Djokovic hahaha

[PeteWasLucky]

He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and no shot clock :)

Shorter and no shot clock :)



http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches

[The Iceberg]

On Thursday, 16 August 2018 16:57:24 UTC+1, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and no shot clock :)
>
> Shorter and no shot clock :)

well the obvious problem is most players will start watching the clock and waiting as long as they possibly can in-between the points, you Fedfans only wanted it cos you wanted to try to cause Nadal and Djoker distraction problems, but you'll just make most matches much longer with less happening.

[PeteWasLucky]

> well the obvious problem is most players will start watching the clock and waiting as long as they possibly can in-between the points, you Fedfans only wanted it cos you wanted to try to cause Nadal and Djoker distraction problems, but you'll just make most matches much longer with less happening.

You are genius man :)

So the player that will keep watching the clock to wait as long as he can which is 25 seconds, won't wait forever if there is no shot clock?

[*skriptis]

PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

> > well the obvious problem is most players will start watching the clock and waiting as long as they possibly can in-between the points, you Fedfans only wanted it cos you wanted to try to cause Nadal and Djoker distraction problems, but you'll just make most matches much longer with less happening.
>
> You are genius man :)
>
> So the player that will keep watching the clock to wait as long as he can which is 25 seconds, won't wait forever if there is no shot clock?

Exactly.

People always like to use something to the maximum.

Its elementary psychology.

You had many guys who took, relatively speaking, very short breaks.

They just went through the motions. It was their style. I'm not
talking about those like Federer or Graf whose tactics was to
rush their opponents.

They will always rush it.


I'm talking about the guys who were neither rushers or delayers.

They just went through the motions and served. Now that they have
a clock, you can bet their breaks will approach 25 seconds.




--


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

[The Iceberg]

this is why you hear NOTHING from PWL and other Fedfans about how the players now steal time from the match with that 1st game changeover that is totally against the rules.

[arahim]

Well if you want a quick match may be the shot clock should be the time the server gets to finish a point. If the server fails to finish the point in a given time the receiver gets the point:)

It will keep the receiver motivated to stay in the points as long as he can even if the game score is quite against him and it will make the server play aggressively.

[TT]

Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....

Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?

A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

[guypers]

Rafa

[TT]

Yes... ah the irony...

[TennisGuy]

You mind explaining in plain English what the irony is?

[PeteWasLucky]

> Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....

Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?

A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Welcome back TT.
Absolutely, no champion should have a problem to play in the allowed time when rules are enforced.

[MBDunc]

On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 12:45:35 AM UTC+3, TT wrote:
: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
> >>
> >> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
> >
> > Rafa
> >
>
> Yes... ah the irony...

As like whisper does, I think this rule generally benefits "better players" a'la Rafa.

.mikko

[Whisper]

Same guy will probably be 1st slam winner with shot clock too.

: )



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

[Whisper]

> ---

Yes, & also fitter players. Laver said Rafa is the fitness goat. Could
be a new mini golden era for Rafa where he racks up many non-clay slam
titles?

[TennisGuy]

On 8/18/2018 10:37 PM, Whisper wrote:
> On 19/08/2018 7:31 AM, TT wrote:
>> PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 16.8.2018 klo 18:57:
>>> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and
>>> no shot clock :)
>>>
>>> Shorter and no shot clock :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....
>>
>> Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
>>
>> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
>>
>
> Same guy will probably be 1st slam winner with shot clock too.
>
> : )

Would that be your favourite player?

[arahim]

On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 7:37:31 PM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> On 19/08/2018 7:31 AM, TT wrote:
> > PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 16.8.2018 klo 18:57:
> >> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and
> >> no shot clock :)
> >>
> >> Shorter and no shot clock :)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....
> >
> > Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
> >
> > A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
> >
>
> Same guy will probably be 1st slam winner with shot clock too.
>
> : )
>
>

Then why was there so much opposition to the shot clock if it was so good and people understood there was no negatives for Nadal in having it?

Anyway the real test of the shot clock restriction on Nadal will come against someone like Djokovic who if not as fit is at least close (Not even against Federer who will try to shorten the points, nor against the big servers where the points are short anyway).

As you say most of the players that he played against were likely to lose to him anyway.

[MBDunc]

On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 8:58:49 AM UTC+3, arahim wrote:
> Then why was there so much opposition to the shot clock if it was so good and people understood there was no negatives for Nadal in having it?

