100 Weeks at #1 for Nole

[Kieran]

Collapse in my book but please do provide me more Merriam style definitions...

I would not send a class of eager schoolchildren to ask you to define a word accurately, if you think a collapse is a slo-mo manouevre.

There ya go, tale your pick. You might notice how often they include the word "suddenly..."

 

[DarthFed]

Collapse in my book but please do provide me more Merriam style definitions...

I would not send a class of eager schoolchildren to ask you to define a word accurately, if you think a collapse is a slo-mo manouevre.

There ya go, tale your pick. You might notice how often they include the word "suddenly..."

And which of those refers to sports? But you can keep insulting and then play innocent victim the second it is returned.

In your world losing to Nadal at Wimbledon is "heroic" and losing a 4-2 lead and taking Nadal to a 9-7 loss is a show of steel. Maybe you should check your definitions :nono

 

[Kieran]

Collapse in my book but please do provide me more Merriam style definitions...

I would not send a class of eager schoolchildren to ask you to define a word accurately, if you think a collapse is a slo-mo manouevre.

There ya go, tale your pick. You might notice how often they include the word "suddenly..."

And which of those refers to sports? But you can keep insulting and then play innocent victim the second it is returned.

In your world losing to Nadal at Wimbledon is "heroic" and losing a 4-2 lead and taking Nadal to a 9-7 loss is a show of steel. Maybe you should check your definitions :nono

Ah okay, I missed that. The word "collapse" takes on a completely different meaning when applied to sports. :nono

Fact is, I'm not insulting you. I'm trying to get you to see that the English language can't so easily be re-arranged or abused just to fit your definition of what happened in Paris.

No need to put words in my mouth, either. I usually choose them fairly carefully...

 

[DarthFed]

Collapse in my book but please do provide me more Merriam style definitions...

I would not send a class of eager schoolchildren to ask you to define a word accurately, if you think a collapse is a slo-mo manouevre.

There ya go, tale your pick. You might notice how often they include the word "suddenly..."

And which of those refers to sports? But you can keep insulting and then play innocent victim the second it is returned.

In your world losing to Nadal at Wimbledon is "heroic" and losing a 4-2 lead and taking Nadal to a 9-7 loss is a show of steel. Maybe you should check your definitions :nono

Ah okay, I missed that. The word "collapse" takes on a completely different meaning when applied to sports. :nono

Fact is, I'm not insulting you. I'm trying to get you to see that the English language can't so easily be re-arranged or abused just to fit your definition of what happened in Paris.

No need to put words in my mouth, either. I usually choose them fairly carefully...

How did I put words in your mouth? Clearly you think Novak showed great fight to take it to 9-7 after being up 4-2. And you specifically mentioned how heroic Roger was in Wimbledon 2008. Should I challenge your definition of the word heroic? It certainly looks laughable when written...

Collapse is a word often used in sports just like choking. The literal definitions of the words do not apply. So there really is no reason for you to be so hung up on someone's different take of the word applied to sports. Yes, the roof didn't collapse on Novak at Paris, and he didn't fall back unconscious onto the court. Jana Novotna didn't choke on ham sandwiches on court. Ya happy now??

 

[Front242]

Sorry to say, and I mentioned this in the chat during the final, but Novak has become the new Lendl when it comes to stinking it up in slam finals. Hopefully 2014 will be better for his sake and his fans. We'll see how the rest of the year goes too of course. I'm sure he's keen to defend the WTF. Much like Fed, Djokovic's year has been all too centered on W.T.F?! except Fed's has been practically everywhere and Djokovic's letdowns have been always on the big stage at the most critical times. It's a bad, bad downward spiral he needs to fix. He's becoming Mr. Self Destruct. Now, enough with my NIN puns.

 

[Kieran]

Collapse is a word often used in sports just like choking. The literal definitions of the words do not apply. So there really is no reason for you to be so hung up on someone's different take of the word applied to sports. Yes, the roof didn't collapse on Novak at Paris, and he didn't fall back unconscious onto the court. Jana Novotna didn't choke on ham sandwiches on court. Ya happy now??

Nearly. At least you've acknowledged that we shouldn't take the word "collapse" to literally mean collapse. In other words, it became meaningless the way you used it. If he choked, by the way - and he did - he also recovered immediately and won the next point.

And then fought on for nine more games after he lost serve. Collapse, yes, if by collapse you mean he didn't...

 

[Front242]

That match was over after Novak decided to hump the net. I watched till the end but the outcome was never in doubt after that. Remember how successful Fed was last year when he set his mind to ironing out the lulls in his game? Novak needs to do the same and he could quite possibly have won 3 slams this year. Now, regarding lulls in Fed's game for 2013 Hypnosis and maybe a visit to the eye doctor. Hopefully next year will be better. This year was fugly.

 

[DarthFed]

Collapse is a word often used in sports just like choking. The literal definitions of the words do not apply. So there really is no reason for you to be so hung up on someone's different take of the word applied to sports. Yes, the roof didn't collapse on Novak at Paris, and he didn't fall back unconscious onto the court. Jana Novotna didn't choke on ham sandwiches on court. Ya happy now??

Nearly. At least you've acknowledged that we shouldn't take the word "collapse" to literally mean collapse. In other words, it became meaningless the way you used it. If he choked, by the way - and he did - he also recovered immediately and won the next point.

