QF: Roddick vs. Ljubicic - who wins? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

QF: Roddick vs. Ljubicic - who wins?

Naranoc
03-14-2007, 07:05 AM
Their h2h is 6-3 in favour of Andy, whose been playing pretty solidly so far in this tournament, but Ljubicic was playing particularly well towards the end of his match with Nalbandian too (after having to call a trainer in the 1st set for his knee)

Allez
03-14-2007, 07:19 AM
Roddick will steamroll a somewhat injured Ljubicic. Wins in 2.

Voo de Mar
03-14-2007, 07:24 AM
A-Rod 7-6 7-5 or 6-4 6-4 ;)

partygirl
03-14-2007, 07:25 AM
The winner will be Jerry!

jazar
03-14-2007, 07:56 AM
the duck in a suprisingly break filled match

Allure
03-14-2007, 08:04 AM
I can't believe I'm saying this but Ljubicic.:o

maqk
03-14-2007, 09:04 AM
ljubo wins in 2 or 3 i think

RonE
03-14-2007, 09:06 AM
A-Rod all the way and I really hope I'm not jinxing him :o

Horatio Caine
03-14-2007, 09:30 AM
God if only I can watch this... :awww:

A-Rod should win...

...but I liken Ljubo to Paul Robinson in Neighbours...he's like the cockroach you just can't quite kill off :mad: But a funny character all the same...Paul Robinson that is :p

Byrd
03-14-2007, 09:38 AM
God if only I can watch this... :awww:

A-Rod should win...

...but I liken Ljubo to Paul Robinson in Neighbours...he's like the cockroach you just can't quite kill off :mad: But a funny character all the same...Paul Robinson that is :p

Though Ljubo is more of a womaniser, ask ancic :p

Johnny Groove
03-14-2007, 09:43 AM
I would put money on at least one tiebreaker

Loremaster
03-14-2007, 09:51 AM
TBs are not problem Andy is king of Tbs these season so far 12-3 sounds good + he is serving like crazy in IW cracking forehands and Jimmy is in his box. Andy is confidence filled

Jogy
03-14-2007, 10:33 AM
I hope Roddick destroys Ljubibi(t)c(ch) so hard and brutal that Ljubicic is a small boy like Rochus after the match!! :lol:

Norrage
03-14-2007, 10:34 AM
I guess Ljubicic will win, because it's impossible to get a Nadal - Roddick matchup, and I don't see Nadal losing to Chela.

I♥PsY@Mus!c
03-14-2007, 10:41 AM
Ivan won't be easy to win,but I still believe he will win in 3! :)

Kolya
03-14-2007, 10:46 AM
Go Ljubo!

In 3 sets again.

oz_boz
03-14-2007, 11:19 AM
No matter who wins, tennis is the loser in this match.

But the SF will probably be interesting if Pig edges Llama.

RonE
03-14-2007, 11:24 AM
No matter who wins, tennis is the loser in this match.

But the SF will probably be interesting if Pig edges Llama.

Seeing as the Llama is lame against the Pig it seems pretty much guaranteed :p

oz_boz
03-14-2007, 11:26 AM
Seeing as the Llama is lame against the Pig it seems pretty much guaranteed :p

Lame pun :p

BTW the h2h is 1-1, both matches in 2004 when Pig was Piglet.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 11:50 AM
Heart says Ljubo, head says A-Rod in 2 close sets, like someone said 7-6 7-5 kind of thing or similar.

yomike
03-14-2007, 12:07 PM
I'm expecting Ivan to clean up the mess:mad: in the next round.

vamosnadal
03-14-2007, 12:17 PM
Ljubicic was one service game away from retiring yesteday..it's Roddick in 2 for me!

Deathless Mortal
03-14-2007, 12:41 PM
Ljubo in 3 :p

Hola Mr. SK
03-14-2007, 12:46 PM
ARod to win by retirement

WatchOut
03-14-2007, 12:49 PM
Roddick 75 75

Fergie
03-14-2007, 12:50 PM
Sadly Roddick :rolleyes:

Loremaster
03-14-2007, 01:34 PM
Andy is too strong in Tbs these year to lose with Bald Dude

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 01:40 PM
Ljubo's serve >>> Duck's serve. That's a fact.

Said that, Roddick is the favorite, but Ljubo can pull this one off.

Loremaster
03-14-2007, 01:44 PM
Ljubo's serve >>> Duck's serve. That's a fact.

Said that, Roddick is the favorite, but Ljubo can pull this one off.

Ljubo can't pull anything off, he isn't fighter he is just lucky survivor but now he won't be able to sneak the win by pulling serves because on the other side of th net will be better server

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 01:47 PM
Ljubo can't pull anything off, he isn't fighter he is just lucky survivor but now he won't be able to sneak the win by pulling serves because on the other side of th net will be better server

Yeah, I mean, Ljubo hasn't schooled the Duck playing for Croatia a couple of years ago, right? :retard:

Ljubicic is a better server than the duck. Get used to this fact.

Loremaster
03-14-2007, 01:51 PM
Yeah, I mean, Ljubo hasn't schooled the Duck playing for Croatia a couple of years ago, right? :retard:

Ljubicic is a better server than the duck. Get used to this fact.

You are killing me with laugh :haha:

look how mnay times Andy was broken this year and how many times Ljubo
get a break
Only in these tourney Ljubo was broken 4 times to Andy 0 :haha:

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 01:54 PM
You are killing me with laugh :haha:

look how mnay times Andy was broken this year and how many times Ljubo
get a break
Only in these tourney Ljubo was broken 4 times to Andy 0 :haha:

Ljubicic played far better players. Nalbandian is a top 10, :retard:

Loremaster
03-14-2007, 02:00 PM
Ljubicic played far better players. Nalbandian is a top 10, :retard:

far better players please don't kill me with such idiotic comments
Falla no. 99 - Lopez 92
Johannson no. 85 - Rohcus 35
Nalbbandian 10 - Gasquet 16

:haha:

yeah Ljubo played much better players :haha:

What else funny will you write ??

Still he lost service twicre against no.99 Falla :haha: yeah he is better server ;)

Blue Heart24
03-14-2007, 02:03 PM
Ljubo in 2.

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 02:05 PM
far better players please don't kill me with such idiotic comments
Falla no. 99 - Lopez 92
Johannson no. 85 - Rohcus 35
Nalbbandian 10 - Gasquet 16

:haha:

yeah Ljubo played much better players :haha:

What else funny will you write ??

Still he lost service twicre against no.99 Falla :haha: yeah he is better server ;)

How many GS have Gasquet/Rochus/Lopez? Do you know who Johansson is? You're not very bright, are you? Those other guys never got even into a GS QF, while Nalbandian has loads of them, of SFs and a final. Get a clue, :retard:

Macbrother
03-14-2007, 02:05 PM
Say whatever nonsense you want about the serve, Ljubicic will be taken to task, plain and simple.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 02:11 PM
I'm not going to get into this discussion about who has a better serve between Llubo and Andy. It really doesn't matter which one has the better motion or technique, or who hits more aces, but really what matters in this match, is who is going to serve better today(tomorrow night). Roddick has served at a higher percentage than Ivan this tournament, and also on the year. I believe that if Roddick serves at around 70% he's only beatable by Roger Federer. No one else has yet to beat him when he's played that well, and the stats don't lie. Beyond the serves, Ivan I guess is slightly injured which of course plays in Roddick's favor but I don't think that will be the important factor. Besides the two times Ivan has beaten Andy when he was injured, so I am talking about that win in the DC, Ivan exposed Andy's weak backhand and weak approach shots. The approach is still weak although, Andy doesn't approach 100% cross court anymore and the backhand is significantly better sometimes playing better than Andy's forehand.

In short, this match will be interesting. I wonder what patterns of play each player will use to win points. Ivan loves pace, and loves to pass Roddick at net, so Andy knows he will have be careful. Really as I said this match will come down to who serves better. The player that serves better in this match , will likely be the victor.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 02:17 PM
How many GS have Gasquet/Rochus/Lopez? Do you know who Johansson is? You're not very bright, are you? Those other guys never got even into a GS QF, while Nalbandian has loads of them, of SFs and a final. Get a clue, :retard:

Oh and just for my two cents. Roddick has had the tougher draw so far. Nalbandian was a tough match but Roddick has had three quality opponents. Johannsson "the one slam wonder(thanks to Marat)" has been playing well for the last year ever since he has that horrific accident to his eye. Then you have some QF...Falla? Um..yea. Lopez is always a tough match, just ask Llubo himself he will tell you how tough he is, then Rochus, and Gasquet...both guys are quality. I would say Nalbandian was a tough one to gut out but that was just one match, A-Rod has had three.

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 02:21 PM
Oh and just for my two cents. Roddick has had the tougher draw so far. Nalbandian was a tough match but Roddick has had three quality opponents. Johannsson "the one slam wonder(thanks to Marat)" has been playing well for the last year ever since he has that horrific accident to his eye. Then you have some QF...Falla? Um..yea. Lopez is always a tough match, just ask Llubo himself he will tell you how tough he is, then Rochus, and Gasquet...both guys are quality. I would say Nalbandian was a tough one to gut out but that was just one match, A-Rod has had three.

:haha:

Nalbandian alone is far harder than any of the other 3 guys Roddick played.

Macbrother
03-14-2007, 02:21 PM
I believe that if Roddick serves at around 70% he's only beatable by Roger Federer. No one else has yet to beat him when he's played that well, and the stats don't lie.

And you would be about right.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 02:24 PM
:haha:

Nalbandian alone is far harder than any of the other 3 guys Roddick played.

Probably true, but one guy doesn't make a hard draw, it makes a hard match. Playing well for two sets doesn't mean you are in form either.

AnnaK_4ever
03-14-2007, 02:31 PM
I tend to think Andy will win but...

Anyway Roddick and Nadal are the only big names left at the tournament. And I hope they will set up good couple in the semifinal ;)

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 02:38 PM
115790 :lol:

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 02:39 PM
Roddick served at 70% and lost to Murray. Come with another joke, Ducktards.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 02:49 PM
Roddick served at 70% and lost to Murray. Come with another joke, Ducktards.

Where's your response about Nalbandian being a tougher draw!? Also, I said should, I didn't say it was a rule oh and btw, everyone needs to stop with this Murray stuff, I love how everyone forgets Roddick beat him the next week in Memphis. :)

Obviously Roddick could serve whatever percentage imaginable and still lose. LOL at you for going to lookup stats in a match to prove me wrong. :)

OOoo...and as far this match goes, I don't see how you ever compare the return of Murray to the return of Ivan...

tangerine_dream
03-14-2007, 02:51 PM
MTF wins :banana: Days of Duckies vs Croattard fights and antifan threads coming right up. :devil:

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 02:53 PM
Where's your response about Nalbandian being a tougher draw!? Also, I said should, I didn't say it was a rule oh and btw, everyone needs to stop with this Murray stuff, I love how everyone forgets Roddick beat him the next week in Memphis. :)

Obviously Roddick could serve whatever percentage imaginable to lose. LOL at you for going to lookup stats in a match to prove me wrong. :)

Ducktard, you said that Federer serving at aroun 70% is only beatable by Federer. I proved you wrong with NUMBERS AND FACTS. Done deal.

