GRASS SEASON - General Discussion

[Chris Koziarz]

I would because think about it. Had fakervic beaten Nadull at RG 11, he would've been firmly implanted in his psyche and he would've known HOW to beat Nadal at RG. He would've ALWAYS had that mental one upmanship over Nadal so he would've closed out RG 13 and may have beaten in him RG 14 too.

With RG 11 to Novak, Nadal ends with 6- 7, MAX 8 RGs. His slam chase is KAPUT, gone poof, all over for dull

Congratulations, monfed on the scope of your imagination. Your vision of an alternative tennis world is definitely the most complex among us, and may even be more skillful than the visions of a well known world leader - a fake news specialist - and who brought his great nation (a nation where most of us live*) to a pariah state.

*I've deduced it by the the post timings & posters' language/grammar.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

@GameSetAndMath : This is your response to my post in the Rankings Thread doubting Roger's Wimbledon odds of 36%. I didn't want to keep polluting that thread..it's nice to keep that one to its purpose, I think. Your post:

"If Roger plays like he did in Halle, then there are at least 20 different players who can take him out.

If Roger plays somewhat decent, then here are the folks who can take him out.

1. Cilic (he is really good on grass with powerful serve and good movement)
2. JMDP (he is a big stage player and has pedigree in Wimbledon)
3. Rejuvenated Novak
4. Kyrgios (every set is a TB with this guy, it is a coin toss, he may win more coin tosses, he does not pee in his pants when seeing big four)
5. An odd upset by any number of folks such as Misha, Querry, Isner, Borna, etc. (this is less probable)."

I take your points and your list on board. Of those, the likeliest one to make the final or SF is Cilic. And I don't think Roger would see him before then, at which point I think Roger will be well-ready. Djokovic is much more vulnerable to upset than either, but, sure, if he's finding his groove and gets Roger semi-early, he might take him out. To @Darth's point, in the post after yours, about Roger finding his motivation: if he's not going to be motivated for Wimbledon, I don't know what. If he can't really find his grass game, that's another thing, but I tend to think he'll be finding that higher gear he's been holding in reserve to conserve energy. I know nothing about betting odds, so if it's 36% chance, I won't argue. But the one person Roger won't have to play is his best self. Even if he's not A+, he can still take on the field, so it's down to how he's feeling it.

I am not trying to downplay Roger's chances to not jinx him or something like that.

Unlike DF, I am not worried about Roger's mental motivation level. He has clearly said many times that winning Wimbledon is his priority. I am only worried as to whether he will find his game.

You probably did not watch much of Halle (and I would not either if I were in your shoes). But, Roger sucked big time. I am not saying he should win every tournament that he plays. I would actually be more comfortable if Roger has lost early in Halle against a good player after a good effort. It is not the loss that I am concerned about. His quality was very bad even in the matches that he won and considering the weak opponents he had in Halle, it is even more mysterious. That is what is bothering me.

With Wimbledon being five set matches and with a guaranteed day of gap (barring rain), I hope he can pick it up.

 

[monfed]

I think Fed was crap in Halle cause he had one day to recover from Stuttgart. At 36 almost 37, Fed can't play B2B tournaments with no days in between anymore even if they're on a less physically demanding surface like grass. Guy's like Yoda, he can produce magic when really required but can't do it day in and day out.

I think losing to Paire would've been a blessing in disguise and would've given him a little more time to recover and spent less energy. I'm just curious to know in what state will Fed be in Wimbledon. Is he even match fit? If he gets dragged into a 5 setter in Rd 2 or 3 will he be totally sapped like in the Olympics 2012 final?

If Fed's match fit he's got enough game to win Wimbledon.

 

[Moxie]

I am not trying to downplay Roger's chances to not jinx him or something like that.

Unlike DF, I am not worried about Roger's mental motivation level. He has clearly said many times that winning Wimbledon is his priority. I am only worried as to whether he will find his game.

You probably did not watch much of Halle (and I would not either if I were in your shoes). But, Roger sucked big time. I am not saying he should win every tournament that he plays. I would actually be more comfortable if Roger has lost early in Halle against a good player after a good effort. It is not the loss that I am concerned about. His quality was very bad even in the matches that he won and considering the weak opponents he had in Halle, it is even more mysterious. That is what is bothering me.

With Wimbledon being five set matches and with a guaranteed day of gap (barring rain), I hope he can pick it up.

