Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Those expecting/hoping for an 8th W title for Federer ...

321 views
Skip to first unread message

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 8:59:33 AM7/16/17
to
... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
first serve.

Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

PeteWasLucky

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:04:16 AM7/16/17
to
I fully agree.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:23:06 AM7/16/17
to
On 16/07/2017 10:59 PM, stephenJ wrote:
> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> first serve.
>
> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
>




Might be a bit easier than that. If he keeps teeing off he's bound to
get a break early in each set & then hold for straight sets - maybe
something like 63 63 63?

The match really should be on Cilic's racket if he can maintain his
power game. He'll make Fed stretch further than someone like Berdych &
create more openings to blast winners.

Imo the media did Cilic a big favour & Fed a disservice by virtually
already praising him for the 8th Wimbledon title. Takes a lot of
pressure off Cilic.



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

Garvin Yee

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:43:21 AM7/16/17
to
On 7/16/2017 5:59 AM, stephenJ wrote:
> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> first serve.
>
> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
>

I don't think so.... It's 5-3 Roger....

He could be the GOAT.

Wow.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/34735015@N03/sets/72157623566520134/

http://fineartamerica.com/art/all/garvin+yee/all

https://www.facebook.com/garvin.yee.37

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:44:58 AM7/16/17
to
On 16/07/2017 11:43 PM, Garvin Yee wrote:
> On 7/16/2017 5:59 AM, stephenJ wrote:
>> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
>> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
>> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
>> first serve.
>>
>> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
>>
>
> I don't think so.... It's 5-3 Roger....
>
> He could be the GOAT.
>
> Wow.
>




Yes, Roger is going great so far. Needs to stop Cilic from getting
comfortable.

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

calim...@gmx.de

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:48:05 AM7/16/17
to
On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 3:23:06 PM UTC+2, Whisper wrote:
> On 16/07/2017 10:59 PM, stephenJ wrote:
> > ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> > guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> > primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> > first serve.
> >
> > Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
> >
>
>
>
>
> Might be a bit easier than that. ...


Lol


Max

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:50:49 AM7/16/17
to
Roger has never played better tennis. Remarkable he can play like this
after 5 yrs in limbo.

kaennorsing

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:51:03 AM7/16/17
to
Op zondag 16 juli 2017 15:23:06 UTC+2 schreef Whisper:
> On 16/07/2017 10:59 PM, stephenJ wrote:
> > ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> > guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> > primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> > first serve.
> >
> > Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
> >
>
>
>
>
> Might be a bit easier than that. If he keeps teeing off he's bound to
> get a break early in each set & then hold for straight sets - maybe
> something like 63 63 63?

Guess not? What happened? Or do you mean 6-3 6-3 6-3 for Federer?

> The match really should be on Cilic's racket if he can maintain his
> power game. He'll make Fed stretch further than someone like Berdych &
> create more openings to blast winners.
>
> Imo the media did Cilic a big favour & Fed a disservice by virtually
> already praising him for the 8th Wimbledon title. Takes a lot of
> pressure off Cilic.

No doubt. Fed started more nervously than Cilic, who came out blasting the ball. The minute Fed hit his first sliced return though, everything changed.

Federer Fanatic

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:55:07 AM7/16/17
to
On Sun, 16 Jul 2017 23:44:51 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com> wrote:
| On 16/07/2017 11:43 PM, Garvin Yee wrote:
|> On 7/16/2017 5:59 AM, stephenJ wrote:
|>> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
|>> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
|>> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
|>> first serve.
|>>
|>> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
|>>
|>
|> I don't think so.... It's 5-3 Roger....
|>
|> He could be the GOAT.
|>
|> Wow.
|>
|
|
|
|
| Yes, Roger is going great so far. Needs to stop Cilic from getting
| comfortable.


Cilic making it easy for Rog...



FF


---
The measure of a man is what he does with power.
- Plato

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 9:58:27 AM7/16/17
to
True - shit he really is crying!

Emotional meltdown on centre court.

Federer Fanatic

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:00:39 AM7/16/17
to
Very strange....panic attack?

FF

ps. Shows it means a lot to him, but it's embarasssing.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:02:54 AM7/16/17
to
It really is. No excuse for it.

Then again maybe it releases all the pent up emotion?

Roger better be careful & not feel sorry for him.

