Andre: Andy is all serve and nothing else [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Andre: Andy is all serve and nothing else

Pages : [1] 2

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 01:17 AM
"Andy's one weapon is bigger than possibly anybody's in the game, which is an important weapon to have, which is his serve, because it's so crucial. But I think when guys get involved with Andy in other parts of the game, I think they're pretty comfortable."

--Agassi on Roddick

Kiara
03-21-2004, 01:19 AM
Andre, tell us something we dont know :yawn:

Guilles' grl
03-21-2004, 01:20 AM
There ya go Kiara.

TennisLurker
03-21-2004, 01:23 AM
WHOA

WHOA WHOA WHOA
BTW
Once Marcelo Rios said that before playing Roddick (very similar words) and Andy defeated Marcelo, after the match Roddick said: I wanted to move him around the court, to prove him that I am more than a good serve.

armaniman
03-21-2004, 01:26 AM
When Mcenroe said that about ivanisevic in 2001...Ivanisevic did his nut and said in an interview "hes an idiot that talks shit" LOL

I think roddicks game will see many improvements with the time on his side but you do see him exposed at times like when nalbandian almost had him in us open semi. he needs to make dramatic improvements on clay for anybody to disagree with agassis observations.

tangerine_dream
03-21-2004, 01:33 AM
Oh, there it is. :lol:

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 01:41 AM
Agassi is spot on. Anybody who disagrees with him needs to take a moment, remove their head from Roddicks ass, and watch him.

The rest of his game is getting a lot better. But if you take away his serve, he really doesn't do anything better than the rest of the top ten. His forehand isn't as good as Moya or Ferrero's, and let's not talk about his backhand.

MisterQ
03-21-2004, 01:41 AM
Here's the complete exchange: ;)

Q.* At this point do you think Roger has a clear-cut better game?
ANDRE AGASSI:* I think he's proven himself to be a cut above everybody right now.* There's no question about that.* He has a lot of weapons out there.* I mean, Andy's one weapon is bigger than possibly anybody's in the game, which is an important weapon to have, which is his serve, because it's so crucial.* But I think when guys get involved with Andy in other parts of the game, I think they're pretty comfortable.
Roger is the kind of guy that never allows you to get comfortable, no matter what is going on out there.*

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 01:42 AM
I'd like to point out that this isn't really such a bad thing. I said "if oyu take away his serve". Obviously you can't do that, and obviously he's won a lot with that serve. But the rest of his game is below that of a few guys ranked below him.

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 01:43 AM
Here's the complete exchange: ;)

Q.* At this point do you think Roger has a clear-cut better game?
ANDRE AGASSI:* I think he's proven himself to be a cut above everybody right now.* There's no question about that.* He has a lot of weapons out there.* I mean, Andy's one weapon is bigger than possibly anybody's in the game, which is an important weapon to have, which is his serve, because it's so crucial.* But I think when guys get involved with Andy in other parts of the game, I think they're pretty comfortable.
Roger is the kind of guy that never allows you to get comfortable, no matter what is going on out there.*
Context! God bless.

Even taken out of context... there was nothing wrong with what Andre said. Spot on.

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 01:52 AM
Damn right, Becca.

A dagger, cached in a Federer cloak, is still a dagger. Got that Q? :p

MisterQ
03-21-2004, 02:04 AM
It's nice to know where the dagger is. ;)

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:07 AM
Well anyone who bothered to really watch Andy with an open mind this week at Indian Wells saw that he is clearly more than a serve and nothing else. Oh I forgot though, all the great volleys he hit all week were just pure luck and he'll never ever do it again :o

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 02:15 AM
Safin said those were fluke volleys.

Jeez, if Andy gets no respect from the players, how can his fans win us over :shrug:

Alan
03-21-2004, 02:21 AM
Well anyone who bothered to really watch Andy with an open mind this week at Indian Wells saw that he is clearly more than a serve and nothing else. Oh I forgot though, all the great volleys he hit all week were just pure luck and he'll never ever do it again :o

andre didn't say that andy relies purely on his luck without a good serve, what he's saying is that other top players could play andy's game pretty comfortably, thus they have a greater chance of beating him

OKAY? :angel:

armaniman
03-21-2004, 02:22 AM
Oh, there it is. :lol:


Duck...gun....loaded...aim...shoot....SORTED ...lmao :lol::lol:

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:25 AM
ohhhh well if Safin says it it MUST be true, silly me, I should have known that he is the omnisicient one.

So the drop volley winners he had against Henman were flukes too? The backhand down the line passing shots? The topspin lob that landed just inside the line? The backhand dipping flicker cross-court passing winner? Oh right, 100% fluke.

As for the players, well they think whatever they want. This is one quote from Andre, and there are many other quotes from Andre where he's said perfectly kind and "respecting" things about Andy. Plus, it's not like what he said was insulting. Andy's clutch thing is his serve and that he has other weaknesses, that's not a surprise to anyone including Andy. But that doesn't also mean that Andre is suggesting that Andy is ALL serve. Tim said some very nice things after their match yesterday, etc etc etc. Andy ALWAYS gives props to his opponents, win or lose. If your favorites aren't classy enough to do that, that's not my problem :)

darnyelb
03-21-2004, 02:26 AM
I don't understand this "serve" argument. Why do folks act like a strong serve is something cheap, like a free throw in basketball? From what I understand, the serve is pretty damn important LOL, so why does everyone discount it as a credible weapon?

As for Andy, I really doubt he would've made it to the top with nothing but a good serve. If he's always had a good serve game, something else about him obviously had had to change if he made it to the top. IMO he's clearly getting more comfortable playing closer to the net and volleying fairly well.

More power to Andy the "one trickster" if that's his game LOL.

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:27 AM
andre didn't say that andy relies purely on his luck without a good serve, what he's saying is that other top players could play andy's game pretty comfortably, thus they have a greater chance of beating him

OKAY? :angel:

I wasn't responding to what Andre said but what other people in this thread said. I don't think anyone can really disagree too much with what Andre said. But I also didn't interpret what he said to so bluntly mean that Andy is all serve and nothing else, just that he has weaknesses, which obviously he does. and Andy knows about them and is quite obviously working on them, and as I said, anyone who watched him this week in Indian Wells could clearly see.

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:28 AM
so why does everyone discount it as a credible weapon?


Well I have my theories but it's not even worth expressing them here. If you really want to talk about it, feel free to PM me or something :angel:

tennischick
03-21-2004, 02:39 AM
wow...i finally understand why bunk18bsb has over nine thousand posts altho' he only joined this board in October 2003. defending Duckboy takes a LOT of work...LOL!!!!!!!!

go Baldy!!! call it like it is!! :worship: :worship:

Fedex
03-21-2004, 02:41 AM
Those werent great volleys. Just quality approach shots ;) Look at some of the amazing volleys Tim made and he dosnt have a big serve.

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:42 AM
wow...i finally understand why bunk18bsb has over nine thousand posts altho' he only joined this board in October 2003. defending Duckboy takes a LOT of work...LOL!!!!!!!!

go Baldy!!! call it like it is!! :worship: :worship:

Why do you care how many posts I have? Maybe I'm just bored.

And I'm a she, thanks.

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 02:42 AM
I don't think anyone's saying that the serve isn't credible. Of course it is. But having only a good serve, or a good backhand, or whatever doesn't make you a great player or unbeatable, without some other weapons to lean on when, say, the serve breaks down blah blah.

Fedex
03-21-2004, 02:43 AM
And Andre the Great speaks wise words again :bowdown:

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:45 AM
Those werent great volleys. Just quality approach shots ;) Look at some of the amazing volleys Tim made and he dosnt have a big serve.

Good job missing the point completely.

The point was not that Andy volleys better than Tim (does anyone volley better than Tim?), the point was that this week at IW, Andy volleyed better than ANDY ever has. He is improving, that's all.

And what does the quality of a person's volleying have to do with his/her serve? Dent serves big and volleys well. So?

J. Corwin
03-21-2004, 02:47 AM
It's to Andy's credit that Andre actually brought Andy up when asked about Roger.

It's definitely true it's his serve that has him at world#3. The rest of his game, however, is decently solid, that combined with his powerful serve, is enough to be a top 3 player.

He's far from a "complete" player though. (unless he starts decreasing the efficiency of his serve so all of his game balances out;))

tennischick
03-21-2004, 02:48 AM
Mandy?? :confused: Susan?? :confused: Duck-Girl?? :confused:

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:49 AM
I don't think anyone's saying that the serve isn't credible. Of course it is. But having only a good serve, or a good backhand, or whatever doesn't make you a great player or unbeatable, without some other weapons to lean on when, say, the serve breaks down blah blah.

Well of course. No one is denying this. Pete had a big serve that was crucial to his game. It was his go-to shot on break points and whatnot, and helped form the crux of his game. But was he all serve? Certainly not.

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 02:51 AM
He's far from a "complete" player though. (unless he starts decreasing the efficiency of his serve so all of his game balances out;))

Well if he were complete at 21, what would be the point of continuing? and LMGDFAO yep that's exactly what he should do :p

J. Corwin
03-21-2004, 02:54 AM
Well if he were complete at 21, what would be the point of continuing? and LMGDFAO yep that's exactly what he should do :p

Nah, we wouldn't him to tumble out of the top 40. ;)

darnyelb
03-21-2004, 03:01 AM
He's far from a "complete" player though. (unless he starts decreasing the efficiency of his serve so all of his game balances out;))

Hysterical! LMAO

Also, Roddick should stop winning so much in the US so he can match his non-American tournament results... you know, to balance out his record!

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 03:09 AM
Also, Roddick should stop winning so much in the US so he can match his non-American tournament results... you know, to balance out his record!

OMG YES!! and he should play only clay tournaments!

armaniman
03-21-2004, 03:22 AM
and on the subject of big servers if rusedski kept his mouth closed it would balance out his face lmao !!!!

Big servers are here to stay... love them or hate them....only way you will get them to develop rest of their game is to swap the balls for marsh mellows lol......agassi only had a mini dig as its harder to recieve the older you get....well thats what all the pensioners say with tony blair in power lol

Ace Tracker
03-21-2004, 03:27 AM
Tim had it planned out very wisely the other day, his attacking game suits him perfectly against a weak Roddick's backhand... one could clearly notice that most of Tim's approaching shots and second serves were directed towards Andy's backhand side... so far, nothing new, most other players try to do the same, the difference was that Tim was closing in at the net, and in the rare case he couldn't stab the volley away, he would just place the ball back to Andy's backhand once again... Andy did produce a superb topspin lob in the third set, but truth is that, he is far less comfortable on the left side and cannot come up with a well paced and placed backhand passing shot most of the times...

There is not much that Brad can actually do concerning this weakness on Andy's game... his backhand technique is flawed, but one stroke that he grew up and is accustomed with, the "hooking" two-hander that makes the ball clear the net up high and without much pace, ripe for the good volleyer easy picking... this backhand is solid enough to keep Andy in on safe baseline rallies, but not good enough to generate winners...

Andy's serve is probably the most formidable weapon of today's game, one that is able to carry Andy to the top for many years to come, and there is not much his opponents can do about it besides trying to get it back on play, but one important lesson could be learnt out of Tim's handbook... He had an interesting approach to Andy's second serve, which is usually almost as lethal as his first one... The majority of Andy's second serves, especially on the add side, were high kicking balls to Tim's backhand... but Henman is an accomplished net rusher, one who knows how to slice down the high ball to make it an approach shot... Tim's low return strategy finally paid otself off when he got the definite break on the third set.. That is an area where Brad Gilbert can work on with Andy... to make the serve placement less predictable...

hedgehog
03-21-2004, 03:27 AM
agassi is stating bloody obvious and its probably a snipe as hes ending his career and roddick is still in early stages of his. sorry but thats how i see it.

scoobydoo
03-21-2004, 03:54 AM
I dun think roddick is all serve, I think his backhand has improved a lot and there arent many players now anyway who have a totally balanced game.

heya
03-21-2004, 04:25 AM
It's a compliment from Baldy :worship:
oooh I'm drooling as I'm watching his shiny head. :devil:

With such an incomplete game, he's still eeking out a few wins. *Bjorn Borg likes that line, yummy
Scary when AR actually plays like a top 10 player
It's not easy having to be hounded by the US media and manipulated by PMac and Gilbert.*barf

MisterQ
03-21-2004, 04:28 AM
Amazing the arguments that this comment has provoked...

