James Blake, I saw him play last night

H

highgeer

Rookie
After watching James' first round match in Houston. I just needed to tell someone that he is incredible to watch. The match was so much fun. He played well and bad at the same time. He had about 20 forehand errors in the last set, and about 25 winners. His opponent was from Argentina, so he got to everything. Blake had to hit multiple amazing shots to win the point. When he does decide to retire, I will be sorry to see him go. He hits the ball so hard and with as much penetration as anyone I have seen. The times he came to net were beautiful, and he still moves like a gazelle. Just thought I'd share; he is so entertaining.

Mike
 
Blake is just awesome to watch... When he was feeling it he was just incredible. Watched the USO quarters with Agassi a few days ago...so much big hitting. Blake laid it on the line in that match.
 
Yeah, As much hate that Blake receives about the way he plays I really like and respect his game. He dictates and goes for his shots, sometimes to a fault. I almost feel his game is better suited to 90s style quick courts, and it will be a shame when he's gone. I almost wish he would play some doubles because his volleys are really underrated has some of the best hands around.

When he was younger he was very very explosive and you can see when he had his A game just why he can beat anybody out there excluding nobody.
 
James Blake best could beat Federer best from what I saw in the 2006 IW or Miami final between them. Amazing power....when he is on he is the true represenative of virtua tennis!
 
kishnabe said:
James Blake best could beat Federer best from what I saw in the 2006 IW or Miami final between them. Amazing power....when he is on he is the true represenative of virtua tennis!
Click to expand...

Blake has beatdown Nadal when Nadal was at his best at the YE masters.
 
kishnabe said:
James Blake best could beat Federer best from what I saw in the 2006 IW or Miami final between them. Amazing power....when he is on he is the true represenative of virtua tennis!
Click to expand...
What match are you talking about? That IW 2006 final was massacre by Federer. As a matter of fact, I recall Federer handing a lot of bagels/breadsticks to Blake in 2006.
 
James was hot or cold at his peak. When hot he could hang with anyone outside of the top 3. When he was not it would usually be a short match.
 
"James Blake best could beat Federer best from what I saw in the 2006 IW or Miami final between them. "

:confused:
It must have been a hot day and you had a few drinks in you.

The two are not in the same discussion as far as talent, ability or performance.

He won a total of ONE SET IN A 9-7 TIEBREAKER out of the 9 times they played. He beat Federer exactly one time. In a walkover. Federer owned him. Even Blake didn't believe he could beat Roger.

Just to make sure we're discussing the same player. Were talking about James Blake here ? The American tennis player out of Yonkers.

When he was at his best his (mindless) ball bashing could blow people of the court. I believe Berdych said it best after going out to him in NY, paraphrasing: "it's either a winner or it's in the stands." That didn't work with Federer.
 
Tshooter said:
"James Blake best could beat Federer best from what I saw in the 2006 IW or Miami final between them. "

:confused:
It must have been a hot day and you had a few drinks in you.

The two are not in the same discussion as far as talent, ability or performance.

He won a total of ONE SET IN A 9-7 TIEBREAKER out of the 9 times they played. He beat Federer exactly one time. In a walkover. Federer owned him. Even Blake didn't believe he could beat Roger.

Just to make sure we're discussing the same player. Were talking about James Blake here ? The American tennis player out of Yonkers.

When he was at his best his (mindless) ball bashing could blow people of the court. I believe Berdych said it best after going out to him in NY, paraphrasing: "it's either a winner or it's in the stands." That didn't work with Federer.
Click to expand...

Blake took Roger out at the Olympics 64 76. Walkovers don't count in H2H.

So I guess what I'm saying is give credit where credit is due.
 
Last edited:
True. But it's not a tour event is it ?

Anyway, the top players (talk to the contrary) don't seem to care about it all that much until after they've packed away a few Majors. Didn't Roddick skip it last time ?

Massu: Olympic Gold singles and doubles.
 
I was there too, very nice match untill the lights went off! and it was so freaking cold that we had to leave. I was very happy the today when I found out he won the third set. I going tomorrow again, day session Blake vs Albert Ramos, it is going to be fun
 
"So I guess what I'm saying is give credit where credit is due."

OK.

But it shouldn't negate the point. If you think Blake's best beats Fed's best they should take your car keys at the gate because you are not in a condition to drive.
 
