PDA

View Full Version : Is James Blake the male Chanda Rubin?


BeautyVenus
06-18-2006, 10:55 PM
Chanda Rubin just like Blake reached the top 10 won some tier II and tier III titles and once in a while beat the top players. Chanda also reached the Australian Open semifinals ten years ago. Blake like Rubin was credited by the American media for being "nice" and "articulate" and not "brash" or "arrogant."
Yet Blake and Rubin share another quality they didn't really believe in themselves nor did they believe they could be grand slam champions. It wasn't because they didn't have the talent it was because they didn't have the mental belief. Rubin didn't believe she had the stuff like Venus or Serena.

Now ten years later the US media are hyping another African American James Blake. Since Roddick seems to be fading the US press are gathering the hpes on Blake.

Bones08
06-18-2006, 11:33 PM
i DON'T KNOW. BUT THE AMERICAN PUBLIC FOR THE MOST DOES LIKE BOTH OF THEM. CHANDA IS JUST, A REALLY GREAT PERSON. I THINK SHE HAD THE BELIEF, I JUST THINK SHE'S RAN UP AGAINST SOME REALLY GOOD PLAYERS IN HER SLAMS THAT SHE WENT FAR IN. THE AUSSIE OPEN MATCH WITH HER AND SANCHEZ VICARION AND THE ONE WITH MONICA SELES ARE MASTERPIECES. LET'S NOT FORGET ONE OF THE BEST MATCHES EVER WITH NOVOTNA, WHERE SHE WAS DOWN 6-0, 5-0!

lucky leprechaun
06-19-2006, 12:35 AM
james blake and chanda rubin are nice and articulate and not brash good people yada yada yada :rolleyes: post number 23423, I'd like to see a black john mcenroe come out for once.

Viper
06-19-2006, 12:42 AM
I'd like to see a McEnroe come out of Federer. Come on Fed, for old time sakes!

Bones08
06-19-2006, 02:00 AM
james blake and chanda rubin are nice and articulate and not brash good people yada yada yada :rolleyes: post number 23423, I'd like to see a black john mcenroe come out for once.

And they would get hell by the public!

superman1
06-19-2006, 03:01 AM
It would actually be fun to see an aggressive personality in tennis. Just to see how it would influence his game. Everyone is the same these days, they speak almost exactly the same.

alienhamster
06-19-2006, 03:11 AM
Hmm, maybe he IS a male Chanda Rubin.

Notice how we've never seen both of them at the same place and the same time . . . .

HyperHorse
06-19-2006, 06:16 AM
no, he aint...
i disagree with what everyone has said in this thread...
having said that, it would be nice to see some aggro in the press
conferences.... see a guy go against the grain...
that might be me, but im not on the pro tour...
so keep dreaming...
*sigh*

Rhino
06-19-2006, 06:44 AM
no blake is half English.
he's the male Virginia Wade

BabolatFan
06-19-2006, 07:09 AM
I'd like to see a McEnroe come out of Federer. Come on Fed, for old time sakes!

Yeah I was gonna say the same thing.

simi
06-19-2006, 09:25 AM
Racism has no place in sports, tennis, or the world in general. This thread has racial undertones.

vkartikv
06-19-2006, 09:29 AM
From your sarcastic user name and your opinion of the press 'hyping up' Blake, it seems like you need to look to the black and white cookie for harmony.

Ronaldo
06-19-2006, 09:31 AM
Wonder why no one mentioned the injuries that shortened Rubin's career and nearly ended Blake's? Ok, like we NEVER heard the war stories, eh?

Cavaleer
06-19-2006, 10:04 AM
First of all, other than a vague similarity of skin-tone and injuries, I see no similarities between Blake and Rubin, on or off the court. The fact that this thread exists merely reflects how color-struck most Americans are. It's funny to me. (chuckle)

Second, Blake is actually a British-American while Rubin is strictly American, unless her parents are from an African country but with a last name like Rubin I don't believe they are.

Second, Rubin never had the physical tools Blake has. She was talented but I honestly believe she made the most or almost the most of what she had. She never showed a Serena or Capriati or Davenport-like ability to dominate with her shots.

But while she may not have the raw talent of Blake, her game was much more polished and mature than Blake's is now.

I think the more accurate comparison would be between Justin Gimelstob and Rubin- good players, likeable people, who worked hard and made the most of their abilities. Or maybe Rubin and Chang-- both undersized, hardworkers who made the most of their ability. Granted, Chang had more success but I'd say the comparison with him and Rubin is closer than Rubin and Blake.

