Novak Djokovic v Stanislas Wawrinka AO 2013

[tudwell]

The best thing about Djokovic surviving this match is that we probably won't see Ferrer reach the final (which is probably what would've happened with Djokovic out of the draw). What a boring slam final that would've been, regardless of who made it from the other half.

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

Originally Posted by Dragan

You are pathetic.

Agreed. The best place to put him is on the ignore list, along with the rest of his multiple accounts.

I think Berdych will give Djokovic a lot of trouble in the QF.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Achilles82

You're the one who is whining you dummy.

Wawrinka is the one who should be playing Berdych in the quarters and you know it. If you were honest, you'd admit you are happy with the call being wrong. Why? Because you are a Djotard. But you're not honest, and you're the one in denial. Anyway, does it matter? Your guy went forward even though he lost. Be happy. He might even win the tournament now, thanks to the linesjudge. Maybe he should give some cheese

Wawrinka won the match. Djokovic goes forward. We're both happy.

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by kpktennis

Kind of chuckled when I read this, weren't you the guy who was in denial about Lance Armstrong doping, even after he came out to the world and said he did?

Sure is. Denial and failure to see the obvious seems to be an epidemic with some people around here.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

He did. Only the scoreboard didn't count it as a match point because of a bad call from earlier.

Djokovic won, Wawrinka lost. Suck it up and deal with it.

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by Dragan

You are pathetic.

Prove me wrong instead of just insulting me. Everything I said about micro dosing EPO is FACT. Educate yourself before you open up your gob about that which you know nothing about.

And please tell me why Cvac would be so against a biological passport if he has nothing to hide?

[kpktennis]

Originally Posted by Dragan

You are pathetic.

Agreed, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Just because there are a few sports with a rampant culture of all types of PEDs doesn't mean its the same for tennis or all sports.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Djokovic won, Wawrinka lost. Suck it up and deal with it.

No. Wawrinka won. Djokovic goes forward. You suck it up. And you deal with it. Why do you care, anyway? Djokovic is going forward. That's all that should matter to you guys. Whether or not he deserved to is irrelevant.

[tudwell]

So what happened in the second set? I only saw the fifth. Did Wawrinka completely choke after being up a break? Or did Djokovic play his usual impenetrable defense to claw his way back? A two sets lead would've made a huge difference for Wawrinka.

[killerboi2]

Didn't expect Wawrinka to take Djokovic to 5. Suppose he can consider himself unlucky not to have won after that dodgy line call. I knew Djokovic would simply outlast the guy, when it was something stupid like 8-8 in the 5th. Djokovic normally always wins those type of matches.

[davced1]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

But they don't want to catch these guys. If they did then they would have the biological passport and do blood tests religiously.

I know that. I just don't like how tennis changed in the last couple of years. It used to be more of a skill sport but is now all about retrieving balls and stamina. The defensive player is at a great advantage in todays game. It's no coincidence, doping or not that four out of the top five have similar playing styles (Djokovic, Murray, Nadal, Ferrer, they are great at chasing down balls and are able to hit strong shots when pushed out wide), and only one shotmaker (Federer)

[lvuong]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

He did. Only the scoreboard didn't count it as a match point because of a bad call from earlier.

Thanks. You have a great imagination, but I will go by the official score.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by kpktennis

Kind of chuckled when I read this, weren't you the guy who was in denial about Lance Armstrong doping, even after he came out to the world and said he did?

My point was always that that the process was unsafe, with all the plea bargaining that goes on. I stand by that view. Plea bargaining opens up the system to blackmail, and thus corruption. I'm asking myself what Armstrong had to gain from confessing to taking PEDs to Oprah on TV, and why some people are still accusing him of lying.

[powerangle]

Originally Posted by Prisoner of Birth

No. Wawrinka won. Djokovic goes forward. You suck it up. And you deal with it. Why do you care, anyway? Djokovic is going forward. That's all that should matter to you guys. Whether or not he deserved to is irrelevant.

