Discussion:
Congratulations AO Champ Joker
(too old to reply)
StephenJ
2021-02-21 10:45:03 UTC
Permalink
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.

18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.

That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
*skriptis
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?

50% of his slams are from Australia.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Whisper
2021-02-21 11:13:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
Mixes mean less when the guy is smashing AO records by such big margins.
His 9 is 50% greater than previous record of 6. Mixes are more
important when talking lower tier greats, not guys who win 13, 9 times
at same slam lol. That's god-like.
StephenJ
2021-02-21 14:07:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Whisper
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
Mixes mean less when the guy is smashing AO records by such big margins.
His 9 is 50% greater than previous record of 6. Mixes are more
important when talking lower tier greats, not guys who win 13, 9 times
at same slam lol. That's god-like.
Just as awesome as the 9 titles is 9-0 in AO finals. Just not losing with the silverware on the line is real all-time level stuff.
Whisper
2021-02-21 14:13:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by Whisper
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
Mixes mean less when the guy is smashing AO records by such big margins.
His 9 is 50% greater than previous record of 6. Mixes are more
important when talking lower tier greats, not guys who win 13, 9 times
at same slam lol. That's god-like.
Just as awesome as the 9 titles is 9-0 in AO finals. Just not losing with the silverware on the line is real all-time level stuff.
He also never lost AO once he made the semis - shows how he steps up in
the crunch.
StephenJ
2021-02-21 14:06:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
Whisper
2021-02-21 14:12:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
Yes, though 'mix' is more of a factor when comparing guys who won less
slams than the big 3. These 3 guys are going to set unbeatable records
by the time they are done.

Covid has prob ruined Djoker's chances of beating Fed's 8 titles
Wimbledon record. If it was held in 2020 & he won he'd have 6 now, with
maybe a 7th in 4 months?
StephenJ
2021-02-21 19:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Whisper
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
Yes, though 'mix' is more of a factor when comparing guys who won less
slams than the big 3. These 3 guys are going to set unbeatable records
by the time they are done.
Covid has prob ruined Djoker's chances of beating Fed's 8 titles
Wimbledon record. If it was held in 2020 & he won he'd have 6 now, with
maybe a 7th in 4 months?
Yes, and not only that, Joker suffered greatly last year in the slam race with Nadal by failing to win either W or the USO. Wimbledon wasn't his fault of course, but USO was a self-inflicted wound that may ultimately cost him the slam race and thus Open Era GOAT-hood. Have to favor Nadal as he has a two slam lead right now.
Whisper
2021-02-21 21:44:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by Whisper
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
Yes, though 'mix' is more of a factor when comparing guys who won less
slams than the big 3. These 3 guys are going to set unbeatable records
by the time they are done.
Covid has prob ruined Djoker's chances of beating Fed's 8 titles
Wimbledon record. If it was held in 2020 & he won he'd have 6 now, with
maybe a 7th in 4 months?
Yes, and not only that, Joker suffered greatly last year in the slam race with Nadal by failing to win either W or the USO. Wimbledon wasn't his fault of course, but USO was a self-inflicted wound that may ultimately cost him the slam race and thus Open Era GOAT-hood. Have to favor Nadal as he has a two slam lead right now.
It's hard to pick a clear fave at this point. I mean Joker sustained a
pretty serious injury & still won easily against someone in red hot
form. It's clear Nadal has to keep winning FO to keep up. Imagine if
he loses at FO this yr or gets an injury? Djoker prob wins FO in that
case and is at 19, and Nadal has to wait til next yr for next FO while
Djoker has 3 non-clay slams ahead of him.
bob
2021-02-22 00:26:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
fed's 8 wimbledons is a huge marker over nadal's 2. that 2 really
hurts nadal.

but every other intangible (H2H, 2 on each surface, OG) all go to
nads.

bob
Whisper
2021-02-22 05:45:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
fed's 8 wimbledons is a huge marker over nadal's 2. that 2 really
hurts nadal.
but every other intangible (H2H, 2 on each surface, OG) all go to
nads.
bob
The god-level stat for Nadal is 13 FO. Arguably the greatest
achievement in all sports.
StephenJ
2021-02-22 15:37:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
fed's 8 wimbledons is a huge marker over nadal's 2. that 2 really
hurts nadal.
but every other intangible (H2H, 2 on each surface, OG) all go to
nads.
bob
The way I see it, at this moment, we'd all rather have Fed's trophy case than Nadal's or Joker's, so that makes him the top dog, and he's been the top dog since July 2009 when he won his 15th slam.