--
"A GOAT who isn't BOAT can never become GOAT if he plays alongside BOAT"

Court_1

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:03:16 AM7/16/17
to
On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 8:59:33 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> first serve.
>
> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4

LOL Bozo. Cilic hasn't played anybody like Federer so far this grass season. I don't think he's played anybody above a ranking of 15 at Wimbledon. Cilic lost to Karlovic and Feli Lopez at the grass tune-ups. This mental midget is not beating Federer in a Wimbledon final. He's having an emotional meltdown/panic attack like Lisicki had a few years ago.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:04:44 AM7/16/17
to
Cilic did lead Roger 2 sets to 0 last Wimbledon & had match points.



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

Court_1

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:09:31 AM7/16/17
to
That was last year when Roger wasn't 100%. This is 2017 when Federer has won the AO and the Sunshine double. Cilic isn't winning this title.

Court_1

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:12:40 AM7/16/17
to
Obviously, something physical must have happened to Cilic when he fell? This can't be only emotional. No way.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:17:33 AM7/16/17
to
I just hope he doesn't fuck up this moment by bailing. Roger deserves a
complete match & 7 full matches. This will be the 1st time he's won
Wimbledon without dropping a set.

calim...@gmx.de

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:17:50 AM7/16/17
to
On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 2:59:33 PM UTC+2, StephenJ wrote:
> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart, ...


Our resident idiot <pat on the back> ...


Max

Jason White

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:27:07 AM7/16/17
to
Groan, I was telling some people that only casual sports fans to get up and tune in. Thinking it could be a match for the ages. To see an emotional meltdown in the middle of a match, bleah. Not exactly a positive thing for the tennis' image, *shrug* whatever. Is this how Goran Ivanisevic was?

Garvin Yee

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:28:34 AM7/16/17
to
Agreed. This is not good for Tennis.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:31:26 AM7/16/17
to
Goran was a mental giant compared to Cilic.

Cilic is not completely out of it. If he can win a t/b maybe Fed tires
a bit?

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:33:23 AM7/16/17
to
oops I meant the other way around. Federer has me rattled too.

: )

Whisper

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 10:35:07 AM7/16/17
to
On 17/07/2017 12:33 AM, Whisper wrote:
> On 17/07/2017 12:31 AM, Whisper wrote:
>> On 17/07/2017 12:27 AM, Jason White wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 7:00:39 AM UTC-7, Federer Fanatic wrote:
>>>> --
>>>
>>> Groan, I was telling some people that only casual sports fans to get
>>> up and tune in. Thinking it could be a match for the ages. To see
>>> an emotional meltdown in the middle of a match, bleah. Not exactly a
>>> positive thing for the tennis' image, *shrug* whatever. Is this how
>>> Goran Ivanisevic was?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> Goran was a mental giant compared to Cilic.
>>
>
> oops I meant the other way around. Federer has me rattled too.
>
> : )
>
>


Double oops - I read that as 'midget'.

This is what I really mean:

Goran was a mental giant compared to Cilic.

I think I'll go have a cry myself.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 11:58:34 AM7/16/17
to
Unimpressed by those who criticize a match prediction long after that
match is underway. But then again, your lack of integrity has shown on
numerous occasions these past couple months, so no surprise.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 12:01:29 PM7/16/17
to
Typical dumb Max. Your comment would have had some force to it had you
made it before the match started. Why not go watch a tape of Steffi and
fantasize about when she used to be GOAT? LMAO!

Court_1

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 11:24:35 PM7/16/17
to
On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 11:58:34 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
> On 7/16/2017 9:03 AM, Court_1 wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 8:59:33 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
> >> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> >> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> >> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> >> first serve.
> >>
> >> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
> >
> > LOL Bozo. Cilic hasn't played anybody like Federer so far this grass season. I don't think he's played anybody above a ranking of 15 at >Wimbledon. Cilic lost to Karlovic and Feli Lopez at the grass tune-ups. This mental midget is not beating Federer in a Wimbledon final. >He's having an emotional meltdown/panic attack like Lisicki had a few years ago.
>
> Unimpressed by those who criticize a match prediction long after that
> match is underway. But then again, your lack of integrity has shown on
> numerous occasions these past couple months, so no surprise.

Your reading comp skills are once again faulty. I picked Federer to win the title--check my picks in the David W contest. There was no way Cilic (injured or not) was going to beat Federer in a Wimbledon final and I said that days ago. Just admit that once again, you failed with your prediction.

