2018 AO Men's QF: Chung v Sandgren

[Federberg]

As, of course, you wouldn't be shocked to find out that every socialist loves Stalin... I agree with the rest of your post but this "guilty by association" thing gives me shivers...

That's the exact opposite of what it is mate. Read it again..

 

[mrzz]

That's the exact opposite of what it is mate. Read it again..

(always remember I am not a native speaker)

Well, you said that you would not be shocked to later find out that a Trump supporter has Nazi sympathies, right? So that means either you suspected it, or that you find that a significant amount of Trump supporters have Nazi inclinations, so statistically you're not surprised. Therefore you are associating one thing with the other, and thus one group (Nazi inclined people) with the other (Trump supporters).

If you are saying it is the opposite, I believe you -- but something is really escaping me then.

And don't get me wrong, "Trump supporter" is also quite offensive in my book...

(yes, we are derailing the thread, but I guess the guy deserved some defense)

 

[Busted]

I'll go with Chung in 4...but only because the more he plays the tired he'll be for a SF against Roger. Hey...I'm not proud...any advantage...

 

[Denis]

Tonight is a big test for Chung. He beat Zverev and Djokovic consecutively, and I hope it does not get to his head. It was already tight the last time he played the staunch liberal and Clintonite Sandgren. He needs to be ready, because I am 100% convinced our civil rights fighter will be ready. The more I think of it, the more I think Sandgren might win.

 

[Federberg]

(always remember I am not a native speaker)

Well, you said that you would not be shocked to later find out that a Trump supporter has Nazi sympathies, right? So that means either you suspected it, or that you find that a significant amount of Trump supporters have Nazi inclinations, so statistically you're not surprised. Therefore you are associating one thing with the other, and thus one group (Nazi inclined people) with the other (Trump supporters).

If you are saying it is the opposite, I believe you -- but something is really escaping me then.

And don't get me wrong, "Trump supporter" is also quite offensive in my book...

(yes, we are derailing the thread, but I guess the guy deserved some defense)

It's venn diagram. Polling data shows that white supremacists strongly support Trump. But also a lot of Obama supporters flipped over to Trump. So it's definitely incorrect to say that all Trump supporters are racist, far from it. But it would be foolish to be surprised if a Trump supporter is a racist/ white supremacist. I'm not sure why this should merit being made cold by my lack of surprise. It's not a case of suspecting anything, just a reasonable understanding of the constituencies that supported Trump. Suggesting that I associate racism with Trump supporters is a mis-characterisation of what I'm saying. I hope you can see that?

 

[Federberg]

Tonight is a big test for Chung. He beat Zverev and Djokovic consecutively, and I hope it does not get to his head. It was already tight the last time he played the staunch liberal and Clintonite Sandgren. He needs to be ready, because I am 100% convinced our civil rights fighter will be ready. The more I think of it, the more I think Sandgren might win.

Lol! Are you thinking Sandgren couldn't abide losing to an Oriental?

 

[Denis]

Lol! Are you thinking Sandgren couldn't abide losing to an Oriental?

Well you never now what gets his juices flowing.

Seriously though: Sandgren is 'in the zone'. You probably recall that ridiculous run Martin Verkerk had at RG. Never won a match at a slam, then reaches the final, seeing the balls like mellons for two weeks. He does not seem to be the type of player that is thinking about his teenage dreams, his legacy, his previous wins, or what he is doing for his country. I think the guy very grounded and will put up a fight now that he has the opportunity. He is a dangerous customer in addition to a dubious social media user.

Chung seems ok in the mental department, so still hopeful. Exciting!

 

[mrzz]

It's venn diagram. Polling data shows that white supremacists strongly support Trump. But also a lot of Obama supporters flipped over to Trump. So it's definitely incorrect to say that all Trump supporters are racist, far from it. But it would be foolish to be surprised if a Trump supporter is a racist/ white supremacist. I'm not sure why this should merit being made cold by my lack of surprise. It's not a case of suspecting anything, just a reasonable understanding of the constituencies that supported Trump. Suggesting that I associate racism with Trump supporters is a mis-characterisation of what I'm saying. I hope you can see that?

