Roger withdraws from the French

[SliceAndDice]

:(

[Shakes]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> :(

Reason ?

[jdeluise]

https://www.si.com/tennis/2017/05/15/roger-federer-withdraws-french-open

[jdeluise]

And I'll save bob and Max the effort...


Sports Illustrated? lol.

[Shakes]

Never mind, just read the news. Good decision IMO.

[Shakes]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> :(

PWL would be disappointed for sure. He had the strategy ready for Fed. :)

[TT]

Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.

I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.

[Shakes]

:)) I am sure Nadal was also hoping to regain the mental edge with a victory on clay.

[PeteWasLucky]

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

> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>> :(
>
> PWL would be disappointed for sure. He had the strategy ready for Fed. :)
>

I definitly like to watch him playing and at times I know I am
selfish asking for too much from a 35 years old player.
Part of Federer success is his ability to make tough decisions and
clearly he is targeting everything after the FO until the end of
the year.

Also he knows what to expect from other competitors on grass and HC.

It will be interesting to see if it works out for him.
--


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

[Gracchus]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:52 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:

It was wisdom. He shouldn't waste his time on the FO whether Rafa is there or not. He risks injuring himself in that dirt-pit when he should grab a head start tuning himself up for Wimbledon. Smart choice from the Great Man.

[TT]

Pretty damn pathetic from Fed.

Now let's ask Courtsie if she thinks Fed has a 'silent ban'?

[TT]

It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
lose competitive edge.

One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.

Courtsie, is he doping or serving a silent ban? Thanks in advance.

[PeteWasLucky]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

Why are you that upset that Federer isn't playing the FO?

[TT]

Because it's disgusting cowardice. The only reason he doesn't play is to
avoid in-form Rafa on clay. That's not fair game and I hope it backfires.

[Guypers]

Rafa will lose to Fognini, or Thiem, ND or Delpo at the FO!!

[Court_1]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:38:18 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
> lose competitive edge.
>
> One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
> isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
> during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.
>
> Courtsie, is he doping or serving a silent ban? Thanks in advance.

TT, shut up! I've already posted on this ng ad nauseam that I think all the top players dope. IMO this is a smart move for Federer. His chances of winning the FO even with this dilapidated clay field are slim. Nadal would probably not be his only challenge on this surface and he doesn't want to risk injury. He'll be 36 years old soon! It makes much more sense to go for Wimbledon and the USO.

The fact that you are so upset about a tennis player you despise missing any tournament is hilarious. The reason you are upset is because you know that once Nadal sweeps the clay season and is off clay he becomes more vulnerable and you must be worried that a rested Federer could be a problem for Nadal off clay. There, there! It will all be ok. You'll get your 10th FO and then Nadal will have four more to go to surpass Federer! Should be easy for Nadal, right? ;)

[jdeluise]

On Mon, 15 May 2017 13:09:32 -0700, Court_1 wrote:

> The reason you are upset is because you know that once Nadal sweeps the
> clay season and is off clay he becomes more vulnerable and you must be
> worried that a rested Federer could be a problem for Nadal off clay.

I'm not sure. I'd like to start taking bets on which middling journeyman
will beat Nadal at Wimbledon yet again this year!

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 20:39:48 UTC+2 schreef SliceAndDice:
> :(

There goes my fantasy of him serve volleying to a 2nd FO title... :(

[jdeluise]

Hey, maybe he'll change his mind and take a last minute wildcard!

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 22:09:34 UTC+2 schreef Court_1:

Good post. Let's see how TT reacts if Rafa tactically skips Wimbledon (or any other slam) 5 years from now. He's so transparant in his emotional responses it's kind of endearing.

[kaennorsing]

Op maandag 15 mei 2017 22:19:21 UTC+2 schreef jdeluise:

:))

[TT]

Sure...

[TT]

15.5.2017, 23:09, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:38:18 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>
>> It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
>> lose competitive edge.
>>
>> One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
>> isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
>> during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.
>>
>> Courtsie, is he doping or serving a silent ban? Thanks in advance.
>
> TT, shut up! I've already posted on this ng ad nauseam that I think all the top players dope. IMO this is a smart move for Federer.

So no silent ban then - talk about double standards!

So tell us, is he taking time off for doping? Worked pretty well for the
AO...

[TT]

15.5.2017, 23:21, kaennorsing kirjoitti:
> Let's see how TT reacts if Rafa tactically skips Wimbledon (or any other slam) 5 years from now.

You reckon Rafa will skip Wimbledon 2022 to avoid Federer? I doubt it.

There's a difference between taking a break and avoiding your rival on
purpose which Fed is certainly doing now. Rafa never did that, hell he
even went to Basel to lose to Federer... I seem to forget Fed paying
back the compliment by attending Barcelona?

[Court_1]

LOL. We shouldn't get cocky like TT is getting again with respect to Nadal because with Nadal, you never know. He could lose in R2 of Wimbledon to some heavy-hitter or he could make the final.

[Court_1]

He's finally wised up and learned the Nadal way. How many times has Nadal skipped slams(mostly OFF clay) due to "injury" only to come back like Superman?

Again, why would you care if a player you claim to despise skips a slam? The reason is exactly what I posted above. You are anxious/scared about Federer vs Nadal AFTER the dirt season and it's precious!

[Court_1]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:21:05 PM UTC-4, kaennorsing wrote:

> Good post. Let's see how TT reacts if Rafa tactically skips Wimbledon (or any other slam) 5 years from now. He's so transparant in his emotional responses it's kind of endearing.

It's disturbing and comical at the same time.

[*skriptis]

kaennorsing <ljub...@hotmail.com> Wrote in message:

Yeah, it's not like Nadal hasn't skipped his fair share of slams.

