Wawrinka crushed the Italian

[PeteWasLucky]

Fognini faught for a set and collapsed after.

[Shakes]

On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 8:17:17 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> Fognini faught for a set and collapsed after.

Wawrinka could play Monfils next rd. Should be an interesting match, at least until Monfils expends his nervous energy and tires.

[PeteWasLucky]

Monfils needs to win his match first tomorrow while Wawrinka will be resting.

[Guypers]

Lol, monfils cant beat stimpy on clay!

[Court_1]

On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 3:39:36 PM UTC-4, Shakes wrote:

Why would that match-up be interesting? Any winner other than Wawrkina would be a travesty as you know there's a high probability that Monfils would tank his next match if he won. After Monfils' disgraceful tank at the USO 2016 vs Djokovic, I've given up taking him seriously or watching any of his matches. He's exactly what a professional tennis player should not be.

[Shakes]

Well, for one thing, Monfils is 2-2 against Wawrinka. And his career win % is highest on clay. So he could trouble Wawrinka.

[Court_1]

On clay I doubt Monfils will trouble Wawrinka. I think it will probably be fairly routine for Wawrinka.

[PeteWasLucky]

> Well, for one thing, Monfils is 2-2 against Wawrinka. And his career win % is highest on clay. So he could trouble Wawrinka.

Shakes doesn't want Wawrinka in the final.

[Carey]

On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 8:31:49 PM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> > Well, for one thing, Monfils is 2-2 against Wawrinka. And his career win % is highest on clay. So he could trouble Wawrinka.
>
> Shakes doesn't want Wawrinka in the final.

Shakes may or may not, but I sure do. Go effin' Stan!

[Gracchus]

Ditto. Pole power.

[Shakes]

On Saturday, June 3, 2017 at 8:31:49 PM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:

> > Well, for one thing, Monfils is 2-2 against Wawrinka. And his career win % is highest on clay. So he could trouble Wawrinka.
>
> Shakes doesn't want Wawrinka in the final.

No, nothing like that. I want Djok to win the tournament, doesn't matter who it is against. FWIW, I am not as invested emotionally in Djok or any player today as I was in Sampras (or Edberg before that).

[Court_1]

On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 2:21:56 AM UTC-4, Shakes wrote:

> No, nothing like that. I want Djok to win the tournament, doesn't matter who it is against.

You'll have to pray very hard then and hope against hope there is a God who can answer your prayers.

A Sampras/Edberg fan liking Djokovic of all players. *rolls eyes*

[Tuan]

You must like bounce-bounce-bounce (repeated 20 times).

[*skriptis]

Shakes <kvcs...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

That's me too. ;)

I prefer s/v but when there's none, I enjoy players who can offer
something truly great, whether it's the game, or inner strength.
Sampras did it, Nadal and Djokovic did that in this
era.


--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

[Whisper]

Yes, when you think of 'best at best' you get the same names coming up;

Laver, McEnroe, Sampras, Nadal & Djokovic.

At their best these guys were animals & seemingly impossible to beat.
There have been other great players with maybe better records eg Borg,
Federer etc, but they were bettered by their biggest rivals at
respective peaks.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

[Guypers]

Euro trash don't count!

[Gracchus]

When "you" think of...?
"You get" the same names?

Who is "you" and from where do those names "come up" to form a list that conveniently excludes the guy with the most impressive records ever and includes certain players with (a) far few titles (b) a resume with two-thirds of the majors on clay? Professional tennis journalists? A wide survey of tennis fans? Whisper and a tiny handful of online cronies? Ah! Looks like I've stumbled upon the answer: Number 3.

[*skriptis]

Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Maybe the answer is to look at other greats and their predictions
and analysis.

The fact that tennis community has considered an AO final a huge
upset says it all.

[Shakes]

I thought you would pick up on that. :) I only liked Djok after quite a while; basically, only after he stopped being a quitter and proved himself to be a fighter.

[PeteWasLucky]

> I thought you would pick up on that. :) I only liked Djok after quite a while; basically, only after he stopped being a quitter and proved himself to be a fighter.

You mean you started to like him when he stopped Federer winning two extra Wimbledon titles.

