Where are the teenagers ? (Top 100 getting older and older) - Page 6 - MensTennisForums.com

MensTennisForums.com

MenstennisForums.com is the premier Men's Tennis forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.Please Register - It's Free!

View Poll Results: Are players peaking at older ages in tennis now than in the past?

Yes 72 71.29%
No 22 21.78%
Don't know / don't care 7 6.93%
Voters: 101. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Old 03-22-2010, 06:24 AM   #76
country flag Arkulari
Faithful Txurigorri
 
Arkulari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 29
Posts: 24,510
Arkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond reputeArkulari has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

if you watch Challenger tournaments around the world, you see most guys on it are 25+, specially in South America, where you often see the likes of Gaudio, Puerta, Marcos Daniel, etc

that way younger guns are finding it harder to get a place in the big dogs world, of course it's their fault they can't do it, but most of the time it's more due to the tricks and versatility of the older players
__________________
Rafael "The Matador of Spin" Nadal
Roger “The Magician of Precision” Federer
Del Potro, Ferrer, Haas, Zeballos


Arkulari is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 03-22-2010, 07:25 AM   #77
country flag cardio
Registered User
 
cardio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,962
cardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond reputecardio has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Money and women, what else.
More they earn , more they want to stay in top as long as they can. And their glamour chicks have quite expensive taste. You just cant say to your beautiful 22.y.o. girlfriend : Darling, I`m 31, I dont want to make such a painful effort any more, play long matches day after day and practice like a madman and travel from hotel to hotel all year long. I want to retire and be a coach in tennis academy. Do we really need all these diamonds, luxury cars,beach house and Gucci-Prada crap ? Why cant we live peaceful life in village, drive Toyota Corolla and live from my coach salary ? We still have each other, that is all what matters...
cardio is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 02:51 PM   #78
country flag duong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,346
duong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

I totally agree with that :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Start da Game View Post
the upcoming players now are bringing nothing new to the fore........hence the veterans are finding it easy to keep them at their places and the young guns are unable to scalp the big fishes right away........
but I don't agree with that :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Start da Game View Post
simply because of the one dimensionality........you create an immediate impact and make your mark right away only when you are somewhat different from others........

even in the 80s and 90s, generally we had players with varied styles and hence it was easier for younger players to surprise the veterans with their variety and spring a surprise........for example chang sprung up in 89 and took everyone by surprise with his lightening speed, tricky low slices, slap forehands and clever passes........he had decent success for his height and whatever talent he possessed, the key was the variety that he brought to the game........

becker broke through in 85 and ran away with wimbledon........he brought that energy and vigor with him along with his tennis........something different to routine........
If I remember big emergences of very young players on tour :

- in the beginning of their carreers, Borg and Lendl had little variety, very limited on backhand ; Noah also had a limited backhand

- a little bit later, Arias, Krickstein had no variety, only big forehands : Bollettieri academy

- Agassi, Courier later still that academy by way, and also emerged very early by hitting very hard

- there was the time of the baseline players using a lot of spin : Carlsson, Perez-Roldan, Mancini, and many others ... not to mention Wilander or Nyström who had little variety when they emerged, even though they had more than the previous ones

- Becker emerged mostly thanks to his big serve at Wimbledon and indoors, not thanks to his variety which he developed a little bit later


All of these players were allowed to emerging thanks to a few shots, and despite their little variety.

But the problem is ... today it's not enough.


By the way, many insisted on the physical aspect, endurance and so on : I'm not sure it's a main factor, I rather see tactical/mental shortages which limit the youngsters when they play against older players.

In the 60s/70s, the game was less physical, and more tactical, technical and mental than in the end of the 70s and in the 80s/90s ... and players could play very well until very old and reached their best later than today (even than today).

Probably there's a matter of physical preparation, maybe playing less as well, anyway taking more care of their health, which allows players to stay fit later.

BUT .. I think the main aspect is tactical and mental, as Angle Queens mentioned in his double match against youngsters.

By the way I read something by Angle Queens about money : if I understand well, it means that top-50 players need to play less than in the past because they get more money. Please note that it's the opposite to what all the people who complain on the calendar say here usually.

This is possible : there was a time when even Lendl or Connors had a silly schedule, playing an incredible number of tournaments ... for money more than points actually (for instance there were WCT tournaments inside). I even read recently that Lendl had an incredible record of 3 tournaments won in 3 weeks ... on 3 different surfaces and even changing continent in that period !