Which is the harder draw? a draw with a bunch of 30-somethings or a draw with a top 10 player? You know you can lose to anyone and it's not RR, so doesn't matter: losing just one match is enough. This said, having only one good player is much more dangerous, because you have a much higher probability to lose to someone like that than to several 30-somethings.

~*BGT*~
03-14-2007, 02:55 PM
Where's your response about Nalbandian being a tougher draw!? Also, I said should, I didn't say it was a rule oh and btw, everyone needs to stop with this Murray stuff, I love how everyone forgets Roddick beat him the next week in Memphis. :)

Obviously Roddick could serve whatever percentage imaginable and still lose. LOL at you for going to lookup stats in a match to prove me wrong. :)

OOoo...and as far this match goes, I don't see how you ever compare the return of Murray to the return of Ivan...

:secret: Don't you know that doesn't count.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 02:57 PM
You are killing me with laugh :haha:

look how mnay times Andy was broken this year and how many times Ljubo
get a break
Only in these tourney Ljubo was broken 4 times to Andy 0 :haha:

This one is easy; Roddick was broken more this year (and last year as well).
ATP Matchfacts: service games won, Ljubo 91% in 17 matches, Roddick 88% in 15 matches.

In case you can't do the math, which wouldn't surprise me actually :devil: - I'll do it for you. It means Ljubo only lost 9% of his service games, and A-Rod lost 12%. Last time I checked, 12 was more than 9. So it means Roddick gets broken more often.

Another thing, Fumus here claims only Fed can beat Roddick when Andy serves over 70%. That is, of course, not true. Nalbandian beat him in TMC quite comfortably, 6-2 7-6, while A-Rod's serve was a whooping 75%. Also, I'm quite sure Murray is able to beat him even against 70% 1st serves in, when he has a good day.

So, get your facts straight before you post such crap. One thing I agree with Fumus though, is that all of this doesn't matter for tomorrow; I guess 70% would be way too much for Ljubo to handle, seeing how he is far from being a returner of Fed, Murray or David's caliber.

my0118
03-14-2007, 03:00 PM
Beating Roddick is all about a returning business.

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 03:02 PM
This one is easy; Roddick was broken more this year (and last year as well).
ATP Matchfacts: service games won, Ljubo 91% in 17 matches, Roddick 88% in 15 matches.

In case you can't do the math, which wouldn't surprise me actually :devil: - I'll do it for you. It means Ljubo only lost 9% of his service games, and A-Rod lost 12%. Last time I checked, 12 was more than 9. So it means Roddick gets broken more often.

Another thing, Fumus here claims only Fed can beat Roddick when Andy serves over 70%. That is, of course, not true. Nalbandian beat him in TMC quite comfortably, 6-2 7-6, while A-Rod's serve was a whooping 75%. Also, I'm quite sure Murray is able to beat him even against 70% 1st serves in, when he has a good day.

So, get your facts straight before you post such crap. One thing I agree with Fumus though, is that all of this doesn't matter for tomorrow; I guess 70% would be way too much for Ljubo to handle, seeing how he is far from being a returner of Fed, Murray or David's caliber.

Look at the post I've done. I posted the stats for Murray-Roddick in San Jose. Roddick served at 70% and lost. Facts are facts.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:02 PM
Ducktard, you said that Federer serving at aroun 70% is only beatable by Federer. I proved you wrong with NUMBERS AND FACTS. Done deal.

Which is the harder draw? a draw with a bunch of 30-somethings or a draw with a top 10 player? You know you can lose to anyone and it's not RR, so doesn't matter: losing just one match is enough. This said, having only one good player is much more dangerous, because you have a much higher probability to lose to someone like that than to several 30-somethings.

So you are saying that Roddick spinning in a Nadal like serve against Murray counts? Lol...you didn't prove me wrong you only egged me on. I said "I believe that if Roddick serves at around 70% he's only beatable by Roger Federer. No one else has yet to beat him when he's played that well, and the stats don't lie." I said when he's playing well...so it doesn't matter what he serves at if he's not.

What are you talking about!? A Nalbandian that didn't show up, and didn't play well...is harder than three high class, high quality encounters, with three tough opponents. Please you gotta stop before you say something really stupid. If you wanna look at numbers look at the negative ratio of unforced errors to winners that Daveed hit in that match, he was -8.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 03:04 PM
:secret: Don't you know that doesn't count.

It counts. Noone claims that Murray or David will beat Roddick any time they play. It's not like he never beat them in return. But Fumus claimed that Fed is the ONLY one who can beat Roddick if he hits more than 70% of his 1st serve bombs, and that is just NOT TRUE. David and Murray are perfectly capable of containing that monster serve; they are capable it on paper (everyone can see they are just incredible returners), and they even proved it in actual matches. So, I believe it means the case is closed: Fed is NOT the only one who can beat Roddick's 70% 1st serves.

How hard a concept is that to grasp? Sheesh. ;)

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:05 PM
This one is easy; Roddick was broken more this year (and last year as well).
ATP Matchfacts: service games won, Ljubo 91% in 17 matches, Roddick 88% in 15 matches.

In case you can't do the math, which wouldn't surprise me actually :devil: - I'll do it for you. It means Ljubo only lost 9% of his service games, and A-Rod lost 12%. Last time I checked, 12 was more than 9. So it means Roddick gets broken more often.

Another thing, Fumus here claims only Fed can beat Roddick when Andy serves over 70%. That is, of course, not true. Nalbandian beat him in TMC quite comfortably, 6-2 7-6, while A-Rod's serve was a whooping 75%. Also, I'm quite sure Murray is able to beat him even against 70% 1st serves in, when he has a good day.

So, get your facts straight before you post such crap. One thing I agree with Fumus though, is that all of this doesn't matter for tomorrow; I guess 70% would be way too much for Ljubo to handle, seeing how he is far from being a returner of Fed, Murray or David's caliber.

Stop stop stop...that's not what I said, so I am not going to respond this crap anymore. I said playing well...sorry but he didn't play well in that Nalby match he did, he did play well against Murray either. I am sorry you chose to read one part of my quote and not the other.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 03:05 PM
Look at the post I've done. I posted the stats for Murray-Roddick in San Jose. Roddick served at 70% and lost. Facts are facts.

I started writing my post a while ago but got interrupted by a phone. Damn customers can't leave me be. :devil:

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:05 PM
It counts. Noone claims that Murray or David will beat Roddick any time they play. It's not like he never beat them in return. But Fumus claimed that Fed is the ONLY one who can beat Roddick if he hits more than 70% of his 1st serve bombs, and that is just NOT TRUE. David and Murray are perfectly capable of containing that monster serve; they are capable it on paper (everyone can see they are just incredible returners), and they even proved it in actual matches. So, I believe it means the case is closed: Fed is NOT the only one who can beat Roddick's 70% 1st serves.

How hard a concept is that to grasp? Sheesh. ;)

Um..again I am going to refer you to my post, which said when Roddick is playing well....

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 03:07 PM
So you are saying that Roddick spinning in a Nadal like serve against Murray counts? Lol...you didn't prove me wrong you only egged me on. I said "I believe that if Roddick serves at around 70% he's only beatable by Roger Federer. No one else has yet to beat him when he's played that well, and the stats don't lie." I said when he's playing well...so it doesn't matter what he serves at if he's not.

What are you talking about!? A Nalbandian that didn't show up, and didn't play well...is harder than three high class, high quality encounters, with three tough opponents. Please you gotta stop before you say something really stupid. If you wanna look at numbers look at the negative ratio of unforced errors to winners that Daveed hit in that match, he was -8.

Now you come with the playing well stuff. Roddick has no game, only serve, then when he's serving at 70%, he's playing well. You said only Federer can beat him serving at around 70% and I've proved you wrong. Accept it.

Big deal, Lopez isn't a high class player. Rochus is consistent but far from being a great player and Gasquet is a mental midget. Nalbandian playing badly is still much better than all these players. It's not hard to do face it.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:07 PM
Look at the post I've done. I posted the stats for Murray-Roddick in San Jose. Roddick served at 70% and lost. Facts are facts.

Again, what's lost in this is, is the first post I made, which you are 100% not looking at which is fine. If you wanna read my post about serving 70%, not even reading the whole post, and go on and on and on about how wrong I am that's fine. That's not what I said.

RickDaStick
03-14-2007, 03:09 PM
Impossible to predict as both are two of the best servers and two of the worst returners on tour. This means most likely tiebreaks will decide the set and those are 50-50.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:11 PM
Now you come with the playing well stuff. Roddick has no game, only serve, then when he's serving at 70%, he's playing well. You said only Federer can beat him serving at around 70% and I've proved you wrong. Accept it.

Big deal, Lopez isn't a high class player. Rochus is consistent but far from being a great player and Gasquet is a mental midget. Nalbandian playing badly is still much better than all these players. It's not hard to do face it.

Yea, playing well serving a high percentage. I don't think that's too unreasonable of a quote. That is what I said. C'mon does that make any sense to you? Hitting 70% first serves in and shaking everything else that comes into play...isn't going to win you matches so obviously you have to play well too. Um, you didn't wrong again. Please read my posts, and besides all this...you still didn't respond to the fact that the two of you guys are comparing Ivan's return to a Murray, Nalbandian!? Get real...

What!? Nalbandian was a tough match. Not a tough draw. So you are telling me if you draw Nalbanbain and qfs the rest of the tournement...that's a hard draw?

Kitty de Sade
03-14-2007, 03:11 PM
Although it doesn't make me happy to see it, I think Rod-dick wins this one. Seems like he's a man possessed.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 03:13 PM
Stop stop stop...that's not what I said, so I am not going to respond this crap anymore. I said playing well...sorry but he didn't play well in that Nalby match he did, he did play well against Murray either. I am sorry you chose to read one part of my quote and not the other.

Oh come on. What do you mean by 'playing well'? I could likewise argue that Ljubo can beat Roddick any time 'if he plays well'. And then just say he didn't play well every time he in fact lost. You wanna play that game?

Why would Roddick suddenly play bad after two decent performances against Federer and Ljubicic? It's not that he played bad, he just got demoralized by David returning his bombs like noone's business. It does get frustrating for all great servers when someone handles their best weapons apparently effortlessly.

Another example, I can claim Gonzo can beat anyone with ease if playing well, and by 'playing well' consider only his performance against Haas. It just doesn't mean anything, it's a tautology. If you hit 42 winners to 3 UEs, you win, period. But the question remains, will your opponent let you do that.

