tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19
From: Whisper
Subject: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat

Highlights 1984 USO final;


http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0







 
Date: 29 Dec 2008 09:24:42
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 28, 4:06=A0pm, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay > wrote:
> "TT" <g...@Olympics.org> wrote in message
>
> news:KbT5l.110670$_03.48696@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Whisper wrote:
> >> TT wrote:
> >>> Whisper wrote:
> >>>> TT wrote:
> >>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
> >>>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper
> >>>>>> <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> >>>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
>
> >>>>>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have though=
t
> >>>>>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>
> >>>>>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread.=
..
>
> >>>>> Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in thes=
e
> >>>>> highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
> >>>>> talent is much more than being able to volley.
>
> >>>>> Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick
> >>>>> points no baseline rallies.
>
> >>>> Not really true. =A0I don't like watching inefficient tennis, so if =
there
> >>>> is no real opportunity to come to net then a long rally is fine. =A0=
It's
> >>>> the cowardice aspect I hate - if Fed hits a big fh eliciting a kind =
of
> >>>> floating return he really should be in for the kill, not setting up
> >>>> another big fh, which is his standard play. =A0Essentially his minds=
et is
> >>>> keep hitting big until the other guy misses or he can hit a winner, =
&
> >>>> ignoring chances to finish point earlier.
>
> >>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
> >>>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never wo=
n
> >>>>> FO.
>
> >>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>
> >>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
> >>> described as a fluke.
> >>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>
> >> Lendl has 3 FO
>
> > Well I got McEnroe right at least...
>
> Also didn't McEnroe lose that final because he choked, he should have won
> it.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

++ Could-a, should-a, would-a...

P



 
Date: 28 Dec 2008 12:21:44
From: Rodjk #613
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 2:25=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> >> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> >>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all t=
hings
> >>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course=
...
> >>>>>>>> P
> >>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to M=
ac's
> >>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver=
I'll listen.
> >>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> >>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> >>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last to=
o
> >>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> >>>>>> P
> >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Ho=
ad
> >>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> >>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac sayi=
ng
> >>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying =
it
> >>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> >>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> >>>> P
> >>> You must be on drugs.
> >>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> >>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> >>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talente=
d'
> >>> within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to suggest =
most
> >>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-ha=
nd
> >>> remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if y=
ou
> >>> look hard enough.
> >>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> >>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> >>> - Show quoted text -
> >> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> >> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> >> messenger, lol
>
> >> P
>
> > Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> > about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> > Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> > years.
>
> Complete bullshit. =A0I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> especially about tennis. =A0The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> than other greats at peak.
>
> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> about it.
>
>
>
> > Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
> > being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
> > shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
> > eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
>
> Oh fuck you must be joking!
>
> > And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
> > threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
> > endure these days.
>
> You fucking miserable cunt.

About as intelligent a comment as you will get from whispy.

>
> > Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
> > during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
> > there right now?
>
> Lendl would eat most of today's players alive & Mac made him look like a
> newbie who couldn't even hold the racket properly.

Yeah, with his losing record against Lendl...

Rodjk #613


 
Date: 28 Dec 2008 12:18:31
From: Rodjk #613
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 6:17=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 5:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>> On Dec 26, 2:29 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>> For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
> >>>>> 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch an=
d
> >>>>> talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg a=
nd
> >>>>> the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players=
,
> >>>>> it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkwa=
rd,
> >>>>> he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
> >>>>> terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.
> >>>> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. =A0How come=
you
> >>>> don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?
> >>> Because Edberg was a newbie junior at the time. Doesn't count.
> >> er, he won a slam the very next year whereas Mac was 5 yrs from his la=
st
> >> slam win in your example.
>
> > So? My original post was not about the scoreline of some Mac-Edberg
> > match. It was about something else, i.e, Mac and Edberg's style of
> > play and how that compares with todays's era. Don't change the topic.
>
> You're suggesting today's style is somehow superior which is wrong. =A0Yo=
u
> probably don't even realize Mac was just about the only s/v'er around
> when he challenged & dethroned Borg (Jimbo was a baseliner). =A0It's not
> like you paint it ie everyone was s/v'ing.
>

I have read your postings for a while, with the thought that you are a
troll...
There was also the sneaking suspicion that you really don't know much
about tennis.

If you want to go on saying that Mac was just about the only S/V
player around in the late 70s and early 80s, you are confirming that
you are not just a troll but clueless about tennis.

>
>
> >>> And why
> >>> didn't Mac win anything after 1984. If he were talent goat, he should
> >>> have won at least one slam based on just his talent, right?
> >> Why didn't Wilander win any more slams after winning 3 in 1988 at age =
23?
>
> > Who claimed Wilander that talent goat?
>
> Not the point. =A0Mac clearly slumped post '84.

So why bring up Wilander?

>
>
>
> >> Mac is a better volleyer today at age 50 than Fed right now. =A0Sampra=
s is
> >> still a far superior server & volleyer than Federer today 6 yrs post
> >> retirement. =A0That shouldn't be the case if Fed is goat - he should a=
t
> >> least be better than those guys today.
>
> > Talent is not just about volleying. It's about the complete package.
> > Federer is better than Sampras or McEnroe in that regard.
>
> It's clear Sampras could cause damage from the baseline as well as serve
> & net - where is this overall superior package beloging to Fed?
>
> >> I didn't include Lendl's winners in that clip, but many looked better
> >> than Fed's today yet Mac still trounced him 63 64 61. =A0Lendl hit man=
y
> >> amazing passing shots that left Mac floundering, but the % are with th=
e
> >> better s/v'er as he has more options.
>
> > Nonsense. How come Stepanek is trounced left and right by top players
> > today? He comes to the net almost all the time and after a certain
> > level it just doesn't work. That's why his ranking is stuck in the
> > 20s.
>
> It's because he's not that good a player. =A0You can't become a player
> just by coming to the net - have to hit the right shots with a purpose
> not just blindly move in on anything.
>
>
>
> >>>> =A0Federer also sets up
> >>>> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.
> >>> Federer aces much more, and has far better skills from the baseline.
> >> v Blake/ljubo types I agree. =A0v say Rafa he looks pretty ordinary I =
must
> >> say.
>
> > Not really. Rafa only edges Federer on clay, where it's more about
> > endurance than talented shotmaking.
>
> Only edges him on clay? =A0It's 10-1 to Rafa, & the only match he lost he
> was up 6-2 before fading physically/mentally after long clay season. =A0I=
f
> Fed had 10-1 record v Rafa on HC would that be a narrow edge too?

Good job missing the point...

>
>
>
> >>> He's got the 1-2 punch basline game down like he's knifing through
> >>> butter.
> >> Yes, v Blake.
>
> > And vs. every other player on the tour, including Rafa, Djokovic,
> > Murray, etc.
>
> Sure, & those guys don't have Sampras' guns.
>
>
>
> >>> He serves up a good serve, waits for the open court and
> >>> executes a laser-precision winner from the baseline. Only an insanely
> >>> fast baseliner like Rafa has the hope to thwart that tactic. The kind
> >>> of baseliner like Rafa didn't exist back then. Edberg and Mac are lik=
e
> >>> sea-turtles compared to Rafa. But comparing eras is futile. It doesn'=
t
> >>> prove anything.
> >> Yet you compared them anyway....?
>
> > I didn't. You did. You claimed Mac to be talent goat, where my point
> > is making such a claim is silly. Every era has its supreme talent.
> > It's futile to claim somebody as the most talented of all time.
>
> I think the obvious talents stand out easily - Mac & Henin produced more
> 'wow' shots than any other players I can think of.

Except maybe Federer.

>
> When Fed plays I don't sit there mesmerized by a barrage of 'how did he
> do that?' shots - I wish that were the case. =A0He produces maybe 1 per
> set on average, whereas with Mac you know it could come at any point
> from anywhere in the court.

You are clueless and a troll. What you sit there doing is of no
consequence to tennis.

>
>
>
>
>
> >>>>> And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got th=
at
> >>>>> jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
> >>>>> Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arm=
s
> >>>>> flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
> >>>>> motions...
> >>>>> One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era=
.
> >>>>> It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and w=
ay
> >>>>> beyond that.
> >>>> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums. =A0
> >>> Slam attendance has set records in recent years. Lendl even said he
> >>> would watch Federer practice. Federer attracts more fans during his
> >>> practice sessions than some of the matches in the past.
> >> I'd watch Fed practice too - he's a great talent. =A0Just not so good =
at
> >> net & not good reflex ability.
>
> > He is pretty good at the net and has great reflexes. You are thinking
> > about somebody else.
>
> He has a palpable fear & lack of confidence at net - even when he hits a
> volley winner you can see the strain. =A0He needs to relax more & trust
> his instincts.
>
>
>
> >>>> Today no one gives
> >>>> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches. =A0
> >>> Complete bs. Exactly what are you trying to prove here? You think 20
> >>> years from now some newbie will look up rst and find your lies and
> >>> take them to be true?
> >> I have nothing against Fed & speak the truth. =A0Your problem is compa=
ring
> >> him to current field rather than history.
>
> > That made no sense.
>
> You think because he dominates current era he'd do likewise with any
> past players - big, big mistake.

You think that because a player dominated a past era he'd do likewise
in the current era - big, big mistake.

>
>
>
> >>>> Fans want to see pure tennis skill
> >>>> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?-
> >>> Because players are more athletic and they can defend more, so there
> >>> are more rallies than before. Pro tennis has changed.
> >> Rallies without net play are like wanking without ejaculating.- Hide q=
uoted text -
>
> > Players do come into net fairly regularly these days. Unfortunately
> > they get passed a lot, which lowers the incentive.
>
> McEnroe came to net 150 times v Jimbo at USO & only won about 50% of
> those points - he didn't quit. =A0It makes for a far more exciting tennis
> spectacle than 2 guys bashing from behind baseline.

To you. Not to mention, the guys out there are trying to win.
S/V is, at this point in time, not a good strategy.

>
>
>
> > All you have proven in this conversation that you do not watch tennis
> > regularly anymore. Today's tennis is not less exciting than the
> > previous eras, yet you continue to press on that talking point. You
> > are a bitter old fool.
>
> It's tough watching tune-up matches today - the points are so
> 1-dimensional it's easy to nod off. When Mac played it was even fun
> watching him play no.120 in 1st rds - his skill was amazing & it didn't
> matter who he played.
>
> I'll watch big slam matches today - & Wimbledon final was a beauty - but
> a lot of crap in those too.

You are looking at a few great matches in the past.
Rose-colored glasses...

Rodjk #613


 
Date: 28 Dec 2008 12:03:17
From: Rodjk #613
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 9:12=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> >>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all thin=
gs
> >>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> >>>>> P
> >>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac'=
s
> >>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'=
ll listen.
> >>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> >>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> >>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> >>> long... you'll be OK...
> >>> P
> >> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> >> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
> > it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
> > repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>
> > P
>
> You must be on drugs.
>
> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>
> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
> within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to suggest most
> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
> remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> look hard enough.
>
> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.

Yeah, back in his day (early 80's) Mac was considered one of or the
most talented...
Not anymore.

Just like your Borg example.

Rodjk #613


 
Date: 28 Dec 2008 08:13:33
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 28, 4:06=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Sakari Lund wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
>
> > Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
> > the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>
> > Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>
> Lendl hit some great shots too but he's not as inspirational. =A0Sometime=
s
> I like to watch these Mac highlights before I go out to play so I can
> reinforce positive thoughts (ie moving forward, trusting instincts at
> net etc) - a training video to get me in the right frame of mind if you
> will.

There's hardly any need to watch training videos before you play if
you always win 6-0 6-1. Sounds like you could just get straight out of
bed and get down to the courts ...