Tshooter said:
"James Blake best could beat Federer best from what I saw in the 2006 IW or Miami final between them. "

:confused:
It must have been a hot day and you had a few drinks in you.

The two are not in the same discussion as far as talent, ability or performance.

He won a total of ONE SET IN A 9-7 TIEBREAKER out of the 9 times they played. He beat Federer exactly one time. In a walkover. Federer owned him. Even Blake didn't believe he could beat Roger.

Just to make sure we're discussing the same player. Were talking about James Blake here ? The American tennis player out of Yonkers.

When he was at his best his (mindless) ball bashing could blow people of the court. I believe Berdych said it best after going out to him in NY, paraphrasing: "it's either a winner or it's in the stands." That didn't work with Federer.
Click to expand...

I have seen the Miami final....Blake was frustrating Federer putting him under a lot of pressure. He had the lead with a 4-1 lead and broke down.
 
kishnabe said:
I have seen the Miami final....Blake was frustrating Federer putting him under a lot of pressure. He had the lead with a 4-1 lead and broke down.
Click to expand...

That was the 2006 Indian Wells final, not Miami. I remember Blake jumping in front early, but then totally collapsing. The last two sets were lopsided.
 
Fed wanted the gold medal bad in 2008 and had to settle for the doubles after Blake knocked him out so I think it was a great win for James.

Agassi always said that his Gold is one of his biggest wins.

Back to the point of the thread, when he is "on", he's great to watch, I can't imagine how much fun it would be live :)
 
Tshooter said:
"So I guess what I'm saying is give credit where credit is due."

OK.

But it shouldn't negate the point. If you think Blake's best beats Fed's best they should take your car keys at the gate because you are not in a condition to drive.
Click to expand...


You do realize that comparing two, or more, players playing at their best is largely a hypothetical exercise; dont you :-? ...

Just because a player in the real world has a superior record vs another, does not neccessarily mean that when both are playing their best that the forementioned player would win.

Tennis is a game of winners and errors, as a matter of fact errors tend to have a more determinative effect nowadays...

So if a player is playing at their best, one can assume that errors will be minimized. Therefore, hypothetically, the more offensive player (i.e. the player who can hit more winners) should beat the less offensive or explosive player - if both are playing their best...

So, I can see how James Blake, or Safin (or other very offensive/explosive player) playing their best would beat Federer playing his best!

Same goes for women's tennis: Venus Williams playing her best, beats any other woman in tennis history playing their best IMO. Due to Venus' power, speed, athleticism, and explosiveness - the most I have ever seen from any woman on a tennis court!

Its sort of the inverse of the fabled tortoise and the hare story...

Now we all know, that in reality, the opposite is usually true.
 
kishnabe said:
James Blake best could beat Federer best
Click to expand...

That's totally absurd and Blake himself would laugh out loud at what you're saying.

Blake is a very good player and almost enyone in the Top 50 can beat the very best players on a given day. But although I like Blake's game, I said this on many threads: he and other aggresive players (Tsonga, etc) have a low percentage game, with low margin of error. A slight off day and they're screwed, because the rely much on a attacking shots. Of course when Blake is on, he's a joy to watch, but that's one thing and another different thing is saying his best can compare to Federer's best.

Federer can rely on attack and can rely on other tactics, because he's much more of a complete player than Blake. Federer doesn't need to be 100% to win matches because his wide repertoire or tactics, that's why he's a multiple slam winner and Blake isn't.

I understand people who prefer to watch this kind of modern aggresive players, I do also because when they're on they're spectacular, from Safin to Tsonga to Blake to whoever. They never stop attacking. But they're not multiple slam winners (well, except Safin who had two), so they're not as good as the likes of Federer, etc. Even Agassi had more repertoire of tactics, he was not "just" an attacking ballbasher.

So I like to watch Blake, in fact when he's on I really enjoy his game an awful lot, but it would be unrealistic to say he is at a level he is really not. He's not a Djokovic, for example.
 
Blake was physically one of the fittest players on the tour and could challenge Ralph in terms of fitness any day, he also had a monster Fh when it was on.

But unfortunately he was pretty much a "late bloomer".
 
DRII said:
You do realize that comparing two, or more, players playing at their best is largely a hypothetical exercise; dont you :-? ...