Cilic is usually a mental midget vs Big Four players. He played nothing but clowns at this Wimbledon and at the grass tune-ups. He had match points vs Federer last year at Wimbledon and choked and that was vs a physically impaired Federer. No way was he going to beat Federer in this form.

Sorry but you're a clown.

Darkfalz

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 11:53:05 PM7/16/17
to
On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 10:59:33 PM UTC+10, StephenJ wrote:
> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
> first serve.
>
> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Cilic got taken apart like the big serving clown he is. I think most of the top players would have taken him apart.

Court_1

unread,
Jul 16, 2017, 11:59:20 PM7/16/17
to
Cilic is more than a big server but he does have a terrible record vs all of the Big Four players. He got lucky Nadal and Murray lost earlier IMO because I doubt he would have made it past both.

John Liang

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 2:20:41 AM7/17/17
to
Murray may be able to defuse Cilic's big serve but Nadal I doubt it specially considering his recent record on grass against this type of players.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 7:46:24 AM7/17/17
to
On 7/16/2017 10:24 PM, Court_1 wrote:
> On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 11:58:34 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
>> On 7/16/2017 9:03 AM, Court_1 wrote:
>>> On Sunday, July 16, 2017 at 8:59:33 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:
>>>> ... will be disappointed. Cilic is playing Muguruza-like tennis, a big
>>>> guy with big tools and brimming with confidence. He will take Fed apart,
>>>> primarily by bashing Fed's second serve and being untouchable on his own
>>>> first serve.
>>>>
>>>> Cilic wins ... 7-5 7-6 3-6 6-4
>>>
>>> LOL Bozo. Cilic hasn't played anybody like Federer so far this grass season. I don't think he's played anybody above a ranking of 15 at >Wimbledon. Cilic lost to Karlovic and Feli Lopez at the grass tune-ups. This mental midget is not beating Federer in a Wimbledon final. >He's having an emotional meltdown/panic attack like Lisicki had a few years ago.
>>
>> Unimpressed by those who criticize a match prediction long after that
>> match is underway. But then again, your lack of integrity has shown on
>> numerous occasions these past couple months, so no surprise.
>
> Your reading comp skills are once again faulty.

Once again? You mean never. You're the one who has shown a complete
inability to understand the meaning of words, and have proven to be a
Clinton-level dissembler. And no, picking Federer to win the tournament
isn't the same as making a match prediction with scoreline.

You are deeply delusional, about multiple things.

Court_1

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 7:54:06 AM7/17/17
to
On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 7:46:24 AM UTC-4, StephenJ wrote:

> > Your reading comp skills are once again faulty.
>
> Once again? You mean never. You're the one who has shown a complete
> inability to understand the meaning of words, and have proven to be a
> Clinton-level dissembler. And no, picking Federer to win the tournament
> isn't the same as making a match prediction with scoreline.
>
> You are deeply delusional, about multiple things.

The only delusional person here is you. I predicted Federer would beat Cilic; you didn't and in fact said the opposite, i.e. that Cilic would destroy Federer.
You were wrong, yet again and yet again can't admit it. That's a sickness.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 8:01:19 AM7/17/17
to
Where's your prediction with score line? If you posted that and I missed
it, I'll apologize and admit I was wrong for saying you hadn't. It will
be the first time I've mischaracterized you- unlike the reverse.

This space reserved for your match prediction w/scoreline:

Court_1

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 8:09:38 AM7/17/17
to
I didn't predict a scoreline but why do I have to predict a scoreline to be right? I very adamantly said Federer would not lose to Cilic in a slam final and you said that not only would Cilic beat Federer but he would destroy him. You were wrong. You posted your incorrect prediction that Cilic would beat Federer a few times in a few different threads. It's all there in the archives.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 8:14:08 AM7/17/17
to
I see, you didn't predict a scoreline, so you have zero grounds to
criticize mine. As for me being wrong about Cilic beating Federer,
obviously i was wrong, and I haven't denied it. Unlike you, I do
understand that some things are actually archived in black and white on
usenet so no use denying what everyone can see, LOL.

All I've done is criticized buffoons who - after the match was over or
well under way - jumped on this thread to criticize my prediction.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 9:07:39 AM7/17/17
to
If we knew he wasn't going to get 50% serves in & have a complete mental
breakdown in the middle of the match nobody would have given him a
prayer. Tough to predict things that are completely controlled by the
player.