Maybe smart for him, but ugly for tennis. Depleted fields, no
stars, it's always less fun.


--

[TT]

15.5.2017, 23:51, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:33:15 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>> 15.5.2017, 23:09, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:38:18 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>>
>>>> It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
>>>> lose competitive edge.
>>>>
>>>> One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
>>>> isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
>>>> during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.
>>>>
>>>> Courtsie, is he doping or serving a silent ban? Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> TT, shut up! I've already posted on this ng ad nauseam that I think all the top players dope. IMO this is a smart move for Federer.
>>
>> So no silent ban then - talk about double standards!
>>
>> So tell us, is he taking time off for doping? Worked pretty well for the
>> AO...
>
> He's finally wised up and learned the Nadal way. How many times has Nadal skipped slams(mostly OFF clay) due to "injury" only to come back like Superman?
>

You just can't seem to answer the question fair and square. Never could.

> Again, why would you care if a player you claim to despise skips a slam? The reason is exactly what I posted above. You are anxious/scared about Federer vs Nadal AFTER the dirt season and it's precious!
>

And federer is so scared of Nadal during clay season that he skips it
altogether, isn't that even more precious...

What... a... coward.

[TT]

I haven't said a word about Wimbledon.

[Court_1]

I've answered the doping question a thousand times. I think Federer, Nadal and Djokovic all dope. You could make a case for all of them on that subject.

The only coward here is you because you can't admit that once clay season is over for Nadal, you aren't sure about how he will do especially against a rested Federer who has improved his bh vs Nadal and who currently has the mental edge over Nadal after four straight wins.

Why can't you just be happy that Nadal is doing so well this year and that he'll probably get #15 at the French. If Nadal is good enough, he'll surpass Fed's slam count so what are you bitching about?

[Court_1]

And very wisely you shouldn't after seeing Nadal's gruesome record there for the past few years.

[Federer Fanatic]

No. It's very smart. I never took your expertise on tennis seriously and
frankly your political ranting is even more insane. Congrads on being a loon
who apparently looks at movies all day long ;-)

FF

[TT]

16.5.2017, 0:21, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 5:06:33 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>> 15.5.2017, 23:51, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 4:33:15 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>>> 15.5.2017, 23:09, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>>>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:38:18 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
>>>>>> lose competitive edge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
>>>>>> isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
>>>>>> during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Courtsie, is he doping or serving a silent ban? Thanks in advance.
>>>>>
>>>>> TT, shut up! I've already posted on this ng ad nauseam that I think all the top players dope. IMO this is a smart move for Federer.
>>>>
>>>> So no silent ban then - talk about double standards!
>>>>
>>>> So tell us, is he taking time off for doping? Worked pretty well for the
>>>> AO...
>>>
>>> He's finally wised up and learned the Nadal way. How many times has Nadal skipped slams(mostly OFF clay) due to "injury" only to come back like Superman?
>>>
>>
>> You just can't seem to answer the question fair and square. Never could.
>>
>>> Again, why would you care if a player you claim to despise skips a slam? The reason is exactly what I posted above. You are anxious/scared about Federer vs Nadal AFTER the dirt season and it's precious!
>>>
>>
>> And federer is so scared of Nadal during clay season that he skips it
>> altogether, isn't that even more precious...
>>
>> What... a... coward.
>
> I've answered the doping question a thousand times. I think Federer, Nadal and Djokovic all dope. You could make a case for all of them on that subject.
>

You just can't tell us that Federer is doping currently without 'but all
dope'. No same problem with Nadal. Different standards and Fedcukery
instead of being 'unbiased' as you like to claim yourself...

> The only coward here is you because you can't admit that once clay season is over for Nadal, you aren't sure about how he will do especially against a rested Federer who has improved his bh vs Nadal and who currently has the mental edge over Nadal after four straight wins.
>

Well duh, OF COURSE it is easier to beat your opponent if you avoid his
best surface. That's why it's cowardice and unfair.

It also skews the h2h. Now we can say that their h2h would be even worse
for Federer if he had not avoided Nadal on clay. And this is not the
first time, he has also skipped MC in past because he didn't believe he
could beat Rafa.

[stephenJ]

> On 5/15/2017 2:05 PM, TT wrote:
> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>> :(
>>
>> Reason ?
>>
>
> Cowardice.

Nadal has dominated clay seasons before and Federer still always played
the FO. Nadal didn't dominate the clay season at all last year and
Federer didn't show up at the FO anyway.

So your explanation is suspect.

Mine? He's an old man and needs to pick his spots. The FO isn't his spot
like W and USO are.

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

[stephenJ]

No Federer and no Serena = :( :( for me. The FO will be a lot less fun
to watch.



> On 5/15/2017 1:39 PM, SliceAndDice wrote:
> :(

[TT]

This coming from someone who calls himself a 'Federer Fanatic' and
apparently supports Trump.

[Court_1]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 5:37:44 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> > I've answered the doping question a thousand times. I think Federer, Nadal and Djokovic all dope. You could make a case for all of them on that subject.
> >
>
> You just can't tell us that Federer is doping currently without 'but all
> dope'.

Are you nuts or dim or both? I've stated numerous times that I think Fed, Djokovic and Nadal all dope? Why are you not comprehending this information and more importantly, what's your problem?

> > The only coward here is you because you can't admit that once clay season is over for Nadal, you aren't sure about how he will do especially against a rested Federer who has improved his bh vs Nadal and who currently has the mental edge over Nadal after four straight wins.
> >
>
> Well duh, OF COURSE it is easier to beat your opponent if you avoid his
> best surface. That's why it's cowardice and unfair.
>
> It also skews the h2h. Now we can say that their h2h would be even worse
> for Federer if he had not avoided Nadal on clay. And this is not the
> first time, he has also skipped MC in past because he didn't believe he
> could beat Rafa.

