intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Mind my own? This is a public forum and I'm chatting here, just like you. It's this kind of emotional reaction which highlights your state as if even more evidence were necessary.
Simon: "I saw a Rafa who played at 75% of his former level"
- Thread starter aldeayeah
- Start date
- Status
Mind my own? This is a public forum and I'm chatting here, just like you. It's this kind of emotional reaction which highlights your state as if even more evidence were necessary.
abmk
Bionic Poster
tcch tccch. loser hack in you got bothered.
You were the one "guessing" my joining date.
Go get some burnol, pal.
OK, you don't have any argument than your mouth.
Good to know.
Now, I suggest you following:
1. Press the button, throw all your arguments there
2. Let's agree on a timeline, and if my account isn't deleted by mods by than, you'll apologise. Deal?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Of course you haven't...
Too busy re-watching your fave player's old tapes, over and over...
Which is why you fail to understand and appreciate current tennis. You can't learn about 2022 from 2006 matches. Won't work. Like trying to predict a 2024 election by studying Ancient Egypt.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Confirmed that you changed your profession after the debacle of confidently predicting Djokovic's defeat at the first level of appeal and touting your legal expertise in favour of it only for the judge to overturn it. I hope you shall have better luck in your new vocation and my best wishes shall always be with you.
abmk
Bionic Poster
frustrated deluded hack is reaching new limits of deluded hackery.
Oh because I did not watch one film, he comes up with more delusions. You do realise English language isn't the only language in which films are made?
There are literally tons of matches in 70s/80s/90s.
But then you don't know sh*t about tennis in that time cos' you haven't watched.
I have watched the AO 22 final live pal and without the ultra-Nadal tinted glasses that you did.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
All arguments are made with words, friend.
You're pretending not to understand how double accounts are found on every forum. I don't essentially care which double account you are, I simply think it's worth highlighting your silly claims as to being an 'objective follower of tennis' who just happens to be driven to join after #21 and who follows well established posting patterns.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Confirmed that you changed your profession after the debacle of confidently predicting Djokovic's defeat at the first level of appeal and touting your legal expertise in favour of it only for the judge to overturn it. I hope you shall have better luck in your new vocation and my best wishes shall always be with you.
It's no surprise you haven't understood anything about the former question but this isn't the thread for that discussion unfortunately.
As for the best wishes, I would welcome them were they coming from someone less obviously emotionally in turmoil and unable to grasp that a public forum isn't his personal treehouse.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
So what is? Your expert diagnoses of my mental state as we converse on an internet forum hiding behind ids that bear no resemblance to our real names? Really, dude, just get off your high horse. Either participate or go back to lurking but please spare me your sermons or your highly unsolicited advice. I am fine, wham, bam, thank you but either you aren't or you must be one of those overbearing boomer uncles that are the life of every party they go to.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Again another stream of consciousness emotional call from the wilderness.
It started with best wishes and ended with high horses.
My, my.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
I wish you all the best, dear intrepidish.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
The only two emotional in this thread are you and the other poster who got so upset that I dared call Med 'pathetic'. Shows the depths of your insecurity that your confidence in your idol's win is ruffled by a contrarian opinion on the internet. Well, at this rate, you won't make much of a psychologist either but hey, you didn't reveal your name so there's still hope for you in your original/self-professed profession.
aldeayeah
G.O.A.T.
I concede them the victory, but even old Nadal has a way to make things closer than they should be.
Whether that would amount to one close set, two close sets, or even a four-setter, I dunno.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
I think calling straight sets in a Big Three match is generally a hazardous proposition except for (a) Nadal against the other two on clay and (b) Djokodal in recent AO history. Based off the 2019 result, I don't see how this Nadal would somehow conjure up a win against Djokovic.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
OK cool. Now start whining about Davydenko AO10, Baggy AO06, Murray AO10 and US08, Novak US07, Roddick WIM05 etc...
Go ahead..
You say Nadal wasn't 35 in 2009 and 2013 well... duh... did you care to think for one second that he got out of those predicaments against prime Fed and Djoko? More than makes up for the fact that AO22 was Med...
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
No it doesn't. 2009 and 2013 was prime to prime. It was an equal contest, physically. This one wasn't. Again, it isn't just that Med is younger but specifically in this tournament, Nadal was returning to tennis after a months long hiatus and had had covid. He himself regarded the win as a minor miracle. Gosh, I swear he is more honest than you bots, lol.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
And you still haven't got a clue....
