Amazing

[Pelle Svanslös]

Just a couple of weeks ago Rafa could play one set against Djok. Now, he
just does not go away ...

Never seen anything like this.

Rafa almost lost the 1st against Djok-lite. Groundgame v. groundgame
Rafa was getting sticked. Too bad, Nishi doesn't have a serve. In the
second set, Nishi got visibly tired ...

The real Djok doesn't go away either ... It's going to be an interesting
TdF.

--
“Hiss first. Listen later."

[TT]

If I had top bet my life right now who will win RG, I'd pick Rafa.

[Gracchus]

On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 11:28:37 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:

> If I had top bet my life right now who will win RG, I'd pick Rafa.

Would you bet one or both testicles on it? Think carefully before answering-- if he loses, someone may collect.

[PeteWasLucky]

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

> On Sunday, April 24, 2016 at 11:28:37 AM UTC-7, TT wrote:
>
>> If I had top bet my life right now who will win RG, I'd pick Rafa.
>
> Would you bet one or both testicles on it? Think carefully before answering-- if he loses, someone may collect.
>

He can bet both, no worries, nothing to collect.
--


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

[Court_1]

Too early yet. RELAX. Take a chill pill. Wait and see what happens in Madrid and Rome.

[TT]

No, only life.

[bob]

i'd say he's good enough to beat anyone on clay but djokovic right
now. by FO he may be my pick. i watched the match today and he seemed
more energetic than i've seen him in 2yrs.

bob

[pari...@gmail.com]

Yay that means you will die soon! No more listening to your Rafa shit.

[Whisper]

I guess we'd all want to see a Djoke v Rafa final. Be a historical high
stakes match with a lot of legacy juice on the line;

- Rafa's 10th FO/15th slam (outright 2nd all time in slam count, 10
would be 3 better than the next most wins (7) at a single slam)
- Rafa would become the only male to win a slam in 11 different yrs
(tied at 10 with Sampras)
- Djoker can become a career slammer
- Djoke's 12th slam would leave only Fed, Rafa & Sampras ahead of him -
heady company.

Having said that we'll probably get Stan v Thiem final : )

[TT]

Nishi & Thiem could be a force during clay season, judging by their
performances so far. Murray was playing really well too.

[bob]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 17:14:44 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com.au>
wrote:

it'll depend on seedings too, but i really don't think djoker will
lose before the finals.

rafa is really a wild card right now. 1 more clay tuneup title though
and i'll have him as a solid FO winner or runnerup.

bob

[TT]

I think Rafa would more of a favourite if they meet in the final. Cause
Djoko never won the title. If they're on the same side and meeting
before the final then the mentality could be a bit different.

[Pelle Svanslös]

That's exactly what I said before last year's TdF.

[Court_1]

On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 9:52:52 AM UTC-4, bob wrote:

> 1 more clay tuneup title though
> and i'll have him as a solid FO winner or runnerup.

Nadal will be a solid FO favorite if he can beat Djokovic again in the clay tune-ups before the FO. Nadal is already the second favorite to win the FO after Djokovic because of his results in MC and Barcelona. But his next mission is to beat Djokovic again.

[soccerfan777]

So suddenly clay "tuneups" are important. Glad finally you can see the light. Top players compete at the "tuneups" for a reason and take them extremely seriously for a reason.

[Court_1]

On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 6:06:15 AM UTC-4, TT wrote:

> Nishi & Thiem could be a force during clay season, judging by their
> performances so far.

How so? Nishikori has trouble beating top five players and Thiem has trouble beating top ten players.

[*skriptis]

soccerfan777 <zepf...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

No they don't.

[*skriptis]

Court_1 <olymp...@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:

The problem for him is he way rarely able to upset Djokovic ie to
beat him while not being fave.

They've played 48 times. Favorite won 37 times, with only 11 upsets.

And it's Djokovic with 9-2 lead in those matches.

In 13 slam matches, just 1 upset.
Wimbledon 2011.