Blake doesn't really have a female comparison, at least not an American, that comes to mind. None of those Stanford NCAA champions ever panned out in the pros.

The media, Nike especially, are making the most of Blake because he's the only American making any noise on the tour, which reflects the current sad state of American tennis.


Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-19-2006, 10:10 AM
no blake is half English.
he's the male Virginia Wade


There you go! LOL.



Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-19-2006, 10:50 AM
Racism has no place in sports, tennis, or the world in general. This thread has racial undertones.


Not racial undertones, skin-color undertones (pun not intended but accepted).

Americans have been trained to be color-struck and to base their identity on skin-color. Notice how Americans say "What are you?" The question doesn't ask for ancestry or educational or regional background, just skin-tone.

Where else in the world is the most superficial aspect of a person the basis of their identity?

Furthermore, there's so such thing as race. It was invented in the 1700 and 1800s especially.

Thus, there's no such thing as a racist, only skin-colorists. LOL. Funny and true.

It shows how irrational the entire notion is, whether you call yourself "white", "black" or "bi-racial", or whatever else.



Cavaleer

BeautyVenus
06-19-2006, 12:46 PM
Blake and Rubin are very self conscious about colour. They try so hard to impress white people because they don't want to give off the "wrong" image. Its hard to respect people that care so much about what the white media or what Mary Gorilla and John "white trash" McEnroe think. He's not very mentally strong and he seems to have a propensity to try to impress his white peers. At the Miami Event he said Andy Roddick is "still the top American." After losing to Agassi at the US OPEN last year he said "it was fun to lose."

scoot
06-19-2006, 12:55 PM
Thats right, child. Neither of them are "true" blacks. They are sell-outs. By assimilating themselves into the white agenda & this is why they never acheived anything great.

kaiotic
06-20-2006, 07:25 PM
Racism has no place in sports, tennis, or the world in general. This thread has racial undertones. Thanks, Arthur Ashe.

Phil
06-20-2006, 09:06 PM
Where else in the world is the most superficial aspect of a person the basis of their identity?


Cavaleer

Where else in the world? Try India, the Middle East, Central and South America, Europe, etc., etc....

Here...Go buy yourself a clue (http://www.islc.net/~ccronan/images/$5%20US%20Note%20Obverse.jpg).

tursafinov
06-20-2006, 10:12 PM
From your sarcastic user name and your opinion of the press 'hyping up' Blake, it seems like you need to look to the black and white cookie for harmony.
I Just had to mention my fond childhood nostalgia at the mention of the black and white cookie. I used to eat one at my grandmothers' kitchen table in Paramus, New Jersey with a glass milk and decide wich side to eat first. Those times are gone now and i smiled tonight because of that comment.

as for Blake a...a hooray for black people and their accomplishments in a sport that is traditionally noted as being WASPy. There is no racial undertone to this post or any other. if you think so; i call you a drama queen.

BeautyVenus
06-20-2006, 11:16 PM
Actually Blake is nothing to cheer about he has a loser attitude and I doubt he will ever win a major. Now Monfils is the future although he's not American he's a lot tougher than Blake. After all Blake has an 0-8 record in 5 set matches.

superman1
06-20-2006, 11:20 PM
So Americans are color struck. How ridiculous. If anything, people in America are more accepting of diversity than almost anywhere else.

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 10:32 AM
Where else in the world? Try India, the Middle East, Central and South America, Europe, etc., etc....

Here...Go buy yourself a clue (http://www.islc.net/~ccronan/images/$5%20US%20Note%20Obverse.jpg).


You speak superficially.

Clearly, in the Caribbean or Brazil for instance, the ways to describe a person's skin-tone are vast. In India, much of the culture is centered around skin-tone issues.

But these situations, along with the obvious and somewhat silly reference to old Abe, is not my point.

In each of the countries you listed or to which you referred, their are clear differences and undertones of skin-shade.

But in none of those countries is the identity and consciousness of the people something other than their nationality. In Brazil or India, people do not call themselves a "black man in Brazil" or a "black man in India" the way many Americans refer to themselves, or as a member of the "white race" as other Americans have and perhaps continue to do. In Brazil, they call themselves Brazilian whether their skin is alabaster or ebony or somewhere in between.

In Europe, you're dealing with immigrants of one form or another, not with people who've been in the country since before the country was even a country.

You sound like you know little of the world and history, except for appearances, despite your Hall of Fame status on TW's message board. You need to know more if you want to joust with me, brother. ;)


Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 10:41 AM
So Americans are color struck. How ridiculous. If anything, people in America are more accepting of diversity than almost anywhere else.

Yes, some Americans have been very accepting of diversity, beginning with the Americans who accepted and assisted the refugee boat people from England in the early 1600s.

But until the last 30 years or so, many more Americans have always been very fearful and weary of foreigners, whether in Thomas Jefferson's day when many politicians and shot-callers opposed the mass immigration of illegal Europeans, or this more recent absurdity over so-called illegal Mexican immigrants. This nation was founded by illegal immigrants, some voluntary, some forced.

You need to study more history before you reply, despite your Hall of Fame status.

But none of this is my point. The only reason this thread was started in the first place is because of the vague similarity of skin-tone between Blake and Rubin. Other than this they have nothing in common, on or off the court.

In fact, Rubin, has more in common with Michael Chang than James Blake, who by the way is the son of an immigrant and a native American, not a "black man", as many people would say.


Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 10:47 AM
I Just had to mention my fond childhood nostalgia at the mention of the black and white cookie. I used to eat one at my grandmothers' kitchen table in Paramus, New Jersey with a glass milk and decide wich side to eat first. Those times are gone now and i smiled tonight because of that comment.

as for Blake a...a hooray for black people and their accomplishments in a sport that is traditionally noted as being WASPy. There is no racial undertone to this post or any other. if you think so; i call you a drama queen.


I, too, don't think there are "racial" underytones in this thread because race is a myth, an invention. I think skin-tone is a subtle undertone behind the whole comparison of Rubin and Blake because otherwise they have nothing in common.

But what Blake is doing is noteworthy only for him and his family. This whole "black people" foolishness is just that.

Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 10:54 AM
Blake and Rubin are very self conscious about colour. They try so hard to impress white people because they don't want to give off the "wrong" image. Its hard to respect people that care so much about what the white media or what Mary Gorilla and John "white trash" McEnroe think. He's not very mentally strong and he seems to have a propensity to try to impress his white peers. At the Miami Event he said Andy Roddick is "still the top American." After losing to Agassi at the US OPEN last year he said "it was fun to lose."


How do you know what they try to do to impress anyone? Do you know them personally?

I think Blake is just very, very modest and almost painfully polite, which to me speaks to his British heritage and mother. He reminds me of Tim Henman in that respect. I think this "niceness" has been and will continue to be his undoing on the tour.

Blake needs to spend some time with some football and basketball players and learn some good old-fashioned American bravado and fearlessness, no?

He probably said that about Roddick because he hasn't beaten Roddick. Until you beat someone how could you call yourself better or higher than they?

Rubin was gutsy and courteous but I've never seen or heard anything obsequious or received the impression she was trying to impress "white people", whoever that is.

You're a funny poster. Where do you come up with this stuff?

LOL.



Cavaleer

tennissavy
06-21-2006, 11:25 AM
Chanda Rubin accomplished a lot more than James Blake. Just look up their accomplishments. Chanda has had a career which has been SUPERIOR to James Blake. He is so over-hyped it is absurd.

Rhino
06-21-2006, 11:39 AM
I have a funny feeling that many future threads started by BeautyVenus will turn into race rants.
And it won't be a coincidence.

Shabazza
06-21-2006, 12:00 PM
I have a funny feeling that many future threads started by BeautyVenus will turn into race rants.
And it won't be a coincidence.
BeautyVenus posts are always about skin color and supposedly appropriate behavior of black people etc. - saying "being nice" isn't "black-like" and a way to impress white people is just plain stupid.
He's so shallow and full of prejudices it's kind of funny, if it wasn't so sad.
You can't take him seriously!!

Kaptain Karl
06-21-2006, 12:50 PM
... recent absurdity over so-called illegal Mexican immigrants. This nation was founded by illegal immigrants, some voluntary, some forced.What a truck load of ... fertilizer!

"Founded by illegal immigrants?" Good grief!

- KK

Phil
06-21-2006, 06:52 PM
You speak superficially.

Clearly, in the Caribbean or Brazil for instance, the ways to describe a person's skin-tone are vast. In India, much of the culture is centered around skin-tone issues.

But these situations, along with the obvious and somewhat silly reference to old Abe, is not my point.

In each of the countries you listed or to which you referred, their are clear differences and undertones of skin-shade.

But in none of those countries is the identity and consciousness of the people something other than their nationality. In Brazil or India, people do not call themselves a "black man in Brazil" or a "black man in India" the way many Americans refer to themselves, or as a member of the "white race" as other Americans have and perhaps continue to do. In Brazil, they call themselves Brazilian whether their skin is alabaster or ebony or somewhere in between.

In Europe, you're dealing with immigrants of one form or another, not with people who've been in the country since before the country was even a country.

You sound like you know little of the world and history, except for appearances, despite your Hall of Fame status on TW's message board. You need to know more if you want to joust with me, brother. ;)


Cavaleer

Funny, doesn't feel like a "joust" to me...more like a schooling...and you're the unwilling "pupil". What you said above is a bunch of nonsensical babble. Race (or color, if you will) is not only an issue in the countries I named, it is what DEFINES people in those countries, just as, you claim, it does in America. Only...more so. In THOSE countries, color not only defines, but it determines what opportunities one will have in such societies. In Brazil, India or anywhere in Europe, people of a darker shade of hue, or whatever stupid term YOU use, are MUCH more limited in career, housing and OTHER opportunities than are their lighter countrymen. If you don't think Brazilians see color, than you're just plain dumb (and pathetically naive to boot).
Your "knowledge" of the world and history...well, I don't have to do a "mine's bigger than yours" spiel 'cause, well, it's obvious that you're an ignoramous...on every subject. The fact that you had to make such a statement indicates your, ahhh...inadequacies in those departments (and others). Get a book, read it. Then, take my advice and BUY YOURSELF a clue...how to form logical, cogent arguments. Right now, "brother", you are sadly lacking.

Your comment in another post about the US being founded by "Illegal" immigrants? I'm curious. Where ARE you from? My guess is you live on a beach, with your head in the sand (or up your rear end). Some people are so clueless that all I can do is shake my head and laugh. And I'm laughing at you. Right now.

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 07:55 PM
Funny, doesn't feel like a "joust" to me...more like a schooling...and you're the unwilling "pupil". What you said above is a bunch of nonsensical babble. Race (or color, if you will) is not only an issue in the countries I named, it is what DEFINES people in those countries, just as, you claim, it does in America. Only...more so. In THOSE countries, color not only defines, but it determines what opportunities one will have in such societies. In Brazil, India or anywhere in Europe, people of a darker shade of hue, or whatever stupid term YOU use, are MUCH more limited in career, housing and OTHER opportunities than are their lighter countrymen. If you don't think Brazilians see color, than you're just plain dumb (and pathetically naive to boot).
Your "knowledge" of the world and history...well, I don't have to do a "mine's bigger than yours" spiel 'cause, well, it's obvious that you're an ignoramous...on every subject. The fact that you had to make such a statement indicates your, ahhh...inadequacies in those departments (and others). Get a book, read it. Then, take my advice and BUY YOURSELF a clue...how to form logical, cogent arguments. Right now, "brother", you are sadly lacking.

Your comment in another post about the US being founded by "Illegal" immigrants? I'm curious. Where ARE you from? My guess is you live on a beach, with your head in the sand (or up your rear end). Some people are so clueless that all I can do is shake my head and laugh. And I'm laughing at you. Right now.


100% pure bred American, my friend, for the last 400+ years. LOL.

But you still don't understand my point. I don't and didn't disagree with you about biases based on shade of skin. The same biases have existed for different reasons, some equally absurd others more substantial, in most cultures around the globe.

Identity, consciousness is an entirely different issue. You don't seem able to grasp the subtleties since this is the third or fourth post where I've stated the same points.


Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 08:12 PM
What a truck load of ... fertilizer!

"Founded by illegal immigrants?" Good grief!

- KK


What else would you call them, the Pilgrims and those who immediately followed them? What do we call Haitians, Cubans etc. etc. who are trying to leave their countries to reach these shores any way they can for what they think will be a better life? The others brought to these shores in the early days of this country came in chains as forced labor, from African and the British Isles. The truth ain't pretty and that's why most people don't like it. But it's still the truth.

I refer you to the book "Redneck Manifesto" if you doubt me.

For the record, however, many Amerindians of the time, the Huron especially thought of the Pilgrims and other European immigrants what we think of "boat people" today.

You may not like the perspective or the connotations but the reality was what it was.

There's far too much romanticism about history and the history of this country in particular. Call it what it was.

The ancient Romans still preserved the hut that Romulus supposedly lived in even when Rome dominated Europe and the mediterranean. No illusions or Romanticism their. They knew what they came from and didn't try to sugar-coat it.

What history books do you read?