Oh, and just in case you somehow fail to realize, I do believe Roddick is the favourite in this match. Which, again, doesn't mean Ljubo has no chance; I just feel Andy has an edge considering his performances so far this week.

RickDaStick
03-14-2007, 03:13 PM
Ljubo has broken serve 9 times this tournament. Roddick 3. If andy serves to Ivans backhand, ljubo is pretty good at just slicing it deep which gets them in a neutral rally.

oz_boz
03-14-2007, 03:21 PM
I believe that if Roddick serves at around 70% he's only beatable by Roger Federer. No one else has yet to beat him when he's played that well, and the stats don't lie.

Fumus, in the first sentence you don't say anything about playing well, you do in the second but there you just state that playing well is equal to serving around 70%.

Besides, you referred to stats in the post, then loled when GlennM came up with stats.

That aside, I think Duck will beat Egg. In 2.

~*BGT*~
03-14-2007, 03:23 PM
Ljubo has broken serve 9 times this tournament. Roddick 3. If andy serves to Ivans backhand, ljubo is pretty good at just slicing it deep which gets them in a neutral rally.

# of times own serve has been broken


Ljube

vs Nalbandian- 2
vs Tojo- 0
vs Falla- 2

Roddick
vs. Feli- 0
vs. Rochus- 0
vs. Gasquet-0

# of sets lost

Ljube-2
Roddick-0

Chances of winning this tournament

Ljube- :lol:
Roddick- is approaching one

:)

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:23 PM
Oh come on. What do you mean by 'playing well'? I could likewise argue that Ljubo can beat Roddick any time 'if he plays well'. And then just say he didn't play well every time he in fact lost. You wanna play that game?

Why would Roddick suddenly play bad after two decent performances against Federer and Ljubicic? It's not that he played bad, he just got demoralized by David returning his bombs like noone's business. It does get frustrating for all great servers when someone handles their best weapons apparently effortlessly.

Another example, I can claim Gonzo can beat anyone with ease if playing well, and by 'playing well' consider only his performance against Haas. It just doesn't mean anything, it's a tautology. If you hit 42 winners to 3 UEs, you win, period. But the question remains, will your opponent let you do that.

Oh, and just in case you somehow fail to realize, I do believe Roddick is the favourite in this match. Which, again, doesn't mean Ljubo has no chance; I just feel Andy has an edge considering his performances so far this week.

Roddick was demoralized after losing to Fed after having match points, he just came out flat. You can't tell me how he played I watched that match. Yea, playing well, playing well, playing wellllll I will say it a thousand times. I am sorry I said anything about numbers or percentages, because I am sure someone in this forum with plenty of free-time on their hands will go look at a situation where Andy did hit 98098 aces in a match, 70434 winners, and 0 unforced errors and still lost a match. I stick my quote, if he serves a high percentage which for him is around 70% then only Federer can beat him if he's playing well. That's what I said...I stand by it.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:24 PM
Fumus, in the first sentence you don't say anything about playing well, you do in the second but there you just state that playing well is equal to serving around 70%.

Besides, you referred to stats in the post, then loled when GlennM came up with stats.

That aside, I think Duck will beat Egg. In 2.

Yea, I didn't mean serving a certain number was playing well. That's why I laugh at Glenn, you, Apement ...and anyone else who wants to join in.

RickDaStick
03-14-2007, 03:24 PM
Fumus: I fail to see why Roddick is unbeatable serving at 70%. He is not a good returner and chances are vs a player with a good serve it will come down to a TB. No matter how well he served the whole set, he could easily miss a few 1st serves and lose the tiebreak. He will most likely hold serve whether he is serving at 100% or 60%. For instance the Muller match, he could of served at 80 % but still would of lost because he couldnt win a tiebreak.

tangerine_dream
03-14-2007, 03:25 PM
Duck and Egg :lol:

Ivan should just save himself the trouble and retire. No need to go in there and embarrass himself. Nobody will miss him. It's the Rafa-Andy match everybody is waiting for. These two other guys, Chela and Ivan, need to just get out of the way, they are standing in Andy and Rafa's way. :)

Apemant
03-14-2007, 03:25 PM
Ljubo has broken serve 9 times this tournament. Roddick 3. If andy serves to Ivans backhand, ljubo is pretty good at just slicing it deep which gets them in a neutral rally.

Maybe you didn't watch Roddick-Rochus. I did. Trust me, A-Rod's rallying as of late is not to be underestimated. He handled Rochus pretty well, even though Rochus himself played good and tried to win. His FH is again quite formidable actually, able to hit clean winners from the baseline as well, not just from the middle of the field. And he moves surprisingly well too.

I hope it's gonna be a good match, lots of aggresive, well placed and strong shots - as well as some awesome serving bombs - and not a WTA-like endless exchanges to the middle of the court till someone UEs out of sheer boredom :devil:

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:26 PM
Fumus: I fail to see why Roddick is unbeatable serving at 70%. He is not a good returner and chances are vs a player with a good serve it will come down to a TB. No matter how well he served the whole set, he could easily miss a few 1st serves and lose the tiebreak. He will most likely hold serve whether he is serving at 100% or 60%. For instance the Muller match, he could of served at 80 % but still would of lost because he couldnt win a tiebreak.

OOo...boy.

oz_boz
03-14-2007, 03:28 PM
It's the Rafa-Andy match everybody is waiting for. These two other guys, Chela and Ivan, need to just get out of the way, are just standing in Andy and Rafa's way. :)

I think a lot of posters would love a Nadal-Ljubo match on hc, me included. Duck or Egg doesn't matter as long as the Pig does his part of the deal.

oz_boz
03-14-2007, 03:30 PM
Yea, I didn't mean serving a certain number was playing well.

If you didn't mean that, you shouldn't have said it. ;)

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 03:33 PM
Yea, I didn't mean serving a certain number was playing well. That's why I laugh at Glenn, you, Apement ...and anyone else who wants to join in.

You laugh because you're making a fool of himself? First you come up with number and stats and when someone proves you wrong with numbers and stats, you back out with subjective arguments, like "playing well". What's playing well? Hitting nice shots? Then Roddick never played well in his whole life. Roddick = serve. When he's serving well he's playing well, because there isn't much more he can do than serve.

Fumus: I fail to see why Roddick is unbeatable serving at 70%. He is not a good returner and chances are vs a player with a good serve it will come down to a TB. No matter how well he served the whole set, he could easily miss a few 1st serves and lose the tiebreak. He will most likely hold serve whether he is serving at 100% or 60%. For instance the Muller match, he could of served at 80 % but still would of lost because he couldnt win a tiebreak.

Tennis is about match-ups. He could serve at 100% against Federer and he'd still be schooled.

All_Slam_Andre
03-14-2007, 03:35 PM
Roddick is the strong favourite to beat Ljubicic. I can't wait for the semi between him and Rafa.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:36 PM
If you didn't mean that, you shouldn't have said it. ;)

Didn't say it. You're mis-interpretation of my quote using guerrilla logic.

Merton
03-14-2007, 03:37 PM
Andy must be considered the slight favourite here, for some reason I am thinking back at their match in Indianapolis, 2004. I think this match will be as close as that was.

Blue Heart24
03-14-2007, 03:37 PM
# of times own serve has been broken


Ljube

vs Nalbandian- 2
vs Tojo- 0
vs Falla- 2

Roddick
vs. Feli- 0
vs. Rochus- 0
vs. Gasquet-0

# of sets lost

Ljube-2
Roddick-0

Chances of winning this tournament

Ljube- :lol:
Roddick- is approaching one

:)


:retard: :retard: :retard: :retard: :retard:

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:38 PM
You laugh because you're making a fool of himself? First you come up with number and stats and when someone proves you wrong with numbers and stats, you back out with subjective arguments, like "playing well". What's playing well? Hitting nice shots? Then Roddick never played well in his whole life. Roddick = serve. When he's serving well he's playing well, because there isn't much more he can do than serve.



Tennis is about match-ups. He could serve at 100% against Federer and he'd still be schooled.

Yes Roddick has never played well. That's right Roddick could sever 100% and still lose because Fed is the unbeatable god of tennis....wait wait...he did just lose didn't he...wait wait...Roddick has beaten him before...wait wait...Roddick did have a mp on him in shanghai and should have won...and did beat him in the aus open warm up...oooOo...ooOOo...ooOOo...geee...

Bibberz
03-14-2007, 03:38 PM
Impossible to predict as both are two of the best servers and two of the worst returners on tour. This means most likely tiebreaks will decide the set and those are 50-50.

Well said. What's the use of comparing 9% to 12%? There will be at least one tiebreak and those are too difficult to forecast.

RickDaStick
03-14-2007, 03:39 PM
# of times own serve has been broken


Ljube

vs Nalbandian- 2
vs Tojo- 0
vs Falla- 2

Roddick
vs. Feli- 0
vs. Rochus- 0
vs. Gasquet-0

# of sets lost

Ljube-2
Roddick-0

Chances of winning this tournament

Ljube- :lol:
Roddick- is approaching one

:)

Ljubo is ahead of Roddick in all the serve categories for the year. But nice try anyways.

Blue Heart24
03-14-2007, 03:39 PM
Ivan will rip him a fat one,I'm telling you.
Roddick might win a set,if he'll be lucky but nothing more.
Ljubo will beat him,Naydahles,and will win the tournament.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 03:40 PM
I stick my quote, if he serves a high percentage which for him is around 70% then only Federer can beat him if he's playing well. That's what I said...I stand by it.

Then I'm sorry to say but you are suffering from fanboyism. An in form David or M-Andy, on a good returning day, hungry for a victory, can beat Roddick no matter if he plays well or serves 70%. And it's not about who is 'the better player', its just the matchup issue. Both of them neutralize his main weapon; and when they play well too (and not just that A-Rod plays well! Of course he'd beat them if they gave a sub-par performance themselves) then they can pretty obviously outrally him on a regular basis. Man, it's just obvious, I can't understand that an intelligent person such as yourself is unable to recognize something so simple.

Case in point, you bring that Memphis match vs. M-Andy, as if it proves anything. If it does prove anything, it is just what I'm telling you here: that M-Andy is an extremely bad matchup for R-Andy. That second set, where M-Andy got himself broken while serving for it, he had like 40% first serves in, while R-Andy had over 70% - and it still went to a tiebreak. Hello? What more evidence you need over that?

Guybrush
03-14-2007, 03:40 PM
Roddick is the strong favourite to beat Ljubicic. I can't wait for the semi between him and Rafa.

Maybe you'll see it in 2008. :cool:

~*BGT*~
03-14-2007, 03:43 PM
:) Ljubo is ahead of Roddick in all the serve categories for the year. But nice try anyways.

Ranking

Ljube- 8
Roddick-8

Race

Ljube- 7
Roddick- 5

Serve doesn't mean everything. Nice try.

