| |
Main
Date: 29 Oct 2006 01:08:30
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
"Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a
fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a
class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy
on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability,
what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every
tennis record out there."
In an telephone interview given in June 2006 to WTT.
http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=198826&src=0
Good Gawd, Pete! Have some self-respect!
The guy has 14 slams and he is a fanboy of Fed?
Not you run of the mill fanboy.
He's a Federer fanboy who thinks his darling Federer will bring "every
tennis record out there"!!!
Woot!!!
Can you get a bigger clown than this one?
;-)
|
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 07:32:39
From:
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
In article <1162112910.297602.23900@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >,
arnab.zaheen@gmail.com () wrote:
> "Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a
> fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a
> class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy
> on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability,
> what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every
> tennis record out there."
I liked Lendl's paean of praise during the US Open. Eurosport asked him
what message he'd send to Federer. "I'd say I think he's a pretty good
player." "That's it?" "He'll know what I mean."
It's not what you say; it's who you are when you say it.
wg
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 03:41:31
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> drew wrote:
> > Whisper wrote:
> >
> >>>Don't have to. We all witnessed the excellent 5-setter that Federer
> >>>won against Sampras. That said it all.
> >>
> >>
> >>How so?
> >
> >
> > It was a great match. You would be gushing about it now if Sampras had
> > won. He might have. It was a close match and a great one.
> >
> >
> >
> >>> Both players were playing
> >>>beautifully on grass, Sampras' favourite surface and it was close but
> >>>Federer prevailed.
> >>>
> >>>Now there will be clowns like Whisper who will say Sampras was very
> >>>very old at 28 or some such shit. Others will protest that Federer was
> >>>only 19 and not the great Federer we see today.
> >>>
> >>>Fact is that on that day both guys found their best tennis and the
> >>>unproven inexperienced guy won. That's proof enough for me.
> >>
> >>How is this fact? Links?
> >
> >
> > Are you trying to rewrite history again Whisp? You are constantly
> > posting Sampras newsreel. Why don't you dig out match point of the
> > ONLY match Sampras and Federer played. We don't need links because
> > those of us who are not bitter about the result remember it as a great
> > match and the result will be burned into our memories for a lifetime.
> > Two guys going at it in a classic 5-setter. Federer defeats Sampras.
> > The look of despair on Sampras' face is heartwrenching after
> > matchpoint. He gives 100% and loses to a better player.
> >
>
>
> Again you're not giving Henman enough respect if this is remotely true.
I don't think you're giving enough respect to Sampras's opinion.
Remember, Sampras said Federer is going to break "every tennis record
out there."
Sampras seems pretty sanguine that Fed is going to win 8 Wimbledons and
7 YEC #1s.
He already thinks Federer is the greater player and is going to be the
goat, and that it's a matter of when, not how.
Surely this is clearest demonstration from someone as important as an
all-time Slam record holder that indicates he knows who's the real
boss?
I mean Sampras not going emotional like the 2-time CYGS winner Laver,
who said he "would be honored to be compared with Roger", rather he's
stating a cold hard observation befitting of his calculated stature.
Sampras seemed to have crunched the numbers in his head, done the cold
hard math, and Federer has come out the clear winner.
That's pretty easy to grasp, really.
I don't know why you're being bothered about this?
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 03:16:17
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > Whisper wrote:
> >
> >>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>
> >>>Whisper wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>bojan wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>federer 9 slams 4 year span
> >>>>>sampras 14 slams 13 years
> >>>>>it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
> >>>>career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
> >>>>earlier.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Ok it's not quite 3rd grade material, may be 7th grade?
> >>>
> >>>You been skipping classes at school again?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>You're making a pretty big assumption here - ie the fact Fed is belting
> >>players who bear no resemblance to Sampras' game proves he'd beat
> >>Sampras....? er, ok. Care to explain?
> >>
> >>2nd thoughts don't bother - it's clear you lack the analytical abilities
> >>to mount a convincing argument....
> >
> >
> > Oh my..."assumption", "analytical abilities", "mount a convincing
> > argument"...biiiig words from a geeky mid-schooler.