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

Whisper

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 9:43:19 AM7/17/17
to
Yes, that's one of my bugbears & why I was calling the Fedfuckers to
join in discussions *during* the final. I was the only one posting there
for a while with tumbleweeds blowing past & crickets chirping. They may
think they are scoring points 'after' the fact, but it doesn't count
when the dust is settled.

If they want to land punches they have to put their nuts on the line &
do it before the result is known. Fedfuckers are mostly cowards so hide
out until it's safe to come out.



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

kaennorsing

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:23:59 AM7/17/17
to
Op maandag 17 juli 2017 15:43:19 UTC+2 schreef Whisper:
Well, I said if Fed could keep his walkabouts to a minimum (he had a few vs Berdych) Cilic had no chance. Just admit you underestimated Federer once again, like you have for the past 14 years. Fed eats big-serving robotic players like Cilic for breakfast. He just neutralizes and dissects their games. And in case you missed it this year's version of Federer is technically and tactically superior to any other version.

dn.u...@gmail.com

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:38:29 AM7/17/17
to
On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 5:14:08 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
> >>>>
> >>> The only delusional person here is you. I predicted Federer would beat Cilic; you didn't and in fact said the opposite, i.e. that Cilic >would destroy Federer.
> >>> You were wrong, yet again and yet again can't admit it. That's a sickness.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Where's your prediction with score line? If you posted that and I missed
> >> it, I'll apologize and admit I was wrong for saying you hadn't. It will
> >> be the first time I've mischaracterized you- unlike the reverse.
> >>
> >> This space reserved for your match prediction w/scoreline:
> >
> > I didn't predict a scoreline but why do I have to predict a scoreline to be right? I very adamantly said Federer would not lose to Cilic >in a slam final and you said that not only would Cilic beat Federer but he would destroy him. You were wrong.
>
> I see, you didn't predict a scoreline, so you have zero grounds to
> criticize mine. As for me being wrong about Cilic beating Federer,
> obviously i was wrong, and I haven't denied it.
>

You were stupid to predict a scoreline; that prediction does not place you on any pedestal, it places you on the loony fringe. If somebody predicts that Federer will win but you say otherwise, that is ground enough to make a comparison between the two predictions. Backing up your prediction with a scoreline just elevates you from merely-wrong to raving-stupid.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:39:01 AM7/17/17
to
Yes, there are some gutless wonders around here who will jump in
afterwards when they were silent beforehand, LOL.


---

dn.u...@gmail.com

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:40:02 AM7/17/17
to
On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 5:14:08 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
> >>>>
> >>> The only delusional person here is you. I predicted Federer would beat Cilic; you didn't and in fact said the opposite, i.e. that Cilic >would destroy Federer.
> >>> You were wrong, yet again and yet again can't admit it. That's a sickness.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Where's your prediction with score line? If you posted that and I missed
> >> it, I'll apologize and admit I was wrong for saying you hadn't. It will
> >> be the first time I've mischaracterized you- unlike the reverse.
> >>
> >> This space reserved for your match prediction w/scoreline:
> >
> > I didn't predict a scoreline but why do I have to predict a scoreline to be right? I very adamantly said Federer would not lose to Cilic >in a slam final and you said that not only would Cilic beat Federer but he would destroy him. You were wrong.
>
> I see, you didn't predict a scoreline, so you have zero grounds to
> criticize mine. As for me being wrong about Cilic beating Federer,
> obviously i was wrong, and I haven't denied it.
>

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:41:55 AM7/17/17
to
On 7/17/2017 10:38 AM, dn.u...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 5:14:08 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>> The only delusional person here is you. I predicted Federer would beat Cilic; you didn't and in fact said the opposite, i.e. that Cilic >would destroy Federer.
>>>>> You were wrong, yet again and yet again can't admit it. That's a sickness.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where's your prediction with score line? If you posted that and I missed
>>>> it, I'll apologize and admit I was wrong for saying you hadn't. It will
>>>> be the first time I've mischaracterized you- unlike the reverse.
>>>>
>>>> This space reserved for your match prediction w/scoreline:
>>>
>>> I didn't predict a scoreline but why do I have to predict a scoreline to be right? I very adamantly said Federer would not lose to Cilic >in a slam final and you said that not only would Cilic beat Federer but he would destroy him. You were wrong.
>>
>> I see, you didn't predict a scoreline, so you have zero grounds to
>> criticize mine. As for me being wrong about Cilic beating Federer,
>> obviously i was wrong, and I haven't denied it.
>>
>
> You were stupid to predict a scoreline

That's really a dumb thing to say. Guess what? I predicted a scoreline
as i often do (predicted Mugs would beat Venus 6-4 6-4 the other day),
was dead wrong, and yet ... the sun still came up, I'm still healthy,
have a great career, hot wife, lots of toys to play with, etc.