Fumus
03-14-2007, 03:44 PM
Then I'm sorry to say but you are suffering from fanboyism. An in form David or M-Andy, on a good returning day, hungry for a victory, can beat Roddick no matter if he plays well or serves 70%. And it's not about who is 'the better player', its just the matchup issue. Both of them neutralize his main weapon; and when they play well too (and not just that A-Rod plays well! Of course he'd beat them if they gave a sub-par performance themselves) then they can pretty obviously outrally him on a regular basis. Man, it's just obvious, I can't understand that an intelligent person such as yourself is unable to recognize something so simple.

Case in point, you bring that Memphis match vs. M-Andy, as if it proves anything. If it does prove anything, it is just what I'm telling you here: that M-Andy is an extremely bad matchup for R-Andy. That second set, where M-Andy got himself broken while serving for it, he had like 40% first serves in, while R-Andy had over 70% - and it still went to a tiebreak. Hello? What more evidence you need over that?

Draw me a diagram with pie-charts and line graphs. Gotta have pie charts....OOo...c'mon...seriously discounting victories left and right here...I mean I guess his win in Cincy over Murray didn't count either...Let me remind you that Roddick has the head to head against DAVVEDDD....and Murray has lost to Roddick 2 out of the last 3 times....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

RickDaStick
03-14-2007, 03:45 PM
:)

Ranking

Ljube- 8
Roddick-8

Serve doesn't mean everything. Nice try.


You are right so i dont get why you posted all those serve stats earlier:confused:

~*BGT*~
03-14-2007, 03:50 PM
You are right so i dont get why you posted all those serve stats earlier:confused:


# of times own serve has been broken


Ljube

vs Nalbandian- 2
vs Tojo- 0
vs Falla- 2

Roddick
vs. Feli- 0
vs. Rochus- 0
vs. Gasquet-0


That's "all those serve stats"?

GlennMirnyi
03-14-2007, 03:53 PM
Yes Roddick has never played well. That's right Roddick could sever 100% and still lose because Fed is the unbeatable god of tennis....wait wait...he did just lose didn't he...wait wait...Roddick has beaten him before...wait wait...Roddick did have a mp on him in shanghai and should have won...and did beat him in the aus open warm up...oooOo...ooOOo...ooOOo...geee...

Roddick beat Federer ages ago. Since 2003 the bitchdom only got bigger and bigger.

About Shanghai... FEDERER WON. Get used to it. MPs mean nothing.

Then I'm sorry to say but you are suffering from fanboyism. An in form David or M-Andy, on a good returning day, hungry for a victory, can beat Roddick no matter if he plays well or serves 70%. And it's not about who is 'the better player', its just the matchup issue. Both of them neutralize his main weapon; and when they play well too (and not just that A-Rod plays well! Of course he'd beat them if they gave a sub-par performance themselves) then they can pretty obviously outrally him on a regular basis. Man, it's just obvious, I can't understand that an intelligent person such as yourself is unable to recognize something so simple.

Case in point, you bring that Memphis match vs. M-Andy, as if it proves anything. If it does prove anything, it is just what I'm telling you here: that M-Andy is an extremely bad matchup for R-Andy. That second set, where M-Andy got himself broken while serving for it, he had like 40% first serves in, while R-Andy had over 70% - and it still went to a tiebreak. Hello? What more evidence you need over that?

Make a drawing with some nice balloons and pictures.

:)

Ranking

Ljube- 8
Roddick-8

Race

Ljube- 7
Roddick- 5

Serve doesn't mean everything. Nice try.

For Roddick it does.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 03:55 PM
Yea, I didn't mean serving a certain number was playing well. That's why I laugh at Glenn, you, Apement ...and anyone else who wants to join in.

Look, this is quite lame way of trying to get away easily. 'Playing well' means precisely jack. Anyone 'playing well' can beat anyone who isn't playing well. If by 'playing well' you mean - getting a W, then it's self explanatory; it's a tautology. It's as if you said, Roddick will beat anybody if he plays well enough to beat them. Well of course.

Roddick can even beat Federer if he's 'playing well', while Fed's playing like crap, as in Canas match. Ljubo can beat Roddick if he's playing well, he can beat Federer if he's playing well, and he can beat Nadal if he's playing well. Where does it lead us from there, eh Angie? :devil:

Don't get me wrong, Roddick is one hell of a tennis player, but to say things like you said is just fanboyism. Some other people say that Gasquet can 'beat anybody' if he is 'playing well'. And so on, and so forth. Roddick, as well as anyone else on the tour, has some people who are natural bad matchups for him; i.e. great returners with good rallying abilities. To say something that amouts to them having 'no chance' against Roddick if he is 'playing well' is just :rolleyes:

ljubicic_
03-14-2007, 04:38 PM
i'm afraid Roddick will win because Ivan's knee is bad, really bad(he said that in interviews) he also said that in the first set against Nalby he had so much pain that he didn't think about winning that set and in the second he bited on his teeth and would try to win and he also said that if Nalby broke in the beginning of the 2set that he would retire(for the Croats who will yell to me for saying that, take a look at index.hr) offcourse i want Ljubo to win but that won't be easy if you play injured against Roddick

ChinoRios4Ever
03-14-2007, 05:06 PM
tennis will be the winner :D

MaryWalsh
03-14-2007, 05:09 PM
Roddick in 3.

Apemant
03-14-2007, 05:21 PM
i'm afraid Roddick will win because Ivan's knee is bad, really bad(he said that in interviews) he also said that in the first set against Nalby he had so much pain that he didn't think about winning that set and in the second he bited on his teeth and would try to win and he also said that if Nalby broke in the beginning of the 2set that he would retire(for the Croats who will yell to me for saying that, take a look at index.hr) offcourse i want Ljubo to win but that won't be easy if you play injured against Roddick

No need for excuses. If he loses, it will be because Andy outplays and outserves him. Pain means nothing; after all, he managed to pull a win in 3 sets despite it, and against someone who excells in comebacks. Goran won Wimby despite having to take painkillers for his sore shoulder. So if Andy beats Ljubo after all, better don't mention this knee. Personally, I will take comfort in the fact that at least we get to see Rafa vs. A-Rod again, after two and a half long years. :cool:

D'oh, I keep forgetting Rafa has to beat Chela first...

Fumus
03-14-2007, 05:26 PM
Glenn you don't respond to the things you are wrong on. You come out with these outlandish statements and when I apply logic to them you simply ignore them like with the Nalbandian draw, Roddick matchups against certain people, beating Fed etc.

Apement seriously get over it. You and I both know that's not what I meant that serving about a certain number is going to beat anyone. I was talking about playing well and serving at high percentage. You fail to see that you like to look at certain quotes but not the big picture. You are right anyone on the right day at this level is unbeatable, I just think Roddick is there more often than not against a lot of players. Federer is just a particularly bad match-up for him and has been his whole career. That said, is why I think if Roddick is serving well enough, and hitting the ball well enough, hitting his forehand hot and making the put away vollies, theres only one guy who can beat him when he's playing like that. Look at the match losses to Murray, to Nalbandian, to whomever and in those matches he wasn't playing the way I describe. Plus I am automatically going to discount the two losses to Murray from last year because Roddick was playing with 0 confidence and exhibiting very little of what I was just talking about.


I have had so much fun posting today. I wish you guys would argue with me more often. IL, I know and we had a battle roy-al with cheese last week, so I appreciate him. Thanks Apement and GlennMirnyi for keep me so occupied when there was no tennis on. I really do enjoy the argument.

celia
03-14-2007, 07:45 PM
Andy is playing much better than the last time this guy beat him. So I expect him to win it quite easily.

rofe
03-14-2007, 08:53 PM
I want Andy to win this one. An Andy-Nadal match might be very interesting.

Havok
03-14-2007, 09:09 PM
Please Roddick, don't lose to Ljubastank. Roddick is playing FAR better than Ljubicic in this tournament, this year, and ever since Cincy 2006. IF Roddick loses this match, he's got some major thinking to do.

We all want a Nadal vs Roddick showdown, we've been deprived of it for far too long. That DC finals on clay doesn't count because it's Nadal vs Roddick on clay, no contest. Hardcourts is much more intriguing.

tangerine_dream
03-14-2007, 09:11 PM
Ivan's so scared of Andy he pulled all his hair out.

RickDaStick
03-14-2007, 09:16 PM
Keep talking Ducktards. Just be sure not to dissapear like the Dopetards when he loses.

tangerine_dream
03-14-2007, 09:18 PM
I will always be here for the Croaties :hug:

All_Slam_Andre
03-14-2007, 10:40 PM
Ljubicic has got to be one of the worst players to ever break into the top ten (as highlighted by him never having won a big title and only going beyond the 3rd round twice in the 30 grand slams that he has played in :haha:). Hopefully A-Rod sends this clown packing.

Corey Feldman
03-14-2007, 10:45 PM
Im going for Jimmy Rod easily in 2.

stebs
03-14-2007, 10:52 PM
Glenn you don't respond to the things you are wrong on. You come out with these outlandish statements and when I apply logic to them you simply ignore them like with the Nalbandian draw, Roddick matchups against certain people, beating Fed etc.

A little hypocritical, your posts have had far less logic than Apemants and yet you still reply saying you're right without an argument to back it up or if there is one then you just post it rather than forming it into a response to Apemants arguments. I am not saying you are wrong (though I think you are) but certainly you are showing that you are struggling to overcome some simple things Apemant has said, rather than reply properly you said:

Draw me a diagram with pie-charts and line graphs. Gotta have pie charts....OOo...c'mon...seriously discounting victories left and right here...I mean I guess his win in Cincy over Murray didn't count either...Let me remind you that Roddick has the head to head against DAVVEDDD....and Murray has lost to Roddick 2 out of the last 3 times....

Now, the first few lines here are simply BS. Just because Apemant uses logic doesn't mean you have to try and mock his argument which happens to have a much more solid basis than any of yours and makes perfect sense.

As for the rest of your argument, they are valid points but the use of examples is only half of an answer, you need to actually say WHY this means anything, you have also contradicted yourself a little. If Murray losing to Roddick the last 2 out of 3 times is an argument for Murray not being better on any particular day then the fact that Dave has won the last 2 in a row vs Roddick both in straight sets is an even better indication that when on his game Dave > Roddick.

Veronique
03-15-2007, 02:43 AM
Some of Ljubicic fans are really pathetic. Please remind me again how many GS and MS Ljubo has won again? Let's talk when he breaks through.

If he loses tomorrow, it's b/c of his bad knee. If he wins, it's b/c he's a superior player.:rolleyes:

Veronique
03-15-2007, 02:46 AM
The bum is going down.

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 02:57 AM
The bum is going down.


I couldn't agree more. Roddick will lose in 3.

