tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:24:38
From: TT
Subject: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
while when healthy it took him 5 sets...

Any explanations?


--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"




 
Date: 28 Jan 2009 14:08:06
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 28, 1:53 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> ahonkan wrote:
> > On Jan 29, 1:30 am, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Jan 28, 11:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> >>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>> TT wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
> >>>>>>>>>>>> of the
> >>>>>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
> >>>>>>>>>>>> had
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
> >>>>>>>>>>>> back?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> >>>>>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
> >>>>>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> >>>>>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> >>>>>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> >>>>>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> >>>>>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
> >>>>>>>>>>>> because of
> >>>>>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> >>>>>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> This
> >>>>>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> >>>>>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> day basis
> >>>>>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
> >>>>>>>>>>>> or not...
> >>>>>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> >>>>>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> >>>>>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
> >>>>>>>>>>>> results as
> >>>>>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
> >>>>>>>>>>>> losses
> >>>>>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> >>>>>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> >>>>>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
> >>>>>>>>>>>> schedule
> >>>>>>>>>>>> against his word.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
> >>>>>>>>>>> two
> >>>>>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> >>>>>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
> >>>>>>>>>>> variables in
> >>>>>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> >>>>>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
> >>>>>>>>>>> almost
> >>>>>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
> >>>>>>>>>>http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
> >>>>>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
> >>>>>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
> >>>>>>>>> career? Thanks.
> >>>>>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
> >>>>>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
> >>>>>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
> >>>>>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
> >>>>>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
> >>>>>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
> >>>>>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
> >>>>>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
> >>>>>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
> >>>>>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
> >>>>>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
> >>>>>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
> >>>>>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
> >>>>>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
> >>>>>> it fits to the whole picture.
> >>>>>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
> >>>>>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
> >>>>>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
> >>>>>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
> >>>>>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
> >>>>>> which it beautifully has.
> >>>>> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
> >>>>> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
> >>>>> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
> >>>>> now he is a new man?
> >>>> The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
> >>>> in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
> >>>> someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
> >>>> that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
> >>>> recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
> >>>> getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
> >>>> some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.
> >>> You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
> >>> Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?
> >> It's out of generosity. I address these to a very select few nuisances
> >> (ie: you, Whisper, Groundaxe, sometimes Dave) who insist on opening
> >> their mouth when they either (a) obviously have no clue as to what
> >> they're talking about or (b) are contradicted by facts. I merely do
> >> them a favor by pointing out the error and suggesting that they return
> >> to school - much in the same way as pointing out to someone that they
> >> have some of their dinner still on their lip. Yes, it's embarrassing
> >> for the schlemiel, and we're reluctant to place people in such a
> >> position - but ultimately they are grateful for it. ;-)
>
> > But you must admit that TennisTroll-Whisper make a great
> > 'Dumb & Dumber' team!
>
> I bet you'd like to join our team. We can call you 'the dumbest'...

Are you guys training for the Special Olympics? :-P


  
Date: 29 Jan 2009 00:11:51
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 28, 1:53 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> ahonkan wrote:
>>> On Jan 29, 1:30 am, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Jan 28, 11:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> TT wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>>>>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>>>>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>>>>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> day basis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or not...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>>>>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> results as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> losses
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>>>>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
>>>>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> variables in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>>>>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost
>>>>>>>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>>>>>>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>>>>>>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>>>>>>>>>> career? Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>>>>>>>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>>>>>>>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>>>>>>>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
>>>>>>>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
>>>>>>>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
>>>>>>>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
>>>>>>>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
>>>>>>>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
>>>>>>>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
>>>>>>>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
>>>>>>>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
>>>>>>>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>>>>>>>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
>>>>>>>> it fits to the whole picture.
>>>>>>>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
>>>>>>>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
>>>>>>>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
>>>>>>>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
>>>>>>>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
>>>>>>>> which it beautifully has.
>>>>>>> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
>>>>>>> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
>>>>>>> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
>>>>>>> now he is a new man?
>>>>>> The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
>>>>>> in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
>>>>>> someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
>>>>>> that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
>>>>>> recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
>>>>>> getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
>>>>>> some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.
>>>>> You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
>>>>> Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?
>>>> It's out of generosity. I address these to a very select few nuisances
>>>> (ie: you, Whisper, Groundaxe, sometimes Dave) who insist on opening
>>>> their mouth when they either (a) obviously have no clue as to what
>>>> they're talking about or (b) are contradicted by facts. I merely do
>>>> them a favor by pointing out the error and suggesting that they return
>>>> to school - much in the same way as pointing out to someone that they
>>>> have some of their dinner still on their lip. Yes, it's embarrassing
>>>> for the schlemiel, and we're reluctant to place people in such a
>>>> position - but ultimately they are grateful for it. ;-)
>>> But you must admit that TennisTroll-Whisper make a great
>>> 'Dumb & Dumber' team!
>> I bet you'd like to join our team. We can call you 'the dumbest'...
>
> Are you guys training for the Special Olympics? :-P

Something like that. You're of course qualified already. :-P

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 28 Jan 2009 12:47:34
From: ahonkan
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 29, 1:30=A0am, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com >
wrote:
> On Jan 28, 11:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >> TT wrote:
> > >>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's on=
ly
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
> > >>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
> > >>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> > >>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only prove=
s
> > >>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
> > >>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 A=
O.
> > >>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than re=
st
> > >>>>>>>>> of the
> > >>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer s=
till
> > >>>>>>>>> had
> > >>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
> > >>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement co=
me
> > >>>>>>>>> back?
> > >>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentato=
r said
> > >>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
> > >>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtuall=
y every
> > >>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should=
be
> > >>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO =
when
> > >>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he mo=
ved
> > >>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
> > >>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
> > >>>>>>>>> because of
> > >>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age=
and
> > >>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence a=
nd more
> > >>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're ten=
se.
> > >>>>>>>>> This
> > >>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves s=
o
> > >>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day t=
o
> > >>>>>>>>> day basis
> > >>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "bac=
k"
> > >>>>>>>>> or not...
> > >>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> > >>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
> > >>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. B=
ut my
> > >>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
> > >>>>>>>>> results as
> > >>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career=
or
> > >>>>>>>>> losses
> > >>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
> > >>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not ma=
king
> > >>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first =
time in
> > >>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his =
recent,
> > >>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
> > >>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not havin=
g it,
> > >>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance a=
nd
> > >>>>>>>>> schedule
> > >>>>>>>>> against his word.
> > >>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and =
then
> > >>>>>>>> two
> > >>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the=
best
> > >>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
> > >>>>>>>> variables in
> > >>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query o=
f "How
> > >>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono an=
d
> > >>>>>>>> almost
> > >>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
> > >>>>>>>http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=3DaVBhffJ
> > >>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerab=
ly in
> > >>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of =
his
> > >>>>>> career? Thanks.
> > >>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady d=
ecline
> > >>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also c=
ounters
> > >>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
> > >>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to =
2007
> > >>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then pi=
cked
> > >>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
> > >>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
> > >>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline l=
ike
> > >>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playi=
ng a
> > >>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
> > >>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
> > >>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
> > >>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
> > >>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see=
how
> > >>> it fits to the whole picture.
> > >>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see tha=
t a
> > >>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
> > >>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federe=
r
> > >>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more ste=
eply
> > >>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down mov=
ement
> > >>> which it beautifully has.
> > >> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only =
in
> > >> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole =
of 2008.
>
> > >> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 a=
nd
> > >> now he is a new man?
>
> > > The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
> > > in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example o=
f
> > > someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
> > > that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
> > > recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
> > > getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
> > > some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.
>
> > You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
> > Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?
>
> It's out of generosity. I address these to a very select few nuisances
> (ie: you, Whisper, Groundaxe, sometimes Dave) who insist on opening
> their mouth when they either (a) obviously have no clue as to what
> they're talking about or (b) are contradicted by facts. I merely do
> them a favor by pointing out the error and suggesting that they return
> to school - much in the same way as pointing out to someone that they
> have some of their dinner still on their lip. Yes, it's embarrassing
> for the schlemiel, and we're reluctant to place people in such a
> position - but ultimately they are grateful for it. ;-)

But you must admit that TennisTroll-Whisper make a great
'Dumb & Dumber' team!