Well, Lendl could play very well until quite late ... but here you can surely see the importance of physical preparation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by about challengers
This is an interesting point and very difficult to put numbers to (trust me, I've tried!). The reason being that it is dependant on what Challenger finish (e.g. Winner, finalist or semi-finalist) players get and the number of Challengers. For example, Challenger winners can quickly accumulate points, but frequent Challengers semi-finalists and quarter-finalists are finding it harder.
Believe me, on the mathematical point of view, I've studied it very precisely, there are one or two threads still left in this forum about that (maybve you've read them actually as what you mention is precisely one of the main things I said) :
you will find nothing special about the last change and on the mathematical point of view.

If you really want to find something, you have to watch on a longer run, and more important than the ranking points will be the composition of the tour, the number of tournaments in the calendar, and the number of tournaments played by players.

It's not only the points which have changed, it's the number/composition of tournaments (far far many more challengers than in the past), it's also ... the density of players at the top.

I mean : if the sport is very developed, you have more players on top ... and then it may be more difficult for youngsters to compete in those challengers and so on.

When you see the 70s, how many players came from the USA ? a big proportion of the best players. It's clear that the situation is completely different in that case : for the composition of the tour, for wild cards ... and also for the density of the Tour ... because one reason why so many of the top-players came from the USA is probably because tennis was not enough developed elsewhere.

I don't think you will find anything about mathematics ... but the composition of the tour itself is much more important.

About Tomic :

I think it's an interesting case, as I said he's very tall but he didn't chose a hitting very hard-bashing game :

it's interesting for his development as I think that later, with size and muscles, he could also develop that.

I mean many people compare him to Hewitt ... but what may be different for him is that he's so tall : he has a lot of further potential development there for the future (see Del Potro when he got some muscle how quickly he raised at this moment).

I mean it's interesting to follow his development : maybe he has a good combination, developing tactically/mentally first (even though he's far from perfect there), then hitting more when he has more muscles/power.

Quote:
think it has something to do with the changes made in Masters tournaments. The younger players are only used to playing best of 5 set matches in slams and best of 3 everywhere else. Before, players had to win best of 5 set matches in Masters tournaments.... seems to make them hardier.
it was only in the finals, then young players were not concerned by that
__________________
useless old guy
duong is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 04:16 PM   #79
country flag Start da Game
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,179
Start da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

If I remember big emergences of very young players on tour :

- in the beginning of their carreers, Borg and Lendl had little variety, very limited on backhand ; Noah also had a limited backhand


hence it took lendl 4 slam finals to win his first and 9 slam finals to finally win his second slam........he really had to master the art of grinding before he could take off and dominate in the mid-late 80s........borg and connors were simply too much of an advanced version of young lendl to allow lendl run away with slams in the early 80s........

as for borg, his topspin and amazing endurance levels itself was variety back then........just imagine, he owned someone like vilas.......

- a little bit later, Arias, Krickstein had no variety, only big forehands : Bollettieri academy

hence they haven't won anything really significant........were they even ever top 30 players? i don't know much about them anyway........

- Agassi, Courier later still that academy by way, and also emerged very early by hitting very hard

now this more of my territory........agassi brought with him the flashy returns and sharp reflexes, he also had an uncanny knack of taking the ball on the rise and spanking them for outright winners........something different to routine.......

- there was the time of the baseline players using a lot of spin : Carlsson, Perez-Roldan, Mancini, and many others ... not to mention Wilander or Nyström who had little variety when they emerged, even though they had more than the previous ones

once again, what are they(mancini, carlson etc.) compared to the real impact creators? i don't know if you are taking random top 100 players from history but i am just offering a viewpoint on why newcomers these days are unable to do something big straightaway unlike in the past........that somewhat translates to answering why the average age of top 100 is increasing which is the point of this thread........

few exceptions like wilander exist but doublehanders were rare back then too........

