Discussion in 'Pro Match Results and Discussion' started by smoledman, Jan 24, 2013.
Thank you doctor House.
Thank you. That explains a lot. I'm in the camp of those who never thought he was faking.
Wrong again. He said he had allergies which caused the problem after he had his deviated septum fixed. It has nothing to do with gluten or your made up diagnosis of celiac disease.
Got some proof that he does?
That's one of the reasons even sampras lost 2 times due to back to back scheduling.
Only one who managed well was Federer, but you never know if he was on Ped to manage that feat!
Got some that he doesn't?
Get some proof that you don't have a squirrel in your head?
The burden of proof lies on those making the claim of the existence of something.
What about AO 2012, then? Murray almost got the better of Djokovic there.
He also said his nutritionist found he was allergic to gluten
You're the one who is claiming he has it so the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that he does. The problem is you have not one single thing that proves he does have it. You just keep spouting off nonsense with nothing to back it up and the gullibles are following your nonsense lock and step.
Lance does not, and has never had such a debilitating disease as celiac. He could not compete tirelessly at such a high level on a very demanding ATP tour if he did no matter if he ate gluten or not.
Really? How many times did Fed have to play the 2nd semi?
There is at least one year when Fed benefited from the scheduling fiasco big time: 2008. Not saying Murray would have won no matter what but he sure didn't have a chance after having to play 3 days in a row in dreadful conditions.
Djomur Will be close no doubt. I wonder if fed would be Able to turn the tide against novak at the AO. Probably not though if he beats murray i dont expect a straight set loss to novak
Anyway why is doping only fixated on Djocovic? Why not Federer who seems to have a great longevity or Nadal who had bulging biceps since he was 18
If I could get close to him and get samples, then possibly I can or not prove it. What do you want me to do, storm in his house and run diagnostic tests on him?
Because *******s and *******s are pissed about Djokovic's (relative) dominance.
Yeah because a nutritionist(fancy name for a dietician)is an expert gastroenterologist and can do any and all tests to prove he has such a debilitating disease. I honestly don't think you have a clue just exactly what celiac disease is or what it does to a person's body.
We're presented nothing but allegations and innuendo here, and unless someone has at least a tinny shred of evidence we should stick to the topic!
The key word is "almost". He also "almost" won in Shanghai. Translation: he lost. If Murray won AO, all credit to him. That win would be much more clearcut than the USO one imo and he would also overcome the 2nd slam after slam title curse, which would make it all the more remarkable. I am not the kind of person who doesn't give credit when credit is due.
I just told you what it is.
I think Fed atleast did 2 times. Phenomenal achievement IMO, but with big * mark how he managed to do so.
Its not like they didn't get a gastroenterologist to recheck.
I know, Djokovic deserved to win there, he was better. But my point is, Djokovic in 2012 > Djokovic in 2013. Murray in 2013 > Murray in 2012 (I'm guessing). So to think Murray doesn't have atleast a 30% chance of winning the match is weird.
Lol, were you there to happily collect the sample? You act as if you have seen all of Lance's medical records. You do not know if he saw a specialist or not, and since a dietician is not a doctor, they cannot make a diagnosis, or test him for celiac.
Not really. You act as if it's just a vitamin deficiency caused by eating gluten when it is a whole lot more than that.
Djokovic is not playing less well now than in 2012. If anything, he's playing better.
This is not an Olympic year.
Of course its a lot more that that, however the range of effects varies on people. Look I respect your opinion, I know what your trying to suggest, there is doping in tennis. But why only point the finger at Novak?
Um, no. Only in the Ferrer match did he look to be playing at that level. But okay.
What level? Are you talking about 2011 or 2012?? Novak didn't tear through his draw with bagels and breadsticks in AO 2012. He lost a set to Hewitt, played a very tight match against Ferrer, was super close to the loss against Murray and had to battle 6 hours to defeat Nadal. He's playing worse in 2013? Disagree.
I agree. This is my main reason for saying everybody is underrating Murray's chances, and/or overrating Djokovic's if they play. I would say Murray has gotten better since the 2012 AO and Djokovic at the very least hasn't gotten any better than he was then. At the end of the day though it will depend on the player's forms on match day.
Also why do you refer to him as Lance? As if your suggesting you know he's doping.
Not significantly worse but I'd say slightly so. Of course, he was God-moding against Ferrer but we'll see.
Seems like wishful thinking to me but, ok, we'll just have to agree to disagree. (and it's not just Ferrer, he destroyed Harrison as well and double breadstick Berd. 1 match with a slow start is not evidence of a difference with 2012. If anything he had more of those slow starts last year.)
That was a burn. :lol:
Let us all wait and see what happens in the final. Don't forget that Djokovic was the one who let Murray become a true member of the big four.
Roger and Rafa were very disappointed with Novak after that. :lol:
No, not wishful thinking at all, I don't do that. And really, I don't mind Djokovic winning the tournament, I do like him. My first preference would be Federer, seeing that he's my favorite player, but I know he is very unlikely to beat Djokovic on this surface (unless he brings his best service game of the tournament to the final, supposing he even makes it there). The only reason I prefer Murray winning over Djokovic is because Djokovic has 3 AOs already and 5 GSs in all and Murray could benefit from the confidence of winning his second.
hopefully fed can knock some sense back to murray, let him know he still doesnt belong in the group, after that he'll give a lesson to joker as well for screwing up :twisted:
the djokovic match today will have no bearing on a match-up with either federe or murray. he was always going to give ferrer a beat down. I think Murray and Djokovic would be incredibly close. I think Djokovic would overcome Federer in 3 or 4
In an eventual final between these two players, my money would be on Murray. Murray beat Djokovic at the USO and almost beat him at the AO last year. Murray lost at the AO because he choked. Now he is a slam winner by beating Djokovic at the USO to boot.
Djokovic would prefer to avoid Murray at all the slams, except for the FO. At the AO, USO and Wimbledon, the Serb will prefer to avoid Murray.
Please please not Novac.... I dont want to see the ape shirt ripping affair again argh ;-( It would be cool if Fed won & did the hairy Fed version for Djock haha
Well said mate. 8)
I would've agreed with the OP but after Djokovic smashed Ferrer to smithereens in the SF of the USO last year only to get crunched by Murray in the Finals, all bets are officially off. I don't care how good somebody looks in a prior match. Tomorrow is a whole different day.
Murray is no little 5'7" David Ferrer. :lol: The last 2 Slam matches between Djokovic and Murray have been thrillers, going the full 5 sets.
Separate names with a comma.