Andre was focusing on Roger in his statement. He was saying that every aspect of Roger's game keeps his opponent out of his comfort zone. Then he contrasted this with another top player, Andy, who has one weapon which is the greatest in the game today, and some other strokes that are more standard. Players can trade groundstrokes with Andy without worrying as much about sudden changes of spin/pace, and court positioning.

I highly doubt it was intended as a slight to Andy, although we can interpret it as such if it pleases us. ;)

Havok
03-21-2004, 04:49 AM
I'm sorry but the name of this thread is :bs: Andre said ROddick's serve is the biggest weapon out there. Please tell me where he said Roddick doesn't have any other shots? Yeah he said all the other parts of the game his opponents are comfortable with, but that doesn't mean the rest of his game is absolutelynothing. and Rebecca, if his forehand isn't as good as Moya or Ferrero, then it's better than everyone else's except those two. so tell me how can it NOT be a weapon when he's got one of the best forehands out there :tape: Yay.

shaoyu
03-21-2004, 04:59 AM
Actually I think Andre was trying to explain why Roger's game is one cut above others, including Roddick who has the biggest weapen as his serve. So it is indeed taking Roddick as the closest contender out there. To interpret his comment as such as the title of this thread is quite misleading.

WyveN
03-21-2004, 05:36 AM
didn't Andre say Roger has the best forehand?

Experimentee
03-21-2004, 05:39 AM
I dont understand whats the big deal about what Andre said, its all true.
Andy's serve is what makes him better than most other players, the other parts of his game are certainly not above other top players.
However he's obviously not all serve, if all you needed was a big serve to reach #1 people like Karlovic would be there.

faboozadoo15
03-21-2004, 05:54 AM
does anyone else notice that the title of this thread is incongruent with that andre actually said??? :rolleyes:

¿esquímaux?
03-21-2004, 05:59 AM
I like the fact that Andy's backhand is an achilles heel; it makes him more human :)

J. Corwin
03-21-2004, 06:39 AM
does anyone else notice that the title of this thread is incongruent with that andre actually said??? :rolleyes:

Of course, but TF would like to make it seem so.

Pea
03-21-2004, 07:00 AM
Lovely thread.:lol:

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 08:08 AM
Of course, but TF would like to make it seem so.

Fab, I disagree. I just gave a jazzy headline to what Andre basically said. Of course I could have written, "Andre says Andy's has big serve but more ordinary game", but that's boring.

Jackson, I didn't know you knew my thoughts. PLease, tell me more about myself and what I would or wouldn't like. Thank you :)

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 08:13 AM
Amazing the arguments that this comment has provoked...

Andre was focusing on Roger in his statement. He was saying that every aspect of Roger's game keeps his opponent out of his comfort zone. Then he contrasted this with another top player, Andy, who has one weapon which is the greatest in the game today, and some other strokes that are more standard. Players can trade groundstrokes with Andy without worrying as much about sudden changes of spin/pace, and court positioning.

I highly doubt it was intended as a slight to Andy, although we can interpret it as such if it pleases us. ;)

Q, why are you summarizing the "exact" quote that you already posted??? Not happy that people aren't changing their minds? :shrug:

CooCooCachoo
03-21-2004, 08:19 AM
Andre has been around and knows what he is talking about, but I could've said this too ;)

J. Corwin
03-21-2004, 09:47 AM
Jackson, I didn't know you knew my thoughts. PLease, tell me more about myself and what I would or wouldn't like. Thank you :)

I was actually joking TF. You're welcome. :)

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 03:11 PM
Andre has been around and knows what he is talking about, but I could've said this too ;)

Yea, we all could have, so? lol.

faboozadoo15
03-21-2004, 04:05 PM
Fab, I disagree. I just gave a jazzy headline to what Andre basically said. Of course I could have written, "Andre says Andy's has big serve but more ordinary game", but that's boring.

Jackson, I didn't know you knew my thoughts. PLease, tell me more about myself and what I would or wouldn't like. Thank you :)
hmmm so you're kinda acting like those journalists who make a title for a column that looks to be a quote from a player on someone else, and then the quote that you are referencing has 1/10 of the weight of the statement in the title. :confused:

Tennis Fool
03-21-2004, 05:53 PM
hmmm so you're kinda acting like those journalists who make a title for a column that looks to be a quote from a player on someone else, and then the quote that you are referencing has 1/10 of the weight of the statement in the title. :confused:
More like 8/10 :D

MisterQ
03-21-2004, 06:12 PM
Q, why are you summarizing the "exact" quote that you already posted??? Not happy that people aren't changing their minds? :shrug:

I wrote a few sentences to point out what I thought Andre was saying. Excuse me if it's similar to the original quote. I didn't give it that much thought.

As for changing people's minds, I don't care about that, nor do I actually care much about how Roddick is perceived, but I'm going to state my opinions and I won't be the first to be redundant from time to time.

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 06:15 PM
Q=:rocker2:

tennischick
03-21-2004, 06:50 PM
another pointless Duckboy defending post...:o

tangerine_dream
03-21-2004, 07:05 PM
does anyone else notice that the title of this thread is incongruent with that andre actually said??? :rolleyes:

I agree.

I don't think Andre's comments were meant to be as negative as TennisFool thinks/wishes it were. I doubt Andre said anything about Andy's game that he hasn't already told Andy himself or that Andy doesn't already know. And as Roddick himself keeps saying in practically every interview he gives, he knows he needs to improve his all-around game and he's doing it. IW showed that. He won't be a s/v like Tim Henman tomorrow, but maybe in a few years he'll be good enough to be classified as an all-court player instead of just a power player. And don't kid yourself: any player would give their limp right arm to have a serve like that.

Also, his backhand isn't nearly as bad as it used to be (still a weak spot but again, it's improved). He's actually hitting some DTL winners with it. :eek: In 2002, who would've thought that could ever happen? :lol:

Deboogle!.
03-21-2004, 07:18 PM
He's actually hitting some DTL winners with it. :eek: In 2002, who would've thought that could ever happen? :lol:

LMFAO!!!! He actually had three, yes, THREE in the match against Henman (all passing shots, but still :p) and to answer your question, not me LOL

Anyway, Andy clearly looks up to Andre and idolizes him in some senses. I'm sure he has asked for advice on his game and whatnot, and I'm sure they've talked about all this stuff privately. Who knows what they talked about over grilled steak at Andre's house :haha:

sigmagirl91
03-21-2004, 07:44 PM
I agree with Andre, because if Andy's serve is not working, he's a sitting duck (I believe that's why you all came up with Duckboy for his nickname, isn't it?). Time will tell how his overall game will develop. Right now, Roger's the man to beat.

Scotso
03-21-2004, 08:41 PM
:lol:

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 10:52 PM
Ugh. I didn't even read this thread. The first page alone was enough for me to find another 5 posts that I would love to sink my teeth into.

A number of you need to learn to fucking READ and you know, respond to posts that were actually written. I'm impressed at the manner in which some of you have made up dialogue and responded accordingly. Bravo!

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 10:55 PM
I'm sorry but the name of this thread is :bs: Andre said ROddick's serve is the biggest weapon out there. Please tell me where he said Roddick doesn't have any other shots? Yeah he said all the other parts of the game his opponents are comfortable with, but that doesn't mean the rest of his game is absolutelynothing. and Rebecca, if his forehand isn't as good as Moya or Ferrero, then it's better than everyone else's except those two. so tell me how can it NOT be a weapon when he's got one of the best forehands out there :tape: Yay.
Did I say that it's not a weapon? Did I say that? Find me a quote where I said that, and then we'll talk.

Exhibit A, of people who can't fucking read, and make up their own posts to respond to.

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 10:58 PM
Well anyone who bothered to really watch Andy with an open mind this week at Indian Wells saw that he is clearly more than a serve and nothing else. Oh I forgot though, all the great volleys he hit all week were just pure luck and he'll never ever do it again :o
How many people before this post said that he was all serve and nothing else? Did Andre say that? Or did you just read the title of the thread (which, in case you haven't noticed by now, was something that TF used to get peoples attention. Duh.)?

Did anybody in this thread say that his volleys this week were all lucky, before you posted that?

Exhibit B, of posters who respond to posts that were never written.

INCREDIBLE!

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 11:00 PM
I don't understand this "serve" argument. Why do folks act like a strong serve is something cheap, like a free throw in basketball? From what I understand, the serve is pretty damn important LOL, so why does everyone discount it as a credible weapon?

As for Andy, I really doubt he would've made it to the top with nothing but a good serve. If he's always had a good serve game, something else about him obviously had had to change if he made it to the top. IMO he's clearly getting more comfortable playing closer to the net and volleying fairly well.

More power to Andy the "one trickster" if that's his game LOL.
Did anybody actually say that there was something wrong with having a big serve? Did anybody say that serving big was "cheap"? Or are you just assuming things based on posts that were never written?

Exhibit C :worship:

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 11:02 PM
Well I have my theories but it's not even worth expressing them here. If you really want to talk about it, feel free to PM me or something :angel:
Sad. Even you know that your "theories" would be such crap that they would be eaten alive if you posted them in public.

We'll be back to pointing out exhibits of posters who didn't read the thread in a moment...

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 11:06 PM
Well of course. No one is denying this. Pete had a big serve that was crucial to his game. It was his go-to shot on break points and whatnot, and helped form the crux of his game. But was he all serve? Certainly not.
Again: Tennis Fool gives this threads titles like this, so that posters like you will read it and go off on a tangent, failing to notice that pretty much nobody in the thread actually said that.

Exhibit D :D

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 11:09 PM
Hysterical! LMAO

Also, Roddick should stop winning so much in the US so he can match his non-American tournament results... you know, to balance out his record!
What on earth does this have to do with this thread? Aside from absolutely nothing because nobody was talking about that, of course.

Exhibit E :worship:

I'm going to run out of letters if I keep this up.

Chloe le Bopper
03-21-2004, 11:16 PM
wow...i finally understand why bunk18bsb has over nine thousand posts altho' he only joined this board in October 2003. defending Duckboy takes a LOT of work...LOL!!!!!!!!

go Baldy!!! call it like it is!! :worship: :worship:
I'd guess that about 5000 of them were spent directly defending Roddick. Another 2000 or so were spent spilling out her "theories" about how we're all antiamerican, except for her and a select few who happen to like Roddick (how unfortunte if you've missed those posts!). The final 2000 were spent replying to posts that were never written ;)

sigmagirl91
03-21-2004, 11:44 PM
And might I add that all 9000 or so was written to reinforce the herd mentality that her and her cohorts share? People, it takes ENERGY to keep the herd informed, doesn't it?

Pea
03-22-2004, 12:12 AM
And might I add that all 9000 or so was written to reinforce the herd mentality that her and her cohorts share? People, it takes ENERGY to keep the herd informed, doesn't it?

Why don't they just get a herd dog than? :o

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 12:22 AM
Why don't they just get a herd dog than? :o

Why don't they just go on and get a rod and staff to get the sheep together? Or better yet, why not a cattle prod? No point in having a herd if you can't keep them together...

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 12:29 AM
And might I add that all 9000 or so was written to reinforce the herd mentality that her and her cohorts share? People, it takes ENERGY to keep the herd informed, doesn't it?

mmmkay if that's what you want to believe. :yeah:

You all seem to care an awful lot about how many posts I have. Don't you have something else to do? In fact, if you don't like reading what I have to say, just put my on ignore. In fact, I shall take my own advice :)

tennischick
03-22-2004, 12:34 AM
bunky dear, we're just pointing out the obvious -- you need to get a LIFE! don't tell me that herding the Duck Flock is all you're capable of? how pathetic...:sad:

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 12:35 AM
Ha. Way to side step the issue.

"I don't like what these people are saying, so I'm just going to ignore them! That way I don't have to bother to properly defend any of my dumbassed points! Rah! I RULE!"

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 12:41 AM
Ha. Way to side step the issue.

"I don't like what these people are saying, so I'm just going to ignore them! That way I don't have to bother to properly defend any of my dumbassed points! Rah! I RULE!"