Now If I'd bet $100,000 on that scoreline, you'd be on to something, LOL.

Carey

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:52:21 AM7/17/17
to
My experience is that guys who are always going on about their 'hot wife' who
'fawns over them' is that they are often being cluelessly cuckolded.

dn.u...@gmail.com

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 11:55:11 AM7/17/17
to
On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 8:41:55 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
>
> That's really a dumb thing to say. Guess what? I predicted a scoreline
> as i often do (predicted Mugs would beat Venus 6-4 6-4 the other day),
> was dead wrong, and yet ... the sun still came up, I'm still healthy,
> have a great career, hot wife, lots of toys to play with, etc.
>

So if you do a dumb thing quite often, it ceases being dumb?

Glad to know that while you waste your time predicting scorelines, there are at least lots of toys (which beat Jaros 6-0 6-0) for your hot wife to play with.

Whisper

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 12:01:32 PM7/17/17
to
This version of Federer is my fave so far. Sure he's not young & a
little slower, but the shotmaking & tactics are as good as it gets in
tennis. This version would most likely dominate the 2006 version -
psyche hm out with all that experience.

It's great watching a champion with so much experience do his thing.
Reminds me a bit of Sampras' last match.

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 12:07:00 PM7/17/17
to
>On 7/17/2017 10:52 AM, Carey wrote:
> My experience is that guys who are always going on about their 'hot wife' who
> 'fawns over them' is that they are often being cluelessly cuckolded.
>

Sorry that you've learned that from experience. Must have been gutting,
hope you've recovered and haven't given up on life. 😰

Whisper

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 12:07:52 PM7/17/17
to
On 18/07/2017 1:52 AM, Carey wrote:
> My experience is that guys who are always going on about their 'hot wife' who
> 'fawns over them' is that they are often being cluelessly cuckolded.
>


Not in my case, but sure it does happen.



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

stephenJ

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 12:08:13 PM7/17/17
to
On 7/17/2017 10:55 AM, dn.u...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, July 17, 2017 at 8:41:55 AM UTC-7, StephenJ wrote:
>>
>> That's really a dumb thing to say. Guess what? I predicted a scoreline
>> as i often do (predicted Mugs would beat Venus 6-4 6-4 the other day),
>> was dead wrong, and yet ... the sun still came up, I'm still healthy,
>> have a great career, hot wife, lots of toys to play with, etc.
>>
>
> So if you do a dumb thing quite often, it ceases being dumb?

You shouldn't have posted this- you've just proved yet again that it
isn't true.

calim...@gmx.de

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 5:27:06 PM7/17/17
to
Jaros, it's never a good idea to drink excessively and then go into the internet/usenet and post randomly.


Max

kaennorsing

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 5:59:38 PM7/17/17
to
Op maandag 17 juli 2017 18:01:32 UTC+2 schreef Whisper:
Agreed, wonderful to watch a master put it all together. However, the final was a bit of a letdown and Cilic failed to push Federer after the first couple of games. Berdy actually did a much better job in the semi and forced Roger to serve volley more and come up with some brilliant passes under pressure.

SliceAndDice

unread,
Jul 17, 2017, 8:47:05 PM7/17/17
to
Also, he is playing unburdened by pressure. He said yesterday that he was perfectly satisfied with 17 slams, the rest is just gravy. I cannot even imagine how much pressure he has had to deal with, even on clay against Nadal he was expected to find a way to win. If he won a match in 5 sets, he was playing badly. He was expected to play perfectly day in and day out on every surface. That is a tremendous amount of pressure, and while he has done a stellar job of living up to expectations, it had to take its toll. That break somehow helped him hit the reset button and now he is playing with freedom, fully satisfied with his career and ready to hang up his racquet on his own terms.

Jason White

unread,
Jul 18, 2017, 12:12:47 AM7/18/17
to
Tennis has no off-season. That needs to change. In other sports, athletes get 4-6 months of down time. Season shouldn't go longer than end of October. Nov-Dec totally off.
0 new messages