rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com
Google Groups
Topic digest
View all topics
The top 5 BIGGEST Islamic nations are NOT on the travel ban - 1 Update
The Federer Backhand That Finally Beat Nadal (stat analysis article) - 2 Updates
Trump dumps on the Aussies - 11 Updates
NY Times article on Margaret Court - 5 Updates
First time ever Roger has defeated Nadal in a slam outside of Wimbledon. - 4 Updates
Congrats Jaros - 2 Updates
The top 5 BIGGEST Islamic nations are NOT on the travel ban
AZ <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com>: Feb 02 01:57PM -0800
On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 12:05:48 AM UTC+6, StephenJ wrote:
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-trump-pence-republican-ticket/
Lesley Stahl: Let's talk about-- some of the issues. Because there seems to be some daylight between you two, and we can just tick-- go quickly through these. Immigration. Mr. Trump, you have called for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States. Do you agree with that?
Mike Pence: I do. In fact, in Indiana we suspended the Syrian refugee program in the wake of the terrorist attack. We have no higher priority than the safety and security of the people of this country, and Donald Trump--
Lesley Stahl: Now--
Mike Pence: --is right to--
Lesley Stahl: --in December--
Mike Pence: --articulate that view.
Lesley Stahl: --in December you tweeted, and I quote you, "Calls to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. are offensive and unconstitutional."
Donald Trump: So you call it territories. OK? We're gonna do territories. We're gonna not let people come in from Syria that nobody knows who they are. Hillary Clinton wants 550 percent more people to come in than Obama--
Lesley Stahl: So you--
Donald Trump: --who doesn't know what he's--
Lesley Stahl: --so you're changing--
Donald Trump: --so we're going to--
Lesley Stahl: --your position.
Donald Trump: --no, I-- call it whatever you want. We'll call it territories, OK?
Back to top
The Federer Backhand That Finally Beat Nadal (stat analysis article)
arahim <arahim_arahim@hotmail.com>: Feb 02 12:56PM -0800
On Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 1:49:05 PM UTC-8, AZ wrote:
> ...In the past, Nadal's topspin has been particularly damaging to Federer's one-handed backhand, one of the most beautiful shots in the sport–but not the most effective.... Federer's backhand was unusually effective yesterday, especially compared to his other matches against Nadal.
> Read here:
> http://www.tennisabstract.com/blog/2017/01/30/the-federer-backhand-that-finally-beat-nadal/
I am not sure what the stats on it are but one thing in this match seemed to be his use of backhand down the line used more tactically than continued cross court usage. He sometimes played down the line even when Nadal was there as opposed to trying to move Nadal cross court.
AZ <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com>: Feb 02 01:48PM -0800
On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 12:08:16 AM UTC+6, Gracchus wrote:
> > > Very good analysis but I need to add that the backhand doesn't operate in a vacuum. For a one hander, the incoming height and spin adds difficulty to the shot. It could very well be that the lower bouncing surface+ball combination allowed this Fed BH to operate better than usual. If we see these guys play again under similar conditions, we will know for sure.
> > We have gone over this. It may have bounced lower than usual, but we cannot say for sure or by how much (IMO not much). What we do know is that Fed took those balls to his bh very early and close to the baseline, over and over again. That made the ball bouncing height redundant and made a lot of difference.
> Redundant?
As in the ball bouncing height wasn't a factor anymore. It is redundant, unnecessary in this analysis. It's taken out of the equation. Fed simply didn't let the ball bounce high. He took the ball early and low.
Back to top
Trump dumps on the Aussies
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Feb 02 08:17PM +0100
> That's all he does. He's flooded the damn whole Europe with them already.
Look THIS is really not funny.
You can't come out in public and claim Seles stabbed herself.
I mean, you could be sick and say she should have been able to
escape the stabbing, or that she's a loser for not recovering
fast enough. You could say even that.
But you can't claim she stabbed herself.
That's just insane.
Putin has nothing to do with this stuff. Its Hillary who opened
the door for neocon policies under Obama.
Killing Gadaffi, trying to oust Assad, destabilizing whole middle
east and north Africa, that's the cause of it. The whole mess
started in 2011.
Putin started bombing Islamists on Syria in autumn 2015, refugees
wave was at its peak in summer.
Besides, Syrians are not even the majority. It's just a pretext.
