Tennis

[kingfox]

2 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

In your head maybe. 
 

 

I thought you stopped being deluded when it came to Tennis, clearly not after tonight, you had a good run though MP 

[Manwell Pablo]

7 minutes ago, kingfox said:

I thought you stopped being deluded when it came to Tennis, clearly not after tonight, you had a good run though MP 

I honestly don’t know what you are worse at Gavin trolling or analysing sport.

[kingfox]

4 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

I honestly don’t know what you are worse at Gavin trolling or analysing sport.

This coming from a guy who thinks Thiem’s US Open victory, was just as impressive without Rafa and Fed in the field.

 

[Manwell Pablo]

30 minutes ago, kingfox said:

This coming from a guy who thinks Thiem’s US Open victory, was just as impressive without Rafa and Fed in the field.

 

Putting words in peoples mouths there aren’t you.

 

I’m saying the fact they aren’t there doesn’t  devalue the tournament. 
 

Like I say, Federer isn’t playing in the Aussie this year, Nadals out, the guy who’s beat him is out. So this must be a tainted grand slam also 🤷‍♂️

[kingfox]

44 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Putting words in peoples mouths there aren’t you.

 

I’m saying the fact they aren’t there doesn’t  devalue the tournament. 
 

Like I say, Federer isn’t playing in the Aussie this year, Nadals out, the guy who’s beat him is out. So this must be a tainted grand slam also 🤷‍♂️

Don’t think so buddy.

 

When two of the three best players in the World are missing from a Grand Slam tournament, of course it devalues it in some ways, especially when Rafa and Fed along with Novak, have dominated Slams for four years. Women’s draw was also devalued, because a good number of top players were also missing. 

 

Thiem winning a Grand Slam without having to play one of the big three, isn’t as impressive, that’s not me trolling, that’s common bloody sense. Would he have won if Novak didn’t get disqualified and Rafa & Fed took part, I think you’ll agree, probably not. If he did, then fair play to him, he would have finally cracked a Grand Slam by beating one of the big three.

 

If Medvedev wins cleanly tomorrow, then it’s far more impressive, because he would have beaten Novak in a Grand Slam final, therefore it won’t be a tainted victory.

Edited 21 February 2021 by kingfox

[Manwell Pablo]

22 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Don’t think so buddy.

 

When two of the three best players in the World are missing from a Grand Slam tournament, of course it devalues you it in some ways, especially when Rafa and Fed along with Novak, have dominated Slams for four years. Women’s draw was also devalued, because a good number of top players were also missing. 

 

Thiem winning a Grand Slam without having to play one of the big three, isn’t as impressive, that’s not me trolling, that’s common bloody sense. Would he have won if Novak didn’t get disqualified and Rafa & Fed took part, I think you’ll agree, probably not. If he did, then fair play to him, he would have finally cracked a Grand Slam by beating one of the big three.

 

If Medvedev wins cleanly tomorrow, then it’s far more impressive, because he would have beaten Novak in a Grand Slam final, therefore it won’t be a tainted victory.

Right.....

 

But at the same time Thiem beat Medvedev (world tours final winner)  in straight sets on his way to the US open title less than a year ago, so that would no longer be a “tainted victory” right?

 

Fed is also not a top 3 player by ranking or anyone with a pair of eyes. Nadal hasn’t won a non “tainted” grand slam off clay for years I don’t think, one at most.

Edited 21 February 2021 by Manwell Pablo

[kingfox]

2 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Right.....

 

But at the same time time Thiem beat Medvedev (world tours final winner)  in straight sets on his way to the US open title less than a year ago, so that would no longer be a “tainted victory” right?

 

Fed is also not a top 3 player by ranking or anyone with a pair of eyes. Nadal hasn’t won a non “tainted” grand slam off clay for years.

You know full well that the “Big 3” are still classified as the “Big 3” for a reason, because they’ve dominated Slams since 2017.

 

Thiem beat Medvedev at the US Open, big deal. Has Medvedev all of a sudden jumped ahead of Novak, Rafa and Roger? Nope. Has Medvedev dominated Grand Slams for four years straight? Nope.