[bob]

they're not important of themselves, but they've always been decent in
judging who's in form coming into a slam.

bob

[jdeluise]

bob <b...@nospam.net> writes:

>
> they're not important of themselves, but they've always been decent in
> judging who's in form coming into a slam.
>

Unless you are Whisper, then it's "Tomic will win 3 Wimbledons in the
next 5 years", "Roddick will win a Grand Slam"

[bob]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016 10:27:34 -0800, jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com>
wrote:

what's that got to do with relevance of tuneups?

fwiw, i never touted tomic, i always thought he had some skills and
touch, but not the athleticism necessary today. in hindsight, it
appears tomic was maybe too spoiled and lazy to fully develop his
overall fitness/strength/game. i know roddick never developed his full
potential.

bob

[John Liang]

Why don't you just admit that you and your master overestimate Roddick's potential and underestimate Federer's ? Your analysis on both simply wasn't very good at all.

[Whisper]

Sometimes yes, often no. The real issue is whether they take them super
seriously or not, they still add absolutely nothing to your legacy -
unless of course they are winning the same tune-up 8, 9+ times - then it
is notable because it's virtually unprecedented.

Rafa is just about the only great who's 'tune-ups' are historically
significant, because the way he's dominating them is unprecedented.

[Whisper]

Yes, & they are also meaningful when a player wins it like 10 times,

[Whisper]

Weak troll - I'm puzzled why you bother? Probably drunk & this is one
of the few pleasures in your life?

[Whisper]

Bet to ignore Jed most of the time. I think he has a drinking problem &
makes things up. Harmless, but no point taking him seriously.

[Whisper]

er, you were the 1st one is rst to say Roddick would have a better
career than Federer. Gonna deny it?

[John Liang]

Except in a few years time nobody care about who won 9 barcelona 500 or 9 Monte Carlos. How is thse historically 'significant ' tennis events registering in your 7543 system. A zero, a donut and a zilch. His 9 FO wins, 9 Barca wins and 9 Monte Carlo wins make him the greatest clay court player but as a player overall he will be behind the other two greats in his era.

[John Liang]

I know I said that before Federer's break through in 2003 and after I saw his demolition of Roddick in semi final of Wimbledon 2003 I knew he was better than Roddick. Deny it no, unlike some idiot named whisper even after that wimbledon semi was telling people here Federer was going to make just one other grand slam finals, what was Federer again in your analysis ? I recall it was tommy haas with wrist actions, what about Roddick only had to play 70% of his max to beat Federer at 100%, fantastic analyze so Roddick probably only played his 70% max game 4 times against Federer. Look forward of your repeating those excuese again.

[John Liang]

OK, just a very easy test for you. You have a choice of taking 10 Barcelona titles and also a single Wimbledon which would you take. Which one is more meaningful than the other ?

[John Liang]

I guess that is far better than kick you dog to death or feed the cat with rat poisoning. Are those some of your well documented sick behaviors ?

[Gracchus]

Not quite accurate. Both pets he killed were dogs. Fortunately for our feline friends, Whisp isn't a cat person.

[*skriptis]

John Liang <jlia...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

You're embarrassing yourself.
--

[John Liang]

Yes, sure class 1 clown.

You should be more embarrass yourself with your slave like defense of whimp. Starting fact of your master's previous contribution to RST is never embarrassing. Defending an idiot like whimp is more embarrassing.

[*skriptis]

Oh come on. You were utterly wrong in your prediction and you want
us to admire you for your jumping on Federer wagon after he had
started winning against the clowns?

How pathetic is that.

[jdeluise]

*skriptis <skri...@post.t-com.hr> writes:

>
> Oh come on. You were utterly wrong in your prediction and you want
> us to admire you for your jumping on Federer wagon after he had
> started winning against the clowns?
>
> How pathetic is that.

Much less pathetic than your support of Whisper's predictions about
Federer and Roddick. Those predictions are set in stone as "The worst
analysis in the history of tennis". Yet you still tout him as a
soothsayer.