Just because a player in the real world has a superior record vs another, does not neccessarily mean that when both are playing their best that the forementioned player would win.

Tennis is a game of winners and errors, as a matter of fact errors tend to have a more determinative effect nowadays...

So if a player is playing at their best, one can assume that errors will be minimized. Therefore, hypothetically, the more offensive player (i.e. the player who can hit more winners) should beat the less offensive or explosive player - if both are playing their best...

So, I can see how James Blake, or Safin (or other very offensive/explosive player) playing their best would beat Federer playing his best!

Same goes for women's tennis: Venus Williams playing her best, beats any other woman in tennis history playing their best IMO. Due to Venus' power, speed, athleticism, and explosiveness - the most I have ever seen from any woman on a tennis court!

Its sort of the inverse of the fabled tortoise and the hare story...

Now we all know, that in reality, the opposite is usually true.
Click to expand...

Yeah but 'at their best' is a flawed way of comparing players. The better metric is always average playing level day in and day out consistently, and of course in that area Federer >>>> Blake.
 
PSNELKE said:
Blake was physically one of the fittest players on the tour and could challenge Ralph in terms of fitness any day, he also had a monster Fh when it was on.

But unfortunately he was pretty much a "late bloomer".
Click to expand...

My friend, agreed Blake was a fit player, but not at Nadal's level. And this is coming from a Roger's fan... but let's be frank. Nadal is a beast in the fitness department. That's his main asset. Go play or take a lesson with a semi-pro, ask him to slice you to death and you will see what I mean. Nadal not only gets on time to respond to Federer's backhand slice (IMO best slice in the world), but more frequently than not generates a winner out of that ball that it's just above his ankle. Blake can get to some very tough balls, no doubt, but that makes him a guy who can run very fast, not the most athletic or fit player in the tour. Ah, as for comparing Nadal's and Blake's forehands, sorry to bring you the news, but Nadal's forehand may be one full level above Blake's. Don't look only at the speed, but the action in the ball (aka. heaviness). Nadal and Federer have a very heavy ball, one that Blake can only dream of. Anyway, all my respects to Blake, a great player and a great person, just not at the level to challenge the best of the best in a continuous basis.
 
el sergento said:
Blake took Roger out at the Olympics 64 76. Walkovers don't count in H2H.

So I guess what I'm saying is give credit where credit is due.
Click to expand...

Federer had 58 unforced errors in only 2 sets. He gave away 10 more points more than the 12 games required to lose on unforced errors alone. Needless to say a beyond horrendous performance. I dont know how to explain Fedrerer's performances at the Olympics. 2 of the worst 5 matches he ever played were vs Berdych and Blake at the Olympics.
 
icazares said:
My friend, agreed Blake was a fit player, but not at Nadal's level. And this is coming from a Roger's fan... but let's be frank. Nadal is a beast in the fitness department. That's his main asset. Go play or take a lesson with a semi-pro, ask him to slice you to death and you will see what I mean. Nadal not only gets on time to respond to Federer's backhand slice (IMO best slice in the world), but more frequently than not generates a winner out of that ball that it's just above his ankle. Blake can get to some very tough balls, no doubt, but that makes him a guy who can run very fast, not the most athletic or fit player in the tour. Ah, as for comparing Nadal's and Blake's forehands, sorry to bring you the news, but Nadal's forehand may be one full level above Blake's. Don't look only at the speed, but the action in the ball (aka. heaviness). Nadal and Federer have a very heavy ball, one that Blake can only dream of. Anyway, all my respects to Blake, a great player and a great person, just not at the level to challenge the best of the best in a continuous basis.
Click to expand...

I can definately agree with those well justified arguments, mate. Appreciate your points.
But don´t get me wrong, I didn´t compare Ralph´s FH with Blakes, just the fitness.
It´s obvious that Ralph´s FH is superior to Blake´s, just stated that his FH was a monster on a good day. :)
 
DRII said:
So, I can see how James Blake, or Safin (or other very offensive/explosive player) playing their best would beat Federer playing his best!
Click to expand...