Veronique
03-15-2007, 03:04 AM
I couldn't agree more. Roddick will lose in 3.

How many slams again?

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 03:06 AM
How many slams again?

www.atptennis.com is your friend. Dont be lazy and do the research yourself.

Veronique
03-15-2007, 03:08 AM
No, you tell me big mouth! And while you're at it, tell me how many MS Ljubo has won as well.

Headbump
03-15-2007, 04:47 AM
No, you tell me big mouth! And while you're at it, tell me how many MS Ljubo has won as well.
How is 2003 revelant to who will win tomorrow?

laure xxx
03-15-2007, 10:08 AM
Can we stop with the "how many slams has Ljubo won" thing please? I mean, I know you're trying to insult this IvanLjubicic poster, but seriously, Andy has only won one slam. You haven't really made it or proven yourself until you've won at least 2.

Apemant
03-15-2007, 10:16 AM
I did some quick research (only ATP matches, I couldn't find exact data for DC), and thought it would be interesting to discuss...

This year Andy was broken 24 times out of 204 service games played, which is 11.7% (non-DC) while Ljubo was broken 21 times out of 213 service games, 9.8% (also non-DC). BUT, no less than 7 of those 24 breaks of Andy's serve are due to Roger's clinical display in AO. That's almost 30% of all his breaks this year, just that one match :eek: :eek:

I think it's quite fair to scratch that match, as playing a clinical Roger isn't something you do every day. :devil: And if we do that then Andy was in fact broken only 8.9% of the time... so yes, it's a very hard thing to break Andy if your name isn't Roger Federer ;)

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 10:36 AM
I did some quick research (only ATP matches, I couldn't find exact data for DC), and thought it would be interesting to discuss...

This year Andy was broken 24 times out of 204 service games played, which is 11.7% (non-DC) while Ljubo was broken 21 times out of 213 service games, 9.8% (also non-DC). BUT, no less than 7 of those 24 breaks of Andy's serve are due to Roger's clinical display in AO. That's almost 30% of all his breaks this year, just that one match :eek: :eek:

I think it's quite fair to scratch that match, as playing a clinical Roger isn't something you do every day. :devil: And if we do that then Andy was in fact broken only 8.9% of the time... so yes, it's a very hard thing to break Andy if your name isn't Roger Federer ;)

+ Andy was broken less on slow clay in DC than Ljubo on hardcourt in Germany

anyway Andy is playing better tennis right now so he should win

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 10:37 AM
How is 2003 revelant to who will win tomorrow?

ok if you want other example
How many times Ljubo was in final of GS or won TMS?? Roddick did both in the end of 2006 which is revelant I think

maqk
03-15-2007, 10:43 AM
guys, Ljubo is also good, why so Anti Ljubo???

All_Slam_Andre
03-15-2007, 11:38 AM
guys, Ljubo is also good, why so Anti Ljubo???

Because he is one of the worst players to ever break into the top 10 as highlighted by his pathetic record at the big events. He doesn't deserve his high ranking. There are 14 big titles up for grabs every year and he hasn't been able to win a single one. This guy has played in 30 grand slams in his career, and he has gone beyond the 3rd round twice. That's pathetic. Ljubicic is a nobody. No surprise that in Gstaad last year some tournament officials didn't know who he was and had to ask whether he was playing the main draw or the qualifiers.

Apemant
03-15-2007, 11:50 AM
Because he is one of the worst players to ever break into the top 10 as highlighted by his pathetic record at the big events. He doesn't deserve his high ranking. There are 14 big titles up for grabs every year and he hasn't been able to win a single one. This guy has played in 30 grand slams in his career, and he has gone beyond the 3rd round twice. That's pathetic. Ljubicic is a nobody. No surprise that in Gstaad last year some tournament officials didn't know who he was and had to ask whether he was playing the main draw or the qualifiers.

Ljubo's pathetic record in GS can't even be compared to the overall patheticness (is that a word? :devil: ) of the above paragraph. It's one thing to compare Ljubo to someone way more successful and say - look, he didn't win nearly as much - but it's a completely different thing to diss him in general, saying things like 'he's a nobody'. Let me ask you one thing: if Ljubo is a nobody, then what are you? Does the fact that great Andre (this is not sarcasm, I have huge respect for Agassi) won all the slams somehow make you worth the air you breathe, just because you're his fan? Does Andre know who you are or does he care if you live or die?

Way to make yourself look :silly:

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 11:55 AM
Ljubo's pathetic record in GS can't even be compared to the overall patheticness (is that a word? :devil: ) of the above paragraph. It's one thing to compare Ljubo to someone way more successful and say - look, he didn't win nearly as much - but it's a completely different thing to diss him in general, saying things like 'he's a nobody'. Let me ask you one thing: if Ljubo is a nobody, then what are you? Does the fact that great Andre (this is not sarcasm, I have huge respect for Agassi) won all the slams somehow make you worth the air you breathe, just because you're his fan? Does Andre know who you are or does he care if you live or die?

Way to make yourself look :silly:

I somehow Agree with your post , but Argument about being nobody is below some level and you like it because you use it frequently. I don't have to be SOMEBODY to talk about other people and think about them in terms of being noone , and compared to other players Ljubicic is short time will be nobody that's a fact if he doesn't win anything big in 10 years only few people will remember him. When you look at all those tennis players in Open era and their results he is clearly nobody in terms of results. I am saying that he is nobody as a person but nobody considering his tennis results.
I would give an example
- many persons crticize Bush saying that he is nobody and I agree with them, but do they need to be famous or something to judge people ?? They would never be a president of USA but still they cliam that he is nobody or even worse by your logic they should be forbidden to do so because they are not well known

All_Slam_Andre
03-15-2007, 12:11 PM
I don't have to be SOMEBODY to talk about other people and think about them in terms of being noone , and compared to other players Ljubicic is short time will be nobody that's a fact if he doesn't win anything big in 10 years only few people will remember him. When you look at all those tennis players in Open era and their results he is clearly nobody in terms of results. I am saying that he is nobody as a person but nobody considering his tennis results.

Great post. As fans of the sport we have every right to criticise players' poor tennis and results as much as we want. Should tennis players be immune to criticism? If so couldn't the same logic be applied to other professionals like doctors, police officers, lawyers etc? I indicated that Ljubicic's career achievements (or lack of them) mean that he doesn't deserve a place in the top 10 and that obviously touched a nerve with an over-sensitive fan of his.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 12:52 PM
Because he is one of the worst players to ever break into the top 10 as highlighted by his pathetic record at the big events. He doesn't deserve his high ranking. There are 14 big titles up for grabs every year and he hasn't been able to win a single one. This guy has played in 30 grand slams in his career, and he has gone beyond the 3rd round twice. That's pathetic. Ljubicic is a nobody. No surprise that in Gstaad last year some tournament officials didn't know who he was and had to ask whether he was playing the main draw or the qualifiers.

You are a nobody.
When you'll achieve all things he did,let me know.
:rolleyes:

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 12:57 PM
You are a nobody.
When you'll achieve all things he did,let me know.
:rolleyes:

sorry but did you always achieve as much as people you crticize ??

Such argument as yours is simply stupid , so I can't crticize people who achieved more, are more famous etc ?? Bullshit if so I can't say that some actor is poor because I haven't been an actor :haha: so forbid whole world to crticize :haha:

I have won some Rome Total War tournaments and some in Warhammer as well I think they are as meaningfull as Ljubicic titles

All_Slam_Andre
03-15-2007, 12:58 PM
You are a nobody.
When you'll achieve all things he did,let me know.
:rolleyes:

I've won the same number of meaningful tennis titles as him :)

njorker
03-15-2007, 12:58 PM
Roddick! :)

His way to the finals is waay open now that Roger's gone. I'm hoping for a Roddick-Nadal semi...it's about time, don't you think?!

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 12:59 PM
I've won the same number of meaningful tennis titles as him :)

Yeah,on a playstation.

All_Slam_Andre
03-15-2007, 01:00 PM
sorry but did you always achieve as much as people you crticize ??

Such argument as yours is simply stupid , so I can't crticize people who achieved more, are more famous etc ?? Bullshit if so I can't say that some actor is poor because I haven't been an actor :haha: so forbid whole world to crticize :haha:

:yeah: Exactly.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:01 PM
sorry but did you always achieve as much as people you crticize ??

Such argument as yours is simply stupid , so I can't crticize people who achieved more, are more famous etc ?? Bullshit if so I can't say that some actor is poor because I haven't been an actor :haha: so forbid whole world to crticize :haha:

And what's your arguments?
Leave the men alone.Go and beat him if he's so bad as you say.

All_Slam_Andre
03-15-2007, 01:02 PM
Yeah,on a playstation.

:lol: Continue to live in denial. It's very funny. The bottom line is has never won a single grand slam, master cup or masters series title. Therefore he has won zero meaningful tennis titles, the same amount that I have won. Do you get it now :)

Kolya
03-15-2007, 01:05 PM
Roddick in form - but I have a feeling Ljubo will pull this off.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 01:05 PM
And what's your arguments?
Leave the men alone.Go and beat him if he's so bad as you say.

how coould you even crtizie other poster did you achieve as much as others :haha:
I am not making arguments I am just showing how stupid your arguments aabout critic are

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:06 PM
:lol: Continue to live in denial. It's very funny. The bottom line is has never won a single grand slam, master cup or masters series title. Therefore he has won zero meaningful tennis titles, the same amount that I have won. Do you get it now :)

You won 7 ATP titles?
Every ATP tournament is meaningful.
You were no.3 in the world?

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 01:06 PM
:lol: Continue to live in denial. It's very funny. The bottom line is has never won a single grand slam, master cup or masters series title. Therefore he has won zero meaningful tennis titles, the same amount that I have won. Do you get it now :)

exactly :worship: :worship:
hehe I've also achieved as much as Ljubicic in terms of meaningful wins so I am as nobody as he is :haha:

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:07 PM
Being no.3 is nothing to you?

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 01:07 PM
You won 7 ATP titles?
Every ATP tournament is meaningful.
You were no.3 in the world?

for whom 7 ATP MM wins is meaningul , maybe for someone as well as for someone tournaments won in Rome Total War or in Warhammer are meaningful

All_Slam_Andre
03-15-2007, 01:08 PM
Every ATP tournament is meaningful.


:lol: People are really going to remember his Vienna and Chennai titles once he has retired.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 01:08 PM
Being no.3 is nothing to you?

for short peroid if he were no.3 when season ends thats ok but he wasn't
Did you know how many players long forgotten were for some time at no.3 ??

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:12 PM
You'll see all tonight,when Ivan will eat the Duck alive.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:13 PM
for short peroid if he were no.3 when season ends thats ok but he wasn't
Did you know how many players long forgotten were for some time at no.3 ??

he finished the year in top 5,so what's the big difference?
Last year,he was 6 straight months in top 5,from April.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:16 PM
He is a top 10 from 31.October 2005,17 conssusetive months.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 01:17 PM
You'll see all tonight,when Ivan will eat the Duck alive.

