https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:

https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701

--

----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

The main points he made:

- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in history”

- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level

- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t to the highest levels of play that they used to be 🎾

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

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

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r> On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_

17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic �probably the best in history�- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level-
Reiterated that the elite players of today aren�t to the highest levels of play that they used to be Why do you lie?He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs
you ti follow the numbers.And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.These are Toni's words:"Djokovic is a great champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my
nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history�you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.Although I think [Roger] Federer has sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world
of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

https://www.eurosport.com/tennis/rafael-nadal-recovering-well-from-surgery-and-wants-to-return-for-2024-australian-open-says-uncle-to_sto9792217/story.shtml


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 12:53:40 PM UTC-4, *skriptis wrote:

PeteWasLucky <waleed...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup

Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in history”- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t
to the highest levels of play that they used to be 🎾

Why do you lie?

He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs you ti follow the numbers.

And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.

These are Toni's words:

"Djokovic is a great champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history…you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.

Although I think [Roger] Federer has sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.
--

----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

Do you have the Spanish version or are you lying too? :)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup

Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in history”- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t
to the highest levels of play that they used to be 🎾



Why do you lie?


He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs you ti follow the numbers.

And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.



These are Toni's words:

"Djokovic is a great champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history…you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.

Although I think [Roger] Federer has sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.




--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

*skriptis <skriptis@post.t-com.hr> Wrote in message:r> PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r> On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_

higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in
history”- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t to the highest levels of play that they used to be Why do you lie?He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the
numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs you ti follow the numbers.And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.These are Toni's words:"Djokovic is a great
champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history…you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.Although I think [Roger] Federer has
sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlhttps://www.
eurosport.com/tennis/rafael-nadal-recovering-well-from-surgery-and-wants-to-return-for-2024-australian-open-says-uncle-to_sto9792217/story.shtml-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html



I support his comeback.


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

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

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r> On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_

17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic �probably the best in history�- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level-
Reiterated that the elite players of today aren�t to the highest levels of play that they used to be Why do you lie?He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs
you ti follow the numbers.And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.These are Toni's words:"Djokovic is a great champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my
nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history�you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.Although I think [Roger] Federer has sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world
of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.-- ----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

I got the audio of Toni, and the translate gave the same version I provided.

So someone else is lying :)
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 13/09/2023 1:44 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701

Poor uncle Toni, I really feel for him. He was so convinced Rafa would
finish top of the slam heap - as was I. Must be a bitter pill to
realize the dream is dead. He shouldn't feel too bad, nobody could have predicted what Novak is doing. It's 1 in a billion type event. It will
take him a couple years to adjust to the new reality of Novak as the
clear goat of tennis, including the women's record.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 13/09/2023 2:34 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:

https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701

The main points he made:

- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in history”

- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level

- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t to the highest levels of play that they used to be 🎾

Carlos is already better than anybody from big 3 era aside from big 3,
and when he peaks may be better than the big 3.

Not sure what he means by Fed playing at a higher level? I agree Fed
won quickly and ruthlessly against the field, but that doesn't mean his
highest level was better than Novak's. This would have been a
reasonable assessment to me about 10 years ago, but not now given all
the evidence. For example Fed's highest level could never trouble Nadal
at FO, best he did was win 1 set, and they played 5 times. Novak beat
Nadal multiple times at FO including a 75 63 61 thrashing, and played
him close several other times eg 9-7 5th.

Uncle Toni is really hurting now that he sees Novak can go on to win a
few more slams from here. There simply is no room for debate, Novak is
king.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 9/13/2023 12:09 PM, Whisper wrote:

On 13/09/2023 1:44 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701

Poor uncle Toni, I really feel for him.  He was so convinced Rafa would finish top of the slam heap - as was I.  Must be a bitter pill to
realize the dream is dead.  He shouldn't feel too bad, nobody could have predicted what Novak is doing.  It's 1 in a billion type event.  It will take him a couple years to adjust to the new reality of Novak as the
clear goat of tennis, including the women's record.

He did...in RG...way more convincingly than Fed in super slow Wimby...

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 13/09/2023 2:53 am, *skriptis wrote:

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup

Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in history”- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t
to the highest levels of play that they used to be 🎾

Why do you lie?

He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs you ti follow the numbers.

And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.

These are Toni's words:

"Djokovic is a great champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history…you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.

Although I think [Roger] Federer has sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.

Yep. Everyone wants the numbers lol : )

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 13/09/2023 10:24, Whisper wrote:

On 13/09/2023 2:53 am, *skriptis wrote:

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

On Tuesday, September 12, 2023 at 11:44:17 AM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701 > > > -- > > > > > ----Android NewsGroup

Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.htmlThe main points he made:- Calls Djokovic “probably the best in history”- Says Federer played at a higher overall peak level- Reiterated that the elite players of today aren’t
to the highest levels of play that they used to be 🎾

Why do you lie?


He doesn't say Djokovic is "probably best", he says "the best by the numbers". Like it or not. He doesn't give an opinion but instructs you ti follow the numbers.

And he actually says "Federer might have played at higher level sometimes" which is true. Compared to 2023 Djokovic.



These are Toni's words:

"Djokovic is a great champion and it will be very difficult to reach him, not only for my nephew, but for anyone. It's very difficult to determine who is the best in history…you have to opt for Djokovic because the titles support him.

Although I think [Roger] Federer has sometimes managed to play at an even higher level, I think in the world of sport if we go by the numbers, Djokovic is without a doubt the best.

Yep.  Everyone wants the numbers lol : )

TT knows what he must do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJbsXeRc_Fw

Track 1 of the GOAT soundtrack - songs for a golden age https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfYzrXmFN84

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.

And that's the bottom line. You "enjoy" watching Federer and that's perfectly fine. Does it really matter so much for your daily life that Djokovic has statistically crossed/surpassed Federer? You should be able to say, "yes Djokovic is superior
according to the stats but I enjoy Federer's tennis more and what's next?" Enjoying a player doesn't mean we have to turn ourselves into a pretzel to claim said player is the greatest in every area when the evidence is clear that isn't the case. Accept
it and move on.


--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

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

On 13/09/2023 1:44 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701> > Poor uncle Toni, I really feel for him. He was so convinced Rafa would

finish top of the slam heap - as was I. Must be a bitter pill to realize the dream is dead. He shouldn't feel too bad, nobody could have predicted what Novak is doing. It's 1 in a billion type event. It will take him a couple years to adjust to the
new reality of Novak as the clear goat of tennis, including the women's record.

Let's remember to discuss this in ten years if we are still in this life, and see who is being talked about more.

I am sure you are watching Mcenroe and Pete tapes, what does this say about you? :)

You were dying for nadal to cross Federer because you hated Federer this much, then you got Djokovic crossing them both.

If I dislike Djokovic the same way you disliked Federer, then I should be dreaming that maybe Alcaraz cross Djokovic, but I don't have this in my mind, I would like to see him winning slams and dominating as the top three did, but the number of slams he
is going to win or actually anyone else is going to win, is controlled by many variables that vary from one player to another, year to year, era to era and of course the level of the tour and competition.

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.And that's the bottom line. You "enjoy" watching Federer and that's perfectly fine. Does it really matter so much for your daily life that Djokovic has

statistically crossed/surpassed Federer? You should be able to say, "yes Djokovic is superior according to the stats but I enjoy Federer's tennis more and what's next?" Enjoying a player doesn't mean we have to turn ourselves into a pretzel to claim
said player is the greatest in every area when the evidence is clear that isn't the case. Accept it and move on.