Maybe she should be Queen Bunk of the Duck Herd.... :haha: :haha:

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 12:41 AM
Ha. Way to side step the issue.

"I don't like what these people are saying, so I'm just going to ignore them! That way I don't have to bother to properly defend any of my dumbassed points! Rah! I RULE!"

Well I'm being made fun of by what? 4 or 5 people for supposedly how much I try to defend myself and my opinions.... so I guess I'm damned if I do or damned if I don't? Plus, I think it's pretty obvious by now there's not much point in me defending myself since I'm just picked apart anyway. If you haven't noticed, it's sort an epidemic here for people to try to say other people's opinions are wrong, very few seem capable of respectfully disagreeing, so why should I continue to put myself into that position? I might be a masochist but I'm not stupid, regardless of how many times you have said that I am.

As for having a life, tennischick, I've got a great one, thanks. At least I don't spend my free time being mean and insulting people I don't even know.

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 12:45 AM
Well I'm being made fun of by what? 4 or 5 people for supposedly how much I try to defend myself and my opinions.... so I guess I'm damned if I do or damned if I don't? Plus, I think it's pretty obvious by now there's not much point in me defending myself since I'm just picked apart anyway. If you haven't noticed, it's sort an epidemic here for people to try to say other people's opinions are wrong, very few seem capable of respectfully disagreeing, so why should I continue to put myself into that position? I might be a masochist but I'm not stupid, regardless of how many times you have said that I am.

As for having a life, tennischick, I've got a great one, thanks. At least I don't spend my free time being mean and insulting people I don't even know.
bunk... I've outlined my problems with your comments in this thread. You still haven't addressed them ;) It's very easy to just dismiss anybody who asks you to clarify your point by saying that "it doesn't matter what I say, you'll pick it apart anyways"... isn't it? It sure beats trying to explain yourself if you don't have a point, I guess.

Anyways, I really do have much better things to do. I'm just not doing them. And clearly, neither are you. So I guess that we're about equal there.

But please spare us the innocent " I don't insult people" act. You've acted like a condescending ass in many a thread, and I've pointed it out many times. I don't think there is a problem with that either. I do it too. There is a problem with denying it, though.

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 12:48 AM
Becca, time to start thinning the herd....

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 12:54 AM
bunk... I've outlined my problems with your comments in this thread. You still haven't addressed them ;) It's very easy to just dismiss anybody who asks you to clarify your point by saying that "it doesn't matter what I say, you'll pick it apart anyways"... isn't it? It sure beats trying to explain yourself if you don't have a point, I guess.

Anyways, I really do have much better things to do. I'm just not doing them. And clearly, neither are you. So I guess that we're about equal there.

But please spare us the innocent " I don't insult people" act. You've acted like a condescending ass in many a thread, and I've pointed it out many times. I don't think there is a problem with that either. I do it too. There is a problem with denying it, though.

I've never called anyone stupid or a tool or told them to fuck off or anything like that just because I didn't like what they said. There's a difference between thinking it and actually insulting people, which obviously you have no problem doing. I do not name-call or put people down. You can hardly deny such personal insults - and I don't care if you admit it or not, it's still rude. Why don't I address your problems with what I say? Because it's not worth it, you won't listen anyway, you'll just call me stupid if I don't answer the way you want. It's happened time and time again. If I really thought you had an open mind to what I had to say then I would be more than happy to talk to you about anything, but you've given me no reason to believe that. So I will just spare us both the time and not bother. If you think that's me being chicken and evading it, then whatever, I don't really care.

And sigma, what are you going to do, come find us and kill us?

I have nothing more to say.

tennischick
03-22-2004, 12:58 AM
"bunk" means "crap" if i'm not mistaken. right? :o

spare me the faux-innocence bi-yatch. i have no use for it. if you gonna try to mess with me, at least have the decency to do it straight up.

and whatever happened to them "ignore" plans. what, you can't resist the temptation to get to 10,000 pointless posts??

denim
03-22-2004, 01:05 AM
I've never called anyone stupid or a tool or told them to fuck off or anything like that just because I didn't like what they said. There's a difference between thinking it and actually insulting people, which obviously you have no problem doing. I do not name-call or put people down. You can hardly deny such personal insults - and I don't care if you admit it or not, it's still rude. Why don't I address your problems with what I say? Because it's not worth it, you won't listen anyway, you'll just call me stupid if I don't answer the way you want. It's happened time and time again. If I really thought you had an open mind to what I had to say then I would be more than happy to talk to you about anything, but you've given me no reason to believe that. So I will just spare us both the time and not bother. If you think that's me being chicken and evading it, then whatever, I don't really care.

And sigma, what are you going to do, come find us and kill us?

I have nothing more to say.

Go for it Bunk I'll back you up... heres to uk and usa and beer grrrrrr lol

Roddick will get holes picked out of him for as long as he plays but his hardcourt season last year was amazing and made me think he would win us open which he did >>>> more slams to follow

yeah so what if baldie says he's a serve and a reebok, where was agassi on finals day at the slams last year????

agassi used to to make 10 minute observations in interviews about sampras and go in depth like they were 50-50 rivals which they weren't as he only once beat him in a slam (aus open)

it just seems that even after agassi retires any statement or comment he makes will be taken as GOD has spoken.

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:07 AM
I've never called anyone stupid or a tool or told them to fuck off or anything like that just because I didn't like what they said. There's a difference between thinking it and actually insulting people, which obviously you have no problem doing. I do not name-call or put people down. You can hardly deny such personal insults - and I don't care if you admit it or not, it's still rude. Why don't I address your problems with what I say? Because it's not worth it, you won't listen anyway, you'll just call me stupid if I don't answer the way you want. It's happened time and time again. If I really thought you had an open mind to what I had to say then I would be more than happy to talk to you about anything, but you've given me no reason to believe that. So I will just spare us both the time and not bother. If you think that's me being chicken and evading it, then whatever, I don't really care.

And sigma, what are you going to do, come find us and kill us?

I have nothing more to say.

Oh, so you ARE part of the herd? Oh...my....god, honey, I am soooo sorry. Why post more, so that you can show us that you are capable of stringing together mindless post after mindless post? If I were you, I really would take that advice....
And, by the way, I don't kill. Herd-killing is not my specialty....
Since you have nothing else to say, you can now sit down and shut the hell up....

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 01:08 AM
Go for it Bunk I'll back you up... heres to uk and usa and beer grrrrrr lol

Roddick will get holes picked out of him for as long as he plays but his hardcourt season last year was amazing and made me think he would win us open which he did >>>> more slams to follow

A lot of us who don't like Roddick thought that he was going to win the USO at some point too, and agree that he might win more slams.

So what was your point? :confused: Did anybody say that it wasn't amazing? Did I miss some posts in this thread... again?

yeah so what if baldie says he's a serve and a reebok, where was agassi on finals day at the slams last year????

Did you even read what Andre actually said, or have you still not gotten passed the thread title? :confused:

LCeh
03-22-2004, 01:10 AM
it just seems that even after agassi retires any statement or comment he makes will be taken as GOD has spoken.

Are you trying to say that the following statement

"Andy's one weapon is bigger than possibly anybody's in the game, which is an important weapon to have, which is his serve, because it's so crucial. But I think when guys get involved with Andy in other parts of the game, I think they're pretty comfortable."

is false?

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:10 AM
One more herd member....
Oh, GOD, why don't you people read?

TennisLurker
03-22-2004, 01:10 AM
He won Australia last year.

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:11 AM
Are you trying to say that the following statement

"Andy's one weapon is bigger than possibly anybody's in the game, which is an important weapon to have, which is his serve, because it's so crucial. But I think when guys get involved with Andy in other parts of the game, I think they're pretty comfortable."

is false?


Basically, yes, LCeh, that is exactly what he/she/it is trying to say...

denim
03-22-2004, 01:12 AM
"bunk" means "crap" if i'm not mistaken. right? :o

spare me the faux-innocence bi-yatch. i have no use for it. if you gonna try to mess with me, at least have the decency to do it straight up.

and whatever happened to them "ignore" plans. what, you can't resist the temptation to get to 10,000 pointless posts??

I am new on here but read a lot of bunks stuff and hes a cool, decent laid back guy so sod off tennis chick, your just trying to pick a fight he doesnt want so go and make the tea or do something usefull.

He's allowed his opionion FFS and he has a lot of posts as he loves tennis.......!!!!

and no before you say am I his bumchum???, we dont even know eachother its just i stick up for the goodguys on the net and he seems a nice guy

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 01:12 AM
Go for it Bunk I'll back you up... heres to uk and usa and beer grrrrrr lol

LOL! no beer for me but tequila sounds good ;)

yeah so what if baldie says he's a serve and a reebok, where was agassi on finals day at the slams last year????

well at the AO he was holding up the trophy lol

it just seems that even after agassi retires any statement or comment he makes will be taken as GOD has spoken.

Well he's a very thoughtful articulate person. I didn't have a problem with what he said in the particular quote that started this thread anyway, because I didn't take it as an insult or attack on Andy. Many people have already said what they felt Andre was trying to say - Comparing him to Andy, which is what Andre was doing, Roger's game is far more complete. No one can disagree with that. I'm sure if someone went up to Andy and told him what Andre said, he'd say something to the effect of "yea no shit sherlock" :lol:

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 01:17 AM
I am new on here but read a lot of bunks stuff and hes a cool, decent laid back guy so sod off tennis chick, your just trying to pick a fight he doesnt want so go and make the tea or do something usefull.

He's allowed his opionion FFS and he has a lot of posts as he loves tennis.......!!!!

and no before you say am I his bumchum???, we dont even know eachother its just i stick up for the goodguys on the net and he seems a nice guy

well I'm a she, but thanks anyway :) the bunk18bsb screenname is a very old name that I've used online for about 6 years and is in honor of a group of old friends from summer camp way back :) And yes, I do love tennis and always have since I was little and my dad turned on Breakfast At Wimbledon on July 4 weekend :) I'm also new to the aspect of following it on a day-to-day basis and I'm trying to learn a lot, which means asking a lot of questions and whatnot and a lot of people here are very helpful and have taught me a lot. And lol nope I've never seen you on this board til now.

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:19 AM
Wow, what a run-on sentence.....

denim
03-22-2004, 01:20 AM
bunk actually means sleeping berth here in the united kingdom.....chick in united kingdom is slang for bimbo, available, easy to pick up..chortle...chortle

NOPE i think agassi is spouting off there and having a dig....duck haters will just have to go in next room when he wins next us open and hits 5th ace in 2 games.

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 01:24 AM
bunk actually means sleeping berth here in the united kingdom....

It has that as one of its meanings in the US as well, and that's where the meaning in my name came from. At the summer camp, people were separated by age and each group was a bunk and it was numbered. My friends and I created one and called it 'Bunk 18' and it stuck and I still use it today all these years later. It's my username for almost everything lol

NOPE i think agassi is spouting off there and having a dig....duck haters will just have to go in next room when he wins next us open and hits 5th ace in 2 games.

:lol:

tennischick
03-22-2004, 01:25 AM
and "bunk" means "crap" in the US. go figure...;)

let me guess, you're Bunky's newly recruited friend aren't ya? how much did she pay you to join the board? is Duckboy picking up the tab or are her 10,000 posts unremunerated? :o

denim
03-22-2004, 01:27 AM
well i have been mad on tennis since 1985 bunk and you seem very educated on game and follow it very closely like myself, and your very non confrontational which is why i hate seeing someone getting crap from someone just for having an opinion.

and sure why shoudlnt you be roddick biased?? we would love to have an andy here in uk and all the people who dislike him probably dont have respect thats acking in the world....I dont have players I hate, and have lots I like same as you, why cant people be happy for the guy?? winning a slam is fkn incredible in this day an age but you got to be superhuman, have every groundstoke in the book, say right things in media, have the right face to please people.......whether he's got one dimensional game or not hes a world class person at his proffesion and achieved more than some of the gobshites on here will ever achieve

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:27 AM
and "bunk" means "crap" in the US. go figure...;)

let me guess, you're Bunky's newly recruited friend aren't ya? how much did she pay you to join the board? is Duckboy picking up the tab or are her 10,000 posts unremunerated? :o


All of the above is my guess. Question is, how much did you get paid to join the herd, denim? Are they offering free Duckboy beaks as a commemoration of the US Open win? Or are they planning their Andy-whore recruitment drive, and you got asked to join?