:haha: if not you hide ??

Xristos
03-15-2007, 01:18 PM
Roddick in 2 tight sets.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:19 PM
:haha: if not you hide ??

No,I wont hide,I stay behind my words,unlike you coward,who dissapears every time Ljubicic wins.Of course,because you are saying 100 posts of bullshit before.

Apemant
03-15-2007, 01:23 PM
Great post. As fans of the sport we have every right to criticise players' poor tennis and results as much as we want. Should tennis players be immune to criticism? If so couldn't the same logic be applied to other professionals like doctors, police officers, lawyers etc? I indicated that Ljubicic's career achievements (or lack of them) mean that he doesn't deserve a place in the top 10 and that obviously touched a nerve with an over-sensitive fan of his.

Read your post again. Does it really sound to you as 'criticism'?

In my book, criticism is a positive thing. Criticism intends to find room for improvement. When you criticise something, you express your desire to see things get better than they are now. Criticism is not a judgement. Criticism is not a dismissal. And your post was just that, a negative judgement, dismissal, and rather rude on top of it. So I just wanted to show you how it looks from the outside. I'm not being judgemental towards you - it's your own doing; you are just not aware of it yet.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 01:23 PM
:haha:

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 01:24 PM
No,I wont hide,I stay behind my words,unlike you coward,who dissapears every time Ljubicic wins.Of course,because you are saying 100 posts of bullshit before.

do some reasearch better

I hope give a lot of credit to Ljubo when he won with Murray in Doha,as well as after his win with Youzhny in Zagreb so I don't hide when BaldMan loses

Fumus
03-15-2007, 01:40 PM
Ivan back off!!

The forum want's a duck vs. pig fight!!!!!!!!!!!! ^^ !!!!!!!

Apemant
03-15-2007, 02:11 PM
Ivan back off!!

The forum want's a duck vs. pig fight!!!!!!!!!!!! ^^ !!!!!!!

Just out of curiosity, if they indeed meet, who will people who are fans of both, root for between them? :devil:

Apemant
03-15-2007, 02:18 PM
:haha:

By the way, even though there IS a small chance of Ljubo winning IW (as your title claims), I'd estimate they are less than 10%, so your signature will only serve as a good bait for more Ljubo bashing and endless flame wars over his accomplishments, should he lose to Andy today (or to anyone else in the last 8).

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 02:20 PM
Great post. As fans of the sport we have every right to criticise players' poor tennis and results as much as we want. Should tennis players be immune to criticism? If so couldn't the same logic be applied to other professionals like doctors, police officers, lawyers etc? I indicated that Ljubicic's career achievements (or lack of them) mean that he doesn't deserve a place in the top 10 and that obviously touched a nerve with an over-sensitive fan of his.

Never thought i would see the day someone says great post to Loremaster.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 02:26 PM
Never thought i would see the day someone says great post to Loremaster.

it is only prove of you ignorance
and anyway All-Slam-Andre isn't the only one

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 02:29 PM
it is only prove of you ignorance
and anyway All-Slam-Andre isn't the only one

Who are you kidding? Its no one besides your little group of fanboys.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 02:34 PM
Who are you kidding? Its no one besides your little group of fanboys.

yeah sure and you are seer who knows everything :haha: you should make more funny posts :haha:
maybe you should open seer office many persons would like to hear from you about their lives and future it would be better than posting ignorant posts,

tangerine_dream
03-15-2007, 02:39 PM
I just did a search for the word "pathetic" and they all showed up in this thread.

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 02:41 PM
I just did a aearch for the word "pathetic" and they all showed up in this thread.


:angel:

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 02:41 PM
yeah sure and you are seer who knows everything :haha: you should make more funny posts :haha:
maybe you should open seer office many persons would like to hear from you about their lives and future it would be better than posting ignorant posts,

What? Me? When? No No

Deathless Mortal
03-15-2007, 02:46 PM
By the way, even though there IS a small chance of Ljubo winning IW (as your title claims), I'd estimate they are less than 10%, so your signature will only serve as a good bait for more Ljubo bashing and endless flame wars over his accomplishments, should he lose to Andy today (or to anyone else in the last 8).

True. Chances for Ljubo winning the IW are small, but there still is a chance, so we are hoping for it. Roddick is a really tough opponent, Ivan will have a tough job today if he wants to win. And if he wins, he'll probably meet Nadal, another tough job, but i know Ljubo can beat him :devil: And then in the final, i would say whoever wins today between Murray and Haas. Anyway, i'm happy Ljubo reached the quarters, he defended his last year's IW points, that's good, if he goes step, 2 or 3 forward, it could only become much better.

Fumus
03-15-2007, 02:46 PM
I just did a aearch for the word "pathetic" and they all showed up in this thread.

Damn...I knew I shouldn't have posted in here....

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 02:50 PM
Damn...I knew I shouldn't have posted in here....

I dont know about you but i know im just going to post once in the post match thread no matter who wins. It will be a war zone in there.

Fumus
03-15-2007, 02:51 PM
I dont know about you but i know im just going to post once in the post match thread no matter who wins. It will be a war zone in there.

70%

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 03:03 PM
True. Chances for Ljubo winning the IW are small, but there still is a chance, so we are hoping for it. Roddick is a really tough opponent, Ivan will have a tough job today if he wants to win. And if he wins, he'll probably meet Nadal, another tough job, but i know Ljubo can beat him :devil: And then in the final, i would say whoever wins today between Murray and Haas. Anyway, i'm happy Ljubo reached the quarters, he defended his last year's IW points, that's good, if he goes step, 2 or 3 forward, it could only become much better.

There's no Federer...
Someday in the past,Ivan could beat anyone besides him..Can he do this again?
I beleive!
Let's go!
Eye of the tiger Ivan :lol:

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 03:14 PM
There's no Federer...
Someday in the past,Ivan could beat anyone besides him..Can he do this again?
I beleive!
Let's go!
Eye of the tiger Ivan :lol:

yeah sure Ivan was so good that he could beat anone besides Federer :haha: joke of the weak , if he was so second to Roger why he wasn't no.2 then ??
:haha:

Apemant
03-15-2007, 03:16 PM
Someday in the past,Ivan could beat anyone besides him..Can he do this again?
I beleive!


Heh, believers...

Roddick is more dangerous than ever, and Ljubo definitely isn't as solid as in the first half of 2006. So, nothing wrong in hoping, but better don't actualy expect it to happen... or you might be up for a nasty disappointment.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 03:20 PM
yeah sure Ivan was so good that he could beat anone besides Federer :haha: joke of the weak , if he was so second to Roger why he wasn't no.2 then ??
:haha:

Keep talking crap :)
I'll see if you will have balls to show up here in the morning tomorrow :wavey:

Apemant
03-15-2007, 03:21 PM
yeah sure Ivan was so good that he could beat anone besides Federer :haha: joke of the weak , if he was so second to Roger why he wasn't no.2 then ??
:haha:

He was... in the race. :devil: He was something just like Haas is today.

Besides, 'could' doesn't equate to 'did'. He said nothing wrong, there wasn't a player besides Federer who was a 'clear favourite' over Ljubo at that time. Yes, other people beat him too, but only Fed was a clear favourite. Unless you think, for example, that Baggy was also a 'clear favourite' before their AO match?

LocoPorElTenis
03-15-2007, 03:21 PM
Rodduck in 2 close sets.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 03:22 PM
Heh, believers...

Roddick is more dangerous than ever, and Ljubo definitely isn't as solid as in the first half of 2006. So, nothing wrong in hoping, but better don't actualy expect it to happen... or you might be up for a nasty disappointment.

Same for you :wavey:

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 03:24 PM
Heh, believers...

Roddick is more dangerous than ever, and Ljubo definitely isn't as solid as in the first half of 2006. So, nothing wrong in hoping, but better don't actualy expect it to happen... or you might be up for a nasty disappointment.

I agree with you here Andy is in better shape but Ljubo still is dangerous it is not like Andy will whip him easily it would be hard match no matter who will win, anyway Ljubo winning would be worse for tourney , I know many persons want to see Ljubo-Nadal , but Andy-Rafa is what everyone is looking for.
and Andy is the only person left in draw who can beat Rafa right now, Ljubicic is Rafa bitch, and even Murray who has the best shot can do this in final and I don't think so that he can be so 100% fresh in final and it is best of 5 which favours Nadal over Djoko, Murray and Tommy. Roddick winning against Ljubo makes tournaments unpredicttable, because out of potenial SF both Haas/Murray, Djokovic, Nadal, Roddick would have great chance to win in particular matchups.

sondraj06
03-15-2007, 03:29 PM
Andy baby

Apemant
03-15-2007, 03:30 PM
Same for you :wavey:

Eh? I actually root for Ljubo, if you didn't realize it by now. :rolleyes:

I'm just trying to be real, and not a blind fanboy. Did you watch Roddick this week at all? See, I did. :) He looks VERY eager to win and full of confidence... and plays great.

Blue Heart24
03-15-2007, 03:32 PM
Eh? I actually root for Ljubo, if you didn't realize it by now. :rolleyes:

I'm just trying to be real, and not a blind fanboy. Did you watch Roddick this week at all? See, I did. :) He looks VERY eager to win and full of confidence... and plays great.

No,I didnt and I don't care about his game.
I watched the highlights against Gasquet.He is good.But he'll lose today.

Bilbo
03-15-2007, 03:34 PM
Roddick

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 03:37 PM
No,I didnt and I don't care about his game.
I watched the highlights against Gasquet.He is good.But he'll lose today.

overconfidence and fanboy blindness
Maybe he will lose against you and your computer or other gaming machine

Joyce_23
03-15-2007, 03:48 PM
No,I didnt and I don't care about his game.
I watched the highlights against Gasquet.He is good.But he'll lose today.

Now that is the right way to predict a match! Just ignore how the other player is doing and blindly go for your own player anyway. :lol:
Anyway, I think Andy will be stronger this time but I don't really care who wins since both have played good tennis so far and should make for an interesting match against Rafa in the semi. If Rafa gets to the semi but I expect him to win.

Apemant
03-15-2007, 03:48 PM
I agree with you here Andy is in better shape but Ljubo still is dangerous it is not like Andy will whip him easily it would be hard match no matter who will win, anyway Ljubo winning would be worse for tourney , I know many persons want to see Ljubo-Nadal , but Andy-Rafa is what everyone is looking for.