But, his reign is coming to an end, probably sometimes this year.
bob
2021-02-22 19:07:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by bob
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
fed's 8 wimbledons is a huge marker over nadal's 2. that 2 really
hurts nadal.
but every other intangible (H2H, 2 on each surface, OG) all go to
nads.
bob
The way I see it, at this moment, we'd all rather have Fed's trophy case than Nadal's or Joker's, so that makes him the top dog, and he's been the top dog since July 2009 when he won his 15th slam.
But, his reign is coming to an end, probably sometimes this year.
the only thing that makes fed's trophy case better (in some minds)
than nad's is the 8 W. every other conveivable achievement goes to
nadal, and probably soon to be djok.

if people can convince me W isn't the most important tournament,
really roger will fall out of the discussion with nadal and soon djok
IMO.

but W is the most important to me.

bob
Whisper
2021-02-23 00:16:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by bob
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
It's always better to have more slams than less. That said, Federer does have the best mix of the Big Three. That's why as of this moment, he's still the top dog. Though he won't be for much longer.
fed's 8 wimbledons is a huge marker over nadal's 2. that 2 really
hurts nadal.
but every other intangible (H2H, 2 on each surface, OG) all go to
nads.
bob
The way I see it, at this moment, we'd all rather have Fed's trophy case than Nadal's or Joker's, so that makes him the top dog, and he's been the top dog since July 2009 when he won his 15th slam.
But, his reign is coming to an end, probably sometimes this year.
Maybe, but in terms of records you'd have to say Nadal has pushed it the
furthest and made the biggest impact with his 13 FO, then Djoker with 9
AO. Fed has edged the Wimbledon record higher, but it's only by 1
title. Rafa & Djoker have obliterated FO/AO records, & own him h2h.

Normally the 8 Wimbledons would be a massive deal, huge sport story.

Federer has improved the Wimbledon record by 14%, Djoker the AO record
by 50% and Rafa 116% at FO.
*skriptis
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
MPOAT score:

AO
1. Djokovic, 48 pts
2. Federer, 45 pts
3. Edberg, 27 pts

FO
1. Nadal, 65 pts
2. Borg, 31 pts
3. Djokovic, 30 pts

Wim
1. Federer, 54 pts
2. Sampras, 38 pts
3. Djokovic, 36 pts

USO
1. Connors, 43 pts
2. Federer, 40 pts
3. Sampras, 37 pts

MPOAT-total
1. Federer, 166 pts
2. Djokovic, 150 pts
3. Nadal, 144 pts
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
bob
2021-02-22 00:24:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 11:50:23 +0100 (GMT+01:00), *skriptis
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
his 5 Wim makes up for too many AO. plus he's a CGS holder. a 2nd FO
would be huge. that's 1 thing nadal has over djok/fed - 2+ on every
surface.

bob
Whisper
2021-02-22 05:43:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by bob
On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 11:50:23 +0100 (GMT+01:00), *skriptis
Post by *skriptis
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Awesome but it's borderline bad mix?
50% of his slams are from Australia.
his 5 Wim makes up for too many AO. plus he's a CGS holder. a 2nd FO
would be huge. that's 1 thing nadal has over djok/fed - 2+ on every
surface.
bob
Yes, plus smashing the AO record makes up for it big time.
Whisper
2021-02-21 11:09:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.
18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.
That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Yes it's astonishing.

All time records at slams;

French Open - Nadal - 13
Australian Open - Djokovic - 9
Wimbledon - Federer - 8
USO - Tilden - 7


Nadal's dominance at FO is off the charts even compared to Djoker at AO.
Djoker has been pushed to 5 sets a few times in AO finals while Nadal
has won all 13 in 3 or 4 sets. Plus the 4 extra titles over 9 is mind
blowing.

Wimbledon & USO records won't change for decades, if ever imo. FO & AO
look likely to keep increasing for next couple yrs.
Max's Hoemom
2021-02-21 17:52:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Whisper
Post by StephenJ
What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice.
18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals.
That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh?
Yes it's astonishing.
All time records at slams;
French Open - Nadal - 13
Australian Open - Djokovic - 9
Wimbledon - Federer - 8
USO - Tilden - 7
So Sampras not Slam king anywhere, anymore? Kinda sucks. I thought that is all that mattered once Federer won his 15th slam.
*skriptis
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sunday, February 21, 2021 at 5:09:39 AM UTC-6, Whisper wrote:> On 21/02/2021 9:45 pm, StephenJ wrote: > > What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice. > > > > 18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals. > > > > That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh? > >> Yes it's astonishing. > > All time records at slams; > > French Open - Nadal - 13 > Australian Open - Djokovic - 9 > Wimbledon - Federer - 8 > USO - Tilden - 7 > So Sampras not Slam king anywhere, anymore? Kinda sucks. I thought that is all that mattered once Federer won his 15th slam.
Wim/USO/YEC/YE№1

Federer - 24
Sampras - 23
Djokovic - 19
Nadal - 11

Federer played additional 7 years compared to Sampras, 8 if you count 2020.


