Fed struggling with his back...
felangey
lot....seems to be annoring him.
C'mon Fed!!
felangey
TT
> ...I mean...huge stuff from Cilic...but he is holding his back a
> lot....seems to be annoring him.
>
Sure he is...
RzR
if he isnt, hes not human
Julia Assange
prohibitive favorite in most matches.
Now, one gets the feeling that anyone he plays has a good chance of
beating him.
uly...@mscomm.com
he doesn't go away mentally for stretches in nearly every match. Then
the level of his play becomes erratic and error-prone. As McEnroe said
today, "Roger used to be perfect all the time, now he's perfect only
90% of the time." That's enough to have him lose many matches he used
to routinely win.
He seems bored out there sometimes, his mind is obviously a million
miles away sometimes on court. He doesn't do much to disguise that.
felangey
Didn't you see him holding/stretching....also seemed to tweak it at one
point moving to his forehand side.
Patrick Kehoe
Funny... I thought Fed played really well today... the first set was
great tennis... never thought he was going to lose that one...
P
felangey
great tennis... never thought he was going to lose that one...
+1
uly...@mscomm.com
Cilic in a million years. My point resonates: he goes away mentally in
almost all matches now, when this was not the case 4-9 years ago.
Sure, he won the Cilic match but he should have won it in straights
without dropping more than 10 games total.
Court_1
Absolutely Uly, I agree with you. Fed was great in periods during this
match today, but there were points when I was thinking, "oh, oh, here
we go again, a Fed loss." Thankfully that did not come to fruition but
Federer has definitely lost some of his lustre and these people who he
routinely defeated even a couple of years ago in his sleep may not be
the case now. It is hard for me to believe that Fed fans can't admit
this fact and make up all kinds of excuses just as Nadal fans do about
Nadal.
I hope Federer can win this USO, but I don't think he will. I think
Djkovovic will and if not Djokovic I put Nadal as second choice even
as badly as Nadal has played lately. Hope I am wrong.
felangey
routinely defeated even a couple of years ago in his sleep may not be
the case now.
Brand new information! ;)
>It is hard for me to believe that Fed fans can't admit
this fact and make up all kinds of excuses just as Nadal fans do about
Nadal.
Who is denying that Fed has been losing to "people who he routinely defeated
even a couple of years ago"? Not even on Federer's fansite am I hearing
this.
>I hope Federer can win this USO, but I don't think he will. I think
Djkovovic will<
Come on Court_1.....going out on a limb, eh? ;) Djoke is back looking AO
level untouchable just now...but let's see what happens. Provided they both
get there, Fed will give it a good crack of the whip, you can be sure of
that. All he can do.
Court_1
Oh sorry felangey, I forgot our pact! :)
I hope Fed wins I really do. He is so talented. Breaks my heart to see
him anything less than perfect.
felangey
Yes. Yes you did. ;)
bob
<Olymp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I hope Fed wins I really do. He is so talented. Breaks my heart to see
>him anything less than perfect.
and therin lies the fedfan mentality, and the origination of all
fed-related posts.
bob
Carey
> On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 21:25:25 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
> >I hope Fed wins I really do. He is so talented. Breaks my heart to see
> >him anything less than perfect.
>
> and therin lies the fedfan mentality, and the origination of all
> fed-related posts.
>
> bob
So unlike the Lisper-loving littlebob.
What a wimp.
bob
wrote:
carey, you're back with nothing to say as usual. lame.
bob
reilloc
Is that a criticism or an acknowledgment?
LNC
bob
both. it shows the nature of the posts, although it is acknowledged
that it's what to be expected.
bob
Court_1
> On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 13:21:36 -0500, reilloc <reil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 9/4/2011 9:42 AM, bob wrote:
> >> On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 21:25:25 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
> >>> I hope Fed wins I really do. He is so talented. Breaks my heart to see
> >>> him anything less than perfect.
>
> >> and therin lies the fedfan mentality, and the origination of all
> >> fed-related posts.
>
> >Is that a criticism or an acknowledgment?
>
> both. it shows the nature of the posts, although it is acknowledged
> that it's what to be expected.
>
> bob
Bob, STFU. Federer>Sampras and nothing you post is going to change
that.
Oddly you claim Federer is arrogant when you are by far the most
arrogant person on here.
bob
and rafa > fed and nothing you can do to change that either. lol.
bob
Court_1
> - Show quoted text -
No, Bob that is not true at all. Overall Federer>Sampras>Nadal. That
is the reality and unless Nadal wins 7 slams that is the way it will
stay.
Court_1
>
> - Show quoted text -
How could Rafa>Fed when Fed>Sampras a man with 14 slams? What kind of
stupid logic is that? Oh, I forgot you don't possess logic.
bob
6-2 in slam finals. we've been over the topic hundreds of times, why
rehash it. we all have our pts of view. fed had his, i have mine, you
have yours. and rafa has his but he's too modest or dishonest to say
it.
bob
felangey
Well, he has actually said it often. But I am guessing that it isn't what
you wanted to hear?
bob
that's where the modesty/dishonesty comes in. :-)
bob
Court_1
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:08:07 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
>
>
>
>
Yes we have been over it and 4 of those slam finals were on clay. Big
deal!
Take clay out and Nadal is not a big deal at all. He is still good but
not great without all the clay titles. Nadal knows he is better on
clay than Federer and that is it. He is nowhere close to as great as
Federer is on non-clay surfaces and never will be.