And then fought on for nine more games after he lost serve. Collapse, yes, if by collapse you mean he didn't...

Choked is meaningless the way you used it since he literally didn't choke. Using the word heroic to describe the loser of a match is as weird as it gets too. I could think of a thousand words to use before saying that. See how it is easy to get hung up on nearly every word? Anyways we are talking in circles...well not literally circles as that would be impossible

 

[Kieran]

Choked is meaningless the way you used it since he literally didn't choke. Using the word heroic to describe the loser of a match is as weird as it gets too. I could think of a thousand words to use before saying that. See how it is easy to get hung up on nearly every word? Anyways we are talking in circles...well not literally circles as that would be impossible

Actually I'm literally going around the room in circles so it's fine.

Choked and heroic are apt metaphors - we know what's being said. Collapsed isn't apt for a set that went to 9-7. It suggests something abrupt and violent, not something that lingered for another 9 games.

The only reason why I'm persisting with it, by the way, is that there's a double insult in calling it a collapse - one to each player. It's unnecessarily negative about Novak's effort after that game, and it makes Rafa look tardy in putting his man to the floor, given how he'd collapsed so suddenly a long time before the end...

 

[Front242]

He never got the break back after he went back on serve at 4-3 and he never was going to after he humped the net and blew his lead/load so he was only delaying the inevitable.

 

[DarthFed]

Choked is meaningless the way you used it since he literally didn't choke. Using the word heroic to describe the loser of a match is as weird as it gets too. I could think of a thousand words to use before saying that. See how it is easy to get hung up on nearly every word? Anyways we are talking in circles...well not literally circles as that would be impossible

Actually I'm literally going around the room in circles so it's fine.

Choked and heroic are apt metaphors - we know what's being said. Collapsed isn't apt for a set that went to 9-7. It suggests something abrupt and violent, not something that lingered for another 9 games.

The only reason why I'm persisting with it, by the way, is that there's a double insult in calling it a collapse - one to each player. It's unnecessarily negative about Novak's effort after that game, and it makes Rafa look tardy in putting his man to the floor, given how he'd collapsed so suddenly a long time before the end...

And it goes full circle, we are in disagreement in the use of the words. To you Roger losing to Rafa at Wimbledon was heroic on his part. To me someone barging into the net and losing 7 of 10 games when he was close to victory is collapsing.

Different sport but the most epic NFL "collapse" was one in which a backup led a team down 35-3 at half to a 41-38 overtime win. I guess you can't call the loss a sudden one but it certainly deserves some metaphor. I'd call it an epic collapse, choke or something along those lines even if it took 2 hours for the 2nd half and overtime to play out.

 

[Front242]

Haas v Fed RG 2009. One point when Fed was down 2 sets to 0 and 4-4 30-30 changed the match. Collapse/choke by Haas or heroic/clutch by Fed? Just want to get the Nadal fanbase viewpoint seeing as we hear warrior and heroic so much when describing him. Personally I think Haas completely lost the plot when he lost that point.

 

[DarthFed]

Haas v Fed RG 2009. One point when Fed was down 2 sets to 0 and 4-4 30-30 changed the match. Collpase/choke by Haas or heroic by Fed? Just want to get the Nadal fanbase viewpoint seeing as we hear warrior and heroic so much when describing him. Personally I think Haas completely lost the plot when he lost that point.

To some Fed is only heroic when he loses

Another good example here. Haas won 2 games and was still on court an hour after losing that game. I guess it isn't sudden enough for the whole thing to be called a "collapse" And since he didn't literally start choking out there I'm not sure what to call that loss

 

[Kieran]

Haas v Fed RG 2009. One point when Fed was down 2 sets to 0 and 4-4 30-30 changed the match. Collapse/choke by Haas or heroic/clutch by Fed? Just want to get the Nadal fanbase viewpoint seeing as we hear warrior and heroic so much when describing him. Personally I think Haas completely lost the plot when he lost that point.

Absolutely! And a collapse! How many more games he won after that? That's a collapse - sudden and irreversible, his resistance went kaput...

 

[Front242]

Haas v Fed RG 2009. One point when Fed was down 2 sets to 0 and 4-4 30-30 changed the match. Collapse/choke by Haas or heroic/clutch by Fed? Just want to get the Nadal fanbase viewpoint seeing as we hear warrior and heroic so much when describing him. Personally I think Haas completely lost the plot when he lost that point.

Absolutely! And a collapse! How many more games he won after that? That's a collapse - sudden and irreversible, his resistance went kaput...

2 games.....so yes, that's a definite collapse. Fed won 6-7 (4/7), 5-7, 6-4, 6-0, 6-2

 

[brokenshoelace]

A collapse was Federer against Nadal at the AO in 2009.

 

[Front242]

A collapse was Federer against Nadal at the AO in 2009.

Don't remind me. God, it's killing me

 

[Kieran]

A collapse was Federer against Nadal at the AO in 2009.

On the podium afterwards? Most certainly!

 

[Front242]

A collapse was Federer against Nadal at the AO in 2009.

On the podium afterwards? Most certainly!

In the 5th set too, ya dolt I've seen Nadal cry too against Djokovic

 

[Kieran]

A collapse was Federer against Nadal at the AO in 2009.

On the podium afterwards? Most certainly!

In the 5th set too, ya dolt I've seen Nadal cry too against Djokovic

Yeah, couple of weeks ago...