  
Date: 29 Dec 2008 06:20:51
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 28, 4:06 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
>>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>> Lendl hit some great shots too but he's not as inspirational. Sometimes
>> I like to watch these Mac highlights before I go out to play so I can
>> reinforce positive thoughts (ie moving forward, trusting instincts at
>> net etc) - a training video to get me in the right frame of mind if you
>> will.
>
> There's hardly any need to watch training videos before you play if
> you always win 6-0 6-1. Sounds like you could just get straight out of
> bed and get down to the courts ...
>



I do - I never warm up for golf or tennis, taking the view I'll warm up
in 1st game or just by using visualization. It always amuses me when
people I play take 10 mins to warm-up, serving from both sides etc & I
just say 'let's go' when I turn up.




 
Date: 28 Dec 2008 17:38:08
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>
>Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
>
>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0

Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.

Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...



  
Date: 28 Dec 2008 18:29:47
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>
>>
>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>
> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>
> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>

Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in these
highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
talent is much more than being able to volley.

Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick points
no baseline rallies. Although including baseline rallies would have
enabled whole rst to laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's
why he never won FO.

What fuck was Lendl doing at net, some pretty awful volleys chosen by
Whisper. Should have stayed in the backcourt. That's why he never won
Wimbledon.

--
"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: 29 Dec 2008 06:28:43
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
TT wrote:
> Sakari Lund wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>
>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>>
>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>>
>
> Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in these
> highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
> talent is much more than being able to volley.
>
> Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick points
> no baseline rallies.


Not really true. I don't like watching inefficient tennis, so if there
is no real opportunity to come to net then a long rally is fine. It's
the cowardice aspect I hate - if Fed hits a big fh eliciting a kind of
floating return he really should be in for the kill, not setting up
another big fh, which is his standard play. Essentially his mindset is
keep hitting big until the other guy misses or he can hit a winner, &
ignoring chances to finish point earlier.


> Although including baseline rallies would have
> enabled whole rst to laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's
> why he never won FO.


He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final - he was all over
Lendl 63 62 & led 4-2 in 4th. The slow clay allowed less skilled types
to keep with him. It's not that he couldn't slide or move well on clay,
it's just that clay is so slow you have to keep doing it over & over til
someone dies physically - not my idea of real tennis.

>
> What fuck was Lendl doing at net, some pretty awful volleys chosen by
> Whisper. Should have stayed in the backcourt. That's why he never won
> Wimbledon.
>


Lendl may have done better at Wimbledon if he stuck with his natural
baseline game, but still not good odds of beating Mac, Becker & Edberg
types at peak.


    
Date: 28 Dec 2008 22:27:12
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Whisper wrote:
> TT wrote:
>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>
>>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
>>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>>>
>>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>>>
>>
>> Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in these
>> highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
>> talent is much more than being able to volley.
>>
>> Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick
>> points no baseline rallies.
>
>
> Not really true. I don't like watching inefficient tennis, so if there
> is no real opportunity to come to net then a long rally is fine. It's
> the cowardice aspect I hate - if Fed hits a big fh eliciting a kind of
> floating return he really should be in for the kill, not setting up
> another big fh, which is his standard play. Essentially his mindset is
> keep hitting big until the other guy misses or he can hit a winner, &
> ignoring chances to finish point earlier.
>
>
>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never won FO.
>
>
> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final

Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
described as a fluke.
What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.


     
Date: 29 Dec 2008 09:14:58
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
TT wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>> TT wrote:
>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
>>>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>>>>
>>>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in these
>>> highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
>>> talent is much more than being able to volley.
>>>
>>> Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick
>>> points no baseline rallies.
>>
>>
>> Not really true. I don't like watching inefficient tennis, so if
>> there is no real opportunity to come to net then a long rally is
>> fine. It's the cowardice aspect I hate - if Fed hits a big fh
>> eliciting a kind of floating return he really should be in for the
>> kill, not setting up another big fh, which is his standard play.
>> Essentially his mindset is keep hitting big until the other guy misses
>> or he can hit a winner, & ignoring chances to finish point earlier.
>>
>>
>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never won FO.
>>
>>
>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>
> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
> described as a fluke.
> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.


Lendl has 3 FO



      
Date: 29 Dec 2008 00:36:25
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Whisper wrote:
> TT wrote:
>> Whisper wrote:
>>> TT wrote:
>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
>>>>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in these
>>>> highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
>>>> talent is much more than being able to volley.
>>>>
>>>> Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick
>>>> points no baseline rallies.
>>>
>>>
>>> Not really true. I don't like watching inefficient tennis, so if
>>> there is no real opportunity to come to net then a long rally is
>>> fine. It's the cowardice aspect I hate - if Fed hits a big fh
>>> eliciting a kind of floating return he really should be in for the
>>> kill, not setting up another big fh, which is his standard play.
>>> Essentially his mindset is keep hitting big until the other guy
>>> misses or he can hit a winner, & ignoring chances to finish point
>>> earlier.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never won
>>>> FO.
>>>
>>>
>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>>
>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
>> described as a fluke.
>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>
>
> Lendl has 3 FO
>

Well I got McEnroe right at least...

--
"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: 29 Dec 2008 00:06:32
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"TT" <gold@Olympics.org > wrote in message
news:KbT5l.110670$_03.48696@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
> Whisper wrote:
>> TT wrote:
>>> Whisper wrote:
>>>> TT wrote:
>>>>> Sakari Lund wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper
>>>>>> <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
>>>>>> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay then. McEnroe might have been "touch-goat"...as we saw in these
>>>>> highlights him doing some nice serve + one volley combinations. But
>>>>> talent is much more than being able to volley.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes we can see Whisper's claimed preferences for the game, quick
>>>>> points no baseline rallies.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not really true. I don't like watching inefficient tennis, so if there
>>>> is no real opportunity to come to net then a long rally is fine. It's
>>>> the cowardice aspect I hate - if Fed hits a big fh eliciting a kind of
>>>> floating return he really should be in for the kill, not setting up
>>>> another big fh, which is his standard play. Essentially his mindset is
>>>> keep hitting big until the other guy misses or he can hit a winner, &
>>>> ignoring chances to finish point earlier.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>>>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never won
>>>>> FO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>>>
>>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
>>> described as a fluke.
>>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>>
>>
>> Lendl has 3 FO
>>
>
> Well I got McEnroe right at least...

Also didn't McEnroe lose that final because he choked, he should have won
it.




        
Date: 29 Dec 2008 11:39:04
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Iceberg wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>>>>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never won
>>>>>> FO.
>>>>>
>>>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>>>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
>>>> described as a fluke.
>>>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>>>
>>> Lendl has 3 FO
>>>
>> Well I got McEnroe right at least...
>
> Also didn't McEnroe lose that final because he choked, he should have won
> it.
>
>


Correct.

He was too busy fucking around in 3rd & 4th sets & then choked 5th.




         
Date: 29 Dec 2008 03:17:39
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Whisper wrote:
> Iceberg wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst
>>>>>>> to laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he
>>>>>>> never won FO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>>>>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
>>>>> described as a fluke.
>>>>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>>>>
>>>> Lendl has 3 FO
>>>>
>>> Well I got McEnroe right at least...
>>
>> Also didn't McEnroe lose that final because he choked, he should have
>> won it.
>>
>
>
> Correct.
>
> He was too busy fucking around in 3rd & 4th sets & then choked 5th.
>
>

That's pretty bad if one chokes more than Lendl.

--
"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: 29 Dec 2008 10:51:16
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"TT" <gold@Olympics.org > wrote in message
news:VyV5l.110694$_03.65281@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
> Whisper wrote:
>> Iceberg wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>>>>>>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never
>>>>>>>> won FO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>>>>>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
>>>>>> described as a fluke.
>>>>>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lendl has 3 FO
>>>>>
>>>> Well I got McEnroe right at least...
>>>
>>> Also didn't McEnroe lose that final because he choked, he should have
>>> won it.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Correct.
>>
>> He was too busy fucking around in 3rd & 4th sets & then choked 5th.
>>
>>
>
> That's pretty bad if one chokes more than Lendl.

I think in his book Mac said he was conscious that he'd be considered the
greatest player that ever lived if he won that match and that pressure was
too much.




           
Date: 29 Dec 2008 14:33:00
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 10:51:16 GMT, "Iceberg"
<big_bad_iceberg@moc.oohay > wrote:

>"TT" <gold@Olympics.org> wrote in message
>news:VyV5l.110694$_03.65281@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi...
>> Whisper wrote:
>>> Iceberg wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Although including baseline rallies would have enabled whole rst to
>>>>>>>>> laugh at McEnroe's powerless backhand dinks. That's why he never
>>>>>>>>> won FO.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> He never won FO because of fluke loss in '84 final
>>>>>>> Lendl has 4 FO titles and McEnroe 0...so the outcome can hardly be
>>>>>>> described as a fluke.
>>>>>>> What was fluke was that Mac got into the lead in the first place.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lendl has 3 FO
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well I got McEnroe right at least...
>>>>
>>>> Also didn't McEnroe lose that final because he choked, he should have
>>>> won it.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Correct.
>>>
>>> He was too busy fucking around in 3rd & 4th sets & then choked 5th.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> That's pretty bad if one chokes more than Lendl.
>
>I think in his book Mac said he was conscious that he'd be considered the
>greatest player that ever lived if he won that match and that pressure was
>too much.

Yeah, the same thing has happened to Federer in three FO finals...



  
Date: 29 Dec 2008 03:06:02
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 01:08:19 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>
>>
>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>
> Thanks, nice highlights, although one-sided. You would have thought
> the match was 6-0, 6-0, 6-0.
>
> Of course everyone is talking about something else in this thread...
>



Lendl hit some great shots too but he's not as inspirational. Sometimes
I like to watch these Mac highlights before I go out to play so I can
reinforce positive thoughts (ie moving forward, trusting instincts at
net etc) - a training video to get me in the right frame of mind if you
will.



 
Date: 27 Dec 2008 03:38:35
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 27, 11:16=A0am, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay > wrote:
> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>
> news:49554f9e$0$15726$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
>
>
> > gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >> On Dec 26, 11:37 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>> Iceberg wrote:
> >>>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> >>>>news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Ho=
ad
> >>>>> are
> >>>>> a cut above.
> >>>> I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
> >>>> versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.
> >>> Rafa does have a good volleying instinct - that did surprise me a cou=
ple
> >>> of yrs ago in final.
>
> >> Absolute rubbish - Nadal's net play is very average. He doesn't even
> >> use the correct grip for volleying. He's no mug though - he only ever
> >> comes into the net on easy putaways. That way he doesn't have to make
> >> any difficult volleys and people can praise him for developing his net
> >> game ...
>
> > Fair point. =A0If we don't see the crap volleys we can't comment.
>
> yes I guess it's that wrong-gripped extremely smooth clean volleying acti=
on
> technique that's the problem, only won the Monte Carlo doubles with that,
> LOL.

Wow, Nadal has won some doubles titles - the one you talk about is on
clay.

Was Nadal serving and volleying on every single first and second serve
on his way to winning that title?



 
Date: 27 Dec 2008 02:22:55
From: kaennorsing
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On 26 dec, 09:29, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:

> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. =A0How come you =
don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?

Er, because it was 5 years before Edberg peaked and he was only 18
years old and just starting out. Be happy he posted a video showcasing
only Mac's highlights. You do realise Edberg won that match in
straights? In fact, didn't he win both of their most prestigious
matches (at Wimbledon)? Answer; yes, both times in straights sets...

> > Compared to
> > today's players, Edberg doesn't scramble to get the ball back often
> > enough. He isn't even half as athletic as today's players.

That's really not true. Don't act like a Whimper.

Both
> > players' shots look like slow-mo compared with today. The rackets, the
> > athleticism, the aggressive mindset, the defensive mindset ---
> > everything is different. In this era McEnroe will be lucky to have
> > someone serving him a juicy floater above the net to execute those
> > volleys.
>
> The serve would set up nice volleys for Mac. =A0Federer also sets up
> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.

He does more than enough with them. You make it sound like Mac never
missed a voley or looked clueless up there. He did, many times.

