 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 12:20:14 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
McEnroe was never in the league of the Big Three players whether or not Borg quit early and McEnroe lost motivation or whatever. What the Big Three did is an anomaly. People looking to find the next Big Three will likely be disappointed.
The "losing motivation" thing was always a McEnroe invention to seal the leaks in his legacy.
Was it? Sounds like something that egotistical idiot would dream up.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 3:33:15 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:on and there were plenty of others to keep them busy.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 5:42:53 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 12:20:14 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
McEnroe was never in the league of the Big Three players whether or not Borg quit early and McEnroe lost motivation or whatever. What the Big Three did is an anomaly. People looking to find the next Big Three will likely be disappointed.
The "losing motivation" thing was always a McEnroe invention to seal the leaks in his legacy.
Was it? Sounds like something that egotistical idiot would dream up.It makes no sense at all, of course. A tennis champion in his prime won't stop caring about winning because a rival retires. I've no doubt he didn't want Borg to quit. Neither did Connors, even though Borg had been beating him for years. But life goes
The thing about Borg retiring because he was "scared of McEnroe" is ludicrous too. Losing the Wimbledon and the USO finals in '81 contributed to him quitting, but not the way others spin it. Obviously, if Borg had won his sixth straight Wimbledon, hewould have had good reason to push himself to stick around and extend that streak. Once it was broken, continuing mattered a lot less. He would have loved to have won the USO too, but he'd been trying for years on multiple surfaces and knew by then he'd
You may have missed this, but a few months ago, I recommended the "Advantage Connors" podcast episode where he interviewed Borg in March of this year. It's a fascinating conversation for any tennis fan. Borg talked extensively about his career,including his decision to retire at 26. And guess what? He did not say losing two slam finals to McEnroe made him cry and run home to Sweden. Old interview comments Whisper cites are taken out of context.
There's a funny moment in the podcast where Connors refers to "your jilted lover, John McEnroe." Apparently, McEnroe saw photos posted online of Borg posing with Connors at Indian Wells. McEnroe immediately called up Borg and demanded, "What are youdoing with Jimmy Connors??!!!" Borg said he replied, "Well you know, John, Jimmy is a friend too." Imagine Mac feeling threatened by that. :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:45:41 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 25/08/2023 11:51 pm, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:37:02 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:Problem is he shriveled into his shell against the elite players. His
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
Oh, you must be referring to the "boring" game of one of the most dazzling shot-makers who ever played the sport.
play was very introverted when he stood up against the guys with bigger
cocks.
Had he retired at age 31 like Pete or lost motivation like Mac, would you have acknowledged he is better than both of them?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
other on to best slam record.
.mikko
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,
None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,
None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.
What is that you even argue you fool?
Against Whisper?
I'm asking in good faith. Your posts make no sense.
Whisper doesn't claim McEnroe is the goat or greatest or whatever so what is it that you oppose him on, tell us what is your agenda here?
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form ofIt sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.
What is that you even argue you fool?
Against Whisper?
I'm asking in good faith. Your posts make no sense.
Whisper doesn't claim McEnroe is the goat or greatest or whatever so what is it that you oppose him on, tell us what is your agenda here?
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 1:28:33 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
On 27/08/2023 11:14 pm, *skriptis wrote:
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the
best you've got, fuck off.
What is that you even argue you fool?
Against Whisper?
I'm asking in good faith. Your posts make no sense.
Whisper doesn't claim McEnroe is the goat or greatest or whatever so
what is it that you oppose him on, tell us what is your agenda here?
Gracchus isn't worthy of taking seriously. My position is Mac's best
was better than Borg/Connors/Lendl. It's hardly a controversial idea, commonplace amongst tennis analysts. It doesn't mean it's correct but
we're all entitled to our opinions, but these clowns are acting like
Mac was a no.5 level pro. It's like arguing with children, waste of
time.
On 27/08/2023 11:14 pm, *skriptis wrote:> Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com> Wrote in message:>> Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.> > > > What is that you even argue you fool?> Against Whisper?> >I'm asking in good faith. Your posts make no sense.> > > Whisper doesn't claim McEnroe is the goat or greatest or whatever so what is it that you oppose him on, tell us what is your agenda here?Gracchus isn't worthy of taking seriously. My position is
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew, >>>> None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up >>>> on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> 30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>>>> other on to best slam record.Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he
My condolences.It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> 30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged eachRight! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy! >>>> 1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew, >>>> None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up >>>> on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62 >>>> 60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the >>>> best of his era no doubts about it.
other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he
My condolences.It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..Mac had a unique game.
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
He was a S&V guy but had unconventional form and an excellent, near preternatural instinct when at the net.
He had adequate footspeed, but should not allow himself to get into
extended rallies...not his thing, really.
He had the most effective left-hand serve I've seen and he milked it all
the way.
He was a superb touch (rather than power) player. This included both
volleys and ground strokes.
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make Woke."
--Sawfish ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.
Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to volley.
I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness than
running forward for volleys.
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:14:37 PM UTC-4, Sawfish wrote:was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote: >>>>>>>> On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>>> 30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>>>>>> other on to best slam record.
?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy! >>>>>> 1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew, >>>>>> None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up >>>>>> on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62 >>>>>> 60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the >>>>>> best of his era no doubts about it.
.mikko
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he
Mac suffered from hemorrhoids?His roid behavior on court is explainable now.Mac had a unique game.My condolences.It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
He was a S&V guy but had unconventional form and an excellent, near
preternatural instinct when at the net.
He had adequate footspeed, but should not allow himself to get into
extended rallies...not his thing, really.
He had the most effective left-hand serve I've seen and he milked it all
the way.
He was a superb touch (rather than power) player. This included both
volleys and ground strokes.
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled theStamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to volley.
length of points by coming to the net.
I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness than running forward for volleys.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> "Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make Woke."
--Sawfish
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> 30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged eachRight! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy! >>>> 1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew, >>>> None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up >>>> on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62 >>>> 60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the >>>> best of his era no doubts about it.
other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he
My condolences.It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..Mac had a unique game.
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
He was a S&V guy but had unconventional form and an excellent, near preternatural instinct when at the net.
He had adequate footspeed, but should not allow himself to get into
extended rallies...not his thing, really.
He had the most effective left-hand serve I've seen and he milked it all
the way.
He was a superb touch (rather than power) player. This included both
volleys and ground strokes.
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
Gracchus isn't worthy of taking seriously. My position is Mac's best
was better than Borg/Connors/Lendl. It's hardly a controversial idea, commonplace amongst tennis analysts. It doesn't mean it's correct but
we're all entitled to our opinions, but these clowns are acting like Mac
was a no.5 level pro. It's like arguing with children, waste of time.
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.
Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to volley.You say you play tennis?
I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness than
running forward for volleys.
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 7:38:10 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
Gracchus isn't worthy of taking seriously. My position is Mac's bestIn fact, that's not what you were saying at all. That's your revised position in the face of irrefutable data. And even that boils down to personal opinion.
was better than Borg/Connors/Lendl. It's hardly a controversial idea,
commonplace amongst tennis analysts. It doesn't mean it's correct but
we're all entitled to our opinions, but these clowns are acting like Mac
was a no.5 level pro. It's like arguing with children, waste of time.
Bluff--->Deflect-->Cherry-pick--->Shift Goalposts--->Repeat.
Whisper's M.O. circa 1995-present day. Some things never change.
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 9:14:37 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising his
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote: >>>>>>>> On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>>> 30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>>>>>>>> other on to best slam record.
?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy! >>>>>> 1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew, >>>>>> None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up >>>>>> on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62 >>>>>> 60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the >>>>>> best of his era no doubts about it.
.mikko
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because he
blocked McEnroe's best chance of winning a FO title in McEnroe's "golden" year, and then, as I said, there's the staring-you-in-the face losing h2h, most damning in slams with 3-7. An intelligent tennis fan--or *human* for that matter--is supposed toMac had a unique game.My condolences.It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
He was a S&V guy but had unconventional form and an excellent, near
preternatural instinct when at the net.
He had adequate footspeed, but should not allow himself to get into
extended rallies...not his thing, really.
He had the most effective left-hand serve I've seen and he milked it all
the way.
He was a superb touch (rather than power) player. This included both
volleys and ground strokes.
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
From the first time I saw them play at the 1980 USO it was plain Lendl would be a burr under his saddle for a long time to come. There were matches in '81 where by McEnroe's own admission, Lendl blew him off the court. This is the same guy who
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-4, jdeluise wrote:
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:
You say you play tennis?
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.
Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to
volley. I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness
than running forward for volleys.