Honest question: how large are the white supremacists as a group?

 

[Federberg]

Honest question: how large are the white supremacists as a group?

I'm sure the FBI has some idea. I couldn't pretend to come up with empirical data, but it's apparent that the numbers are far larger than anyone would like in 2018. To be clear, I'm talking about racists, white supremacists are a sub-set of that group that are more active promoting racist view points

 

[mrzz]

I'm sure the FBI has some idea. I couldn't pretend to come up with empirical data, but it's apparent that the numbers are far larger than anyone would like in 2018. To be clear, I'm talking about racists, white supremacists are a sub-set of that group that are more active promoting racist view points

I see. I was not expecting empirical data anyway, a nice educated guess would do fine.

But here is the thing... Yes, one is a sub-set of the other, but we can only be sure about white supremacists, given they are the ones who self proclaim themselves as such. On one hand, it makes sense to assume that there are a lot of "in the closet" racists out there, but on the other you can play out with those projections to fire some low blows, and use such projections as part of a political strategy.

 

[Federberg]

I see. I was not expecting empirical data anyway, a nice educated guess would do fine.

But here is the thing... Yes, one is a sub-set of the other, but we can only be sure about white supremacists, given they are the ones who self proclaim themselves as such. On one hand, it makes sense to assume that there are a lot of "in the closet" racists out there, but on the other you can play out with those projections to fire some low blows, and use such projections as part of a political strategy.

You've kind of lost me there. Are you asserting that my rather basic statistical inference is somehow flawed? I never expanded it to imply anything political. I merely took a logical step. I repeat... if we know that white supremacists voted for Trump in numbers, it shouldn't be a shock if we find out that a Trump supporter is a white supremacist. I'm not sure where the flaw in that thinking is. Remember I never called the guy a white supremacist. I just said I wouldn't be surprised if he was. If it clarifies things for you, I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't one either. Does that help?

 

[mrzz]

You've kind of lost me there. Are you asserting that my rather basic statistical inference is somehow flawed? I never expanded it to imply anything political. I merely took a logical step. I repeat... if we know that white supremacists voted for Trump in numbers, it shouldn't be a shock if we find out that a Trump supporter is a white supremacist. I'm not sure where the flaw in that thinking is. Remember I never called the guy a white supremacist. I just said I wouldn't be surprised if he was. If it clarifies things for you, I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't one either. Does that help?

Oh, sorry, I never meant that you said it explicitly (other posters did, though). But I guess that you agree that the (goodness of the) statistical inference depends on how large the white supremacist group actually is. I mean, if they are just 37 guys making noise, the chance that a Trump voter is a white supremacist is quite slim (I know you know that, and I exaggerated to make a point). All I am saying is that people can play with those numbers to identify one group as the other. As always, it all depends on empirical data (and that part I am sure you agree with).

 

[Denis]

For the record: Sandgren is a Trump supporter.

 

[Federberg]

For the record: Sandgren is a Trump supporter.

The plot thickens...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I have not seen Teenys from Tennessee play Tennis at all. So, I am not qualified to make comments.
Nonetheless, I cast my vote (for Chung in three).

 

[I.Haychew]

Lol! Are you thinking Sandgren couldn't abide losing to an Oriental?

Oriental? I'm extremely offended, and I'm not even Oriental! I feel the need to find a "safe space"! That said, I'll be pulling for the guy wearing the white robe and hood...because I have a hatred for visually challenged, vertically not-challenged Oriental tennis players who have vertically not-challenged torsos and vertically challenged legs.

 

[Moxie]

Early break to Chung.

 

[kskate2]

The Chung train keeps rolling. Takes the opener 6-4

 

[Moxie]

Amazing exchange, and Chung won it.

 

[shawnbm]

I’ve seen the future of tennis—to cop a phrase—and his name is Chung. This kid ain’t going anywhere but up. He has that thing—you know it when you see it. At times it appears he is not ending the point as soon as he can just to wear Sandgren down a bit more. He also hits it harder and is more aggressive. Very impressive