What do you say about Serena and Graf?
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Max's Hoemom
2021-02-21 18:19:53 UTC
Permalink
On Sunday, February 21, 2021 at 5:09:39 AM UTC-6, Whisper wrote:> On 21/02/2021 9:45 pm, StephenJ wrote: > > What a beatdown ... I gave Medvedev a decent chance but no dice. > > > > 18 slams, 9-0 in AO Finals. > > > > That 9-0 in AO finals is something, eh? > >> Yes it's astonishing. > > All time records at slams; > > French Open - Nadal - 13 > Australian Open - Djokovic - 9 > Wimbledon - Federer - 8 > USO - Tilden - 7 > So Sampras not Slam king anywhere, anymore? Kinda sucks. I thought that is all that mattered once Federer won his 15th slam.
Wim/USO/YEC/YE№1
Federer - 24
Sampras - 23
Djokovic - 19
Nadal - 11
Federer played additional 7 years compared to Sampras, 8 if you count 2020.
BS. Federer reached #14 way before Sampras did.
What do you say about Serena and Graf?
--
Graf reached #22 way before Serena did.
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
*skriptis
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Are you blind? I said Wim/USO/YEC/YE№1 not slams.

Sure, Federer reached 14 earlier, but then again Sampras never gave much priority to AO/FO. Certainly not as much as these guys today. FO for obvious reasons, but even AO was a second rate slam for him. How about Agassi showing up in Australia for the first time in 1995, almost aged 25?


So comparing stuff that were seen similar in both eras or by both players might be a better indicator.

Wim/USO/YEC/YE№1 is just that.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Max's Hoemom
2021-02-21 19:49:40 UTC
Permalink
Are you blind? I said Wim/USO/YEC/YE№1 not slams.
Sure, Federer reached 14 earlier, but then again Sampras never gave much priority to AO/FO. Certainly not as much as these guys today. FO for obvious reasons, but even AO was a second rate slam for him. How about Agassi showing up in Australia for the first time in 1995, almost aged 25?
So comparing stuff that were seen similar in both eras or by both players might be a better indicator.
Wim/USO/YEC/YE№1 is just that.
How did you arrive at those numbers? Talking shit as usual?
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
*skriptis
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
I added up.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Max's Hoemom
2021-02-21 20:04:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by *skriptis
I added up.
--
You added YEC to Wimbledon?
You added Year end No.1 to Wimbledon?

Are you brain dead?
Post by *skriptis
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
*skriptis
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Yes.

It's a pattern we're trying to unveil.

YEC is always bellow Wimbledon you idiot.

But YEC in the 90s is similar to YEC today.

Wimbledon in the 90s is similar to Wimbledon today. So the stuff is comparable. Get it?

AO in the late 80s/90s is not the same as AO today.


Agassi played his first US Open in 1986.
His first AO was in 1995.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
StephenJ
2021-02-21 21:10:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by *skriptis
Agassi played his first US Open in 1986.
His first AO was in 1995.
That's rather startling. I remember that, but it had never really hit home until you put it that way.
Whisper
2021-02-21 22:00:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by StephenJ
Post by *skriptis
Agassi played his first US Open in 1986.
His first AO was in 1995.
That's rather startling. I remember that, but it had never really hit home until you put it that way.
Yes, Agassi was kicking himself for not playing AO earlier. His game
was very suited to the surface, like Djoker. Still he won 4, but maybe
6-8 was possible?
bob
2021-02-22 00:29:45 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 21 Feb 2021 21:14:28 +0100 (GMT+01:00), *skriptis
Nadal - 11 > > Federer played additional 7 years compared to Sampras, 8 if you count 2020. BS. Federer reached #14 way before Sampras did.> > > What do you say about Serena and Graf?> -- Graf reached #22 way before Serena did.> > > > > ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html> Are you blind? I said Wim/USO/YEC/YE?1 not slams. > > Sure, Federer reached 14 earlier, but then again Sampras never gave much priority to AO/FO. Certainly not as much as these guys today. FO for obvious reasons, but even AO was a second rate slam for him. How about Agassi showing up in Australia for the first time in 1995, almost aged 25? > > > So comparing stuff that were seen similar in both eras or by both players might be a better indicator. > > Wim/USO/YEC/YE?1 is just that. How did you arrive at those numbers?> I added up.> -- > > You added YEC to Wimbledon?You added Year end No.1 to Wimbledon?Are you brain dead?> > > ----Android NewsGroup
Reader---- > https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html
Yes.
It's a pattern we're trying to unveil.
YEC is always bellow Wimbledon you idiot.
But YEC in the 90s is similar to YEC today.
Wimbledon in the 90s is similar to Wimbledon today. So the stuff is comparable. Get it?
AO in the late 80s/90s is not the same as AO today.
Agassi played his first US Open in 1986.
His first AO was in 1995.
plus look at the 70s - many FO and AO just plain skipped by the top
players of the time.

bob
Loading...