It can cut drama and tension out? We love to see them fight against each other, not against clock/computer?

.mikko

[Whisper]

Imo this will give Rafa an advantage over Djoker. Laver said Rafa is
fittest ever, not Djoker. There will be much rest time for Djoker
between rallies. He will suffer far more than Rafa imo.

I actually was making this point here about 4 yrs ago but was dismissed
as trolling. I was very serious.

[The Iceberg]

there's opposition to the clock cos the ONLY reason it's been implemented is by Fedfans who want to try to hinder Nadal and Djoker, that's the ONLY reason PWL likes it so much cos he thinks it'll give trouble to Nadal/Djoker vs Fed. Problem is it will also allow other players to time waste as much as possible and prolong games.

[joh]

On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 10:12:17 AM UTC+2, MBDunc wrote:
> On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 8:58:49 AM UTC+3, arahim wrote:
> > Then why was there so much opposition to the shot clock if it was so good and people understood there was no negatives for Nadal in having it?
>
> It can cut drama and tension out? We love to see them fight against each other,

..instead of see them waste endless amounts of time. There'll be plenty drama left.

It makes sense to restrict the time they can use, it makes sense to enforce the rules. If you can't deal with the rules it's gonna cost ya. Nature of the game.

I'd be in favour of placing dB-meters, and restrict the amount of noise you can make.


not against clock/computer?
>
> .mikko

[John Liang]

On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 6:47:22 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> On 19/08/2018 3:58 PM, arahim wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 7:37:31 PM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 19/08/2018 7:31 AM, TT wrote:
> >>> PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 16.8.2018 klo 18:57:
> >>>> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and
> >>>> no shot clock :)
> >>>>
> >>>> Shorter and no shot clock :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....
> >>>
> >>> Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
> >>>
> >>> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
> >>>
> >>
> >> Same guy will probably be 1st slam winner with shot clock too.
> >>
> >> : )
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Then why was there so much opposition to the shot clock if it was so good and people understood there was no negatives for Nadal in having it?
> >
> > Anyway the real test of the shot clock restriction on Nadal will come against someone like Djokovic who if not as fit is at least close (Not even against Federer who will try to shorten the points, nor against the big servers where the points are short anyway).
> >
> > As you say most of the players that he played against were likely to lose to him anyway.
> >
> >
>
> Imo this will give Rafa an advantage over Djoker. Laver said Rafa is
> fittest ever, not Djoker. There will be much rest time for Djoker
> between rallies. He will suffer far more than Rafa imo.

fitness should have given the edge to Nadal then why he was the one that often lost in the fifth set or just chicken out in AO this year, surely the edge was with him going into a fifth against Cilic.

[kaennorsing]

Op zondag 19 augustus 2018 10:47:22 UTC+2 schreef Whisper:

> On 19/08/2018 3:58 PM, arahim wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 7:37:31 PM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 19/08/2018 7:31 AM, TT wrote:
> >>> PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 16.8.2018 klo 18:57:
> >>>> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and
> >>>> no shot clock :)
> >>>>
> >>>> Shorter and no shot clock :)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....
> >>>
> >>> Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
> >>>
> >>> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
> >>>
> >>
> >> Same guy will probably be 1st slam winner with shot clock too.
> >>
> >> : )
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Then why was there so much opposition to the shot clock if it was so good and people understood there was no negatives for Nadal in having it?
> >
> > Anyway the real test of the shot clock restriction on Nadal will come against someone like Djokovic who if not as fit is at least close (Not even against Federer who will try to shorten the points, nor against the big servers where the points are short anyway).
> >
> > As you say most of the players that he played against were likely to lose to him anyway.
> >
> >
>
> Imo this will give Rafa an advantage over Djoker. Laver said Rafa is
> fittest ever, not Djoker. There will be much rest time for Djoker
> between rallies. He will suffer far more than Rafa imo.

Rafa is the fittest ever on clay for sure. Outside, I'm not so sure. He may be fitter now than he ever was on hard, though he wasn't always that fit with all his broken toes, feet and knees, no?

[TT]

These guys said that Nadal cheats with time because he can't play fast,
they wanted a shot clock. Then Nadal plays his first tournament with
shot clock and immediately wins. Be careful what you ask for.

[TT]

Whisper doesn't say exactly that... he says that it favours fitter players.

That's true but not entirely correct; having shorter time favours fitter
player AND big servers. That's not necessarily good because big servers
don't need any more help to promote their spectator unfriendly type of
play - while favouring more fit player is neither a good thing for
tennis fans (rather have skill win than fitness).