Absolutely. There is big difference of playing one volley occasionally compared to rushing to the net on every point. It's much easier to
run left and right chasing balls that slowed down traversing the
entire court compared to rushing quickly to catch every ball flying by
you on the net.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> writes:> On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-4, jdeluise wrote:>> PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:>> >> >> > >> > His roid behavior on court is explainable now.>> > >> >>> > Stamina is testedmore when the player has to rush forward to>> > volley. I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness>> > than running forward for volleys.>> You say you play tennis?>> Absolutely. There is big difference of playing one volley occasionally>
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-4, jdeluise wrote:
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:
You say you play tennis?
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.
Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to
volley. I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness
than running forward for volleys.
Absolutely. There is big difference of playing one volley occasionally compared to rushing to the net on every point. It's much easier toBut look, approach shots often work to slow the point down at first
run left and right chasing balls that slowed down traversing the
entire court compared to rushing quickly to catch every ball flying by
you on the net.
(often slice, often to extreme points of the court to force the opponent
to move more/longer), specifically to enable reaching the right position
at net. When a player commits to rushing the net, they are almost
always already facing it. When serving, they already have forward
momentum towards the net!
At net, the point is typically resolved on the first volley. But
regardless of the length of the rest of the point, the player at net
will be moving less than if they had remained at the baseline.
Compare that to the typical baseline rally between pros where they are changing directions and running full speed from side to side. These
days 20% of pro points last 5+ shots!
Logically and based on my own experience and observation, what you say doesn't ring true.
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r
Moving forwards is a more agressive/taxing move.
Let me try to say it differently. Playing solely serve/volley game in
pro tennis to win on the elite level requires different type of
athletism that they need to train for and continue to maintain. It
requires speed and explosiveness on every point compared to the
regular baseline movement.
Of course this is more of an issue when the opponent isn't playing s/v
and is consistent on the baseline with the new requet/string
technology. Here is a question. Can serve/volley player maintain
his/her game without much deterioration when they get older the same
way baseline players are able? I believe the answer is no, and to
continue success they need to mix it with good baseline play.
Whisper is a fun guy, though...
Got his head screwed on right on a lot of contemporary social issues,
and when he has no dog in the fight, an excellent analyst. Trouble is,
like MIchael Vick, he owns a large kennel.
We all have our little shortcomings...
The problem is a deterioration of raw speed and reflexes has a greaterimpact to the net player than to the baseliner because of the margins of
The problem is a deterioration of raw speed and reflexes has aimpact to the net player than to the baseliner because of the margins
greater
of error.
Here you are contradicting yourself even though you tried to
be safe in your language to argue your case.
Decline in their game means the player is solely dependent on an
element in his fitness that is difficult to maintain. Why would their
game decline just because they slowed a little bit down? Because their
game is demanding and everyone knows repetitive sprinting is more
demanding than slower pace long distances.
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:
The problem is a deterioration of raw speed and reflexes has aimpact to the net player than to the baseliner because of the margins
greater
of error.
Here you are contradicting yourself even though you tried to
be safe in your language to argue your case.
Decline in their game means the player is solely dependent on anNo, I am saying that it has nothing to do with "stamina", which is your original argument.
element in his fitness that is difficult to maintain. Why would their
game decline just because they slowed a little bit down? Because their game is demanding and everyone knows repetitive sprinting is more demanding than slower pace long distances.
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:54:02 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:stories about the enormous marijuana cache he misplaced somewhere, his 200-pound Doberman that never happened to be at home when you were visiting, and so on. Last I heard, Wayne ended up in the military.
Whisper is a fun guy, though...He's always reminded me of a guy I knew in high school named Wayne. We'd hang out and play guitar together, get pizza, etc. He was a fun friend as long as you never forgot he was an inveterate bullshitter and thus forever undependable. He'd tell
Got his head screwed on right on a lot of contemporary social issues,
and when he has no dog in the fight, an excellent analyst. Trouble is,
like MIchael Vick, he owns a large kennel.
We all have our little shortcomings...So they say. I've yet to find mine. ;)
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 2:07:48 PM UTC-4, jdeluise wrote:compared to the regular baseline movement. Of course this is more of an issue when the opponent isn't playing s/v and is consistent on the baseline with the new requet/string technology.
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:Let me try to say it differently. Playing solely serve/volley game in pro tennis to win on the elite level requires different type of athletism that they need to train for and continue to maintain. It requires speed and explosiveness on every point
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-4, jdeluise wrote:But look, approach shots often work to slow the point down at first
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:Absolutely. There is big difference of playing one volley occasionally
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.You say you play tennis?
Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to
volley. I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness
than running forward for volleys.
compared to rushing to the net on every point. It's much easier to
run left and right chasing balls that slowed down traversing the
entire court compared to rushing quickly to catch every ball flying by
you on the net.
(often slice, often to extreme points of the court to force the opponent
to move more/longer), specifically to enable reaching the right position
at net. When a player commits to rushing the net, they are almost
always already facing it. When serving, they already have forward
momentum towards the net!
At net, the point is typically resolved on the first volley. But
regardless of the length of the rest of the point, the player at net
will be moving less than if they had remained at the baseline.
Compare that to the typical baseline rally between pros where they are
changing directions and running full speed from side to side. These
days 20% of pro points last 5+ shots!
Logically and based on my own experience and observation, what you say
doesn't ring true.
Here is a question. Can serve/volley player maintain his/her game without much deterioration when they get older the same way baseline players are able?
I believe the answer is no, and to continue success they need to mix it with good baseline play.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> writes:> jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r>> Moving forwards is a more agressive/taxing move.Why do you join aggressive with taxing? They aren't the same thing. Doyou think it's more taxing to runforwards in the direction you arealready facing compared to running, turning around on a dime andrunning the other direction?
In general usage, stamina and endurance are used interchangeably to
refer to the capacity to keep going despite fatigue or difficult circumstances. In fitness, stamina is often used specifically to refer
to how long a person can do something at maximum effort, while
endurance is often specifically used to refer to how long someone can
do something at normal or low intensity.
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> writes:> jdeluise<jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r>> Moving forwards is a more agressive/taxing move.Why do you join aggressive with taxing? They
aren't the same thing. Doyou think it's more taxing to run forwards
in the direction you arealready facing compared to running, turning
around on a dime andrunning the other direction?
It's agressive and the overall long term effect is taxing.
It must be agressive because you are desperate to get to the net on
time, you have no luxury or time to waste.
If your plan is not to do that, and you want to stay on the baseline,
you casually wait for the return ball if it's a high quality, or if
it's not, you step in to deal with shorter ball.
Very rarely players hit return winners that go past by you if you stay
back.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> writes:> jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r>> *skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> writes:> jdeluise> <jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r>> Moving forwards is a more> agressive/taxing move.Why do youjoin aggressive with taxing? They> aren't the same thing. Doyou think it's more taxing to run forwards> in the direction you arealready facing compared to running, turning> around on a dime andrunning the other direction?>>> It's agressive and the
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> writes:>>> In general usage, stamina and endurance are used interchangeably to> refer to the capacity to keep going despite fatigue or difficult> circumstances. In fitness, stamina is often used specifically torefer> to how long a person can do something at maximum effort, while> endurance is often specifically used to refer to how long someone can> do something at normal or low intensity.And? We know that baseline play extends the length of rallies and
jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:rrefer> to how long a person can do something at maximum effort, while> endurance is often specifically used to refer to how long someone can> do something at normal or low intensity.And? We know that baseline play extends the length of rallies and
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:>>> In general usage, stamina and endurance are used interchangeably to> refer to the capacity to keep going despite fatigue or difficult> circumstances. In fitness, stamina is often used specifically to
You talk as if all these guys who hug the baseline are always 100% on the ball and that's way we had so many rallies and long matches?
No. Most of the time they're just scrambling. Hitting shots way out of positions etc.
You've seen Djokovic or Nadal or Alcaraz stretching.
As for McEnroe, you're missing something. His drug and party issues aside, tenniswise he was a player from wood era, grew up using those racquets and then switched to modern stuff in the process.
The fact he grew up with wood, became #1 and then switched to modern racquets and became #1 again is fairly impressive and speaks about his level.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 6:57:48 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
The fact he grew up with wood, became #1 and then switched to modern
racquets and became #1 again is fairly impressive and speaks about
his level.
And other players grew up playing with what?
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
My condolences.
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> writes:
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.
Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to volley.
I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness than
running forward for volleys.
You say you play tennis?