>
>
> > And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
> > jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
> > Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
> > flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
> > motions...
>
> > One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
> > It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
> > beyond that.
>
> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums. =A0Today no one gives
> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches. =A0Fans want to see pure tennis skill
> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?

Today, stadiums are fully packed as well retard. And who's bumrooting?
Nadal?


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 13:34:32
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 1:00=A0pm, gregor...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > You must be on drugs.
>
> > If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> > was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>
> I don't remember many people saying that at all? Can you provide some
> quotes?

++ Right... Borg was descirbed as "a machine", "the tennis machine",
"the iceman", on the brink of being the greatest champion in the
sports history... they didn't single out his talent... it was his
status as a boywonder having become thee star in tennis so young...
Talent GOAT was not what he was known as/or for...

Borg described as cool, mode, media sensation, bringing millions to
the game as a celebrity player, tennis' media superstar...

Cover of Time June 30, 1980 feature was titled: "The Incredible Tennis
Machine."

He was seen as a physical specimen, who ground you down, never letting
the moment get to him, "The Iceman Commeth" as the Times said... that
was his rhetorical reputation NOT the range of his talent or
association to being TALENT GOAT specifically... that came to be
McEnroe's signature primarily touted by Tony Trabert... it was TRABERT
who took EVERY on-air opportunity to call McEnroe a brilliant talent,
a natural... and as men's tennis moved out of the era of US men's
dominance that because a refrain of US media...

P


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 13:10:07
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
> > He is pretty good at the net and has great reflexes. You are thinking
> > about somebody else.
>
> He has a palpable fear & lack of confidence at net - even when he hits a
> volley winner you can see the strain. =A0He needs to relax more & trust
> his instincts.

But you said his instincts at the net are very poor, so why would he
trust them?



  
Date: 27 Dec 2008 08:42:26
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> He is pretty good at the net and has great reflexes. You are thinking
>>> about somebody else.
>> He has a palpable fear & lack of confidence at net - even when he hits a
>> volley winner you can see the strain. He needs to relax more & trust
>> his instincts.
>
> But you said his instincts at the net are very poor, so why would he
> trust them?
>


Could be catch-22. He may be able to force some magic up there with
some balls.



 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 13:05:23
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 11:37=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Iceberg wrote:
> > "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> >news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> >> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad =
are
> >> a cut above.
>
> > I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
> > versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.
>
> Rafa does have a good volleying instinct - that did surprise me a couple
> of yrs ago in final.

Absolute rubbish - Nadal's net play is very average. He doesn't even
use the correct grip for volleying. He's no mug though - he only ever
comes into the net on easy putaways. That way he doesn't have to make
any difficult volleys and people can praise him for developing his net
game ...



  
Date: 27 Dec 2008 08:41:44
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Dec 26, 11:37 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Iceberg wrote:
>>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad are
>>>> a cut above.
>>> I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
>>> versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.
>> Rafa does have a good volleying instinct - that did surprise me a couple
>> of yrs ago in final.
>
> Absolute rubbish - Nadal's net play is very average. He doesn't even
> use the correct grip for volleying. He's no mug though - he only ever
> comes into the net on easy putaways. That way he doesn't have to make
> any difficult volleys and people can praise him for developing his net
> game ...
>



Fair point. If we don't see the crap volleys we can't comment.



   
Date: 27 Dec 2008 11:16:31
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:49554f9e$0$15726$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 11:37 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>> Iceberg wrote:
>>>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>>>> are
>>>>> a cut above.
>>>> I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
>>>> versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.
>>> Rafa does have a good volleying instinct - that did surprise me a couple
>>> of yrs ago in final.
>>
>> Absolute rubbish - Nadal's net play is very average. He doesn't even
>> use the correct grip for volleying. He's no mug though - he only ever
>> comes into the net on easy putaways. That way he doesn't have to make
>> any difficult volleys and people can praise him for developing his net
>> game ...
>>
>
> Fair point. If we don't see the crap volleys we can't comment.

yes I guess it's that wrong-gripped extremely smooth clean volleying action
technique that's the problem, only won the Monte Carlo doubles with that,
LOL.




   
Date: 27 Dec 2008 09:08:35
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 08:41:44 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>gregorawe@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 11:37 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>> Iceberg wrote:
>>>> "Whisper" <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>>>> news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad are
>>>>> a cut above.
>>>> I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
>>>> versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.
>>> Rafa does have a good volleying instinct - that did surprise me a couple
>>> of yrs ago in final.
>>
>> Absolute rubbish - Nadal's net play is very average. He doesn't even
>> use the correct grip for volleying. He's no mug though - he only ever
>> comes into the net on easy putaways. That way he doesn't have to make
>> any difficult volleys and people can praise him for developing his net
>> game ...
>>
>
>
>
>Fair point. If we don't see the crap volleys we can't comment.

you don't have to see the crap to smell it and know it's there either.


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 13:00:42
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
> You must be on drugs.
>
> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.

I don't remember many people saying that at all? Can you provide some
quotes?



 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 06:50:03
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 6:17=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 5:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>> On Dec 26, 2:29 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>> For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
> >>>>> 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch an=
d
> >>>>> talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg a=
nd
> >>>>> the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players=
,
> >>>>> it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkwa=
rd,
> >>>>> he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
> >>>>> terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.
> >>>> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. =A0How come=
you
> >>>> don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?
> >>> Because Edberg was a newbie junior at the time. Doesn't count.
> >> er, he won a slam the very next year whereas Mac was 5 yrs from his la=
st
> >> slam win in your example.
>
> > So? My original post was not about the scoreline of some Mac-Edberg
> > match. It was about something else, i.e, Mac and Edberg's style of
> > play and how that compares with todays's era. Don't change the topic.
>
> You're suggesting today's style is somehow superior which is wrong. =A0Yo=
u
> probably don't even realize Mac was just about the only s/v'er around
> when he challenged & dethroned Borg (Jimbo was a baseliner). =A0It's not
> like you paint it ie everyone was s/v'ing.
>
>
>
> >>> And why
> >>> didn't Mac win anything after 1984. If he were talent goat, he should
> >>> have won at least one slam based on just his talent, right?
> >> Why didn't Wilander win any more slams after winning 3 in 1988 at age =
23?
>
> > Who claimed Wilander that talent goat?
>
> Not the point. =A0

Of course it's not. Who brought up Wilander? How does he even enter
this discussion about talent goats?

> Mac clearly slumped post '84.
>
>

Yeah, we know. That's the outcome. The question is if he were the
talent goat, he surely could have pulled off at least one slam, right?

>
> >> Mac is a better volleyer today at age 50 than Fed right now. =A0Sampra=
s is
> >> still a far superior server & volleyer than Federer today 6 yrs post
> >> retirement. =A0That shouldn't be the case if Fed is goat - he should a=
t
> >> least be better than those guys today.
>
> > Talent is not just about volleying. It's about the complete package.
> > Federer is better than Sampras or McEnroe in that regard.
>
> It's clear Sampras could cause damage from the baseline as well as serve
> & net - where is this overall superior package beloging to Fed?
>

What do you mean? Have you sleep-walked all these years? Federer has
won 13 slams in record time, far faster than Sampras. Mac doesn't even
come in the picture.

> >> I didn't include Lendl's winners in that clip, but many looked better
> >> than Fed's today yet Mac still trounced him 63 64 61. =A0Lendl hit man=
y
> >> amazing passing shots that left Mac floundering, but the % are with th=
e
> >> better s/v'er as he has more options.
>
> > Nonsense. How come Stepanek is trounced left and right by top players
> > today? He comes to the net almost all the time and after a certain
> > level it just doesn't work. That's why his ranking is stuck in the
> > 20s.
>
> It's because he's not that good a player. =A0You can't become a player
> just by coming to the net - have to hit the right shots with a purpose
> not just blindly move in on anything.
>

This is all talk. "Hitting the right shots with a purpose" is much
more difficult today than in in Mac's era. You get much less reaction
time, and you have to expect a variety of tough shots coming from your
opponents now.

>
> >>>> =A0Federer also sets up
> >>>> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.
> >>> Federer aces much more, and has far better skills from the baseline.
> >> v Blake/ljubo types I agree. =A0v say Rafa he looks pretty ordinary I =
must
> >> say.
>
> > Not really. Rafa only edges Federer on clay, where it's more about
> > endurance than talented shotmaking.
>
> Only edges him on clay? =A0It's 10-1 to Rafa, & the only match he lost he
> was up 6-2 before fading physically/mentally after long clay season. =A0I=
f
> Fed had 10-1 record v Rafa on HC would that be a narrow edge too?
>

Alright, Rafa owns Federer on clay. But that's because Rafa is
probably the best, most precocious claycourter of all time.

But that's not the point. The point is Federer played Rafa on clay and
other slow surfaces (including the Wimbledons 2007 and 2008)
disproportionately more than he played him on fast surfaces. And
Federer's baseline skills helps him a lot against Rafa on fast
surfaces.


>
>
> >>> He's got the 1-2 punch basline game down like he's knifing through
> >>> butter.
> >> Yes, v Blake.
>
> > And vs. every other player on the tour, including Rafa, Djokovic,
> > Murray, etc.
>
> Sure, & those guys don't have Sampras' guns.
>

True, but Safin has bigger guns than Sampras, and Federer has beat
him.

>
> >>> He serves up a good serve, waits for the open court and
> >>> executes a laser-precision winner from the baseline. Only an insanely
> >>> fast baseliner like Rafa has the hope to thwart that tactic. The kind
> >>> of baseliner like Rafa didn't exist back then. Edberg and Mac are lik=
e
> >>> sea-turtles compared to Rafa. But comparing eras is futile. It doesn'=
t
> >>> prove anything.
> >> Yet you compared them anyway....?
>
> > I didn't. You did. You claimed Mac to be talent goat, where my point
> > is making such a claim is silly. Every era has its supreme talent.
> > It's futile to claim somebody as the most talented of all time.
>
> I think the obvious talents stand out easily - Mac & Henin produced more
> 'wow' shots than any other players I can think of.
>

Personal opinion. Henin?

> When Fed plays I don't sit there mesmerized by a barrage of 'how did he
> do that?' shots - I wish that were the case. =A0He produces maybe 1 per
> set on average, whereas with Mac you know it could come at any point
> from anywhere in the court.
>

What nonsense! Nobody produces a barrage of 'how did he do that?'
shots, not even Mac did that. What are you talking about?

>
>
> >>>>> And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got th=
at
> >>>>> jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
> >>>>> Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arm=
s
> >>>>> flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
> >>>>> motions...
> >>>>> One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era=
.
> >>>>> It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and w=
ay
> >>>>> beyond that.
> >>>> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums. =A0
> >>> Slam attendance has set records in recent years. Lendl even said he
> >>> would watch Federer practice. Federer attracts more fans during his
> >>> practice sessions than some of the matches in the past.
> >> I'd watch Fed practice too - he's a great talent. =A0Just not so good =
at
> >> net & not good reflex ability.
>
> > He is pretty good at the net and has great reflexes. You are thinking
> > about somebody else.
>
> He has a palpable fear & lack of confidence at net - even when he hits a
> volley winner you can see the strain. =A0He needs to relax more & trust
> his instincts.
>

He used to be pretty good. May be the pressure has got to him. Anyway,
his talent at the net is there. May be it's not his priority at the
moment.

>
> >>>> Today no one gives
> >>>> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches. =A0
> >>> Complete bs. Exactly what are you trying to prove here? You think 20
> >>> years from now some newbie will look up rst and find your lies and
> >>> take them to be true?
> >> I have nothing against Fed & speak the truth. =A0Your problem is compa=
ring
> >> him to current field rather than history.
>
> > That made no sense.
>
> You think because he dominates current era he'd do likewise with any
> past players - big, big mistake.
>

I don't think he would dominate as much. But nobody will question his
talent like you are doing here.