LOL @ you talking about a skewed h2h and Fed avoiding Nadal. That has been Nadal's speciality. How many times has Federer been waiting to meet Nadal off clay all these years but Nadal couldn't get there thus skewing their h2h?

Just worry about Nadal winning his 10th FO and stop obsessing about Federer. He knows what he's doing and if Nadal is better/greater than Federer, he'll surpass his slam count. Right? ;)

[TT]

16.5.2017, 0:37, stephenJ kirjoitti:
>> On 5/15/2017 2:05 PM, TT wrote:
>> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>> :(
>>>
>>> Reason ?
>>>
>>
>> Cowardice.
>
> Nadal has dominated clay seasons before and Federer still always played
> the FO. Nadal didn't dominate the clay season at all last year and
> Federer didn't show up at the FO anyway.
>

He did play MC and Rome.

> So your explanation is suspect.
>
> Mine? He's an old man and needs to pick his spots. The FO isn't his spot
> like W and USO are.
>

He may need a lighter schedule but obviously not THIS light. He has no
injuries.

It's sort of like Trump's initial excuse for firing Comey.

[*skriptis]

If there were posters here, more people would ridicule your
political position. ;)


--

[stephenJ]

On 5/15/2017 4:54 PM, TT wrote:
> 16.5.2017, 0:37, stephenJ kirjoitti:
>>> On 5/15/2017 2:05 PM, TT wrote:
>>> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>>> :(
>>>>
>>>> Reason ?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Cowardice.
>>
>> Nadal has dominated clay seasons before and Federer still always played
>> the FO. Nadal didn't dominate the clay season at all last year and
>> Federer didn't show up at the FO anyway.
>>
>
> He did play MC and Rome.

So?

[RaspingDrive]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:05:52 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
> > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> >> :(
> >
> > Reason ?
> >
>

> Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
> against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.

Rather prudence? He knows he cannot beat almost peak Rafa so why give him the edge going to Wimbledon?

[RaspingDrive]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:30:52 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
> 15.5.2017, 22:10, Shakes kirjoitti:

> > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:52 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> >> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
> >
> >>> Reason ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
> >> against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.
> >>

> >> I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.
> >

> > :)) I am sure Nadal was also hoping to regain the mental edge with a victory on clay.
> >
>
> Pretty damn pathetic from Fed.

No, he is probably challenging Nadal to meet him in the finals at Wimbledon and/or USO. Will Nadal be up for the challenge?


> Now let's ask Courtsie if she thinks Fed has a 'silent ban'?

[RaspingDrive]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:30:32 PM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:52 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> > 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:

> > > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> > >> :(
> > >

> > > Reason ?
> > >
> >
> > Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
> > against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.
> >
> > I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.
>

> It was wisdom. He shouldn't waste his time on the FO whether Rafa is there or not. He risks injuring himself in that dirt-pit when he should grab a head start tuning himself up for Wimbledon. Smart choice from the Great Man.

Exactly. Now that he has made his decision, seems to be a wise one.

[RaspingDrive]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 3:38:18 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> 15.5.2017, 22:30, Gracchus kirjoitti:
> > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:52 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> >> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
> >>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> >>>> :(
> >>>
> >>> Reason ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
> >> against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.
> >>
> >> I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.
> >
> > It was wisdom. He shouldn't waste his time on the FO whether Rafa is there or not. He risks injuring himself in that dirt-pit when he should grab a head start tuning himself up for Wimbledon. Smart choice from the Great Man.
> >
>

> It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
> lose competitive edge.

He surmised he would only end up losing energy going for the FO title.

> One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
> isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
> during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.

He probably reckons more slams is more important than Number 1.

[RaspingDrive]

Federer has conceded to Nadal on clay. What is so difficult to fathom? He thinks he has a better chance against Nadal on grass or HC. Nadal should now try and beat him in the final on those surfaces.

[Carey]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 12:30:32 PM UTC-7, Gracchus wrote:


> It was wisdom. He shouldn't waste his time on the FO whether Rafa is there or not. He risks injuring himself in that dirt-pit when he should grab a head start tuning himself up for Wimbledon. Smart choice from the Great Man.

All this.

Good to see you back, Gracch, BTW.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 0:53, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 5:37:44 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>
>>> I've answered the doping question a thousand times. I think Federer, Nadal and Djokovic all dope. You could make a case for all of them on that subject.
>>>
>>
>> You just can't tell us that Federer is doping currently without 'but all
>> dope'.
>
> Are you nuts or dim or both? I've stated numerous times that I think Fed, Djokovic and Nadal all dope? Why are you not comprehending this information and more importantly, what's your problem?
>

What is it that you do not understand? This has been discussed numerous
times:

You have no trouble saying that Nafal is doping/silent ban.
Yet have failed to say even once the same about Federer without adding
that 'they all dope'.

Is it so hard to admit that Federer is currently serving a silent
ban/doping without ifs and buts...

>>> The only coward here is you because you can't admit that once clay season is over for Nadal, you aren't sure about how he will do especially against a rested Federer who has improved his bh vs Nadal and who currently has the mental edge over Nadal after four straight wins.
>>>
>>
>> Well duh, OF COURSE it is easier to beat your opponent if you avoid his
>> best surface. That's why it's cowardice and unfair.
>>
>> It also skews the h2h. Now we can say that their h2h would be even worse
>> for Federer if he had not avoided Nadal on clay. And this is not the
>> first time, he has also skipped MC in past because he didn't believe he
>> could beat Rafa.
>
> LOL @ you talking about a skewed h2h and Fed avoiding Nadal. That has been Nadal's speciality. How many times has Federer been waiting to meet Nadal off clay all these years but Nadal couldn't get there thus skewing their h2h?
>

This has been proven to be false claim...