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 9:14:37 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:blocked McEnroe's best chance of winning a FO title in McEnroe's "golden" year, and then, as I said, there's the staring-you-in-the face losing h2h, most damning in slams with 3-7. An intelligent tennis fan--or *human* for that matter--is supposed to
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
From the first time I saw them play at the 1980 USO it was plain Lendl would be a burr under his saddle for a long time to come. There were matches in '81 where by McEnroe's own admission, Lendl blew him off the court. This is the same guy who
On 28/08/2023 7:21 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 1:33 PM, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:54:02 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
Whisper is a fun guy, though...He's always reminded me of a guy I knew in high school named Wayne.
Got his head screwed on right on a lot of contemporary social issues,
and when he has no dog in the fight, an excellent analyst. Trouble is, >>>> like MIchael Vick, he owns a large kennel.
We'd hang out and play guitar together, get pizza, etc. He was a fun
friend as long as you never forgot he was an inveterate bullshitter
and thus forever undependable. He'd tell stories about the enormous
marijuana cache he misplaced somewhere, his 200-pound Doberman that
never happened to be at home when you were visiting, and so on. Last
I heard, Wayne ended up in the military.
We all have our little shortcomings...So they say. I've yet to find mine. ;)
Hah!
That's like in Catch-22 where Yossarian is convinced he's right,
"because to the best of his knowledge, he'd never been wrong."
Well I was a big Fonzie fan. Wore the black leather jacket and forced
my mates to call me Fonz - true story. I was about 12.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvdY3HfepOo
On 8/27/23 1:33 PM, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:54:02 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
Whisper is a fun guy, though...He's always reminded me of a guy I knew in high school named Wayne.
Got his head screwed on right on a lot of contemporary social issues,
and when he has no dog in the fight, an excellent analyst. Trouble is,
like MIchael Vick, he owns a large kennel.
We'd hang out and play guitar together, get pizza, etc. He was a fun
friend as long as you never forgot he was an inveterate bullshitter
and thus forever undependable. He'd tell stories about the enormous
marijuana cache he misplaced somewhere, his 200-pound Doberman that
never happened to be at home when you were visiting, and so on. Last I
heard, Wayne ended up in the military.
We all have our little shortcomings...So they say. I've yet to find mine. ;)
Hah!
That's like in Catch-22 where Yossarian is convinced he's right,
"because to the best of his knowledge, he'd never been wrong."
On 8/27/23 3:46 PM, *skriptis wrote:
jdeluise <jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:rThe thing about playing an S&V game routinely, as your primary offensive strategy, is that you *know* it'll be over very soon. In this regard
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> writes:> jdeluise
<jdeluise@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r>> *skriptis
<skriptis@post.t-com.hr> writes:> jdeluise> <jdeluise@gmail.com>
Wrote in message:r>> Moving forwards is a more> agressive/taxing
move.Why do you join aggressive with taxing? They> aren't the same
thing. Doyou think it's more taxing to run forwards> in the
direction you arealready facing compared to running, turning> around
on a dime andrunning the other direction?>>> It's agressive and the
overall long term effect is taxing.>> It must be agressive because
you are desperate to get to the net on> time, you have no luxury or
time to waste.The quality of your approach shot has a lot to say
about it. A goodapproach shot gives you a lot more time. A bad one
will likely cost youthe point right away.It's the same with S/V
except you also have some forward momentum fromthe serve itself.>> If
your plan is not to do that, and you want to stay on the baseline,>
you casually wait for the return ball if it's a high quality, or if>
it's not, you step in to deal with shorter ball.You don't "causally"
wait for the return ball, you're constantlyrepositioning yourself to
where you think is the optimal position. Dueto the geometry of the
game, the baseliner has more ground to cover.>> Very rarely players
hit return winners that go past by you if you stay> back.So they run
more, and take a greater hit to their "supply" of stamina.
Untrue. No server is under pressure if he decides to stay behind.
What's the pressure if you hit a serve and have all the time in world
to wait for a return?
It has all changed. Sampras serve was a very agressive one and through
inertia he was already halfway to the net after finishing his serve
even if didn't want to volley. Older guys too.
Guys, nowadays, most have laid back serves, meaning even if they serve
big, they're fairly comfortable and static on the baseline. The serve
doesn't necessarily pull them forwards like it used to.
Compare Djokovic hitting 4 aces in a row and where his movement ends
and then look at Sampras. Mind you it's 4 aces.
https://youtu.be/CQEbJlfJZmg?si=ArqnszzhS4Fhsic-
https://youtu.be/nke3R-dYi7M?si=C32g8-0BoN8M6WMB
it's explosive, without much thought to conserving energy. It will be
done in 10 seconds if you follow the serve in.
This means that on return you will play a radically different game.
You'll have to stay back, mostly (of course you could go nuts and come
in regardless, but...) and since baseline is not your game, you'll look
for an approach as soon as one appears--sometimes you're a bit wishful
on this, but...
(BYW, this searching for the soonest approach is why I played with gut.
If the ball strike was clean it made a clear note, and you'd just keep
going in. But if it did not make the note, you could--and should--back
off. Abort the approach.)
And if you're into a decent groove, every first serve feels like the
Charge of the Light Brigade. You really don't care what the opponent
does because you're in it all the way from the get-go. You'll make it,
or you won't.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> writes:
In general usage, stamina and endurance are used interchangeably to
refer to the capacity to keep going despite fatigue or difficult
circumstances. In fitness, stamina is often used specifically to refer
to how long a person can do something at maximum effort, while
endurance is often specifically used to refer to how long someone can
do something at normal or low intensity.
And? We know that baseline play extends the length of rallies and makes players run more. And these guys aren't just leisurely walking across
the court, they're busting a lung running from side to side, changing directions. And they're not merely trying to get to the ball, they're
trying to get to the ball *early* so they can get to the optimal
position and execute the optimum stroke mechanics. And they don't just
hit the ball and stand there watching it, they're immediately changing positions, moving, side-stepping or even backpedaling to get to where
they predict they should be next. Get it wrong? They'll be expending
even more energy correcting course.
And we've all seen the results, players take longer and longer between points, stopping to hunch over and suck air for a while, call a fitness trainer on the court or even retire. See guys like Monfils who shoot
their wad after a handful of games and spend the rest of the match
sucking air like a professional balloon filler. It's a battle of
attrition for these guys. Remember Rafa/Djok's 6+ hour AO final where
they could barely stand by the end of the match? Ever seen that happen between two S/V?
It's baseline play which requires more stamina and "explosiveness". Net players are playing the margins, hoping for a skill imbalance, hoping
they'll intimidate their opponents by forcing them to hit the right
shots with *less* time than they are used to. It forces the baseliner to
be more "explosive".
It's no surprise that high-talent, low-fitness guys like McEnroe
excelled at net, at least in a previous age. They knew they'd be dead huffing around the baseline all day long.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 6:57:48 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
The fact he grew up with wood, became #1 and then switched to modern
racquets and became #1 again is fairly impressive and speaks about
his level.
And other players grew up playing with what?
softcocks
On 28/08/2023 11:16 am, jdeluise wrote:
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 6:57:48 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:
The fact he grew up with wood, became #1 and then switched to modern
racquets and became #1 again is fairly impressive and speaks about
his level.
And other players grew up playing with what?
softcocks
and bumrooters
On 28/08/2023 2:51 am, Gracchus wrote:blocked McEnroe's best chance of winning a FO title in McEnroe's "golden" year, and then, as I said, there's the staring-you-in-the face losing h2h, most damning in slams with 3-7. An intelligent tennis fan--or *human* for that matter--is supposed to
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 9:14:37 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
From the first time I saw them play at the 1980 USO it was plain Lendl would be a burr under his saddle for a long time to come. There were matches in '81 where by McEnroe's own admission, Lendl blew him off the court. This is the same guy who
Mac's career ended Feb 1985. We know the reasons why. Similarly I don't really count Connor's record post 1984 either. It was a different era
and context compared to today's tennis.
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:54:02 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:stories about the enormous marijuana cache he misplaced somewhere, his 200-pound Doberman that never happened to be at home when you were visiting, and so on. Last I heard, Wayne ended up in the military.
Whisper is a fun guy, though...
Got his head screwed on right on a lot of contemporary social issues,He's always reminded me of a guy I knew in high school named Wayne. We'd hang out and play guitar together, get pizza, etc. He was a fun friend as long as you never forgot he was an inveterate bullshitter and thus forever undependable. He'd tell
and when he has no dog in the fight, an excellent analyst. Trouble is, like MIchael Vick, he owns a large kennel.