Still unhinged?
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 2:39:52 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:

..@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.And that's the bottom line. You "enjoy" watching Federer and that's perfectly fine. Does it really matter so much for your daily life that Djokovic

has statistically crossed/surpassed Federer? You should be able to say, "yes Djokovic is superior according to the stats but I enjoy Federer's tennis more and what's next?" Enjoying a player doesn't mean we have to turn ourselves into a pretzel to claim
said player is the greatest in every area when the evidence is clear that isn't the case. Accept it and move on.

Still unhinged?

Projection is a real thing, isn't it? You're exhibit A of that!

Again, enjoy Federer all you like, he was an all time great, that's fact #1. Fact #2 is, Djokovic has shown he's superior. You should be able to state both fact #1 and fact #2 without having a hissy fit or nervous breakdown! It's just not normal.

Enjoy your day. Maybe get away from the computer screen for 20 minutes and do something else? Or, are you physically chained to something?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 2:39:52PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> ..@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r > > > Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.And that's the bottom line. You "enjoy"

watching Federer and that's perfectly fine. Does it really matter so much for your daily life that Djokovic has statistically crossed/surpassed Federer? You should be able to say, "yes Djokovic is superior according to the stats but I enjoy Federer's
tennis more and what's next?" Enjoying a player doesn't mean we have to turn ourselves into a pretzel to claim said player is the greatest in every area when the evidence is clear that isn't the case. Accept it and move on. > > Still unhinged?Projection
is a real thing, isn't it? You're exhibit A of that!Again, enjoy Federer all you like, he was an all time great, that's fact #1. Fact #2 is, Djokovic has shown he's superior. You should be able to state both fact #1 and fact #2 without having a hissy
fit or nervous breakdown! It's just not normal.Enjoy your day. Maybe get away from the computer screen for 20 minutes and do something else? Or, are you physically chained to something?

You really can't help it, very out of control. You simply can't stop asking me how I should feel, how I should behave, etc.

Please seek professional help, seriously you need it.


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 2:56:16 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:

Wrote in message:r

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 2:39:52 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> ..@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r > > > Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.And that's the bottom line. You "

enjoy" watching Federer and that's perfectly fine. Does it really matter so much for your daily life that Djokovic has statistically crossed/surpassed Federer? You should be able to say, "yes Djokovic is superior according to the stats but I enjoy
Federer's tennis more and what's next?" Enjoying a player doesn't mean we have to turn ourselves into a pretzel to claim said player is the greatest in every area when the evidence is clear that isn't the case. Accept it and move on. > > Still unhinged?
Projection is a real thing, isn't it? You're exhibit A of that!Again, enjoy Federer all you like, he was an all time great, that's fact #1. Fact #2 is, Djokovic has shown he's superior. You should be able to state both fact #1 and fact #2 without having
a hissy fit or nervous breakdown! It's just not normal.Enjoy your day. Maybe get away from the computer screen for 20 minutes and do something else? Or, are you physically chained to something?

You really can't help it, very out of control. You simply can't stop asking me how I should feel, how I should behave, etc.

Please seek professional help, seriously you need it.

Again, simply projection on your part! You're the unhinged fan.

I know you're a bit slow but I'll explain it once again. I'm not asking you to "feel" anything you don't feel. I said, by all means, fantasize about Federer all day if you want. He was a one of a kind player. However, you can maintain those feelings
about him and yet still not act like a delusional mental patient when it's clear that statistically, Djokovic has amply shown that he's superior.

You'll be a better healthier person if you can move on from it.

We're done here or at least, I'm done for today.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Court_1 <olympia0000@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 2:56:16PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> Wrote in message:r> > On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 2:39:52 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:> ..@yahoo.com> Wrote in message:r > > > Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure,

but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.And that's the bottom line. You "enjoy" watching Federer and that's perfectly fine. Does it really matter so much for your daily life that Djokovic has statistically crossed/surpassed Federer? You
should be able to say, "yes Djokovic is superior according to the stats but I enjoy Federer's tennis more and what's next?" Enjoying a player doesn't mean we have to turn ourselves into a pretzel to claim said player is the greatest in every area when
the evidence is clear that isn't the case. Accept it and move on. > > Still unhinged?Projection is a real thing, isn't it? You're exhibit A of that!Again, enjoy Federer all you like, he was an all time great, that's fact #1. Fact #2 is, Djokovic has
shown he's superior. You should be able to state both fact #1 and fact #2 without having a hissy fit or nervous breakdown! It's just not normal.Enjoy your day. Maybe get away from the computer screen for 20 minutes and do something else? Or, are you
physically chained to something? > > You really can't help it, very out of control. You simply can't stop asking me how I should feel, how I should behave, etc. > > Please seek professional help, seriously you need it.Again, simply projection on your
part! You're the unhinged fan.I know you're a bit slow but I'll explain it once again. I'm not asking you to "feel" anything you don't feel. I said, by all means, fantasize about Federer all day if you want. He was a one of a kind player. However, you
can maintain those feelings about him and yet still not act like a delusional mental patient when it's clear that statistically, Djokovic has amply shown that he's superior. You'll be a better healthier person if you can move on from it.We're done here
or at least, I'm done for today.

Tough day?
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/09/2023 4:18 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

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

On 13/09/2023 1:44 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:> https://www.yardbarker.com/tennis/articles/federer_played_at_higher_level_but_djokovic_is_the_best_says_toni_nadal/s1_17131_39245701> > Poor uncle Toni, I really feel for him. He was so convinced Rafa would

finish top of the slam heap - as was I. Must be a bitter pill to realize the dream is dead. He shouldn't feel too bad, nobody could have predicted what Novak is doing. It's 1 in a billion type event. It will take him a couple years to adjust to the
new reality of Novak as the clear goat of tennis, including the women's record.

Let's remember to discuss this in ten years if we are still in this life, and see who is being talked about more.

I am sure you are watching Mcenroe and Pete tapes, what does this say about you? :)

You were dying for nadal to cross Federer because you hated Federer this much, then you got Djokovic crossing them both.

If I dislike Djokovic the same way you disliked Federer, then I should be dreaming that maybe Alcaraz cross Djokovic, but I don't have this in my mind, I would like to see him winning slams and dominating as the top three did, but the number of slams

he is going to win or actually anyone else is going to win, is controlled by many variables that vary from one player to another, year to year, era to era and of course the level of the tour and competition.

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.

I think the same way about Federer. I never rewatch his matches as they
bore me.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 6:08:27 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:

On 14/09/2023 4:18 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.

I think the same way about Federer. I never rewatch his matches as they
bore me.

Maybe because you're a dildo? At least consider the possibility before dismissing it.

Aside from that, I don't get why anyone with a life would waste time rewatching *anyone's* matches. Highlights are fun, but that's about it. The drama is done. There are far better ways to spend your time.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Some intentionally confuse things between eye-candy and absolute quality. (e.g. you can have all the best basketball dunks look way better if you lower the basket 10-20-30....50cm)

On clay: Kuerten vs Nadal -> of course Nadal is better, but gee this Kuerten was full of charisma and he had all those flashy shots.
On grass: love to have Mac there, or Becker, or Sampras - more propably they are playing it better with more bore game since Fed....
On HC: Well...Djoker is a kind of Bollittieri predicted (pre-1990) absolute?