Where's your whinging about Davydenko AO10, Baggy AO06, Murray AO10 and US08, Cilic WIM17 and AO18, Novak US07, Roddick WIM05 etc...
All of them played garbage and/or mentally fell apart...
Nah, instead all you can do is swear your head off because you're so enraged that your hero lost the slam record...
I've only ever really seen you give Nadal some credit when it comes to clay.... his victories over Fed off clay, you have a sure fire excuse for every single one of them because you're too much of a coward to admit that Fed lost fair and square....
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Once more, highlighting someone else's overblown emotional tirade doesn't make anyone else 'emotional' but the person who made and continues to make the tirade.
As for 'ruffled feathers' I'd say that your huffy little 'mind your own business' on a public forum is a rather nice touch and you have followed it up in style here, as elsewhere.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Prime Fed and prime Novak >>>>>>>>>> prime Med... sorry to tell you that mate....
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Except that in this instance, Med wasn't playing prime Dal. Far from it. You know it too. You're just arguing for the sake of it.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Well, someone needs to hype up Medvedev.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
And still you claim you're not in emotional turmoil here. It's really becoming rather dire.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Whose tirades? The other Nadalgirl whom you teamed up with? As best as I could tell, he was the one responding to paras of properly constructed sentences with a few lines of separated text along the lines of "you're emotional". As you are doing now. Is that common among lawyers and Nadal fans? And pyschologists? Anybody else I should include, messr?
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Nope, I've already stated Nadal was 35...
35 yr old Nadal 0-40 to prime Med is about equal to prime Nadal being 0-40 to prime Fed and Novak...
Whilst prime Nadal >>>>>>>> 35 yr old Nadal, prime Fed and Novak >>>>>>> prime Med... it all evens out...
Your stupid notion of physicality being a factor won't cut it either... reality is, from that position, it's more about mental strength rather than physicality...
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
Well, thank you, so you admit that Med was mentally weak, which I have been saying from the beginning. Gotcha, trapped in your own circular argumentation.
abmk
Bionic Poster
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Now you're calling a poster you think is male a 'Nadalgirl'. Your emotional desperation is growing ever more apparent. This isn't about anyone else but you, honey. You have the power to turn off this flow of bile coming up from edep down inside.
OK, so you're afraid to accept a deal and apologise in case if your assumption is wrong
Could you quote my posts where I 'hate' Rafa?
Please do it as a private message, so that we don't hijack this thread
Also, please don't confuse assessment of Rafa's opposition, with hating Rafa
He showed that he's a great champion as soon as he showed up in ATP. It's a pity that he doesn't have opponents that would be even closely resembling his level when he was 18-25 years old
Last edited:
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
You haven't got anything and clearly missed the point which was that Nadal has had the mental strength to get himself out of those situations in the past... not just against Med.
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
highlights your utter desperation that you edited what I wrote.
No, I'm simply highlighting the obvious overblown emotional response but the whole post also works just fine. Calling people 'loser hacks' and referring to 'burnoil' is hardly well-adjusted behavior, friend.
If this had been a match with Roger prevailing, you'd still be singing about it, just as you did back in the day
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
No, this is about you. Like him, you are keeping the convo going and accusing me of not turning it off. Because your big ego, as evidenced earlier by your need to impose your lawyerly credentials in an internet debate, won't let go. LOLOLOL. I said earlier you could either join the debate about the topic itself or mind your business. You chose not to and now you're aggrieved I won't yield. Yes I won't, do as you please. The fact that my not doing so irritates you so much makes it well worth it.
abmk
Bionic Poster
I was actually making fun of him. Stop projecting your emotions onto others.
its burnol, not burnoil.
I don't call loser hacks as wonderful achievers. Sorry.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
I never said Nadal doesn't have mental strength. I said Med is not mentally strong. That is why he surrendered the break of serve in the very next game after failing to convert.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
helter, I think you'd make a great poker player. Have you ever played? I know you're a good chess player; I mean, after all, you almost beat me once (haha) but I think you should think about it (poker).
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
frustrated deluded hack is reaching new limits of deluded hackery.
Oh because I did not watch one film, he comes up with more delusions. You do realise English language isn't the only language in which films are made?
There are literally tons of matches in 70s/80s/90s.
But then you don't know sh*t about tennis in that time cos' you haven't watched.
I have watched the AO 22 final live pal and without the ultra-Nadal tinted glasses that you did.