As for Nadal, I've argued that he actually plays better when he does his
service routines faster and thinks less. The serve becomes more
instinctive and fluent instead of thought-out and forced.

Of course when the rallies are long, use of shot clock decreases level
of play and thus works as equalizer of skill (poor player can get closer
in level with better player as the better player's performance lacks the
edge). With two exhausted players it becomes less about skill.
...This is of course true in all sports, poor (playing) conditions help
the worse player to close the skill gap. For example playing pool
billiards with worn out cloth...

It all depends on umpire, whether he lets the players rest a bit longer
after long rallies, as he imo should. Umpire starts the clock.

[TT]

John Liang kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 14:38:
> fitness should have given the edge to Nadal then why he was the one that often lost in the fifth set

Actually Nadal has been close to all time best on fifth sets, and is
still good.

Your question shows your dishonesty since you know that Rafa has lost a
few 5th sets in recent years NOT because of fitness but because of nerves.

[John Liang]

Well, if you believe he is fittest guy on tour and also mentally the toughest then he should be able to outlast guys who were both not as fit as him and also mentally not as tough as him. Dishonesty is to believe he is really mentally tougher than other great of thsi generation.

[arahim]

If it is detrimental to the player whose supporters support it then why so much hue and cry about it by supporters of a player to whom it will be beneficial?

[arahim]

On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 5:09:48 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> MBDunc kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 3:50:
> > On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 12:45:35 AM UTC+3, TT wrote:
> > : Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
> >>>>
> >>>> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
> >>>
> >>> Rafa
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes... ah the irony...
> >
> > As like whisper does, I think this rule generally benefits "better players" a'la Rafa.
> >
> > .mikko
> >
>
> Whisper doesn't say exactly that... he says that it favours fitter players.
>
> That's true but not entirely correct; having shorter time favours fitter
> player AND big servers. That's not necessarily good because big servers
> don't need any more help to promote their spectator unfriendly type of
> play - while favouring more fit player is neither a good thing for
> tennis fans (rather have skill win than fitness).
>

If the player is so much more skillful then he can quickly end most points. It is always a mix of skill and fitness.

A pitcher who can pitch 20 or 30 great pitches but cannot last the nine innings is not going to be pitching for the major portion of the game.

> As for Nadal, I've argued that he actually plays better when he does his
> service routines faster and thinks less. The serve becomes more
> instinctive and fluent instead of thought-out and forced.
>

Then let it be.

> Of course when the rallies are long, use of shot clock decreases level
> of play and thus works as equalizer of skill (poor player can get closer
> in level with better player as the better player's performance lacks the
> edge). With two exhausted players it becomes less about skill.
> ...This is of course true in all sports, poor (playing) conditions help
> the worse player to close the skill gap. For example playing pool
> billiards with worn out cloth...
>

Not necessarily. Part of being skillful is dealing with different conditions. conditions that lead to randomization do close the gap between the skillful and the unskillful. The shot clock is a not a random condition change. It is a systematic change against which practicing will improve that skill. Some will improve more and some less.

> It all depends on umpire, whether he lets the players rest a bit longer
> after long rallies, as he imo should. Umpire starts the clock.

Why not allow a 400 meter runner breaks after every 100 meters? Yes the run time over 400 meters will be improved and depending on the length of break the 100 meter runner will beat the 400 meter runner. That is an extreme case but as the sport develops at different times emphasis is given to different things. Why allow non-wood racquets or why have hardcourts or why still have grass and clay or why allow advantage to a taller player in serving or why have this size for a court and not that or have a shot clock or anything else.

[PeteWasLucky]

> It can cut drama and tension out? We love to see them fight against each other, not against clock/computer?

Then watch them fighting against each other with less time to rest between points. Let's see who has marathon abilities.

[TT]

arahim kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 16:37:
> Why not allow a 400 meter runner breaks after every 100 meters?

What a dumb analogy.

[TennisGuy]

First of all Felangey and Dave Hazelwood haven't been here for ages,
so I doubt they will respond to your question.

Second of all, did they really want a shot clock?
Could you show me where they said that?

Third of all, the umpire has had a "shot clock" for a very long time
now. The only difference now is that the PUBLIC can also see it.

[Whisper]

The slams are the biggest matches.