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 23:53:33
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
ahonkan wrote:
> On Jan 29, 1:30 am, "andrew.r...@gmail.com" <andrew.r...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Jan 28, 11:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>> TT wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
>>>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
>>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
>>>>>>>>>>>> back?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
>>>>>>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
>>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
>>>>>>>>>>>> day basis
>>>>>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
>>>>>>>>>>>> or not...
>>>>>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
>>>>>>>>>>>> results as
>>>>>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
>>>>>>>>>>>> losses
>>>>>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
>>>>>>>>>>>> schedule
>>>>>>>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
>>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
>>>>>>>>>>> variables in
>>>>>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
>>>>>>>>>>> almost
>>>>>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>>>>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>>>>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>>>>>>>> career? Thanks.
>>>>>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>>>>>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>>>>>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>>>>>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
>>>>>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
>>>>>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
>>>>>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
>>>>>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
>>>>>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
>>>>>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
>>>>>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
>>>>>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
>>>>>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>>>>>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
>>>>>> it fits to the whole picture.
>>>>>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
>>>>>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
>>>>>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
>>>>>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
>>>>>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
>>>>>> which it beautifully has.
>>>>> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
>>>>> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
>>>>> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
>>>>> now he is a new man?
>>>> The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
>>>> in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
>>>> someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
>>>> that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
>>>> recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
>>>> getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
>>>> some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.
>>> You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
>>> Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?
>> It's out of generosity. I address these to a very select few nuisances
>> (ie: you, Whisper, Groundaxe, sometimes Dave) who insist on opening
>> their mouth when they either (a) obviously have no clue as to what
>> they're talking about or (b) are contradicted by facts. I merely do
>> them a favor by pointing out the error and suggesting that they return
>> to school - much in the same way as pointing out to someone that they
>> have some of their dinner still on their lip. Yes, it's embarrassing
>> for the schlemiel, and we're reluctant to place people in such a
>> position - but ultimately they are grateful for it. ;-)
>
> But you must admit that TennisTroll-Whisper make a great
> 'Dumb & Dumber' team!

I bet you'd like to join our team. We can call you 'the dumbest'...

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 28 Jan 2009 12:30:11
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 28, 11:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> TT wrote:
> >>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
> >>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
> >>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
> >>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> >>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
> >>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
> >>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
> >>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
> >>>>>>>>> of the
> >>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
> >>>>>>>>> had
> >>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
> >>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
> >>>>>>>>> back?
> >>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> >>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
> >>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> >>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> >>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> >>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> >>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
> >>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
> >>>>>>>>> because of
> >>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> >>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> >>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
> >>>>>>>>> This
> >>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> >>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
> >>>>>>>>> day basis
> >>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
> >>>>>>>>> or not...
> >>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> >>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
> >>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> >>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
> >>>>>>>>> results as
> >>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
> >>>>>>>>> losses
> >>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
> >>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> >>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> >>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> >>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
> >>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> >>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
> >>>>>>>>> schedule
> >>>>>>>>> against his word.
> >>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
> >>>>>>>> two
> >>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> >>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
> >>>>>>>> variables in
> >>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> >>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
> >>>>>>>> almost
> >>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
> >>>>>>>http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
> >>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
> >>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
> >>>>>> career? Thanks.
> >>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
> >>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
> >>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
> >>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
> >>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
> >>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
> >>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
> >>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
> >>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
> >>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
> >>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
> >>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
> >>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
> >>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
> >>> it fits to the whole picture.
> >>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
> >>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
> >>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
> >>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
> >>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
> >>> which it beautifully has.
> >> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
> >> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
>
> >> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
> >> now he is a new man?
>
> > The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
> > in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
> > someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
> > that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
> > recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
> > getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
> > some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.
>
> You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
> Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?

It's out of generosity. I address these to a very select few nuisances
(ie: you, Whisper, Groundaxe, sometimes Dave) who insist on opening
their mouth when they either (a) obviously have no clue as to what
they're talking about or (b) are contradicted by facts. I merely do
them a favor by pointing out the error and suggesting that they return
to school - much in the same way as pointing out to someone that they
have some of their dinner still on their lip. Yes, it's embarrassing
for the schlemiel, and we're reluctant to place people in such a
position - but ultimately they are grateful for it. ;-)


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 23:48:49
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 28, 11:00 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> TT wrote:
>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
>>>>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
>>>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
>>>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
>>>>>>>>>>> back?
>>>>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
>>>>>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
>>>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
>>>>>>>>>>> day basis
>>>>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
>>>>>>>>>>> or not...
>>>>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
>>>>>>>>>>> results as
>>>>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
>>>>>>>>>>> losses
>>>>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
>>>>>>>>>>> schedule
>>>>>>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
>>>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
>>>>>>>>>> variables in
>>>>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
>>>>>>>>>> almost
>>>>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>>>>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>>>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>>>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>>>>>>> career? Thanks.
>>>>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>>>>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>>>>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>>>>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
>>>>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
>>>>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
>>>>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
>>>>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
>>>>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
>>>>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
>>>>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
>>>>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
>>>>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>>>>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
>>>>> it fits to the whole picture.
>>>>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
>>>>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
>>>>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
>>>>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
>>>>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
>>>>> which it beautifully has.
>>>> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
>>>> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
>>>> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
>>>> now he is a new man?
>>> The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
>>> in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
>>> someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
>>> that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
>>> recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
>>> getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
>>> some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.
>> You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
>> Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?
>
> It's out of generosity. I address these to a very select few nuisances
> (ie: you, Whisper, Groundaxe, sometimes Dave) who insist on opening
> their mouth when they either (a) obviously have no clue as to what
> they're talking about or (b) are contradicted by facts. I merely do
> them a favor by pointing out the error and suggesting that they return
> to school - much in the same way as pointing out to someone that they
> have some of their dinner still on their lip. Yes, it's embarrassing
> for the schlemiel, and we're reluctant to place people in such a
> position - but ultimately they are grateful for it. ;-)

Or maybe you're just a dork. ;)

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 28 Jan 2009 10:54:01
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 28, 10:35 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> So you are saying that mono begun after 2007 AO?
> ...
> I understand everything.

It's very, entirely, undoubtedly and unarguably clear that you don't.


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 21:01:06
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 28, 10:35 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> So you are saying that mono begun after 2007 AO?
>> ...
>> I understand everything.
>
> It's very, entirely, undoubtedly and unarguably clear that you don't.

Well at least everything that is talked in rst...