 

None of the next generation have broken through in a Slam yet, by beating one of the “Big 3” to win one.

 

If Medvedev beats Novak, then he solidifies himself as a top player, because he’s finally cracked a Grand Slam by beating one of the big three to do so.

 

Can you say that about Thiem? No you can’t.

[Manwell Pablo]

15 minutes ago, kingfox said:

You know full well that the “Big 3” are still classified as the “Big 3” for a reason, because they’ve dominated Slams since 2017.

 

Thiem beat Medvedev at the US Open, big deal. Has Medvedev all of a sudden jumped ahead of Novak, Rafa and Roger? Nope. Has Medvedev dominated Grand Slams for four years straight? Nope.

 

None of the next generation have broken through in a Slam yet, by beating one of the “Big 3” to win one.

 

If Medvedev beats Novak, then he solidifies himself as a top player, because he’s finally cracked a Grand Slam by beating one of the big three to do so.

 

Can you say that about Thiem? No you can’t.

Roger federer most definitely, both literally in the rankings and again to anyone with any brain cells, the man is 40 in August.

 

Nadal again has only won grand slams when Djokovic isn’t there or retired through injury off of clay.

 

But this is all much of muchness to be honest, your argument basically boils down too unless Novak Djokovic is in a grand slam it’s not worthy of note, which is obviously a laughable statement, and one that discredits numerous players that have won grand slams when a player who may have beat them was absent.

 

Theims win is worth no more or less than other grand slam win, you my friend are a proper child of tennis’s golden generation who doesn’t understand how the sport worked without it or indeed will work after it.

 

Plus Djokovic has an abducted tear He has been nursing for a week so even if Medvedev does win no doubt that will be discredited as well.

 

 

 

 

Edited 21 February 2021 by Manwell Pablo

[kingfox]

8 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

Roger federer most definitely, both literally in the rankings and again to anyone with any brain cells, the man is 40 in August.

 

Nadal again has only won grand slams when Djokovic isn’t there or retired through injury off of clay.

 

But this is all much of muchness to be honest, your argument basically boils down too unless Novak Djokovic is in a grand slam it’s not worthy of note, which is obviously a laughable statement, and one that discredits numerous players that have won grand slams when a player who may have beat them was absent.

 

Theims win is worth no more or less than other grand slam win, you my friend are a proper child of tennis’s golden generation who doesn’t understand how the sport worked without it or indeed will work after it.

 

Plus Djokovic has an abducted tear He has been nursing for a week so even if Medvedev does win no doubt that will be discredited as well.

 

 

 

 

Discredits numerous players who have won Grand Slams  who are they mate? I’m talking post 2017 here, not bloody early 2000’s.

 

Have you suddenly forgotten that Djokovic, Nadal and Fed have dominated every Slam since 2017, the last guy to crack past them was Wawrinka at the 2016 US Open.

 

You fully expect Djokovic, Nadal and Federer to still reach Grand Slam finals, that’s how dominant they still are.

 

That’s facts, it’s down in writing, it’s down in history.

 

Have any of the next generation been able to break that pattern yet? Nope. When they finally do, then they’ll get the credit they deserve.

 

If you want to keep deluding yourself, carry on 

[Manwell Pablo]

44 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Discredits numerous players who have won Grand Slams  who are they mate? I’m talking post 2017 here, not bloody early 2000’s.

 

Have you suddenly forgotten that Djokovic, Nadal and Fed have dominated every Slam since 2017, the last guy to crack past them was Wawrinka at the 2016 US Open.

 

You fully expect Djokovic, Nadal and Federer to still reach Grand Slam finals, that’s how dominant they still are.

 

That’s facts, it’s down in writing, it’s down in history.

 

Have any of the next generation been able to break that pattern yet? Nope. When they finally do, then they’ll get the credit they deserve.

 

If you want to keep deluding yourself, carry on 

If you fully expect it, I will bet you £500 Roger Federer does not reach another grand slam final between now and his retirement.

[kingfox]

2 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

If you fully expect it, I will bet you £500 Roger Federer does not reach another grand slam final between now and his retirement.