I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?).

.mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:31:00 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

Some intentionally confuse things between eye-candy and absolute quality. (e.g. you can have all the best basketball dunks look way better if you lower the basket 10-20-30....50cm)

Roddick was Whispers eye candy. It seems Mac is an eye candy for you.
There was never nothing about him that was candy or quality like for me.

On clay: Kuerten vs Nadal -> of course Nadal is better, but gee this Kuerten was full of charisma and he had all those flashy shots.
On grass: love to have Mac there, or Becker, or Sampras - more propably they are playing it better with more bore game since Fed....

Surprisingly Mac wished many of times to play the game the way Federer did.

On HC: Well...Djoker is a kind of Bollittieri predicted (pre-1990) absolute?

I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?).

.mikko

What did he do to solve the puzzles? Gluten free? Extend the rallies from 30 to 50?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net> Wrote in message:r

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:30:16PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:> On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:31:00AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote: > > Some intentionally confuse things between eye-candy and absolute quality. (e.g. you can have all the best

basketball dunks look way better if you lower the basket 10-20-30....50cm)> Roddick was Whispers eye candy. It seems Mac is an eye candy for you. I am not particular Mac fan, maybe opposite, but he is better in GOAT lists than his GS resume says.> There
was never nothing about him that was candy or quality like for me.> > > > On clay: Kuerten vs Nadal -> of course Nadal is better, but gee this Kuerten was full of charisma and he had all those flashy shots. > > On grass: love to have Mac there, or Becker,
or Sampras - more propably they are playing it better with more bore game since Fed....> Surprisingly Mac wished many of times to play the game the way Federer did.Most wished that Fed would have beaten Nadal clearly. Game = spot on. But weakness/
cryptonite = not that good? (later Djoker exploited this even more severe - more mental edge than game edge?)> > On HC: Well...Djoker is a kind of Bollittieri predicted (pre-1990) absolute? > > > > I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle
many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?). > > > > .mikko> What did he do to solve the puzzles? Gluten free? Extend the rallies from 30 to 50?Djoker
beat Fed, Nadal, Murray, Wawrinka -gen, Djoker beat Zverev, Tsitsi, Thiem, Meds -gen, Djoker is doing quite well with Alcaraz, Sinner, Rune -gen....What puzzles you ask? Bring on Laver/Connors/Borg?.mikko

Nadal definitely was better on clay than anyone.
Regarding djokovic, you need to review the chronolgical sequence of events between him and Federer, and see if this trigger any thoughts or ideas.

If anyone believes that Federer should have continued to dominate Djokovic as they both were getting older, then I really don't know what to say.

Here is a nice 45 minutes, cast it to your TV.

https://youtu.be/S9ikf1iHAvE?si=eEHI52kOHheJXBjk


You will see how gradually Federer was phasing out and how Djokovic was phasing in as Djokovic was getting in his prime and Federer was phasing out.
It's part of life and athletes know it.
People were thinking that Federer was going to retire at 31.
At this stage, Federer was getting beaten mainly by Djokovic, Nadal, Murray etc.
It's amazing that he was able to take down Djokovic in the FO in 2011 after his long winning streak. Also, defeated Djokovic in the SF of Wimbledon and Murray in the final.

Then being able to recharge his game to beat nadal in AO 2017 and three times after that was really sweet.

His last win on Djokovic in London to deny him year End #1 was very good as well.

He can't phase out while the younger Djokovic and Nadal phase in because they are 5-6 years younger then somehow reverse the other couple of years later. As he said anything that came later in his career was bonus.


--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:30:16 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:31:00 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

Some intentionally confuse things between eye-candy and absolute quality. (e.g. you can have all the best basketball dunks look way better if you lower the basket 10-20-30....50cm)

Roddick was Whispers eye candy. It seems Mac is an eye candy for you.

I am not particular Mac fan, maybe opposite, but he is better in GOAT lists than his GS resume says.

There was never nothing about him that was candy or quality like for me.

On clay: Kuerten vs Nadal -> of course Nadal is better, but gee this Kuerten was full of charisma and he had all those flashy shots.
On grass: love to have Mac there, or Becker, or Sampras - more propably they are playing it better with more bore game since Fed....

Surprisingly Mac wished many of times to play the game the way Federer did.

Most wished that Fed would have beaten Nadal clearly. Game = spot on. But weakness/cryptonite = not that good? (later Djoker exploited this even more severe - more mental edge than game edge?)

On HC: Well...Djoker is a kind of Bollittieri predicted (pre-1990) absolute?

I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?).

.mikko

What did he do to solve the puzzles? Gluten free? Extend the rallies from 30 to 50?

Djoker beat Fed, Nadal, Murray, Wawrinka -gen, Djoker beat Zverev, Tsitsi, Thiem, Meds -gen, Djoker is doing quite well with Alcaraz, Sinner, Rune -gen....

What puzzles you ask? Bring on Laver/Connors/Borg?

.mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

You confuse older = worse

I am not confused, athletes especially in individual sports, are in their prime between the ages of 22,23 to 26-27.

If you really believe older doesn't mean worse, please tell me why can't players continue to dominate and win slams in their 40's and 50's and 60's.

Or maybe tell me when it's acceptable to say older = worse. Give me the exact point at which older = worse.




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:53:49 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:

MBDunc <mich...@dnainternet.net> Wrote in message:r

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:30:16 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:> On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:31:00 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote: > > Some intentionally confuse things between eye-candy and absolute quality. (e.g. you can have all the

best basketball dunks look way better if you lower the basket 10-20-30....50cm)> Roddick was Whispers eye candy. It seems Mac is an eye candy for you. I am not particular Mac fan, maybe opposite, but he is better in GOAT lists than his GS resume says.>
There was never nothing about him that was candy or quality like for me.> > > > On clay: Kuerten vs Nadal -> of course Nadal is better, but gee this Kuerten was full of charisma and he had all those flashy shots. > > On grass: love to have Mac there, or
Becker, or Sampras - more propably they are playing it better with more bore game since Fed....> Surprisingly Mac wished many of times to play the game the way Federer did.Most wished that Fed would have beaten Nadal clearly. Game = spot on. But weakness/
cryptonite = not that good? (later Djoker exploited this even more severe - more mental edge than game edge?)> > On HC: Well...Djoker is a kind of Bollittieri predicted (pre-1990) absolute? > > > > I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle
many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?). > > > > .mikko> What did he do to solve the puzzles? Gluten free? Extend the rallies from 30 to 50?Djoker
beat Fed, Nadal, Murray, Wawrinka -gen, Djoker beat Zverev, Tsitsi, Thiem, Meds -gen, Djoker is doing quite well with Alcaraz, Sinner, Rune -gen....What puzzles you ask? Bring on Laver/Connors/Borg?.mikko

Nadal definitely was better on clay than anyone.

But Nadal's clay record is so .... eh it is way too much more than ok.... (like Phelps, too good, actually backfires legacy?)

Regarding djokovic, you need to review the chronolgical sequence of events between him and Federer, and see if this trigger any thoughts or ideas.

If anyone believes that Federer should have continued to dominate Djokovic as they both were getting older, then I really don't know what to say.

You confuse older = worse.

People were thinking that Federer was going to retire at 31.
At this stage, Federer was getting beaten mainly by Djokovic, Nadal, Murray etc.
It's amazing that he was able to take down Djokovic in the FO in 2011 after his long winning streak. Also, defeated Djokovic in the SF of Wimbledon and Murray in the final.