I hope you came with a warranty as you are beyond defective.

[John Liang]

Oh come on, did I deny I was wrong in 2001 when I said Roddick was going to have a better career than Federer ? Was I wrong in changing my prediction after 2003 Wimbledon ? Do you want us to admire your position as a Djoker stooge and bob 2nd when it come to defend your master whimp ?

>
> How pathetic is that.

Best leave that word in describing yourself. You are more fitting for that description.

[*skriptis]

jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Look cockeyed
Whisper made at a time perfectly sound prediction
that unfortunately didn't come true, but he also has made tons of
other where he had correctly foreseen the future events.

No one can have 100% success rate, it's impossible.


So it's rather disturbing that he gets called out by people who
made same or worse mistakes regarding that particular prediction.

You get a feeling there is something beyond all that.

[jdeluise]

*skriptis <skri...@post.t-com.hr> writes:


>
> Look cockeyed Whisper made at a time perfectly sound prediction
> that unfortunately didn't come true, but he also has made tons of
> other where he had correctly foreseen the future events.
>
> No one can have 100% success rate, it's impossible.
>
>
> So it's rather disturbing that he gets called out by people who
> made same or worse mistakes regarding that particular prediction.
>
> You get a feeling there is something beyond all that.

Whisper continued to make that prediction beyond all reason for years
after it was clear he was wrong. Does the same with Tomic when pushed.
It's true Nobody can have a 100% success rate, but Whisper is making a
pretty good case for being the worst analyst in the history of tennis.
That is the unshakable truth.

[PeteWasLucky]

*skriptis <skri...@post.t-com.hr> Wrote in message:

Another Whisper zombie :) lol

[John Liang]

On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 10:01:04 AM UTC+10, *skriptis wrote:
> jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:
> > *skriptis <skri...@post.t-com.hr> writes:
> >
> >>
> >> Oh come on. You were utterly wrong in your prediction and you want
> >> us to admire you for your jumping on Federer wagon after he had
> >> started winning against the clowns?
> >>
> >> How pathetic is that.
> >
> > Much less pathetic than your support of Whisper's predictions about
> > Federer and Roddick. Those predictions are set in stone as "The worst
> > analysis in the history of tennis". Yet you still tout him as a
> > soothsayer.
> >
> > I hope you came with a warranty as you are beyond defective.
> >
>
>
> Look cockeyed
> Whisper made at a time perfectly sound prediction
> that unfortunately didn't come true, but he also has made tons of
> other where he had correctly foreseen the future events.

Look, he made that prediction but has no guts to admit he was wrong, he made bunches of excuses and some of those are totally unreasonable.

>
> No one can have 100% success rate, it's impossible.

No one has but it is possible for him to admit that he was wrong without making those unreasonable excuses and abuse the others.

>
>
> So it's rather disturbing that he gets called out by people who
> made same or worse mistakes regarding that particular prediction.

There are people made same mistake but rarely worse mistake like the ones about Federer and Roddick..

[*skriptis]

jdeluise <jdel...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

I am puzzled with Tomic case.
Like Mr Bob said his fitness is suspicious but remove the current
crop of top guys and assuming all the pretenders keep with
progress whom one might see as a next Wimbledon champion?

I have Tomic among the very top few. Certainly see him there
before Nishikori or Goffin. Not sure I would heavily favour
Kyrgios over him too in a Wimbledon match.

Tomic is very talented. Whisper's prediction was marvelous in a
way, at a time when the future was uncertain.
He probably feels he had to reiterate his prediction because of
disrespectful people like you.

[John Liang]

You are entitled to think Whisper's Tomic prediction is marvellous but the prediction itself is still wrong and way wrong. Tomic not only did not win Wimbledon as he predicted but fail to win even a 2nd tier or 3rd tier tour events. And you don't sounds like respectful yourself when you call the others disrespectful. Please don't expect people to treat with respect when you are not treating them with respect.