I actually did watch a fair bit of Halle, and I understand your concern. But I still think that Roger holds out his best for the Majors. We'll see if he has another gear, or not, I guess. I think he does.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I actually did watch a fair bit of Halle, and I understand your concern. But I still think that Roger holds out his best for the Majors. We'll see if he has another gear, or not, I guess. I think he does.

The general theory to explain Roger's bad patch was that he was subscribing to the philosophy of why bring your A game when you can manage to win with a B or C game. But, the trouble is that there is no denying that he wanted to win the final and he could not.

Two big areas where he is lacking is movement and holding serve. While he holds serve most of the time in under two minutes, he does throw in a crazy game to get broken and the frequency of those occurrences is increasing.

 

[Horsa]

Please! You're a uniquely skilled person among us here, I love your comments & creations.

O.K. I will write it later. Thank you very much. I guess I could say I've got a way with words & am quite creative. I'm glad you like what I have to say & how I say it.

 

[Horsa]

It's nearly time for Wimbledon, most British tennis fans event of the year.
It's nearly time to get the Pimms & lemonade ready so for our favourite players we can cheer.
When I was young we used to get the strawberries from a pick your own.
The last few years though we've got them from the plants in our garden we have grown.
When I was young our favourite player was John McEnroe as we liked his rows with the umpire saying "that wasn't out. It was in.".
Nowadays, there are more British players, so as a patriotic Brit I want a Brit to win.
That's all for now, I can't say I won't come up with more before the games begin.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

It's nearly time for Wimbledon, most British tennis fans event of the year.
It's nearly time to get the Pimms & lemonade ready so for our favourite players we can cheer.
When I was young we used to get the strawberries from a pick your own.
The last few years though we've got them from the plants in our garden we have grown.
When I was young our favourite player was John McEnroe as we liked his row with the umpire saying "that wasn't out. It was in.".
Nowadays, there are more British players, so as a patriotic Brit I want a Brit to win.
That's all for now, I can't say I won't come up with more before the games begin.

Thanks for bringing up the all important wimby ambiance to here. It's not only about the competition that TV & inet brings. No real strawberries for me down under in the winter season.

 

[Horsa]

Thanks for bringing up the all important wimby ambiance to here. It's not only about the competition that TV & inet brings. No real strawberries for me down under in the winter season.

You're welcome. I'm very sorry to hear that. Frozen strawberries are nice too if defrosted the night before but I wouldn't try tinned strawberries as I don't think they taste anything like normal strawberries. They taste like something out of this world & a pile of sugar. When I added cream to them they just tasted like a creamy pile of sugar with a funny taste not known to nature. I know normal strawberries have a hidden sugar in them though like all fruits, 1 called fructose but that's natural. If it's any consolation, this year our strawberry plants have been doing poorly & have only produced 4 strawberries so I might have to buy some. I'll opt for British though as they'll be fresher not having been flown a long way after picking for who knows how long.

 

[monfed]

Congratulations, monfed on the scope of your imagination. Your vision of an alternative tennis world is definitely the most complex among us, and may even be more skillful than the visions of a well known world leader - a fake news specialist - and who brought his great nation (a nation where most of us live*) to a pariah state.

*I've deduced it by the the post timings & posters' language/grammar.

Truth is bitter. Sorry to tell you that mate.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

I'll opt for British though as they'll be fresher not having been flown a long way after picking for who knows how long.

It goes without saying (it will be even more obvious for future generations who will have to find the solution to revert climate change) that wasting fossil fuel energy for transporting food around the world is the most environmentally stupid thing our civilization has been doing. Even worse is bottled water transported e.g. from Fiji to US and sold to spoiled consumers there who have too much money for the elusive "exotic water" while the same water flows free from their tap (or rather "faucet"). But enough said because this is off topic on this forum. We understand each other very well I think. I don't need to add that strawberries imported from US are available in my supermarkets but I never buy them.

 

[Horsa]

It goes without saying (it will be even more obvious for future generations who will have to find the solution to revert climate change) that wasting fossil fuel energy for transporting food around the world is the most environmentally stupid thing our civilization has been doing. Even worse is bottled water transported e.g. from Fiji to US and sold to spoiled consumers there who have too much money for the elusive "exotic water" while the same water flows free from their tap (or rather "faucet"). But enough said because this is off topic on this forum. We understand each other very well I think. I don't need to add that strawberries imported from US are available in my supermarkets but I never buy them.