You're a coward that hasn't watched any slam that Fed won without ultra-Fed tinted glasses...
Zara
G.O.A.T.
I seriously wonder if Medvedev will win another slam. For some reason it just doesn't feel that way.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Yes and then I highlighted prime Fed and prime Novak doing the same thing v Nadal...
In fact prime Novak also surrendered the break straight after that 0-40 come back from Nadal...
You don't have a leg to stand on here...
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Ah, that's another attempt at evasion. You and your friend here are deeply emotionally invested to the point where even your vocabulary betrays you. Calling people 'losers' and telling others in a public forum to 'mind their own business' being just the tip of the iceberg.
The topic here is spurious and there's no 'debate' to speak of. So then it becomes a question of why such threads are so important to a handful of posters and then the answer simply leaps to one's eyes. Strangely, the same emotionally despondent posters were very cheery about analogous events in the past but which involved another key rival.
mike danny
Bionic Poster
Well, I think he will because Djokodal are not getting any younger and the USO becomes more and more of a problem for them due to its placement in the season.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
we about to see the return of the legendary abmk vs. The_Order rivalry?
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
And I addressed that earlier too. Med was two sets up. If from two sets up he doesn't have the confidence to go for the kill, it's much more about him than Nadal. Er, did you actually watch the match? How many times in a big match have you even seen Nadal make the kind of uncharacteristic mistakes he made in that match? He was bad for at least two and a half sets. Med let him out of jail and then surrendered the match thereon. Full credit to Nadal for doing what he had to from that point to win but don't tell me Med played great. It was anything but.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
Nah, he's too much of a coward to get embarrassed by me again...
He will tuck his tail between his legs because he knows he hasn't got a hope in hell...
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Again, this is not the attitude and vocabulary of someone who is merely having a difference of opinion. You're so obviously investing your own self-image into wins and losses from Federer and an important Federer rival that you simply have to let off steam with other members of the church to find some sort of hollow solace when that rival appears to make historical strides to the rest of the world.
Zara
G.O.A.T.
You've taken that rather personally. And you are also deeply emotionally involved. But it's okay. Most of the time I just want to have fun but I also want to observe so that I can decide when it comes to that as to who I think should be the winner. Now that's a riddle for you. Carry on.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
You're clutching at straws...
Nadal made many more uncharacteristic errors v Novak at RG21...
fwiw, I don't think Med played great either... but he was nowhere near as bad as Fed nuts are trying to make out... they're just angry because 21 > 20
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
The only person evading is you. You have nothing to contribute so you seek glory in the comments of other Nadal fans and like them but won't engage me or @abmk in a debate. You watch from the sidelines and then jump in to make personal attacks when nothing was said to you previously.
As for loser, I didn't call you that but feel free to believe that. Loser is as loser does. You are seriously confused about what you're even doing in this conversation. You have no idea why you are stuck in it but you are too emotionally invested to let go (all the while constantly making comments about MY emotional state). Oh, the sheer hilariousness of it! You, what a joke you are! Yes, I shall 'betray' my sheer amusement at your helplessness.
Dolgopolov85
G.O.A.T.
And that is relevant how? Nadal lost that match. What were you even driving at by bringing it up?
abmk
Bionic Poster
I am not a fan of Nadal/Djokovic, but I do acknowledge when they've played well - nadal in RG 20 final, djoko in AO 21 SF/F, RG 21 SF (after 1st set), RG 21 F (last 3 sets) for instance to speak of recent stuff. nadal showed great fight in AO 22 final, but the level just wasn't there.
Rest of it is you projecting your emotions onto me, pal.
The_Order
G.O.A.T.
You asked the question of whether I'd seen Nadal make as many uncharacteristic mistakes in a big match... there's your answer.
In fact he was x100 worse... he made more UEs in that Novak match than he did at times when he won the whole tournament in the past that's how bad he was...
intrepidish
Hall of Fame
Friend, there's nothing resembling glory in any of this by definition so the idea that you would even suggest such a thing can only be understood in keeping with your rather strange emotional commitment here.
'Watching from the sidelines' along with 'mind your own business' are again deeply odd comments about users interacting in a public forum but of course it's consistent with your sense of aggrieved ownership and excessively emotional attachment.
As for what I'm doing here, it's been consistent and I have explained it previously. As with other topics, one can't be faulted if one's audience fails to register straightforward utterances.
- Status