[*skriptis]

But you pretend to be such a smartass. "Hey I changed my
prediction when I saw Federer winning slams with
ease"?
lol really.
But that was not the core of Whisper's prediction.

You were wrong in 2001, and not especially bright or right in
2003, just jumping on a wagon.

You utterly failed with Federer, Whisper didn't. He was cheated by
Roddick and by the lack of Federer's opposition. Of course the
guy like Federer will end up winning everything if no one steps
up.

Hoe can you not understand the facts?

[*skriptis]

John Liang <jlia...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

What itches you is the fact you made same mistake and now you're
trying to bully whisper.

I don't think you'll get respect around here,by behaving that way.

[John Liang]

What was the core of Whisper's prediction ? I have very sharp memory it will be embarrassment to you for me to reiterate those fine predictions he made about both players after that 2003 match.

>
> You were wrong in 2001, and not especially bright or right in
> 2003, just jumping on a wagon.

Still much brighter than someone who claimed Federer won his last slam only to have to revise 16 more times.

>
> You utterly failed with Federer, Whisper didn't. He was cheated by
> Roddick and by the lack of Federer's opposition.

Pretty weak defence of your master here jerk.

Of course the
> guy like Federer will end up winning everything if no one steps
> up.
>
> Hoe can you not understand the facts?

I understand the facts perfectly. Do you ?

[John Liang]

On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 12:01:03 PM UTC+10, *skriptis wrote:

I made the mistake I don't have problem admitting. As for bullying whisper I am merely returning his abuses.

>
> I don't think you'll get respect around here,by behaving that way.

Childish, do you think I care about getting respect from whimp and his stooges like yourself and bob.

[*skriptis]

John Liang <jlia...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

Truth is the most important.


--

[The Iceberg]

HAHAHAHAA! so you changed your tune! LOL

[The Iceberg]

LOL

[Whisper]

Obvious answer. You're missing the point though.

[Whisper]

I have a Siamese - but she has great disdain for me.

[Whisper]

I've already addressed these points at least 50 times in great detail.
I refuse to keep going over old ground unless there is a new angle. Jed
just loses a lot of arguments & thinks he's getting a shot in.
Surprising behavior from a grown man. He never touts for eg my
prediction Rafa would win the career slam way back in 2003. Can't take
one eyed posters seriously.

[Whisper]

If you take 'all' my analysis into consideration I'd be miles out in
front. Picking bits here & there but ignoring 90% of it is just
spamming the ng - complete waste of time.

Is everything well at home? You seem unhinged lately & plain lying
through your teeth. Hope you get better.

[Whisper]

You're blowing things way out of proportion as usual. The thrust of my
Tomic analysis was that he would win Wimbledon 1 day. The rest is fluff
& you're just clogging the ng with nonsense that's easily refuted.

I really have to get that FAQ set up & just link to it every time
john/Jed types get alzheimer's & forget everything & Groundhog day
starts again.

I feel like 25% of all rst traffic revolves around my so called Fed
predictions over a decade ago. Complete waste of time as I've answered
& addressed every single issue in great detail. If you have a new angle
by all means bring it in for discussion, but these posts have been
repeated over 100 times at least with never a new angle/insight.

[Whisper]

What do you think will happen in rst if Tomic wins Wimbledon over the
next couple yrs? Will john/Jed give me any credit at all?

[PeteWasLucky]

Next couple of years? Now it became the next couple of years? lol
So if I post somewhere a list of players that will win Wimbledon in the next couple of years I will be genius?