Definitely. I agree. We're lucky when it comes to bottled water in Britain because there are many natural springs which companies can use like at the Rest & be thankful in the highlands of Scotland & Buxton. I know bottled water companies use the spring in Buxton because I've been there & seen it for myself. I'm very sorry. It wasn't totally off-topic. It's tradition for people to eat strawberries & cream while watching Wimbledon. I'm very sorry for annoying people who may have been annoyed by my subject change. I guess it's similar to someone reading a book on horses & finding information about dogs in it. Some people would be very disappointed. The point being I need to talk about the topic in question because that's what people come here to talk about. If I want to talk about other things I should go to the relevant places. Some people like my word-play but not everyone does so keep it for the ones who do although I find it funny & some other people do.
Sometimes I've got between 3 & 5 different answers to what's said & have to choose & then flow too much. Sometimes I choose the wrong thing to say. (Writer's traits, I guess). I think we understand each other very well. Back on topic, are you looking forward to Wimbledon?

 

[Chris Koziarz]

Definitely. I agree. We're lucky when it comes to bottled water in Britain because there are many natural springs which companies can use like at the Rest & be thankful in the highlands of Scotland & Buxton. I know bottled water companies use the spring in Buxton because I've been there & seen it for myself. I'm very sorry. It wasn't totally off-topic. It's tradition for people to eat strawberries & cream while watching Wimbledon. I'm very sorry for annoying people who may have been annoyed by my subject change. I guess it's similar to someone reading a book on horses & finding information about dogs in it. Some people would be very disappointed. The point being I need to talk about the topic in question because that's what people come here to talk about. If I want to talk about other things I should go to the relevant places. Some people like my word-play but not everyone does so keep it for the ones who do although I find it funny & some other people do.
Sometimes I've got between 3 & 5 different answers to what's said & have to choose & then flow too much. Sometimes I choose the wrong thing to say. (Writer's traits, I guess). I think we understand each other very well. Back on topic, are you looking forward to Wimbledon?

My 1st emphasis: You've been sorry for what you've posted here on at least 10 occasions since I joined. Far more often than others (e.g. myself precisely once). I understand your point of being extra gentle because it's easy to offend others due to difficulty of expressing sentiments with written words. It happened to me many times. But I digress, don't get me wrong I don't want to criticize your style, just note how different your style is to others around on this forum. Thanks for caring about our feelings, the quality most die-hard sport-fans usually lack.
My 2nd emphasis: yeah similar here. I have to use simple words and to the point only so that others are not bored with my elaborations.
U try & use rich vocabulary to better express your feelings. But when sentences are becoming too complex and u say too many things at once people tend to ignore your effort. Difficult trade-off.
I secretly hope this year's wimby will bring a new "Grass Cinderella" to the spotlight, similarly to what happened at RG. These kind of events are always most exciting. Like that unknown brit player few years back ranked in 700s (sorry forgot the name), cashed in the check of his life but lost to fed in 2nd or 3rd... Tellingly, the central court was cheering for brit guy although it would've been unimaginable for fed to lose that match. Probably, they would've quickly turned their sentiments around if fed had been in trouble there. I would've been disappointed too, because I like fed not just as a player but as a man, and wish him the best in his most important test this year. So the new Grass Cinderella'd better emerge in the bottom half.

 

[Horsa]

My 1st emphasis: You've been sorry for what you've posted here on at least 10 occasions since I joined. Far more often than others (e.g. myself precisely once). I understand your point of being extra gentle because it's easy to offend others due to difficulty of expressing sentiments with written words. It happened to me many times. But I digress, don't get me wrong I don't want to criticize your style, just note how different your style is to others around on this forum. Thanks for caring about our feelings, the quality most die-hard sport-fans usually lack.
My 2nd emphasis: yeah similar here. I have to use simple words and to the point only so that others are not bored with my elaborations.
U try & use rich vocabulary to better express your feelings. But when sentences are becoming too complex and u say too many things at once people tend to ignore your effort. Difficult trade-off.
I secretly hope this year's wimby will bring a new "Grass Cinderella" to the spotlight, similarly to what happened at RG. These kind of events are always most exciting. Like that unknown brit player few years back ranked in 700s (sorry forgot the name), cashed in the check of his life but lost to fed in 2nd or 3rd... Tellingly, the central court was cheering for brit guy although it would've been unimaginable for fed to lose that match. Probably, they would've quickly turned their sentiments around if fed had been in trouble there. I would've been disappointed too, because I like fed not just as a player but as a man, and wish him the best in his most important test this year. So the new Grass Cinderella'd better emerge in the bottom half.