We all have our little shortcomings...So they say. I've yet to find mine. ;)
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 2:18:19 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:blocked McEnroe's best chance of winning a FO title in McEnroe's "golden" year, and then, as I said, there's the staring-you-in-the face losing h2h, most damning in slams with 3-7. An intelligent tennis fan--or *human* for that matter--is supposed to
On 28/08/2023 2:51 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 9:14:37 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
From the first time I saw them play at the 1980 USO it was plain Lendl would be a burr under his saddle for a long time to come. There were matches in '81 where by McEnroe's own admission, Lendl blew him off the court. This is the same guy who
70s-80s.Mac's career ended Feb 1985. We know the reasons why. Similarly I don't really count Connor's record post 1984 either. It was a different eraYou can count and not count whatever you want. But when all is said and done, it amounts to picking cherries and wearing blinders to preserve your preferred vision of favored player's legacies. And to be clear, these were my two favorite players of the
and context compared to today's tennis.
"Different era, different context" is more of the same--it boils down to a lot of "hand-waving." If all of that makes you feel good, fine. Just saying it's damn hypocritical to call other posters "fanboys" and much worse for doing the same.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the >>> length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, >>> and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
On 21/08/2023 10:35 am, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!> > Fed fans tellus Fed never won the USO after 2008 as he was old by then, having reached the advanced age of 26. Djoker is a big chance of winning it at 36.
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the >>> length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, >>> and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:There's no reason involved. Just ridiculousness.
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right nowNo they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same. The narrative shifts all the time with them. It's always about desperately trying to show that their favorite player is the best despite the fact that statistics may show something very different.
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
The Djokovic fanatics will pull the age card the second Djokovic loses a couple of important matches in a row even though those fanatics were calling Federer fanatics crazy for claiming Federer was old and past it when he was the same age and makingslam finals.. The fact that Djokovic has won two slams this year at age 36 will be forgotten quickly if he loses the USO to Alcaraz just as Federer fanatics were calling Federer decrepit at ate 28 in 2008 after many big losses to Nadal. It's one sicko
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same.
On 30/08/2023 10:26 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same.
This guy is a huge Novak fan. 9:40 mark says you can argue Novak is the best he's ever been;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoysvcEMqYc
Apology accepted.
Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:rus Fed never won the USO after 2008 as he was old by then, having reached the advanced age of 26. Djoker is a big chance of winning it at 36.
On 21/08/2023 10:35 am, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!> > Fed fans tell
Djokovic has a big chance against the current field with no other younger champions like Nadal, djok, and Federer at their prime standing in his way.
We just got one good young guy that just hatched from his egg and we want to consider him to be equivalent to prime nadal and djok.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 8:26:39 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:There's no reason involved. Just ridiculousness.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same. The narrative shifts all the time with them. It's always about desperately trying to show that their favorite player is the best despite the fact that statistics may show something very different.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the >>>>>> length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, >>>>>> and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>>>>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>>>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >>>>> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >>>>> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
slam finals.. The fact that Djokovic has won two slams this year at age 36 will be forgotten quickly if he loses the USO to Alcaraz just as Federer fanatics were calling Federer decrepit at ate 28 in 2008 after many big losses to Nadal. It's one sicko
The Djokovic fanatics will pull the age card the second Djokovic loses a couple of important matches in a row even though those fanatics were calling Federer fanatics crazy for claiming Federer was old and past it when he was the same age and making
I am not a djok fan, and of course Djok is at disadvantage against Alcaraz because of his age.
It's stupid to say being younger or older makes no difference.
On 30/08/2023 7:37 pm, Whisper wrote:
On 30/08/2023 10:26 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now >>>> at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his >>>> best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same.
This guy is a huge Novak fan. 9:40 mark says you can argue Novak is
the best he's ever been;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoysvcEMqYc
Apology accepted.
At 10:40 mark he mocks PWL types who make a big deal about age gap
between Fed and Nadal : )
On 30/08/2023 1:57 pm, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:r
On 21/08/2023 10:35 am, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments
many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to
Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz;
Federer was only 5+ years older!> > Fed fans tell us Fed never won >>> the USO after 2008 as he was old by then, having reached the advanced
age of 26. Djoker is a big chance of winning it at 36.
Djokovic has a big chance against the current field with no other
younger champions like Nadal, djok, and Federer at their prime
standing in his way.
We just got one good young guy that just hatched from his egg and we
want to consider him to be equivalent to prime nadal and djok.
Many think Carlos is the best player ever, better than the big 3.
On 30/08/2023 10:26 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same.
This guy is a huge Novak fan. 9:40 mark says you can argue Novak is the best he's ever been;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoysvcEMqYc
Apology accepted.
On 30.8.2023 12.37, Whisper wrote:
On 30/08/2023 10:26 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now >>>> at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his >>>> best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same.
This guy is a huge Novak fan. 9:40 mark says you can argue Novak is
the best he's ever been;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoysvcEMqYc
Apology accepted.
Peak Djok doesn't do things like this.
https://youtu.be/MoysvcEMqYc?t=104
Backing off is a four letter word in Djokese. Because he backs off, he
hits a weak shot and gives Alcatraz all the space he needs and then
some. It's a tremendous point nevertheless. Still needed super skills to light up the match. But Djok tarred his own feathers.
Whisper <whisper@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:rus Fed never won the USO after 2008 as he was old by then, having reached the advanced age of 26. Djoker is a big chance of winning it at 36.
On 21/08/2023 10:35 am, Court_1 wrote:> This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!> > Fed fans tell
Djokovic has a big chance against the current field with no other younger champions like Nadal, djok, and Federer at their prime standing in his way.
We just got one good young guy that just hatched from his egg and we want to consider him to be equivalent to prime nadal and djok.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 8:26:39 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:There's no reason involved. Just ridiculousness.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same. The narrative shifts all the time with them. It's always about desperately trying to show that their favorite player is the best despite the fact that statistics may show something very different.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the >>>>>> length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, >>>>>> and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>>>>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>>>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >>>>> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >>>>> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
slam finals.. The fact that Djokovic has won two slams this year at age 36 will be forgotten quickly if he loses the USO to Alcaraz just as Federer fanatics were calling Federer decrepit at ate 28 in 2008 after many big losses to Nadal. It's one sicko
The Djokovic fanatics will pull the age card the second Djokovic loses a couple of important matches in a row even though those fanatics were calling Federer fanatics crazy for claiming Federer was old and past it when he was the same age and making
I am not a djok fan, and of course Djok is at disadvantage against Alcaraz because of his age.
It's stupid to say being younger or older makes no difference.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the >>>>> length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, >>>>> and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>>>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >>>> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >>>> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:story.shtml
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>>>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >>>> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >>>> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his >> best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol
Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now >> at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his >> best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol
Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>> On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka but thosehttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.
On 30/08/2023 8:59 pm, Pelle Svanslös wrote:
On 30.8.2023 12.37, Whisper wrote:
On 30/08/2023 10:26 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now >>>>> at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past
his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
No they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same.
This guy is a huge Novak fan. 9:40 mark says you can argue Novak is
the best he's ever been;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoysvcEMqYc
Apology accepted.
Peak Djok doesn't do things like this.
https://youtu.be/MoysvcEMqYc?t=104
Backing off is a four letter word in Djokese. Because he backs off, he
hits a weak shot and gives Alcatraz all the space he needs and then
some. It's a tremendous point nevertheless. Still needed super skills
to light up the match. But Djok tarred his own feathers.
Not sure what you're talking about? The way Djoker played this point he would have won it 3 times if it was anyone other than Carlitos. The
shot he played chasing the drop shot would have been a winner over just
about anyone, and then the volley he made crosscourt too.
This is why the age arguments many Federer fanatics bring out to explain Federer's losses to Djokovic are imbecilic! Djokovic is 16 years older than Alcaraz; Federer was only 5+ years older!Well then Djokovic should still be playing even with Alcaraz in 5 years, 10 years or 15 years...assuming nothing else but normal wear and tear.
On 25/08/2023 12:45 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 12:34:20 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 24/08/2023 2:41 am, TT wrote:
*skriptis kirjoitti 23.8.2023 klo 16.42:
McEnroe was talented player, fell to off court distractions rather
early in his career and consequently played as if he was semi-retired. >>>> He lost a chance to improve his legacy and so on.
In reality Mac couldn't handle Lendl after the latter got his nerves in >>> czech.
That's not reality rather misguided fantasy. Lendl was a fine tennis
player but not in goat/boat class.
Lendl beat Mac seven times in a row in the latter's supposed "prime" of 1981-82. A second-rate player did this to the BOAT?Mac was depressed because Borg quit. You call yourself a tennis fan and
you don't know the basics?
If Lendl was better why did he lose 10 of 12 matches in 1984? Mono?
Got temporarily old before being reborn?
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:46:22 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:McEnroe was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis playerLOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
ever.