Invaders come from Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan Pakistan too.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Feb 02 07:44PM
On 02/02/2017 16:40, TT wrote:
> The word is 'refugee'. 'Illegal immigrant/alien' is someone who has
> entered country illegally, or entered legally and has fallen out of
> legal status.
I thought it was quite clear what the situation was.
One thing puzzles me though. It seems that the president wasn't aware of
the deal before his phonecon. Maybe he should be briefed first, although
it seems that he gets distracted easily, and his mind wanders.
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Feb 02 08:53PM +0100
> One thing puzzles me though. It seems that the president wasn't aware of
> the deal before his phonecon. Maybe he should be briefed first, although
> it seems that he gets distracted easily, and his mind wanders.
Legal tricks. What do you do with aliens when you intercept them
in international waters, but heading for Australia?
Since they haven't landed on the soil they aren't even illegals?
So you call them refugees and send them to that island and later
to USA?
So it's a nice trick.
But Trump isn't impressed.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Feb 02 10:17PM +0200
2.2.2017, 21:44, Brian W Lawrence kirjoitti:
>> entered country illegally, or entered legally and has fallen out of
>> legal status.
> I thought it was quite clear what the situation was.
Yes, it's pretty clear that Trump (or Skriptis) don't understand what
'illegals' means.
That might also explain his many illegal activities...
> One thing puzzles me though. It seems that the president wasn't aware of
> the deal before his phonecon. Maybe he should be briefed first, although
> it seems that he gets distracted easily, and his mind wanders.
Well he didn't know that he has to fill his cabinet and executive
offices either, before learning that straight from Obama...
But no worries... we know he surrounds himself with the 'best people'
and knows 'more than generals'.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Feb 02 10:27PM +0200
2.2.2017, 21:53, *skriptis kirjoitti:
> to USA?
> So it's a nice trick.
> But Trump isn't impressed.
Oh shit... You still don't understand.
If Australia was sending illegal immigrants then that would mean that
police would be arresting people on the streets and sending them to USA.
This would be people who are staying illegally in the country.
Being a refugee and seeking an asylum and citizenship is not illegal at
all, instead it is a legal process... these people do it by the law and
rules.
DavidW <no@email.provided>: Feb 03 07:48AM +1100
On 3/02/2017 6:53 AM, *skriptis wrote:
>> it seems that he gets distracted easily, and his mind wanders.
> Legal tricks. What do you do with aliens when you intercept them
> in international waters, but heading for Australia?
What are you on about? They headed to Australia by boat seeking asylum,
which people are allowed to do. They were intercepted and taken to Manus
Island (New Guinea) or Nauru, where they were processed and found to be
at risk of persecution if returned to their home countries, and are
therefore are now officially refugees. Australia is not claiming they
aren't. They are not "illegal" in any way.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Feb 02 12:53PM -0800
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 12:17:45 PM UTC-8, TT wrote:
> Yes, it's pretty clear that Trump (or Skriptis) don't understand what
> 'illegals' means.
> That might also explain his many illegal activities...
Trump or skriptis?
DavidW <no@email.provided>: Feb 03 07:58AM +1100
On 3/02/2017 4:02 AM, The Iceberg wrote:
> Australia wants to get rid of them.
> Somehow the Aussie PM convinced the USA to do a deal about this.
> Obama for some reason said he'll take them
The deal was for the U.S. to accept refugees being held on Manus and
Nauru and Australia would accept refugees being held in Costa Rica.
Brian W Lawrence <brian_w_lawrence@msn.com>: Feb 02 09:00PM
On 02/02/2017 20:17, TT wrote:
>> I thought it was quite clear what the situation was.
> Yes, it's pretty clear that Trump (or Skriptis) don't understand what
> 'illegals' means.
Probably both.
> offices either, before learning that straight from Obama...
> But no worries... we know he surrounds himself with the 'best people'
> and knows 'more than generals'.
I discovered that he must have known about the agreement - they inserted
a sentence into the Executive Order (13769, Jan 27) saying,
"when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its
conduct to a preexisting international agreement". Mind you, does
he read what he signs? Or if he read it would he know what it meant.