>
>
> >>>> Fans want to see pure tennis skill
> >>>> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?-
> >>> Because players are more athletic and they can defend more, so there
> >>> are more rallies than before. Pro tennis has changed.
> >> Rallies without net play are like wanking without ejaculating.- Hide q=
uoted text -
>
> > Players do come into net fairly regularly these days. Unfortunately
> > they get passed a lot, which lowers the incentive.
>
> McEnroe came to net 150 times v Jimbo at USO & only won about 50% of
> those points - he didn't quit. =A0It makes for a far more exciting tennis
> spectacle than 2 guys bashing from behind baseline.
>

Stepanek is exciting too. Probably comes to the net just as much.
Great hands, great volleys. Too bad he can't even make the semis at
slams. The game is different now. It's too fast for the net rusher to
handle and get to the top rankings at the same time. Players are very
fast and get to the balls easily and makes you play another volley. If
you are playing against Rafa, you will make a perfect volley at his
backhand corner and he will still hit a cross-court winner off-balance
from 10 ft behind the baseline. It's tough. Mac would lose all his
hair.

>
> > All you have proven in this conversation that you do not watch tennis
> > regularly anymore. Today's tennis is not less exciting than the
> > previous eras, yet you continue to press on that talking point. You
> > are a bitter old fool.
>
> It's tough watching tune-up matches today - the points are so
> 1-dimensional it's easy to nod off. When Mac played it was even fun
> watching him play no.120 in 1st rds - his skill was amazing & it didn't
> matter who he played.
>

You are clearly a very nostalgic Mac fan. Your heart is in the right
place. But tennis has different things to offer now.

> I'll watch big slam matches today - & Wimbledon final was a beauty - but
> a lot of crap in those too.

It's a different kinda game.




 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 06:49:49
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 6:24=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 5:22 pm, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
> >> Sampras?- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > "He has good volleys and he has this little backhand flick that
> > honestly, I have never seen before... it's something that I didn't
> > have."
>
> > This quote disproves many talking points trotted out by Whimpy and his
> > ilk here.
>
> > 4) Federer's bh flick something he never seen, i.e., he is impressed
> > by the novelty and variety of Federer's talented shotmaking.
>
> Like this flick bh?;
>
> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DR42OB0WM- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I think Sampras was talking about these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DU76sVE5Gzz8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DsQYWytc8RmU



 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 04:14:14
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 5:34=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
> > "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley department.
> >> But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
> >> the effort.
>
> > Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.
>
> arnab thinks Fed is only 'maybe' lacking in volley dept - stunning lack
> of objectivity.

Sampras agreed with me. He said Federer is a good vollyer. What do you
think of that, Whimpy?


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 04:12:53
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 6:00=A0pm, p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Dec 26, 5:10=A0pm, p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
> >> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > On Dec 26, 6:46=A0am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >> >> >http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
>
> >> >> Laver is superior, imo.
>
> >> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D1Q13_STOUBc&feature=3Drelated
>
> >> >> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.
>
> >> > Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley departmen=
t.
> >> > But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not wort=
h
> >> > the effort.
>
> >> Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Even Federer was an outstanding volleyer before. Especially untill
> > 2003. Check out some of the Halle Open, Germany clips of his (if you
> > can find them on the net). He was a great volleyer on fast, slick
> > grass. But he didn't keep it up.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as saying he didn't keep it up.
>

He's certainly not displaying the same level of volleying skills now.
But it's still quite good.

> Anyway, I merely provided examples that volleys are still considered
> important despite the eras and all.- Hide quoted text -
>

Of course, you can still make a decent career out of volleying. Look
at Stepanek.


  
Date: 29 Dec 2008 12:41:37
From: john
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat

"arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:c4780729-8631-42d3-a74c-269000ea602f@35g2000pry.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 26, 6:00 pm, p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Dec 26, 5:10 pm, p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
> >> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> > On Dec 26, 6:46 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> >> > Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >> >> >http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>
> >> >> Laver is superior, imo.
>
> >> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q13_STOUBc&feature=related
>
> >> >> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.
>
> >> > Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley
> >> > department.
> >> > But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
> >> > the effort.
>
> >> Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Even Federer was an outstanding volleyer before. Especially untill
> > 2003. Check out some of the Halle Open, Germany clips of his (if you
> > can find them on the net). He was a great volleyer on fast, slick
> > grass. But he didn't keep it up.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as saying he didn't keep it up.
>

He's certainly not displaying the same level of volleying skills now.
But it's still quite good.

> Anyway, I merely provided examples that volleys are still considered
> important despite the eras and all.- Hide quoted text -
>

Of course, you can still make a decent career out of volleying. Look
at Stepanek.

Stepanek makes a better career in picking up WTA chicks than he does in
ATP tour...




 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 03:56:49
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 5:22=A0pm, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay > wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:50312cb5-719b-4821-a0f2-fb09191cfbe8@r13g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 26, 4:02 pm, Carey <carey_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Whisper wrote:
> > > arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > > > On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > >> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > >>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote=
:
> > > >>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> > > >>>>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> > > >>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with a=
ll
> > > >>>>>>>> things
> > > >>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of
> > > >>>>>>>> course...
> > > >>>>>>>> P
> > > >>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close =
to
> > > >>>>>>> Mac's
> > > >>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Lave=
r
> > > >>>>>>> I'll listen.
> > > >>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is =
out
> > > >>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts
> > > >>>>>> say,
> > > >>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't las=
t
> > > >>>>>> too
> > > >>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> > > >>>>>> P
> > > >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver =
&
> > > >>>>> Hoad
> > > >>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> > > >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > > >>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers an=
d
> > > >>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac
> > > >>>> saying
> > > >>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Say=
ing
> > > >>>> it
> > > >>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > > >>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> > > >>>> P
> > > >>> You must be on drugs.
> > > >>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *whe=
n
> > > >>> he
> > > >>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> > > >>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most
> > > >>> talented'
> > > >>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest
> > > >>> most
> > > >>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto
> > > >>> off-hand
> > > >>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if =
you
> > > >>> look hard enough.
> > > >>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> > > >>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text=
-
> > > >>> - Show quoted text -
> > > >> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writer=
s
> > > >> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> > > >> messenger, lol
>
> > > >> P
>
> > > > Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> > > > about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> > > > Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's p=
eak
> > > > years.
>
> > > Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> > > especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> > > than other greats at peak.
>
> > > The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> > > about it.
>
> >How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
> >have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
> >Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
> >McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
> >best talent they have ever seen.
>
> Sampras?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

"I had a taste of what the best is and I think Roger has that extra
gear," said Sampras, 36.

"He has good volleys and he has this little backhand flick that
honestly, I have never seen before... it's something that I didn't
have."

This quote disproves many talking points trotted out by Whimpy and his
ilk here.

1) Sampras thinks Federer is the best.
2) He thinks Federer is a good volleyer.
3) Federer has the extra gear beyond other tennis greats, including
himself.
4) Federer's bh flick something he never seen, i.e., he is impressed
by the novelty and variety of Federer's talented shotmaking.

Sampras is a great, modest champion and says he is a fan of Federer.
If only his blind fanboys could follow suit and stop with the Federer-
hatred.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 23:24:59
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Dec 26, 5:22 pm, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>> Sampras?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
> "He has good volleys and he has this little backhand flick that
> honestly, I have never seen before... it's something that I didn't
> have."
>
> This quote disproves many talking points trotted out by Whimpy and his
> ilk here.
>
> 4) Federer's bh flick something he never seen, i.e., he is impressed
> by the novelty and variety of Federer's talented shotmaking.
>


Like this flick bh?;


http://www.megaupload.com/?d=R42OB0WM



   
Date: 27 Dec 2008 02:29:31
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 5:22 pm, "Iceberg" <big_bad_iceb...@moc.oohay> wrote:
>>> Sampras?- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>
>> "He has good volleys and he has this little backhand flick that
>> honestly, I have never seen before... it's something that I didn't
>> have."
>>
>> This quote disproves many talking points trotted out by Whimpy and his
>> ilk here.
>>
>> 4) Federer's bh flick something he never seen, i.e., he is impressed
>> by the novelty and variety of Federer's talented shotmaking.
>>
>
>
> Like this flick bh?;
>
>
> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=R42OB0WM
>

Upload to youtube please, I'm too lazy to start entering codes, waiting
30 seconds, downloading and only after that watching the clip.
You can nowadays upload high quality video on youtube

Thnaks

--
"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 Dec 2008 03:48:12
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 5:28=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 2:29 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>> For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
> >>> 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch and
> >>> talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg and
> >>> the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players,
> >>> it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkward=
,
> >>> he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
> >>> terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.
> >> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. =A0How come y=
ou
> >> don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?
>
> > Because Edberg was a newbie junior at the time. Doesn't count.
>
> er, he won a slam the very next year whereas Mac was 5 yrs from his last
> slam win in your example.
>

So? My original post was not about the scoreline of some Mac-Edberg
match. It was about something else, i.e, Mac and Edberg's style of
play and how that compares with todays's era. Don't change the topic.

> > And why
> > didn't Mac win anything after 1984. If he were talent goat, he should
> > have won at least one slam based on just his talent, right?
>
> Why didn't Wilander win any more slams after winning 3 in 1988 at age 23?
>

Who claimed Wilander that talent goat?

> Mac is a better volleyer today at age 50 than Fed right now. =A0Sampras i=
s
> still a far superior server & volleyer than Federer today 6 yrs post
> retirement. =A0That shouldn't be the case if Fed is goat - he should at
> least be better than those guys today.
>

Talent is not just about volleying. It's about the complete package.
Federer is better than Sampras or McEnroe in that regard.

>
>
>
>
>
> >>> Compared to
> >>> today's players, Edberg doesn't scramble to get the ball back often
> >>> enough. He isn't even half as athletic as today's players. Both
> >>> players' shots look like slow-mo compared with today. The rackets, th=
e
> >>> athleticism, the aggressive mindset, the defensive mindset ---
> >>> everything is different. In this era McEnroe will be lucky to have
> >>> someone serving him a juicy floater above the net to execute those
> >>> volleys.
> >> The serve would set up nice volleys for Mac.
>
> > I am going to guess Mac's slow serves would get mowed down more often
> > than anything. Remember Federer blazing the return winner off
> > Sampras's serve in Wimbledon 2001. It wasn't a bad serve, far superior
> > to Mac's serve in fact, yet Samrpas had no chance. He moved in at the
> > net and watched the passing shot go by him in dispair. The same would
> > happen to Mac, and more often I am afraid.
>
> I didn't include Lendl's winners in that clip, but many looked better
> than Fed's today yet Mac still trounced him 63 64 61. =A0Lendl hit many
> amazing passing shots that left Mac floundering, but the % are with the
> better s/v'er as he has more options.
>

Nonsense. How come Stepanek is trounced left and right by top players
today? He comes to the net almost all the time and after a certain
level it just doesn't work. That's why his ranking is stuck in the
20s.

>
> >> =A0Federer also sets up
> >> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.
>
> > Federer aces much more, and has far better skills from the baseline.
>
> v Blake/ljubo types I agree. =A0v say Rafa he looks pretty ordinary I mus=
t
> say.
>

Not really. Rafa only edges Federer on clay, where it's more about
endurance than talented shotmaking.

> > He's got the 1-2 punch basline game down like he's knifing through
> > butter.
>
> Yes, v Blake.
>

And vs. every other player on the tour, including Rafa, Djokovic,
Murray, etc.

> > He serves up a good serve, waits for the open court and
> > executes a laser-precision winner from the baseline. Only an insanely
> > fast baseliner like Rafa has the hope to thwart that tactic. The kind
> > of baseliner like Rafa didn't exist back then. Edberg and Mac are like
> > sea-turtles compared to Rafa. But comparing eras is futile. It doesn't
> > prove anything.
>
> Yet you compared them anyway....?
>

I didn't. You did. You claimed Mac to be talent goat, where my point
is making such a claim is silly. Every era has its supreme talent.
It's futile to claim somebody as the most talented of all time.