We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "
bolster their favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to
I'll never understand the time and energy investment either. I wanted Federer to end up the best and enjoyed all the back-and-forth debate over the years. But in the end, it didn't turn out that way, and that's life. Somebody like Whisper wants to haveit both ways. He'll bash posters like PWL for propping up Federer while doing the same kind of stuff with his own "pet" players. It's half-trolling, half genuine hypocrisy.
On Friday, 25 August 2023 at 04:45:33 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:McEnroe was too old at 25, too tired, too drugged out, too preoccupied with his divorce", etc. It's hilarious. Such double standards.
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:46:22 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:28:23 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:03:59 PM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:We know how Whisper reacted to all the Federer losses vs Nadal and Djokovic in important matches and yet he doesn't follow the same line of thinking when it comes to Lendl beating McEnroe time and time again in critical matches. Then we hear, "
On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 9:14:45 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Whisper's theme song should be "Still Trolling After All These Years."
I think he has a genuine claim to being called the best tennis player >>>>>> ever.LOL! You've lost it. You claim to be impartial and then you spew this crap that McEnroe was the best tennis player ever? That's a laughable claim, seriously.
bolster their favorite players. It's unbelievable to me. Why waste time doing that?The great player who has more slams and other crucial stats over another player including owning the h2h is the greater/better player. The end. People seem to have such a hard time with this concept and come up with every excuse in the book to
have it both ways. He'll bash posters like PWL for propping up Federer while doing the same kind of stuff with his own "pet" players. It's half-trolling, half genuine hypocrisy.I'll never understand the time and energy investment either. I wanted Federer to end up the best and enjoyed all the back-and-forth debate over the years. But in the end, it didn't turn out that way, and that's life. Somebody like Whisper wants to
Whisper's mentions about Mac are nothing compared to how you Fedfans used to threaten huge violence to anyone who disputed that Fed was the GOAT back in the day!
On 26/08/2023 2:32 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:45:41 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 25/08/2023 11:51 pm, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:37:02 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote: >>>Problem is he shriveled into his shell against the elite players. His
Also, I am not propping Federer when I am stating other variables or facts. Stating these facts doesn't change results and this isn't my personality at all to just argue losses. He lost and won his share, it's all fine.
GOAT or not, he is my favorite to watch, I enjoy his mechanics, swings and how he made things look so easy in tennis courts.
Oh, you must be referring to the "boring" game of one of the most dazzling shot-makers who ever played the sport.
play was very introverted when he stood up against the guys with bigger >> cocks.
Had he retired at age 31 like Pete or lost motivation like Mac, would you have acknowledged he is better than both of them?Prob v Djoker at the time, but not Rafa.
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 11:34:16 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:because by that time, he was "distracted." :)
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 7:42:14 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 25/08/2023 11:45 pm, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 6:18:59 AM UTC-7, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
other on to best slam record.
.mikko
Oh, but he must have gotten over his depression by then....even though no new rival had appeared on the scene yet. Course, as soon as a wave of new rivals appeared in 1985-86 (in the form of Becker, Agassi, etc), Mac's motivation dropped again
supposedly "drove Borg into retirement" because he knew he couldn't beat Mac anymore. That being the case, why would Borg's presence on the tour be Mac's prime motivator when Lendl was the guy kicking his ass repeatedly?But that aside, let's wind back to 1981-82. According to the Gospel of John McEnroe (which Whisper adheres to), McEnroe achieved dominance over Borg because he had three consecutive wins over him--most notably Wimbledon & USO back-to->back. This
always rooted for him vs. Lendl. But 15-21 match record including 3-7 in slams is the tale of the tape and all the excuses or attitude in the world won't change it.It's hard to take these arguments seriously. Anyone who can't see McEnroe was at least better than Lendl is not worth engaging. You're either blind or trolling. And Borg admitted McEnroe's rise to no.1 made him lose motivation and drove him into retirement. Most of us knew this before he admitted it. For the people who still don't get this today, I don't know what to say. It's pointless, like arguing with drunks. I prefer to leave them alone and let them sleep it off, hopefully come to their senses in the morning.Same old Whisper playbook. Lacking evidence or the ability to construct a valid rebuttal, try to bluff your way out of it via phantom social proof, support from nonexistent external authority, or simple posing. I loved watching McEnroe play and
Aside from that, you need to write some new lines for yourself. Your canned attacks are so old they've grown mold.Good post Gman!
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 1:28:33 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote:
30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged each >>> other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy!
1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew, None of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating upOpinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62
60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the
best of his era no doubts about it.
On 8/27/23 6:14 AM, *skriptis wrote:
Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
Opinion sans logical evidence or insight = bullshit. If this is the best you've got, fuck off.
What is that you even argue you fool?
Against Whisper?
I'm asking in good faith. Your posts make no sense.
Whisper doesn't claim McEnroe is the goat or greatest or whatever so what is it that you oppose him on, tell us what is your agenda here?
----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlskript, it is the same-old, same-old...a long-standing rst custom of
finding someone you don't like for some reason, and finding ways to
stick it to them over minor, or even manufactured, issues.
So it's not the stated issue, but the person doing the "stating". This presents the comical possibility where one's hated interlocutor could
agree with one, and this would not provide closure, but would increase frustration because now a new divisive issue must be found--or manufactured.
A lot of fuckin' needless work, if you ask me. Why can't they just stick
to their original position so that the brawl could continue ad infinitum?
Shirley you have seen this before...
:^)
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 9:14:37 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:he was becoming violent.” In response, McEnroe issued a statement saying he had hoped “after all these years she would see things more accurately and that she would share my concern for the welfare of our children.” Now, however, he’s revising
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Saturday, August 26, 2023 at 4:28:33 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>> On 26/08/2023 5:21 am, Court_1 wrote:
How did he lose motivation if he was doing what I quoted below in 86, 87 and after? Also, was he beating players earlier in his career because of it and he couldn't get to work any more and needed more and more as he got older?On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:59 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote: >>>>>> On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:47:21 AM UTC+3, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> 30's. Mac had little motivation after Borg quit, the big 3 egged eachNone of his rivals were as good as Borg so he lost interest beating up
Right! Whisper forgot that little detail while creating his fantasy! >>>> 1984 was a last hurrah for Mac. It proved to him what he already knew,other on to best slam record.?... wasn't 1984 the absolute Mac pinnacle year (two years+ after Borg quitted).
.mikko
on Lendl/Connors/Wilander etc. Mac even crushed Edberg at 1984 USO 62 >>>> 60 61, and Stefan had already won a slam by then. Mac was clearly the >>>> best of his era no doubts about it.
<McEnroe now concedes he began a six-year stretch starting in 1986 in which he “unknowingly” took steroids -- a denial that seems absurd in the face of O’Neal’s assertions last June.
In a TV interview, O’Neal said McEnroe used steroids when he was coming back after their son Sean was born in 1987. O’Neal said she did not know if tennis officials were aware of McEnroe’s steroid use, but said she “made him stop because
McEnroe's best chance of winning a FO title in McEnroe's "golden" year, and then, as I said, there's the staring-you-in-the face losing h2h, most damning in slams with 3-7. An intelligent tennis fan--or *human* for that matter--is supposed to believe oneMy condolences.It sounds like you didn't watch tennis at that time? I knew Mac was
But poor McEnreo, he didn't know and he was not motivated as Whisper said while admitting to take it for six years without knowing what he was talking
"For six years I was unaware I was being given a form of
steroid of the legal kind they used to give horses until they
decided it was too strong even for horses," McEnroe said.
finished when I saw him in May 1985. It was a sad day for me : (
Records over the years here demonstrate your lack of many substance: logical reasoning, wrong claims and quick run when getting busted, shifting your grounds and measures to continue arguments, falling in love with the sports cheaters, ..Mac had a unique game.
Twenty years ago I thought you knew something about tennis, but it didn't take long to figure you out and stop taking you seriously. I just like to bust your nonsense from time to time.
Cheers :)
He was a S&V guy but had unconventional form and an excellent, near preternatural instinct when at the net.
He had adequate footspeed, but should not allow himself to get into extended rallies...not his thing, really.
He had the most effective left-hand serve I've seen and he milked it all the way.
He was a superb touch (rather than power) player. This included both volleys and ground strokes.
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. HeFrom the first time I saw them play at the 1980 USO it was plain Lendl would be a burr under his saddle for a long time to come. There were matches in '81 where by McEnroe's own admission, Lendl blew him off the court. This is the same guy who blocked
is overpowering him."
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 12:44:59 PM UTC-4, jdeluise wrote:
PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> writes:
His roid behavior on court is explainable now.
Absolutely. There is big difference of playing one volley occasionally compared to rushing to the net on every point.Stamina is tested more when the player has to rush forward to volley. I'd say running right and left requires less explosiveness thanYou say you play tennis?
running forward for volleys.