In which case you would be officially insane, especialy regarding Blake. Blake has never played tennis that would even come close to beating Federer at his best. If he has name me a single match or tournament he has played his whole career vs anyone that would beat Federer at his best, I look forward to any answer you could conjure to that one. Their matches vs each other alone would prove that, he wasnt close to winning in any of them except for his one actual win where he won in 2 close sets over Federer producing 58 unforced errors in 2 sets, so obviously would have won just playing a bit less awful that day. So you are forced to suggest Blake has never played his best tennis in any of his many matches with Federer.

Safin is a rather weak case too given his 2-11 head to head with Federer, but atleast he did have one day he beat Federer playing very well in an epic, and in a major encounter.

Same goes for women's tennis: Venus Williams playing her best, beats any other woman in tennis history playing their best IMO.
Click to expand...

LOL this one is rich and I happen to like Venus. What is Venus's best exactly.

1999- lost Australian Open quarters to Davenport 6-4, 6-0, lost French Open 4th round to Schwarz, lost Wimbledon quarters to 30 year old Graf in final tournament, lost U.S Open semis to Hingis, lost WTA final semis to Hingis.

2000- struggled throughout year with aging way past her prime Sanchez Vicario including losing to her in French Open quarters, had smackdown losses to Coetzer and Dokic, was 2 points from defeat to Hingis in U.S Open semis, and didnt win a tournament all year outside of grass or decoturf hard.

2001- lost 6-1, 6-1 to Hingis in Australian Open semis, lost 1st round of French to Barbara Schett. During dominant 3 month summer swing lost to Shaughnessy.

2002 and 2003- lost 5 slam finals in a row to Serena, lost to Zvonareva and nearly retired Seles in other 2 slam apperances.

So Venus playing at her best would beat Henin at her best on clay, or Serena at her best on rebound ace, or Navratilova or Graf at their best on grass. Yeah right.


DRII said:
Tennis is a game of winners and errors, as a matter of fact errors tend to have a more determinative effect nowadays...

So if a player is playing at their best, one can assume that errors will be minimized. Therefore, hypothetically, the more offensive player (i.e. the player who can hit more winners) should beat the less offensive or explosive player - if both are playing their best...
Click to expand...

I take it you have never seen a Blake-Federer match. Federer has more winners than Blake in all of their encounters. Their best match was at the 2006 U.S Open which was definitely Blake playing at his absolute best, and still nearly losing in 3 straight sets. They ended the match with roughly the same unforced errors while Federer produced about 20 more winners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
icazares said:
. Ah, as for comparing Nadal's and Blake's forehands, sorry to bring you the news, but Nadal's forehand may be one full level above Blake's. Don't look only at the speed, but the action in the ball (aka. heaviness). Nadal and Federer have a very heavy ball, one that Blake can only dream of. Anyway, all my respects to Blake, a great player and a great person, just not at the level to challenge the best of the best in a continuous basis.
Click to expand...

This is an unfair comparison since Blake chooses to hit a flatter, longer and more penetrating forehand. If I had Blake's forehand, I would not be dreaming about anyone else's.
 
Tshooter said:
True. But it's not a tour event is it ?

Anyway, the top players (talk to the contrary) don't seem to care about it all that much until after they've packed away a few Majors. Didn't Roddick skip it last time ?

Massu: Olympic Gold singles and doubles.
Click to expand...

Yes it is, with ATP points and everything.
 
Tshooter said:
"So I guess what I'm saying is give credit where credit is due."

OK.

But it shouldn't negate the point. If you think Blake's best beats Fed's best they should take your car keys at the gate because you are not in a condition to drive.
Click to expand...

Hold on there cowboy, all I said was that Blake was good enough to beat Roger at least once. I was correcting the H2H you posted, that is all.
 
NadalAgassi said:
Federer had 58 unforced errors in only 2 sets. He gave away 10 more points more than the 12 games required to lose on unforced errors alone. Needless to say a beyond horrendous performance. I dont know how to explain Fedrerer's performances at the Olympics. 2 of the worst 5 matches he ever played were vs Berdych and Blake at the Olympics.
Click to expand...

Berdych was a shocker, but in Beijing I think Nadal was very much in his head.

Shouldn't take anything away from Blake though. He didn't crumble in that second set tie break, and that's his MO.
 