[bob]

i'd be happy with stan in the final, stan gave us a great final a
couple yrs ago. i wouldnt' mind seeing him mix it up with nadal or
djok again.

bob

[bob]

wawrinka in 3 or 4. monfils is a nice clown, but not a serious tennis
champ.

bob

[Shakes]

On Sunday, June 4, 2017 at 10:10:05 AM UTC-7, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> > I thought you would pick up on that. :) I only liked Djok after quite a while; basically, only after he stopped being a quitter and proved himself to be a fighter.
>
> You mean you started to like him when he stopped Federer winning two extra Wimbledon titles.

Not to mention when he stopped Fed winning two extra USO titles by snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. You know the one where Fed was *upset* that Djok went for a go-for-broke return at match-point ?

On a serious note, if my liking a player depended on him beating Fed, then I would've liked Nadal after Wim 2008. :)

[PeteWasLucky]

> On a serious note, if my liking a player depended on him beating Fed, then I would've liked Nadal after Wim 2008. :)

But Federer didn't have seven Wimbledon titles in 2008.

[Whisper]

Don't be coy. You know exactly what I mean.

[Whisper]

Monfils & Dimtrov are brothers from different mothers. This is dad;


http://www.officialpsds.com/images/thumbs/ronald-mcdonald-psd51748.png

[The Iceberg]

We should still respect Fed a bit for exploiting the situation when the other better players are out of sorts though and having the best clown thrashing record ever seen!

[Whisper]

On 5/06/2017 7:45 PM, The Iceberg wrote:
> We should still respect Fed a bit for exploiting the situation when the other better players are out of sorts though and having the best clown thrashing record ever seen!
>
>

Yes, this is a big feather in Fed's cap. He never played half arsed -
treated every single match like a Wimbledon final, whether it was a
Wimbledon final or 1st rd qualifiers.

[heyg...@gmail.com]

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 6:11:46 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> On 5/06/2017 7:45 PM, The Iceberg wrote:
> > We should still respect Fed a bit for exploiting the situation when the other better players are out of sorts though and having the best clown thrashing record ever seen!
> >
> >
>
>
> Yes, this is a big feather in Fed's cap. He never played half arsed -
> treated every single match like a Wimbledon final, whether it was a
> Wimbledon final or 1st rd qualifiers.
>

Maybe that's the secret to separating yourself from other GOAT contenders. It would take savant-level mental focus and toughness for Fed to do what you describe. Maybe in the end that's more important than best at best.

I mean, if Djok were able to do it he wouldn't have crashed after last year's FO. If Rafa were able to do it he wouldn't crash out of 25% of slams before the semis...

[SliceAndDice]

On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 6:11:46 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:

Nope..that is Nadal.

[bob]

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 19:28:25 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com>
wrote:

lol

bob

[bob]

On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT), heyg...@gmail.com wrote:

>On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 6:11:46 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
>> On 5/06/2017 7:45 PM, The Iceberg wrote:
>> > We should still respect Fed a bit for exploiting the situation when the other better players are out of sorts though and having the best clown thrashing record ever seen!
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Yes, this is a big feather in Fed's cap. He never played half arsed -
>> treated every single match like a Wimbledon final, whether it was a
>> Wimbledon final or 1st rd qualifiers.
>>
>Maybe that's the secret to separating yourself from other GOAT contenders.

maybe. and i've said this a long time now. fed's consistency is
legenday in my book. i don't know if it means his peak was the highest
peak, but his median was certainly the highest median.

> It would take savant-level mental focus and toughness for Fed to do what you describe. Maybe in the end that's more important than best at best.
>I mean, if Djok were able to do it he wouldn't have crashed after last year's FO. If Rafa were able to do it he wouldn't crash out of 25% of slams before the semis...

agree.

bob

[Whisper]

On 7/06/2017 11:02 AM, bob wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT), heyg...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Monday, June 5, 2017 at 6:11:46 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
>>> On 5/06/2017 7:45 PM, The Iceberg wrote:
>>>> We should still respect Fed a bit for exploiting the situation when the other better players are out of sorts though and having the best clown thrashing record ever seen!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, this is a big feather in Fed's cap. He never played half arsed -
>>> treated every single match like a Wimbledon final, whether it was a
>>> Wimbledon final or 1st rd qualifiers.
>>>
>> Maybe that's the secret to separating yourself from other GOAT contenders.
>
> maybe. and i've said this a long time now. fed's consistency is
> legenday in my book. i don't know if it means his peak was the highest
> peak, but his median was certainly the highest median.
>

Yes, no matter when you watch Fed - 2004 or 2017 - his form always looks
the same. Amazing really.