It's much easier to run left and right chasing balls that slowed down traversing the entire court compared to rushing quickly to catch every ball flying by you on the net.
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:There's no reason involved. Just ridiculousness.
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He >>> is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all. >>>
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces. >> What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part >> time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right nowNo they're not! Fanatics of all players are the same. The narrative shifts all the time with them. It's always about desperately trying to show that their favorite player is the best despite the fact that statistics may show something very different.
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
The Djokovic fanatics will pull the age card the second Djokovic loses a couple of important matches in a row even though those fanatics were calling Federer fanatics crazy for claiming Federer was old and past it when he was the same age and makingslam finals.. The fact that Djokovic has won two slams this year at age 36 will be forgotten quickly if he loses the USO to Alcaraz just as Federer fanatics were calling Federer decrepit at ate 28 in 2008 after many big losses to Nadal. It's one sicko
On Sunday, 27 August 2023 at 17:51:05 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:blocked McEnroe's best chance of winning a FO title in McEnroe's "golden" year, and then, as I said, there's the staring-you-in-the face losing h2h, most damning in slams with 3-7. An intelligent tennis fan--or *human* for that matter--is supposed to
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 9:14:37 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly, and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He is overpowering him."
From the first time I saw them play at the 1980 USO it was plain Lendl would be a burr under his saddle for a long time to come. There were matches in '81 where by McEnroe's own admission, Lendl blew him off the court. This is the same guy who
your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court in the 1984 FO final, everyone knows what happens, it was all on Mac's racquet and he messed it up, Lendl was barely part of it, why are you pretending about that?
your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court in the 1984 FO final
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>> On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka but thosehttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
counted,....If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn't
It seems to be very subjective I guess.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka but thosePeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:story.shtml
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now >>>>>>> at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his >>>>>>> best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol
Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
counted,....so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn't
If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.
to see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.
It seems to be very subjective I guess.
LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans want
Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.
On 31.8.2023 23.09, Court_1 wrote:losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote: >>>> On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka but thosePeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:story.shtml
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>> On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol >>>>> Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
counted,....so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn't
If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.
to see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.
It seems to be very subjective I guess.
LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans want
Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.But Wrinka is 1-umpteen in H2H against Djok. Can't be a matchup thing. Wrinka was just lucky to play Djok in a RG final when RG was still the
hump in Djok's CGS dreams. In that USO F loss, Djok had nine toes and
one elbow. The left elbow.
https://static9.depositphotos.com/1011382/1144/i/950/depositphotos_11444953-stock-photo-shoulder-shrug.jpg
--
"And off they went, from here to there,
The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"
-- Traditional
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote: >>>> On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka but thosehttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
counted,....If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn't
see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.It seems to be very subjective I guess.LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans want to
Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 4:09:54 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:those losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka buthttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
counted,....If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn't
to see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.It seems to be very subjective I guess.LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans want
Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.You got offended again and chose to go on the attack instead of staying on the topic and you want us to believe every woman that comes forward saying her man assaulted her :)
You are saying h2h against a player says the player is mentally strong or stronger than his opponent?
You didn't explain to me how he is mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal if he loses the most important matches to inferior players.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:23:30 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:those losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 4:09:54 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol
Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka buthttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
counted,....If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn't
want to see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.It seems to be very subjective I guess.LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans
matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.You got offended again and chose to go on the attack instead of staying on the topic and you want us to believe every woman that comes forward saying her man assaulted her :)
You are saying h2h against a player says the player is mentally strong or stronger than his opponent?
You didn't explain to me how he is mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal if he loses the most important matches to inferior players.I'm not the offended one here. I like Federer the best but I'm not blind to facts like you are.
Djokovic's mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal because as I said above, he dominated them in important matches for the past decade(with Nadal, off clay.) If you show that you're better than the two other goat players, isn't that enough?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look at the
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:46:07 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:those losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:23:30 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 4:09:54 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : (
I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol
Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinka buthttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
t counted,....If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one isn'
want to see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.It seems to be very subjective I guess.LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans
the matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.You got offended again and chose to go on the attack instead of staying on the topic and you want us to believe every woman that comes forward saying her man assaulted her :)
You are saying h2h against a player says the player is mentally strong or stronger than his opponent?
You didn't explain to me how he is mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal if he loses the most important matches to inferior players.I'm not the offended one here. I like Federer the best but I'm not blind to facts like you are.
Djokovic's mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal because as I said above, he dominated them in important matches for the past decade(with Nadal, off clay.) If you show that you're better than the two other goat players, isn't that enough?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look at
lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:56:03 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:but those losses were all about Wawrinka's game and nothing to do with Djokovic's mental toughness.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:46:07 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:23:30 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 4:09:54 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 2:10:03 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 12:11:36 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 1:44:50 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Wednesday, August 30, 2023 at 12:59:13 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 30.8.2023 klo 7.36:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2023 at 4:48:58 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 29/08/2023 3:46 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Monday, August 28, 2023 at 4:58:28 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:Some of the biggest Djoker fans are saying he is at his best right now
On 28/08/2023 2:14 am, Sawfish wrote:I guess you missed something, Federer's era ended 2009 too, he was not interested and was playing on one foot and because he was too good he managed to win more slams even when his era magically ended like Mac :)
On 8/27/23 8:19 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
On Sunday, August 27, 2023 at 10:42:34 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
On 28/08/2023 12:30 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:
He was very confident (in his heyday).
I don't think his stamina was tested. In part because he controlled the
length of points by coming to the net.
At the end I can remember watching as Lendl turned the tables, visibly,
and thinking: "Wow. He's pushing McEnroe off the back of the court. He
is overpowering him."
These are my personal observations, and I'll go with them, thanks all.
Lendl was in top form in 1984, Mac killed him 10 times on all surfaces.
What was wrong with Lendl in 1984?
For me McEnroe era ended February 1985. He was on crack and played part
time after that, looked a shadow. Very sad times : ( >>>
Amazing how other players have era that ends but poor Federer never had one :)
at 36. His fans are very different to Fed fans who say Fed was past his
best just as Nadal & Djoker came on.
Of course Djok is older, no doubt about it, but the current generation is useless.
Let Djok play against a couple of younger multi slam champions and you will find out the impact of being past prime.
You don't need to go far, check what happened when he was drained in five sets against zverev in us open then he was taken care of by medvedev.
Medvedev tends to beat Djoke regardless of schedule.
Also in the Olympics he lost to zverev in 3 sets to zverev and couldn't beat Carreno the next day to win a medal.That's just complete BS. Djokovic tired after a three setter, lol
Djokovic simply couldn't handle Olympic nerves.
He's mentally tough. He's had a couple of chihuahua moments(at USO one match from CYGS, and at Olympics vs Zverev) but those have been few and far between since 2011. Some would say he wasn't mentally tough in his slam losses vs Wawrinkahttps://www.eurosport.com/tennis/tokyo-2020/2021/tokyo-2020-olympics-novak-djokovic-couldn-t-control-emotions-frustration-boiled-over-with-racket-abu_sto8460609/story.shtml
Do you mean Djok isn't mentally tough as Whisper says?
isn't counted,....If he's not considered a mentally tough all time great champion, who is? You have to put Djokovic, Nadal and Sampras(in no particular order) as the top three in mental toughness IMO. Connors should probably be up there too.so losing the most important matches in his career against inferior opponents shouldn't be counted, and other matches he lost against Wawrinka were because of Wawrinka super play, and losing to Federer in London to lose year end number one
want to see. It sucks but it is what it is. Yes, Djokovic is mentally stronger than Federer. You just have to look at most of their slam matches vs each other to determine that. It's not rocket science. Just move on already.It seems to be very subjective I guess.LOL, you have a very serious issue with respect to your Federer worshipping. There's no reasoning with a person like you. Whisper is the same when it comes to McEnroe. I forgot about that until Whisper started his gushing again recently.
Djokovic made the other two goats(Federer, Nadal off clay) his pigeons for the past decade in the most important matches. He's proven that he's slightly better than the other two despite the fact that Federer is the artist/shotmaker 90% of fans
the matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?Wawrinka has a game style that bothers Djokovic but not Federer or Nadal. You know that's how match-ups work.You got offended again and chose to go on the attack instead of staying on the topic and you want us to believe every woman that comes forward saying her man assaulted her :)
You are saying h2h against a player says the player is mentally strong or stronger than his opponent?
You didn't explain to me how he is mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal if he loses the most important matches to inferior players.I'm not the offended one here. I like Federer the best but I'm not blind to facts like you are.