Sid_Vicious said:
The most amazing thing about James is his athleticism. He easily tops Nadal in the speed department.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hy6PR0-Ma3E&feature=player_detailpage#t=230s
Click to expand...
I know it was back in 2005 and 2006, but still, Blake's 3 wins against Nadal are crazy. And the times he's lost, he's always taken a set off Rafa. Amazing. In many ways, it's such a terrible match up for Blake. I can see how Rafa's heavy top spin might work to flat hitting Blake's advantage, but his backhand is so suspect to me, it's strange to me that Nadal couldn't just break that side down with ease. Federer should study those matches.
 
I see a lot of Blake in Sam Querrey. Huge, flat forehand, very aggressive, tries to end points early.

Slower courts have hurt guys like Blake and Querrey by allowing defense on what used to be winners.
 
Hold on there cowboy, all I said was that Blake was good enough to beat Roger at least once. I was correcting the H2H you posted, that is all."

Is your name Kishnabe, "cowboy".

And I stand corrected on the Olympics and points.
 
I should have written "If one thinks" instead of "If you think" to make clearer I was referring back to the poster stating that Blake's best beats Fed's best.

It's so preposterous I couldn't write clearly.

Yes, he beat him once. No minor achievement so credit where it's due.
 
jdubbs said:
I see a lot of Blake in Sam Querrey. Huge, flat forehand, very aggressive, tries to end points early.

Slower courts have hurt guys like Blake and Querrey by allowing defense on what used to be winners.
Click to expand...

Querrey has a bigger serve, moves a lot worse of course, and probably a bit worse off the ground. Between the ears I would say Blake is better, but neither one is a mental giant.

35ft6 said:
I know it was back in 2005 and 2006, but still, Blake's 3 wins against Nadal are crazy. And the times he's lost, he's always taken a set off Rafa. Amazing. In many ways, it's such a terrible match up for Blake. I can see how Rafa's heavy top spin might work to flat hitting Blake's advantage, but his backhand is so suspect to me, it's strange to me that Nadal couldn't just break that side down with ease. Federer should study those matches.
Click to expand...

Blake always seemed to bring it a bit more when he plays Rafa, which is funny considering the fact he usually shrinks when he plays top guys. The 05 USO one was when Rafa had come off of beating Agassi in the finals of Canada, and some thought he could make a deep run at the USO. 06 YEC was one of the best matches I've seen Blake play. He just did a good job of hanging in rallies w/ Nadal and letting his power dictate play. In many ways though I think the Nadal-Fed h2h became more mental over the years. And of course there's the fact that JB never played Rafa on clay. ;) Even past his prime in 09 Blake still managed to take a set in their 2 meetings in Asia, before Rafa eventually got the upper hand in the h2h.
 
Last edited:
Just came back from the club, Blake lost in two sets to Paulo Cuevas, very good first set, this guy Cuevas is really good.
 
jmverdugo said:
Just came back from the club, Blake lost in two sets to Paulo Cuevas, very good first set, this guy Cuevas is really good.
Click to expand...

I just wonder where Blake's season goes from here. He wont get wild cards into non-US tournaments, and I don't see him playing qualies at the French or Wimbledon. Is he just going to hang out and then play the US open?
 
35ft6 said:
I know it was back in 2005 and 2006, but still, Blake's 3 wins against Nadal are crazy. And the times he's lost, he's always taken a set off Rafa. Amazing. In many ways, it's such a terrible match up for Blake. I can see how Rafa's heavy top spin might work to flat hitting Blake's advantage, but his backhand is so suspect to me, it's strange to me that Nadal couldn't just break that side down with ease. Federer should study those matches.
Click to expand...

The best tennis I ever saw Blake play was mostly against Nadal. I guess he decided he was the underdog and just let it rip, realizing at his best he had potential to overpower Nadal on a decent speed court. As he said in his book too he knew he couldnt beat Nadal by playing neutral or defense in long rallies. Nadal in 2005 and 2006 was also very beatable on hard courts, very good already but very beatable (even today he is definitely beatable, but much harder to). He never even made a slam semifinal on the surface until 2008, and was owned by a number of the better flat ball hitters- Blake, Berdych, Davydenko, Youhzny, Gonzalez, of those only Davydenko is he still.

Blake is stronger in the upper body than Federer so the high heavy topspun backhands arent really a problem for him like Federer, even though he doesnt have a better backhand than Federer overall.