Nadal owns both Djoker 9-5 & Federer 9-3

Djokovic owns Federer 9-6


So the toughest players mentally & physically are in order;

Nadal
Djokovic
Federer

[Whisper]

On 19/08/2018 11:55 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
>> It can cut drama and tension out? We love to see them fight against each other, not against clock/computer?
>
> Then watch them fighting against each other with less time to rest between points. Let's see who has marathon abilities.
>

Exactly. Like I always said this benefits Rafa hugely over Fed/Djoker.

[John Liang]

On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 6:10:59 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> On 19/08/2018 11:07 PM, John Liang wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 10:20:23 PM UTC+10, TT wrote:
> >> John Liang kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 14:38:
> >>> fitness should have given the edge to Nadal then why he was the one that often lost in the fifth set
> >>
> >> Actually Nadal has been close to all time best on fifth sets, and is
> >> still good.
> >>
> >> Your question shows your dishonesty since you know that Rafa has lost a
> >> few 5th sets in recent years NOT because of fitness but because of nerves.
> >
> > Well, if you believe he is fittest guy on tour and also mentally the toughest then he should be able to outlast guys who were both not as fit as him and also mentally not as tough as him. Dishonesty is to believe he is really mentally tougher than other great of thsi generation.
> >
>
>
>
> The slams are the biggest matches.
>
> Nadal owns both Djoker 9-5 & Federer 9-3

And why he won less titles at Wimbledon and on hard court slams ? We forget that Nadal did not get to a lot of finals on hard court and grass court.

[John Liang]

And why didn't he win the last few AO then surely the longer match benefit him not Fed/Djoker. How did Djoker won Wimbledon last month?

[John Liang]

On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 6:10:59 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:

> On 19/08/2018 11:07 PM, John Liang wrote:
> > On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 10:20:23 PM UTC+10, TT wrote:
> >> John Liang kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 14:38:
> >>> fitness should have given the edge to Nadal then why he was the one that often lost in the fifth set
> >>
> >> Actually Nadal has been close to all time best on fifth sets, and is
> >> still good.
> >>
> >> Your question shows your dishonesty since you know that Rafa has lost a
> >> few 5th sets in recent years NOT because of fitness but because of nerves.
> >
> > Well, if you believe he is fittest guy on tour and also mentally the toughest then he should be able to outlast guys who were both not as fit as him and also mentally not as tough as him. Dishonesty is to believe he is really mentally tougher than other great of thsi generation.
> >
>
>
>
> The slams are the biggest matches.
>
> Nadal owns both Djoker 9-5 & Federer 9-3

It helps to preserve that h2h when he could not make a single final at Wimbledon in the last 7 years.

[The Iceberg]

cos the Fedfans were trying to pretend it was to benefit the sport when it wasn't.

[Whisper]

On 20/08/2018 6:58 PM, John Liang wrote:
> On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 6:10:59 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
>> On 19/08/2018 11:07 PM, John Liang wrote:
>>> On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 10:20:23 PM UTC+10, TT wrote:
>>>> John Liang kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 14:38:
>>>>> fitness should have given the edge to Nadal then why he was the one that often lost in the fifth set
>>>>
>>>> Actually Nadal has been close to all time best on fifth sets, and is
>>>> still good.
>>>>
>>>> Your question shows your dishonesty since you know that Rafa has lost a
>>>> few 5th sets in recent years NOT because of fitness but because of nerves.
>>>
>>> Well, if you believe he is fittest guy on tour and also mentally the toughest then he should be able to outlast guys who were both not as fit as him and also mentally not as tough as him. Dishonesty is to believe he is really mentally tougher than other great of thsi generation.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The slams are the biggest matches.
>>
>> Nadal owns both Djoker 9-5 & Federer 9-3
>
> And why he won less titles at Wimbledon and on hard court slams ? We forget that Nadal did not get to a lot of finals on hard court and grass court.
>

Completely irrelevant response. Clay is a bona fide surface. You can't
wish it away or pretend the big slam losses somehow don't count on clay.

[Whisper]

Because they had more time to recover after punishing points. Those
easy days are now over thanks to shot clock. Rafa will no longer be
cheated out of close 5 setters - they will be converted to 4 set wins.