>
> >>> And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
> >>> jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
> >>> Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
> >>> flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
> >>> motions...
> >>> One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
> >>> It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
> >>> beyond that.
> >> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums. =A0
>
> > Slam attendance has set records in recent years. Lendl even said he
> > would watch Federer practice. Federer attracts more fans during his
> > practice sessions than some of the matches in the past.
>
> I'd watch Fed practice too - he's a great talent. =A0Just not so good at
> net & not good reflex ability.
>

He is pretty good at the net and has great reflexes. You are thinking
about somebody else.

>
>
> >> Today no one gives
> >> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches. =A0
>
> > Complete bs. Exactly what are you trying to prove here? You think 20
> > years from now some newbie will look up rst and find your lies and
> > take them to be true?
>
> I have nothing against Fed & speak the truth. =A0Your problem is comparin=
g
> him to current field rather than history.
>

That made no sense.

>
> >> Fans want to see pure tennis skill
> >> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?-
>
> > Because players are more athletic and they can defend more, so there
> > are more rallies than before. Pro tennis has changed.
>
> Rallies without net play are like wanking without ejaculating.- Hide quot=
ed text -
>

Players do come into net fairly regularly these days. Unfortunately
they get passed a lot, which lowers the incentive.

All you have proven in this conversation that you do not watch tennis
regularly anymore. Today's tennis is not less exciting than the
previous eras, yet you continue to press on that talking point. You
are a bitter old fool.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 23:17:06
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Dec 26, 5:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>> On Dec 26, 2:29 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
>>>>> 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch and
>>>>> talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg and
>>>>> the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players,
>>>>> it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkward,
>>>>> he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
>>>>> terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.
>>>> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. How come you
>>>> don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?
>>> Because Edberg was a newbie junior at the time. Doesn't count.
>> er, he won a slam the very next year whereas Mac was 5 yrs from his last
>> slam win in your example.
>>
>
> So? My original post was not about the scoreline of some Mac-Edberg
> match. It was about something else, i.e, Mac and Edberg's style of
> play and how that compares with todays's era. Don't change the topic.




You're suggesting today's style is somehow superior which is wrong. You
probably don't even realize Mac was just about the only s/v'er around
when he challenged & dethroned Borg (Jimbo was a baseliner). It's not
like you paint it ie everyone was s/v'ing.




>
>>> And why
>>> didn't Mac win anything after 1984. If he were talent goat, he should
>>> have won at least one slam based on just his talent, right?
>> Why didn't Wilander win any more slams after winning 3 in 1988 at age 23?
>>
>
> Who claimed Wilander that talent goat?



Not the point. Mac clearly slumped post '84.



>
>> Mac is a better volleyer today at age 50 than Fed right now. Sampras is
>> still a far superior server & volleyer than Federer today 6 yrs post
>> retirement. That shouldn't be the case if Fed is goat - he should at
>> least be better than those guys today.
>>
>
> Talent is not just about volleying. It's about the complete package.
> Federer is better than Sampras or McEnroe in that regard.


It's clear Sampras could cause damage from the baseline as well as serve
& net - where is this overall superior package beloging to Fed?


>> I didn't include Lendl's winners in that clip, but many looked better
>> than Fed's today yet Mac still trounced him 63 64 61. Lendl hit many
>> amazing passing shots that left Mac floundering, but the % are with the
>> better s/v'er as he has more options.
>>
>
> Nonsense. How come Stepanek is trounced left and right by top players
> today? He comes to the net almost all the time and after a certain
> level it just doesn't work. That's why his ranking is stuck in the
> 20s.


It's because he's not that good a player. You can't become a player
just by coming to the net - have to hit the right shots with a purpose
not just blindly move in on anything.



>
>>>> Federer also sets up
>>>> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.
>>> Federer aces much more, and has far better skills from the baseline.
>> v Blake/ljubo types I agree. v say Rafa he looks pretty ordinary I must
>> say.
>>
>
> Not really. Rafa only edges Federer on clay, where it's more about
> endurance than talented shotmaking.


Only edges him on clay? It's 10-1 to Rafa, & the only match he lost he
was up 6-2 before fading physically/mentally after long clay season. If
Fed had 10-1 record v Rafa on HC would that be a narrow edge too?



>
>>> He's got the 1-2 punch basline game down like he's knifing through
>>> butter.
>> Yes, v Blake.
>>
>
> And vs. every other player on the tour, including Rafa, Djokovic,
> Murray, etc.


Sure, & those guys don't have Sampras' guns.


>
>>> He serves up a good serve, waits for the open court and
>>> executes a laser-precision winner from the baseline. Only an insanely
>>> fast baseliner like Rafa has the hope to thwart that tactic. The kind
>>> of baseliner like Rafa didn't exist back then. Edberg and Mac are like
>>> sea-turtles compared to Rafa. But comparing eras is futile. It doesn't
>>> prove anything.
>> Yet you compared them anyway....?
>>
>
> I didn't. You did. You claimed Mac to be talent goat, where my point
> is making such a claim is silly. Every era has its supreme talent.
> It's futile to claim somebody as the most talented of all time.


I think the obvious talents stand out easily - Mac & Henin produced more
'wow' shots than any other players I can think of.

When Fed plays I don't sit there mesmerized by a barrage of 'how did he
do that?' shots - I wish that were the case. He produces maybe 1 per
set on average, whereas with Mac you know it could come at any point
from anywhere in the court.




>
>>>>> And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
>>>>> jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
>>>>> Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
>>>>> flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
>>>>> motions...
>>>>> One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
>>>>> It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
>>>>> beyond that.
>>>> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums.
>>> Slam attendance has set records in recent years. Lendl even said he
>>> would watch Federer practice. Federer attracts more fans during his
>>> practice sessions than some of the matches in the past.
>> I'd watch Fed practice too - he's a great talent. Just not so good at
>> net & not good reflex ability.
>>
>
> He is pretty good at the net and has great reflexes. You are thinking
> about somebody else.
>


He has a palpable fear & lack of confidence at net - even when he hits a
volley winner you can see the strain. He needs to relax more & trust
his instincts.



>>
>>>> Today no one gives
>>>> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches.
>>> Complete bs. Exactly what are you trying to prove here? You think 20
>>> years from now some newbie will look up rst and find your lies and
>>> take them to be true?
>> I have nothing against Fed & speak the truth. Your problem is comparing
>> him to current field rather than history.
>>
>
> That made no sense.


You think because he dominates current era he'd do likewise with any
past players - big, big mistake.


>
>>>> Fans want to see pure tennis skill
>>>> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?-
>>> Because players are more athletic and they can defend more, so there
>>> are more rallies than before. Pro tennis has changed.
>> Rallies without net play are like wanking without ejaculating.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>
> Players do come into net fairly regularly these days. Unfortunately
> they get passed a lot, which lowers the incentive.


McEnroe came to net 150 times v Jimbo at USO & only won about 50% of
those points - he didn't quit. It makes for a far more exciting tennis
spectacle than 2 guys bashing from behind baseline.


>
> All you have proven in this conversation that you do not watch tennis
> regularly anymore. Today's tennis is not less exciting than the
> previous eras, yet you continue to press on that talking point. You
> are a bitter old fool.


It's tough watching tune-up matches today - the points are so
1-dimensional it's easy to nod off. When Mac played it was even fun
watching him play no.120 in 1st rds - his skill was amazing & it didn't
matter who he played.

I'll watch big slam matches today - & Wimbledon final was a beauty - but
a lot of crap in those too.



 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 03:27:21
From: Carey
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat


Whisper wrote:
> Carey wrote:
> >
> > Whisper wrote:
> >> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>> On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> >>>> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
> >>>>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> >>>>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> >>>>>>>>>> P
> >>>>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
> >>>>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
> >>>>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> >>>>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> >>>>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> >>>>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> >>>>>>>> P
> >>>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> >>>>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> >>>>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
> >>>>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
> >>>>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> >>>>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> >>>>>> P
> >>>>> You must be on drugs.
> >>>>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> >>>>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> >>>>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
> >>>>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest most
> >>>>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
> >>>>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> >>>>> look hard enough.
> >>>>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> >>>>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> >>>> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> >>>> messenger, lol
> >>>>
> >>>> P
> >>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> >>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> >>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> >>> years.
> >>
> >> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> >> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> >> than other greats at peak.
> >>
> >> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> >> about it.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
> >>> being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
> >>> shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
> >>> eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
> >>
> >>
> >> Oh fuck you must be joking!
> >
> >>> And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
> >>> threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
> >>> endure these days.
> >>> Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
> >>> during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
> >>> there right now?
> >>
> >> Lendl would eat most of today's players alive & Mac made him look like a
> >> newbie who couldn't even hold the racket properly.
> >
> > Have you heard of Jack Kramer? The guy seen them all, and who's always
> > grudging in his praise? He said Mac "could have played
> > us tough". He said of Federer "he can do more with the tennis ball
> > than anyone. He's the best I've ever seen."
>
>
> Yes, but I've seen these comments about many players. You can't be so
> new to tennis to think this is unique?
>
>
>
> > I'll take Kramer's word (and JMac's, Becker's, Agassi's,
> > Wilander's, Lendl's, Bruguera's, Drysdale's.. it goes on and on) over
> > the Lisper's, any time.
>
>
> These guys have all disparaged Federer at various times. Given
> Federer's achievements the relatively low level of praise is very
> surprising, but it is understandable if we look at absolute ability v
> results.
>
>
> >
> > Mac v Lendl h2h: Mac 15, Lendl 21.
> > Mac v Lendl *IN MAJORS*: Mac 3, Lendl 7.
>
>
> Yes, but most of Lendl's wins came after '84.
False. Typical LisperLie. Do keep it up though-
it's *funny.*

Most experts consider
> McEnroe far superior to Lendl at respective peaks. Read Arthur Ashe's
> comments for an idea.
Um, isn't this the kind of cherry-picking that you
say lacks merit (see below)?
>
>
> >
> > Fact is, Lendl scared JMac right out of the top tier of
> > tennis. You could look up JMac's quotes in SI after
> > the '85 USO for further confirmation- but you won't.
>
> You can't take isolated comments & trot them out as evidence. If we do
> that even Becker would come across as goat.
>
Funny- you do that all the time. :) And we're talking
here about Mac's *own quotes re Lendl* after the '85
USO. Mac is not known for talking himself down.
Newbie?


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 03:14:16
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 5:10=A0pm, p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Dec 26, 6:46=A0am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >> > Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >> >http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
>
> >> Laver is superior, imo.
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D1Q13_STOUBc&feature=3Drelated
>
> >> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.
>
> > Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley department.
> > But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
> > the effort.
>
> Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Even Federer was an outstanding volleyer before. Especially untill
2003. Check out some of the Halle Open, Germany clips of his (if you
can find them on the net). He was a great volleyer on fast, slick
grass. But he didn't keep it up.

I think if a slightly faster grass was introduced and the grass season
got a month longer, we could see a comeback of great volleying.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 14:00:39
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > writes:

> On Dec 26, 5:10 pm, p...@me.not.invalid wrote:
>> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > On Dec 26, 6:46 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>
>> >> >http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>
>> >> Laver is superior, imo.
>>
>> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q13_STOUBc&feature=related
>>
>> >> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.
>>
>> > Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley department.
>> > But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
>> > the effort.
>>
>> Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Even Federer was an outstanding volleyer before. Especially untill
> 2003. Check out some of the Halle Open, Germany clips of his (if you
> can find them on the net). He was a great volleyer on fast, slick
> grass. But he didn't keep it up.

I wouldn't go as far as saying he didn't keep it up.

Anyway, I merely provided examples that volleys are still considered
important despite the eras and all.