In reality Federer makes the appointment roughly as often on clay as
Nadal does on hard. However Nadal always never fails to make the
appointment on clay while Federer often fails to make the appointment on
hard. So Fed can only blame his relative ineptitude.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 1:04, stephenJ kirjoitti:
> On 5/15/2017 4:54 PM, TT wrote:
>> 16.5.2017, 0:37, stephenJ kirjoitti:
>>>> On 5/15/2017 2:05 PM, TT wrote:
>>>> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>>>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>>>> :(
>>>>>
>>>>> Reason ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cowardice.
>>>
>>> Nadal has dominated clay seasons before and Federer still always played
>>> the FO. Nadal didn't dominate the clay season at all last year and
>>> Federer didn't show up at the FO anyway.
>>>
>>
>> He did play MC and Rome.
>
> So?
>

So he wasn't avoiding Rafa as blatantly.

[RaspingDrive]

The six months rest and reflection of his chances in solitude may have convinced him that skipping FO would be the right direction to take.

[TT]

https://twitter.com/Dimonator/status/864189033152471040

[Giovanna]

> :(

:-(
:-(

well it's probably for the best I guess

[RaspingDrive]

Ha ha. Good one. And true.

[PeteWasLucky]

TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
> 15.5.2017, 22:42, PeteWasLucky kirjoitti:
>> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:

>>> 15.5.2017, 22:30, Gracchus kirjoitti:

>>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 12:05:52 PM UTC-7, TT wrote:
>>>>> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>>>>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>>>>> :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reason ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>

>>>>> Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
>>>>> against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.
>>>>

>>>> It was wisdom. He shouldn't waste his time on the FO whether Rafa is there or not. He risks injuring himself in that dirt-pit when he should grab a head start tuning himself up for Wimbledon. Smart choice from the Great Man.
>>>>
>>>

>>> It could also backfire, yes he keeps h2h and aura intact but could also
>>> lose competitive edge.
>>>
>>> One could also note that he's practically giving up on #1, guess it
>>> isn't that important after all. Then again he wouldn't have won anything
>>> during clay season anyway the way Rafa is playing.
>>>
>>> Courtsie, is he doping or serving a silent ban? Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>

>> Why are you that upset that Federer isn't playing the FO?
>>
>
> Because it's disgusting cowardice. The only reason he doesn't play is to
> avoid in-form Rafa on clay. That's not fair game and I hope it backfires.
>

You are afraid of rested Federer focusing on certain slams that
Nadal doesn't do well playing and you were hoping he will be
wasted on clay and the proof is your own words that you couldn't
hide when you said "I hope it backfires".

You are a baby and somehow I thought you should have matured over
the years.
--


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

[Court_1]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 6:46:09 PM UTC-4, RaspingDrive wrote:

> > Pretty damn pathetic from Fed.
>
> No, he is probably challenging Nadal to meet him in the finals at Wimbledon and/or USO. Will Nadal be up for the challenge?

Exactly. It's like Fed is saying, "we know you are the head honcho on clay but come get me at W or the USO and we'll see what's what!"

[Court_1]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:14:57 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> You have no trouble saying that Nafal is doping/silent ban.
> Yet have failed to say even once the same about Federer without adding
> that 'they all dope'.
>
> Is it so hard to admit that Federer is currently serving a silent
> ban/doping without ifs and buts...

I hope Fed is currently doping up a storm and has taken some sound lessons from Nadal on how to cycle up during down periods. It seems to work for both.

> > LOL @ you talking about a skewed h2h and Fed avoiding Nadal. That has been Nadal's speciality. How many times has Federer been waiting to meet Nadal off clay all these years but Nadal couldn't get there thus skewing their h2h?
> >
>
> This has been proven to be false claim...

By whom? The Vamos Brigade? *rolls eyes*

[Gracchus]

Thanks, Carey.

[ahonkan]

On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 00:35:52 UTC+5:30, TT wrote:
> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
> > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> >> :(
> >
> > Reason ?
> >
>
> Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
> against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.
>
> I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.

If that's cowardice, I suppose it's bravery when Rafa skips countless
grass & HC slams because he is not ready to play at that level or due
to 'injuries'?

One can see what excessive play on clay has done to Rafa's body. Name
a single clay specialist who has continued to play at a high level
uninjured well into his mid-30's.

[ahonkan]

On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 02:15:23 UTC+5:30, Court_1 wrote:

> LOL. We shouldn't get cocky like TT is getting again with respect to Nadal because with Nadal, you never know. He could lose in R2 of Wimbledon to some heavy-hitter or he could make the final.

If Rafa had suffered a shock one-off defeat to a red-hot player at Wimbledon,
I'd accept the argument that he could make it to the final. But losses to
Rosol, Darcis, Kyrgios, Young in consecutive years followed by skipping in
2016 due to 'cowardice' (to borrow from TT) gives me the feeling he could
skip it again to 'protect his h2h' vs Fed and 'not give him a mental edge'
with another loss to Fed on the grass! :-)

[Jason White]

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> :(

Don't see why this is shocking. Clay tennis is too grindy and not suited for his attacking game. Unless he needs the ranking points, he'll continue to skip this part of the year. If his tennis gets to the point that he needs ranking points from clay that badly, time to walk away.

[Guypers]

Clay tennis is not real tennis, for commits and non ballets playing with snow shoes and all doped up, Korda anyone?