I don’t fully expect it, there’s a good chance he won’t, but as of now people still classify him as part of the “Big 3”.

 

Djokovic and Rafa maybe the one’s who will continue to dominate, we’ll have to wait and see.

 

But nobody since Wawrinka at the 2016 US Open, has cracked past the “Big 3” yet on their way to winning a Grand Slam.

 

As I said above, they are still the dominant three when it comes to Slams, that’s facts, it’s down in writing, it’s down in history.

 

The next generation are yet to break that cycle, they will at some point, it could even start today with Medvedev beating Djokovic(not by retirement I hope) then the discussion of the next generation finally breaking through can happen.

 

If Medvedev fails to win today, then yet again all the talk will be about Novak’s dominance, and how the next generation still can’t break the Djokovic, Nadal and Federer Grand Slam cycle, that all started in 2017.

[Manwell Pablo]

Just now, kingfox said:

I don’t fully expect it, there’s a good chance he won’t, but as of now people still classify him as part of the “Big 3”.

 

Djokovic and Rafa maybe the one’s who will continue to dominate, we’ll have to wait and see.

 

But nobody since Wawrinka at the 2016 US Open, has cracked past the “Big 3” yet on their way to winning a Grand Slam.

 

As I said above, they are still the dominant three when it comes to Slams, that’s facts, it’s down in writing, it’s down in history.

 

The next generation are yet to break that cycle, they will at some point, it could even start today with Medvedev beating Djokovic(not by retirement I hope) then the discussion of the next generation finally breaking through can happen.

 

If Medvedev fails to win today, then yet again all the talk will be about Novak’s dominance, and how the next generation still can’t break the Djokovic, Nadal and Federer Grand Slam cycle, that all started in 2017.

But you did fully expect it in your last post.

 

Balls are shrinking here Gavin.

 

I’ll give you the same bet on Nadal with Roland Garros excluded, or we can adjust it to whatever you can afford 😉

[kingfox]

3 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

But you did fully expect it in your last post.

 

Balls are shrinking here Gavin.

 

I’ll give you the same bet on Nadal with Roland Garros excluded, or we can adjust it to whatever you can afford 😉

I wouldn’t be surprised if he does, I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t. 
 

But when he beats Jerzy Janowicz in the 2021 Wimbledon final, you won’t be so cocky then.

 

I’ll bet you a Freddo that Rafa wins AO, Wimbledon or USO at least one more time.

[Manwell Pablo]

Just now, kingfox said:

I wouldn’t be surprised if he does, I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t. 
 

But when he beats Jerzy Janowicz in the 2021 Wimbledon final, you won’t be so cocky then.

 

I’ll bet you a Freddo that Rafa wins AO, Wimbledon or USO at least one more time.

You have to buy the Freddo and deliver it my house in person when I win and we are on.

[kingfox]

8 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

You have to buy the Freddo and deliver it my house in person when I win and we are on.

Considering you live in La Coruna and I don’t have a passport.

 

Bet off.

[Manwell Pablo]

9 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Considering you live in La Coruna and I don’t have a passport.

 

Bet off.

I live in Ashby kiddo, you are south leicester aren’t you. Easy commute, not very shocked you don’t have a passport though,

 

I’m sure @Facecloth will hold the money for us if he has a paypal account he loves nothing more than you being shown up, make it as little as you want, I can do £2 if you are still on the checkouts at Tesco.

 

Prefer your bet though, I do like Fredos, I’ll even buy you a selection box if you win.

 

If I’m that deluded it’s easy money right?

Edited 21 February 2021 by Manwell Pablo

[kingfox]

2 minutes ago, Manwell Pablo said:

I live in Ashby kiddo, you are south leicester aren’t you. Easy commute, not very shocked you don’t have a passport though,

 

I’m sure @Facecloth will hold the money for us if he has a paypal account he loves nothing more than you being shown up, make it as little as you want, I can do £2 if you are still on the checkouts at Tesco.

 

Prefer your bet though, I do like Fredos, I’ll even buy you a selection box if you win.

