Originally Posted by krosero
I'm sure you know this, Ben-Hur, but that argument you quoted from Fabrice Leroy was withdrawn by Fabrice himself two years ago:
I mean, I would feel at least self-conscious about arguing with someone who 1) withdrew his argument and 2) may not even be listening. I would think it would look like grandstanding.
Sure, people still make Fabrice's argument. But I would quote them, in their current threads, for a real argument. Or start a new thread with your observations about the 84F final. The problem is not with your arguments, it's just that this whole business about being able to resurrect threads long after they're dead strikes me as problematic. But I've already said why above. It just strikes me as strange when people get all up in arms against others who are not even there.
I think other boards have rules about not responding to threads after 60 days.
Well, after this thread was resurected a few days ago, I skimmed through it a bit but didn't actually see that post from Fabrice Leroy, or at least don't remember it. But in any case, he is withdrawing the notion that this match should count as a McEnroe victory of sorts. What I was addressing in my last post is the idea that Mcenroe outplayed Lendl in the third, or for that matter in any of the last three sets. This is I think a common misperception, not borne out by watching the match, as I explained. The third and fourth were very close, and in the fifth I think Lendl played better than McEnroe.