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 03:10:14
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 4:39=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> >>>>> P
> >>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> >>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> >>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's pe=
ak
> >>>> years.
> >>> Complete bullshit. =A0I couldn't have missed all this as I read widel=
y,
> >>> especially about tennis. =A0The praise Federer is receiving is far le=
ss
> >>> than other greats at peak.
> >>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> >>> about it.
>
> > How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
> > have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
> > Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
> > McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
> > best talent they have ever seen.
>
> We have that on record about many players. =A0Wilander said Fed has no
> balls, Newk said no way can Fed be goat if he can't even be greater that
> Rafa in h2h, Moya said Sampras was far better than Federer etc
>
> What matters is what consensus is 20 yrs after player retires - ceibs is
> like Katy Perry's 'I kissed a girl' - great today, but laughed at in a
> couple of yrs.
>
> Guys like Tilden & Laver will always be goats, Borg clearly never will.- =
Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

What a completely useless post. Alright, back to killfile for you.


 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 03:10:03
From: Carey
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat


arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Dec 26, 4:02?pm, Carey <carey_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Whisper wrote:
> > > arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > > > On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> > > >> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > > >>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> > > >>>>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
> > > >>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> > > >>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> > > >>>>>>>> P
> > > >>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
> > > >>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. ?If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
> > > >>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> > > >>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> > > >>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> > > >>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> > > >>>>>> P
> > > >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> > > >>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> > > >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > > >>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > > >>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
> > > >>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
> > > >>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > > >>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> > > >>>> P
> > > >>> You must be on drugs.
> > > >>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> > > >>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> > > >>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
> > > >>> within 5 yrs of retirement. ?I can't even find anything to suggest most
> > > >>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
> > > >>> remarks? ?There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> > > >>> look hard enough.
> > > >>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> > > >>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> > > >>> - Show quoted text -
> > > >> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> > > >> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> > > >> messenger, lol
> >
> > > >> P
> >
> > > > Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> > > > about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> > > > Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> > > > years.
> >
> > > Complete bullshit. ?I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> > > especially about tennis. ?The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> > > than other greats at peak.
> >
> > > The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> > > about it.
> >
>
> How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
> have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
> Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
> McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
> best talent they have ever seen.

Yes, of course you're right.

It's evidence of the Lisper's nervousness that she feels
the need to start holding actions *now*, even before Federer
breaks Sappras's record- "talent GOAT, ability GOAT-
that were previously unheard of even from her...



  
Date: 27 Dec 2008 02:25:21
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Carey wrote:
>
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 4:02?pm, Carey <carey_1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Whisper wrote:
>>>> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>>>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>>>>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. ?If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>>>>>>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>>>>>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>>>>>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>>>>>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>>>>>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
>>>>>>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
>>>>>>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
>>>>>>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
>>>>>>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>> You must be on drugs.
>>>>>>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
>>>>>>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>>>>>>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
>>>>>>> within 5 yrs of retirement. ?I can't even find anything to suggest most
>>>>>>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
>>>>>>> remarks? ?There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
>>>>>>> look hard enough.
>>>>>>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
>>>>>>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
>>>>>> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
>>>>>> messenger, lol
>>>>>> P
>>>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>>>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>>>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
>>>>> years.
>>>> Complete bullshit. ?I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
>>>> especially about tennis. ?The praise Federer is receiving is far less
>>>> than other greats at peak.
>>>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
>>>> about it.
>> How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
>> have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
>> Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
>> McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
>> best talent they have ever seen.
>
> Yes, of course you're right.
>
> It's evidence of the Lisper's nervousness that she feels
> the need to start holding actions *now*, even before Federer
> breaks Sappras's record- "talent GOAT, ability GOAT-
> that were previously unheard of even from her...
>

You sound rather nervous yourself too. And I don't thinks Whisper is a
she...

--
"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 Dec 2008 03:07:16
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 2:29=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 12:26 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
> >>> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> >>>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all =
things
> >>>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of cours=
e...
> >>>>>>>>> P
> >>>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to =
Mac's
> >>>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Lave=
r I'll listen.
> >>>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> >>>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say=
,
> >>>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last t=
oo
> >>>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> >>>>>>> P
> >>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & H=
oad
> >>>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> >>>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac say=
ing
> >>>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying=
it
> >>>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> >>>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> >>>>> P
> >>>> You must be on drugs.
> >>>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when h=
e
> >>>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> >>>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talent=
ed'
> >>>> within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to suggest=
most
> >>>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-h=
and
> >>>> remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if =
you
> >>>> look hard enough.
> >>>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> >>>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> >>> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> >>> messenger, lol
> >>> P
> >> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> >> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> >> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> >> years.
>
> >> Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
> >> being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
> >> shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
> >> eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
> >> And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
> >> threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
> >> endure these days. Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
> >> during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
> >> there right now?
>
> > For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
> > 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch and
> > talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg and
> > the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players,
> > it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkward,
> > he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
> > terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.
>
> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. =A0How come you
> don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?
>

Because Edberg was a newbie junior at the time. Doesn't count. And why
didn't Mac win anything after 1984. If he were talent goat, he should
have won at least one slam based on just his talent, right?

> > Compared to
> > today's players, Edberg doesn't scramble to get the ball back often
> > enough. He isn't even half as athletic as today's players. Both
> > players' shots look like slow-mo compared with today. The rackets, the
> > athleticism, the aggressive mindset, the defensive mindset ---
> > everything is different. In this era McEnroe will be lucky to have
> > someone serving him a juicy floater above the net to execute those
> > volleys.
>
> The serve would set up nice volleys for Mac.

I am going to guess Mac's slow serves would get mowed down more often
than anything. Remember Federer blazing the return winner off
Sampras's serve in Wimbledon 2001. It wasn't a bad serve, far superior
to Mac's serve in fact, yet Samrpas had no chance. He moved in at the
net and watched the passing shot go by him in dispair. The same would
happen to Mac, and more often I am afraid.

> =A0Federer also sets up
> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.
>

Federer aces much more, and has far better skills from the baseline.
He's got the 1-2 punch basline game down like he's knifing through
butter. He serves up a good serve, waits for the open court and
executes a laser-precision winner from the baseline. Only an insanely
fast baseliner like Rafa has the hope to thwart that tactic. The kind
of baseliner like Rafa didn't exist back then. Edberg and Mac are like
sea-turtles compared to Rafa. But comparing eras is futile. It doesn't
prove anything.

>
> > And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
> > jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
> > Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
> > flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
> > motions...
>
> > One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
> > It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
> > beyond that.
>
> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums. =A0

Slam attendance has set records in recent years. Lendl even said he
would watch Federer practice. Federer attracts more fans during his
practice sessions than some of the matches in the past.

> Today no one gives
> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches. =A0

Complete bs. Exactly what are you trying to prove here? You think 20
years from now some newbie will look up rst and find your lies and
take them to be true?

> Fans want to see pure tennis skill
> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?-

Because players are more athletic and they can defend more, so there
are more rallies than before. Pro tennis has changed.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 22:28:40
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Dec 26, 2:29 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>> For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
>>> 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch and
>>> talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg and
>>> the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players,
>>> it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkward,
>>> he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
>>> terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.
>> er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. How come you
>> don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?
>>
>
> Because Edberg was a newbie junior at the time. Doesn't count.



er, he won a slam the very next year whereas Mac was 5 yrs from his last
slam win in your example.



> And why
> didn't Mac win anything after 1984. If he were talent goat, he should
> have won at least one slam based on just his talent, right?


Why didn't Wilander win any more slams after winning 3 in 1988 at age 23?

Mac is a better volleyer today at age 50 than Fed right now. Sampras is
still a far superior server & volleyer than Federer today 6 yrs post
retirement. That shouldn't be the case if Fed is goat - he should at
least be better than those guys today.


>
>>> Compared to
>>> today's players, Edberg doesn't scramble to get the ball back often
>>> enough. He isn't even half as athletic as today's players. Both
>>> players' shots look like slow-mo compared with today. The rackets, the
>>> athleticism, the aggressive mindset, the defensive mindset ---
>>> everything is different. In this era McEnroe will be lucky to have
>>> someone serving him a juicy floater above the net to execute those
>>> volleys.
>> The serve would set up nice volleys for Mac.
>
> I am going to guess Mac's slow serves would get mowed down more often
> than anything. Remember Federer blazing the return winner off
> Sampras's serve in Wimbledon 2001. It wasn't a bad serve, far superior
> to Mac's serve in fact, yet Samrpas had no chance. He moved in at the
> net and watched the passing shot go by him in dispair. The same would
> happen to Mac, and more often I am afraid.


I didn't include Lendl's winners in that clip, but many looked better
than Fed's today yet Mac still trounced him 63 64 61. Lendl hit many
amazing passing shots that left Mac floundering, but the % are with the
better s/v'er as he has more options.


>
>> Federer also sets up
>> volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.
>>
>
> Federer aces much more, and has far better skills from the baseline.



v Blake/ljubo types I agree. v say Rafa he looks pretty ordinary I must
say.



> He's got the 1-2 punch basline game down like he's knifing through
> butter.


Yes, v Blake.


> He serves up a good serve, waits for the open court and
> executes a laser-precision winner from the baseline. Only an insanely
> fast baseliner like Rafa has the hope to thwart that tactic. The kind
> of baseliner like Rafa didn't exist back then. Edberg and Mac are like
> sea-turtles compared to Rafa. But comparing eras is futile. It doesn't
> prove anything.


Yet you compared them anyway....?



>
>>> And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
>>> jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
>>> Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
>>> flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
>>> motions...
>>> One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
>>> It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
>>> beyond that.
>> That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums.
>
> Slam attendance has set records in recent years. Lendl even said he
> would watch Federer practice. Federer attracts more fans during his
> practice sessions than some of the matches in the past.



I'd watch Fed practice too - he's a great talent. Just not so good at
net & not good reflex ability.



>
>> Today no one gives
>> a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches.
>
> Complete bs. Exactly what are you trying to prove here? You think 20
> years from now some newbie will look up rst and find your lies and
> take them to be true?


I have nothing against Fed & speak the truth. Your problem is comparing
him to current field rather than history.


>
>> Fans want to see pure tennis skill
>> - why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?-
>
> Because players are more athletic and they can defend more, so there
> are more rallies than before. Pro tennis has changed.


Rallies without net play are like wanking without ejaculating.





 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 02:30:59
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 4:02=A0pm, Carey <carey_1...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
> > arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > > On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> > >> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > >>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> > >>>>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> > >>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all=
things
> > >>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of cour=
se...
> > >>>>>>>> P
> > >>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to=
Mac's
> > >>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Lav=
er I'll listen.
> > >>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is ou=
t
> > >>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts sa=
y,
> > >>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last =
too
> > >>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> > >>>>>> P
> > >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & =
Hoad
> > >>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > >>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac sa=
ying
> > >>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Sayin=
g it
> > >>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > >>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> > >>>> P
> > >>> You must be on drugs.
> > >>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when =
he
> > >>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> > >>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talen=
ted'
> > >>> within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to sugges=
t most
> > >>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-=
hand
> > >>> remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if=
you
> > >>> look hard enough.
> > >>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> > >>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> > >>> - Show quoted text -
> > >> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> > >> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> > >> messenger, lol
>
> > >> P
>
> > > Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> > > about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> > > Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's pea=
k
> > > years.
>
> > Complete bullshit. =A0I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> > especially about tennis. =A0The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> > than other greats at peak.
>
> > The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> > about it.
>

How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
best talent they have ever seen.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 11:22:56
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:50312cb5-719b-4821-a0f2-fb09191cfbe8@r13g2000vbp.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 26, 4:02 pm, Carey <carey_1...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
> > arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > > On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> > >> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > >>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> > >>>>>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
> > >>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all
> > >>>>>>>> things
> > >>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of
> > >>>>>>>> course...
> > >>>>>>>> P
> > >>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to
> > >>>>>>> Mac's
> > >>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver
> > >>>>>>> I'll listen.
> > >>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> > >>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts
> > >>>>>> say,
> > >>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last
> > >>>>>> too
> > >>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> > >>>>>> P
> > >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver &
> > >>>>> Hoad
> > >>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > >>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac
> > >>>> saying
> > >>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying
> > >>>> it
> > >>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > >>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> > >>>> P
> > >>> You must be on drugs.
> > >>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when
> > >>> he
> > >>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> > >>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most
> > >>> talented'
> > >>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest
> > >>> most
> > >>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto
> > >>> off-hand
> > >>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> > >>> look hard enough.
> > >>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> > >>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> > >>> - Show quoted text -
> > >> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> > >> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> > >> messenger, lol
>
> > >> P
>
> > > Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> > > about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> > > Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> > > years.
>
> > Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> > especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> > than other greats at peak.
>
> > The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> > about it.
>
>
>How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
>have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
>Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
>McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
>best talent they have ever seen.