Didn’t know Deportivo La Coruna legend, Manuel Pablo lived in Ashby.

 

South Leicester, nah.

 

@Facecloth knows full well that Rafa will win the AO, Wimbledon or USO at least one more time, he’s not as deluded as you nowadays. 
 

You won’t find me in any Tesco mate, more of a Sainsbury’s guy.

 

I’m that confident, I may even stretch to a Curly Wurly.

[Manwell Pablo]

13 minutes ago, kingfox said:

Didn’t know Deportivo La Coruna legend, Manuel Pablo lived in Ashby.

 

South Leicester, nah.

 

@Facecloth knows full well that Rafa will win the AO, Wimbledon or USO at least one more time, he’s not as deluded as you nowadays. 
 

You won’t find me in any Tesco mate, more of a Sainsbury’s guy.

 

I’m that confident, I may even stretch to a Curly Wurly.

You can manage a fiver then I hear Sainsbury’s pay better than Tesco.

 

So Rafa Nadal to not win another grand slam on hard or grass, it was just a final but you've somehow managed to talk yourself out of that, Given your confidence I’d say we are pretty much agreed on the fiver we just need a money holder with @Facecloth looking like the best candidate to ref this encounter.

Pleasure doing business with you Gavin.

 

Edited 21 February 2021 by Manwell Pablo

[kingfox]

1 minute ago, Manwell Pablo said:

You can manage a fiver then I hear Sainsbury’s pay better than Tesco.

 

So Rafa Nadal to not win another grand slam on hard or grass, it was just a final but you've somehow managed to talk yourself out of that, Given your confidence I’d say we are pretty much agreed just need a money holder with @Facecloth looking like the best candidate to ref this encounter.

Pleasure doing business with you Gavin.

 

A poxy fiver over a Freddo, you really are deluded.

 

Could be a few years wait, by any luck you’ll be banned from Foxestalk by then, for constantly spoiling the tennis thread with delusional posts.

 

As you’d rather have money over chocolate, the bet is off and I’m off to bed.

 

Had enough of your delusion for one night.

 

I’ll look forward to a Medvedev tainted victory against a retired Djokovic in the morning 

[Facecloth]

 I thought I liked to argue too much on here!

 

I don't use PayPal sadly, so not sure i can be your cashier. 

 

What I will say is, we beg for the new generation to come through and when they do start putting caveats on their victories. Thiem won the us open fair and square, he didn't asked Djokovic to get disqualified. 

 

I do tend to agree that we're unlikely to see Federer do well in Slams in future. Even before the enforced break we could see he was dropping off and he's nearly 40. Nadal won't get near a Wimbledon final again, I think we all know that. As for the two hard court slams, he has slight chance, but I think others are moving ahead of him on that surface now. Yes they've had an era of dominance, but we shouldn't discredit the new generation when they start winning slams because the big 3 have either been forced out or taken themselves out of the competition. They didn't ask for that to happen, they can only beat what they are put up against. Thiem is a grand slam champion, end off discussion. If he goes on to win another 10, nobody will give a **** who he beat to win his first.

Edited 21 February 2021 by Facecloth

[Manwell Pablo]

2 hours ago, Facecloth said:

 I thought I liked to argue too much on here!

 

I don't use PayPal sadly, so not sure i can be your cashier. 

 

What I will say is, we beg for the new generation to come through and when they do start putting caveats on their victories. Thiem won the us open fair and square, he didn't asked Djokovic to get disqualified. 

 

I do tend to agree that we're unlikely to see Federer do well in Slams in future. Even before the enforced break we could see he was dropping off and he's nearly 40. Nadal won't get near a Wimbledon final again, I think we all know that. As for the two hard court slams, he has slight chance, but I think others are moving ahead of him on that surface now. Yes they've had an era of dominance, but we shouldn't discredit the new generation when they start winning slams because the big 3 have either been forced out or taken themselves out of the competition. They didn't ask for that to happen, they can only beat what they are put up against. Thiem is a grand slam champion, end off discussion. If he goes on to win another 10, nobody will give a **** who he beat to win his first.

Oh don’t worry, Gavin doesn’t actually have any intention of accepting.