Wile E.
Sampras won his slams against quality top notch players, where as
Federer won 6 slams vs quality top notch players, that is a major
difference. Federer still has a long way to go to reach Sampras.
Federer still has a ways to go to even reach Nadal in quality slams.
Another major factor is that Nadal owns Federer and Federer and the
world recognize this. No one owned Sampras.
What you think doesn't change these issues.
bob
i'll pretend you didn't say that.
> He is still good but not great without all the clay titles. Nadal knows he is better on
>clay than Federer and that is it. He is nowhere close to as great as
>Federer is on non-clay surfaces and never will be.
he was unfortunate to be born when he was; 5 yrs earlier and he denies
fed 3/4 of his slams on all surfaces. such is life.
bob
bob
wrote:
tier I post. wile E. coyote, masquerading around here as "wile."
bob
felangey
Did he tell you this personally off-record....or is this just a creative
writing assignment? :)
jdeluise
> tier I post. wile E. coyote, masquerading
> around here as "wile."
You'll suck up to just about any liar. Pathetic.
jdeluise
Nah... wherever there is dishonesty you can be sure bob is not far
away.
Thomas R. Kettler
<e5c07a6d-ef23-4387...@u20g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
"Wile E." <jsm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Another major factor is that Nadal owns Federer and Federer and the
> world recognize this. No one owned Sampras.
>
> What you think doesn't change these issues.
Not true. Sampras was 0-13 against Roland Garros.
--
Remove blown from email address to reply.
Patrick Kehoe
bob's 'sounding' vitriolic this year... he used to be a person one
could have a discussion with... ???
P
Patrick Kehoe
> The point is this: in peak Fed years, he would not have lost a set to
> Cilic in a million years. My point resonates: he goes away mentally in
> almost all matches now, when this was not the case 4-9 years ago.
> Sure, he won the Cilic match but he should have won it in straights
> without dropping more than 10 games total.
Fed didn't go away mentally in the Cilic match... had he done so he
would have LOST... Cilic was hitting an amazing ball...
P
bob
you still can - there's time to save you all!
bob
bob
wrote:
lol. why on earth is it "sucking up" to agree with another's post? you
do it all day long, and i don't call it "sucking up." it's simply your
(usually misguided) opinion.
bob
Rodjk #613
> On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 18:57:10 -0400, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > tier I post. wile E. coyote, masquerading
> > around here as "wile."
>
> You'll suck up to just about any liar. Pathetic.
Come on, he is just Whispers shadow...and whispa will suck up to any
liar who opposes Fed.
It really is silly and annoying that fellow Sampras fans are such
jerks.
I admire Pete as much as ever, while at the same time recognizing that
Fed's accomplishments have superseded Pete.
Trying to knock down Fed will never elevate Pete, guys...quite being
so silly.
Wow, 3 posts in 10 minutes...must be a record for me. Now I have to go
feed the boys...
Rodjk #613
jdeluise
> lol. why on earth is it "sucking up" to agree > with another's post?
When you lie down with dogs you will get up with fleas.
bob
wrote:
>On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 20:23:27 -0400, bob <stei...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> lol. why on earth is it "sucking up" to agree > with another's post?
>
>When you lie down with dogs you will get up with fleas.
that's funny. i have heard that said before. you don't need to lie
down with any dog to understand when the dog barks, he might be
barking the truth.
bob
bob
<Olymp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Sep 4, 6:55 pm, bob <stein...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:34:41 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> bob- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Oh please. Nothing would have changed if Nadal were born 5 years
>earlier. It still would take him 4 or 5 years to get a grass or hard
>court title from his first FO win.
>Nadal is a dirt baller pure and simple.
a dirt baller with a USO, 2 wim and AO title. uh huh. sure he is best
on clay, but at his best, great everywhere.
> He is a great player and will
>be one of the greatest but he does not have the talent in his pinky
>that Federer has in his whole body. Nadal was able to have the benefit
>of a bad match up with Federer spinning those high balls to Fed's one
>handed BH and Nadal did not start winning slams against Fed "off clay"
>until Fed had started his descent south.
so by coincidence fed won 3 slams out of 4, losing the 4th after
having match pts - all in 09-jan 2010 when rafa developed a knee
problem. please. enuff.
>Your Fed for hate is clouding your reason.
and your love is clouding yours.
bob
Court_1
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 19:12:41 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
>
>
>
>
I am not arguing with you on this issue. Fed's prime was 2004-2007.
You can think whatever you wish. I don't agree and neither do many
sane individuals.
Your hate for Federer is laughable.
bob
is it dark down there in the sand where your head is?
>You can think whatever you wish. I don't agree and neither do many
>sane individuals. Your hate for Federer is laughable.
this is how you reply for fed's extraordinary slam results for 4
straight slams in 09-2010, the minute nadal had a knee prob or drug
prob or whateve prob? i.e. once we confirmed nadal had some type of
problem, and was absent/out of form, fed surged immediately to 3
quickies and match pts on 4th?
now pls, stick your head back in that sand, and dont' respond to me
anymore without uly's or dave's written permission.
bob
John Liang
> On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 19:54:24 -0700 (PDT), Court_1
>
>
>
>
>
bob, accusing someone need permission to post, did you get permission
from your
dad Whisper to post ? Show us the signature.