[bob]

whisper makes quite a few longshot picks and picking longshots
backfires regularly, but it's more fun than picking the same ole every
day. won't criticize him for that any more than i'll criticize trump
for saying hillary would get 5% of vote if she were male. it's easy to
be PC all the time, harder to stick the neck out. my longshot was
kyrgios.

tomic, as i said few yrs ago, just didn't have the fit/athletic skills
needed to challenge the top 3, and didn't seem to care to develop
them. agassi at one time was a fat lazy guy, then became the fittest
on tour. navratilova once said after a loss in late 70s she lost cause
she was fat and tired and vowed she would never lose a match due to
fitness again. then she turned it on evert. perhaps tomic got too much
$$ too soon and got lazy. roddick had the same on a lesser scale, he
loved fame more than practice.

bob

[bob]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 20:38:36 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com.au>
wrote:

as over the course of a player's avg 10-12 yr career, at max 10-12
guys on earth can win wimbledon so odds are stacked against most top
20 type guys anyhow. if tomic even wins 1 in his career it'll be a
great accomplishment, how many guys win 1? literally 3.5 guys have
completely dominated tennis for the past decade +.

bob

[bob]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 20:17:53 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com.au>
wrote:

siamese are very aggressive cats by nature. i'd probably not put a
siamese with any other cats, particularly friendly persian types, or
with dogs either.

bob

[TT]

28.4.2016, 13:38, Whisper kirjoitti:
> What do you think will happen in rst if Tomic wins Wimbledon over the
> next couple yrs?

Let's see him first win a 500 event...

[John Liang]

Obvious answer, you know slam worth more than 10 minor tournaments like Barca.

[John Liang]

You will be miles out in front but in the wrong direction.

[John Liang]

Why not we will have clearer idea who is really suffering from Alzhemer's and who is deliberately lying about his own predictions. Why don't you list all your good Tomic analysis, your wonderful analysis on Roddick and Federer and it will make other realizing how 'great' you are with your predictions.

>
> I feel like 25% of all rst traffic revolves around my so called Fed
> predictions over a decade ago. Complete waste of time as I've answered
> & addressed every single issue in great detail. If you have a new angle
> by all means bring it in for discussion, but these posts have been
> repeated over 100 times at least with never a new angle/insight.

And other 25% with all your lies.

[John Liang]

I will give your credit if he win Wimbledon however I doubt he will.

I know the lines of excuses you have in storage if he doesn't win Wimbledon in the next few years。

[*skriptis]

Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com.au> Wrote in message:

No, but what worries me is the climate here staying the same.
Bad.
--

[*skriptis]

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

Cilic won USO and never a 500.
--

[TT]

28.4.2016, 16:34, *skriptis kirjoitti:
> TT <as...@dprk.kp> Wrote in message:
>> 28.4.2016, 13:38, Whisper kirjoitti:
>>> What do you think will happen in rst if Tomic wins Wimbledon over the
>>> next couple yrs?
>>
>> Let's see him first win a 500 event...
>>
>
>
> Cilic won USO and never a 500.
>

Wonders of doping.

[The Iceberg]

he just goes silent if you ask him about 2013.

[John Liang]

On Thursday, April 28, 2016 at 8:36:13 PM UTC+10, Whisper wrote:

Let's revisit some of those prediction and quotes you made about Tomic winning Wimbledon


29/5/2013

"Lot's of time to get get into the top 10. Wimbledon's pretty much a
lock for Tomic this year. And USO. If he meets Nadal in any major
Tomic should be able to take the Spaniard out in straight sets.


16/1/2013 Hazelwood made a list of your prediction on Tomic

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.sport.tennis/Tomic$20does$20not$20win$20Wimbledon$20/rec.sport.tennis/w-ozZn--6Xg/JD0xSxUAkXkJ

[TT]

> 29/5/2013
>
> "Lot's of time to get get into the top 10. Wimbledon's pretty much a
> lock for Tomic this year. And USO. If he meets Nadal in any major
> Tomic should be able to take the Spaniard out in straight sets.

Great prediction.

[PeteWasLucky]

http://tinyurl.com/hsdodo6

In case the other link didn't work

[Scott]

Lol

[Whisper]

lol a lot of these are taken out of context & some I never said - Raja &
a few others logged in as 'Whisper' & made up a whole lot of funny posts.

[Pelle Svanslös]

Like I already suggested once, you should change your nick to Howler.

[acebh...@gmail.com]

Whats a Howler?