Yes, the tourney execs would definitely prefer Roddick-Nadal, and then perhaps Roddick-Djokovic or Nadal-Murray (or any combination of those :) ). Haas is old news already and even though he's playing great ATM, he didn't win anyting big recently to warrant high attention. I don't even want to mention what disaster it would be to see a Ferrer-Chela final, for example. :devil: (nothing against those guys, it's just that they are as weak draws as Ljubo, if not weaker)

Ljubicic is Rafa bitch,

The rest of the paragraph is ok, but I had to comment on this one. So Ljubo is Rafa's bitch for winning one match in 3, losing one in 3, and losing one in 5?
Yeah, I don't count their RG match here, for obvious reasons as Rafa is undisputed king of clay and very few people have any business challenging Rafa there.

Since when is 1-2 in 3 very tough matches being someone's bitch? Get your facts straight. In all those matches, Ljubo was playing better but lost the mental aspect of the game, as Rafa was miles ahead in confidence and determination. Other than that, Ljubo matches quite well against Rafa. If his BH is working, it can compete with Rafa's lefty FH CC, and Rafa isn't exactly a great returner of 1st serves. So it's easily 50/50 on HC, at worst.

Apemant
03-15-2007, 03:53 PM
No,I didnt and I don't care about his game.
I watched the highlights against Gasquet.He is good.But he'll lose today.

Only the wizards of the art can afford being disinterested about their opponents game. I asure you, Ljubo himself very much cares about how Andy plays, as he is intelligent enough to know he can't really afford being overconfident about this. He definitely understands his own limitations.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 04:02 PM
Yes, the tourney execs would definitely prefer Roddick-Nadal, and then perhaps Roddick-Djokovic or Nadal-Murray (or any combination of those :) ). Haas is old news already and even though he's playing great ATM, he didn't win anyting big recently to warrant high attention. I don't even want to mention what disaster it would be to see a Ferrer-Chela final, for example. :devil: (nothing against those guys, it's just that they are as weak draws as Ljubo, if not weaker)



The rest of the paragraph is ok, but I had to comment on this one. So Ljubo is Rafa's bitch for winning one match in 3, losing one in 3, and losing one in 5?
Yeah, I don't count their RG match here, for obvious reasons as Rafa is undisputed king of clay and very few people have any business challenging Rafa there.

Since when is 1-2 in 3 very tough matches being someone's bitch? Get your facts straight. In all those matches, Ljubo was playing better but lost the mental aspect of the game, as Rafa was miles ahead in confidence and determination. Other than that, Ljubo matches quite well against Rafa. If his BH is working, it can compete with Rafa's lefty FH CC, and Rafa isn't exactly a great returner of 1st serves. So it's easily 50/50 on HC, at worst.

Ok I agree on that sentence that Ljubicic is Rafa Bitch was too strong and not true, but still I think that Rafa in semifinal would be huge favourite over Ivan not only because of their history which favours Rafa winning last 3 matches and gives him confidence , also being in SF of TMS would boost Rafa confidence + Ivan is not 100% fit which is really bad when playing against Rafa with many long rallies and when playing against nadal one must be 100% fit

Apemant
03-15-2007, 04:17 PM
Ok I agree on that sentence that Ljubicic is Rafa Bitch was too strong and not true, but still I think that Rafa in semifinal would be huge favourite over Ivan not only because of their history which favours Rafa winning last 3 matches and gives him confidence , also being in SF of TMS would boost Rafa confidence + Ivan is not 100% fit which is really bad when playing against Rafa with many long rallies and when playing against nadal one must be 100% fit

There is all this talk about him changing racquet or not changing racquet but painting the old one, etc etc, and now I'm not sure myself what's the real truth in all this.

But yes, many of his performances this year weren't convincing even if he pulled a W. So I guess Ljubo is an underdog vs. both Andy and Rafa here at IW.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 04:33 PM
There is all this talk about him changing racquet or not changing racquet but painting the old one, etc etc, and now I'm not sure myself what's the real truth in all this.

But yes, many of his performances this year weren't convincing even if he pulled a W. So I guess Ljubo is an underdog vs. both Andy and Rafa here at IW.

I think that all talk about racquet isn't true he has been serving in many tournamnets really great , especially in Doha his performances weren't great but service was always there , he wnet through some real problems against Youzhny twice Soderling even Nalbandian my firing serves and hanging tough I think he just isn't as confident as he was last year in spring TMS I think that loss to Fish AO killed it and he didn't manged to rebuild it losing in his home tournaments and then in other one, finals weren't bad results but he was expecting something more to bounce back not to lose in three tournaments with not so great draw. Losing to Fish, then Baggy in Zagreb and then Mahut only damaged his confidence more Rotterdam could change it but he lost pretty bad in final. Then even QF isn't such a big boost because he survived Falla and then Nalby + his health problems , of course win over Andy could change it but has he confidence to win, in close moments I would favour Andy who is really riding on tons of confidence he doesn't won a title yet but lost to really greta players never reaching two semis and final + Jimmy is great motivation for him + his tennis these weak was really impressive and confident no slumps no bad mistakes being really mentally tough in breakers , he has won 3 TBs in row here + 12-3 whole season which shows how he improved his confidence comparing to something like 50% last year, and even he lost some of Tbs in all he fight well making them very close.

Deathless Mortal
03-15-2007, 04:36 PM
Apemant is a smart guy :)

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 07:15 PM
Apemant is a smart guy :)

I agree. Apemant = smart Loremaster = dumb as a rock

Fumus
03-15-2007, 07:23 PM
Loremaster = Awesome
Everyone else = Meanie poofaces.

sondraj06
03-15-2007, 07:36 PM
Loremaster = Awesome
Everyone else = Meanie poofaces.

I agree

Veronique
03-15-2007, 07:37 PM
He was... in the race. :devil: He was something just like Haas is today.

Besides, 'could' doesn't equate to 'did'. He said nothing wrong, there wasn't a player besides Federer who was a 'clear favourite' over Ljubo at that time. Yes, other people beat him too, but only Fed was a clear favourite. Unless you think, for example, that Baggy was also a 'clear favourite' before their AO match?

Yet, he still couldn't even manage to win an MS? Poor guy!:sad:

Jelena_78
03-15-2007, 08:20 PM
I guess Ivan will make it tonight! In 2 or 3,doesn't matter...
Go Ljubo! :worship: :clap2:

Apemant
03-15-2007, 08:25 PM
Yet, he still couldn't even manage to win an MS? Poor guy!:sad:

Yes, poor guy. If you don't remember, I'll refresh your memory. He lost both IW and Miami to Roger. He lost another 3 finals in the 1st half of 2005 to Roger as well. If you are a Roddick fan, you of all people should be able to sympathise with all Roger's victims. Roddick would have like 5 GS under his belt by now if Roger wasn't around.

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 08:33 PM
Yes, poor guy. If you don't remember, I'll refresh your memory. He lost both IW and Miami to Roger. He lost another 3 finals in the 1st part of 2005 to Roger as well. If you are a Roddick fan, you of all people should be able to sympathise with all Roger's victims. Roddick would have like 5 GS under his belt by now if Roger wasn't around.

I dont really agree here , you could also lose as well to anybody else in those finals for example Blake , as well as Andy could lose both Wimby finals to Hewitt if Roger wasn't around. You can't tell what would happen for example withour Roger maybe Andy or Lleyton would be so dominant and full of confidence that he would be in Roger's place and Ljubo would not be able to win it.
Ljubo had his chances in Madird and Paris when Roger wasn't around and lost it, Andy had his chance for example in Cincy and took it that what makes him much better player (Ljubo was 100% fit and lost to Robredo in striaghts there )

Apemant
03-15-2007, 08:55 PM
I dont really agree here , you could also lose as well to anybody else in those finals for example Blake , as well as Andy could lose both Wimby finals to Hewitt if Roger wasn't around. You can't tell what would happen for example withour Roger maybe Andy or Lleyton would be so dominant and full of confidence that he would be in Roger's place and Ljubo would not be able to win it.

Of course. I didn't say it was given. But it works both ways. When a guy (Federer) wins like 8 GS and 12 AMS in 3 years, it means there is that many less for others to win. And also, winning all those GS and AMS must have been over someone else's back.

Ljubo had his chances in Madird and Paris when Roger wasn't around and lost it, Andy had his chance for example in Cincy and took it that what makes him much better player (Ljubo was 100% fit and lost to Robredo in striaghts there )

And then lost to Lopez in straights in USO. I know all this. Did I ever say Ljubo was a 'better player' than Andy? I don't believe I ever did. So no need to rub those things against my nose. I'm very well aware of all the missed chances.

Yet, I also know something about statistics. Those failed (or used) chances are far too rare events to base any statistical conclusions on them.

EDIT: maybe this isn't clear. Say, if you throw a die 18 times, do you really expect all numbers to appear exactly 3 times? Of course not. So if you threw a die 18 times you could 'statistically' come to a conclusion like this: number 4 has a greater chance to appear than number 3. Because in your sample maybe number 4 appeared 5 times and 3 none at all. Statistics only work if you have a really really big sample.

ezekiel
03-15-2007, 09:05 PM
Roddick will win relativelly easy, Ivan is not impressive as usual

Apemant
03-15-2007, 09:16 PM
Roddick will win relativelly easy, Ivan is not impressive as usual

You mean, he is unimpressive AS USUAL, or he is not impressive, as he USUALLY IS (impressive)?

:devil:

tennismaster882001
03-15-2007, 09:24 PM
for whom 7 ATP MM wins is meaningul , maybe for someone as well as for someone tournaments won in Rome Total War or in Warhammer are meaningful

:lol: People are really going to remember his Vienna and Chennai titles once he has retired.

Ivan will always be remembered because of DC record he achieved, only one loss that year!
Whenever there is DC, commentators always mention him and McEnroe!
That is great achievement, so STFU and leave the man alone, just continue to lick Roddick's ass! It seems you like to do that! :yeah:

ezekiel
03-15-2007, 09:31 PM
You mean, he is unimpressive AS USUAL, or he is not impressive, as he USUALLY IS (impressive)?

:devil:

His game is steady but unimpressive and skilled players in form can dominate him at will . When they do, he can't raise his game as there is nothing to raise

ljubicic_
03-15-2007, 09:34 PM
You people really need to get a life:rolleyes: (loremaster and Apemant)
Only bragging about Ljubo but he will have a bether life than you 2 so stfu please!

Apemant
03-15-2007, 09:35 PM
His game is steady but unimpressive and skilled players in form can dominate him at will . When they do, he can't raise his game as there is nothing to raise

Funny, but this exact line people often use to describe Nole. Steady, but no distinctive weapons. Always solid and very good, but never brilliant.

Apemant
03-15-2007, 09:36 PM
You people really need to get a life:rolleyes: (loremaster and Apemant)
Only bragging about Ljubo but he will have a bether life than you 2 so stfu please!

In 100 years it will make little difference. :devil: We will all be space dust.

MissPovaFan
03-15-2007, 09:38 PM
Roddick in 3

ezekiel
03-15-2007, 09:58 PM
Funny, but this exact line people often use to describe Nole. Steady, but no distinctive weapons. Always solid and very good, but never brilliant.