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 28 Jan 2009 10:53:03
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> TT wrote:
> > andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
> >>>>>>>>> Godsick
> >>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
> >>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> >>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
> >>>>>>>>> opposite.
> >>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
> >>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
> >>>>>>> of the
> >>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
> >>>>>>> had
> >>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
> >>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
> >>>>>>> back?
> >>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> >>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
> >>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> >>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> >>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> >>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> >>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
> >>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
> >>>>>>> because of
> >>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> >>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> >>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
> >>>>>>> This
> >>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> >>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
> >>>>>>> day basis
> >>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
> >>>>>>> or not...
> >>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> >>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
> >>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> >>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
> >>>>>>> results as
> >>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
> >>>>>>> losses
> >>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
> >>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> >>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> >>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> >>>>>> 'successful' years.
> >>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> >>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
> >>>>>>> schedule
> >>>>>>> against his word.
> >>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
> >>>>>> two
> >>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> >>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
> >>>>>> variables in
> >>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> >>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
> >>>>>> almost
> >>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
> >>>>>http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
> >>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
> >>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
> >>>> career? Thanks.
> >>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
> >>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
> >>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>
> >> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
> >> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
> >> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
> >> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
> >> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
> >> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
> >> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
> >> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
> >> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
> >> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>
> > Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
> > it fits to the whole picture.
>
> > You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
> > decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
>
> > Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
> > will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
> > downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
> > which it beautifully has.
>
> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
>
> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
> now he is a new man?

The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 21:00:29
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 28, 10:33 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> TT wrote:
>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
>>>>>>>>>>> Godsick
>>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
>>>>>>>>>>> opposite.
>>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
>>>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
>>>>>>>>> back?
>>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
>>>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
>>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
>>>>>>>>> day basis
>>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
>>>>>>>>> or not...
>>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
>>>>>>>>> results as
>>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
>>>>>>>>> losses
>>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
>>>>>>>>> schedule
>>>>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
>>>>>>>> two
>>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
>>>>>>>> variables in
>>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
>>>>>>>> almost
>>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>>>>> career? Thanks.
>>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
>>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
>>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
>>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
>>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
>>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
>>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
>>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
>>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
>>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
>>> it fits to the whole picture.
>>> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
>>> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
>>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
>>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
>>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
>>> which it beautifully has.
>> Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
>> the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.
>>
>> Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
>> now he is a new man?
>
> The *medical* consensus is that the effects of mono can take months -
> in remote cases, even years - to overcome. Ancic is a great example of
> someone who suffered from it for an extended period of time. Beyond
> that, for a professional athlete, you have to worry not only about
> recovering from the mono and its effects on your body, but also then
> getting back into top physical condition, which can obviously take
> some time. Sheesh - go read some books, get an education, please.

You often have the need to add slight insults in the end of your posts.
Why is this...bad self esteem or subconscious way of admitting defeat?

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 28 Jan 2009 10:26:02
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 28, 10:22 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> >>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
> >>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> >>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
> >>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
> >>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
> >>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
> >>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
> >>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
> >>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> >>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
> >>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> >>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> >>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> >>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> >>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
> >>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
> >>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> >>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> >>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
> >>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> >>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
> >>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
> >>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> >>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
> >>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> >>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
> >>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
> >>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
> >>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> >>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> >>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> >>>>> 'successful' years.
> >>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> >>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
> >>>>>> against his word.
> >>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
> >>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> >>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
> >>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> >>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
> >>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
> >>>>http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
> >>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
> >>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
> >>> career? Thanks.
> >> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
> >> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
> >> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>
> > Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
> > (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
> > it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
> > very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
> > relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
> > 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
> > part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
> > should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
> > comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
> > obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>
> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
> it fits to the whole picture.

Quite the opposite - I'm looking at how the last 2 or so years fit
into the overall picture, whereas you're looking at how 2008 fits into
the picture of 2007.

> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
> which it beautifully has.

Great prediction, genius. I'm not sure you even understand why there
are the drastic up an down swings during the last year or so.


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 20:35:18
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 28, 10:22 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
>>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
>>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
>>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
>>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
>>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
>>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
>>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
>>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
>>>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
>>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
>>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
>>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>>>> career? Thanks.
>>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
>>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
>>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
>>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
>>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
>>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
>>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
>>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
>>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
>>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
>> it fits to the whole picture.
>
> Quite the opposite - I'm looking at how the last 2 or so years fit
> into the overall picture, whereas you're looking at how 2008 fits into
> the picture of 2007.

So you are saying that mono begun after 2007 AO?

>
>> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
>> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
>> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
>> which it beautifully has.
>
> Great prediction, genius. I'm not sure you even understand why there
> are the drastic up an down swings during the last year or so.

I understand everything.


--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 15:51:57
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> >>>>>> and Roger saying so.
> >>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> >>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
> >>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
> >>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
> >>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
> >>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
> >>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
> >>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> >>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
> >>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> >>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> >>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> >>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> >>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
> >>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
> >>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> >>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> >>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
> >>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> >>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
> >>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
> >>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> >>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
> >>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> >>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
> >>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
> >>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
> >>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> >>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> >>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> >>> 'successful' years.
> >>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> >>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
> >>>> against his word.
> >>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
> >>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> >>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
> >>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> >>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
> >>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
> >>http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>
> > What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
> > 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
> > career? Thanks.
>
> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
> about all your arguments in your previous post.

Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
(odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 20:22:17
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>> career? Thanks.
>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>
> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.

Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
it fits to the whole picture.

You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.

Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
which it beautifully has.


--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


   
Date: 28 Jan 2009 20:33:42
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
TT wrote:
> andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Jan 27, 2:18 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only
>>>>>>>>> Godsick
>>>>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves
>>>>>>>>> opposite.
>>>>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest
>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still
>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come
>>>>>>> back?
>>>>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>>>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>>>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>>>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>>>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>>>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not
>>>>>>> because of
>>>>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense.
>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to
>>>>>>> day basis
>>>>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back"
>>>>>>> or not...
>>>>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>>>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his
>>>>>>> results as
>>>>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or
>>>>>>> losses
>>>>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>>>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>>>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>>>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>>>>> 'successful' years.
>>>>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and
>>>>>>> schedule
>>>>>>> against his word.
>>>>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then
>>>>>> two
>>>>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>>>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of
>>>>>> variables in
>>>>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>>>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and
>>>>>> almost
>>>>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>>>>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>>>> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
>>>> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
>>>> career? Thanks.
>>> You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
>>> since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
>>> about all your arguments in your previous post.
>>
>> Actually, what the graph shows is that, after a mediocre start to 2007
>> (odd losses to Canas, Volandri, etc..), he leveled off and then picked
>> it up in the middle until just about the end, and that starting in
>> very late 2007 / very early 2008 he began dropping like a stone -
>> relative to his previous performance. If 2008 was a soft decline like
>> 2007 you could blame it on age, etc.. - and that no doubt is playing a
>> part - but 2008 looks as if he suddenly became 65. Moreover, you
>> should well know, rankings don't tell the whole story. And, again,
>> comparing his current movement to that of a year ago it's patently
>> obvious there was *something* physically detrimental going on.
>
> Your mistake is that you're looking at one year only and do not see how
> it fits to the whole picture.
>
> You should study similar graphs of other players and you'll see that a
> decline does not get any clearer and more evenly varied than this.
>
> Looking at the graph you can even predict that in early 2009 Federer
> will get a little bit more points until heading once again more steeply
> downwards. That is if his graph follows the symmetric up'n'down movement
> which it beautifully has.
>
>

Also note that Federer didn't have the claimed mono full year, only in
the beginning of the year...But his decline continues through whole of 2008.

Or is the current ff consensus that Federer's mono took whole 2008 and
now he is a new man?

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 12:23:07
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> >>>> and Roger saying so.
> >>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
> >>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
> >>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
> >> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
> >> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
> >> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>
> >> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
> >> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> >> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>
> > If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> > other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> > obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> > being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> > horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>
> >> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
> >> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> >> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> >> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
> >> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> >> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
> >> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>
> > Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> > obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>
> >> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> >> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
> >> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
> >> in middle and latter part of the year.
>
> > Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> > slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> > nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> > 'successful' years.
>
> >> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> >> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
> >> against his word.
>
> > Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
> > days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> > tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
> > tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> > did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
> > lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>
> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ

What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
career? Thanks.