Hilarious segment on BBC's '100 Days' program tonight - a BBC Persian
Service translator was talking about instant live translation of Trump
into Farsi. He said he needs to get into character and use the hand
gestures in order to get the message across. He got advice from an
expert who was explaining what the hand gestures mean, and the lack
of structure in the 'speeches', jumping from one thought to another,
then ditching that one as well. Apparently the 'threading the needle'
gesture - thumb and forefinger forming the eye - occurs when he
arrives at the point he was aiming to make - not necessarily the one
he started with though :=)
I also note that he was moaning about how the Apprentice was going down
the tubes with Arnie fronting it. The Terminator came back with a
suggestion that they swapped jobs.
Another item on '100 Days' was pointing out that after a week he has
only had 4 members of his cabinet confirmed, whereas Obama had 10
in the first week. The White House blames the Dems for this, but
more likely is that the transition team are to blame. Also said that
2 Reps will not support Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary, so she
will be rejected.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Feb 02 11:19PM +0200
2.2.2017, 22:58, DavidW kirjoitti:
>> Obama for some reason said he'll take them
> The deal was for the U.S. to accept refugees being held on Manus and
> Nauru and Australia would accept refugees being held in Costa Rica.
Random fact: 'nauru' means 'laughter' in Finnish.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Feb 02 11:34PM +0200
2.2.2017, 23:00, Brian W Lawrence kirjoitti:
>> Yes, it's pretty clear that Trump (or Skriptis) don't understand what
>> 'illegals' means.
> Probably both.
Yes, that's what I meant.
> "when admitting the person would enable the United States to conform its
> conduct to a preexisting international agreement". Mind you, does
> he read what he signs? Or if he read it would he know what it meant.
Well he certainly doesn't draft them, and I doubt he understands them
well either.
> gesture - thumb and forefinger forming the eye - occurs when he
> arrives at the point he was aiming to make - not necessarily the one
> he started with though :=)
Sad! Believe me.
> I also note that he was moaning about how the Apprentice was going down
> the tubes with Arnie fronting it. The Terminator came back with a
> suggestion that they swapped jobs.
lol. Had not heard about Arnie's reply.
> more likely is that the transition team are to blame. Also said that
> 2 Reps will not support Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary, so she
> will be rejected.
Dems would still need one Republican vote more... 3 in total.
If they are even as they seem to be now (50-50), then vice president
vote solves the draw.
Back to top
NY Times article on Margaret Court
heyguys00@gmail.com: Feb 02 11:24AM -0800
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 2:09:14 PM UTC-5, soccerfan777 wrote:
> I know it is the bullshit excuse Serena made. In future somebody might win fifteen 256 player draws and claim they have surpassed Serena. What will Serena say to that.
> Court had no option when it came to size of draw. She won it fair and square.
> > In her 24 slams how many matches did Court have to win? 140something? Serena won 161 with her 23 slams...that's about 27 "Court equivalent" slams.
Chances are things will change...maybe a 5th slam will be added one day and screw up all comparisons. Nobody is saying Court didn't win 24 slams. That's why Serena is shooting for 25 to end the argument altogether. If that happens it'll be Graf fans who end up making the open/modern era distinction, not Serena fans.
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Feb 02 11:38AM -0800
> > Court had no option when it came to size of draw. She won it fair and square.
> > > In her 24 slams how many matches did Court have to win? 140something? Serena won 161 with her 23 slams...that's about 27 "Court equivalent" slams.
> Chances are things will change...maybe a 5th slam will be added one day
No freaking way... it will never happen.
>and screw up all comparisons. Nobody is saying Court didn't win 24 slams. That's why Serena is shooting for 25 to end the argument altogether. If that happens it'll be Graf fans who end up making the open/modern era distinction, not Serena fans.
I don't think Graf fans in general care. Graf didnt care enough to try to get to 24 or 25, why would her fans care? Graf was the greatest in her era, that is about what I am proud of. I am not interested if she is at the top of some hypothetical all-time list.
PS: When Graf retired who is the greatest. And she said Martina Navratilova. She never wanted to be GOAT.
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Feb 02 02:57PM -0600
On 2/2/2017 1:09 PM, soccerfan777 wrote:
>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>> I also often hear 23 being the "modern" era record, meaning the era of 128-draw slams. It's pretty obvious a 32-person draw AO shouldn't be treated the same as a 128-person draw AO.
> I know it is the bullshit excuse Serena made.