Then being able to recharge his game to beat nadal in AO 2017 and three times after that was really sweet.

His last win on Djokovic in London to deny him year End #1 was very good as well.

He can't phase out while the younger Djokovic and Nadal phase in because they are 5-6 years younger then somehow reverse the other couple of years later. As he said anything that came later in his career was bonus.

Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.

Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press issues, ... at the end you have records.

Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can alone bring two.

I love to have my favourite players: safin, hingis, stich, kuerten, rios, seles = who have no burden to be GOAT....much easier...

.mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net> writes:

But Nadal's clay record is so .... eh it is way too much more than
ok.... (like Phelps, too good, actually backfires legacy?)

You confuse older = worse.

Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.

Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press
issues, ... at the end you have records.

Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can
alone bring two.

I love to have my favourite players: safin, hingis, stich, kuerten,
rios, seles = who have no burden to be GOAT....much easier...

.mikko

You're arguing with someone who thinks Sampras should have gone full
baseliner in his old age to preserve the body. Fact is, I don't think
Waleed even plays tennis based on his rock-bottom technical analysis. He
just walks around all day with a constant hard-on for Fed. Pretty sad.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

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

MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net> writes:>> But Nadal's clay record is so .... eh it is way too much more than> ok.... (like Phelps, too good, actually backfires legacy?)>>> You confuse older = worse.>>> Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.>> Folks

can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press> issues, ... at the end you have records.>> Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can> alone bring two.>> I love to have my favourite players: safin, hingis, stich,
kuerten,> rios, seles = who have no burden to be GOAT....much easier...>> .mikkoYou're arguing with someone who thinks Sampras should have gone fullbaseliner in his old age to preserve the body. Fact is, I don't thinkWaleed even plays tennis based on
his rock-bottom technical analysis. Hejust walks around all day with a constant hard-on for Fed. Pretty sad.

You can help MBD to answer the question I asked, and it's sad Sampras was miserable at age 29 even though he was playing serve and volley and was very excited to run away from the game after he got his last slam at age 31 while Agassi won many slams at
older age.
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14.9.2023 21.53, PeteWasLucky wrote:

Here is a nice 45 minutes, cast it to your TV.

https://youtu.be/S9ikf1iHAvE?si=eEHI52kOHheJXBjk

"I'm sure you'll be diplomatic and all that ..."

https://youtu.be/S9ikf1iHAvE?t=526

And Rogi proceeds to give us some dipwomacy. The next one is good too.
"A great effort by finishing [playing] even worse than him ... I don't
care anymore".

Lol. Those were the bitter days!

You will see how gradually Federer was phasing out and how Djokovic was phasing in as Djokovic was getting in his prime and Federer was phasing out.
It's part of life and athletes know it.
People were thinking that Federer was going to retire at 31.
At this stage,

Yeah, but he didn't. He still played some great tennis for a few years.
He still played close against Djok after that and beat him several
times. He still won maybe 4 slams after that Courier 31 remark. Won
some, lost some. That's the way it goes.

--
"And off they went, from here to there,
The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"
-- Traditional

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:14:06 AM UTC-4, Gracchus wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 6:08:27 AM UTC-7, Whisper wrote:

On 14/09/2023 4:18 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

Djokovic is an amazing athlete for sure, but he is not the genius of tennis I would enjoy watching.

I think the same way about Federer. I never rewatch his matches as they bore me.

Maybe because you're a dildo? At least consider the possibility before dismissing it.

Aside from that, I don't get why anyone with a life would waste time rewatching *anyone's* matches. Highlights are fun, but that's about it. The drama is done. There are far better ways to spend your time.

I agree. There are times where I do revisit a match. For example, I have re-watched portions of that Wimbledon 2019 final but stopped short of watching the last few games as I knew the unfortunate outcome. It was a great quality match but man, did
Federer blow that one!

But yes, I don't get these fans who constantly watch matches over and over or even fans who watch all these tennis tournaments and tennis matches daily. There are so many other things in life to do and much more productive ways to spend your time IMO.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 11:20:14 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:

MBDunc <mich...@dnainternet.net> writes:>> But Nadal's clay record is so .... eh it is way too much more than> ok.... (like Phelps, too good, actually backfires legacy?)>>> You confuse older = worse.>>> Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.>>

Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press> issues, ... at the end you have records.>> Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can> alone bring two.>> I love to have my favourite players: safin, hingis,
stich, kuerten,> rios, seles = who have no burden to be GOAT....much easier...>> .mikkoYou're arguing with someone who thinks Sampras should have gone fullbaseliner in his old age to preserve the body. Fact is, I don't thinkWaleed even plays tennis based
on his rock-bottom technical analysis. Hejust walks around all day with a constant hard-on for Fed. Pretty sad.

You can help MBD to answer the question I asked, and it's sad Sampras was miserable at age 29 even though he was playing serve and volley and was very excited to run away from the game after he got his last slam at age 31 while Agassi won many slams at

older age.

Sampras played the match of his life at USO 2002 final.

Compared to their 1990 USO final it was totally different world.

Obsession with GOATs blur things, I do not like Sampras, but his USO 2002 final showing was one of the pinnacles of tennis seen. This Goatness/Boatness
might have been surpassed; who cares. Enjoy tennis, enjoy highlights. Even if GOAT is named Wehate Becauseyoustink .... it is the drama of matches which counts, right?

.mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:31:00 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?).

I agree with you. He has solved so many players from Federer, Nadal to Medvedev and perhaps Alcaraz? We'll see how that future rivalry goes. Djokovic is without a doubt the best at studying players and figuring out ways to beat them. Too bad he can be
such a moron. This is his latest comment:

‘If I wasn’t from Serbia, I’d have been glorified on a sporting level many years ago’ – Novak Djokovic

https://www.tennis365.com/us-open/serbia-glorified-many-years-ago-novak-djokovic-us-open


STFU! Always the persecution complex with Djokovic and his maniac fans. That's not the reason people dislike him. It's been some of his actions/behaviors throughout the years. It's also because Fedal were so beloved. Safin was from Eastern Europe and
was beloved by a lot of people although I never cared for him much. I always felt I could get a STD by just looking at that greaseball.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 2:32:06 PM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 8:30:16 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 10:31:00 AM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

Some intentionally confuse things between eye-candy and absolute quality. (e.g. you can have all the best basketball dunks look way better if you lower the basket 10-20-30....50cm)

Roddick was Whispers eye candy. It seems Mac is an eye candy for you.

I am not particular Mac fan, maybe opposite, but he is better in GOAT lists than his GS resume says.

There was never nothing about him that was candy or quality like for me.

On clay: Kuerten vs Nadal -> of course Nadal is better, but gee this Kuerten was full of charisma and he had all those flashy shots.
On grass: love to have Mac there, or Becker, or Sampras - more propably they are playing it better with more bore game since Fed....

Surprisingly Mac wished many of times to play the game the way Federer did.

Most wished that Fed would have beaten Nadal clearly. Game = spot on. But weakness/cryptonite = not that good? (later Djoker exploited this even more severe - more mental edge than game edge?)

On HC: Well...Djoker is a kind of Bollittieri predicted (pre-1990) absolute?

I like Djoker most about how he has solved the puzzle many times during his 18th year at the top..... and that alone has made him fascinating to watch (what can he do with this new guy in the block?).

.mikko

What did he do to solve the puzzles? Gluten free? Extend the rallies from 30 to 50?