Djokovic's mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal because as I said above, he dominated them in important matches for the past decade(with Nadal, off clay.) If you show that you're better than the two other goat players, isn't that enough?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look at
tennis strokes don't change that, sadly.lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.Of course it does! You had these two all time great players playing 50 matches vs each other! That directly tells us which player is better with no guessing involved. Federer choked away too many slam matches vs Djokovic. It's sad but true. His pretty
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
Federer never got to the final of the USO to be one match away from a CYGS, what are you talking about? Djokovic got much closer to the CYGS. You are completely oblivious to the facts it seems.
Come on, it's getting scary with your blatant re-organizing of the facts!
On another note, Grach, I just saw that the Circus Freak(Isner) retired! I'm sure you're as upset about it as I am!
Fat Sock retired too. 😂
On another note, Grach, I just saw that the Circus Freak(Isner) retired! I'm sure you're as upset about it as I am!
Fat Sock retired too. 😂
opponent is inferior.Come on, it's getting scary with your blatant re-organizing of the facts!Everything is mixed up in your head. When player A has winning h2h against player B, it never implies that player A is mentally tougher than player B. But on the other hand, a better measure is how the player plays when it matters the most and the
On 1/09/2023 4:29 am, Gracchus wrote:> On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 8:29:40 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:>> On Sunday, 27 August 2023 at 17:51:05 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:>> your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court in the 1984 FOfinal, everyone knows what happens, it was all on Mac's racquet and he messed it up, Lendl was barely part of it, why are you pretending about that?> > When a player has it on his racquet and "messes up," then the stress of the moment and/or mental
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 8:29:40 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:year" of his prime. He wanted it as much as any title he played for, so no excuses.
On Sunday, 27 August 2023 at 17:51:05 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:
your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court in the 1984 FO final, everyone knows what happens, it was all on Mac's racquet and he messed it up, Lendl was barely part of it, why are you pretending about that?
When a player has it on his racquet and "messes up," then the stress of the moment and/or mental dynamics with the opponent factored in. Bottom line is Mac didn't get his FO and it was one more loss in his shoddy h2h with Lendl. This >was the "golden
at the matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?Djokovic's mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal because as I said above, he dominated them in important matches for the past decade(with Nadal, off clay.) If you show that you're better than the two other goat players, isn't that enough?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look
pretty tennis strokes don't change that, sadly.lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.Of course it does! You had these two all time great players playing 50 matches vs each other! That directly tells us which player is better with no guessing involved. Federer choked away too many slam matches vs Djokovic. It's sad but true. His
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
Federer never got to the final of the USO to be one match away from a CYGS, what are you talking about? Djokovic got much closer to the CYGS. You are completely oblivious to the facts it seems.
Come on, it's getting scary with your blatant re-organizing of the facts!
Everything is mixed up in your head. When player A has winning h2h against player B, it never implies that player A is mentally tougher than player B. But on the other hand, a better measure is how the player plays when it matters the most and theopponent is inferior.
And of course, for Federer to repeat this in three years, winning three slams and lose in the final against the clay goat in the FO final shows how consistently great Federer was. But definitely this will go unnoticed for people that can't see theobvious.
matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look at the
lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 10:46:07 PM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look at the
lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
Whisper have you watched that match live or at any time later?
I thought of watching the entire match as it's obviously one of the most important slam finals in history and it's probably fun to see what happened, but I am somewhat bored with old matches.
Is it worth it?
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 12:25:18 PM UTC+3, *skriptis wrote:
Whisper have you watched that match live or at any time later?
I thought of watching the entire match as it's obviously one of the most important slam finals in history and it's probably fun to see what happened, but I am somewhat bored with old matches.
Is it worth it?80:ies matches: Becker - Lendl USO 1989 final is a kind of pinnacle quality which provided also seamless transition to 90:ies.
Very high quality match.
.mikko
On 1/09/2023 4:29 am, Gracchus wrote:year" of his prime. He wanted it as much as any title he played for, so no excuses.
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 8:29:40 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:
On Sunday, 27 August 2023 at 17:51:05 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:
your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court in the 1984 FO final, everyone knows what happens, it was all on Mac's racquet and he messed it up, Lendl was barely part of it, why are you pretending about that?
When a player has it on his racquet and "messes up," then the stress of the moment and/or mental dynamics with the opponent factored in. Bottom line is Mac didn't get his FO and it was one more loss in his shoddy h2h with Lendl. This >was the "golden
Mac was leading the overall h2h before that FO final and had won the previous 5 matches and 8 out of 9. In that '83/'84 stretch Mac beat
Lendl 10 times out 12, with 2 fluky losses - should have been 12-0.
Leading into FO Mac beat Lendl twice on clay 64 62 and 63 62, and led FO final 63 62. Lendl was at his peak so no real excuses.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:10:37 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 12:25:18 PM UTC+3, *skriptis wrote:Yes, very super, better than no forehand Mikenroe?
Whisper have you watched that match live or at any time later?80:ies matches: Becker - Lendl USO 1989 final is a kind of pinnacle quality which provided also seamless transition to 90:ies.
I thought of watching the entire match as it's obviously one of the most important slam finals in history and it's probably fun to see what happened, but I am somewhat bored with old matches.
Is it worth it?
Very high quality match.
.mikko
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 2:21:50 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:year" of his prime. He wanted it as much as any title he played for, so no excuses.
On 1/09/2023 4:29 am, Gracchus wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 8:29:40 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote:
On Sunday, 27 August 2023 at 17:51:05 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:When a player has it on his racquet and "messes up," then the stress of the moment and/or mental dynamics with the opponent factored in. Bottom line is Mac didn't get his FO and it was one more loss in his shoddy h2h with Lendl. This >was the "golden
your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court in the 1984 FO final, everyone knows what happens, it was all on Mac's racquet and he messed it up, Lendl was barely part of it, why are you pretending about that?
many times.Mac was leading the overall h2h before that FO final and had won theLots of cherry-picking and shoulda-woulda-coulda. Bottom line is a losing h2h, poor h2h in slams, and no FO for Mac. I can just imagine your response if a poster did this with any other player. In fact, I don't have to imagine it since I've seen it so
previous 5 matches and 8 out of 9. In that '83/'84 stretch Mac beat
Lendl 10 times out 12, with 2 fluky losses - should have been 12-0.
Leading into FO Mac beat Lendl twice on clay 64 62 and 63 62, and led FO
final 63 62. Lendl was at his peak so no real excuses.
Yes, very super, better than no forehand Mikenroe?Yep.
He and Edberg had questionable forehands. Not so much consistency, but
lack of the ability to go on the attack from the FH.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 7:05:06 PM UTC+3, Sawfish wrote:Unsure why we're talking about the man who made popular the Hawaiian grip.
At same time: Berasatequi had so extreme western FH that it was like reverse eastern.Yes, very super, better than no forehand Mikenroe?Yep.
He and Edberg had questionable forehands. Not so much consistency, but
lack of the ability to go on the attack from the FH.
Edberg had very classic eastern FH,
just built for his net game.
What is to be noted: Edberg's return game stats were much higher than average.I didn't realize that. Good point.
No wonder he got some succee even with his questionable FH..
.mikko
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 12:25:18 PM UTC+3, *skriptis wrote:
Whisper have you watched that match live or at any time later?
I thought of watching the entire match as it's obviously one of the most important slam finals in history and it's probably fun to see what happened, but I am somewhat bored with old matches.
Is it worth it?
80:ies matches: Becker - Lendl USO 1989 final is a kind of pinnacle quality which provided also seamless transition to 90:ies.
Very high quality match.
.mikko
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 11:44:45 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:at the matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?
Djokovic's mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal because as I said above, he dominated them in important matches for the past decade(with Nadal, off clay.) If you show that you're better than the two other goat players, isn't that enough?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to look
pretty tennis strokes don't change that, sadly.lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.Of course it does! You had these two all time great players playing 50 matches vs each other! That directly tells us which player is better with no guessing involved. Federer choked away too many slam matches vs Djokovic. It's sad but true. His
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
Federer never got to the final of the USO to be one match away from a CYGS, what are you talking about? Djokovic got much closer to the CYGS. You are completely oblivious to the facts it seems.
Come on, it's getting scary with your blatant re-organizing of the facts!
opponent is inferior.Everything is mixed up in your head. When player A has winning h2h against player B, it never implies that player A is mentally tougher than player B. But on the other hand, a better measure is how the player plays when it matters the most and the
No, you have it backwards. The greatest measure of a player is how he plays vs his biggest rivals time and time again. Federer was absolutely fantastic at playing and beating lesser players(probably the best ever) but he often came up short againstNadal for the first decade of his career and then Djokovic for the second decade of his career.
obvious.And of course, for Federer to repeat this in three years, winning three slams and lose in the final against the clay goat in the FO final shows how consistently great Federer was. But definitely this will go unnoticed for people that can't see the
But he was losing finals at off clay slams vs Nadal when he was in his prime! He was never able to get beyond Nadal at the FO so how was he closer to a CYGS than Djokovic who got to the final of the USO and was one match away from a CYGS?