  
Date: 28 Jan 2009 00:18:24
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 27, 11:49 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>>>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>>>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>>>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
>>>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
>>>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
>>>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>>>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
>>> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
>>> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
>>> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
>>> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>>>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
>>>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>>>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>>>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
>>>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>>>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
>>>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>>> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
>>> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>>>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>>>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
>>>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
>>>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>>> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
>>> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
>>> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
>>> 'successful' years.
>>>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>>>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
>>>> against his word.
>>> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
>>> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
>>> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
>>> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
>>> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
>>> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.
>> http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ
>
> What are you trying to show? That his ranking dropped considerably in
> 2008, in sharp contrast to the preceding...well...every year of his
> career? Thanks.

You must be blind or dishonest. Federer has been in very steady decline
since beginning of 2007, is what this image tells us. This also counters
about all your arguments in your previous post.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 27 Jan 2009 08:57:27
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> >> and Roger saying so.
>
> > And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>
> >> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>
> > Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>
> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>
> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.

If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.

> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...

Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).

> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
> in middle and latter part of the year.

Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
'successful' years.

> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
> against his word.

Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 21:49:09
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>
>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>
> If there's one person claiming it's gotten worse, and virtually every
> other analyst claiming it's improved - and to anyone it should be
> obvious that he's not having nearly the same problems this AO when
> being pulled out wide to the forehand, whereas last year he moved
> horribly to that shot - it's not much of a controversy.
>
>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>
> Again, his movement is clearly better. If it's not immediately
> obvious, get glasses (or better glasses, as the case may be).
>
>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>
> Riiight....his first 1-slam year in 3 years, first time not making
> slam final in over 2 years, losing no.1 ranking for the first time in
> nearly 5 years - these things are all clearly on par with his recent,
> 'successful' years.
>
>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
>> against his word.
>
> Hey: How can Federer barely get passed a top-20 opponent, and then two
> days later man-handle a top-10 opponent who's been playing the best
> tennis of his life? Wow! Look at that! There are a lot of variables in
> tennis! Maybe now you will understand why your idiotic query of "How
> did he beat Blake and Berdych so easily last year with mono and almost
> lose to Berdych this year hurr hurr I'm retarded" sounds.


http://www.postimage.org/image.php?v=aVBhffJ

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 22:18:20
From: Pedro Dias
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 7:18=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Pedro Dias wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 12:27 pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:24:38 +0200, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> >>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>> Any explanations?
> >> Yes. Berdych is one of the most inconsistent players in tennis
> >> history. He can play great, or he can play crap.
>
> > Yes. Also, the fact, often explained to, and ignored by, TT, that
> > mononucleosis is also very inconsistent. Symptoms vary widely from day
> > to day. While extremely unlikely, it is actually *possible* that
> > Federer was feeling worse yesterday than in the earlier match.
>
> > Not probable in the extreme, but that's how variable the symptoms can
> > be.
>
> lol!

Get a bib. You're drooling as you giggle again.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 18:29:36
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 6:12=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> >> and Roger saying so.
>
> > And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>
> >> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>
> > Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>
> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>
> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>
> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>
> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
> in middle and latter part of the year.
> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
> against his word.

++ Well... the ESPN crew (PMac, Killer Cahill, Brad Gilbert) have all
commented on how they think Federer is moving better than last year...
and basically won against Big Bird due to his defensive speed that
held him in until his hitting came back...

P


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 04:42:32
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> On Jan 26, 6:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>
>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>
>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>>
>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
>> against his word.
>
> ++ Well... the ESPN crew (PMac, Killer Cahill, Brad Gilbert) have all
> commented on how they think Federer is moving better than last year...
> and basically won against Big Bird due to his defensive speed that
> held him in until his hitting came back...
>
> P

Right...

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 18:21:55
From: RahimAsif
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 8:12=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> >> and Roger saying so.
>
> > And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>
> >> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>
> > Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>
> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>
> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>
> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>
> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
> in middle and latter part of the year.
> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
> against his word.

Your argument would have more weight if Fed had declared he had mono
after being humbled by Nadal at the FO, or losing his Wim title or
even the Olympics which he wanted to win so badly. But he declared it
after losing in the semis of the AO and dubai, the LEAST important of
the slams and a very tournament. Logic tells us he was speaking the
truth...


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 04:42:07
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
RahimAsif wrote:
> On Jan 26, 8:12 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>>>> and Roger saying so.
>>> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>>>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>>> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.
>> I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
>> year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
>> mono during Olympics and YEC.
>>
>> Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
>> Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
>> after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.
>>
>> My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
>> mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
>> because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
>> tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
>> theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
>> differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
>> evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...
>>
>> Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
>> estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
>> we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
>> in middle and latter part of the year.
>> However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
>> weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
>> against his word.
>
> Your argument would have more weight if Fed had declared he had mono
> after being humbled by Nadal at the FO, or losing his Wim title or
> even the Olympics which he wanted to win so badly. But he declared it
> after losing in the semis of the AO and dubai, the LEAST important of
> the slams and a very tournament. Logic tells us he was speaking the
> truth...

Or your logic can be turned against itself...Why would there be need to
announce this after the fact at all since those two tournaments were so
unimportant.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 17:45:40
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
> and Roger saying so.

And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?

> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.

Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 04:12:49
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 5:37 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
>> and Roger saying so.
>
> And who else would satisfy you if not the player who has it?
>
>> If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.
>
> Sure it does. Especially the way he played during the 2008 AO.

I disagree. I don't see him playing differently there than rest of the
year. Unless you're one of those loonies that think Federer still had
mono during Olympics and YEC.

Then there's this claimed movement issue. Has his movement come back?
Some say it has some it hasn't. Today even Finnish commentator said
after Nadal match that Federer's movement has gone worse.

My take on Federer's movement is that it definitely was not because of
mono since he's still a half step slower. It's because of age and
because of tougher competition resulting to less confidence and more
tension during matches. Hard to move fluently when you're tense. This
theory would also be supported by observations how he moves so
differently depending on which match he plays. You hear day to day basis
evaluations by his fanboys about whether his movement is "back" or not...

Actually I'm not certain whether he did or did not have it. But my
estimation is that if he did, it probably didn't change his results as
we can see from his ranking points progress during his career or losses
in middle and latter part of the year.
However I would be slightly tilted in favour of him not having it,
weighing all these unanswered questions and his performance and schedule
against his word.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 17:29:53
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 4:08 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.

Thank you for missing the point. C

> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
> diagnisis publicly etc...
>
> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.

Of course you are being silly. It's one thing to be skeptical about
his mono, it's another entirely to flatly deny it on no grounds. Silly
silly silly. None of your points even make sense. A high fever isn't
always associated with it (I never had one - but the right side of my
throat nearly closed up and you could feel my spleen); it's difficult
to diagnose any significant period of time prior to the initial
symptoms; why would an athlete need to share *private* medical records
with the curious public unless it was a case of proving non-violation
of drug rules, etc... This is beyond silly - it's ignorance and bad
thinking rolled into one awesome package.

As I said - I don't necessarily believe the mono, but what evidence
there is would seem to overwhelmingly support either mono or some sort
of physical issue over him being fine and healthy. This should be
obvious to any village idiot - so I'm not sure why you in particular
are bucking that trend.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 03:37:04
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 4:08 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>
> Thank you for missing the point. C
>
>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
>> diagnisis publicly etc...
>>
>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>
> Of course you are being silly. It's one thing to be skeptical about
> his mono, it's another entirely to flatly deny it on no grounds. Silly
> silly silly.

Copycat.