Federer went into playing Nadal with a different mentality than Blake. Obviously unlike Blake he could not approach the match with nothing to lose, not even on clay could he totally grip that way of thinking. He had the pressure of defending his position as the dominant player but playing the guy who was already the biggest threat to it. And once he lost a few times to Nadal early on, both on clay and hard courts, he began to fear the pressures of the matchup IMO.
 
jamesblakefan#1 said:
Blake always seemed to bring it a bit more when he plays Rafa, which is funny considering the fact he usually shrinks when he plays top guys. The 05 USO one was when Rafa had come off of beating Agassi in the finals of Canada, and some thought he could make a deep run at the USO. 06 YEC was one of the best matches I've seen Blake play. He just did a good job of hanging in rallies w/ Nadal and letting his power dictate play. In many ways though I think the Nadal-Fed h2h became more mental over the years. And of course there's the fact that JB never played Rafa on clay. ;) Even past his prime in 09 Blake still managed to take a set in their 2 meetings in Asia, before Rafa eventually got the upper hand in the h2h.
Click to expand...

I think Blake is the worst matchup for Rafa I've seen, worst than Davidenko or whoever. Even players like Tsonga or Soderling needed to play out of their minds to beat Nadal, but Blake didn't. Blake could trouble Nadal without playing a 100% himself, there are very few players you can say that of. Blake has been Nadal's Nemesis and he didn't hurt Nadal more because Blake was not at the same level as a player. But in terms of matchups, Blake was to Nadal what Nadal was to Federer.

If Blake had been as good as for example Djokovic, Nadal would've had nightmares day in day out for years.
 
Dilettante said:
I think Blake is the worst matchup for Rafa I've seen, worst than Davidenko or whoever. Even players like Tsonga or Soderling needed to play out of their minds to beat Nadal, but Blake didn't. Blake could trouble Nadal without playing a 100% himself, there are very few players you can say that of. Blake has been Nadal's Nemesis and he didn't hurt Nadal more because Blake was not at the same level as a player. But in terms of matchups, Blake was to Nadal what Nadal was to Federer.

If Blake had been as good as for example Djokovic, Nadal would've had nightmares day in day out for years.
Click to expand...

I think Delpo is more tailor made to beat Rafa. He's tall, so he doesn't mind Nadal's high kicking balls, and he's got enough fire power to, when he's playing his best, hit through Nadal.
 
Tshooter said:
True. But it's not a tour event is it ?

Anyway, the top players (talk to the contrary) don't seem to care about it all that much until after they've packed away a few Majors. Didn't Roddick skip it last time ?

Massu: Olympic Gold singles and doubles.
Click to expand...

He couldn't miss the Legg Mason in DC.
 
HunterST said:
I just wonder where Blake's season goes from here. He wont get wild cards into non-US tournaments, and I don't see him playing qualies at the French or Wimbledon. Is he just going to hang out and then play the US open?
Click to expand...

He'll probably skip the clay season, play challengers in US (see above) and then play the grass season, where he's usually pretty good.
 
Worst case for James Blake: He calls it a career. Goes back to finish at Harvard. Get's a nice network gig....hopefully taking Pmac's spot.
 
Dilettante said:
I think Blake is the worst matchup for Rafa I've seen, worst than Davidenko or whoever. Even players like Tsonga or Soderling needed to play out of their minds to beat Nadal, but Blake didn't. Blake could trouble Nadal without playing a 100% himself, there are very few players you can say that of. Blake has been Nadal's Nemesis and he didn't hurt Nadal more because Blake was not at the same level as a player. But in terms of matchups, Blake was to Nadal what Nadal was to Federer.

If Blake had been as good as for example Djokovic, Nadal would've had nightmares day in day out for years.
Click to expand...

Blake takes the ball soo early that's the reason Nadal struggles. And like you've Mentioned Davydenko also takes the ball early. Takes away Nadal's time and rhythm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Conquistador
James Blake Must Change His Game
Replies
18
Views
1K
Rabbit
Rabbit
Tchocky
James Blake on 60 Minutes
Replies
16
Views
2K
tennisjunkiela
T
P
Missing James Blake.
Replies
26
Views
2K
Cup8489
Cup8489
Jimmyk459
Advice for the Game of James Blake
Replies
10
Views
2K
cujays
C
pirateofthecarribean
Will James Blake ever win a "big" one?
Replies
23
Views
2K
superman1
superman1
Back
Top