Seriously, you're so affected by Federer mania it isn't even funny. You got too caught up in the beauty of Federer's game(I did too for a long while) and for some reason can't allow yourself to see his weaknesses. It's pretty scary.
On 9/1/23 6:45 AM, Gracchus wrote:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 2:21:50 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
On 1/09/2023 4:29 am, Gracchus wrote:Lots of cherry-picking and shoulda-woulda-coulda. Bottom line is a
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 8:29:40 AM UTC-7, The Iceberg wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, 27 August 2023 at 17:51:05 UTC+1, Gracchus wrote:Mac was leading the overall h2h before that FO final and had won the
your whole problem here is Lendl didn't blow Mac off the court inWhen a player has it on his racquet and "messes up," then the stress
the 1984 FO final, everyone knows what happens, it was all on Mac's
racquet and he messed it up, Lendl was barely part of it, why are
you pretending about that?
of the moment and/or mental dynamics with the opponent factored in.
Bottom line is Mac didn't get his FO and it was one more loss in his
shoddy h2h with Lendl. This >was the "golden year" of his prime. He
wanted it as much as any title he played for, so no excuses.
previous 5 matches and 8 out of 9. In that '83/'84 stretch Mac beat
Lendl 10 times out 12, with 2 fluky losses - should have been 12-0.
Leading into FO Mac beat Lendl twice on clay 64 62 and 63 62, and led FO >>> final 63 62. Lendl was at his peak so no real excuses.
losing h2h, poor h2h in slams, and no FO for Mac. I can just imagine
your response if a poster did this with any other player. In fact, I
don't have to imagine it since I've seen it so many times.
Here I am reading yet another thread on the abilities of past masters.
Last night I watched Alcaraz vs I guy named Harris. Harris is not
special, but is active and competent.
The match looked like a grown man playing a little kid.
I get scared, real scared, watching Alcaraz's progress. I could go on in detail, but I've decided to ease up on RST readers in honor of the US
Labor Day.
I do not see an area or technique that needs to be better to compete as
ATP #1 for years. Only injury seems to be a threat.
That, or voodoo...
On 1/09/2023 11:10 pm, MBDunc wrote:
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 12:25:18 PM UTC+3, *skriptis wrote:
Whisper have you watched that match live or at any time later?
I thought of watching the entire match as it's obviously one of the most important slam finals in history and it's probably fun to see what happened, but I am somewhat bored with old matches.
Is it worth it?
80:ies matches: Becker - Lendl USO 1989 final is a kind of pinnacle quality which provided also seamless transition to 90:ies.
Very high quality match.
.mikkoyes, but too fucking slow between points. Becker took forever to start
the next point. Wish they had 25 second rule back then.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 5:38:20 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 11:44:45 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Seriously, you're so affected by Federer mania it isn't even funny. You got too caught up in the beauty of Federer's game(I did too for a long while) and for some reason can't allow yourself to see his weaknesses. It's pretty scary.
Federer in his prime was too good and too consistent that he was guaranteed to win all slams and be in the FO final against Nadal.
So for me it was about his ability to win the cygs then which he was capable of if nadal wasn't around. If Nadal wasn't around he would have won the four slams in the same year twice
Btw, Djokovic didn't win the cygs, so one match away or two are wishful thinking, he failed to beat an inferior player in the final which is not a sign of mental strength.
On 9/1/23 9:26 AM, MBDunc wrote:
Edberg had very classic eastern FH,My opinion: he may have had a classic eastern FH GRIP, but the stroke mechanics were not classic.
just built for his net game.In my estimation his FH mechanics was not so much a result of his grip,
but more in the way he kept his arm bent somewhat at the elbow. He
tended to "scoop" the ball a bit. He seemed to be contacting the ball somewhat *behind* the optimum strike point.
This affected penetration. If Wawrinka is an exemplar of "penetrating
shots" (and I think he is), Edberg's FH was the anti-Wawrinka FH.
But yes, the *grip* allowed for better FH approach shots than further west.
What is to be noted: Edberg's return game stats were much higher than average.I didn't realize that. Good point.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 9:54:19 AM UTC-7, Sawfish wrote:
On 9/1/23 9:26 AM, MBDunc wrote:I am not so sure about Edberg's FH grip being Classic Eastern (a la Lendl, Sampras). I thought he had a Continental grip that was a result of his S/V game (he didn't have to change grips for the volley).
Edberg had very classic eastern FH,My opinion: he may have had a classic eastern FH GRIP, but the stroke
mechanics were not classic.
just built for his net game.In my estimation his FH mechanics was not so much a result of his grip,
but more in the way he kept his arm bent somewhat at the elbow. He
tended to "scoop" the ball a bit. He seemed to be contacting the ball
somewhat *behind* the optimum strike point.
he didn't try to do anything spectacular with it; it was good enough to keep him in a rally and for hitting effective approach shots (so he didn't have to hit that many FH's).This affected penetration. If Wawrinka is an exemplar of "penetratingCorrect. It also enabled him to "scoop" up low balls. Also, while Edberg's FH was quirky and a weakness in terms of power, it was hard to pin him on that side because: 1) he was much more consistent from that side than people thought/expected, and 2)
shots" (and I think he is), Edberg's FH was the anti-Wawrinka FH.
But yes, the *grip* allowed for better FH approach shots than further west.
And Edberg was very fast around the court for a big guy.
Yes, Edberg had a very effective ROS and he was tough to ace. He would get back a lot of serves.What is to be noted: Edberg's return game stats were much higher than average.I didn't realize that. Good point.
On Friday, September 1, 2023 at 5:38:20 AM UTC-4, Court_1 wrote:look at the matches Federer and Djokovic played against each other to determine whom the mentally stronger player is. When you look at that, it's crystal clear. How many slam matches vs Djokovic did Federer hold match points and blow it?
On Thursday, August 31, 2023 at 11:44:45 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:
Djokovic's mentally stronger than Federer and Nadal because as I said above, he dominated them in important matches for the past decade(with Nadal, off clay.) If you show that you're better than the two other goat players, isn't that enough?
He also came closer to a CYGS(one freaking match) than Federer and Nadal ever did. You think the fact that Djokovic lost some slam finals vs Wawrinka and Murray(two great players) shows that he's weaker than Federer? It doesn't. We have to
pretty tennis strokes don't change that, sadly.lol, again h2h means nothing for mental toughness.Of course it does! You had these two all time great players playing 50 matches vs each other! That directly tells us which player is better with no guessing involved. Federer choked away too many slam matches vs Djokovic. It's sad but true. His
Federer was one match short to win cygs three times and he was denied this match by prime nadal in the FO.
Federer never got to the final of the USO to be one match away from a CYGS, what are you talking about? Djokovic got much closer to the CYGS. You are completely oblivious to the facts it seems.
Come on, it's getting scary with your blatant re-organizing of the facts!
opponent is inferior.Everything is mixed up in your head. When player A has winning h2h against player B, it never implies that player A is mentally tougher than player B. But on the other hand, a better measure is how the player plays when it matters the most and the
Nadal for the first decade of his career and then Djokovic for the second decade of his career.No, you have it backwards. The greatest measure of a player is how he plays vs his biggest rivals time and time again. Federer was absolutely fantastic at playing and beating lesser players(probably the best ever) but he often came up short against
obvious.And of course, for Federer to repeat this in three years, winning three slams and lose in the final against the clay goat in the FO final shows how consistently great Federer was. But definitely this will go unnoticed for people that can't see the
But he was losing finals at off clay slams vs Nadal when he was in his prime! He was never able to get beyond Nadal at the FO so how was he closer to a CYGS than Djokovic who got to the final of the USO and was one match away from a CYGS?
Seriously, you're so affected by Federer mania it isn't even funny. You got too caught up in the beauty of Federer's game(I did too for a long while) and for some reason can't allow yourself to see his weaknesses. It's pretty scary.
Federer in his prime was too good and too consistent that he was guaranteed to win all slams and be in the FO final against Nadal.
So for me it was about his ability to win the cygs then which he was capable of if nadal wasn't around. If Nadal wasn't around he would have won the four slams in the same year twice
Btw, Djokovic didn't win the cygs, so one match away or two are wishful thinking, he failed to beat an inferior player in the final which is not a sign of mental strength.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 483 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 170:00:08 |
| Calls: | 9,595 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 13,679 |
| Messages: | 6,149,872 |