> None of your points even make sense. A high fever isn't
> always associated with it (I never had one - but the right side of my
> throat nearly closed up and you could feel my spleen); it's difficult
> to diagnose any significant period of time prior to the initial
> symptoms; why would an athlete need to share *private* medical records
> with the curious public unless it was a case of proving non-violation
> of drug rules, etc... This is beyond silly - it's ignorance and bad
> thinking rolled into one awesome package.
>
> As I said - I don't necessarily believe the mono, but what evidence
> there is would seem to overwhelmingly support either mono or some sort
> of physical issue over him being fine and healthy. This should be
> obvious to any village idiot - so I'm not sure why you in particular
> are bucking that trend.

You keep pointing to this evidence but where is it? It's only Godsick
and Roger saying so.

If you're referring to his play during 2008...it only proves opposite.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 17:10:19
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 27 jan, 02:05, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > On 27 jan, 01:36, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> kaennorsing wrote:
> >>> On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in =
straights -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an =
Olympic
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Sw=
itzerland"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse=
the other.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your funct=
ional
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stup=
id, and
> >>>>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
> >>>>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wrec=
k.
> >>>>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable ar=
gument
> >>>>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his result=
s in
> >>>>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
> >>>>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument tha=
t
> >>>>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is an=
d the
> >>>>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.=
*
> >>>>>> He was?
> >>>>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and=
he
> >>>>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
> >>>>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies.=
I
> >>>>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
> >>>>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in anoth=
er
> >>>>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 mont=
hs
> >>>>> after the initial illness.
> >>>>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks af=
ter
> >>>>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why G=
odsick
> >>>>>> =A0 =A0was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only p=
layed more
> >>>>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatmen=
t
> >>>>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when question=
ed
> >>>>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could=
beat
> >>>>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still contin=
ues
> >>>>>> losing? Why?
> >>>>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's fals=
e
> >>>>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
> >>>>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to giv=
e
> >>>>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active charac=
ter
> >>>>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies an=
y
> >>>>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover hi=
s
> >>>>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berd=
ych
> >>>>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
> >>>>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
> >>>>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
> >>>>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better a=
nd
> >>>>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mon=
o.
> >>>>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
> >>>>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
> >>>>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw =
you
> >>>>> out of his court room.
> >>>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
> >>>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...t=
hen
> >>>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
> >>>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
> >>>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being a=
ble
> >>>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share th=
e
> >>>> diagnisis publicly etc...
> >>>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered quest=
ions
> >>>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believ=
e
> >>>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
> >>> Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
> >>> athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly?
> >> So this is your only answer to numerous questions I asked...weak littl=
e
> >> reply from weak little fanboy thai kickboxer wannabe.
>
> > When did I claim to be a thai kickboxer or whatever? Being dishonest
> > again I see? Anyway my reply was obviously so sound you can't respond
> > to it directly, can you?
>
> I did you little bugger. :)
>
>
>
> >> I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT t=
o
> >> take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
> >> diagnosis going in public.
> >> Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
> >> attend an event.
>
> > Really? Ok then please provide some doctors reports of Nadal's injury
> > (whatever it was) for say skipping Shanghai last year.
>
> Silly little thai kickboxer wannabe thinks I'm an atp official
> obviously. Maybe he's been kicked too many times in the head?

Each of these responses validates my earlier assessment. Nothing more
to be said. Good buy and good luck finding those public medical
reports, dumb ass.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 03:12:49
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 02:05, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>> On 27 jan, 01:36, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>>>> On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>>>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>>>>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>>>>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>>>>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>>>>>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>>>>>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>>>>>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>>>>>>>> He was?
>>>>>>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>>>>>>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>>>>>>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
>>>>>>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
>>>>>>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
>>>>>>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
>>>>>>> after the initial illness.
>>>>>>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>>>>>>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>>>>>>>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>>>>>>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>>>>>>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>>>>>>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>>>>>>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>>>>>>>> losing? Why?
>>>>>>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
>>>>>>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
>>>>>>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
>>>>>>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
>>>>>>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
>>>>>>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
>>>>>>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
>>>>>>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>>>>>>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
>>>>>>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
>>>>>>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
>>>>>>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
>>>>>>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
>>>>>>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
>>>>>>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
>>>>>>> out of his court room.
>>>>>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>>>>>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
>>>>>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
>>>>>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
>>>>>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
>>>>>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
>>>>>> diagnisis publicly etc...
>>>>>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
>>>>>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
>>>>>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>>>>> Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
>>>>> athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly?
>>>> So this is your only answer to numerous questions I asked...weak little
>>>> reply from weak little fanboy thai kickboxer wannabe.
>>> When did I claim to be a thai kickboxer or whatever? Being dishonest
>>> again I see? Anyway my reply was obviously so sound you can't respond
>>> to it directly, can you?
>> I did you little bugger. :)
>>
>>
>>
>>>> I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT to
>>>> take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
>>>> diagnosis going in public.
>>>> Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
>>>> attend an event.
>>> Really? Ok then please provide some doctors reports of Nadal's injury
>>> (whatever it was) for say skipping Shanghai last year.
>> Silly little thai kickboxer wannabe thinks I'm an atp official
>> obviously. Maybe he's been kicked too many times in the head?
>
> Each of these responses validates my earlier assessment. Nothing more
> to be said. Good buy and good luck finding those public medical
> reports, dumb ass.

Probably kicked to the balls too, so much anger in our little tiny
weenie fanboy thai kickboxer wannabe.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 16:59:53
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 27 jan, 01:36, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in st=
raights -
> >>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Ol=
ympic
> >>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Swit=
zerland"
> >>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse t=
he other.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functio=
nal
> >>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid=
, and
> >>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
> >>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> >>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argu=
ment
> >>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results =
in
> >>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
> >>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> >>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and =
the
> >>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
> >>>> He was?
> >>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and h=
e
> >>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
> >>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
> >>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
> >>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
> >>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
> >>> after the initial illness.
> >>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks afte=
r
> >>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why God=
sick
> >>>> =A0 =A0was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only pla=
yed more
> >>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> >>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> >>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could b=
eat
> >>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continue=
s
> >>>> losing? Why?
> >>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
> >>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
> >>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
> >>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active characte=
r
> >>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
> >>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
> >>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdyc=
h
> >>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
> >>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
> >>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
> >>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
> >>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
> >>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
> >>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
> >>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw yo=
u
> >>> out of his court room.
> >> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>
> >> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...the=
n
> >> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
> >> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
> >> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being abl=
e
> >> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
> >> diagnisis publicly etc...
>
> >> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questio=
ns
> >> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
> >> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>
> > Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
> > athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly?
>
> So this is your only answer to numerous questions I asked...weak little
> reply from weak little fanboy thai kickboxer wannabe.

When did I claim to be a thai kickboxer or whatever? Being dishonest
again I see? Anyway my reply was obviously so sound you can't respond
to it directly, can you?

> I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT to
> take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
> diagnosis going in public.
> Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
> attend an event.

Really? Ok then please provide some doctors reports of Nadal's injury
(whatever it was) for say skipping Shanghai last year.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 03:05:16
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 01:36, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>> On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>>>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>>>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>>>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>>>>>> He was?
>>>>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>>>>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>>>>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
>>>>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
>>>>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
>>>>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
>>>>> after the initial illness.
>>>>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>>>>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>>>>>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>>>>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>>>>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>>>>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>>>>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>>>>>> losing? Why?
>>>>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
>>>>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
>>>>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
>>>>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
>>>>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
>>>>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
>>>>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
>>>>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>>>>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
>>>>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
>>>>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
>>>>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
>>>>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
>>>>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
>>>>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
>>>>> out of his court room.
>>>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>>>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
>>>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
>>>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
>>>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
>>>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
>>>> diagnisis publicly etc...
>>>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
>>>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
>>>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>>> Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
>>> athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly?
>> So this is your only answer to numerous questions I asked...weak little
>> reply from weak little fanboy thai kickboxer wannabe.
>
> When did I claim to be a thai kickboxer or whatever? Being dishonest
> again I see? Anyway my reply was obviously so sound you can't respond
> to it directly, can you?