[bob]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 18:10:51 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com>
wrote:

>On 19/08/2018 11:07 PM, John Liang wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 10:20:23 PM UTC+10, TT wrote:
>>> John Liang kirjoitti 19.8.2018 klo 14:38:
>>>> fitness should have given the edge to Nadal then why he was the one that often lost in the fifth set
>>>
>>> Actually Nadal has been close to all time best on fifth sets, and is
>>> still good.
>>>
>>> Your question shows your dishonesty since you know that Rafa has lost a
>>> few 5th sets in recent years NOT because of fitness but because of nerves.
>>
>> Well, if you believe he is fittest guy on tour and also mentally the toughest then he should be able to outlast guys who were both not as fit as him and also mentally not as tough as him. Dishonesty is to believe he is really mentally tougher than other great of thsi generation.
>>
>
>
>
>The slams are the biggest matches.
>
>Nadal owns both Djoker 9-5 & Federer 9-3
>Djokovic owns Federer 9-6

pretty big spread there. i'm really looking forward to this USO.

>So the toughest players mentally & physically are in order;
>Nadal
>Djokovic
>Federer

bob

[joh]

So Rafa waited for the shot clock being introduced to capitalise? What a moron then. Probably will cost him GOAT-hood.

[John Liang]

So are hard court and grass court. You can' pretend that Nadal did not lose to Brown, Darcis types in the last few Wimbledon, somehow ducking out against 100th ranked opponents don't count on grass.

[bob]

On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 00:31:54 +0300, TT <as...@dprk.kp> wrote:

>PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 16.8.2018 klo 18:57:
>> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and no shot clock :)
>>
>> Shorter and no shot clock :)
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches
>>
>
>Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....
>Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
>A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

:-) good pt. but i wouldn't pick on hazey. miss him.

bob

[bob]

On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:38:56 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com>
wrote:

>On 19/08/2018 10:50 AM, MBDunc wrote:
>> On Sunday, August 19, 2018 at 12:45:35 AM UTC+3, TT wrote:

>> : Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
>>>>>
>>>>> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
>>>>

>>>> Rafa
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes... ah the irony...
>>

>> As like whisper does, I think this rule generally benefits "better players" a'la Rafa.
>>
>> .mikko
>>

>> ---
>
>Yes, & also fitter players. Laver said Rafa is the fitness goat. Could
>be a new mini golden era for Rafa where he racks up many non-clay slam
>titles?

rafa is getting older but this USO could be a great barometer for
that. should rafa win, look out...

bob

[bob]

On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 18:47:15 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com>
wrote:

>On 19/08/2018 3:58 PM, arahim wrote:
>> On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 7:37:31 PM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:

>>> On 19/08/2018 7:31 AM, TT wrote:
>>>> PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 16.8.2018 klo 18:57:
>>>>> He said: I think we have to keep tennis matches dynamic, shorter and
>>>>> no shot clock :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Shorter and no shot clock :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/24389143/novak-djokovic-roger-federer-divided-length-tennis-matches
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Quiz question for Petewasluckcy, Felangey and Dave Hazelwood....
>>>>

>>>> Q: Who was the winner of first ever Masters tournament with a shot clock?
>>>>
>>>> A: AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
>>>>
>>>

>>> Same guy will probably be 1st slam winner with shot clock too.
>>>
>>> : )
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Then why was there so much opposition to the shot clock if it was so good and people understood there was no negatives for Nadal in having it?
>>
>> Anyway the real test of the shot clock restriction on Nadal will come against someone like Djokovic who if not as fit is at least close (Not even against Federer who will try to shorten the points, nor against the big servers where the points are short anyway).
>>
>> As you say most of the players that he played against were likely to lose to him anyway.
>>
>>
>

>Imo this will give Rafa an advantage over Djoker. Laver said Rafa is
>fittest ever, not Djoker. There will be much rest time for Djoker
>between rallies. He will suffer far more than Rafa imo.

>I actually was making this point here about 4 yrs ago but was dismissed
>as trolling. I was very serious.

i think there were small bursts of time where djoker was the fittest
player i've ever seen, but he hasn't maintained it as long or as
consistently as nadal or even federer.

the shot clock may end up helping rafa for that logic you've used for
a decade - his opponents will really suffer no breather.

bob

[Whisper]

On 20/08/2018 11:31 PM, joh wrote:
> On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 2:04:23 PM UTC+2, Whisper wrote:
>> On 20/08/2018 6:59 PM, John Liang wrote:
>>> On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 6:13:20 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
>>>> On 19/08/2018 11:55 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
>>>>>> It can cut drama and tension out? We love to see them fight against each other, not against clock/computer?
>>>>>
>>>>> Then watch them fighting against each other with less time to rest between points. Let's see who has marathon abilities.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly. Like I always said this benefits Rafa hugely over Fed/Djoker.
>>>>