> >
> > You sure you know what all those mean, Wittle Whithpy? Did your teacher
> > make you learn all those big difficult words for your junior SAT?
> >
> > Ok, enough. Everyone quiet. The math class is now in session for Wittly
> > Whithpy. Today he's going to learn about a fascinating new concept
> > called inequality.
> >
> > Let's start with a simple example. This is known by everyone. Don't
> > ever forget this one, or everyone will call you stupid during lunch
> > break and you will never a get a job when you grow up.
> >
> > Repeat after me: Peak Fed > Peak Sampras.
> >
> > See that ">" sign? It's called the "greater than".
> >
> > So what have we learned today?
> >
> > "Peak Fed is greater than Peak Sampras."
> >
> > Got it? Gooood boy. Here, take this Feder-bear beanie baby. Isn't that
> > cute, Whittle Whithpy? (Little Whispy nods, he seems to like it very
> > much)
> >
> > Why are you pointing at the window? What? No, no! There are no clowns
> > at the window. You've been sniffing those gluesticks again, haven't
> > you? Baad boy! You're going to be punished for this. Go up to the board
> > right now and write Peak Fed > Peak Sampras, a hundred times. Yes! You
> > heard me! Don't make me come over there and take away the beanie baby,
> > you little devil!
> >
> > Alright, everybody. Class is dismissed.
> >
>
>
> You must pull a lot of chicks.
Oh no! You're already losing your train of thought.
Repeat: Peak Federer > Peak Sampras.
:-)
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 03:06:23
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>
> >>You're not fooling anyone.
> >
> >
> > It seems that Federer has Sampras fooled though.
> >
> > I mean Fed has never admitted to being a Sampras fan or even about
> > emulating Sampras.
>
>
> Yes he has, & I can post a credible link.
>
> a little wager 1st to make it interesting? $100?
Er, you shouldn't be carrying that much money with you, Whittle
Whithpy. Here, give me that. Now go play with other kids.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 03:02:47
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > Whisper wrote:
> >
> >>bojan wrote:
> >>
> >>>federer 9 slams 4 year span
> >>>sampras 14 slams 13 years
> >>>it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
> >>career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
> >>earlier.
> >
> >
> > Ok it's not quite 3rd grade material, may be 7th grade?
> >
> > You been skipping classes at school again?
> >
>
>
> You're making a pretty big assumption here - ie the fact Fed is belting
> players who bear no resemblance to Sampras' game proves he'd beat
> Sampras....? er, ok. Care to explain?
>
> 2nd thoughts don't bother - it's clear you lack the analytical abilities
> to mount a convincing argument....
Oh my..."assumption", "analytical abilities", "mount a convincing
argument"...biiiig words from a geeky mid-schooler.
You sure you know what all those mean, Wittle Whithpy? Did your teacher
make you learn all those big difficult words for your junior SAT?
Ok, enough. Everyone quiet. The math class is now in session for Wittly
Whithpy. Today he's going to learn about a fascinating new concept
called inequality.
Let's start with a simple example. This is known by everyone. Don't
ever forget this one, or everyone will call you stupid during lunch
break and you will never a get a job when you grow up.
Repeat after me: Peak Fed > Peak Sampras.
See that " >" sign? It's called the "greater than".
So what have we learned today?
"Peak Fed is greater than Peak Sampras."
Got it? Gooood boy. Here, take this Feder-bear beanie baby. Isn't that
cute, Whittle Whithpy? (Little Whispy nods, he seems to like it very
much)
Why are you pointing at the window? What? No, no! There are no clowns
at the window. You've been sniffing those gluesticks again, haven't
you? Baad boy! You're going to be punished for this. Go up to the board
right now and write Peak Fed > Peak Sampras, a hundred times. Yes! You
heard me! Don't make me come over there and take away the beanie baby,
you little devil!
Alright, everybody. Class is dismissed.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 22:07:58
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>
>>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>
>>>Whisper wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>bojan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>federer 9 slams 4 year span
>>>>>sampras 14 slams 13 years
>>>>>it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
>>>>career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
>>>>earlier.
>>>
>>>
>>>Ok it's not quite 3rd grade material, may be 7th grade?