I did you little bugger. :)

>
>> I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT to
>> take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
>> diagnosis going in public.
>> Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
>> attend an event.
>
> Really? Ok then please provide some doctors reports of Nadal's injury
> (whatever it was) for say skipping Shanghai last year.

Silly little thai kickboxer wannabe thinks I'm an atp official
obviously. Maybe he's been kicked too many times in the head?



--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 16:45:40
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 27 jan, 01:36, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:

> I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT to
> take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
> diagnosis going in public.
> Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
> attend an event

Are you really this dumb or just love fooling everyone?


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 02:57:00
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 01:36, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>> I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT to
>> take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
>> diagnosis going in public.
>> Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
>> attend an event
>
> Are you really this dumb or just love fooling everyone?

Little thai kickboxer wannabe has a knack for sidestepping questions he
doesn't like.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 16:42:18
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 27 jan, 01:29, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> kaennorsing wrote:
> > On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in st=
raights -
> >>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Ol=
ympic
> >>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Swit=
zerland"
> >>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse t=
he other.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functio=
nal
> >>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid=
, and
> >>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
> >>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> >>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argu=
ment
> >>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results =
in
> >>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
> >>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> >>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and =
the
> >>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
> >>>> He was?
> >>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and h=
e
> >>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
> >>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
> >>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
> >>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
> >>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
> >>> after the initial illness.
> >>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks afte=
r
> >>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why God=
sick
> >>>> =A0 =A0was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only pla=
yed more
> >>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> >>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> >>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could b=
eat
> >>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continue=
s
> >>>> losing? Why?
> >>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
> >>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
> >>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
> >>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active characte=
r
> >>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
> >>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
> >>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdyc=
h
> >>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
> >>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
> >>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
> >>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
> >>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
> >>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
> >>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
> >>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw yo=
u
> >>> out of his court room.
> >> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>
> >> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...the=
n
> >> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
> >> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
> >> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being abl=
e
> >> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
> >> diagnisis publicly etc...
>
> >> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questio=
ns
> >> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
> >> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>
> > Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
> > athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly? And what would be
> > the point in doing that, since the people who refuse to believe these
> > athletes on their word would still not believe it even if there was a
> > public record, since that could be manipulated as well, couldn't it
> > dumbass?
>
> > So with your response above you've simply validated my assessment of
> > your consistent dishonesty / biase, haven't you, you silly being?
>
> Little thai kickboxer is very angry for his hero. cry me a river. :)

You've been hit hard, counted out and officially lost by T.K.O. Right
now you're being lifted out of the ring on a stretcher, cross-eyes
staring at the ceiling mumbling "public report, public report, no
mono, no public report"

You'll wake up in the hospital in a couple days and start all over in
search of the public mono-report.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 02:59:05
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 01:29, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> kaennorsing wrote:
>>> On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>>>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>>>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>>>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>>>>>> He was?
>>>>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>>>>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>>>>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
>>>>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
>>>>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
>>>>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
>>>>> after the initial illness.
>>>>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>>>>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>>>>>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>>>>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>>>>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>>>>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>>>>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>>>>>> losing? Why?
>>>>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
>>>>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
>>>>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
>>>>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
>>>>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
>>>>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
>>>>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
>>>>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>>>>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
>>>>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
>>>>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
>>>>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
>>>>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
>>>>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
>>>>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
>>>>> out of his court room.
>>>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>>>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
>>>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
>>>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
>>>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
>>>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
>>>> diagnisis publicly etc...
>>>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
>>>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
>>>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>>> Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
>>> athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly? And what would be
>>> the point in doing that, since the people who refuse to believe these
>>> athletes on their word would still not believe it even if there was a
>>> public record, since that could be manipulated as well, couldn't it
>>> dumbass?
>>> So with your response above you've simply validated my assessment of
>>> your consistent dishonesty / biase, haven't you, you silly being?
>> Little thai kickboxer is very angry for his hero. cry me a river. :)
>
> You've been hit hard, counted out and officially lost by T.K.O. Right
> now you're being lifted out of the ring on a stretcher, cross-eyes
> staring at the ceiling mumbling "public report, public report, no
> mono, no public report"
>
> You'll wake up in the hospital in a couple days and start all over in
> search of the public mono-report.

And you heard this from a thai kickboxer wannabe lying in Burgumgrad
hospital.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 16:17:46
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in stra=
ights -
> >>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olym=
pic
> >>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switze=
rland"
> >>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the=
other.
> >>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functiona=
l
> >>>>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, =
and
> >>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>>>> read: stupidly.
> >>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> >>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argume=
nt
> >>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
> >>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
> >>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> >>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and th=
e
> >>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
> >> He was?
>
> >> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
> >> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>
> > That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
> > had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
> > speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
> > 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
> > after the initial illness.
>
> >> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
> >> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsi=
ck
> >> =A0 =A0was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only playe=
d more
> >> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> >> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> >> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could bea=
t
> >> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
> >> losing? Why?
>
> > Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
> > to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
> > light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
> > any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
> > I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
> > possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
> > fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
> > and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>
> > Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
> > However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
> > throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
> > better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
> > So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
> > evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
> > certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
> > out of his court room.
>
> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>
> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
> diagnisis publicly etc...
>
> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.

Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly? And what would be
the point in doing that, since the people who refuse to believe these
athletes on their word would still not believe it even if there was a
public record, since that could be manipulated as well, couldn't it
dumbass?

So with your response above you've simply validated my assessment of
your consistent dishonesty / biase, haven't you, you silly being?


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 02:36:37
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>>>> He was?
>>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
>>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
>>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
>>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
>>> after the initial illness.
>>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>>>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>>>> losing? Why?
>>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
>>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
>>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
>>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
>>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
>>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
>>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
>>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
>>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
>>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
>>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
>>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
>>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
>>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
>>> out of his court room.
>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>>
>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
>> diagnisis publicly etc...
>>
>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>
> Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
> athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly?

So this is your only answer to numerous questions I asked...weak little
reply from weak little fanboy thai kickboxer wannabe.

I'll answer that with another question...wouldn't it be suitable NOT to
take any tournaments off just because you can't afford doctor's
diagnosis going in public.
Surely players have to provide a doctor's diagnosis when they do not
attend an event.


--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 02:29:06
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 01:08, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>>>> He was?
>>>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>>>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>>> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
>>> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
>>> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
>>> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
>>> after the initial illness.
>>>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>>>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>>>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>>>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>>>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>>>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>>>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>>>> losing? Why?
>>> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
>>> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
>>> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
>>> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
>>> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
>>> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
>>> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
>>> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>>> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
>>> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
>>> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
>>> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
>>> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
>>> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
>>> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
>>> out of his court room.
>> Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.
>>
>> And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
>> the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
>> accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
>> Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
>> to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
>> diagnisis publicly etc...
>>
>> So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
>> and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
>> everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.
>
> Granted, you're not being silly here. You're silly, period. When did
> athletes ever publish their doctors record publicly? And what would be
> the point in doing that, since the people who refuse to believe these
> athletes on their word would still not believe it even if there was a
> public record, since that could be manipulated as well, couldn't it
> dumbass?
>
> So with your response above you've simply validated my assessment of
> your consistent dishonesty / biase, haven't you, you silly being?