Djoker beat Fed, Nadal, Murray, Wawrinka -gen, Djoker beat Zverev, Tsitsi, Thiem, Meds -gen, Djoker is doing quite well with Alcaraz, Sinner, Rune -gen....

What puzzles you ask? Bring on Laver/Connors/Borg?

PWL lives in an alternate reality. He's wondering which puzzles Djokovic solved. LOL, now I've heard it all.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

You confuse older = worseI am not confused, athletes especially in individual sports, are in their prime between the ages of 22,23 to 26-27.If you really believe older doesn't mean worse, please tell me why can't players continue to dominate and win

slams in their 40's and 50's and 60's.Or maybe tell me when it's acceptable to say older = worse. Give me the exact point at which older = worse.----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

I am waiting for any of the big fans in rst to answer my question.
--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net> Wrote in message:r

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 11:20:14PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > MBDunc <mich...@dnainternet.net> writes:>> But Nadal's clay record is so .... eh it is way too much more than> ok.... (like Phelps, too good, actually backfires legacy?)>>>

You confuse older = worse.>>> Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.>> Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press> issues, ... at the end you have records.>> Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can>
alone bring two.>> I love to have my favourite players: safin, hingis, stich, kuerten,> rios, seles = who have no burden to be GOAT....much easier...>> .mikkoYou're arguing with someone who thinks Sampras should have gone fullbaseliner in his old age to
preserve the body. Fact is, I don't thinkWaleed even plays tennis based on his rock-bottom technical analysis. Hejust walks around all day with a constant hard-on for Fed. Pretty sad. > > You can help MBD to answer the question I asked, and it's sad
Sampras was miserable at age 29 even though he was playing serve and volley and was very excited to run away from the game after he got his last slam at age 31 while Agassi won many slams at older age.Sampras played the match of his life at USO 2002
final.Compared to their 1990 USO final it was totally different world.Obsession with GOATs blur things, I do not like Sampras, but his USO 2002 final showing was one of the pinnacles of tennis seen. This Goatness/Boatnessmight have been surpassed; who
cares. Enjoy tennis, enjoy highlights. Even if GOAT is named Wehate Becauseyoustink .... it is the drama of matches which counts, right? .mikko

Are you going to answer my question?

If you really believe older doesn't mean worse, please tell me why can't players continue to dominate and win slams in their 40's and 50's and 60's.

Or maybe tell me when it's acceptable to say older = worse. Give me the exact point at which older = worse.

--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 3:29:00 PM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:53:49 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:

If anyone believes that Federer should have continued to dominate Djokovic as they both were getting older, then I really don't know what to say.

You confuse older = worse.

People were thinking that Federer was going to retire at 31.
At this stage, Federer was getting beaten mainly by Djokovic, Nadal, Murray etc.
It's amazing that he was able to take down Djokovic in the FO in 2011 after his long winning streak. Also, defeated Djokovic in the SF of Wimbledon and Murray in the final.

Then being able to recharge his game to beat nadal in AO 2017 and three times after that was really sweet.

His last win on Djokovic in London to deny him year End #1 was very good as well.

He can't phase out while the younger Djokovic and Nadal phase in because they are 5-6 years younger then somehow reverse the other couple of years later. As he said anything that came later in his career was bonus.

Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.

Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press issues, ... at the end you have records.

Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can alone bring two.

He(PWL) has some kind of psychosis on this topic. I've never seen anything like it. It's some kind of protection mechanism although God only knows why somebody would need those with regards to a great pro tennis player who is a complete stranger.
Nobody will ever get through to him. It's a lost cause. You just have to run in the other direction.

I agree with you. Federer was great and had an artistry second to none IMO. But that artistry, along with the gushing media helped create a false God theory when discussing Federer. It's very hard to reconcile that a player who was so smooth with such a
beautiful game could have any flaws at all and that a player like Djokovic, who acted like a fool over the years and was basically a robot, could be greater. That's the problem a lot of people have with accepting Djokovic as greater.

For me, Federer is greater than Nadal. So it's--Djokovic>Federer>Nadal. However, there's room for debate when it comes to 2nd best between Federer and Nadal. What can't be debated in any way shape or form is who the number one greatest is. HIs stats are
impenetrable. :(

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 4:52:07 PM UTC-4, Pelle Svanslös wrote:

On 14.9.2023 21.53, PeteWasLucky wrote:

Here is a nice 45 minutes, cast it to your TV.

https://youtu.be/S9ikf1iHAvE?si=eEHI52kOHheJXBjk

"I'm sure you'll be diplomatic and all that ..."

https://youtu.be/S9ikf1iHAvE?t=526

Wow, I didn't know that existed. I'll have to watch that later.

And Rogi proceeds to give us some dipwomacy. The next one is good too.
"A great effort by finishing [playing] even worse than him ... I don't
care anymore".

Lol. Those were the bitter days!

LOL. Well, Federer was right back then because in those days, Djokovic was a headcase who retired in every other big match. Remember Roddick's comments about early Djokovic? However, did those comments ever come back to bite Federer. It gave Djokovic so
much fuel to be better and say FU to Federer for all those early salty comments.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 14/09/2023 22:22, Court_1 wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 3:29:00 PM UTC-4, MBDunc wrote:

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 9:53:49 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:

If anyone believes that Federer should have continued to dominate Djokovic as they both were getting older, then I really don't know what to say.

You confuse older = worse.

People were thinking that Federer was going to retire at 31.
At this stage, Federer was getting beaten mainly by Djokovic, Nadal, Murray etc.
It's amazing that he was able to take down Djokovic in the FO in 2011 after his long winning streak. Also, defeated Djokovic in the SF of Wimbledon and Murray in the final.

Then being able to recharge his game to beat nadal in AO 2017 and three times after that was really sweet.

His last win on Djokovic in London to deny him year End #1 was very good as well.

He can't phase out while the younger Djokovic and Nadal phase in because they are 5-6 years younger then somehow reverse the other couple of years later. As he said anything that came later in his career was bonus.

Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.

Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press issues, ... at the end you have records.

Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can alone bring two.

He(PWL) has some kind of psychosis on this topic. I've never seen anything like it. It's some kind of protection mechanism although God only knows why somebody would need those with regards to a great pro tennis player who is a complete stranger.

Nobody will ever get through to him. It's a lost cause. You just have to run in the other direction.

I agree with you. Federer was great and had an artistry second to none IMO. But that artistry, along with the gushing media helped create a false God theory when discussing Federer. It's very hard to reconcile that a player who was so smooth with such

a beautiful game could have any flaws at all and that a player like Djokovic, who acted like a fool over the years and was basically a robot, could be greater. That's the problem a lot of people have with accepting Djokovic as greater.

For me, Federer is greater than Nadal. So it's--Djokovic>Federer>Nadal. However, there's room for debate when it comes to 2nd best between Federer and Nadal. What can't be debated in any way shape or form is who the number one greatest is. HIs stats

are impenetrable. :(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dr57W6R1qVE

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

I am waiting for any of the big fans in rst to answer my question.

Of course older is worse, who expects players in their 60s to compete at the world level?


But maybe you ignore something which hurts you the most?

Djokovic seems to be most perfect player with (near) perfect technique allowing him to last long, very long?

Federer was great himself, but maybe not as much?

Djokovic and Federer are 6 years apart.

Compare those seasons?
Federer won 2 slams in 2017, Djokovic 3 in 2023.