[TT]

16.5.2017, 3:55, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:14:57 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>
>> You have no trouble saying that Nafal is doping/silent ban.
>> Yet have failed to say even once the same about Federer without adding
>> that 'they all dope'.
>>
>> Is it so hard to admit that Federer is currently serving a silent
>> ban/doping without ifs and buts...
>
> I hope Fed is currently doping up a storm and has taken some sound lessons from Nadal on how to cycle up during down periods. It seems to work for both.
>
>

You're hopeless. Once again you couldn't just say that fed is doping
without ifs and buts.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 9:02, ahonkan kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 00:35:52 UTC+5:30, TT wrote:
>> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>> :(
>>>
>>> Reason ?
>>>
>>
>> Cowardice. Said earlier this year that a reason for his poor success
>> against Rafa has been the scheduled beating on clay.
>>
>> I think Ljubicic told him that he should avoid Rafa on clay.
>
> If that's cowardice, I suppose it's bravery when Rafa skips countless
> grass & HC slams because he is not ready to play at that level or due
> to 'injuries'?
>

First you question legitimacy of Nadal's injuries with your use of
quotation marks...

> One can see what excessive play on clay has done to Rafa's body.

...And then you use those injuries as an excuse for Fed not playing.

Lame.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 9:13, ahonkan kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday, 16 May 2017 02:15:23 UTC+5:30, Court_1 wrote:
>
>> LOL. We shouldn't get cocky like TT is getting again with respect to Nadal because with Nadal, you never know. He could lose in R2 of Wimbledon to some heavy-hitter or he could make the final.
>
> If Rafa had suffered a shock one-off defeat to a red-hot player at Wimbledon,
> I'd accept the argument that he could make it to the final. But losses to
> Rosol, Darcis, Kyrgios, Young in consecutive years followed by skipping in
> 2016 due to 'cowardice'

Rafa actually withdrew after R2 at 2016 RG. Looks like your argument is
that facing Granollers scared him so badly that he had to withdraw from
RG and Wimbledon. Genius.

[Fota]

It's shocking to me to see someone give up a chance for a CYGS for no reason. Probably Fed's last chance. He probably figured the odds were too great, but why not give it a shot anyway?

[The Iceberg]

What a wussy! Yeah I bet Court1 will make up some excuse why this isn't a silent ban, yet Nadal takes 2 days off and that's what she says is the reason.

[The Iceberg]

Nadal always turned up if Djoker was playing, it's really poor sportsmanship that Fed is not playing the FO just to avoid Nadal.

[The Iceberg]

He's scared to play Nadal in his current form, which is a real shame, it's not like Nadal is even near peak.

[Whisper]

Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
decision ever by a great champion. No injury, just decided to pull out.

He may think he's zoned into the faster court style & doesn't want to
jeopardize changing his current game with the rest of the off-clay
season, but really what's the harm in going in & just playing the same
game on clay? If he loses early he just gets more time to practice on
grass.

Hope he changes his mind & gets a wildcard.

[Guypers]

Yes, even if he loses first week, should be good practice playing best of five sets!

[*skriptis]

ahonkan <aho...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Brown not Young.

I know Donald Young is brown and Dustin Brown is not young so it's
confusing.


--

[Gracchus]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 7:30:03 AM UTC-7, *skriptis wrote:
> ahonkan <aho...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

> > I'd accept the argument that he could make it to the final. But losses to
> > Rosol, Darcis, Kyrgios, Young in consecutive years followed by skipping in
> > 2016 due to 'cowardice' (to borrow from TT) gives me the feeling he could
> > skip it again to 'protect his h2h' vs Fed and 'not give him a mental edge'
> > with another loss to Fed on the grass! :-)

> Brown not Young.

> I know Donald Young is brown and Dustin Brown is not young so it's
> confusing.

:)

[RaspingDrive]

Well done, Skriptis. You are good :)

[Court_1]

One wouldn't think that he would go very far at Wimbledon given his results there the past few years but it's a new year and who knows with Nadal? Is his current mindset to put all his energy into winning #10 and then take his foot off the gas a bit or will he try to go all out to win off clay slams as well at this point and will he succeed or are there too many other players who can stop him off clay?

We have to keep in mind he made the final of the AO 2017 and that was on a faster hc. His backhand is also a big weapon these days and he's trying to play more aggressively. His serve has improved too. These are all things which may translate well off clay. People are talking a lot about Federer's improved backhand but Nadal's has improved a lot too.

Nadal is like one of those monsters you see in a horror film. You think he's finally dead and he keeps coming back to life.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 17:55, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> Nadal is like one of those monsters you see in a horror film. You think he's finally dead and he keeps coming back to life.

Rather like Terminator which never stops coming at you. Until you get it
into a hydraulic press.

[Court_1]

LOL. I'm the hopeless one and yet I've said 100 times that I think Fed dopes. I'm really not sure what's confusing you about that.

You were silent like a mouse for a long time when Nadal was losing and now that he's back in good form, you're getting obnoxious again. As always,there's no neutral zone with you and your idol worship. You have some kind of obsessive personality with these famous people who are strangers to you, i.e. Nadal, Charlize Theron, Hillary Clinton, etc. where you turn them into inhuman models of perfection, people who have no faults or weaknesses. It's ridiculous and juvenile what you do. You act like a besotted teenager. Take it down a few notches would you? But I doubt you're capable of doing that.

[Gracchus]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:15:26 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:

> You were silent like a mouse for a long time when Nadal was losing and now that he's back in good form, you're getting obnoxious again. As always,there's no neutral zone with you and your idol worship. You have some kind of obsessive personality with these famous people who are strangers to you, i.e. Nadal, Charlize Theron, Hillary Clinton, etc. where you turn them into inhuman models of perfection, people who have no faults or weaknesses.