>>>
>>>You been skipping classes at school again?
>>>
>>
>>
>>You're making a pretty big assumption here - ie the fact Fed is belting
>>players who bear no resemblance to Sampras' game proves he'd beat
>>Sampras....? er, ok. Care to explain?
>>
>>2nd thoughts don't bother - it's clear you lack the analytical abilities
>>to mount a convincing argument....
>
>
> Oh my..."assumption", "analytical abilities", "mount a convincing
> argument"...biiiig words from a geeky mid-schooler.
>
> You sure you know what all those mean, Wittle Whithpy? Did your teacher
> make you learn all those big difficult words for your junior SAT?
>
> Ok, enough. Everyone quiet. The math class is now in session for Wittly
> Whithpy. Today he's going to learn about a fascinating new concept
> called inequality.
>
> Let's start with a simple example. This is known by everyone. Don't
> ever forget this one, or everyone will call you stupid during lunch
> break and you will never a get a job when you grow up.
>
> Repeat after me: Peak Fed > Peak Sampras.
>
> See that ">" sign? It's called the "greater than".
>
> So what have we learned today?
>
> "Peak Fed is greater than Peak Sampras."
>
> Got it? Gooood boy. Here, take this Feder-bear beanie baby. Isn't that
> cute, Whittle Whithpy? (Little Whispy nods, he seems to like it very
> much)
>
> Why are you pointing at the window? What? No, no! There are no clowns
> at the window. You've been sniffing those gluesticks again, haven't
> you? Baad boy! You're going to be punished for this. Go up to the board
> right now and write Peak Fed > Peak Sampras, a hundred times. Yes! You
> heard me! Don't make me come over there and take away the beanie baby,
> you little devil!
>
> Alright, everybody. Class is dismissed.
>
You must pull a lot of chicks.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 03:02:12
From: drew
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >
> > I mean Fed has never admitted to being a Sampras fan or even about
> > emulating Sampras.
>
>
> Yes he has, & I can post a credible link.
>
> a little wager 1st to make it interesting? $100?
If you have some spare plywood you could build another shack and wager
that.
I'm sure Federer has said some nice things about Sampras somewhere.
The guy is a gentleman. He's probably said it more than once.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 02:56:32
From: drew
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> >
> > Don't have to. We all witnessed the excellent 5-setter that Federer
> > won against Sampras. That said it all.
>
>
> How so?
It was a great match. You would be gushing about it now if Sampras had
won. He might have. It was a close match and a great one.
>
> > Both players were playing
> > beautifully on grass, Sampras' favourite surface and it was close but
> > Federer prevailed.
> >
> > Now there will be clowns like Whisper who will say Sampras was very
> > very old at 28 or some such shit. Others will protest that Federer was
> > only 19 and not the great Federer we see today.
> >
> > Fact is that on that day both guys found their best tennis and the
> > unproven inexperienced guy won. That's proof enough for me.
>
> How is this fact? Links?
Are you trying to rewrite history again Whisp? You are constantly
posting Sampras newsreel. Why don't you dig out match point of the
ONLY match Sampras and Federer played. We don't need links because
those of us who are not bitter about the result remember it as a great
match and the result will be burned into our memories for a lifetime.
Two guys going at it in a classic 5-setter. Federer defeats Sampras.
The look of despair on Sampras' face is heartwrenching after
matchpoint. He gives 100% and loses to a better player.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 22:05:34
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
drew wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>
>>>Don't have to. We all witnessed the excellent 5-setter that Federer
>>>won against Sampras. That said it all.
>>
>>
>>How so?
>
>
> It was a great match. You would be gushing about it now if Sampras had
> won. He might have. It was a close match and a great one.
>
>
>
>>> Both players were playing
>>>beautifully on grass, Sampras' favourite surface and it was close but
>>>Federer prevailed.
>>>
>>>Now there will be clowns like Whisper who will say Sampras was very
>>>very old at 28 or some such shit. Others will protest that Federer was
>>>only 19 and not the great Federer we see today.
