The Gorilla
Banned
Wimbledon is a hardcourt at it's fastest and on a hot day it plays like a claycourt, literally, so is there any distinction at all now between 'best hardcourt player' and 'best grass court player'?
The fault in this argument is that you are saying GOAT of grass, not GOAT of fast grass of the 80's or clay-like grass of now. Grass is grass, regardless of the speed. When you say that someone is the best at something and not specify, you can't really go back and then say what you meant. You are not comparing the players of now to the players before because it does not matter. Grass is grass.
Probably not, Fed did better in Australia by not losing a set, the people that pushed him at Wimbledon this year by taking sets off of him have been dubbed "clay court specialists" in the past. Funny how that works.
I certainly can't comment on the details of each surface for I had not kept up with it in detail for the last few years, but I always thought and believed strongly that the four Grand Slams should represent the different surfaces of play in their original form, as close as can be to allow a tournament to be played upon them for a fortnight.
Well, if we want the Grand Slams to represent their "original form", Australia and USO would go back to grass, and only Roland Garros would be different. Heck, the French was probably originally played on grass too.
Yes, and I know that, and more specifically I should have put in 'modern' form, so yes, crucify me if that is your wish and intention. *whirls and falls to the ground shot!* but my point is still the same. According to history almost all tennis was played on grass 'courts' but then we would go back to using our hands if being totally original. Sorry for the faux pas in not exactly dating original.
Don't get your panties in a wad. I wasn't trying to "crucify" you, just pointing out to everyone that until relatively recently, AO and USO were grass too. The larger point implied by mention of this is that surfaces are always changing. In fact, didn't AO just announce that they are abandoning rebound ace next year?
What last I said I wasn't even responding to you at all, but if you chose to take what I said personally, that's you.What I said was in response to Sondraj's post. Hadn't read yours at all. I remember your other posts elsewhere.
I said the post I was responding to even if I didn't click a quote link to paste it. I was responding to Sondraj at that time, as I said. None other. The next one down the thread, because I read again, before I post. You responded back to me after that. I had read what you wrote in the interim, but needed to say nothing more to you. I responded to someone else further down that made more sense to me. Accept it. If you don't want to, again, that's your choice.
You've followed me before, misquoting or either taking personally what I've said even if I wasn't speaking directly to you. I don't understand the reason, as I am not so special.
Its not confusing because I read your remarks, but found no reason to respond to them after a point (whatever point you chose to believe or that makes you feel better), or irrelevant rhetoric I had already responded to. Verstehen sie? Do you understand this time? I hope so, because juvenile one upsmanship has never been of interest to me.
^
This is basically even more confusing gobbly gook... Look: Anyone who's following this thread can see clearly that you made a post about surfaces, I quoted you and responded to your point, then you quoted me and responded to my point, and so on.
It's pretty simple. Really don't know what you're yammering on and on about. Maybe someone else in this thread can set this guy straight on this issue, or maybe teach him to use the quote feature properly? I don't know what the problem is.
DE is way cool, I was just in Rehoboth for a few days, I think I came back yesterday or the day before. I am losing track...
Definitely. Beach towns in DE are wonderful, if my dim memory of a trip to Rehobeth as a child is accurate.