 

Good post.

[kingfox]

2 hours ago, Facecloth said:

 I thought I liked to argue too much on here!

 

I don't use PayPal sadly, so not sure i can be your cashier. 

 

What I will say is, we beg for the new generation to come through and when they do start putting caveats on their victories. Thiem won the us open fair and square, he didn't asked Djokovic to get disqualified. 

 

I do tend to agree that we're unlikely to see Federer do well in Slams in future. Even before the enforced break we could see he was dropping off and he's nearly 40. Nadal won't get near a Wimbledon final again, I think we all know that. As for the two hard court slams, he has slight chance, but I think others are moving ahead of him on that surface now. Yes they've had an era of dominance, but we shouldn't discredit the new generation when they start winning slams because the big 3 have either been forced out or taken themselves out of the competition. They didn't ask for that to happen, they can only beat what they are put up against. Thiem is a grand slam champion, end off discussion. If he goes on to win another 10, nobody will give a **** who he beat to win his first.

See MP

 

A well constructed thoughtful post, something that you can’t manage.

 

However Facecloth, yes Thiem won the US Open fair and square, but was his victory just as impressive without Rafa & Fed in the field? Of course it wasn’t, those two being out, instantly diminishes the quality of the field.

 

I haven’t discredited the next generation, for some reason MP obviously thinks I did. When they finally start breaking through, then they’ll get the credit they deserve, something which I said. Until then though, Djokovic, Rafa and Fed on paper are still dominant, they’ve dominated every Slam for the past four years, you know that.

 

The next generation will finally break through at some point; however the argument always is that those three in particular are still the dominant trio, they still get talked about as being the “Big 3”, and when that finally changes, then the next generation will finally get the Worldwide respect they deserve.

 

This Djokovic vs Medvedev match right now, is just proving my point, Djokovic is wiping the floor with him. These guys have proven that they can get the job done, in best of 3 sets, but they are yet to break the Djokovic, Nadal, Fed cycle when it comes to Grand Slam Tennis, it’s bloody frustrating to see, especially as your starting to see a next generation in the Women’s game coming through, the Men’s next generation when it comes to Slams are still way off.

[Facecloth]

Feeling a bit for Medvedev here. The crowd aren't just on his back more, but seem hell bent on distracting him.

[rachhere]

Novak's record in Australia is just insane. Shame Danil hasn't been able to show what he can do in this match, but his time will come. It's hard not to see Novak overtaking Rafa and Federer's number of grand slam wins.

[Manwell Pablo]

2 minutes ago, kingfox said:

See MP

 

A well constructed thoughtful post, something that you can’t manage.

 

However Facecloth, yes Thiem won the US Open fair and square, but was his victory just as impressive without Rafa & Fed in the field? Of course it wasn’t, those two being out, instantly diminishes the quality of the field.

 

I haven’t discredited the next generation, for some reason MP obviously thinks I did. When they finally start breaking through, then they’ll get the credit they deserve, something which I said. Until then though, Djokovic, Rafa and Fed on paper are still dominant, they’ve dominated every Slam for the past four years, you know that.

 

The next generation will finally break through at some point; however the argument always is that those three in particular are still the dominant trio, they still get talked about as being the “Big 3”, and when that finally changes, then the next generation will finally get the Worldwide respect they deserve.

 

This Djokovic vs Medvedev match right now, is just proving my point, Djokovic is wiping the floor with him. These guys have proven that they can get the job done, in best of 3 sets, but they are yet to break the Djokovic, Nadal, Fed cycle when it comes to Grand Slam Tennis, it’s bloody frustrating to see, especially as your starting to see a next generation in the Women’s game coming through, the Men’s next generation when it comes to Slams are still way off.

Your arguing against a point I’ve not even made now. 😂 I’ve said you can’t call Grand Slam win tainted and that Roger Federer isn’t going to make another final and is no longer anything like dominant in this sport anymore, which he is not.

 

This doesn’t prove anything, Nole clearly is dominant and no one has claimed otherwise, but him missing defaulting in a slam doesn’t “taint” it. Nonsense talk.