- Becker emerged mostly thanks to his big serve at Wimbledon and indoors, not thanks to his variety which he developed a little bit later

does variety come only with tennis? can't it happen through a player's personality? doesn't becker's energy and power oriented fiery approach translate to variety?
Start da Game is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 04:51 PM   #80
country flag duong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,346
duong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Start da Game View Post
- a little bit later, Arias, Krickstein had no variety, only big forehands : Bollettieri academy

hence they haven't won anything really significant........were they even ever top 30 players? i don't know much about them anyway........
Arias was in the top-10 at less than 19 years old, and in the top-5 at less than 20 years old. He didn't do better, you're right for this part

Krickstein was in the top-10 at 17 years old He still owns many records of precociousness. But he will have to wait for a long time to do better, after a dark period (he got number 6 at 22 years old)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Start da Game View Post
- there was the time of the baseline players using a lot of spin : Carlsson, Perez-Roldan, Mancini, and many others ... not to mention Wilander or Nyström who had little variety when they emerged, even though they had more than the previous ones

once again, what are they(mancini, carlson etc.) compared to the real impact creators? i don't know if you are taking random top 100 players from history but i am just offering a viewpoint on why newcomers these days are unable to do something big straightaway unlike in the past........that somewhat translates to answering why the average age of top 100 is increasing which is the point of this thread........
Carlsson has been number 6, Mancini number 8, Perez-Roldan number 13. I could have mentioned many others who had less good results (and even some who had the same like Tulasne who was top-10)

And the topic is top-100 then why concentrate only on Agassi or Nadal ?

Anyway, my examples are quite representative of some times : the time of the big forehands, the time of a lot of spin especially, the time of big serve in a lesser extent.

As for Borg and Becker, they are quite different : they emerged on the very-top winning slams with a limited game which was just enough to succeed :

- in the 1974 RG final against Orantes, Borg had a poor serve and backhand then played only with his forehand and his physical, beating Orantes by exhaustion (being led 2 sets to null, he won the final three sets 6/0 6/1 6/1 ... and I've read he hardly sweat )

- when Becker won Wimbledon 1985, he had a great serve but was still limited.

But both of them have in common that they developed their game quite quickly afterwards : it's especially why Borg won Wimbledon 1976 with a great volleying game, and why Becker reached RG semifinal in 1987.
__________________
useless old guy
duong is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 05:13 PM   #81
country flag Start da Game
Banned!
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 10,179
Start da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond reputeStart da Game has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

yeah i told you i don't know much about arias and krickstein but i don't think you got what i was implying........

And the topic is top-100 then why concentrate only on Agassi or Nadal ?

i took a case of a few breakthrough slam winners and showed you how it was relatively(compared to the modern day) easier to get to the top of ranking charts back in the 80s and 90s........doesn't that make a point for decrease of average age of overall top 100? a few breakthrough players like that would certainly decrease the average age because they would be replacing the older players.......no?
Start da Game is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 05:15 PM   #82
country flag LocoPorElTenis
Registered User
 
LocoPorElTenis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,507
LocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond reputeLocoPorElTenis has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Good thread. IMO, the main reason (of course already mentioned) is that due to the more physical nature of today's game players need to be fully developed in order to reach the top level.

Is longevity also increasing? How does the average retirement age(or age of dropping from the top 100) now compares with 10 or 20 years ago?
LocoPorElTenis is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 06:24 PM   #83
country flag GugaF1
Registered User
 
GugaF1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,127
GugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond reputeGugaF1 has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Good thread, but I see the exact opposite. I think that never has the new generation caused so much impact as now. You got Djokovic, JMDP, Cilic, Murray all GS contenders under or 24, some under 22. Even Nadal has been around for a while but he is not exact an older guy.

I think it is basically a good thing that the older guys are having better chances, because for a while it seems like getting into the 30 was a death sentence and tennis was becoming a youngters game. I can't seem to recall many guys into the 30ties doing well lately. So is good to see the Ferrreros, Ljubicic, Stepanek, Haas doing well lately.

But all in all, tennis can not really be considered a very generous sport for much of the older guys. So many sports Guys into the 30 and late 30 are able to reach their peak and be at the top of their game. While in Tennis late 30 is nearly game over professionaly. Problably because these guys all compete from so young already.
GugaF1 is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 06:34 PM   #84
country flag JMG
Registered User
 
JMG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,666
JMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond reputeJMG has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Maybe it is just harder for the younger players to reach the top 100 early, because in this generation the future and challenger tournaments are stronger than in the 90s, so it isn't easy to progress, if you are not a huge talent and it takes longer to reach the top 100. Koellerer for example said that these days in futures all players can play tennis, while that wasn't the case when he started his career.
JMG is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 07:25 PM   #85
country flag amirbachar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Age: 28
Posts: 567
amirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldenoldie View Post
I don't have any figures to back this up, it's just a gut feeling, so please feel free to shoot me down.