>>>
>>>Fact is that on that day both guys found their best tennis and the
>>>unproven inexperienced guy won. That's proof enough for me.
>>
>>How is this fact? Links?
>
>
> Are you trying to rewrite history again Whisp? You are constantly
> posting Sampras newsreel. Why don't you dig out match point of the
> ONLY match Sampras and Federer played. We don't need links because
> those of us who are not bitter about the result remember it as a great
> match and the result will be burned into our memories for a lifetime.
> Two guys going at it in a classic 5-setter. Federer defeats Sampras.
> The look of despair on Sampras' face is heartwrenching after
> matchpoint. He gives 100% and loses to a better player.
>
Again you're not giving Henman enough respect if this is remotely true.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 02:39:28
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > Whisper wrote:
> >
> >>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>
> >>>"Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a
> >>>fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a
> >>>class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy
> >>>on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability,
> >>>what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every
> >>>tennis record out there."
> >>>
> >>>In an telephone interview given in June 2006 to WTT.
> >>>
> >>>http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=198826&src=0
> >>>
> >>>Good Gawd, Pete! Have some self-respect!
> >>>
> >>>The guy has 14 slams and he is a fanboy of Fed?
> >>>
> >>>Not you run of the mill fanboy.
> >>>
> >>>He's a Federer fanboy who thinks his darling Federer will bring "every
> >>>tennis record out there"!!!
> >>>
> >>>Woot!!!
> >>>
> >>>Can you get a bigger clown than this one?
> >>>
> >>>;-)
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
> >>
> >>; )
> >
> >
> > But that would be too much roll-over-clownish for even a mega-fanboy
> > (as evidenced by the comment above) such as Pete, don't you think?
> >
> > I mean Sampras probably *knows* more than anyone that at his peak, he's
> > probably going to get beaten by Peak Fed anyway (he admits he would
> > give Fed a hell of a match though), and that's exactly why he's not
> > bringing it up.
> >
> > Who with a sane mind would admit being humiliated in an imaginary
> > matchup, even if there's 90% certainty that that's exactly what's going
> > to happen?
>
>
> How did you arrive at this 90% assessment? Fed suddenly morphs into a
> great volleyer...?
>
>
In the other thread, how did you arrive at the exact number of sets and
games they will have had they met at their peaks?
Sampras suddenly morphs into something he never was, is or ever will
be....?
>
> >
> > That's an open invitation for Wilander to trumpet that "Sampras has no
> > balls against even imaginary Fed, let alone a real one".
> >
> > Sampras surely knows better than that?
> >
>
>
> You're not fooling anyone.
It seems that Federer has Sampras fooled though.
I mean Fed has never admitted to being a Sampras fan or even about
emulating Sampras. He has always strongly stated he does his own thing,
always.
OTOH, Sampras has already admitted of being a Fed fan.
Ergo, Sampras has lost the mental battle already.
Join the dots....
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 21:51:08
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>
>>You're not fooling anyone.
>
>
> It seems that Federer has Sampras fooled though.
>
> I mean Fed has never admitted to being a Sampras fan or even about
> emulating Sampras.
Yes he has, & I can post a credible link.
a little wager 1st to make it interesting? $100?
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 02:34:11
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> drew wrote:
> > Whisper wrote:
> >
> >>Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
> >
> >
> > Don't have to. We all witnessed the excellent 5-setter that Federer
> > won against Sampras. That said it all.
>
>
> How so? Sampras nearly lost to Cowan rd before & was losing in every
> tournament for 2 yrs. Are you trolling or unaware of tennis history...?
>
> If you're unaware you should refrain from mouthing off until you do some
> research... - Google is your friend.
>
> > Both players were playing
> > beautifully on grass, Sampras' favourite surface and it was close but
> > Federer prevailed.
> >
> > Now there will be clowns like Whisper who will say Sampras was very
> > very old at 28 or some such shit. Others will protest that Federer was
> > only 19 and not the great Federer we see today.
> >
> > Fact is that on that day both guys found their best tennis and the
> > unproven inexperienced guy won. That's proof enough for me.
> >
>
>
>
> How is this fact? Links?
Have you already forgotten the link to the clip of the Federer-Sampras
match?