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:28 AM
well i have been mad on tennis since 1985 bunk and you seem very educated on game and follow it very closely like myself, and your very non confrontational which is why i hate seeing someone getting crap from someone just for having an opinion.

and sure why shoudlnt you be roddick biased?? we would love to have an andy here in uk and all the people who dislike him probably dont have respect thats acking in the world....I dont have players I hate, and have lots I like same as you, why cant people be happy for the guy?? winning a slam is fkn incredible in this day an age but you got to be superhuman, have every groundstoke in the book, say right things in media, have the right face to please people.......whether he's got one dimensional game or not hes a world class person at his proffesion and achieved more than some of the gobshites on here will ever achieve

Alright, did you check your grammar before you posted here, or you just an emotional wreck right now? Which is it?

denim
03-22-2004, 01:33 AM
and "bunk" means "crap" in the US. go figure...;)

let me guess, you're Bunky's newly recruited friend aren't ya? how much did she pay you to join the board? is Duckboy picking up the tab or are her 10,000 posts unremunerated? :o

well i am new and took bunks side as their (i didnt know she was a she at first) seem nicer person then you....

doesnt speak volumes for way you come over to people, your rude and cold so if its seems i am taking sides and offends you then thats probably as they are a nicer person and attract friends easier.

bunk definetely has more brains than you and comes over better in arguements, your catty cheap and insulting.

go watch the 2003 us open semi .... i will even pay for your sick bucket lmao

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 01:34 AM
well i have been mad on tennis since 1985 bunk and you seem very educated on game and follow it very closely like myself, and your very non confrontational which is why i hate seeing someone getting crap from someone just for having an opinion.

well thanks, I've tried to learn a lot about how it all works. Now I understand the rankings and all that stuff, which took a while. I'm also trying to learn about the actual technical aspects of the game, but that's a lot harder lol. I'm just trying to watch a lot and learn about all the players and read about it, etc. It's been a lot of fun. But non-confrontational? LOL that's not really true ;) I'm trying though, as I learn how it's just not worth it.

and sure why shoudlnt you be roddick biased?? we would love to have an andy here in uk and all the people who dislike him probably dont have respect thats acking in the world....I dont have players I hate, and have lots I like same as you, why cant people be happy for the guy?? winning a slam is fkn incredible in this day an age but you got to be superhuman, have every groundstoke in the book, say right things in media, have the right face to please people.......whether he's got one dimensional game or not hes a world class person at his proffesion and achieved more than some of the gobshites on here will ever achieve

Interesting perspectives! no I don't hate any players. I have "least favorite" players but there are no players out there who when they play I go "oh I hope he loses today" - it's just not the way I work, I'd rather just cheer for my favorites - and I like watching matches where I don't care about either player that much, because that's when I can really pay attention to what goes on and that's where I've been able to learn a lot about the game. And there are tons of other players I love, from all over the world and as I learn more about the game, there are more and more players I am liking more and more! :) Andy happens to be my current favorite but if he were to retire tomorrow I would still be a big tennis fan and I'd still come to this board to talk about it.

denim
03-22-2004, 01:34 AM
Nice to meet you bunk by the way, did you get to see indian wells final?

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 01:37 AM
Yes I watched both the men's and ladies today :) Was a shame Tim didn't have the flair he had during his earlier matches this week but he's showing he's playing great tennis after all these years and that's great for him. Roger played a fantastic match so congrats to him, but it's too bad it wasn't more exciting or closer.

tennischick
03-22-2004, 01:44 AM
well i am new and took bunks side as their (i didnt know she was a she at first) seem nicer person then you....

doesnt speak volumes for way you come over to people, your rude and cold so if its seems i am taking sides and offends you then thats probably as they are a nicer person and attract friends easier.

bunk definetely has more brains than you and comes over better in arguements, your catty cheap and insulting.

go watch the 2003 us open semi .... i will even pay for your sick bucket lmao
you're NEW to the board yet you've decided that bashing Agassi will have some kind of negative effect on me? how exactly does that work?

well Bunk #2, i have sad news for ya, but i don't go around only praising the Bald One. don't take my word for it. check my thread about his baby daughter picks -- it's the most recent place where i had a couple of negative things to say about him.

unlike you and Bunk #1, i don't actually spend my time salivating over tennis players who could give a rat's ass about my existence. feel free to bash Agassi. i am not Agassi and i happen to have an identity completely separate from being a fan of his. (bash Steffi and you might get me a tad worked up :mad: )

and if you and Bunk think that you're convincing anyone with your silly pretend act then you're both even studpider than i thought. now i'm off to bed. :wavey:

azza
03-22-2004, 01:50 AM
Just hit to Andys backhand and make him Volley and u have won the match

denim
03-22-2004, 01:50 AM
ad your lil mate is offended i didnt spell or get grammar perfect...???? lmao i only bother proof reading and spell checking when its important and this, you and her are certainly not that so i just click mouse and if theres errors in it you cant deal with or cope with...tough shit old bean DEAL WITH IT !! lmao


Bunk i agree I was dissapointed Tim lost and his great run against fed ended but hey it was inevitable and way fed is playing now nobody in world in world would have stopped him today

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 01:53 AM
ad your lil mate is offended i didnt spell or get grammar perfect...???? lmao i only bother proof reading and spell checking when its important and this, you and her are certainly not that so i just click mouse and if theres errors in it you cant deal with or cope with...tough shit old bean DEAL WITH IT !! lmao


Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaatever...

*in my best "she's all that" snobby voice*

Have they brainwashed you, honey? They did....oh...my....god....you poor, poor soul.....

J. Corwin
03-22-2004, 01:53 AM
welcome to mtf denim

I see you're having fun already.

vaiva
03-22-2004, 01:59 AM
He's allowed his opionion FFS and he has a lot of posts as he loves tennis.......!!!!

ding! ding! ding!

Random reading can be fun.

Busty St. Clair 21,005 vs bunk18bsb 9,386 :tape: Not 'nuf love as yet

denim
03-22-2004, 02:13 AM
well i like roddick and his style of play and loved betting on him winning us open 2003 and lots more to come and anyone who hates him can shove a pool cue up their arse.....cos people who pick holes are people who can never achieve...its a frustration thing.....if his game doesnt suit you and makes you unhappy maybe you need a councellor or get out more....its sport for fucks sake not a war, why do people have people they love and hate in tennis???? try growing up and evolving into adulthood.....HMMMMM hate roddick but if he died in car crash tommorow the arseholes would have something different to say..

fucking grow up !!! its a game !!! i dont love nor hate any of the players their all great....if they got huge serve and dont play clay court master groundstrokes then dont watch !!!

denim
03-22-2004, 02:19 AM
welcome to mtf denim

I see you're having fun already.

cheers !!! lmaoooo !! education so far, i cant belive you cant like a player without people having a nervous break down OH HOW YOU DARE YOU LIKE RODDICK !!! THATS ILLEGAL !!!! officer i saw him cheering his 3rd ace and want to make a full statement lmaoooooooo


I like who I like and if people dont liek it, tough shit and they can deal with it in their little dark corner. I have always loved big serving and the goran grass court era anyway.

Of course Roddicks game and success would not be what it is or has produced without THE SERVE but its your taste ot it isnt, I like it myself and if it earnt me that success and prize money and titles without having the perfection of backhands I would be WELL HAPPY

denim
03-22-2004, 02:21 AM
Duck hunting like fox hunting is cruel anyway, i say shoot hunters, much more fun LOL

Pea
03-22-2004, 05:24 AM
denim is a prime example why duck season should be all season long.

darnyelb
03-22-2004, 05:39 AM
Did anybody actually say that there was something wrong with having a big serve? Did anybody say that serving big was "cheap"? Or are you just assuming things based on posts that were never written?

Exhibit C :worship:

I was referring to criticisms of big serving in general (McEnroe on Ivanisevic for example), not to any particular post. My points were directed at what I felt was a misconception among a lot of tennis fans.

darnyelb
03-22-2004, 05:45 AM
What on earth does this have to do with this thread? Aside from absolutely nothing because nobody was talking about that, of course.

Exhibit E :worship:

I'm going to run out of letters if I keep this up.

LOLOLOL... my comment was a lot more relevant than half the other comments made in this topic. Interesting how you picked mine out. Didn't realize we couldn't express thoughts independent of a thread.

For the record, I was making a statement on the ridiculous overcriticism of Roddick that is rampant here.

WyveN
03-22-2004, 07:50 AM
Denim seems like a version of Heya who writes longer then one sentence posts
Truly scary

Action Jackson
03-22-2004, 07:56 AM
Sings "Feed the Trolls, Let Them Know It's Christmas Time."

the cat
03-22-2004, 03:52 PM
I like Roddick but I don't have a problem with what Agassi said about Roddick's game. Andre was analysing Andy's game and spoke his mind in a rational well thought out way.

Tennis Fool
03-22-2004, 03:56 PM
Hey Cat, you've been MIA for a while...

gorandevil
03-22-2004, 03:56 PM
i know agassis head was big in shape sideways on, now i know its because it holding a big brain to make such an obseravtion, is he the new einsteen or something? lol

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 03:58 PM
I like Roddick but I don't have a problem with what Agassi said about Roddick's game. Andre was analysing Andy's game and spoke his mind in a rational well thought out way.

Well sure, because it wasn't anything new or earth-shattering :) I'm sure if we looked hard enough we could find a not-too-different quote from Andy himself for that matter lol

gorandevil
03-22-2004, 03:59 PM
denim is a prime example why duck season should be all season long.

Thankyou for your screename choice, I am going food shopping later and have just added you to my list lol

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:17 PM
well i like roddick and his style of play and loved betting on him winning us open 2003 and lots more to come and anyone who hates him can shove a pool cue up their arse.....cos people who pick holes are people who can never achieve...its a frustration thing.....if his game doesnt suit you and makes you unhappy maybe you need a councellor or get out more....its sport for fucks sake not a war, why do people have people they love and hate in tennis???? try growing up and evolving into adulthood.....HMMMMM hate roddick but if he died in car crash tommorow the arseholes would have something different to say..

fucking grow up !!! its a game !!! i dont love nor hate any of the players their all great....if they got huge serve and dont play clay court master groundstrokes then dont watch !!!
Actually, a lot of the people who "pick holes" just happen to be people who enjoy analysing tennis. It doesn't necessarily have to do with "loving" or "hating".

For somebody who throws out accusations regarding other posters maturity levels, you sure do have a way of simplifying things. (ie: comparing negative comments about his tennis abilities to him dying in a car crash... wtf?)

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:17 PM
Denim seems like a version of Heya who writes longer then one sentence posts
Truly scary
Maybe it's another one of her cousins.

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:19 PM
I like Roddick but I don't have a problem with what Agassi said about Roddick's game. Andre was analysing Andy's game and spoke his mind in a rational well thought out way.
Exactly. Rational and well thought out. Two descriptors that could never mistakenly be used for many of the posts in this thread.

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:20 PM
LOLOLOL... my comment was a lot more relevant than half the other comments made in this topic. Interesting how you picked mine out. Didn't realize we couldn't express thoughts independent of a thread.

For the record, I was making a statement on the ridiculous overcriticism of Roddick that is rampant here.
It's rampant here, but it wasn't rampant in this thread. Perhaps you should have made it clear that you weren't staying on topic, and I wouldn't have criticized you.

Interesting that you failed to notice that I pointed out the posts of a couple other posters too, by the way. Self importance can lead to blindness, I suppose.

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:25 PM
I was referring to criticisms of big serving in general (McEnroe on Ivanisevic for example), not to any particular post. My points were directed at what I felt was a misconception among a lot of tennis fans.
Well I don't believe that it's really that big of a misconception here, so posting in the manner which you did about it was completely unnecessary. Being a condescending shithead is fine and dandy, but doing it for absolutely no reason at all when you don't understand anything better than anybody else... well, it embarasses me to see people do that.