I think it has something to do with the change in the distribution of ranking points. Established players get higher points from slams and MS so one or two good performances keep them in the top 100. More difficult for new (=younger)players to break through playing lower ranked ATP and challengers.
There is some truth in that - for example today the smallest ATP tournaments (250) gives twice the points of the biggest challengers comparing to 1.75 times in 2008. The biggest ones are 4 comparing to just 3 in 2008, and Masters are 8 comparing to 5 in 2008.
That can't be the only explanation as older players did climb up the rankings.

We should remember that last year was a transition year, so player that had good results at the last part of 2008 was overrated up until the very end.

It might be very dangerous for the tour not to give a better chance of breaking through early. Some talented players might retire...

Last edited by amirbachar : 03-22-2010 at 07:33 PM.
amirbachar is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 08:04 PM   #86
country flag swisht4u
Registered User
 
swisht4u's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,366
swisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond reputeswisht4u has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

It seems the level of the game is very high taking more time to develop the endurance and skills needed for the youngsters.

On the other side is the older players. They know how to take care of their bodies and have all the latest supplements, training and smart scheduling to keep them going.
__________________

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXÈ


Federer

Del Potro

Gulbis

Janowicz
swisht4u is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 08:39 PM   #87
country flag amirbachar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Age: 28
Posts: 567
amirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond reputeamirbachar has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Quote:
Originally Posted by duong View Post
Believe me, on the mathematical point of view, I've studied it very precisely, there are one or two threads still left in this forum about that (maybve you've read them actually as what you mention is precisely one of the main things I said) :
you will find nothing special about the last change and on the mathematical point of view.
To prove it's not the case, I've made a simple mathematical model:
I assumed that in each round the probability of winning is the same, but it is different for ATP and challengers.
The question I've tested, is for each winning chance in challengers, what is the required probability in the smallest ATP to have the same points expectancy.
The result are that the required probability is now lower, which means it is easier to get the same amount of points in ATP tournaments that before.
The bigger ATP and Masters have even more significant results.

Here is the Excel file that demonstrate it:
http://www.2shared.com/file/12252478...mparisons.html
amirbachar is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 10:04 PM   #88
country flag duong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,346
duong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Quote:
Originally Posted by amirbachar View Post
To prove it's not the case, I've made a simple mathematical model:
I assumed that in each round the probability of winning is the same, but it is different for ATP and challengers.
The question I've tested, is for each winning chance in challengers, what is the required probability in the smallest ATP to have the same points expectancy.
The result are that the required probability is now lower, which means it is easier to get the same amount of points in ATP tournaments that before.
The bigger ATP and Masters have even more significant results.

Here is the Excel file that demonstrate it:
http://www.2shared.com/file/12252478...mparisons.html
yes there is something like gthat but it's a small effect : I had made a simulation how the rankings do change with the old and new system and the impact was small.

Moreover it's rather older than young players who succeed in challengers

The topic here is far more complicated.

I rather think that the person here above who says that the level of the challengers and futures is higher than before has a much much stronger point.
__________________
useless old guy
duong is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 10:23 PM   #89
country flag -Valhalla-
Mais Oui
 
-Valhalla-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Asgard
Posts: 779
-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute-Valhalla- has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Quote:
Originally Posted by duong View Post
I rather think that challengers are still advantaged in points comparing to main tour tournaments.
THIS.

And Duong, you make some excellent observations on the game, but is there any chance you can make your posts a little bit more concise? Tighten things up a bit? Thx
__________________
.. ..

"He who endures, conquers."
- Persius
-Valhalla- is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2010, 10:25 PM   #90
country flag duong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,346
duong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond reputeduong has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Age and Ranking - Why is the top 100 getting older?

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Valhalla- View Post
THIS.

And Duong, you make some excellent observations on the game, but is there any chance you can make your posts a little bit more concise? Tighten things up a bit? Thx
no chance (except this one)
__________________
useless old guy
duong is offline View My Blog!   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios