Generation N?
101 - 120 of 248 Posts
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
I did answer your questions. Which part didn't you like?
I also messed up thinking that ys had said 22, with something that somebody else had said, that was still totally unrealted to what TBE said. Regardless, my bad
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
"I did answer your questions" is your typical response to a question.Rebecca said:
You did it again.
You people are a bunch of lying hypocrites.
Before the Williamses started dominated Women's tennis, it was a consensus that rivalries makes tennis exciting, but since the WTA has produced a rivalry of two people you guys don't like, all of a sudden, " two people dominating is boring for tennis."
I actually think it's cool to see two people at the top dominating. Rivalries makes tennis exciting!
With regard to the topic at hand. I agree with Y_S (what does that stand for?) The leading players on the ATP are the Generation of Nobodies. They differ from the '90s set in talent. None of the guys have the talent of Agassi, or Sampras...case in point, both these guys beat them with regularity, and are still on top...and are old.
At this stage in their careers, which players from the previous generation beat up on Andre and Pete? I rest my case.
Before the Williamses started dominated Women's tennis, it was a consensus that rivalries makes tennis exciting, but since the WTA has produced a rivalry of two people you guys don't like, all of a sudden, " two people dominating is boring for tennis."
I actually think it's cool to see two people at the top dominating. Rivalries makes tennis exciting!
With regard to the topic at hand. I agree with Y_S (what does that stand for?) The leading players on the ATP are the Generation of Nobodies. They differ from the '90s set in talent. None of the guys have the talent of Agassi, or Sampras...case in point, both these guys beat them with regularity, and are still on top...and are old.
At this stage in their careers, which players from the previous generation beat up on Andre and Pete? I rest my case.
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
Head to Heads:
Agassi vs:
Hewitt 3-4
Ferrero 1-2
Grosjean 3-2
Pete vs:
Hewitt 4-5
Safin 3-4
Roddick 1-2
Federer 0-1
Haas 5-3 (4 of Petes victories came in 1998 and before)
None of the young guys can beat them regularly?
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
2 people dominating would be somewhat exciting, if they produced matches that were worthy of a rivalry.
Speaking of lying, I hope that you check out the stats that I posted before this
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
Becca, you read the message wrong.Rebecca said:
It was asked of the generation previous to Sampras-Agassi (ie McEnroe-Lendl-Connors generation beat up on a young Sampras and Agassi?)
Somehow I feel you're going to pull a USO '91 Krickstein v Connors stat...
I'm still waiting for your view of the situation without a question/question answer...
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
Yeah, like I don't see your UserName posted all over the WTA World board cheering when Serena or Venus wins...Rebecca said:
I'm beginning to think you don't have any opinion--you just go with the flow and like to argue just for the sake of it.
Prove me wrong (no question/question answer now
)
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
I have no idea what you are talking about. Elaborate.
Your entitled to your opinion, and I certaintly couldn't care less what it was.
This is the internet - I say what I want, when I want, and if some internet "tard" doesn't like it, too bad
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
Was this supposed to be amusing?
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
I didn't read the entire message wrong.....
Nan Cu wrote:
As far as I can tell, this poster is saying that Pete and Andre are old, but still able to beat up on the young players of today.
The second point adresses the previous generation, which I didn't actually realise - which seems kind of out of place with the rest of the post, but whatever.
I felt that the first part was misleading, so I provided stats, and those are still relevant - regardless of me misreading the last sentence.
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
You don't like it, Becca?Rebecca said:I say what I want, when I want, and if some internet "tard" doesn't like it, too bad
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
Once again, you cease from making any sense whatsoever.
Do you actually want to discuss tennis, or do you want to have petty personal debates?
I will not have the latter with you.
Do you actually want to discuss tennis, or do you want to have petty personal debates?
I will not have the latter with you.
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
No, just the relevant part...Rebecca said:
Yes, they are relevantly WRONG.
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
Actually Tennis Fool, my stats were totally correct and relevant.
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
Only in your mind, BeccaRebecca said:
But not to the argument stated at hand.
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
They were entirely relevant to the topic at hand.
Just because you have a childish personal vendetta against the internet poster known as "Rebecca", doesn't change the fact that you are looking very foolish by denying that.
Just because you have a childish personal vendetta against the internet poster known as "Rebecca", doesn't change the fact that you are looking very foolish by denying that.
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
I am. You just don't want to hear that you read the message wrong and provided wrong stats.Rebecca said:
Thus you are getting angry and flustered.
Joined
·
8,760 Posts
What are you smoking?Rebecca said:
Joined
·
27,997 Posts
Is that all your could come up with?
101 - 120 of 248 Posts