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:31 PM
Okay, one more post to have fun with before I return to the world of Eigenvalues, Deception, and "please accept me into your program!" paper writing.

This wasn't addressed at me, but it's just too too funny to let pass without comment.

well i am new and took bunks side as their (i didnt know she was a she at first) seem nicer person then you....

Shouldn't one form their opinions based on, oh, I don't know... the material being argued about, and not the people who are arguing it? Thank you for making it clear what type of poster you are right off the bat. The type not interested in the material, who is thus, not worth arguing with... I do hope that the rest of you read this :)

doesnt speak volumes for way you come over to people, your rude and cold so if its seems i am taking sides and offends you then thats probably as they are a nicer person and attract friends easier.

Oh no! I'm sure that everybody who disagrees with bunk is going to CRY over the fact that they don't attract INTERNET friends as easily as she does! *sniff* (that claim is truly debatable btw, but I refuse to seriously debate a topic that stupid)

bunk definetely has more brains than you and comes over better in arguements, your catty cheap and insulting.

Again, this wasn't addressed to me, and I know this. But I must point out that being insulting towards another poster is no way indicative of your intelligence level. As for whether or not bunk has more brains that tennischick, you.... my burnt toast. Well, it doesn't really matter now does it? This is the INTERNET. Remember? We come across how we want to come across.

go watch the 2003 us open semi .... i will even pay for your sick bucket lmao

New poster my asshole.

Heya's cousin it is ;)

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 04:32 PM
Roddick fans must be so proud to have another one on board....

joske
03-22-2004, 04:34 PM
Anybody who disagrees with him needs to take a moment, remove their head from Roddicks ass, and watch him.

muha :) agreed

sigmagirl91
03-22-2004, 04:43 PM
Becca, that quote DID sound rather asinine, didn't it?

Kiara
03-22-2004, 05:05 PM
Becca, honestly...anyone would think you dont like roddick lmao

I dont think it's RODDICK Becca dislikes....;)

Pea
03-22-2004, 05:10 PM
Becca, that quote DID sound rather asinine, didn't it?

:haha: It sure did.:taped:

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 05:32 PM
calm down dear lmao...you get too excited for a tennis forum
Mom, is that you?

Chloe le Bopper
03-22-2004, 05:32 PM
I dont think it's RODDICK Becca dislikes....;)
It doesn't matter what I think. These people will assume likes, dislikes, and emotions for me totally regardless of what I have said on the messageboard.

Kiara
03-22-2004, 05:34 PM
Denim seems like a version of Heya who writes longer then one sentence posts
Truly scary

Speaking of Heya, she dropped another nugget of wisdom in the Coria forum, charming really...this one was more than one sentence though.

the cat
03-22-2004, 08:15 PM
Hi TF! :wavey: I guess I was a stray cat for awhile. :cat: ;) I'm sure Roddick didn't lose any sleep over what Agassi said about his game. The question I have is with the Davis Cup and the Olympics, why is Roddick playing so many tournaments this year? :confused: He needs to be well rested for the French Open, Wimbledon, defense of his U.S. Open title, the Davis Cup and the Olympics. There is not reasonable reason for Roddick to be playing San Jose and Memphis in a year where he has such a crowded shcedule to begin with. I'm surprised the very bright and articulate coach of champuions Brad Gilbert has not gotten Roddick to reduce his schedule.

Deboogle!.
03-22-2004, 08:41 PM
He's changed his schedule a bit. The problem with Andy is that he is fiercely loyal to some tournaments, and San Jose and Memphis happen to be two of them - they gave him early wild cards and stuff. From now on, his schedule is pared down a little. He's not playing St. Poelten so the only clay he'll play before the TMS tourneys and RG is Houston (another tournament he probably shouldn't play but is way too loyal to), and he's playing less in the fall as well (though last year he didn't end up playing a couple tourneys b/c of his hamstring).

Gosh I should hope that Brad's exerted a little influence over his schedule!!

Fumus
03-22-2004, 09:07 PM
Agassi is spot on. Anybody who disagrees with him needs to take a moment, remove their head from Roddicks ass, and watch him.

The rest of his game is getting a lot better. But if you take away his serve, he really doesn't do anything better than the rest of the top ten. His forehand isn't as good as Moya or Ferrero's, and let's not talk about his backhand.


Let's review what you said here, Moya and Ferrero have a better forehand? :bs: Maybe on clay where they can put that high boucing topspin to use. Andy has one of the best forehand flat shots in the game period. It doesn't get him far on clay but on hard court that's alot of pace to deal with.

Also if Andy was no more than a big serve how does he break top names like Safin, Ferrero, Federer? Could it be groundstrokes? Did you know he can't serve all the time?That the other person serves half the time, you do know that much right?

Maybe you need to pop your head out of your own ass....this whole thread is a conspiracy to vent frustration on Andy by all those Andy haters..

LCeh
03-22-2004, 10:13 PM
Also if Andy was no more than a big serve how does he break top names like Safin, Ferrero, Federer? Could it be groundstrokes? Did you know he can't serve all the time?That the other person serves half the time, you do know that much right?

Who said Andy is "no more than a big serve"?

In your quote of Rebecca, this part answers your above question:

The rest of his game is getting a lot better. But if you take away his serve, he really doesn't do anything better than the rest of the top ten.

hythger
03-23-2004, 12:37 AM
Agassi is spot on. Anybody who disagrees with him needs to take a moment, remove their head from Roddicks ass, and watch him.

The rest of his game is getting a lot better. But if you take away his serve, he really doesn't do anything better than the rest of the top ten. His forehand isn't as good as Moya or Ferrero's, and let's not talk about his backhand.

Could not agree with you more!!

sigmagirl91
03-23-2004, 01:49 AM
Andy fans=The Paranoid Duck Herd

melbournechick
03-23-2004, 03:02 AM
It doesn't matter what I think. These people will assume likes, dislikes, and emotions for me totally regardless of what I have said on the messageboard.

Do you own the Mens Tennis Forums? as you seem to act as though you do.

Action Jackson
03-23-2004, 03:07 AM
Do you own the Mens Tennis Forums? as you seem to act as though you do.

No, no no she is a member of the proletariat as are all the posters on MTF.

melbournechick
03-23-2004, 03:12 AM
lol !! I like that, you got very dry humour.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 03:20 AM
Let's review what you said here, Moya and Ferrero have a better forehand? :bs: Maybe on clay where they can put that high boucing topspin to use. Andy has one of the best forehand flat shots in the game period. It doesn't get him far on clay but on hard court that's alot of pace to deal with.

Andy's forehand is not better than Moya or Ferrero's. This has been discussed in another thread. The very fact that it doesn't get him far on clay proves my point. Ferrero and Moya's are effective on ALL surfaces.

Also if Andy was no more than a big serve how does he break top names like Safin, Ferrero, Federer? Could it be groundstrokes? Did you know he can't serve all the time?That the other person serves half the time, you do know that much right?

Ugh.

Exhibit ZZ6072. Read the thread. Read my post. Again. And Again. And Again. Don't address posts to me that don't have ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING THAT I WROTE.


Maybe you need to pop your head out of your own ass....this whole thread is a conspiracy to vent frustration on Andy by all those Andy haters..

Paranoid. Delusional.

Don't worry, you are not alone. There is an entire convention of you on this very forum. And you aren't all Roddick fans either.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 03:21 AM
Who said Andy is "no more than a big serve"?

In your quote of Rebecca, this part answers your above question:
Ah, thanks. It's not just my imagination that this poster DID NOT READ THE THREAD ;)

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 03:22 AM
Do you own the Mens Tennis Forums? as you seem to act as though you do.
Mom, is that you?

Action Jackson
03-23-2004, 03:24 AM
lol !! I like that, you got very dry humour.

Or maybe she is not a member of the proletariat, when in fact lumpen would be a more accurate way of describing MTF.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 03:25 AM
GWH is right, by the way. I'm a BUM. And I've neved denied it! :devil:

Action Jackson
03-23-2004, 03:27 AM
True Rebecca.

darnyelb
03-23-2004, 03:28 AM
Well I don't believe that it's really that big of a misconception here, so posting in the manner which you did about it was completely unnecessary. Being a condescending shithead is fine and dandy, but doing it for absolutely no reason at all when you don't understand anything better than anybody else... well, it embarasses me to see people do that.

Alas, I am shamed! *head hung down*

SanTaureau Fan
03-23-2004, 03:31 AM
He's all serve and has a nice ass, it's not nothing :cool:

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 03:34 AM
Alas, I am shamed! *head hung down*
hehehe... I do have a way with the dramatics...

WyveN
03-23-2004, 05:45 AM
Speaking of Heya, she dropped another nugget of wisdom in the Coria forum, charming really...this one was more than one sentence though.

Thank you so much!

Without your reference I would have missed it.

Now why was it in the Coria forum? LOL

That classic deserved its own thread

Pea
03-23-2004, 07:18 AM
Andy fans=The Paranoid Duck Herd

:taped: Migrate somewhere else, I say. :o

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 01:56 PM
Thank you so much!

Without your reference I would have missed it.

Now why was it in the Coria forum? LOL

That classic deserved its own thread
lol... I had to run over and read it too, after seeing the reference to it. Very funny stuff.

Fumus
03-23-2004, 03:04 PM
Andy's forehand is not better than Moya or Ferrero's. This has been discussed in another thread. The very fact that it doesn't get him far on clay proves my point. Ferrero and Moya's are effective on ALL surfaces.

Ugh.

Exhibit ZZ6072. Read the thread. Read my post. Again. And Again. And Again. Don't address posts to me that don't have ANYTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING THAT I WROTE.

Paranoid. Delusional.

Don't worry, you are not alone. There is an entire convention of you on this very forum. And you aren't all Roddick fans either.

1)
Define better if by better you mean more versatile it’s possible. You didn't say versatile you just said better. Better to me means, more power, the chance of hitting a winner or forcing an error is higher, with Roddick’s forehand it is. Ferrero does have a good forehand but, certainly not bigger than Andys on hardcourt, grass, or indoors. Moya, don't even talk about his forehand unless you are on clay. Basically, the two guys you said have better forehands don't even if you mean by way of versatility. On hardcourt, grass and carpet courts Andy's forehand is one of the best in the top ten. Moya and Ferrero are only better than Roddick on clay.

(Note)
Even if you and bunch of people decide on something that is wrong in another thread if you come here and try to say it's still wrong.

2)
You agreed with the topic, you agreed with the misconstrued quote. By doing that you are saying Andy is nothing but serve. Also you said outside his serve he doesn’t do anything better than anyone else in the top ten. So you are wrong, read what you wrote.
Don't dodge the obvious; you should try to keep quiet from now on.

3)
You don't like Roddick or his fans, thus you are bias and cannot be taken seriously...

the cat
03-23-2004, 03:16 PM
bunk, it's time Roddick is loyal to his future instead of tournaments he doesn't need to play. He plays a very physical and draining brand of tennis. He needs to be healthy for the grand slams and Davis Cup. The grand slams and Davis Cup will define his career and how great a player he becomes.

Roddick has a tremendous forehand! Arguably the best in tennis.

Fumus
03-23-2004, 03:20 PM
bunk, it's time Roddick is loyal to his future instead of tournaments he doesn't need to play. He plays a very physical and draining brand of tennis. He needs to be healthy for the grand slams and Davis Cup. The grand slams and Davis Cup will define his career and how great a player he becomes.

Roddick has a tremendous forehand! Arguably the best in tennis.

::muah:: :smooch: Thank you

the cat
03-23-2004, 03:25 PM
You're welcome, Fumus. :wavey:

I want Roddick to fulfill his vast potential and become a great tennis player. But the Roddick-ifcation of men's tennis has been interrupted by the great play of Roger Federer. If Andy stays healthy and concentrates on the majors over the next few years he can rack up an impressive grand slam singles title resume. :)

Deboogle!.
03-23-2004, 03:27 PM
bunk, it's time Roddick is loyal to his future instead of tournaments he doesn't need to play. He plays a very physical and draining brand of tennis. He needs to be healthy for the grand slams and Davis Cup. The grand slams and Davis Cup will define his career and how great a player he becomes.