Federer won AO.
Djokovic won AO.

Federer skips FO (sign of weakness, old age, injury?)
Djokovic wins FO


This second count is the difference.



--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

T24gMTUvMDkvMjAyMyA0OjUzIGFtLCBQZXRlV2FzTHVja3kgd3JvdGU6DQo+IE1CRHVuYyA8 bWljaGFlbGJAZG5haW50ZXJuZXQubmV0PiBXcm90ZSBpbiBtZXNzYWdlOnINCj4+IE9uIFRo dXJzZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMTQsIDIwMjMgYXQgODozMDoxNhpQTSBVVEMrMywgUGV0ZVdh c0x1Y2t5IHdyb3RlOj4gT24gVGh1cnNkYXksIFNlcHRlbWJlciAxNCwgMjAyMyBhdCAxMDoz MTowMBpBTSBVVEMtNCwgTUJEdW5jIHdyb3RlOiA+ID4gU29tZSBpbnRlbnRpb25hbGx5IGNv bmZ1c2UgdGhpbmdzIGJldHdlZW4gZXllLWNhbmR5IGFuZCBhYnNvbHV0ZSBxdWFsaXR5LiAo ZS5nLiB5b3UgY2FuIGhhdmUgYWxsIHRoZSBiZXN0IGJhc2tldGJhbGwgZHVua3MgbG9vayB3 YXkgYmV0dGVyIGlmIHlvdSBsb3dlciB0aGUgYmFza2V0IDEwLTIwLTMwLi4uLjUwY20pPiBS b2RkaWNrIHdhcyBXaGlzcGVycyBleWUgY2FuZHkuIEl0IHNlZW1zIE1hYyBpcyBhbiBleWUg Y2FuZHkgZm9yIHlvdS4gSSBhbSBub3QgcGFydGljdWxhciBNYWMgZmFuLCBtYXliZSBvcHBv c2l0ZSwgYnV0IGhlIGlzIGJldHRlciBpbiBHT0FUIGxpc3RzIHRoYW4gaGlzIEdTIHJlc3Vt ZSBzYXlzLj4gVGhlcmUgd2FzIG5ldmVyIG5vdGhpbmcgYWJvdXQgaGltIHRoYXQgd2FzIGNh bmR5IG9yIHF1YWxpdHkgbGlrZSBmb3IgbWUuPiA+ID4gPiBPbiBjbGF5OiBLdWVydGVuIHZz IE5hZGFsIC0+IG9mIGNvdXJzZSBOYWRhbCBpcyBiZXR0ZXIsIGJ1dCBnZWUgdGhpcyBLdWVy dGVuIHdhcyBmdWxsIG9mIGNoYXJpc21hIGFuZCBoZSBoYWQgYWxsIHRob3NlIGZsYXNoeSBz aG90cy4gPiA+IE9uIGdyYXNzOiBsb3ZlIHRvIGhhdmUgTWFjIHRoZXJlLCBvciBCZWNrZXIs IG9yIFNhbXByYXMgLSBtb3JlIHByb3BhYmx5IHRoZXkgYXJlIHBsYXlpbmcgaXQgYmV0dGVy IHdpdGggbW9yZSBib3JlIGdhbWUgc2luY2UgRmVkLi4uLj4gU3VycHJpc2luZ2x5IE1hYyB3 aXNoZWQgbWFueSBvZiB0aW1lcyB0byBwbGF5IHRoZSBnYW1lIHRoZSB3YXkgRmVkZXJlciBk aWQuTW9zdCB3aXNoZWQgdGhhdCBGZWQgd291bGQgaGF2ZSBiZWF0ZW4gTmFkYWwgY2xlYXJs eS4gR2FtZSA9IHNwb3Qgb24uIEJ1dCB3ZWFrbmVzcy9jcnlwdG9uaXRlID0gbm90IHRoYXQg Z29vZD8gKGxhdGVyIERqb2tlciBleHBsb2l0ZWQgdGhpcyBldmVuIG1vcmUgc2V2ZXJlICAt IG1vcmUgbWVudGFsIGVkZ2UgdGhhbiBnYW1lIGVkZ2U/KT4gPiBPbiBIQzogV2VsbC4uLkRq b2tlciBpcyBhIGtpbmQgb2YgQm9sbGl0dGllcmkgcHJlZGljdGVkIChwcmUtMTk5MCkgYWJz b2x1dGU/ID4gPiA+ID4gSSBsaWtlIERqb2tlciBtb3N0IGFib3V0IGhvdyBoZSBoYXMgc29s dmVkIHRoZSBwdXp6bGUgbWFueSB0aW1lcyBkdXJpbmcgaGlzIDE4dGggeWVhciBhdCB0aGUg dG9wLi4uLi4gYW5kIHRoYXQgYWxvbmUgaGFzIG1hZGUgaGltIGZhc2NpbmF0aW5nIHRvIHdh dGNoICh3aGF0IGNhbiBoZSBkbyB3aXRoIHRoaXMgbmV3IGd1eSBpbiB0aGUgYmxvY2s/KS4g PiA+ID4gPiAubWlra28+IFdoYXQgZGlkIGhlIGRvIHRvIHNvbHZlIHRoZSBwdXp6bGVzPyBH bHV0ZW4gZnJlZT8gRXh0ZW5kIHRoZSByYWxsaWVzIGZyb20gMzAgdG8gNTA/RGpva2VyIGJl YXQgRmVkLCBOYWRhbCwgTXVycmF5LCBXYXdyaW5rYSAtZ2VuLCBEam9rZXIgYmVhdCBadmVy ZXYsIFRzaXRzaSwgVGhpZW0sIE1lZHMgLWdlbiwgRGpva2VyIGlzIGRvaW5nIHF1aXRlIHdl bGwgd2l0aCBBbGNhcmF6LCBTaW5uZXIsIFJ1bmUgLWdlbi4uLi5XaGF0IHB1enpsZXMgeW91 IGFzaz8gQnJpbmcgb24gTGF2ZXIvQ29ubm9ycy9Cb3JnPy5taWtrbw0KPiANCj4gTmFkYWwg ZGVmaW5pdGVseSB3YXMgYmV0dGVyIG9uIGNsYXkgdGhhbiBhbnlvbmUuDQo+IFJlZ2FyZGlu ZyBkam9rb3ZpYywgeW91IG5lZWQgdG8gcmV2aWV3IHRoZSBjaHJvbm9sZ2ljYWwgc2VxdWVu Y2Ugb2YgZXZlbnRzIGJldHdlZW4gaGltIGFuZCBGZWRlcmVyLCBhbmQgc2VlIGlmIHRoaXMg dHJpZ2dlciBhbnkgdGhvdWdodHMgb3IgaWRlYXMuDQo+IA0KPiBJZiBhbnlvbmUgYmVsaWV2 ZXMgdGhhdCBGZWRlcmVyIHNob3VsZCBoYXZlIGNvbnRpbnVlZCB0byBkb21pbmF0ZSBEam9r b3ZpYyBhcyB0aGV5IGJvdGggd2VyZSBnZXR0aW5nIG9sZGVyLCB0aGVuIEkgcmVhbGx5IGRv bid0IGtub3cgd2hhdCB0byBzYXkuDQo+IA0KPiBIZXJlIGlzIGEgbmljZSA0NSBtaW51dGVz LCBjYXN0IGl0IHRvIHlvdXIgVFYuDQo+IA0KPiBodHRwczovL3lvdXR1LmJlL1M5aWtmMWlI QXZFP3NpPWVFSEk1MmtPSGhlSlhCamsNCj4gDQo+IA0KPiBZb3Ugd2lsbCBzZWUgaG93IGdy YWR1YWxseSBGZWRlcmVyIHdhcyBwaGFzaW5nIG91dCBhbmQgaG93IERqb2tvdmljIHdhcyBw aGFzaW5nIGluIGFzIERqb2tvdmljIHdhcyBnZXR0aW5nIGluIGhpcyBwcmltZSBhbmQgRmVk ZXJlciB3YXMgcGhhc2luZyBvdXQuDQo+IEl0J3MgcGFydCBvZiBsaWZlIGFuZCBhdGhsZXRl cyBrbm93IGl0Lg0KPiBQZW9wbGUgd2VyZSB0aGlua2luZyB0aGF0IEZlZGVyZXIgd2FzIGdv aW5nIHRvIHJldGlyZSBhdCAzMS4NCj4gQXQgdGhpcyBzdGFnZSwgIEZlZGVyZXIgd2FzIGdl dHRpbmcgYmVhdGVuIG1haW5seSBieSBEam9rb3ZpYywgTmFkYWwsIE11cnJheSBldGMuDQo+ IEl0J3MgYW1hemluZyB0aGF0IGhlIHdhcyBhYmxlIHRvIHRha2UgZG93biBEam9rb3ZpYyBp biB0aGUgRk8gaW4gMjAxMSBhZnRlciBoaXMgbG9uZyB3aW5uaW5nIHN0cmVhay4gQWxzbywg ZGVmZWF0ZWQgRGpva292aWMgaW4gdGhlIFNGIG9mIFdpbWJsZWRvbiBhbmQgTXVycmF5IGlu IHRoZSBmaW5hbC4NCj4gDQo+IFRoZW4gYmVpbmcgYWJsZSB0byByZWNoYXJnZSBoaXMgZ2Ft ZSB0byBiZWF0IG5hZGFsIGluIEFPIDIwMTcgYW5kIHRocmVlIHRpbWVzIGFmdGVyIHRoYXQg d2FzIHJlYWxseSBzd2VldC4NCj4gDQo+IEhpcyBsYXN0IHdpbiBvbiBEam9rb3ZpYyBpbiBM b25kb24gdG8gZGVueSBoaW0geWVhciBFbmQgIzEgd2FzIHZlcnkgZ29vZCBhcyB3ZWxsLg0K PiANCj4gSGUgY2FuJ3QgcGhhc2Ugb3V0IHdoaWxlIHRoZSB5b3VuZ2VyIERqb2tvdmljIGFu ZCBOYWRhbCBwaGFzZSBpbiBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZXkgYXJlIDUtNiB5ZWFycyB5b3VuZ2VyIHRo ZW4gc29tZWhvdyByZXZlcnNlIHRoZSBvdGhlciBjb3VwbGUgb2YgeWVhcnMgbGF0ZXIuIEFz IGhlIHNhaWQgYW55dGhpbmcgdGhhdCBjYW1lIGxhdGVyIGluIGhpcyBjYXJlZXIgd2FzIGJv bnVzLg0KPiANCj4gDQoNCg0KSG93IGNvbWUgeW91IGRvbid0IGFwcGx5IHNhbWUgbG9naWMg dG8gU2FtcHJhcyB2IEZlZGVyZXIgV2ltYmxlZG9uIA0KbWF0Y2g/ICBJcyBpdCBiZWNhdXNl IHlvdSdyZSBhIGhvbW9zZXh1YWwgaW4gbG92ZSB3aXRoIGEgU3dpc3MgdGVubmlzIA0KcGxh eWVyPw0K