I think the reason why I'm sorry more often than others is because I'm more spontaneous than most people & it usually works for me but sometimes I say things I later think I shouldn't have said & because sometimes people reason with me & I realise they're right. I always admit when I know I'm wrong, explain & apologise. Sometimes I'm overly conscientious. Sometimes it's because I try to see things in every possible way which isn't always easy. I normally find it easy to express myself but when I'm saying something I feel the need to say but it's on a taboo subject or it's difficult I sometimes get flustered. At 1 time I had an answer for almost everything & never got stuck for words. (I'm sure I read somewhere that the reason why we have problems vociferating our thoughts sometimes which can happen to the most articulate people is because the part of our mind which deals with words is 1 of the last to develop so although we know what we're thinking & why we can sometimes have trouble putting those thoughts into words). I know the simplest sentence can be seen as ambiguous. Then sometimes I appear to read people's intentions as they sometimes seem to be able to read my intentions. Then I have to explain. I get you. Most people prefer plain, simple & to the point. Although a lot of people sometimes like word-play they don't want it all the time. Other people do change subject but not as often as me. Everyone has their own style. I joined with other horse-loving people who wrote but they appear to have disappeared. It would be nice if there were more writers & poetically-minded people for me to talk to & have fun with. You're welcome. Sometimes I care too much about what other people think & not enough about what I think. I have made some good friends here & fit in, in a funny sort of way. I do enjoy chatting with other people & making friends. I just want to join in & have fun like everyone else. I'm trying to act like everyone else but find writing poetry easier than chatting at the moment as I can say what I want poetically but have to think about my own & other people's thoughts & feelings & how what I say could be construed when chatting.

I actually like people's longer & more complex pieces. I try my best to not sound intimidating or be seen as a show-off. It can be very hard to get the balance right. I try my best not to but sometimes I get idea surges. Maybe I'd be better off taking your advice & writing something constructive when I'm like that. Sometimes 1 sentence someone says to me elicits 1/2 a page or more & sometimes a long comment from someone else only elicits 1 sentence. Maybe I'd be better off expressing myself poetically to slow myself down when I've got lots of different answers at once then when I've slowed myself down if I've got something relevant to say, say it. I don't think what I have to say is complex & I've read a couple of books written in a similar style to mine. I found they gave me something more to chew on & couldn't put them down. Actually, you've got a point. Sometimes what I put in 1 piece could actually go in 3 very good pieces in the relevant places. People don't always ignore what I have to say. Some people only say something if they disagree with you. Some people don't interact with longer pieces because they think the other person is too communicative. (I've thought this for a bit but got ideas surges.) Other people only interact with longer pieces if they find them interesting. I agree.

I'm really looking forward to Wimbledon & hoping for a British winner.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

I think the reason why I'm sorry more often than others is because I'm more spontaneous than most people & it usually works for me but sometimes I say things I later think I shouldn't have said & because sometimes people reason with me & I realise they're right. I always admit when I know I'm wrong, explain & apologise. Sometimes I'm overly conscientious. Sometimes it's because I try to see things in every possible way which isn't always easy. I normally find it easy to express myself but when I'm saying something I feel the need to say but it's on a taboo subject or it's difficult I sometimes get flustered. At 1 time I had an answer for almost everything & never got stuck for words. (I'm sure I read somewhere that the reason why we have problems vociferating our thoughts sometimes which can happen to the most articulate people is because the part of our mind which deals with words is 1 of the last to develop so although we know what we're thinking & why we can sometimes have trouble putting those thoughts into words). I know the simplest sentence can be seen as ambiguous. Then sometimes I appear to read people's intentions as they sometimes seem to be able to read my intentions. Then I have to explain. I get you. Most people prefer plain, simple & to the point. Although a lot of people sometimes like word-play they don't want it all the time. Other people do change subject but not as often as me. Everyone has their own style. I joined with other horse-loving people who wrote but they appear to have disappeared. It would be nice if there were more writers & poetically-minded people for me to talk to & have fun with. You're welcome. Sometimes I care too much about what other people think & not enough about what I think. I have made some good friends here & fit in, in a funny sort of way. I do enjoy chatting with other people & making friends. I just want to join in & have fun like everyone else. I'm trying to act like everyone else but find writing poetry easier than chatting at the moment as I can say what I want poetically but have to think about my own & other people's thoughts & feelings & how what I say could be construed when chatting.