Who said that about Nole ?
You don't have to follow him to know that he is one of the best young players in recent history and his game is absolutelly explosive with a killer forehand and a deadly 2 hand backhand and he is very athletic . He is set to become elite player in near future and he is only 19. Only mythmakers try to muddy his abilities

But lets get back to this enthralling matchup between 2 giant servers :D

ezekiel
03-15-2007, 10:05 PM
You people really need to get a life:rolleyes: (loremaster and Apemant)
Only bragging about Ljubo but he will have a bether life than you 2 so stfu please!

Little bit presumptous to be talking about people's lives or lack thereof ?
What about that other Ljubo fan who brags how Ljubo owns a hotel? Is that supposed to make us jealous and admire mighty Ljubo ? :cool:

Viken01
03-15-2007, 11:07 PM
roddick :)

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 11:09 PM
You people really need to get a life:rolleyes: (loremaster and Apemant)
Only bragging about Ljubo but he will have a bether life than you 2 so stfu please!

one of the most funny arguments I have seen How would you know if he will have better life are you God??
In which aspect he will have better life and how you know this ?? because he has big money ?? money can't buy you happiness and I can always win milions on lotery, he could have some bad luck in life accident or something (I DO NOT WISH HIM THAT TO BE CLEAR)
your comment is just simply stupid get a break

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 11:16 PM
Who said that about Nole ?
You don't have to follow him to know that he is one of the best young players in recent history and his game is absolutelly explosive with a killer forehand and a deadly 2 hand backhand and he is very athletic . He is set to become elite player in near future and he is only 19. Only mythmakers try to muddy his abilities

But lets get back to this enthralling matchup between 2 giant servers :D

killer forehand :haha: deadly backhand :haha: very athletic :haha:
I even Like Nole but right now he doesn't have serious weapons

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 11:20 PM
killer forehand :haha: deadly backhand :haha: very athletic :haha:
I even Like Nole but right now he doesn't have serious weapons

I have to agree here. I even went back to make sure this guy was actually talking about novak djokovic.

Sean.J.S.
03-15-2007, 11:27 PM
Andy 6-1 6-2.

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 11:28 PM
Andy 6-1 6-2.


Rightttttt

Loremaster
03-15-2007, 11:30 PM
Andy 6-1 6-2.

it would be sweet but it won't happen

BlackSilver
03-15-2007, 11:30 PM
Roddick is more dangerous than ever

Why?

RickDaStick
03-15-2007, 11:32 PM
Why?

Yes i was wondering the same thing. He was much more dangerous when he had the killer forehand. These days opponents know he isnt going to hurt them from the back so they mostly concentrate on return of serve.

bluefork
03-15-2007, 11:40 PM
Yes i was wondering the same thing. He was much more dangerous when he had the killer forehand. These days opponents know he isnt going to hurt them from the back so they mostly concentrate on return of serve.

This is off topic, but what the hell is going on in your avatar?

ezekiel
03-16-2007, 12:26 AM
killer forehand :haha: deadly backhand :haha: very athletic :haha:
I even Like Nole but right now he doesn't have serious weapons

You can underestimate him but no one on the other side of the net does so . If you think he has no weapons, do you wonder how he will enter top 10 at 19 years ? ;)

ezekiel
03-16-2007, 12:28 AM
I have to agree here. I even went back to make sure this guy was actually talking about novak djokovic.

I was talking about top young players , what makes you think different ?

Horatio Caine
03-16-2007, 12:34 AM
Andy 6-1 6-2.

You're being too generous

RickDaStick
03-16-2007, 12:35 AM
Andy 6-1 6-2.

I knew Verdasco was screwed up in the head but i had no idea it spread to his fans too.

Corey Feldman
03-16-2007, 12:37 AM
IvanLjubicic, you are gonna have one sore ass tomorrow if your guy lets you down

:lol:

Loremaster
03-16-2007, 01:21 AM
You can underestimate him but no one on the other side of the net does so . If you think he has no weapons, do you wonder how he will enter top 10 at 19 years ? ;)

I do not underestimate him he is great talent but he has no weapons , you know hewitt also doesn't have weapons to end point quickly but he is 2GS winner and former world no.1 because of his talent, fitness, heart, ideal counterpunching skills

Loremaster
03-16-2007, 01:28 AM
The hour of truth is coming ......

Apemant
03-16-2007, 07:10 AM
The hour of truth is coming ......

So, how do you like the truth?

Not a comfortable difference between a GS champion/GS contender, and a guy who won nothing big in his life, right?

Such is life, you miss several good chances and you go down as 'nobody'. And why is that? Because it should be like that? No, it's because people are shallow. So blinded by images of success that they can't look further than their nose.

At this point I always remember the famous line 'no risk, no money'. How is it possible that something so stupid can become a 'general wisdom'? Of all the people who take risks, only a small percentage of them actually profit by it (otherwise it's not really a 'risk'). For every man who took chances and succeeded, and then going around proudly talking crap like 'no risk, no money', there are 10s of those who took risks and failed miserably. But you don't get to see those failures on TV, nobody cares about them. We only want to see stories like the american dream, that appeal to our delusion of endless opportunities at our disposal, just waiting for grabs. And this disparity in showing success vs. showing failures in mass media creates the false image in unwise people's minds, that risk almost guarantees you success. That all you need is a little courage and the success will undoubtly follow, as outlined by another magnificent piece of popular stupidity 'nothing is impossible when you set your mind to it'. Well, don't hold your breath there. :devil:

It's not that poor Olie Rochus could dethrone Federer if only he 'set his mind to doing that'. Sheesh.

Loremaster
03-16-2007, 11:08 AM
So, how do you like the truth?

Not a comfortable difference between a GS champion/GS contender, and a guy who won nothing big in his life, right?

Such is life, you miss several good chances and you go down as 'nobody'. And why is that? Because it should be like that? No, it's because people are shallow. So blinded by images of success that they can't look further than their nose.

At this point I always remember the famous line 'no risk, no money'. How is it possible that something so stupid can become a 'general wisdom'? Of all the people who take risks, only a small percentage of them actually profit by it (otherwise it's not really a 'risk'). For every man who took chances and succeeded, and then going around proudly talking crap like 'no risk, no money', there are 10s of those who took risks and failed miserably. But you don't get to see those failures on TV, nobody cares about them. We only want to see stories like the american dream, that appeal to our delusion of endless opportunities at our disposal, just waiting for grabs. And this disparity in showing success vs. showing failures in mass media creates the false image in unwise people's minds, that risk almost guarantees you success. That all you need is a little courage and the success will undoubtly follow, as outlined by another magnificent piece of popular stupidity 'nothing is impossible when you set your mind to it'. Well, don't hold your breath there. :devil:

It's not that poor Olie Rochus could dethrone Federer if only he 'set his mind to doing that'. Sheesh.

It was nice to see Ljubo losing but I am not saying that Ivan played poorly, he played as good as Andy but slighly worse on big points. Andy looked untouchable in TBs (as back in 2003-2004) and really work hard in those breakers in second he was all around not giving Ljubo a snigle chance to get set
and now Andy is 7-3 against Ljubo days of Ljubo as a whipping boy of Andy are coming again

Horatio Caine
03-16-2007, 12:24 PM
IvanLjubicic, you are gonna have one sore ass tomorrow if your guy lets you down

:lol:

Not just him. Ivan himself has a mighty sore ass from losing 2 more tiebreaks this year. His conversion rate is going the same way as Roddick's when he was in decline last year :help:

Veronique
03-16-2007, 12:26 PM
So, how do you like the truth?

Not a comfortable difference between a GS champion/GS contender, and a guy who won nothing big in his life, right?

Such is life, you miss several good chances and you go down as 'nobody'. And why is that? Because it should be like that? No, it's because people are shallow. So blinded by images of success that they can't look further than their nose.

At this point I always remember the famous line 'no risk, no money'. How is it possible that something so stupid can become a 'general wisdom'? Of all the people who take risks, only a small percentage of them actually profit by it (otherwise it's not really a 'risk'). For every man who took chances and succeeded, and then going around proudly talking crap like 'no risk, no money', there are 10s of those who took risks and failed miserably. But you don't get to see those failures on TV, nobody cares about them. We only want to see stories like the american dream, that appeal to our delusion of endless opportunities at our disposal, just waiting for grabs. And this disparity in showing success vs. showing failures in mass media creates the false image in unwise people's minds, that risk almost guarantees you success. That all you need is a little courage and the success will undoubtly follow, as outlined by another magnificent piece of popular stupidity 'nothing is impossible when you set your mind to it'. Well, don't hold your breath there. :devil:

It's not that poor Olie Rochus could dethrone Federer if only he 'set his mind to doing that'. Sheesh.

Nice speech! Success in tennis as in any other sport is measured in terms of wins and losses. Ljubo just doesn't have it in him. He's a good player, and that has made him a millionaire. There's a big difference between Roddick and Ljubo. The former is a winner, the latter is not.

I found a nice quote by David Feherty

The land of failure is a comfortable place because you have so much company. Successville, on the other hand, is a ghost town filled with responsibility and further expectations, and is inhabited by only the selfish and the brave.

Apemant
03-16-2007, 03:22 PM
Nice speech! Success in tennis as in any other sport is measured in terms of wins and losses. Ljubo just doesn't have it in him. He's a good player, and that has made him a millionaire. There's a big difference between Roddick and Ljubo. The former is a winner, the latter is not.

There is a difference, undoubtly, but whether it is big or not, is a matter of someone's point of view.

From where I stand, there isn't a big difference. Success does indeed shine so brightly that one is easily blinded by it; but when you think again, just as everything else, success also tends to come and go. One day, you are a 'winner', as you would say, next day, noone gives a crap for you. New people come and you are pushed aside.

The bottom line being - everything is relative. If you measure Ljubo by Roddick's standards, then yes, he is not a winner. But the same holds true for Roddick: if you measure him by Federer standards, he is not a winner either.

Apemant
03-16-2007, 03:35 PM
I found a nice quote by David Feherty

The land of failure is a comfortable place because you have so much company. Successville, on the other hand, is a ghost town filled with responsibility and further expectations, and is inhabited by only the selfish and the brave.

LOL.

You know what I find funny? I've never heard of anyone named David Feherty till I just looked him up on Wikipedia. Golf bores me to death so no wonder. So what do you think, did he consider himself a resident of that successville thing? :devil: By virtue of being brave, or by 'virtue' of being selfish?

And, regardless of that, tell me one thing. If you like that quote, what is your personal stance towards it? Do you consider yourself a resident of 'successville'? I'm really curious about that. Does Ljubicic live there? Does Roddick? And what about David Ferrer for example? Or Benoit B. Mandelbrot? (I'm quite sure you never heard of THAT one...)