I agree that Court is the legitimate all-time record holder with 24
slams, but don't put the arguments against her on Serena. The entire
tennis community has, for decades, acted like Court's record doesn't
exist and Steffi was always regarded as the "slam record holder" by fans
and media.
So in a way, it *is* unfair for others to now talk about Court and her
24 when nobody did that when Graf had the most in the open era. One
could argue that racism is at play here, moving the goal posts once a
black woman breaks the record.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Feb 02 01:07PM -0800
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 2:57:18 PM UTC-6, StephenJ wrote:
> tennis community has, for decades, acted like Court's record doesn't
> exist and Steffi was always regarded as the "slam record holder" by fans
> and media.
If that is the case, media is super dumb. Steffi never held the most titles ever. Neither did she claim that nor did her fans claim that.
> So in a way, it *is* unfair for others to now talk about Court and her
> 24 when nobody did that when Graf had the most in the open era.
Are you for real?
> One
> could argue that racism is at play here, moving the goal posts once a
> black woman breaks the record.
One could argue that you are a dumbarse. Court won 24 slams, it is plain and simple. Whether or not if she is greatest ever is irrelevant. She won 24 slams. And Serena has to win 3 more to pass her slam count.
Not many in their right mind would consider Court to be greater than say Helen Wills who won 19! But she still holds 24 slams.
stephenJ <sjaros3@cox.net>: Feb 02 03:19PM -0600
On 2/2/2017 3:07 PM, soccerfan777 wrote:
>> could argue that racism is at play here, moving the goal posts once a
>> black woman breaks the record.
> One could argue that you are a dumbarse.
You are objectively an idiot. You can't even add you're so dumb.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Back to top
First time ever Roger has defeated Nadal in a slam outside of Wimbledon.
arahim <arahim_arahim@hotmail.com>: Feb 02 11:19AM -0800
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 2:25:57 AM UTC-8, Whisper wrote:
> On 2/02/2017 11:57 AM, Scott wrote:
> > I think if this match could have been played 100 times Fed wins it 60 or so times. The 5% prediction and constant dismissal of Fed's prospects was Tier Five quality.
> That's your opinion. I Think Rafa wins it 75 to 80 times?
That's not even their over all numbers (and they have had a large number of matches).
Overall
Federer 34%
Nadal 66%
On clay you can argue that:
Federer: 2
Nadal: 13
On Hard its about 50/50
Federer: 8
Nadal: 9
Grass:
Federer: 2
Nadal: 1
For your favorite "slam finals":
AO: 1-1
FO: All Nadal
W: Federer 2-1
USO: 0-0
So for slam finals outside clay Federer does have the better winning percentage.
May be you mean now that Federer is over 35?
arahim <arahim_arahim@hotmail.com>: Feb 02 11:22AM -0800
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 8:33:21 AM UTC-8, TT wrote:
> untypical for him those days.
> This is not the first time Federer makes excuses and puts words in his
> follower's mouths.
You know Federer pretty much conceded that Nadal had the edge over him and was destroying his game on clay and you're still not happy:)
*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr>: Feb 02 08:58PM +0100
>> Who would have picked Lenin over Stalin?
> Bannon. He's a self described Leninist.
That makes no sense. If he ever said it, he was joking. Alt right
guys have a superb sense of humor.
Being alt right today is like listening to rocknroll in the 50s.
It's subversive and cool.
That's why young people are flocking and are massively attracted.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Feb 02 10:30PM +0200
2.2.2017, 21:58, *skriptis kirjoitti:
> Being alt right today is like listening to rocknroll in the 50s.
> It's subversive and cool.
> That's why young people are flocking and are massively attracted.
lol. You truly are sick in the head.
There is nothing Trump and his cronies could do or say which wouldn't
get your praise. It's amusing almost.
Back to top
Congrats Jaros
heyguys00@gmail.com: Feb 02 11:36AM -0800
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 5:07:18 AM UTC-5, Whisper wrote:
> for tennis fans who don't recognize what they are seeing. It's like
> being blind.
> : (
Mac and Henin both stopped winning slams at 25/26. Maybe drool-worthy talent is only good for 7 slams max?
soccerfan777 <zepfloyes@gmail.com>: Feb 02 11:38AM -0800
> > being blind.
> > : (
> Mac and Henin both stopped winning slams at 25/26. Maybe drool-worthy talent is only good for 7 slams max?
lol
Back to top
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.