Little thai kickboxer is very angry for his hero. cry me a river. :)

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:47:06
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 3:30 pm, kaennorsing <ljubit...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On 27 jan, 00:10, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> > >>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> > >>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> > >>>>>>>> --
> > >>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> > >>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
> > >>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> > >>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> > >>>>>>> retardation?
> > >>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> > >>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
> > >>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> > >>>> read: stupidly.
> > >>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> > >> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
> > >> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
> > >> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>
> > > What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> > > mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
> > > clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>
> > He was?
>
> > A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
> > felt weak couple weeks after that.
>
> > Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
> > the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
> > was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
> > than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> > would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> > about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
> > Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
> > losing? Why?
>
> Why...? Because you're an idiot.
>
> All these questions have obvious reasons and answers and they have
> been discussed plenty. You can look them up yourself or realise them
> by using your mind. Just don't expect others to give you answers
> because we know you're gonna dismiss them at best and ignore them if
> they can't be dismissed.
>
> Moron.

You're right - on more counts than just one. :-)


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:46:40
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> >>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> >>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
> >>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> >>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> >>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
> >>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>> read: stupidly.
> >>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> >> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
> >> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
> >> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>
> > What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> > mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
> > clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>
> He was?
>
> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
> felt weak couple weeks after that.

That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
after the initial illness.

> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
> losing? Why?

Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.

Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
out of his court room.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 02:08:54
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 3:10 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>> He was?
>>
>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>
> That's because, as with all illnesses, severity of symptoms varies. I
> had mono years ago, and it was an extremely light case, relatively
> speaking. I was extremely sick for 2 weeks but back to 95% in another
> 2 weeks. Then I had a friend who was still fighting symptoms 6 months
> after the initial illness.
>
>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>> losing? Why?
>
> Too many silly and in many cases unrelated questions, but it's false
> to claim that it was diagnosed after the AO. It was only brought to
> light after the AO - which makes sense, since you don't want to give
> any advantages away ahead of time. Why Godsick was an active character
> I don't know, but I also don't see why his involvement nullifies any
> possibility that Fed had it. Why did he keep playing? To recover his
> fitness, which he was obviously lacking. And how could he beat Berdych
> and Blake so easily? I shouldn't even have to answer this one.
>
> Ultimately, I don't know with 100% certainty that he had mono.
> However, nothing disproves it in the least, and in fact his form
> throughout last year - and the fact that it got noticeably better and
> better - at least supports the possibility that he may have had mono.
> So, in conclusion, you have zero evidence for your side, and some
> evidence that what Fed claimed is actually true. We can't be 100%
> certain without seeing blood tests, but any good judge would throw you
> out of his court room.

Any judge would want to see doctor's documents on it.

And even IF the doctor told us that yes indeed he diagnosed mono...then
the obvious question would be that was his diagnosis even remotely
accurate...did Federer ever have 2 weeks long high fever etc. Did
Federer sue his doctor or at least change his doctor for not being able
to diagnose this earlier? Why Federer didn't let the doctor share the
diagnisis publicly etc...

So you see I'm not just being silly, there are many unanswered questions
and events that just don't fit. But of course if one wants to believe
everything they hear from some managers that's their choice.



--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:39:08
From: Jason Catlin
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 6:10=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straig=
hts -
> >>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympi=
c
> >>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerl=
and"
> >>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the o=
ther.
> >>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> >>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, an=
d
> >>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>> read: stupidly.
> >>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> >> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
> >> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
> >> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>
> > What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> > mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
> > clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>
> He was?
>
> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>
> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
> =A0 =A0was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played m=
ore
> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
> losing? Why?

I have no idea whether Fed had mono or not.

But I think as far as why he "continues losing" that's down to 2
things:

1. the competition is tougher, imo
2. Fed doesn't care much anymore about tune-ups and even MS titles
(try to explain it away,
but I think it's a pretty huge coincidence that almost all of his best
results last year came at Slams).


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:30:31
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 27 jan, 00:10, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straig=
hts -
> >>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympi=
c
> >>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerl=
and"
> >>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the o=
ther.
> >>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> >>>>>>> retardation?
> >>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, an=
d
> >>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >>>> read: stupidly.
> >>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
> >> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
> >> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
> >> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>
> > What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> > mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
> > clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>
> He was?
>
> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>
> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
> =A0 =A0was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played m=
ore
> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
> losing? Why?

Why...? Because you're an idiot.

All these questions have obvious reasons and answers and they have
been discussed plenty. You can look them up yourself or realise them
by using your mind. Just don't expect others to give you answers
because we know you're gonna dismiss them at best and ignore them if
they can't be dismissed.

Moron.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 01:46:16
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
kaennorsing wrote:
> On 27 jan, 00:10, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>>>> read: stupidly.
>>>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>>>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>>>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>>>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>>> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
>>> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
>>> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*
>> He was?
>>
>> A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
>> felt weak couple weeks after that.
>>
>> Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
>> the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
>> was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
>> than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
>> would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
>> about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
>> Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
>> losing? Why?
>
> Why...? Because you're an idiot.
>
> All these questions have obvious reasons and answers and they have
> been discussed plenty. You can look them up yourself or realise them
> by using your mind. Just don't expect others to give you answers
> because we know you're gonna dismiss them at best and ignore them if
> they can't be dismissed.
>
> Moron.

hahah our little thai boxer is hurt. poor little thing...

But still he couldn't answer a single question, dumb little thing...

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 14:25:04
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> >>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>>>> Any explanations?
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> >>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
> >>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> >>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> >>>>> retardation?
> >>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
> >>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
> >>> chose to comment appropriately.
> >> read: stupidly.
>
> > As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>
> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.


What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 01:10:47
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 11:11 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>>>> retardation?
>>>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>>>> read: stupidly.
>>> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.
>> Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
>> that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
>> 2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.
>
>
> What are you talking about? And how reasonable is an argument that
> mono doesn't affect a pro athlete, in the face of what mono is and the
> clear fact that Federer was certainly sufferring from *something.*

He was?

A friend of mine had mono and he had fever for couple of weeks and he
felt weak couple weeks after that.

Did Federer have any fever? Why wasn't it diagnosed until weeks after
the fact? Why they felt it had to be told afterwards at all? Why Godsick
was an active character in this episode? Why Federer only played more
than usually straight after the disease when obvious best treatment
would be taking it easy? Why Godsick used the phrase when questioned
about this "He likes to play himself into form"? How Federer could beat
Berdych and Blake so easily? Why after the disease he still continues
losing? Why?

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 11:03:24
From:
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 12:24=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> Any explanations?
>
> --
> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"

fed never had mono. dont buy that.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:45:39
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> >>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
> >>>> Any explanations?
> >>>> --
> >>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> >>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
> >>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> >>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> >>> retardation?
> >> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>
> > Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
> > chose to comment appropriately.
>
> read: stupidly.

As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 21:11:30
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 10:27 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>>>> Any explanations?
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>>>> retardation?
>>>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
>>> chose to comment appropriately.
>> read: stupidly.
>
> As if we're going to accept your judgment after this train-wreck.

Well you didn't accept my statistically proved and reasonable argument
that whether or not Federer had mono it didn't affect his results in
2008. He should/might have had same losses anyway.

I'm referring here to that player ranking point progress chart I used to
submit here.

