I'm laughing because you're being ridiculous. You are claiming that the player up two sets is being "schooled" by his opponent. That is laughable.When @DFSNOLE has lost the argument (or is just lost), he is left with using laughing emojis.
Pathetic.
how did Wimbledon turn out for Medvedev when he played Alcaraz?
I think the point is pretty clear but I guess I have to spell it out; playing THAT FAR back is not a good strategy, even if it works ONE NIGHT when the opponent is clearly having an off night
that's as far as he'll ascend, too
They are not playing at Wimbledon. regarding this match, you said he would be doing better if he wasn't playing that far back, and he was up 2-0, your comment was idiotic or poorly stated.
If you are attempting to make a blanket statement over all the times they play then you need to better assert that position.
I think we all know they are not playing at Wimbledon. But playing back didn't work there; playing back at Indian Wells didn't work, either. All anyone has to do is watch the video I posted above.
And, yes, I do believe Medvedev would be doing better TONIGHT if he didn't play back. The first set, after all, went to an uncomfortable tie breaker, did it not? And now, instead of possibly winning in straight sets, off to the 4th set we go. This match is far from over. This is what I typed tonight:
"He barely won the first set even with Carlos playing so poorly"
"Imagine if Medvedev didn't play so far back? It would be an even bigger rout for Medvedev at this point."
And that's what I clearly did in a prior post:
I think the point is pretty clear but I guess I have to spell it out; playing THAT FAR back is not a good strategy, even if it works ONE NIGHT when the opponent is clearly having an off night.
I'm laughing because you're being ridiculous. You are claiming that the player up two sets is being "schooled" by his opponent. That is laughable.
The 3rd and 4th set have no bearing on your comment about doing better at 2-0, you are pursuing a differing line of reasoning based on the idiocy of your initial comment. You stated Medvedev would be doing better through 2 sets if he was playing closer in, even though he was up two sets.
Spin it all you want, that was your comment and the outcome of this match or any other has no bearing on what you stated.
He was #1 in 2022, are you saying he will not ascend further than #3 going forward?
re-read my post and try again.
or don't waste our time and accept defeat.
@DFSNOLE , well?
And imagine if Medvedev didn't play so far back? It would be an even bigger rout for Medvedev at this point.
Oh, well; I guess #3 in the world is fine with him.
I did; maybe you should read what you posted
are you saying he will rise on this list?
Ultimate Tennis Statistics - Most Weeks at ATP No. 1
Most Weeks at ATP No. 1 at Ultimate Tennis Statisticswww.ultimatetennisstatistics.com
Well, this is what I posted:
And, yes, I do believe Medvedev would be doing better TONIGHT if he didn't play back. The first set, after all, went to an uncomfortable tie breaker, did it not?
I responded to your comment that Medvedev would ascend no higher than #3. I pointed out you were wrong and offered you the chance to correct your comment by stating he will not ascend further than his current #3 ranking.
Are you saying he was not #1?
Glad you finally conceded the point, unsure why you are quoting a different comment when it is not germane to the rout comment discussion.
Again, thank you for conceding the point. Were you going to explain the superfluousjust accept defeat. are all you Noles fans this dumb?
Again, thank you for conceding the point. Were you going to explain the superfluous
comment you quoted that did not pertain to our rout discussion?
LOL
No, I was not wrong. I clearly was not looking back; I was looking at the present. I simply said "that's [#3] as far as he'll ascend, too."
Now, I will offer you a chance to correct your comment.
And I clearly recognized that he has been #1 in the past by showing he's just #18 on the all time weeks #1 list. Not exactly something to brag about.
you sound completely defeated, which you are.
hope you have a better night.
That is what I expected, you are unable to make a point with typed word and then spend time defending an idiotic or inaccurate comment.
Your sentence was not clear and lacked basic structure to suggest that it was only forward thinking.
Thats as far as he will ascend, means he will never be higher, he has already, so your comment was inaccurate.
Your reading comprehension is as inept as your sentence structuring.
Are you going to explain the superfluous quote?
LOL
You complain about my sentence structuring when in your very first sentence you use a comma when you should have used a semi-colon or a period.
Again, just accept defeat. I realize being stupid is probably hard on you and hard to accept but do try to have a better night.
You clearly are not very bright and not worth any more of my time but I am sure you will reply again with more stupid comments. Maybe you will prove me wrong for the first time tonight; I doubt it, however.
You clearly are not very bright and not worth any more of my time but I am sure you will reply again with more stupid comments. Maybe you will prove me wrong for the first time tonight; I doubt it, however.
Fran, why do you avoid addressing direct questions?
Still wasting my time. Still have yet to prove me wrong tonight.
We're done here.
Thank you for again conceding that you made an idiotic post regarding the status of the match when the score was 2 sets to zero.
Hope you were able to enjoy the match tonight even though the guy getting “schooled” was victorious 3-1.
Your ability to comprehend that you conceded is less surprising than Medvedev's victory.LOL
I clearly did not concede a thing. What I did do, however, was easily punch holes in all of your idiotic statments. I am not surprised that you fail to see this. You have failed all night, after all.
We're done here.
Your ability to comprehend that you conceded is less surprising than Medvedev's victory.
Another inaccuracy in your posting, the pattern is crystal clear at this point.
I dont get it. Everyone has to like the same sports?I guess I need to post a whole bunch of laughing emojis; I'm laughing so hard, I have tears, TEARS, i tell you.
All this back and forth bitching and arguing--on a freaking TENNIS thread? This has been hysterical. I'm surprised someone didn't bring up Trump's name in all this.
Correct. You don't get it. But enjoy tennis if you like.I dont get it. Everyone has to like the same sports?
Hey danks!Correct. You don't get it. But enjoy tennis if you like.