Us Open 2012

[Cheesy]

What? That's the sillest thing ever. Just because he's "your player" means you should go up in arms when people don't praise him?



Boo Hoo I didn't praise Murray and lamented the long rallies instead. Get over it. And the Federer bit is an assumption as well pretty much like the rest of your responses in this thread. Based on.... nothing.



What is "my tennis"? I don't have a particular brand of tennis of my own. I like Federer's and Tsonga's style the most out of current players. Plenty of other players I like as well. Particularly the more agressive ones.

And I don't actually dislike the true baseliners either. As you said there should be variety. But I do think there's a bit of overkill happening. How could I have a preference eh?

No, I'm not saying that at all. Once you again you ignore any points I make by just twisting your words. I'm not saying that you have to go up in arms about it; all I'm saying is it's bit annoying when a guy comes in and talks a load of shit about the courts because his favourite player didn't win the tournament.

I'd think that someone who likes tennis would at least have some appreciation for a good match, even if it's not exactly to their taste, isn't of putting in snipy little comments about the style of play.

You generally constantly show bias towards players who are more aggressive, like the ones you mentioned. I don't really see how the game is in overkill. It's simply the case that we have more quality baseline players at the moment. It's a phase tennis is in and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. You have this bizarre view though that the courts are skewed in favour of the type of style you aren't really a fan of and it's a tad tedious now.

 

[Snake Plissken]

He posts better than you anyday.

that really stung

You can't compete with wit like that

 

[amolbhatia50k]

No, I'm not saying that at all. Once you again you ignore any points I make by just twisting your words. I'm not saying that you have to go up in arms about it; all I'm saying is it's bit annoying when a guy comes in and talks a load of shit about the courts because his favourite player didn't win the tournament.

You're making this out to be about something it's not. I'm fine with how this US Open wen't. Federer didn't it but I don't go into GS's expecting him to win anymore. I'm just enjoying the fag end of his career and him winning is now a bonus for me. I said what I said with no care for how Federer's US Open or how Djokovic's and Murray's went.

I'd think that someone who likes tennis would at least have some appreciation for a good match, even if it's not exactly to their taste, isn't of putting in snipy little comments about the style of play.

Maybe I do have some appreciation for the match? But I don't see why I need to post exactly what you want to see?

You generally constantly show bias towards players who are more aggressive, like the ones you mentioned. I don't really see how the game is in overkill. It's simply the case that we have more quality baseline players at the moment. It's a phase tennis is in and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it at all. You have this bizarre view though that the courts are skewed in favour of the type of style you aren't really a fan of and it's a tad tedious now.

Well I'm saying I prefer the agressive players. It's hardly some hidden bias creeping through my posts. I'm stating it. Clearly.

If you find it tedious then ignore it. I find your considerable bias and defensiveness with regards to Murray even more tedious.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

that really stung

You can't compete with wit like that

True. But you can use full stops and capital letters.

 

[Snake Plissken]

True. But you can use full stops and capital letters.

kicking me when I'm down

You'd probably hit a guy with glasses too.

 

[CheadleBeagle]

If I can butt in here, I happen to also like the all court attacking game of which Roger Federer is the best example. I'm glad Murray won yesterday but some of the rallies were tedious and almost every point was the same war of attrition. Nearly all tennis is now played like clay court tennis and I have never liked clay court tennis at all so the match was not to may taste but that is my opinion. I like a court which gives the all court attacking player a chance and there were times yesterday where I screamed for someone to get to the net when they had the chance and shorten the point but it rarely happened. Because of the style of play of these guys I doubt any of them will be winning major titles when they are 30 + as they will be wrecked by then. Because Roger does not play this way he is still out there and still winning thank God.

 

[ILBB15]

If I can butt in here, I happen to also like the all court attacking game of which Roger Federer is the best example. I'm glad Murray won yesterday but some of the rallies were tedious and almost every point was the same war of attrition. Nearly all tennis is now played like clay court tennis and I have never liked clay court tennis at all so the match was not to may taste but that is my opinion. I like a court which gives the all court attacking player a chance and there were times yesterday where I screamed for someone to get to the net when they had the chance and shorten the point but it rarely happened. Because of the style of play of these guys I doubt any of them will be winning major titles when they are 30 + as they will be wrecked by then. Because Roger does not play this way he is still out there and still winning thank God.

I see your point but yesterdays match shouldn't really be used as an example. The wind was causing all sorts of trouble and both of them struggled to get into any kind of rythm really because of the unability to anticipate the ball properly.

Had it not been for the wind the match would have probably looked like their last Aussie Open meeting, full of attacking tennis.

 

[Snake Plissken]

remember the photo of Zlatan and Pique?

 

[Mihajlovic]

Both good guys. Would have never happened if any one of them were Federer, that bitch of a sore loser.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Both good guys. Would have never happened if any one of them were Federer, that bitch of a sore loser.

The greatest winners tend to be bad losers (eg. SAF)

 

[Hitchcocker]

Both good guys. Would have never happened if any one of them were Federer, that bitch of a sore loser.

Touche. He'd probably highlight his GS wins rather than praise Murray. Murray's lucky he played an opponent willing to share the limelight for his final.