Sampras?




  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 21:39:49
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>>>> P
>>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
>>>> years.
>>> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
>>> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
>>> than other greats at peak.
>>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
>>> about it.
>
> How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
> have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
> Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
> McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
> best talent they have ever seen.


We have that on record about many players. Wilander said Fed has no
balls, Newk said no way can Fed be goat if he can't even be greater that
Rafa in h2h, Moya said Sampras was far better than Federer etc

What matters is what consensus is 20 yrs after player retires - ceibs is
like Katy Perry's 'I kissed a girl' - great today, but laughed at in a
couple of yrs.

Guys like Tilden & Laver will always be goats, Borg clearly never will.






   
Date: 27 Dec 2008 02:19:25
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>>>>> P
>>>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>>>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>>>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
>>>>> years.
>>>> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
>>>> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
>>>> than other greats at peak.
>>>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
>>>> about it.
>>
>> How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
>> have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
>> Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
>> McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
>> best talent they have ever seen.
>
>
> We have that on record about many players. Wilander said Fed has no
> balls, Newk said no way can Fed be goat if he can't even be greater that
> Rafa in h2h, Moya said Sampras was far better than Federer etc
>
> What matters is what consensus is 20 yrs after player retires - ceibs is
> like Katy Perry's 'I kissed a girl' - great today, but laughed at in a
> couple of yrs.
>
> Guys like Tilden & Laver will always be goats, Borg clearly never will.
>
>

I don't recall Lendl saying that. He said Federer has to win FO in order
to become goat.

Kramer, that senile, probably never watched Federer having a bad day.
Federer's competition was Hewitt and Roddick on hard courts, of course
he would look great beating them 10 in a row...But today he has a 50-50
chance against players like Murray, Djokovic, Simon...and Nadal truly
exposes his lack of claimed best game ever.


--
"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 Dec 2008 02:23:01
From: TT
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
TT wrote:
> Whisper wrote:
>> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>>>>>> P
>>>>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>>>>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>>>>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's
>>>>>> peak
>>>>>> years.
>>>>> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
>>>>> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
>>>>> than other greats at peak.
>>>>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
>>>>> about it.
>>>
>>> How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
>>> have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
>>> Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
>>> McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
>>> best talent they have ever seen.
>>
>>
>> We have that on record about many players. Wilander said Fed has no
>> balls, Newk said no way can Fed be goat if he can't even be greater
>> that Rafa in h2h, Moya said Sampras was far better than Federer etc
>>
>> What matters is what consensus is 20 yrs after player retires - ceibs
>> is like Katy Perry's 'I kissed a girl' - great today, but laughed at
>> in a couple of yrs.
>>
>> Guys like Tilden & Laver will always be goats, Borg clearly never will.
>>
>>
>
> I don't recall Lendl saying that. He said Federer has to win FO in order
> to become goat.
>
> Kramer, that senile, probably never watched Federer having a bad day.
> Federer's competition was Hewitt and Roddick on hard courts, of course
> he would look great beating them 10 in a row...But today he has a 50-50
> chance against players like Murray, Djokovic, Simon...and Nadal truly
> exposes his lack of claimed best game ever.
>
>

And furthermore commentators had to praise Federer.
What else could they do...admit that level on fast surfaces was pitiful
Federer beating his opponents 10 times in a row? Of course they wouldn't
do that.


--
"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 Dec 2008 21:12:39
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 21:39:49 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>>>>> P
>>>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>>>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>>>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
>>>>> years.
>>>> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
>>>> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
>>>> than other greats at peak.
>>>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
>>>> about it.
>>
>> How does Whimpy know all this? He simply doesn't. On the other hand we
>> have, on record, multiple quotes from every living tennis legend, from
>> Kramer to Sampras (and including Laver, Rosewall, Borg, Lendl,
>> McEnroe, Wilander and Agassi), saying that Federer at his peak is the
>> best talent they have ever seen.
>
>
>We have that on record about many players. Wilander said Fed has no
>balls, Newk said no way can Fed be goat if he can't even be greater that
>Rafa in h2h, Moya said Sampras was far better than Federer etc
>
>What matters is what consensus is 20 yrs after player retires - ceibs is
>like Katy Perry's 'I kissed a girl' - great today, but laughed at in a
>couple of yrs.
>
>Guys like Tilden & Laver will always be goats, Borg clearly never will.
>

*BORG IS*



 
Date: 26 Dec 2008 02:02:04
From: Carey
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat


Whisper wrote:
> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> > On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
> >> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
> >>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> >>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> >>>>>>>> P
> >>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
> >>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
> >>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> >>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> >>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> >>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
> >>>>>> P
> >>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> >>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
> >>>>> - Show quoted text -
> >>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> >>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
> >>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
> >>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> >>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
> >>>> P
> >>> You must be on drugs.
> >>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> >>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
> >>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
> >>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest most
> >>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
> >>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> >>> look hard enough.
> >>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> >>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
> >>> - Show quoted text -
> >> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> >> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> >> messenger, lol
> >>
> >> P
> >
> > Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> > about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> > Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> > years.
>
>
> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
> than other greats at peak.
>
> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
> about it.
>
>
> >
> > Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
> > being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
> > shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
> > eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
>
>
>
> Oh fuck you must be joking!

> > And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
> > threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
> > endure these days.
> > Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
> > during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
> > there right now?
>
>
> Lendl would eat most of today's players alive & Mac made him look like a
> newbie who couldn't even hold the racket properly.

Have you heard of Jack Kramer? The guy seen them all, and who's always
grudging in his praise? He said Mac "could have played
us tough". He said of Federer "he can do more with the tennis ball
than anyone. He's the best I've ever seen."
I'll take Kramer's word (and JMac's, Becker's, Agassi's,
Wilander's, Lendl's, Bruguera's, Drysdale's.. it goes on and on) over
the Lisper's, any time.

Mac v Lendl h2h: Mac 15, Lendl 21.
Mac v Lendl *IN MAJORS*: Mac 3, Lendl 7.

Fact is, Lendl scared JMac right out of the top tier of
tennis. You could look up JMac's quotes in SI after
the '85 USO for further confirmation- but you won't.




  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 21:21:19
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Carey wrote:
>
> Whisper wrote:
>> arnab.z@gmail wrote:
>>> On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>>>>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>>>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>>>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>>>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>>>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
>>>>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
>>>>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
>>>>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
>>>>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>>>>>> P
>>>>> You must be on drugs.
>>>>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
>>>>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>>>>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
>>>>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest most
>>>>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
>>>>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
>>>>> look hard enough.
>>>>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
>>>>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
>>>> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
>>>> messenger, lol
>>>>
>>>> P
>>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
>>> years.
>>
>> Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
>> especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
>> than other greats at peak.
>>
>> The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
>> about it.
>>
>>
>>> Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
>>> being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
>>> shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
>>> eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
>>
>>
>> Oh fuck you must be joking!
>
>>> And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
>>> threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
>>> endure these days.
>>> Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
>>> during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
>>> there right now?
>>
>> Lendl would eat most of today's players alive & Mac made him look like a
>> newbie who couldn't even hold the racket properly.
>
> Have you heard of Jack Kramer? The guy seen them all, and who's always
> grudging in his praise? He said Mac "could have played
> us tough". He said of Federer "he can do more with the tennis ball
> than anyone. He's the best I've ever seen."


Yes, but I've seen these comments about many players. You can't be so
new to tennis to think this is unique?



> I'll take Kramer's word (and JMac's, Becker's, Agassi's,
> Wilander's, Lendl's, Bruguera's, Drysdale's.. it goes on and on) over
> the Lisper's, any time.


These guys have all disparaged Federer at various times. Given
Federer's achievements the relatively low level of praise is very
surprising, but it is understandable if we look at absolute ability v
results.


>
> Mac v Lendl h2h: Mac 15, Lendl 21.
> Mac v Lendl *IN MAJORS*: Mac 3, Lendl 7.


Yes, but most of Lendl's wins came after '84. Most experts consider
McEnroe far superior to Lendl at respective peaks. Read Arthur Ashe's
comments for an idea.


>
> Fact is, Lendl scared JMac right out of the top tier of
> tennis. You could look up JMac's quotes in SI after
> the '85 USO for further confirmation- but you won't.

You can't take isolated comments & trot them out as evidence. If we do
that even Becker would come across as goat.

The true test is the test of time (anti-ceibs) - lets look where Federer
rates in 20 yrs - I can assure you (if he doesn't win any more slams) it
won't be anywhere near goat level. He'll rate somewhere like Borg today
- ie never offered up as *the* goat, just a great player.

Tilden, Laver & Sampras are the top 3 goats, & Sampras has the edge due
to all his achievements being in open era.







 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 23:00:26
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 12:26=A0pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Dec 26, 11:05=A0am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 25, 7:12=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > > Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > > On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > >>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > > >>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> > > >>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> > > >>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all =
things
> > > >>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of cours=
e...
> > > >>>>> P
> > > >>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to =
Mac's
> > > >>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Lave=
r I'll listen.
> > > >>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> > > >>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say=
,
> > > >>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last t=
oo
> > > >>> long... you'll be OK...
> > > >>> P
> > > >> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & H=
oad
> > > >> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > > > players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac say=
ing
> > > > it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying=
it
> > > > repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > > > Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>
> > > > P
>
> > > You must be on drugs.
>
> > > If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> > > was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>
> > > I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talente=
d'
> > > within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to suggest =
most
> > > think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-ha=
nd
> > > remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if y=
ou
> > > look hard enough.
>
> > > You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> > > seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> > and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> > messenger, lol
>
> > P
>
> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> years.
>
> Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
> being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
> shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
> eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
> And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
> threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
> endure these days. Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
> during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
> there right now?

For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch and
talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg and
the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players,
it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkward,
he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it. Compared to
today's players, Edberg doesn't scramble to get the ball back often
enough. He isn't even half as athletic as today's players. Both
players' shots look like slow-mo compared with today. The rackets, the
athleticism, the aggressive mindset, the defensive mindset ---
everything is different. In this era McEnroe will be lucky to have
someone serving him a juicy floater above the net to execute those
volleys.

And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
motions...

One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
beyond that.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 19:29:09
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Dec 26, 12:26 pm, "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>>>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>>>>>> P
>>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
>>>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
>>>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
>>>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
>>>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>>>>> P
>>>> You must be on drugs.
>>>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
>>>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>>>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
>>>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest most
>>>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
>>>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
>>>> look hard enough.
>>>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
>>>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
>>> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
>>> messenger, lol
>>> P
>> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
>> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
>> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
>> years.
>>
>> Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
>> being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
>> shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
>> eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
>> And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
>> threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
>> endure these days. Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
>> during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
>> there right now?
>
> For an example, check out this video of McEnroe vs Edberg Wimbledon
> 1989. Yes, McEnroe plays nicely at the net here, and shows touch and
> talent in his backhand return. But observe the movement of Edberg and
> the speed, power and spin in his shots. Compared to today's players,
> it's absolutely lacking. Edberg's movement at the baseline is awkward,
> he lacks speed, he cannot bend down enough, his passing shots are
> terrible and lack power, spin, placement, you name it.



er, '89 Mac was on crack & 5 yrs past his last slam win. How come you
don't mention the 61 60 62 Mac v Edberg USO match?