Roddick has a tremendous forehand! Arguably the best in tennis.

oh!! I TOTALLY agree!!! I was just explaining why he plays certain tournaments. Most of them I don't think are a problem anyway. He maybe shouldn't have played San Jose right after Davis Cup, given him a week off before Memphis... but that turned out to be his only title so far this season so how can you tell him to skip it? LOL Memphis is a good tournament and he needs to play the ISG events, so that one's ok. He needed to play Scottsdale to get used to the desert (though the weather ended up being much different but at least you can get used to playing outdoors).... so, what would he have cut out, y'know? Houston is the glaring one to me, he should be going over to Europe and getting used to the conditions there in one of those tournaments where there are better clay players in addition.

Andy's the type of guy who would say to Brad upon suggestion of skipping one of these tourneys, I'm sure, something like "No, he was good to me when I was 17, I've gotta play, it's my duty" - in the long run it might be a detriment to his career, but in the short run it's quite a reflection of character :)

star
03-23-2004, 03:32 PM
Plus, Andy's whole family lives close to Houston and his own home is close to Houston.

It's sort of like saying Federer shouldn't have played Gstaad right after Wimbledon.

Deboogle!.
03-23-2004, 03:34 PM
exactly, great analogy star :yeah:

Plus he's never not reached the final and has had some good wins there. Nope, just don't see him skipping it lol

vene
03-23-2004, 03:44 PM
You're welcome, Fumus. :wavey:

I want Roddick to fulfill his vast potential and become a great tennis player. But the Roddick-ifcation of men's tennis has been interrupted by the great play of Roger Federer. If Andy stays healthy and concentrates on the majors over the next few years he can rack up an impressive grand slam singles title resume. :)
The Roddick-ifcation of men's tennis??!!!! I'll stop watching tennis when it becomes Roddick-ified!! that's never going to happen. Roger has saved tennis from certain death (at least in the US) and will be on top for a long time to come. As for Roddick, what's the difference between him, Krajeck and Ivanisevic? They all relied heavily on their serve and only won 1 Slam. (BTW, Andy barely won the slam when everyone else was exhausted!)
Roddick= multiple slams? :confused:
Wake up!
Andre knows what he's talking about: no serve=duck!

Deboogle!.
03-23-2004, 03:46 PM
well someone's clearly lost their sense of humor and doesn't know where to find it :o

Kiara
03-23-2004, 03:58 PM
Thank you so much!

Without your reference I would have missed it.

Now why was it in the Coria forum? LOL

That classic deserved its own thread

Maybe she's still bitter that Roger defeated Coria in the final of the Orange Bowl in '98 :p

Fumus
03-23-2004, 04:35 PM
The Roddick-ifcation of men's tennis??!!!! I'll stop watching tennis when it becomes Roddick-ified!! that's never going to happen. Roger has saved tennis from certain death (at least in the US) and will be on top for a long time to come. As for Roddick, what's the difference between him, Krajeck and Ivanisevic? They all relied heavily on their serve and only won 1 Slam. (BTW, Andy barely won the slam when everyone else was exhausted!)
Roddick= multiple slams? :confused:
Wake up!
Andre knows what he's talking about: no serve=duck!

haha Barely won did you see the final?

Stop watching tenns soon!

tangerine_dream
03-23-2004, 06:08 PM
Hi vene :wavey:

The Roddick-ifcation of men's tennis??!!!! I'll stop watching tennis when it becomes Roddick-ified!!

Ah, so then you are not a "true" tennis fan. ;)

Roger has saved tennis from certain death (at least in the US)

I think Roddick and the other young Americans are great for US tennis and he is indeed helping to "save" it. And for people who don't like Roddick, there's always Roger or any other number of great talents to fall back on. It's like Sampras and Agassi (ut oh, there's that connection again): if you don't want coffee, I can offer you tea ... ;)

But luckily, tennis doesn't really need "saving" in other parts of the world. In the US we've got characters like McIngvale who are helping to "save" US tennis while simultaneously shooting us in the foot. It's a brilliant plan. :tape:

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 07:30 PM
1)
Define better if by better you mean more versatile it’s possible. You didn't say versatile you just said better. Better to me means, more power, the chance of hitting a winner or forcing an error is higher, with Roddick’s forehand it is. Ferrero does have a good forehand but, certainly not bigger than Andys on hardcourt, grass, or indoors. Moya, don't even talk about his forehand unless you are on clay. Basically, the two guys you said have better forehands don't even if you mean by way of versatility. On hardcourt, grass and carpet courts Andy's forehand is one of the best in the top ten. Moya and Ferrero are only better than Roddick on clay.

You've successfully demonstrated that you know nothing about Moya, which is roughly what I had suspected. If you know nothing about Moya, then I really see no reason to assume you know anything about Ferrero either, so I'm not going to bother to reply to this in any detail, at least not until you educate yourself on the players that you speak of.

I will say, however, that if power was the deciding factor in who had the "best" forehand, then Gonzo would have the best forehand in the top 50. Some may think that, but I don't believe it's a popular opinion. There are other factors that must be considered.

Now, go watch Cincinatti 2002, US Open 1998, and Australia 1997, and then I'll adress the rest.

(Note)
Even if you and bunch of people decide on something that is wrong in another thread if you come here and try to say it's still wrong.

Me and a bunch of people? I'm sorry, I don't travel in packs. If you want to address me, address me. Don't address the "bunch" because I have no idea who the "bunch" is.

I think that you're missing a word or two here, btw, because it really doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't care about typos, but you've failed to convey any meaning here, so I must ask for clarification before I go assuming anythying else

2)
You agreed with the topic, you agreed with the misconstrued quote. By doing that you are saying Andy is nothing but serve. Also you said outside his serve he doesn’t do anything better than anyone else in the top ten. So you are wrong, read what you wrote.
Don't dodge the obvious; you should try to keep quiet from now on.

How was the quote miscontrued?

Read the quote again, because you quite obviously misunderstood it.

3)
You don't like Roddick or his fans, thus you are bias and cannot be taken seriously...

This coming from the same guy who just said that Moya's forehand is only to be taken seriously on a clay court?

Ha.

While you're at it, why don't you make a list of all negative posts I have ever made about Andy Roddick. Find me my posts where I hate on him. Go!

And please don't generalize and tell me who I hate. It's irritating, and just plain stupid. I don't like idiots, period. I don't care who they happen to be a fan of.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 07:32 PM
Maybe she's still bitter that Roger defeated Coria in the final of the Orange Bowl in '98 :p
I think it's fair to say that all Coria fans share a secret loathing of Roger for that! It's not so secret anymore, though :sad:

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 07:33 PM
For the cat:

Roddick has a very good forehand. It's a weapon. But it's not the best in tennis.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 07:35 PM
haha Barely won did you see the final?

Stop watching tenns soon!
YOu need to win 7 matches to win a grand slam. Not just one. That poster was obviously refering to the ENTIRE tournament, and not just the final. Duh.

That isn't to say that I agree with that poster, but sheesh. Talk about completely missing the point

Kiara
03-23-2004, 07:51 PM
I think it's fair to say that all Coria fans share a secret loathing of Roger for that! It's not so secret anymore, though :sad:

yes. Roger the rat bastard! Im so mad at him for denying Coria that prestigious Orange Bowl title :fiery:

Fumus
03-23-2004, 08:12 PM
You've successfully demonstrated that you know nothing about Moya, which is roughly what I had suspected. If you know nothing about Moya, then I really see no reason to assume you know anything about Ferrero either, so I'm not going to bother to reply to this in any detail, at least not until you educate yourself on the players that you speak of.

I will say, however, that if power was the deciding factor in who had the "best" forehand, then Gonzo would have the best forehand in the top 50. Some may think that, but I don't believe it's a popular opinion. There are other factors that must be considered.

Now, go watch Cincinatti 2002, US Open 1998, and Australia 1997, and then I'll adress the rest.



Me and a bunch of people? I'm sorry, I don't travel in packs. If you want to address me, address me. Don't address the "bunch" because I have no idea who the "bunch" is.

I think that you're missing a word or two here, btw, because it really doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't care about typos, but you've failed to convey any meaning here, so I must ask for clarification before I go assuming anythying else



How was the quote miscontrued?

Read the quote again, because you quite obviously misunderstood it.



This coming from the same guy who just said that Moya's forehand is only to be taken seriously on a clay court?

Ha.

While you're at it, why don't you make a list of all negative posts I have ever made about Andy Roddick. Find me my posts where I hate on him. Go!

And please don't generalize and tell me who I hate. It's irritating, and just plain stupid. I don't like idiots, period. I don't care who they happen to be a fan of.

Generalizations:
Becca = Roddick hater
Becca = unable to admit when she is wrong
Becca = Rude
Becca = Crass
Becca = Stuck up

Listen silly, you said “we already talked about this in another thread”, so yea, quit backtracking.

You just dodged all my answers but, I guess it's hard to respond when you know you are wrong. Why did you remove the Queen? It fit you so well.That whole crass stuck up thing was all you...

now. On to the relevant stuff.

Logically, you cannot tell me I know nothing without telling me what I don't know. Anyone can say "you know nothing" but, until you explain what you mean, you are just blabbing like you always do...

Moya's forehand is not a big as Andys period. Moya's forehand isn't a factor against top ten players unless on clay. Watch the Tennis Master's Houston(watch him and JCF not win a match).

hmm...what else, oh yea, did I say power makes the best forehand, no I didn’t but, it certainly is a factor. I said ability to hit winners and force errors but you didn't even address that, did you?

You also didn’t address the fact that Roddick can win on more surfaces with his….

Fumus
03-23-2004, 08:17 PM
YOu need to win 7 matches to win a grand slam. Not just one. That poster was obviously refering to the ENTIRE tournament, and not just the final. Duh.

That isn't to say that I agree with that poster, but sheesh. Talk about completely missing the point

The only match that was a struggle was the Nalb match...

oh yea, I didn't know I was talking to you about this Becca

Becca= Says things to provoke arguement
Becca= Always gotta get her 2 cents in

man the list goes on...

J. Corwin
03-23-2004, 09:21 PM
I think Roddick's forehand in general is less consistent than Ferrero's or Moya's. That's why I consider it less effective.

Having more compact strokes help too.

WyveN
03-23-2004, 09:53 PM
I want Roddick to fulfill his vast potential and become a great tennis player. But the Roddick-ifcation of men's tennis has been interrupted by the great play of Roger Federer.

It is not like Roger is beating Andy in the final every week so Federer isn't exactly the reason Andy isn't performing

Sjengster
03-23-2004, 10:03 PM
In case you hadn't noticed Fumus, Moya's forehand was pretty effective twice on hardcourt during 2002 against a Top 10 player by the name of Lleyton Hewitt. It was also very effective against Roddick in Houston last year, he had enough chances to take charge at the start of the third set but ended up blowing it. His forehand will always be a big weapon on any surface, just like Roddick's or Ferrero's or Federer's - in fact the only New Ball whose backhand is a better shot than their forehand is Safin.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 11:00 PM
You also didn’t address the fact that Roddick can win on more surfaces with his….

This? Is an embarassment.

Read what Sjengster wrote. Read what 1jackson wrote.

No need to fill your response to me with insults because you can't handle the fact that you were incorrect and had NO idea what you were talking about. If anything, doing so just makes that fact more evident.

Chloe le Bopper
03-23-2004, 11:02 PM
Federer also has a better forehand :)

TennisLurker
03-24-2004, 12:27 AM
in fact the only New Ball whose backhand is a better shot than their forehand is Safin.

Isnt that true for Nalbandian and Coria too?

Deboogle!.
03-24-2004, 12:28 AM
I'd say it's definitely true. Nalbandian's backhand = :eek:

and Coria's down the line = :eek::eek:

J. Corwin
03-24-2004, 02:36 AM
David's bh is the best, imo.

WyveN
03-24-2004, 03:51 AM
Well Moya did make the final of the 1997 AO where his forehand beat the then top players Becker & Chang

Fumus
03-24-2004, 03:55 AM
This? Is an embarassment.

Read what Sjengster wrote. Read what 1jackson wrote.

No need to fill your response to me with insults because you can't handle the fact that you were incorrect and had NO idea what you were talking about. If anything, doing so just makes that fact more evident.