Don't forget the King of Pop. :)

[Court_1]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:23:01 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:

> Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
> decision ever by a great champion.

LOL. If he wins W and the USO, the last thing most people would be thinking is how dumb his decision making was!

> No injury, just decided to pull out.

He said his trainers/doctors told him playing on clay contributed to his injury last year so he's afraid of playing on it at this point and doing more damage. He also has the mental edge over Nadal at the moment off clay and he probably doesn't want to mess it up by having Nadal defeat him on clay after hours of grinding.

> He may think he's zoned into the faster court style & doesn't want to
> jeopardize changing his current game with the rest of the off-clay
> season, but really what's the harm in going in & just playing the same
> game on clay? If he loses early he just gets more time to practice on
> grass.
>
> Hope he changes his mind & gets a wildcard.

I think it's a good decision. He wouldn't win the FO. There are a bunch of players he could lose to these days on that surface, not only Nadal whereas on grass and hc his chances are so much better to go the distance.

[Gracchus]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:24:43 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:23:01 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:

> > Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
> > decision ever by a great champion.

> LOL. If he wins W and the USO, the last thing most people would be thinking is how dumb his decision making was!

Imagine the reporters: "Ha ha, will you look at that fool Federer! He skipped the French Open and now won a record 8th Wimbledon for his 19th slam. What a strategic moron!"

[Court_1]

Oh yeah, how could I forget that one? :) That's the creepiest one of all. To not have the ability to see what Jackson actually was, i.e. a mixed up pedo/druggie/freak is unbelievable and I say that as somebody who loved Jackson as a performer and recognized his talent. The guy was a walking time bomb.

[Court_1]

:)

[stephenJ]

On 5/16/2017 7:22 AM, Whisper wrote:
> On 16/05/2017 9:23 PM, Fota wrote:
>> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:28:18 AM UTC-5, Jason White wrote:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>> :(
>>>
>>> Don't see why this is shocking. Clay tennis is too grindy and not
>>> suited for his attacking game. Unless he needs the ranking points,
>>> he'll continue to skip this part of the year. If his tennis gets to
>>> the point that he needs ranking points from clay that badly, time to
>>> walk away.
>>
>> It's shocking to me to see someone give up a chance for a CYGS for no
>> reason. Probably Fed's last chance. He probably figured the odds were
>> too great, but why not give it a shot anyway?
>>
>
>
> Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
> decision ever by a great champion. No injury, just decided to pull out.

He'd just say skipping FO is what allowed him to win W/USO.

Let's face it: what Fed is doing isn't new, it's actually quite a
tradition among aging champs who have either had far more success at
W/USO than FO, or are desperate for W success that they haven't had.





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

[TT]

16.5.2017, 18:15, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 5:44:43 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>> 16.5.2017, 3:55, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:14:57 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>>
>>>> You have no trouble saying that Nafal is doping/silent ban.
>>>> Yet have failed to say even once the same about Federer without adding
>>>> that 'they all dope'.
>>>>
>>>> Is it so hard to admit that Federer is currently serving a silent
>>>> ban/doping without ifs and buts...
>>>
>>> I hope Fed is currently doping up a storm and has taken some sound lessons from Nadal on how to cycle up during down periods. It seems to work for both.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You're hopeless. Once again you couldn't just say that fed is doping
>> without ifs and buts.
>
> LOL. I'm the hopeless one and yet I've said 100 times that I think Fed dopes. I'm really not sure what's confusing you about that.
>

You've not said even once that without the additions. It's obvious how
'unbiased' you are on the matter...

> You were silent like a mouse for a long time when Nadal was losing and now that he's back in good form, you're getting obnoxious again. As always,there's no neutral zone with you and your idol worship. You have some kind of obsessive personality with these famous people who are strangers to you, i.e. Nadal, Charlize Theron, Hillary Clinton, etc. where you turn them into inhuman models of perfection, people who have no faults or weaknesses. It's ridiculous and juvenile what you do. You act like a besotted teenager. Take it down a few notches would you? But I doubt you're capable of doing that.
>

In fact it is you who acts rather disturbed on these matters... you like
to think yourself as unbiased and reasonable while you're anything
but... cough silent bans cough. In reality you are just as obsessed as
the next person... be it Naomi Watts, Federer, Grant, whoever. The
difference between you and others is simply that you like to pretend
you're something you're not.

I guess that would be ok, but unfortunately your self deception is quite
pathological while you are hellbent on convincing others that they keep
false gods... since you don't keep them yourself, in your own mind. This
pathology is probably enhanced by your misguided illusion of superiority
on the matter... The more you tear on other's idols the more you
convince yourself of your superiority on the matter. So I think rest of
us here are normal and don't pretend anything while you like to deceive
yourself in whims of righteous anger.

As for my favourites...
I'm in no way obsessed about Theron although I have seen many of her
movies. Simply arguing with you that Theron is generally thought as
better actress than Watts doesn't make only one party of the argument
obsessed.

You say that myself being silent about Rafa proves something. Yes. It
proves that I'm not nearly as fanatical about Nadal as you think.

Oh and Hillary Clinton. I don't think I have said a word about her in
months. Simply arguing about something doesn't make one obsessed. But
the way you do it does - you're less interested in the argument but more
focused on your own little imagined air of superiority of 'not being a
fanboy'.

So there.

[TT]

I maintain that we don't know whether Jackson was a pedo, no lawsuit
against him could really stand the daylight. This matter is once again
about your disturbed fascination to try and tear other people's idols
down and to feel superiority about it.

Hats off though, it requires incredible amount of self-deception to
convince yourself that your argument about silent bans etc nonsense
would somehow be the less obsessed one.