I actually like people's longer & more complex pieces. I try my best to not sound intimidating or be seen as a show-off. It can be very hard to get the balance right. I try my best not to but sometimes I get idea surges. Maybe I'd be better off taking your advice & writing something constructive when I'm like that. Sometimes 1 sentence someone says to me elicits 1/2 a page or more & sometimes a long comment from someone else only elicits 1 sentence. Maybe I'd be better off expressing myself poetically to slow myself down when I've got lots of different answers at once then when I've slowed myself down if I've got something relevant to say, say it. I don't think what I have to say is complex & I've read a couple of books written in a similar style to mine. I found they gave me something more to chew on & couldn't put them down. Actually, you've got a point. Sometimes what I put in 1 piece could actually go in 3 very good pieces in the relevant places. People don't always ignore what I have to say. Some people only say something if they disagree with you. Some people don't interact with longer pieces because they think the other person is too communicative. (I've thought this for a bit but got ideas surges.) Other people only interact with longer pieces if they find them interesting. I agree.

I'm really looking forward to Wimbledon & hoping for a British winner.

Yes. The dialog with other people, especially over internet where there is no face to face communication, must harder than literary monologue (what you probably meant in the fragment emphasized above) because the effort must be made from both parties to align their level of understanding of the subject, needless to say they need to be equally interested in the subject! So if you feel disappointed that people often ignore what you say, it may be due to lack of interest from the third parties. If these inet days, this forum included, people tend to be lazy and have all info explained to them in the simplest digest possible. Think about it: why are the movies so popular while books much less so? Example: I go to my local library, to borrow a bestseller book. I note the DVD movie they already happened to record based on the book, is reserved by 200-300 people, so virtually unavailable for several months, while I can get the book straight away or within few days only. Why? Because by watching a movie, people can "digest" the story in 2h while reading a book requires at least couple days of effort. No need to add how disappointed I feel if I watch the movie after having read the book, because a movie's so "shallow" after all that imagination I got from the book. You probably understand my point by now. Inet even reinforced what TV has started: people tend to go for simplicity and clarity of information, at the expense of its esthetic richness.
Back to tennis: it's nice to have hopes, even though the hopes are against the odds.The only brit to materialize your hopes would be Edmund, but chances of such upset are very small, less than 1%.

 

[Horsa]

Yes. The dialog with other people, especially over internet where there is no face to face communication, must harder than literary monologue (what you probably meant in the fragment emphasized above) because the effort must be made from both parties to align their level of understanding of the subject, needless to say they need to be equally interested in the subject! So if you feel disappointed that people often ignore what you say, it may be due to lack of interest from the third parties. If these inet days, this forum included, people tend to be lazy and have all info explained to them in the simplest digest possible. Think about it: why are the movies so popular while books much less so? Example: I go to my local library, to borrow a bestseller book. I note the DVD movie they already happened to record based on the book, is reserved by 200-300 people, so virtually unavailable for several months, while I can get the book straight away or within few days only. Why? Because by watching a movie, people can "digest" the story in 2h while reading a book requires at least couple days of effort. No need to add how disappointed I feel if I watch the movie after having read the book, because a movie's so "shallow" after all that imagination I got from the book. You probably understand my point by now. Inet even reinforced what TV has started: people tend to go for simplicity and clarity of information, at the expense of its esthetic richness.
Back to tennis: it's nice to have hopes, even though the hopes are against the odds.The only brit to materialize your hopes would be Edmund, but chances of such upset are very small, less than 1%.