Immigrant life in those days was what it was- ugly, dangerous, desperate and harsh- just like it sometimes is today, whether in American or among Eastern Europeans trying to reach the West.

There was nothing romantic or grand about life in 1600 England, for the Pilgrims or the authorities who jailed, tortured and eventually kicked them out of the country. The Pilgrims were outlawed in two countries, my friend. But their extremist brand of Christianity wasn't why they were booted out of England. Treason, or as they called it "sedition" was the nail in the Pilgrims' coffin.

For more on the Pilgrims, the full, un-sugar-coated story, I refer you to Simon Worrall's "Pilgrims: The True Story of the Englishmen Who Founded America."

I believe in calling a spade a spade. I don't sugarcoat it, then or now. I call it what it is. Jefferson, Washington and the other Founding Fathers certainly did. They kept a healthy distance between themselves, the government they created and the first English immigrants, as much as they could of course, which if compared to our distance today was next to nothing.

But as is often the case, something that starts one way can easily turn into something entirely different. The Pilgrims would in no way recognize the shores they landed on today or the people who are their theoretical descendants.

I think this is the most tangential, off-topic thread I've ever seen. LOL.


Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 08:13 PM
Chanda Rubin accomplished a lot more than James Blake. Just look up their accomplishments. Chanda has had a career which has been SUPERIOR to James Blake. He is so over-hyped it is absurd.


I totally agree, which was why I compared her to Chang. Blake has a long way to go to equal her achievements.


Cavaleer

Cavaleer
06-21-2006, 08:16 PM
BeautyVenus posts are always about skin color and supposedly appropriate behavior of black people etc. - saying "being nice" isn't "black-like" and a way to impress white people is just plain stupid.
He's so shallow and full of prejudices it's kind of funny, if it wasn't so sad.
You can't take him seriously!!


Thanks for the heads up. LOL.

Ronaldo
06-21-2006, 09:41 PM
I totally agree, which was why I compared her to Chang. Blake has a long way to go to equal her achievements.


Cavaleer

A long way to go but a short time to get there

Kaptain Karl
06-21-2006, 11:56 PM
What else would you call them, the Pilgrims and those who immediately followed them?How about "Pilgrims" ... and explorers, settlers and pioneers?

The truth ain't pretty and that's why most people don't like it. But it's still the truth.If you are still asserting the Europeans who settled here in the 1500s and 1600s were "illegal immigrants," it still isn't true.

I refer you to the book "Redneck Manifesto" if you doubt me.Goad is whacked ... and you are too, if you consider his book to be ... authoritative.

... many Amerindians of the time, the Huron especially thought of the Pilgrims and other European immigrants what we think of "boat people" today.There is so much wrong with this, I'll only address the most obvious:
1 - "Amerindians"??? When did they call themselves that? (Hint: They didn't.)
2 - Since the Indians didn't conceive of "land ownership" and didn't have national governments, your claim is ridiculous. We perceived the Boat People as coming illegally to our sovereign country. HUGE difference.

I believe in calling a spade a spade.You need your some or all of the following checked: Vision, Hearing, Reading Comprehension.

- KK

Phil
06-22-2006, 12:07 AM
100% pure bred American, my friend, for the last 400+ years. LOL.

But you still don't understand my point. I don't and didn't disagree with you about biases based on shade of skin. The same biases have existed for different reasons, some equally absurd others more substantial, in most cultures around the globe.

Identity, consciousness is an entirely different issue. You don't seem able to grasp the subtleties since this is the third or fourth post where I've stated the same points.


Cavaleer

I understand your point, but in the context of race "relations"-how people are perceived and treated due to their skin color, it's a "minor" point, and it's not even correct. How can you, as a "400-plus" year old American determine what you think is the consciousness of dark skinned and light skinned people. How one is treated is part of "consciousness"-believe me, Brazilian blacks and Indian dark-skinned "untouchables" carry around with them a color-consciousness, because they are reminded, every day, what color they are. You just don't read about it or know about it, as you would blacks and other people of color in the USA.

superman1
06-22-2006, 12:17 AM
Indian "untouchables," which is a bad word among most Indians, are too busy living and surviving in their huts and villages to worry about their color. In some places you accept the hand you are dealt or you die. Most Indians are equally dark skinned anyway.

Phil
06-22-2006, 12:38 AM
Indian "untouchables," which is a bad word among most Indians, are too busy living and surviving in their huts and villages to worry about their color. In some places you accept the hand you are dealt or you die. Most Indians are equally dark skinned anyway.

What is the "acceptable" term to use, then?