[Whisper]

Your pointing to a copy-pasted Hazelwood post, not mine.

: )

[Pelle Svanslös]

On 29.4.2016 13:12, acebh...@gmail.com wrote:
> Whats a Howler?

1. [informal]
a stupid or glaring mistake, especially an amusing one. synonyms:
mistake, error, blunder, faux pas, fault, gaffe, slip, ...

[John Liang]

Hazelwood was summarizing your amazing analysis and put them into 1 post.

[Whisper]

Haze, Drew & Raja all took turns logging in as 'Whisper', making
outrageous posts & then linking to them to make a point. Anyone who's
been here long enough knows it. Don't know why they bother?

[John Liang]

The biggest problem is that you are/were using an email address from Australia, using an news reader from Australia and that trace all the way back to your email address. You were/are using an Ozemail address and using westnet as your news group server. And Haze, Drew and Raja took turn logging in as 'Whisper' well they may be able to use different alias but it is easily traceable if they are using an Ozemail email account. Hazel is using a gmail account and certainly wasn't using an ozemail account. I worked in IT and I certainly know how to read email headers, you can continue to lie about them as imposters posting as you but your lies are well exposed by the news Posting host server you used, look up the news posting host, it has an ip address 124.168.182.28 and that is iinet server located in Sydney. For your information Drew's Posting server is in Niagara Fall area.

[bob]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2016 21:07:43 +1000, Whisper <beav...@ozemail.com.au>
wrote:

i remember that. i recall seeing "whisper" saying lendl was greatest
ever and i said, shit, has whisp lost his mind?

bob

[Guypers]

John catching whimpy lying again, whatsnew? You are too smart for them!

[John Liang]

That wasn't the real whisper and this is easily exposed when looking his email address, Post Hosting server. Has whisper lost his mind ? Let's just say that his digital signature with his email address, time stamps of some of his post, Post Hosting Server are something he wasn't able to cover.

[Whisper]

john hasn't heard of VPN, & my email isn't real.

[soccerfan777]

Nice try Whispo. It's all you. You are a stupid mofo

[PeteWasLucky]

> lol a lot of these are taken out of context & some I never said - Raja &
> a few others logged in as 'Whisper' & made up a whole lot of funny posts.
>
>
>

Do you want to play this game?
Okay, which quote was not yours?

[Whisper]

You're kidding? I'd have to go & search for the original posts, check
context etc. Who cares that much? It's a hell of a lot of work to go
through this every couple of months & the result is always the same, as
are the questions. I stand by all my opinions/analysis at the time &
deny nothing. Anything can be taken out of context & made to sound
black & white. I have answered every allegation here at least 50,
probably 100 times. I regret not doing it just once in a big FAQ & then
confused types can read the faq before posting what they think is
unique/profound. It's just groundhog day.

The faq would have to include all my brilliant analysis too for
perspective, which would completely dwarf the few bits that didn't come
to pass.

[John Liang]

And you think I don't know about VPN. Do you seriously want me to expose your lies by posting the header of your post with those header ? Posting detail of the meaning of those headers with location of Post Hosting servers, that would not be pretty for you.

[Whisper]

What lies? Are you saying no one ever pretended to be me here?

[MBDunc]

On Friday, April 29, 2016 at 3:21:05 PM UTC+3, bob wrote:
> >Haze, Drew & Raja all took turns logging in as 'Whisper', making
> >outrageous posts & then linking to them to make a point. Anyone who's
> >been here long enough knows it. Don't know why they bother?
>
> i remember that. i recall seeing "whisper" saying lendl was greatest
> ever and i said, shit, has whisp lost his mind?
>
> bob

Years ago whisper officially made one longish post where he turned everything upside an down. Was it one April fools' day? Anyway it was clear he was not in for a real - which he quickly clarified.

.mikko

[Gracchus]

As Sean Connery's character in "The Untouchables" said, "Who would claim to be that who was not?"

[John Liang]

No, I am asking why you need to lie about your old analysis when it is pretty clear cut those were your own works.