What? No reply to my post from earlier? You conceding that you don't know for sure that Stan would have won?

Originally Posted by powerangle

Even if Stan challenged the call, the point would have been replayed as Novak had a play on the ball. It didn't automatically mean it would have been 5-4 to Stan. It would have just been ad-Stan, and replay the point. And going by how Stan made some pretty bad UE's on several big points, there is no guarantee he would have won the next point to hold his serve.

Yes, it COULD have changed the result of the match, but you don't know for sure.

And you must know nothing about tennis if you assume Stan would have served out the match (and this is assuming Stan wins the replayed ad-point) at 5-4, just because he managed to hold at 4-5.

I'm still waiting for you to show proof that Stan would have in fact won the match if they caught the bad line call and decided to replay the point (ad-Stan).

[TennisLovaLova]

Originally Posted by kpktennis

Agreed, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Armstrong happened

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by kpktennis

Agreed, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? Just because there are a few sports with a rampant culture of all types of PEDs doesn't mean its the same for tennis or all sports.

So I suppose you want me to believe tennis is the only clean sport out of all of them? That it is some special exception even though players like Cvac, who never used to able to last 4 gruelling sets, now can outlast everyone in the longest of matches with his grinding style of play? No way.


Tennis is filthy, and if WADA and ATP actually wanted to catch these guys they would take the testing a whole lot more seriously than letting a guy with the most suspicious increase in performance on tour go without a single blood test in 7 months.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by powerangle

What? No reply to my post from earlier? You conceding that you don't know for sure that Stan would have won?



I'm still waiting for you to show proof that Stan would have in fact won the match if they caught the bad line call and decided to replay the point (ad-Stan).

The ball shouldn't have been called out in the first place, allowing Wawrinka an easy put-away. Judging by Djokovic's reaction, he thought it was out and would've challenged it, and would've lost the point. Wawrinka had nerves of steel on all match-points, only a Djotard can deny he would've failed serving it out considering the fact that he DID. I know for a fact that Wawrinka won if that ball wasn't called out. You do, too. Because he did.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by 6-1 6-3 6-0

Agreed. The best place to put him is on the ignore list, along with the rest of his multiple accounts.

I think Berdych will give Djokovic a lot of trouble in the QF.

You think wrong!

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by always_crosscourt

Just shut up. A Nadal fan can never accuse another player of doping when Nadal is by far the most likely doper on tour.

Having a relatively big left arm, despite apparently never lifting a weight, disappearing from the tour when there was nothing wrong with him against Rosol, having tendon troubles when steroids are known to weaken tendons...etc...

I'm not even accusing Nadal of doping - (in fact, I'd love it if the ATP let players load up on as many steroids as they possibly can, just so tennis takes on a new level of physicality - fvck the health of the players - I just want entertainment) - BUT, there is no flipping way you can accuse another tennis player of doping when you are a fan of Nadal.

I think they all dope, genius. I have said that many times on here.

You also cannot deny that the sudden and drastic increase in performance by this guy is highly suspicious. Even Nadal never went from a tired player who wilted in the heat to an unstoppable and indefatigable monster who never tires. No wonder we will never get a clean sport in tennis with so many people like you with their head stuck in the sand.

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by Mustard

My point was always that that the process was unsafe, with all the plea bargaining that goes on. I stand by that view. Plea bargaining opens up the system to blackmail, and thus corruption. I'm asking myself what Armstrong had to gain from confessing to taking PEDs to Oprah on TV, and why some people are still accusing him of lying.

Isn't it because he hopes they will reduce the lifetime ban on competitions? I don't think he deserves it. I don't think he deserves anything. They should dish out jail sentences for doping because winning as a result of doping in professional sports where money is involved is akin to stealing money from the other competitors and fraud for the sponsors who are unwillingly investing in a tainted product.