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 15/09/2023 7:12 am, PeteWasLucky wrote:

PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com> Wrote in message:r

You confuse older = worseI am not confused, athletes especially in individual sports, are in their prime between the ages of 22,23 to 26-27.If you really believe older doesn't mean worse, please tell me why can't players continue to dominate and win

slams in their 40's and 50's and 60's.Or maybe tell me when it's acceptable to say older = worse. Give me the exact point at which older = worse.----Android NewsGroup Reader----https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

I am waiting for any of the big fans in rst to answer my question.

Many experts are saying Novak is at his best as a tennis player right
now. Meanwhile you're burying poor Roger at age 27. Not sure what
you're hoping to achieve?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

T24gMTUvMDkvMjAyMyA3OjE2IGFtLCBQZXRlV2FzTHVja3kgd3JvdGU6DQo+IE1CRHVuYyA8 bWljaGFlbGJAZG5haW50ZXJuZXQubmV0PiBXcm90ZSBpbiBtZXNzYWdlOnINCj4+IE9uIFRo dXJzZGF5LCBTZXB0ZW1iZXIgMTQsIDIwMjMgYXQgMTE6MjA6MTQaUE0gVVRDKzMsIFBldGVX YXNMdWNreSB3cm90ZTo+ID4gTUJEdW5jIDxtaWNoLi4uQGRuYWludGVybmV0Lm5ldD4gd3Jp dGVzOj4+IEJ1dCBOYWRhbCdzIGNsYXkgcmVjb3JkIGlzIHNvIC4uLi4gZWggaXQgaXMgd2F5 IHRvbyBtdWNoIG1vcmUgdGhhbj4gb2suLi4uIChsaWtlIFBoZWxwcywgdG9vIGdvb2QsIGFj dHVhbGx5IGJhY2tmaXJlcyBsZWdhY3k/KT4+PiBZb3UgY29uZnVzZSBvbGRlciA9IHdvcnNl Lj4+PiBGZWQgd2FzIGdyZWF0LCBidXQgLi4uIE5hZGFsIGFuZCBEam9rZXIuPj4gRm9sa3Mg Y2FuIHR3aXN0IGJldHdlZW4gZ29vZCBsb29rcywgbmljZSBnYW1lLCBhZ2UgaXNzdWVzLCBw cmVzcz4gaXNzdWVzLCAuLi4gYXQgdGhlIGVuZCB5b3UgaGF2ZSByZWNvcmRzLj4+IEN1cnJl bnRseSBldmVyeSBHT0FUIGNsYWltIHlvdSBjYW4gYnJpbmcgZm9yIE5hZGFsIG9yIEZlZCwg RGpva2VyIGNhbj4gYWxvbmUgYnJpbmcgdHdvLj4+IEkgbG92ZSB0byBoYXZlIG15IGZhdm91 cml0ZSBwbGF5ZXJzOiBzYWZpbiwgaGluZ2lzLCBzdGljaCwga3VlcnRlbiw+IHJpb3MsIHNl bGVzID0gd2hvIGhhdmUgbm8gYnVyZGVuIHRvIGJlIEdPQVQuLi4ubXVjaCBlYXNpZXIuLi4+ PiAubWlra29Zb3UncmUgYXJndWluZyB3aXRoIHNvbWVvbmUgd2hvIHRoaW5rcyBTYW1wcmFz IHNob3VsZCBoYXZlIGdvbmUgZnVsbGJhc2VsaW5lciBpbiBoaXMgb2xkIGFnZSB0byBwcmVz ZXJ2ZSB0aGUgYm9keS4gRmFjdCBpcywgSSBkb24ndCB0aGlua1dhbGVlZCBldmVuIHBsYXlz IHRlbm5pcyBiYXNlZCBvbiBoaXMgcm9jay1ib3R0b20gdGVjaG5pY2FsIGFuYWx5c2lzLiBI ZWp1c3Qgd2Fsa3MgYXJvdW5kIGFsbCBkYXkgd2l0aCBhIGNvbnN0YW50IGhhcmQtb24gZm9y IEZlZC4gUHJldHR5IHNhZC4gPiA+IFlvdSBjYW4gaGVscCBNQkQgdG8gYW5zd2VyIHRoZSBx dWVzdGlvbiBJIGFza2VkLCBhbmQgaXQncyBzYWQgU2FtcHJhcyB3YXMgbWlzZXJhYmxlIGF0 IGFnZSAyOSBldmVuIHRob3VnaCBoZSB3YXMgcGxheWluZyBzZXJ2ZSBhbmQgdm9sbGV5IGFu ZCB3YXMgdmVyeSBleGNpdGVkIHRvIHJ1biBhd2F5IGZyb20gdGhlIGdhbWUgYWZ0ZXIgaGUg Z290IGhpcyBsYXN0IHNsYW0gYXQgYWdlIDMxIHdoaWxlIEFnYXNzaSB3b24gbWFueSBzbGFt cyBhdCBvbGRlciBhZ2UuU2FtcHJhcyBwbGF5ZWQgdGhlIG1hdGNoIG9mIGhpcyBsaWZlIGF0 IFVTTyAyMDAyIGZpbmFsLkNvbXBhcmVkIHRvIHRoZWlyIDE5OTAgVVNPIGZpbmFsIGl0IHdh cyB0b3RhbGx5IGRpZmZlcmVudCB3b3JsZC5PYnNlc3Npb24gd2l0aCBHT0FUcyBibHVyIHRo aW5ncywgSSBkbyBub3QgbGlrZSBTYW1wcmFzLCBidXQgaGlzIFVTTyAyMDAyIGZpbmFsIHNo b3dpbmcgd2FzIG9uZSBvZiB0aGUgcGlubmFjbGVzIG9mIHRlbm5pcyBzZWVuLiBUaGlzIEdv YXRuZXNzL0JvYXRuZXNzbWlnaHQgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIHN1cnBhc3NlZDsgd2hvIGNhcmVzLiBF bmpveSB0ZW5uaXMsIGVuam95IGhpZ2hsaWdodHMuIEV2ZW4gaWYgR09BVCBpcyBuYW1lZCBX ZWhhdGUgQmVjYXVzZXlvdXN0aW5rIC4uLi4gaXQgaXMgdGhlIGRyYW1hIG9mIG1hdGNoZXMg d2hpY2ggY291bnRzLCByaWdodD8gLm1pa2tvDQo+IA0KPiBBcmUgeW91IGdvaW5nIHRvIGFu c3dlciBteSBxdWVzdGlvbj8NCj4gDQo+IElmIHlvdSByZWFsbHkgYmVsaWV2ZSBvbGRlciBk b2Vzbid0IG1lYW4gd29yc2UsIHBsZWFzZSB0ZWxsIG1lIHdoeSBjYW4ndCBwbGF5ZXJzIGNv bnRpbnVlIHRvIGRvbWluYXRlIGFuZCB3aW4gc2xhbXMgaW4gdGhlaXIgNDAncyBhbmQgNTAn cyBhbmQgNjAncy4NCj4gDQo+IE9yIG1heWJlIHRlbGwgbWUgd2hlbiBpdCdzIGFjY2VwdGFi bGUgdG8gc2F5IG9sZGVyID0gd29yc2UuIEdpdmUgbWUgdGhlIGV4YWN0IHBvaW50IGF0IHdo aWNoIG9sZGVyID0gd29yc2UuDQo+IA0KDQoNCllvdSBvbmx5IHVzZSB0aGlzIGFnZSBhcmd1 bWVudCB3aGVuIEZlZCB0dXJuZWQgMjcsIHRoaW5raW5nIGl0J3Mgc29tZSANCmtpbmQgb2Yg Z2V0IG91dCBvZiBqYWlsIGNhcmQgZm9yIGFsbCB0aGUgbG9zc2VzIHRvIFJhZmEvTm92YWsu ICBUaGVyZSANCndhcyBubyBtZW50aW9uIG9mIGFnZSB3aGVuIFNhbXByYXMgbG9zdCA3LTUg aW4gNXRoIHRvIEZlZGVyZXIuICBZb3Ugd2VyZSANCmZvYW1pbmcgYXQgdGhlIG1vdXRoLg0K