Sheesh, talk about ADD. It gets worse with age, doesn't it?
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 02:18:00
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> bojan wrote:
> > federer 9 slams 4 year span
> > sampras 14 slams 13 years
> > it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
> >
> >
>
>
> Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
> career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
> earlier.
Ok it's not quite 3rd grade material, may be 7th grade?
You been skipping classes at school again?
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 21:37:13
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>
>>bojan wrote:
>>
>>>federer 9 slams 4 year span
>>>sampras 14 slams 13 years
>>>it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
>>career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
>>earlier.
>
>
> Ok it's not quite 3rd grade material, may be 7th grade?
>
> You been skipping classes at school again?
>
You're making a pretty big assumption here - ie the fact Fed is belting
players who bear no resemblance to Sampras' game proves he'd beat
Sampras....? er, ok. Care to explain?
2nd thoughts don't bother - it's clear you lack the analytical abilities
to mount a convincing argument....
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 11:42:31
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
On Sun, 29 2006 21:37:13 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:
>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>> Whisper wrote:
>>
>>>bojan wrote:
>>>
>>>>federer 9 slams 4 year span
>>>>sampras 14 slams 13 years
>>>>it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
>>>career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
>>>earlier.
>>
>>
>> Ok it's not quite 3rd grade material, may be 7th grade?
>>
>> You been skipping classes at school again?
>>
>
>
>You're making a pretty big assumption here - ie the fact Fed is belting
>players who bear no resemblance to Sampras' game proves he'd beat
>Sampras....? er, ok. Care to explain?
er....he DID beat Sampras whatdaya mean proves he'd beat Sampras !
Federer 1 Sampras 0 !!!! Remember !
>
>2nd thoughts don't bother - it's clear you lack the analytical abilities
>to mount a convincing argument....
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 02:15:01
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > "Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a
> > fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a
> > class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy
> > on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability,
> > what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every
> > tennis record out there."
> >
> > In an telephone interview given in June 2006 to WTT.
> >
> > http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=198826&src=0
> >
> > Good Gawd, Pete! Have some self-respect!
> >
> > The guy has 14 slams and he is a fanboy of Fed?
> >
> > Not you run of the mill fanboy.
> >
> > He's a Federer fanboy who thinks his darling Federer will bring "every
> > tennis record out there"!!!
> >
> > Woot!!!
> >
> > Can you get a bigger clown than this one?
> >
> > ;-)
> >
>
>
> Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
>
> ; )
But that would be too much roll-over-clownish for even a mega-fanboy
(as evidenced by the comment above) such as Pete, don't you think?
I mean Sampras probably *knows* more than anyone that at his peak, he's
probably going to get beaten by Peak Fed anyway (he admits he would
give Fed a hell of a match though), and that's exactly why he's not
bringing it up.
Who with a sane mind would admit being humiliated in an imaginary
matchup, even if there's 90% certainty that that's exactly what's going
to happen?
That's an open invitation for Wilander to trumpet that "Sampras has no
balls against even imaginary Fed, let alone a real one".
Sampras surely knows better than that?
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 21:31:30
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>
>>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>
>>>"Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a
>>>fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a
>>>class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy
>>>on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability,
>>>what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every
>>>tennis record out there."
>>>
>>>In an telephone interview given in June 2006 to WTT.
>>>
>>>http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=198826&src=0
>>>
>>>Good Gawd, Pete! Have some self-respect!
>>>
>>>The guy has 14 slams and he is a fanboy of Fed?
>>>
>>>Not you run of the mill fanboy.
>>>
>>>He's a Federer fanboy who thinks his darling Federer will bring "every
>>>tennis record out there"!!!
>>>
>>>Woot!!!
>>>
>>>Can you get a bigger clown than this one?
>>>
>>>;-)
>>>
>>
>>
>>Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
>>
>>; )
>
>
> But that would be too much roll-over-clownish for even a mega-fanboy
> (as evidenced by the comment above) such as Pete, don't you think?
>
> I mean Sampras probably *knows* more than anyone that at his peak, he's
> probably going to get beaten by Peak Fed anyway (he admits he would
> give Fed a hell of a match though), and that's exactly why he's not
> bringing it up.