So whether I'm reasonable or not doesn't seem to make a difference, you
guys are still acting like morons.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:33:31
From: xamigax@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On 26 jan, 19:26, "Rodjk #613" <rjka...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, DNA <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 12:24=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > > Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> > > while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> > > Any explanations?
>
> > > --
> > > "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> > > singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> > hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
> > feel normal one day but completely down the other?
>
> > Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
> > play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
> > sets in the R16 match.
>
> > And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
> > about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
> > mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
> > announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
> > now?
>
> Federer's health and Berdych's play may be up and down, but at least
> TT is consistent.
>
> Rodjk #613

Yep, consistent mono-troll

Share & Enjoy,
Manolo


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 21:16:30
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
xamigax@gmail.com wrote:
> On 26 jan, 19:26, "Rodjk #613" <rjka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, DNA <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jan 26, 12:24 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>> Any explanations?
>>>> --
>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>> hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
>>> feel normal one day but completely down the other?
>>> Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
>>> play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
>>> sets in the R16 match.
>>> And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
>>> about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
>>> mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
>>> announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
>>> now?
>> Federer's health and Berdych's play may be up and down, but at least
>> TT is consistent.
>>
>> Rodjk #613
>
> Yep, consistent mono-troll
>
> Share & Enjoy,
> Manolo

I see monopologists as the true "mono-trolls" here. People that would be
saying that Federer still had mono at FO, Wimbledon, Olympics...and
whoknowswhen.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:32:18
From: Lax
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
I like your logic TT. You're clearly a genius.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 21:13:40
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Lax wrote:
> I like your logic TT. You're clearly a genius.

That information is between me and Mensa.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:26:10
From: Rodjk #613
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 11:29=A0am, DNA <susene...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 12:24=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
> > Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> > while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> > Any explanations?
>
> > --
> > "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> > singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
> feel normal one day but completely down the other?
>
> Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
> play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
> sets in the R16 match.
>
> And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
> about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
> mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
> announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
> now?

Federer's health and Berdych's play may be up and down, but at least
TT is consistent.

Rodjk #613


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:27:54
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Rodjk #613 wrote:
> On Jan 26, 11:29 am, DNA <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 12:24 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>> Any explanations?
>>> --
>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>> hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
>> feel normal one day but completely down the other?
>>
>> Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
>> play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
>> sets in the R16 match.
>>
>> And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
>> about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
>> mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
>> announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
>> now?
>
> Federer's health and Berdych's play may be up and down, but at least
> TT is consistent.
>
> Rodjk #613

Lol. Thank you...

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 10:24:41
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> >> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> >> Any explanations?
>
> >> --
> >> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> >> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> > Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> > Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> > retardation?
>
> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>

Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
chose to comment appropriately.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:27:07
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 9:32 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>> Any explanations?
>>>> --
>>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>>> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
>>> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
>>> retardation?
>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>
>
> Rattled? I was simply surprised that someone could be so stupid, and
> chose to comment appropriately.

read: stupidly.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:54:04
From:
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 12:32=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> andrew.r...@gmail.com wrote:

> > Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> > Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> > retardation?
>
> Why so rattled by a simple question?


It doesn't sound to me like he's rattled...just bored to tears like
everyone else by you ruminating about the mono.


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:33:17
From: Pedro Dias
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 12:27=A0pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:24:38 +0200, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
> >Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> >while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> >Any explanations?
>
> Yes. Berdych is one of the most inconsistent players in tennis
> history. He can play great, or he can play crap.

Yes. Also, the fact, often explained to, and ignored by, TT, that
mononucleosis is also very inconsistent. Symptoms vary widely from day
to day. While extremely unlikely, it is actually *possible* that
Federer was feeling worse yesterday than in the earlier match.

Not probable in the extreme, but that's how variable the symptoms can
be.


  
Date: 27 Jan 2009 11:18:15
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Pedro Dias wrote:
> On Jan 26, 12:27 pm, Sakari Lund <sakari.l...@welho.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:24:38 +0200, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>> Any explanations?
>> Yes. Berdych is one of the most inconsistent players in tennis
>> history. He can play great, or he can play crap.
>
> Yes. Also, the fact, often explained to, and ignored by, TT, that
> mononucleosis is also very inconsistent. Symptoms vary widely from day
> to day. While extremely unlikely, it is actually *possible* that
> Federer was feeling worse yesterday than in the earlier match.
>
> Not probable in the extreme, but that's how variable the symptoms can
> be.


lol!


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:29:42
From: DNA
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 12:24=A0pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> Any explanations?
>
> --
> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"

hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
feel normal one day but completely down the other?

Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
sets in the R16 match.

And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
now?


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 12:58:00
From: Trevor Smithson
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 09:29:42 -0800 (PST), DNA <susenets2@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>
>
>And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
>about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
>mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
>announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
>now?

LOL, well done.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 15:39:31
From: Javier Gonzalez
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
DNA <susenets2@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Jan 26, 12:24 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>
>> Any explanations?
>>
>> --
>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
> feel normal one day but completely down the other?
>
> Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
> play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
> sets in the R16 match.
>
> And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
> about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
> mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
> announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
> now?

I KNEW IT!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!

/dances insane caper of glee

Oops, my tinfoil hat has gone askew...


   
Date: 26 Jan 2009 21:19:10
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Javier Gonzalez wrote:
> DNA <susenets2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 26, 12:24 pm, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>>
>>> Any explanations?
>>>
>>> --
>>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>> hasn't it been discussed enough times on RST how mono can make you
>> feel normal one day but completely down the other?
>>
>> Is it possible that it has something to do with Berdych's level of
>> play these two days? He was playing great tennis for the first two
>> sets in the R16 match.
>>
>> And to make you feel better, all the Federer fans and Federer lied
>> about mononucleosis. In fact, there isn't anything called
>> mononucleosis. Fed's agent wrote the wiki page a few hrs before he
>> announced it. Ancic's agents had done some groundwork. There, happy
>> now?
>
> I KNEW IT!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!
>
> /dances insane caper of glee
>
> Oops, my tinfoil hat has gone askew...

Put it quickly on or I might get through with this no-mono theory.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 09:28:45
From: andrew.reys@gmail.com
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org > wrote:
> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
> Any explanations?
>
> --
> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"

Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
retardation?


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:32:02
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
andrew.reys@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jan 26, 9:24 am, TT <g...@Olympics.org> wrote:
>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>
>> Any explanations?
>>
>> --
>> "Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
>> singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"
>
> Gee, I dunno, maybe Berdych played better one day and worse the other.
> Don't you have better things to do than showcase your functional
> retardation?

Why so rattled by a simple question?

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


   
Date: 26 Jan 2009 18:53:31
From: Aimless
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...

"TT" <gold@Olympics.org > wrote in message
> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>

We're rattled by your redardation, not by your question.


    
Date: 26 Jan 2009 20:16:12
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Aimless wrote:
>
> "TT" <gold@Olympics.org> wrote in message
>> Why so rattled by a simple question?
>>
>
> We're rattled by your redardation, not by your question.

Learn to spell "retardation" before making such comments.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"


 
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:27:52
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:24:38 +0200, TT <gold@Olympics.org > wrote:

>Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>
>Any explanations?

Yes. Berdych is one of the most inconsistent players in tennis
history. He can play great, or he can play crap.


  
Date: 26 Jan 2009 19:30:25
From: TT
Subject: Re: One thing that confuses me with Federer's mononucleosis...
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:24:38 +0200, TT <gold@Olympics.org> wrote:
>
>> Federer beat Berdych during claimed height of his mono in straights -
>> while when healthy it took him 5 sets...
>>
>> Any explanations?
>
> Yes. Berdych is one of the most inconsistent players in tennis
> history. He can play great, or he can play crap.

Thanks. He must have been playing really crap at AO 2008 then, losing in
straights to a sick man.

--
"Now I have so many dreams to chase - the French Open, an Olympic
singles gold medal in London in 2012, the Davis Cup for Switzerland"