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 5:16:13 PM UTC-4, PeteWasLucky wrote:

MBDunc <mich...@dnainternet.net> Wrote in message:r

On Thursday, September 14, 2023 at 11:20:14 PM UTC+3, PeteWasLucky wrote:> > MBDunc <mich...@dnainternet.net> writes:>> But Nadal's clay record is so .... eh it is way too much more than> ok.... (like Phelps, too good, actually backfires legacy?)>>>

You confuse older = worse.>>> Fed was great, but ... Nadal and Djoker.>> Folks can twist between good looks, nice game, age issues, press> issues, ... at the end you have records.>> Currently every GOAT claim you can bring for Nadal or Fed, Djoker can>
alone bring two.>> I love to have my favourite players: safin, hingis, stich, kuerten,> rios, seles = who have no burden to be GOAT....much easier...>> .mikkoYou're arguing with someone who thinks Sampras should have gone fullbaseliner in his old age to
preserve the body. Fact is, I don't thinkWaleed even plays tennis based on his rock-bottom technical analysis. Hejust walks around all day with a constant hard-on for Fed. Pretty sad. > > You can help MBD to answer the question I asked, and it's sad
Sampras was miserable at age 29 even though he was playing serve and volley and was very excited to run away from the game after he got his last slam at age 31 while Agassi won many slams at older age.Sampras played the match of his life at USO 2002
final.Compared to their 1990 USO final it was totally different world.Obsession with GOATs blur things, I do not like Sampras, but his USO 2002 final showing was one of the pinnacles of tennis seen. This Goatness/Boatnessmight have been surpassed; who
cares. Enjoy tennis, enjoy highlights. Even if GOAT is named Wehate Becauseyoustink .... it is the drama of matches which counts, right? .mikko

Are you going to answer my question?
If you really believe older doesn't mean worse, please tell me why can't players continue to dominate and win slams in their 40's and 50's and 60's.

Or maybe tell me when it's acceptable to say older = worse. Give me the exact point at which older = worse.
--

----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

No answers yet, it's just a simple question.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Court_1 kirjoitti 15.9.2023 klo 0.08:

I always felt I could get a STD by just fooking that greaseball.

Fixed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

MBDunc <michaelb@dnainternet.net> Wrote in message:r

On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 10:49:07 PM UTC+3, TT wrote:> Court_1 kirjoitti 15.9.2023 klo 0.08: > > I always felt I could get a STD by just fooking that greaseball. > > Fixed.Highest level Fed ever played was probably AO 2016 3rd set when he

went all-in and managed to win a set from absolute peak Djoker. That was actually superb play..mikko


:)



--




----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, September 15, 2023 at 10:49:07 PM UTC+3, TT wrote:

Court_1 kirjoitti 15.9.2023 klo 0.08:

I always felt I could get a STD by just fooking that greaseball.

Fixed.

Highest level Fed ever played was probably AO 2016 3rd set when he went all-in and managed to win a set from absolute peak Djoker. That was actually superb play.

.mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)