>
> Who with a sane mind would admit being humiliated in an imaginary
> matchup, even if there's 90% certainty that that's exactly what's going
> to happen?
How did you arrive at this 90% assessment? Fed suddenly morphs into a
great volleyer...?
>
> That's an open invitation for Wilander to trumpet that "Sampras has no
> balls against even imaginary Fed, let alone a real one".
>
> Sampras surely knows better than that?
>
You're not fooling anyone.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 02:07:53
From: drew
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
Don't have to. We all witnessed the excellent 5-setter that Federer
won against Sampras. That said it all. Both players were playing
beautifully on grass, Sampras' favourite surface and it was close but
Federer prevailed.
Now there will be clowns like Whisper who will say Sampras was very
very old at 28 or some such shit. Others will protest that Federer was
only 19 and not the great Federer we see today.
Fact is that on that day both guys found their best tennis and the
unproven inexperienced guy won. That's proof enough for me.
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 21:16:39
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
drew wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>
>>Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
>
>
> Don't have to. We all witnessed the excellent 5-setter that Federer
> won against Sampras. That said it all.
How so? Sampras nearly lost to Cowan rd before & was losing in every
tournament for 2 yrs. Are you trolling or unaware of tennis history...?
If you're unaware you should refrain from mouthing off until you do some
research... - Google is your friend.
> Both players were playing
> beautifully on grass, Sampras' favourite surface and it was close but
> Federer prevailed.
>
> Now there will be clowns like Whisper who will say Sampras was very
> very old at 28 or some such shit. Others will protest that Federer was
> only 19 and not the great Federer we see today.
>
> Fact is that on that day both guys found their best tennis and the
> unproven inexperienced guy won. That's proof enough for me.
>
How is this fact? Links?
|
| | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 12:05:23
From: chrisf
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
Whisper wrote:
> How so? Sampras nearly lost to Cowan rd before & was losing in every
> tournament for 2 yrs. Are you trolling or unaware of tennis history...?
Are you unaware of tennis history or just bad at math? Sampras won
Wimbledon 1 year before.
|
| | | | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 12:07:24
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
On Sun, 29 2006 12:05:23 GMT, chrisf <user@mail.com > wrote:
>Whisper wrote:
>
>> How so? Sampras nearly lost to Cowan rd before & was losing in every
>> tournament for 2 yrs. Are you trolling or unaware of tennis history...?
>
>Are you unaware of tennis history or just bad at math? Sampras won
>Wimbledon 1 year before.
and he won the USO after.
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 20:35:38
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> "Well, I think when I look at Roger, I mean, I'm a fan. I mean, I'm a
> fan of how he plays, what he's about, just the fact that I think he's a
> class -- I don't know him personally, but seems like he's a class guy
> on and off the court. He's fun to watch. Just his athletic ability,
> what he's able to do on the run. I think he can and will break every
> tennis record out there."
>
> In an telephone interview given in June 2006 to WTT.
>
> http://www.noticias.info/asp/aspComunicados.asp?nid=198826&src=0
>
> Good Gawd, Pete! Have some self-respect!
>
> The guy has 14 slams and he is a fanboy of Fed?
>
> Not you run of the mill fanboy.
>
> He's a Federer fanboy who thinks his darling Federer will bring "every
> tennis record out there"!!!
>
> Woot!!!
>
> Can you get a bigger clown than this one?
>
> ;-)
>
Why don't you ask Pete if he thinks Fed would beat him at peak?
; )
|
| |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 10:22:32
From: bojan
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
federer 9 slams 4 year span
sampras 14 slams 13 years
it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
|
| | |
Date: 29 Oct 2006 20:47:59
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Pete Sampras is suffering from a morbid case of ceibs
|
bojan wrote:
> federer 9 slams 4 year span
> sampras 14 slams 13 years
> it takes 3rd or 4th grade kid to make conclusion .
>
>
Not quite that simplistic - eg Sampras maintained slam level for whole
career - Fed wasn't at that level as young as Sampras, & may also fade
earlier.
|
|