>>>

>>> And why didn't he win the last few AO then surely the longer match benefit him not Fed/Djoker. How did Djoker won Wimbledon last month?
>>>
>>
>> Because they had more time to recover after punishing points. Those
>> easy days are now over thanks to shot clock. Rafa will no longer be
>> cheated out of close 5 setters - they will be converted to 4 set wins.
>
> So Rafa waited for the shot clock being introduced to capitalise? What a moron then. Probably will cost him GOAT-hood.
>

Rafa is a very humble sportsman & wants to win fair & square. The
reason he took time between points was to let his opponent recover
because he didn't want to take advantage of their poorer conditioning.
For him the passion is in the battle, winning punishing rallies & giving
opponent every chance to play his best. It's no sweat for him to play
very quickly, but he feels bad for the other guy doubled over on the
other side of the net.

[arahim]

He is even willing to switch the red clay for blue.

[John Liang]

Humble? A characteristic of been humble is obey the rule. Breaking the rule and bending the rule is anything but humble.

[joh]

On Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at 1:27:24 PM UTC+2, Whisper wrote:
> On 20/08/2018 11:31 PM, joh wrote:
> > On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 2:04:23 PM UTC+2, Whisper wrote:
> >> On 20/08/2018 6:59 PM, John Liang wrote:
> >>> On Monday, August 20, 2018 at 6:13:20 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:
> >>>> On 19/08/2018 11:55 PM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> >>>>>> It can cut drama and tension out? We love to see them fight against each other, not against clock/computer?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Then watch them fighting against each other with less time to rest between points. Let's see who has marathon abilities.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Exactly. Like I always said this benefits Rafa hugely over Fed/Djoker.
> >>>>
>
> >>>
> >>> And why didn't he win the last few AO then surely the longer match benefit him not Fed/Djoker. How did Djoker won Wimbledon last month?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Because they had more time to recover after punishing points. Those
> >> easy days are now over thanks to shot clock. Rafa will no longer be
> >> cheated out of close 5 setters - they will be converted to 4 set wins.
> >
> > So Rafa waited for the shot clock being introduced to capitalise? What a moron then. Probably will cost him GOAT-hood.
> >
>
>
>
> Rafa is a very humble sportsman & wants to win fair & square.

Fair & square is adhering to the rules without needing a shot clock to enforce it.

[RaspingDrive]

There is lot of humor in what you write. Seriously. But it is an incorrect representation of the real Rafa on court. Outside of it he is a real gentleman and immensely likable.

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 21/08/2018 23.45, RaspingDrive wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at 7:27:24 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
>> On 20/08/2018 11:31 PM, joh wrote:
>
>>> So Rafa waited for the shot clock being introduced to capitalise?
>>> What a moron then. Probably will cost him GOAT-hood.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Rafa is a very humble sportsman & wants to win fair & square.
>> The reason he took time between points was to let his opponent
>> recover because he didn't want to take advantage of their poorer
>> conditioning. For him the passion is in the battle, winning
>> punishing rallies & giving opponent every chance to play his best.
>> It's no sweat for him to play very quickly, but he feels bad for
>> the other guy doubled over on the other side of the net.
>
> There is lot of humor in what you write. Seriously.

Yes. It's amusing. A bit too amusing perhaps to have trolling traction.

--
"We're trying to help you, Sir"
-- Paramedic in "Little Fockers"

[MBDunc]

tiistai 21. elokuuta 2018 14.27.24 UTC+3 Whisper kirjoitti:
> Rafa is a very humble sportsman & wants to win fair & square.

True.

> The reason he took time between points was to let his opponent recover
> because he didn't want to take advantage of their poorer conditioning.

Bullshit.

> For him the passion is in the battle, winning punishing rallies & giving
> opponent every chance to play his best. It's no sweat for him to play
> very quickly, but he feels bad for the other guy doubled over on the
> other side of the net.

Battle part OK, rest total bullshit.

My take:

Rafa really is genuinely humble and respectful. He is no fake. But his (minor) OCD does not notice that his antics can frustrate and even anger both opponents and spectators.

This clock thing is very minor thing: propably pushed by big TV-companies/broadcasters who want more control over match lengths (without realizing that this really has none effects and is more annoyance - like Djoker getting a warning when he had already started his service motion.

.mikko

[bob]

i agree

bob