59 winners to 13 winners: 46 more? Are you kidding me?

[brokenshoelace]

AP, you missed the original joke from Riotbeard. Read back to the beginning of this quote. I accused Cali of having no sense of humor, (and he doesn't,) but I thought you did. :s

No, Cali just has a different type of humor than your tepid, airheaded, and frivolous "humor" rooted in false assumptions about an array of matters.

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

 

[Front242]

AP, you missed the original joke from Riotbeard. Read back to the beginning of this quote. I accused Cali of having no sense of humor, (and he doesn't,) but I thought you did. :s

No, Cali just has a different type of humor than your tepid, airheaded, and frivolous "humor" rooted in false assumptions about an array of matters.

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

but mostly

 

[calitennis127]

AP, you missed the original joke from Riotbeard. Read back to the beginning of this quote. I accused Cali of having no sense of humor, (and he doesn't,) but I thought you did. :s

No, Cali just has a different type of humor than your tepid, airheaded, and frivolous "humor" rooted in false assumptions about an array of matters.

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

If I recall correctly, when I made the "flip the switch" comment, it was in response to trivial practical minds like you making too big a deal out of some of his early recent losses. I then went on to predict a strong week for Federer and him actually reaching the final.

Both happened.

 

[brokenshoelace]

AP, you missed the original joke from Riotbeard. Read back to the beginning of this quote. I accused Cali of having no sense of humor, (and he doesn't,) but I thought you did. :s

No, Cali just has a different type of humor than your tepid, airheaded, and frivolous "humor" rooted in false assumptions about an array of matters.

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

If I recall correctly, when I made the "flip the switch" comment, it was in response to trivial practical minds like you making too big a deal out of some of his early recent losses. I then went on to predict a strong week for Federer and him actually reaching the final.

Both happened.

The flip a switch comment was in regards to Federer against the big 4. Not against Benoit Paire. He doesn't need a switch to beat him so your prediction (ballsy as it was!) is irrelevant.

 

[calitennis127]

AP, you missed the original joke from Riotbeard. Read back to the beginning of this quote. I accused Cali of having no sense of humor, (and he doesn't,) but I thought you did. :s

No, Cali just has a different type of humor than your tepid, airheaded, and frivolous "humor" rooted in false assumptions about an array of matters.

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

If I recall correctly, when I made the "flip the switch" comment, it was in response to trivial practical minds like you making too big a deal out of some of his early recent losses. I then went on to predict a strong week for Federer and him actually reaching the final.

Both happened.

The flip a switch comment was in regards to Federer against the big 4. Not against Benoit Paire. He doesn't need a switch to beat him so your prediction (ballsy as it was!) is irrelevant.

It was not about Federer against the Big 4. We were talking about his recent results, genius. LOL. Suffering from the problems of old age that you obsess over with Federer?

 

[brokenshoelace]

No, Cali just has a different type of humor than your tepid, airheaded, and frivolous "humor" rooted in false assumptions about an array of matters.

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

If I recall correctly, when I made the "flip the switch" comment, it was in response to trivial practical minds like you making too big a deal out of some of his early recent losses. I then went on to predict a strong week for Federer and him actually reaching the final.

Both happened.

The flip a switch comment was in regards to Federer against the big 4. Not against Benoit Paire. He doesn't need a switch to beat him so your prediction (ballsy as it was!) is irrelevant.

It was not about Federer against the Big 4. We were talking about his recent results, genius. LOL. Suffering from the problems of old age that you obsess over with Federer?

Yeah, I'll just flip a switch and be as good as new.

 

[calitennis127]

Good. I hope you see the humor in today's scoreline then, as "still in his prime, just flip a switch Federer" got crushed.

If I recall correctly, when I made the "flip the switch" comment, it was in response to trivial practical minds like you making too big a deal out of some of his early recent losses. I then went on to predict a strong week for Federer and him actually reaching the final.

Both happened.

The flip a switch comment was in regards to Federer against the big 4. Not against Benoit Paire. He doesn't need a switch to beat him so your prediction (ballsy as it was!) is irrelevant.

It was not about Federer against the Big 4. We were talking about his recent results, genius. LOL. Suffering from the problems of old age that you obsess over with Federer?

Yeah, I'll just flip a switch and be as good as new.

But I said the "flip-the-switch" quality only belongs to those who are really, really talented.

Rotterdam 2012 final - what a display of tennis. I wish you'd watch it, just once. Just once.