It is. We mustn't forget that when we are communicating in writing we have no voice tone to help us realise what moods people are in or whether they're being sarcastic which funnily enough is an advantage to communicating in writing as well as a disadvantage because we don't have to be scared about other people's moods as we don't have to have them shouting at us though all capitalisation in internet conversations represents shouting. We don't have paralanguage to help us tell if someone is lying either although paralanguage isn't always effective it has a 98% success rate. It works on the basis that the position of someone's eyes when they answer certain questions tells you if someone is accessing their memory or lying. It doesn't work on me though as my eyes wonder all over anyway as I've had a lazy eye since I was a toddler which I had an operation on & have had to wear spectacles on & off all my life. I get your points. Everyone has different hobbies & interests. I prefer doing my research the old way though find the internet useful when I can't get access to the books I really want to read. The good thing about the internet is anyone can have a webpage so we can access all different people's expertise but that's also the bad thing about the internet, not all information has to be correct so we have to watch our sources of information carefully & size them up against what we already know or in shorter terms we have to weigh things up & consider them. The internet is also a cause of lack of concentration for some people. I find I can concentrate better when reading a *proper book* than when reading a webpage though I have learnt a lot from the internet. Funnily enough I find it easier to concentrate on long, complex pieces than short & simple ones. I nearly always prefer the book to the film. Exceptions for me have been the horse whisperer & palomino. I think that most of the time the book has more in it than the film though there are exceptions. Not all films are easy though. I've had to explain a beautiful mind to my Sister a few times & I found the theory of everything full on. I had to watch it 3 times to get everything. I like to use my imagination & be blown away by the vocab & nice, eloquent way of writing of the author. I like watching films when I haven't got the book option or my eyes are playing me up. The films don't tend to agree with my imaginings created by my reading of the book but I think that's maybe because although everyone reads the same words in the same book we all tend to imagine & interpret them differently. I do understand.

I know my hopes are unrealistic but I can still hope. I know.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

It is. We mustn't forget that when we are communicating in writing we have no voice tone to help us realise what moods people are in or whether they're being sarcastic which funnily enough is an advantage to communicating in writing as well as a disadvantage because we don't have to be scared about other people's moods as we don't have to have them shouting at us though all capitalisation in internet conversations represents shouting. We don't have paralanguage to help us tell if someone is lying either although paralanguage isn't always effective it has a 98% success rate. It works on the basis that the position of someone's eyes when they answer certain questions tells you if someone is accessing their memory or lying. It doesn't work on me though as my eyes wonder all over anyway as I've had a lazy eye since I was a toddler which I had an operation on & have had to wear spectacles on & off all my life. I get your points. Everyone has different hobbies & interests. I prefer doing my research the old way though find the internet useful when I can't get access to the books I really want to read. The good thing about the internet is anyone can have a webpage so we can access all different people's expertise but that's also the bad thing about the internet, not all information has to be correct so we have to watch our sources of information carefully & size them up against what we already know or in shorter terms we have to weigh things up & consider them. The internet is also a cause of lack of concentration for some people. I find I can concentrate better when reading a *proper book* than when reading a webpage though I have learnt a lot from the internet. Funnily enough I find it easier to concentrate on long, complex pieces than short & simple ones. I nearly always prefer the book to the film. Exceptions for me have been the horse whisperer & palomino. I think that most of the time the book has more in it than the film though there are exceptions. Not all films are easy though. I've had to explain a beautiful mind to my Sister a few times & I found the theory of everything full on. I had to watch it 3 times to get everything. I like to use my imagination & be blown away by the vocab & nice, eloquent way of writing of the author. I like watching films when I haven't got the book option or my eyes are playing me up. The films don't tend to agree with my imaginings created by my reading of the book but I think that's maybe because although everyone reads the same words in the same book we all tend to imagine & interpret them differently. I do understand.

I know my hopes are unrealistic but I can still hope. I know.

Interesting what you write. We don't have paralanguage in written language, especially "typed language" but we do have certain clues if we practice long enough. We can easily pick up logical inconsistencies and self-contradictions (which can be an indication of lying) and changes in style/vocabulary depending on mood. Some of us may have developed skills to judge people from their writing only. What do others think? This topic (as well as taking about films such as Horse Whisperer, Palomino, Beautiful Mind or The Theory of Everything) is becoming unrelated to tennis and this thread in particular. If anyone interested chips in, we can expand, otherwise we may need to save it to a different time/thread.

 

[Horsa]

Interesting what you write. We don't have paralanguage in written language, especially "typed language" but we do have certain clues if we practice long enough. We can easily pick up logical inconsistencies and self-contradictions (which can be an indication of lying) and changes in style/vocabulary depending on mood. Some of us may have developed skills to judge people from their writing only. What do others think? This topic (as well as taking about films such as Horse Whisperer, Palomino, Beautiful Mind or The Theory of Everything) is becoming unrelated to tennis and this thread in particular. If anyone interested chips in, we can expand, otherwise we may need to save it to a different time/thread.

I was responding directly to your comments in my words. That's very true. I guess so.

 

[kskate2]

LOL, well I wouldn't go that far. That win over Djoker is still legendary in my book even if it raised Nadal's chances in that final from 30% to 99%

Legendary for me because I'm the only one on this forum that called it before it happened.