Becca = Can't think for herself, ert himself or itself

*yawn* go away and keep quiet, when you wanna respond to what I wrote and take the blame for some of the idiotic contradictions you have made I will be around... :)

Havok
03-24-2004, 04:18 AM
man Roddick threads rule don't they. :drive: nobody can get enough of them

Iza
03-24-2004, 06:39 AM
I completely changed my opinion about Agassi! I never thought a fellow American player would say this about pretty little Andy, but Andre stepped up and told the truth and nothing but the truth and I can't see the point in trying to convince us, anti-roddick people, of his fantastic abilities to play tennis and have a varied game!

Action Jackson
03-24-2004, 06:47 AM
man Roddick threads rule don't they. :drive: nobody can get enough of them

I don't get enough of you sweetcheeks.

naiwen
03-24-2004, 07:28 AM
Did Roddick win any clay title other than Jimmy's tournament?

J. Corwin
03-24-2004, 08:08 AM
Not that it's a spectacular achievement, but yes. He won St. Poelten last year.

J. Corwin
03-24-2004, 08:09 AM
And if you want to count another U.S. clay tournament (it was on green clay), Andy won Atlanta in 2001.

Chloe le Bopper
03-24-2004, 01:22 PM
Well Moya did make the final of the 1997 AO where his forehand beat the then top players Becker & Chang
Perhaps they changed the surface to clay that year?

Or maybe Fumus is an idiot?

One of those possibilities is far more likely than the other!

Next thing you know he's going to tell us that Ferrero isn't a multisurface player... oh wait... he already said that :o

Chloe le Bopper
03-24-2004, 01:24 PM
Becca = Can't think for herself, ert himself or itself

*yawn* go away and keep quiet, when you wanna respond to what I wrote and take the blame for some of the idiotic contradictions you have made I will be around... :)
Still can't admit you were wrong, huh? Those Moya comments were very embarassing.

As for the apparent contradictions I made... they're all in your head. Nobody else seems to be seeing them, for some strange reason. LIkely because... they're all in your head. :p

Kiara
03-24-2004, 01:46 PM
Isnt that true for Nalbandian and Coria too?

Yes it is, they both have better backhands imho.

the cat
03-24-2004, 03:47 PM
Well said, T_D.

Vene, Roddick has given tennis in America a huge boost in the last couple of years. :) The tennis media in America has focused it's attention on Roddick and he has handled the immense pressure beautifully and come through with flying colors! :D There is a good group of young American men but Roddick is the only one who has shown he is a top player capable of doing great things. That's fact not fiction.

Becca, I can't say definatively that Roddick has the best forehand in men's tennis. But his forehand is among the best and it is a weapon that's almost as dangerous and imposing as his first serve.

Sjengster
03-24-2004, 04:54 PM
Isnt that true for Nalbandian and Coria too?

Ah, well I was referring to the New Balls who have won Slams... Hewitt isn't a power player however much he tries to be, but can still do more with the forehand than with the backhand. Totally agree about Nalbandian and Coria though.

vene
03-24-2004, 04:58 PM
.

Vene, Roddick has given tennis in America a huge boost in the last couple of years. :) The tennis media in America has focused it's attention on Roddick and he has handled the immense pressure beautifully and come through with flying colors!

I don't agree that Roddick has given American tennis a boost. In fact the recent SI with tennis on the cover was its lowest selling ever. Yes, the media has focused its attention on him, that's true, but his US Open final against Ferraro was one of the lowest ratings in years. I would also refer you record massive amounts of mail to Jon Wertheim complaining about ESPN tennis coverage. In fact fans complained so much Tennisweek had to interview ESPN execs. No, people are starting to enjoy tennis more because Roger's game is so much fun to watch :) That's why he was voted fan fave!

Mattress mac knows this, that's why he is trying to get Roger at his tournament.

Deboogle!.
03-24-2004, 05:25 PM
I don't agree that Roddick has given American tennis a boost. In fact the recent SI with tennis on the cover was its lowest selling ever. Yes, the media has focused its attention on him, that's true, but his US Open final against Ferraro was one of the lowest ratings in years. I would also refer you record massive amounts of mail to Jon Wertheim complaining about ESPN tennis coverage. In fact fans complained so much Tennisweek had to interview ESPN execs. No, people are starting to enjoy tennis more because Roger's game is so much fun to watch :) That's why he was voted fan fave!

Mattress mac knows this, that's why he is trying to get Roger at his tournament.

You're kidding right? First of all, the SI cover in question was of Serena Williams LAST YEAR After the Australian Open. If you do not think that Andy has helped tennis in the US, then you are really mistaken IMO. You do not have to like Andy to recognize that he has brought attention to tennis that did not exist before. My parents watch it now and they only used to watch the slams. Many of my friends at school have seen me watching Andy and said "wow he is cool and fun to watch" so they watch with me now and they know other players' names too. If you really deny all this and think it's Roger that is helping tennis in the US, at this point (since who knows what will happen in the future), then your Roger-worshipping proves you to be just as blind-eyed as any Andy fan could be accused of being.

And anyway, Andre is still, by far, the biggest tennis star in the US.

vene
03-24-2004, 05:54 PM
You're kidding right? First of all, the SI cover in question was of Serena Williams LAST YEAR After the Australian Open. If you do not think that Andy has helped tennis in the US, then you are really mistaken IMO. You do not have to like Andy to recognize that he has brought attention to tennis that did not exist before. My parents watch it now and they only used to watch the slams. Many of my friends at school have seen me watching Andy and said "wow he is cool and fun to watch" so they watch with me now and they know other players' names too. If you really deny all this and think it's Roger that is helping tennis in the US, at this point (since who knows what will happen in the future), then your Roger-worshipping proves you to be just as blind-eyed as any Andy fan could be accused of being.

And anyway, Andre is still, by far, the biggest tennis star in the US.


My friends all watch Roger now, actually. I think Roger has brought a lot of attention to tennis - look at a few message boards apart from RO. I agree that Andre is the biggest tennis star in the US. I do not dislike Andy personally- I just don't like his game. I reiterate Andy has not helped tennis in the US. IMO, the majority of tennis fans find his power tennis boring. Oh, I do not worship Roger.....but he is next to God ;)
Let's wait, time we tell. Last year the media and all the Andy fans looked forward to the Roddification of tennis. Others knew it wasn't going to happen and it didn't. So we'll see.

MisterQ
03-24-2004, 07:41 PM
the Roddification of tennis.

great word! ;)

Deboogle!.
03-24-2004, 07:46 PM
that's what the cat said, Q ;) but I think it was said in jest and people jumped all over it, oddly enough

tangerine_dream
03-24-2004, 09:22 PM
And anyway, Andre is still, by far, the biggest tennis star in the US.

I agree. Agassi is the one and true rock star of tennis! :worship: It'll be interesting to see if Andy reaches the same level of recognition as Andre has. As his career chugs along, I'm sure he will.

And Roger will be the "boring" one who wins everything a la Petey. ;)

vene
03-24-2004, 09:30 PM
Like I said, we'll see, I doubt it- Andy does not have the tennis or the personality. If I rightly remember, WyverN was the only one who gave Roger a chance of winning the AO in that thread, so predicting the future is risky business, isn't it? ;)

Kiara
03-24-2004, 09:36 PM
and Roger will never be as "boring" as Carpet ;)

J. Corwin
03-24-2004, 10:02 PM
Well said, T_D.

Vene, Roddick has given tennis in America a huge boost in the last couple of years. :) The tennis media in America has focused it's attention on Roddick and he has handled the immense pressure beautifully and come through with flying colors! :D There is a good group of young American men but Roddick is the only one who has shown he is a top player capable of doing great things. That's fact not fiction.

Becca, I can't say definatively that Roddick has the best forehand in men's tennis. But his forehand is among the best and it is a weapon that's almost as dangerous and imposing as his first serve.

Well I'd say Andy's serve is arguably the best in the business...while his forehand is maybe "only" one of the best. His forehand is still definitely a weapon...as opposed to it being a rally shot or a liability.

tangerine_dream
03-24-2004, 10:07 PM
and Roger will never be as "boring" as Carpet ;)

I've heard Tim Henman described as being as exciting as Beige. ;)

Pea
03-24-2004, 10:30 PM
Like I said, we'll see, I doubt it- Andy does not have the tennis or the personality. If I rightly remember, WyverN was the only one who gave Roger a chance of winning the AO in that thread, so predicting the future is risky business, isn't it? ;)

LOL, I agree!

Kiara
03-24-2004, 11:11 PM
I've heard Tim Henman described as being as exciting as Beige. ;)

Were we talking about Tim??and beige is a good colour, classy understated but very cool ;)

the cat
03-25-2004, 01:02 AM
You read me well, bunk. :) And thanks for giving me the credit for "Rodd-ification". :D

Vene, we just disagree on the impact of Andy Roddick. He is by far the best and biggest young male American star to emerge on the world tennis scene since Jim Courier broke through in 1991 to win the French Open. And Roddick just might be the only player who can stop Roger Federer from complete domination over the next couple of years.

Hi 1J2001! :wavey:

Proph
03-25-2004, 02:59 AM
look at a few message boards apart from RO.

Can we leave my site out of this please?

Deboogle!.
03-25-2004, 03:21 AM
You read me well, bunk. :) And thanks for giving me the credit for "Rodd-ification". :D

Vene, we just disagree on the impact of Andy Roddick. He is by far the best and biggest young male American star to emerge on the world tennis scene since Jim Courier broke through in 1991 to win the French Open. And Roddick just might be the only player who can stop Roger Federer from complete domination over the next couple of years.

Hi 1J2001! :wavey:

:) Well I mean.... to me it was sort of obvious you were speaking in jest. But alas, some people have no sense of humor ;) And I agree with the rest of what you said :)

hedgehog
03-25-2004, 03:46 AM
Roddick has made a huge impact on us tennis...his first us open wont be his last for sure, and hes not pure 100% serve, many other aspects to his game, some of which will never win french open obviouslly but tennis isnt based purely on clay court abilty.

hes certainlly gonna be in top 5 for a while and a contender for the aussie open, us open and wimbledon for a while too.....and no i am not a major onsessive roddick fan either....i like the guy and just think even if he only has success on hard courts, you still got to make the incisive shot to break whether it be during set and a service break. and hes done that many a time.

if you didnt have great servers you wouldnt have great returners, I thinks hes an asset for the game.

Havok
03-25-2004, 04:43 AM
My friends all watch Roger now, actually. I think Roger has brought a lot of attention to tennis - look at a few message boards apart from RO. I agree that Andre is the biggest tennis star in the US. I do not dislike Andy personally- I just don't like his game. I reiterate Andy has not helped tennis in the US. IMO, the majority of tennis fans find his power tennis boring. Oh, I do not worship Roger.....but he is next to God ;)
Let's wait, time we tell. Last year the media and all the Andy fans looked forward to the Roddification of tennis. Others knew it wasn't going to happen and it didn't. So we'll see.
how do you know Andy hasn't helped tennis in the US. IF everyone found him boring, they wouldn't be cheering him on. and they don't cheer him on because they're both american. is it that hard to realise what Andy has done for tennis in the US? and again saying that Roddick hasn't helped tennis in the US is a bit :retard: and once again, you know that the majority of tennis fans find his power game boring because??? let me reming you that ALL top male players play with immense power, and yes that included FEderer. Ive seen him playing with power moreso than playing with variety quite a few times. and if the majority of tenis fans found his power game boring, then how do you explain his popularity around the world, his fame, etc. and if his power game is boring, then so is Safin's, and Philippoussis', and other power players. everyone has their own tastes, and believe it or not, some people do enjoy the power game. shoking isnt it.

oh and you also said that Andy doesn't have the talent or personality :retard: if you're in the top 10, you obviously have talent. og course he's nowhere near the talent level of Agassi/Federer, but you can't deny the fact that the guy IS talented. and him lacking in personality. excuse me while i :lol: if Andy doesn't have a personality, then a shitload of ATP players are probably in the negative percentages for traces of personalities :scared:

J. Corwin
03-25-2004, 07:56 AM
Hi, the cat! :wavey:

the cat
03-25-2004, 03:37 PM
Thanks bunk.

Well said hedgehog and Naldo.