 

[brokenshoelace]

If I recall correctly, when I made the "flip the switch" comment, it was in response to trivial practical minds like you making too big a deal out of some of his early recent losses. I then went on to predict a strong week for Federer and him actually reaching the final.

Both happened.

The flip a switch comment was in regards to Federer against the big 4. Not against Benoit Paire. He doesn't need a switch to beat him so your prediction (ballsy as it was!) is irrelevant.

It was not about Federer against the Big 4. We were talking about his recent results, genius. LOL. Suffering from the problems of old age that you obsess over with Federer?

Yeah, I'll just flip a switch and be as good as new.

But I said the "flip-the-switch" quality only belongs to those who are really, really talented.

Rotterdam 2012 final - what a display of tennis. I wish you'd watch it, just once. Just once.

That was a year ago. The more he gets up there in age, the less likely he is to replicate these sorts of performances on a consistent basis, and the less likely he is to switch that "switch."

Keep in mind, I say this as someone who predicts Federer will do really well at Wimbledon, for instance.

 

[calitennis127]

The flip a switch comment was in regards to Federer against the big 4. Not against Benoit Paire. He doesn't need a switch to beat him so your prediction (ballsy as it was!) is irrelevant.

It was not about Federer against the Big 4. We were talking about his recent results, genius. LOL. Suffering from the problems of old age that you obsess over with Federer?

Yeah, I'll just flip a switch and be as good as new.

But I said the "flip-the-switch" quality only belongs to those who are really, really talented.

Rotterdam 2012 final - what a display of tennis. I wish you'd watch it, just once. Just once.

That was a year ago. The more he gets up there in age, the less likely he is to replicate these sorts of performances on a consistent basis, and the less likely he is to switch that "switch."

Fine, but does this in any way excuse many of his losses in the last 3 to 5 years against the Top 4 in particular, matches he should have won and was in position to win?

No.

My problem with those whole line of thinking is that the likes of Darth (obviously you don't share his bias) pull out the "Federer isn't playing his generation" card every time he loses to Djokovic or Murray or Nadal, when the main reasons for him losing have not been age-related. It is preposterous to blame a 27-year-old losing to a 22-year-old or a 29-year-old losing to a 24-year-old on age, when the older player is healthy enough to be in the Top 10, or in Federer's case, the Top 3.

That is my problem.

Now, was today ugly? Sure it was. If Federer was 6 years younger, his knees wouldn't look as brittle as they have in 2013, particularly the 2013 clay season (they did not look like this in 2012), but all that would have meant is Federer would have provided a little bit more resistance in long rallies, and maybe lost 7-5, 6-3 or 6-4, 6-4. But whether at age 24, 28, or 31, Federer's fundamental problems against Nadal on clay are the same. The fact that he has pretty much given up on the prospect of defeating Nadal on clay does not change this in my estimation.

 

[brokenshoelace]

It was not about Federer against the Big 4. We were talking about his recent results, genius. LOL. Suffering from the problems of old age that you obsess over with Federer?

Yeah, I'll just flip a switch and be as good as new.

But I said the "flip-the-switch" quality only belongs to those who are really, really talented.

Rotterdam 2012 final - what a display of tennis. I wish you'd watch it, just once. Just once.

That was a year ago. The more he gets up there in age, the less likely he is to replicate these sorts of performances on a consistent basis, and the less likely he is to switch that "switch."

Fine, but does this in any way excuse many of his losses in the last 3 to 5 years against the Top 4 in particular, matches he should have won and was in position to win?

No.

My problem with those whole line of thinking is that the likes of Darth (obviously you don't share his bias) pull out the "Federer isn't playing his generation" card every time he loses to Djokovic or Murray or Nadal, when the main reasons for him losing have not been age-related. It is preposterous to blame a 27-year-old losing to a 22-year-old or a 29-year-old losing to a 24-year-old on age, when the older player is healthy enough to be in the Top 10, or in Federer's case, the Top 3.

That is my problem.

Now, was today ugly? Sure it was. If Federer was 6 years younger, his knees wouldn't look as brittle as they have in 2013, particularly the 2013 clay season (they did not look like this in 2012), but all that would have meant is Federer would have provided a little bit more resistance in long rallies, and maybe lost 7-5, 6-3 or 6-4, 6-4. But whether at age 24, 28, or 31, Federer's fundamental problems against Nadal on clay are the same. The fact that he has pretty much given up on the prospect of defeating Nadal on clay does not change this in my estimation.

Good post, I agree.