[Gracchus]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 10:16:00 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> 16.5.2017, 18:32, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:24:16 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:15:26 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
> >>
> >>> You were silent like a mouse for a long time when Nadal was losing and now that he's back in good form, you're getting obnoxious again. As always,there's no neutral zone with you and your idol worship. You have some kind of obsessive personality with these famous people who are strangers to you, i.e. Nadal, Charlize Theron, Hillary Clinton, etc. where you turn them into inhuman models of perfection, people who have no faults or weaknesses.
> >>
> >> Don't forget the King of Pop. :)
> >
> > Oh yeah, how could I forget that one? :) That's the creepiest one of all. To not have the ability to see what Jackson actually was, i.e. a mixed up pedo/druggie/freak is unbelievable and I say that as somebody who loved Jackson as a performer and recognized his talent. The guy was a walking time bomb.

> I maintain that we don't know whether Jackson was a pedo, no lawsuit
> against him could really stand the daylight.

They didn't need to. Jackson's payoffs took care of that. Really, if you don't believe he was a pedo, then you probably swallow the fiction that his face morphed naturally due to a "skin disease" too.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 15:22, Whisper kirjoitti:
> Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
> decision ever by a great champion. No injury, just decided to pull out.

As others have pointed out, this doesn't make much sense. I'd like to
add that even if he won Wimbledon and USO - that doesn't mean at all
that he would also have beaten Nadal at RG. It's completely another
matter and that's why he's skipping it; he doesn't believe he can beat
Rafa there no matter his own form.

However if Rafa were to lose early at RG THEN it would have been a dumb
decision. Unless of course he believes he can't win RG even when Rafa is
out.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 20:26, Gracchus kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 10:16:00 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
>> 16.5.2017, 18:32, Court_1 kirjoitti:
>>> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:24:16 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:15:26 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You were silent like a mouse for a long time when Nadal was losing and now that he's back in good form, you're getting obnoxious again. As always,there's no neutral zone with you and your idol worship. You have some kind of obsessive personality with these famous people who are strangers to you, i.e. Nadal, Charlize Theron, Hillary Clinton, etc. where you turn them into inhuman models of perfection, people who have no faults or weaknesses.
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget the King of Pop. :)
>>>
>>> Oh yeah, how could I forget that one? :) That's the creepiest one of all. To not have the ability to see what Jackson actually was, i.e. a mixed up pedo/druggie/freak is unbelievable and I say that as somebody who loved Jackson as a performer and recognized his talent. The guy was a walking time bomb.
>
>> I maintain that we don't know whether Jackson was a pedo, no lawsuit
>> against him could really stand the daylight.
>
> They didn't need to. Jackson's payoffs took care of that.

Even though Jackson paid civil suits because his lawyers advised him to,
the accusations were nonsense... illogical, contradictory details and
provable lies and changing of story from the plaintiffs. Those civil
suits really came off as means to cash in on MJ.

> Really, if you don't believe he was a pedo, then you probably swallow the fiction that his face morphed naturally due to a "skin disease" too.
>

The guy had more knife than Nicole Kidman.

[Gracchus]

Reality check: nobody cares about clay except fans of clay specialists. It's obviously a less important slam than Wimbledon, and thus a waste of time for a player Federer's age to risk his health at prior to what may be his last realistic chance to win a record-setting 8th Wimbledon. Let Rafa have his glorious 10th RG for what it's worth, and if he can manage not to stumble en route to the title.

[TT]

16.5.2017, 20:43, Gracchus kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 10:34:32 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
>> 16.5.2017, 15:22, Whisper kirjoitti:
>>> Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
>>> decision ever by a great champion. No injury, just decided to pull out.
>>
>> As others have pointed out, this doesn't make much sense. I'd like to
>> add that even if he won Wimbledon and USO - that doesn't mean at all
>> that he would also have beaten Nadal at RG. It's completely another
>> matter and that's why he's skipping it; he doesn't believe he can beat
>> Rafa there no matter his own form.
>>
>> However if Rafa were to lose early at RG THEN it would have been a dumb
>> decision. Unless of course he believes he can't win RG even when Rafa is
>> out.
>
> Reality check: nobody cares about clay except fans of clay specialists.

You're pretty delusional about this...

Let me guess, you're an American?

[Gracchus]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 10:41:38 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> 16.5.2017, 20:26, Gracchus kirjoitti:
> > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 10:16:00 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
> >> 16.5.2017, 18:32, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> >>> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 11:24:16 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:15:26 AM UTC-7, Court_1 wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> You were silent like a mouse for a long time when Nadal was losing and now that he's back in good form, you're getting obnoxious again. As always,there's no neutral zone with you and your idol worship. You have some kind of obsessive personality with these famous people who are strangers to you, i.e. Nadal, Charlize Theron, Hillary Clinton, etc. where you turn them into inhuman models of perfection, people who have no faults or weaknesses.
> >>>>
> >>>> Don't forget the King of Pop. :)
> >>>
> >>> Oh yeah, how could I forget that one? :) That's the creepiest one of all. To not have the ability to see what Jackson actually was, i.e. a mixed up pedo/druggie/freak is unbelievable and I say that as somebody who loved Jackson as a performer and recognized his talent. The guy was a walking time bomb.
> >
> >> I maintain that we don't know whether Jackson was a pedo, no lawsuit
> >> against him could really stand the daylight.
> >
> > They didn't need to. Jackson's payoffs took care of that.
>
> Even though Jackson paid civil suits because his lawyers advised him to,
> the accusations were nonsense... illogical, contradictory details and
> provable lies and changing of story from the plaintiffs. Those civil
> suits really came off as means to cash in on MJ.

Of course his lawyers advised him to pay. Because they were scared to death of losing even though they no doubt were the best lawyers a zillionaire could pay for.