Good morning 1j2001! :wavey:

Deboogle!.
03-25-2004, 03:57 PM
the cat, you should come visit us on the Andy forum, we have some fun discussions down there :crazy:

vene
03-25-2004, 04:28 PM
how do you know Andy hasn't helped tennis in the US. IF everyone found him boring, they wouldn't be cheering him on. and they don't cheer him on because they're both american. is it that hard to realise what Andy has done for tennis in the US? and again saying that Roddick hasn't helped tennis in the US is a bit :retard: and once again, you know that the majority of tennis fans find his power game boring because??? let me reming you that ALL top male players play with immense power, and yes that included FEderer. Ive seen him playing with power moreso than playing with variety quite a few times. and if the majority of tenis fans found his power game boring, then how do you explain his popularity around the world, his fame, etc. and if his power game is boring, then so is Safin's, and Philippoussis', and other power players. everyone has their own tastes, and believe it or not, some people do enjoy the power game. shoking isnt it.

oh and you also said that Andy doesn't have the talent or personality :retard: if you're in the top 10, you obviously have talent. og course he's nowhere near the talent level of Agassi/Federer, but you can't deny the fact that the guy IS talented. and him lacking in personality. excuse me while i :lol: if Andy doesn't have a personality, then a shitload of ATP players are probably in the negative percentages for traces of personalities :scared:

:bs: Take off the Andy-goggles and join us in the real world. :haha: You don't even live in the US!

Deboogle!.
03-25-2004, 04:30 PM
vene, Naldo's post was no more BS than any of the Roger-worshipping stuff you've posted. Come on, be real.

vene
03-25-2004, 04:46 PM
HELP!!! I'M BEING ATTACKED BY ALL THE DUCKBOY MANIACS!!!! :crying2: :crying2:

shaoyu
03-25-2004, 06:34 PM
HELP!!! I'M BEING ATTACKED BY ALL THE DUCKBOY MANIACS!!!! :crying2: :crying2:

Cheer up Vene! You are certainly entitled to have your own opinion. If you feel a little bit down just go watch a few of Roger's match I am sure it will comfort you, and don't forget Roger has been voted ATP's Fan Favorite of 2003 :)

Action Jackson
03-25-2004, 06:42 PM
HELP!!! I'M BEING ATTACKED BY ALL THE DUCKBOY MANIACS!!!! :crying2: :crying2:

It could be worse, just remember 5-1 to Federer over Duckboy, Roger schooled him at Wimbledon and and at Houston. There you go now stop whining.

Havok
03-25-2004, 06:49 PM
aww poor you:rolleyes: take a look at the GM and even the Roddick forum and then you should stop whining about you getting attacked

alfonsojose
03-25-2004, 06:56 PM
Andre didn't say that. He just says what we already know. Roddick's serve is his biggest weapon. His forehand is good but another top players has a good one too. That's all.

:)

Fumus
03-25-2004, 08:37 PM
Perhaps they changed the surface to clay that year?

Or maybe Fumus is an idiot?

One of those possibilities is far more likely than the other!

Next thing you know he's going to tell us that Ferrero isn't a multisurface player... oh wait... he already said that :o

Still can't admit you were wrong, huh? Those Moya comments were very embarassing.

As for the apparent contradictions I made... they're all in your head. Nobody else seems to be seeing them, for some strange reason. LIkely because... they're all in your head. :p


Who cares about 97, we are talking about now. 97 was 7 years ago, alot has changed in tennis since then. So Becca, relax with bringing up ancient tennis history.

Alright...read what I wrote I never said that their games couldn't win on hardcourt. I said that their forehands weren't as dominating unless they were on clay. Roddick can over power people on more surfaces with his than Moya or Ferrero can...

The fact that Ferrero or Moya made the finals of some hardcourt slams is great. :yippee: :woohoo: That is irrelevant informant...What does that have to do with their forehands as compared to Roddicks ?

I love how you say “it's all in my head " twice. Is that for extra emphasis? You are a grammatical champion!

sigmagirl91
03-25-2004, 08:41 PM
Oh, Lord :rolleyes: here we freakin' go again :confused: :eek: :retard:

Sjengster
03-25-2004, 08:53 PM
Fumus, the fact that Moya and Ferrero have reached hardcourt Slam finals shows that their forehands are effective on faster surfaces. I can't believe I'm actually having to point this out considering Ferrero beat Hewitt and Agassi back to back at the US Open last year. But then of course, their results on hardcourt are just LOUSY as well, aren't they? Better that the four of 'em stick to clay.

Havok
03-25-2004, 08:57 PM
ugh who cares, let him be that he thinks Roddick's forehand is better than Ferrero and Moya's. this reminds me of the backhand comparison of Venus and Christine over at wtaworld. what are you gonna bring up Christine winning Roland Garros to establish that her backhand is better than Venus' ? :retard:

Fumus
03-25-2004, 09:04 PM
arg.....Sjeng. I like ya pal but, read what I wrote. I said "Roddick foreahand is more dominating, it's better and more versitale". I didn't say those guys couldn't have good hard court relsults or even that they had bad forehands....soooooo chhiillll out ice cube!!

Naldo, this is less that I really believe his forhand is better it's that Becca thinks she can say anything and this time I am going to say something. She bashes Roddick to much..

Sjengster
03-25-2004, 09:07 PM
Fine, and I'm disagreeing with you. Their forehands are easily as good as Roddick's in the categories that you mention.

BTW, I think Rebecca prefers to bash the idiocy of some of his fans more than Roddick himself.

Fumus
03-25-2004, 09:09 PM
ehh, she bashes both but, I harldy consider myself an idiot :lol:

Sjengster
03-25-2004, 09:16 PM
Sometimes the closest things to us are the hardest for us to see...

Fumus
03-25-2004, 09:20 PM
Listen Sjenger banger, Roddick has one of the best forehands in the game, Ferrero and Moya maybe and stress maybe more consistant with theirs but who cares, winners to unforced errors, power, versality, control I think Roddicks is better...

tangerine_dream
03-25-2004, 09:27 PM
I need a new recipe for chocolate/oatmeal cookies, can someone post it here? Thanks! :)

Deboogle!.
03-25-2004, 09:28 PM
ewww oatmeal?

My mom said she made muffins using chocolate milk.... *whines* I want some :(

Sjengster
03-25-2004, 09:32 PM
Fine Fumigator, but don't expect me to concur when I don't have the stats to hand (especially regarding the winners to unforced errors ratio, which surely at this level depends on a player's performance rather than their technique). Nice Italian flag, though.

Sjengster
03-25-2004, 09:32 PM
Or is it Irish? Actually, it does look more orange than red. I'm going colour blind, I swear...

Havok
03-25-2004, 09:39 PM
it's irish sjeng;)

Sjengster
03-25-2004, 09:48 PM
Yes, so it is... I thought either option was likely, given that Irish and Italians are very well-represented over in America, but then maybe Fumus just likes Ireland a lot? I've never been, but should.

Chloe le Bopper
03-26-2004, 12:08 AM
Fine, and I'm disagreeing with you. Their forehands are easily as good as Roddick's in the categories that you mention.

BTW, I think Rebecca prefers to bash the idiocy of some of his fans more than Roddick himself.
Entirely correct. Fact is, Fumus couldn't find a Roddick bashing post of mine if he tried. Even the duck thread contains a couple of fairly positive posts about him by me. This is why I don't bother seriously with Roddick arseholes like Fumus. They are unable to distinguish between my thinking that THEY are an idiot, and my not liking Roddick. It's not as insulting, but it's no different than the time Tangerine called GWH a nazi. Both were ridiculous claims that will never be backed by evidence, because frankly, the people who used them just aren't very intelligent (or have no interest in demonstrating otherwise on this messageboard)

Chloe le Bopper
03-26-2004, 12:15 AM
ugh who cares, let him be that he thinks Roddick's forehand is better than Ferrero and Moya's. this reminds me of the backhand comparison of Venus and Christine over at wtaworld. what are you gonna bring up Christine winning Roland Garros to establish that her backhand is better than Venus' ? :retard:
Naldo, it is not the fact that his opinion differed that was the problem. It was that he was unable to provide any sound reasoning. I repeat: his reasoning contained "let's not talk about Moya off clay". He quite obviously had no fucking clue what he was talking about. I mean, what an embarassing statement to make! Then there was teh comment about how Roddick wins on more surfaces than his. Huh? No need to look further than last years slam results and pit his against Ferrero's to know that simply isn't the truth.

Again... disagreement is swell. I'd have let it go at that. But when you fill your disagreement with absolutely stupidity and "facts" that are total rubbish, then I'm going to pick it apart.

Let that be a lesson to idiots everywhere ;)

Chloe le Bopper
03-26-2004, 12:19 AM
ehh, she bashes both but, I harldy consider myself an idiot :lol:
Denial is a very fascinating mechanism.

Havok
03-26-2004, 01:13 AM
Rebecca please stop taking such joy out of talking down to idiots (as you perceive themselves to be). its pretty pathetic :o you really can't just read something, laugh at the idiocy of it, and move along. i know the temptation is too hard sometimes, but you can lay off the constant responses.

Deboogle!.
03-26-2004, 01:18 AM
Well Naldo, for me there is a difference between saying that you think someone is wrong and calling them an idiot or something similar. Skyler might be wrong about Andy's forehand as compared to Moya or Ferrero or whomever, but that doesn't mean he is an idiot, IMO. But the rudeness hasn't died down since I've been here and I don't expect it to stop anytime soon. The ignore option is quite a lovely thing :)

Havok
03-26-2004, 01:20 AM
i know i gave it a shot what can i say :scared:

Chloe le Bopper
03-26-2004, 01:21 AM
Rebecca please stop taking such joy out of talking down to idiots (as you perceive themselves to be). its pretty pathetic :o you really can't just read something, laugh at the idiocy of it, and move along. i know the temptation is too hard sometimes, but you can lay off the constant responses.
Naldo, I like to give people the chance to prove that they did indeed have a point. You might notice that I didn't start calling Fumus an idiot until asking him to clarify several times and having him ramble this way and another.

Just because I don't understand a point doesn't mean that it's wrong. There have been times that I read something and thought "wtf?" then asked them to clarify and it made perfect sense.

What is the point in "discussing" if I don't challenge people that I disagree with?

Havok
03-26-2004, 01:21 AM
oh and i never called Fumus an idiot. i used the words (as you perceive people to be) in my post in regards to Rebecca's thinking. i wouldn't call him dumb at all, but hey thats me:D

Havok
03-26-2004, 01:23 AM
but the point is, Rebecca, you take JOY from doing this. that was my point. just let it go sometimes :scared:

Chloe le Bopper
03-26-2004, 01:24 AM
Well Naldo, for me there is a difference between saying that you think someone is wrong and calling them an idiot or something similar. Skyler might be wrong about Andy's forehand as compared to Moya or Ferrero or whomever, but that doesn't mean he is an idiot, IMO. But the rudeness hasn't died down since I've been here and I don't expect it to stop anytime soon. The ignore option is quite a lovely thing :)
Stop pretending that you have me on ignore.

Just in case you didn't understand it the first 6 times I said it: my problem with Fumus is NOT that he said Roddicks forehand was better. I didnt' call the cat an idiot, did I? My problem was that his arguement contained many errors, and when I pointed them out to him he got all snippy.

I don't see either of you being all that upset over the personal insults that he hurled at me. I'm not either, but be consistent. If you don't like "rudeness" you should take a good look at Fumus' behavior in this thread.

Havok
03-26-2004, 01:25 AM
but does he do it on a daily basis:drive: no. Yay.

Chloe le Bopper
03-26-2004, 01:26 AM
oh and i never called Fumus an idiot. i used the words (as you perceive people to be) in my post in regards to Rebecca's thinking. i wouldn't call him dumb at all, but hey thats me:D
Yes, you made it very clear that you were talking from my point of view.

Anyways, I don't take joy out of this. I wish that more people would like, know what they were talking about before shooting their mouths off, so that when we disagree it could be fine and dandy. Unfortunately there are a lot of fan whores on this board who really don't know anything, but pretend to anyways.

Why do posters insist on attributing emotions to me that I don't have? I take joy from many things... but not the internet. This is just "something to do"