> Compared to
> today's players, Edberg doesn't scramble to get the ball back often
> enough. He isn't even half as athletic as today's players. Both
> players' shots look like slow-mo compared with today. The rackets, the
> athleticism, the aggressive mindset, the defensive mindset ---
> everything is different. In this era McEnroe will be lucky to have
> someone serving him a juicy floater above the net to execute those
> volleys.


The serve would set up nice volleys for Mac. Federer also sets up
volleys but hasn't got enough ability to do a whole lot with them.


>
> And even aesthetically, McEnroe doesn't look that good. He's got that
> jerky last-second shot thing going on for him, but compared to
> Federer, he is like Roseanne Barr to Federer's Monica Bellucci. Arms
> flailing around, looking confused all the time, nervous ticks and
> motions...
>
> One conclusion to be taken from here is that it was a different era.
> It must have been great for that era. But tennis has moved on and way
> beyond that.



That was real tennis when fans packed out stadiums. Today no one gives
a fuck outside 1 or 2 slam matches. Fans want to see pure tennis skill
- why sit through 3 hrs of bumrooting?


 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 22:26:00
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 11:05=A0am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net > wrote:
> On Dec 25, 7:12=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > > On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > >>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> > >>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> > >>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> > >>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all th=
ings
> > >>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course.=
..
> > >>>>> P
> > >>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Ma=
c's
> > >>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver =
I'll listen.
> > >>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> > >>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> > >>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> > >>> long... you'll be OK...
> > >>> P
> > >> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoa=
d
> > >> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > > ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > > players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac sayin=
g
> > > it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying i=
t
> > > repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > > Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>
> > > P
>
> > You must be on drugs.
>
> > If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> > was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>
> > I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
> > within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to suggest mo=
st
> > think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
> > remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> > look hard enough.
>
> > You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> > seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
> messenger, lol
>
> P

Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
years.

Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.
And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
endure these days. Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
there right now?


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 19:25:21
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
arnab.z@gmail wrote:
> On Dec 26, 11:05 am, Patrick Kehoe <pke...@telus.net> wrote:
>> On Dec 25, 7:12 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>>>>> P
>>>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>>>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>>>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>>>>> P
>>>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>>>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
>>>> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
>>>> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
>>>> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
>>>> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>>>> P
>>> You must be on drugs.
>>> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
>>> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>>> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
>>> within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest most
>>> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
>>> remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
>>> look hard enough.
>>> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
>>> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>>> - Show quoted text -
>> ++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
>> and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
>> messenger, lol
>>
>> P
>
> Never have been so many tennis greats and tennis writers unanimous
> about the supreme talent of one player as they have been about
> Federer. The praise just gushed and gushed forth during Federer's peak
> years.


Complete bullshit. I couldn't have missed all this as I read widely,
especially about tennis. The praise Federer is receiving is far less
than other greats at peak.

The plaudits re Gonzalez, Tilden, Laver etc were far greater no doubt
about it.


>
> Talent isn't just about airy-fairy touches and cute volleying. It's
> being at the right place at the right time and executing the right
> shot. Mac wasn't the complete package, his baseline game would be
> eaten alive today. His shot arsenal is lacking compared to Federer.



Oh fuck you must be joking!



> And Mac wouldn't be able to handle the acutely-angled or needle-
> threading baseline bombs that Stepanek and other net rushers have to
> endure these days.


You fucking miserable cunt.



> Mac couldn't even completely handle one Lendl
> during his time, how can he handle an army of Lendls that are out
> there right now?


Lendl would eat most of today's players alive & Mac made him look like a
newbie who couldn't even hold the racket properly.


 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 22:16:54
From: arnab.z@gmail
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 26, 6:46=A0am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
>
> Laver is superior, imo.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D1Q13_STOUBc&feature=3Drelated
>
> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.

Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley department.
But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
the effort.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 13:10:10
From:
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com > writes:

> On Dec 26, 6:46 am, Shakes <kvcsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> > Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>
>> >http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>
>> Laver is superior, imo.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q13_STOUBc&feature=related
>>
>> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.
>
> Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley department.
> But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
> the effort.

Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.


   
Date: 26 Dec 2008 22:34:08
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
pok@me.not.invalid wrote:
> "arnab.z@gmail" <arnab.zaheen@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Federer is better, imo. May be lacking a bit in the volley department.
>> But it's a much different era now. Honing your volleying is not worth
>> the effort.
>
> Some of the top juniors are outstanding volleyers.


arnab thinks Fed is only 'maybe' lacking in volley dept - stunning lack
of objectivity.



 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 21:05:18
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 7:12=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> >>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all thin=
gs
> >>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> >>>>> P
> >>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac'=
s
> >>>> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'=
ll listen.
> >>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> >>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> >>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> >>> long... you'll be OK...
> >>> P
> >> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> >> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> > players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
> > it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
> > repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> > Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>
> > P
>
> You must be on drugs.
>
> If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
> was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.
>
> I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
> within 5 yrs of retirement. =A0I can't even find anything to suggest most
> think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
> remarks? =A0There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
> look hard enough.
>
> You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
> seriously think that is more talented than Mac.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

++ It isn't me saying Fed is Talent GOAT... it's the tennis writers
and greats of the game who repeatedly say it... don't shoot the
messenger, lol

P


 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 16:46:40
From: Shakes
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0

Laver is superior, imo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q13_STOUBc&feature=related

excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 14:13:47
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Shakes wrote:
> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>
>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>
> Laver is superior, imo.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q13_STOUBc&feature=related
>
> excellent serve, volleying, passing shots, and athleticism.



Possibly, but nobody was able to wrong foot opponents as easily as Mac.
He made Lendl look like a fool in his best matches, not the no.2
player in the world.



 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 16:37:26
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 4:28=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
> >>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> >>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> >>> P
> >> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
> >> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll=
listen.
>
> > ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> > there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> > right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> > long... you'll be OK...
>
> > P
>
> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...

P




  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 11:18:38
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat

"Patrick Kehoe" <pkehoe@telus.net > wrote in message
news:3a55038b-68dc-4ebf-a97f-8a574e24b80c@q30g2000prq.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> >>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
> >>>>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
> >>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> >>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
> >>> P
> >> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
> >> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll
> >> listen.
>
> > ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> > there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> > right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> > long... you'll be OK...
>
> > P
>
> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
>++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
>players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
>it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
>repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
>Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...

It's called (desperately) marketting the sport after an era where the number
1 player (Sampras) didn't like to be marketted.




  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 14:12:16
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> On Dec 25, 4:28 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>> P
>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>> P
>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>> are a cut above.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> ++ "clearly"... LOL... so why aren't the major tennis writers and
> players saying this? Or Mac himself? Modesty? LOL... Why is Mac saying
> it's Federer who is the most talented male to play the game? Saying it
> repeatedly for years now... and Becker... and Wilander... and
> Agassi... denying it won't change the general consensus...
>
> P
>
>



You must be on drugs.

If you recall everyone was saying Borg was the most talented *when he
was playing* - today only his mum & dad say such things.

I'll bet you anything Federer will not be the consensus 'most talented'
within 5 yrs of retirement. I can't even find anything to suggest most
think he's most talented right now - you must be latching onto off-hand
remarks? There are quotes suggesting Hewitt was most talented if you
look hard enough.

You really must be a troll or newbie to look at Fed's talents &
seriously think that is more talented than Mac.







 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 16:18:39
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 1:11=A0pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> >> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> >>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0
>
> > ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> > developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>
> > P
>
> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
> genius/reflex at the net. =A0If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll li=
sten.

++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
long... you'll be OK...

P




  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 11:28:10
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>> P
>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>
> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
> long... you'll be OK...
>
> P
>
>


Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
are a cut above.



   
Date: 26 Dec 2008 21:10:02
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:28:10 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au >
wrote:

>Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>> P
>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.
>>
>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>> long... you'll be OK...
>>
>> P
>>
>>
>
>
>Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>are a cut above.


ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Funny how Mac, Laver and Hoad all disagree !

Keep trying.


    
Date: 27 Dec 2008 09:49:58
From: *skriptis
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat

"Dave Hazelwood" <the_big_kahuna@mailcity.com > wrote in message
news:irl9l450kdaniihjqh6cqmop26d6uvi1ri@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:28:10 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>>Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>> P
>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll
>>>> listen.
>>>
>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>>
>>> P
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>are a cut above.
>
>
> ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
>
> Funny how Mac, Laver and Hoad all disagree !

Hoad's been dead for 14 years.



> Keep trying.

yeah, you too.




     
Date: 27 Dec 2008 18:19:54
From: Dave Hazelwood
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 09:49:58 +0100, "*skriptis"
<skriptis@post.t-com.hr > wrote:

>
>"Dave Hazelwood" <the_big_kahuna@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>news:irl9l450kdaniihjqh6cqmop26d6uvi1ri@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:28:10 +1100, Whisper <beaver999@ozemail.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>>>> P
>>>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll
>>>>> listen.
>>>>
>>>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>>>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>>>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>>>> long... you'll be OK...
>>>>
>>>> P
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>>are a cut above.
>>
>>
>> ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
>>
>> Funny how Mac, Laver and Hoad all disagree !
>
>Hoad's been dead for 14 years.
>

So ? I have connections !


     
Date: 27 Dec 2008 21:02:22
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
*skriptis wrote:
> "Dave Hazelwood" <the_big_kahuna@mailcity.com> wrote in message

>>>
>>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad
>>> are a cut above.
>>
>> ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
>>
>> Funny how Mac, Laver and Hoad all disagree !
>
> Hoad's been dead for 14 years.
>
>
>
>> Keep trying.
>
> yeah, you too.
>
>


Haze is not a tennis newbie in terms of linear years, but as his
interest is solely on 1 player & not really the tennis aspect, he has
the wherewithal of a 2 month newbie.

Not surprising he doesn't know who Hoad is.




   
Date: 26 Dec 2008 11:18:37
From: Iceberg
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
"Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au > wrote in message
news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>> On Dec 25, 1:11 pm, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>> Patrick Kehoe wrote:
>>>> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>>>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>>>> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
>>>> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>>>> P
>>> Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
>>> genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll
>>> listen.
>>
>> ++ It isn't up to you and I to say, is it... the consensus is out
>> there, written about, defining this decade... and the experts say,
>> right now, in this era, Federer... don't worry... it won't last too
>> long... you'll be OK...
>>
>> P
>>
>>
>
>
> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad are
> a cut above.

I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.




    
Date: 26 Dec 2008 22:37:22
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Iceberg wrote:
> "Whisper" <beaver999@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:4954251e$0$15742$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>
>>
>> Federer is the most talented today yes, but clearly Mac, Laver & Hoad are
>> a cut above.
>
> I'd say Nadal is at least as talented if not more so, who else is as
> versatile, also Nadal's volley technique IS remakrably natural.
>
>



Rafa does have a good volleying instinct - that did surprise me a couple
of yrs ago in final.


 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 10:16:14
From: Scott
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 9:08=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0

how come it is so blurry?

nice clips. How about posting some Hoad clips and really make this a
nice XMas? :)



 
Date: 25 Dec 2008 10:07:21
From: Patrick Kehoe
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
On Dec 25, 6:08=A0am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au > wrote:
> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>
> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3DLHKIKEJ0

++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...


P


  
Date: 26 Dec 2008 08:11:50
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: xmas bonus vid : Talent goat
Patrick Kehoe wrote:
> On Dec 25, 6:08 am, Whisper <beaver...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> Highlights 1984 USO final;
>>
>> http://www.megaupload.com/?d=LHKIKEJ0
>
> ++ Yep... in 1984 he was considered Talent GOAT... as with all things
> developmental by nature, Mac no longer is Talent GOAT, of course...
>
>
> P




Sure as fuck isn't Federer - he shows nothing remotely close to Mac's
genius/reflex at the net. If you mean a revision of Hoad/Laver I'll listen.