Weirder yet was that Jackson continued "caring for" little boys directly even AFTER accusations and payoffs. That behavior has compulsive sex offender written all over it.

[rec.sport.tennis]

On Mon, 15 May 2017 11:43:23 -0700, Shakes wrote:

> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>> :(
>

> Reason ?

"I need to recognize that scheduling will be the key to my longevity
moving forward."

fairly obvious really

[grif]

On 16/05/2017 00:48, RaspingDrive wrote:
> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:32:31 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>> 16.5.2017, 2:26, RaspingDrive kirjoitti:
>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:16:18 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>>>> 16.5.2017, 1:04, stephenJ kirjoitti:
>>>>> On 5/15/2017 4:54 PM, TT wrote:
>>>>>> 16.5.2017, 0:37, stephenJ kirjoitti:
>>>>>>>> On 5/15/2017 2:05 PM, TT wrote:

>>>>>>>> 15.5.2017, 21:43, Shakes kirjoitti:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> :(
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Reason ?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Cowardice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nadal has dominated clay seasons before and Federer still always played
>>>>>>> the FO. Nadal didn't dominate the clay season at all last year and
>>>>>>> Federer didn't show up at the FO anyway.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He did play MC and Rome.
>>>>>
>>>>> So?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So he wasn't avoiding Rafa as blatantly.
>>>
>>> The six months rest and reflection of his chances in solitude may have convinced him that skipping FO would be the right direction to take.
>>>
>>
>> https://twitter.com/Dimonator/status/864189033152471040
>
> Ha ha. Good one. And true.
>

Run Rogi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUG8YK4LN4I

[Court_1]

Nice try but everybody on RST knows that you hold irrational beliefs about the people you idolize and there is no middle ground for you. I don't idolize anybody in any shape or form. Idolatry of any kind makes me gag. You absolutely fail to recognize any negatives with respect to any of these people you put on a pedestal. Do you really think that's normal behavior? It's immature as well.

[TT]

Fitting. :)

[TT]

16.5.2017, 21:31, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> I don't idolize anybody in any shape or form. Idolatry of any kind makes me gag.

I rest my case...

> You absolutely fail to recognize any negatives with respect to any of these people you put on a pedestal.

I've called multiple times in past week Nadal greedy and idiot...
And that's what I think.

Now fuck off.

[Court_1]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 1:16:00 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> I maintain that we don't know whether Jackson was a pedo, no lawsuit
> against him could really stand the daylight.

We don't? In your deluded imagination you have conjured up the belief that he wasn't a pedo but all evidence points to the fact that he was a clear cut pedo. If he wasn't an extremely wealthy and connected person without the best lawyers money could buy he would have been rotting in a jail cell.

He was an extremely disturbed individual who was abused as a child and taken advantage of by his own parents. He had a distorted view about his appearance, he was a drug addict who lost his fortune and worst of all he was without a doubt an abuser of young boys. He was THE classic case of such a person. Only a moron of the highest order would say anything different about Jackson after looking at all of the evidence over 30 years on the guy.

Stop embarrassing yourself with your disgusting idolatry of this insane pedo. Seriously, I find it disgusting.

[Court_1]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:36:50 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> > You absolutely fail to recognize any negatives with respect to any of these people you put on a pedestal.
>
> I've called multiple times in past week Nadal greedy and idiot...
> And that's what I think.
>
> Now fuck off.

Oops, I hit a nerve!

Did you jerk off once or twice today to You Tube videos of Nadal at match point from Madrid? :)

[TT]

16.5.2017, 21:49, Court_1 kirjoitti:
> On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:36:50 PM UTC-4, TT wrote:
>
>>> You absolutely fail to recognize any negatives with respect to any of these people you put on a pedestal.
>>
>> I've called multiple times in past week Nadal greedy and idiot...
>> And that's what I think.
>>
>> Now fuck off.
>
> Oops, I hit a nerve!
>

No you were just so blatantly wrong that it deserved a send off...

Look, you claimed that I fail to recognize any negatives in Nadal while
I openly say here that the guy is an idiot. Great player and admirable
for his mental strength competition wise but still a dumb jock.

So what you say has nothing to do with reality but happens inside your
head only. You're ranting at imaginary things and feeling superiority
about it. Laughable.

> Did you jerk off once or twice today to You Tube videos of Nadal at match point from Madrid? :)
>

Is that what you fedfans do when watching your idol? You sick fucks.

[Federer Fanatic]

court1 is such a great gal! Btw, I secretly idolize her...oops ;-)

FF

[Scott]

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:23:01 AM UTC-4, Whisper wrote:
> On 16/05/2017 9:23 PM, Fota wrote:

> > On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:28:18 AM UTC-5, Jason White wrote:
> >> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 11:39:48 AM UTC-7, SliceAndDice wrote:
> >>> :(
> >>

> >> Don't see why this is shocking. Clay tennis is too grindy and not suited for his attacking game. Unless he needs the ranking points, he'll continue to skip this part of the year. If his tennis gets to the point that he needs ranking points from clay that badly, time to walk away.
> >
> > It's shocking to me to see someone give up a chance for a CYGS for no reason. Probably Fed's last chance. He probably figured the odds were too great, but why not give it a shot anyway?
> >
>
>

> Exactly. If he does somehow win Wim/USO it could go down as the dumbest
> decision ever by a great champion. No injury, just decided to pull out.
>

> He may think he's zoned into the faster court style & doesn't want to
> jeopardize changing his current game with the rest of the off-clay
> season, but really what's the harm in going in & just playing the same
> game on clay? If he loses early he just gets more time to practice on
> grass.
>
> Hope he changes his mind & gets a wildcard.

Good post.