2018 Wimbledon men’s SF: Djokovic v Nadal

[monfed]

Actually, your understanding of "childish bickering" (my first emphasis) is different than as described by the English dictionary:
bicker /ˈbɪkə/ argue about petty and trivial matters.
The fact that Moxie refuted your arguments downgrading Nadal, by pointing the same arguments also downgrade Federer, is a valid debating technique, involving so called "counter argumentation". On the other hand, your argument (my second emphasis) is simply a non-sequitur in the discussion, because no one has been talking about murder on this thread so far. The purpose of raising such non-sequitur argument is clear to me: an emotional appeal by the disputant who tries to win the audience by emotive empathy rather than by logical argumentation. As such, your argument falls into the "Appeal to Pity" category of logical fallacies, read about it e.g. here:
https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/
In likely case that you don't care about logical fallacies in your discourse (you've proven it many times in this forum), maybe one thing you can learn herein is: with a proper understanding of the term "childish bickering" as cited by me above, the term in question is more applicable to your latest "murder" (my second emphasis) argument, rather than any argument raised beforehand by Moxie. Arguments having no logical meaning but carrying heavy emotive weight, are common among squabbling children.

Damn. Are you done with your thesis? It's called tit for tat which is standard dulltard arguments. No need to be defensive.

 

[the AntiPusher]

That's the most illogical post I've read in quite some time (and that's saying a lot!). You do realize Anderson played a long match against Roger and then played 6 hours 36 minutes against Isner. Maybe, just maybe THAT might be why he was easy for Novak to beat.

His first serve was down 15-20 mph in the final, he visibly couldn't push up on weary legs to serve properly till he got a second wind when it was too late in set 3 and needed an arm massage cos of discomfort from all the long matches beforehand. Without his serve, Anderson is hopeless. A fit Anderson last time they played at Wimbledon won the first 2 sets against Novak and only lost the match cos it was postponed to the following day. There's no way he wins only 2 games per set when 100% physically fit and you know it.

Think before posting nonsense like this please next time.

This is for you and GSM who just co-sign this bull crap..You are making excuses for Anderson..He had two full days to recover and Novak barely had less than 20 hours.. To call my post illogical is WEAK..anyone who co signed your post has exposed themselves as being bias and simple as your reply..

 

[Front242]

This is for you and GSM who just co-sign this bull crap..You are making excuses for Anderson..He had two full days to recover and Novak barely had less than 20 hours.. To call my post illogical is WEAK..anyone who co signed your post has exposed themselves as being bias and simple as your reply..

Let's be real here....you're ultra pissed off that a less than great Djokovic beat Nadal and the only way to make yourself feel better is by proclaiming Novak was actually better than what we all saw. Newsflash, he wasn't. Federer lost to Anderson also. It happens.

 

[monfed]

This is for you and GSM who just co-sign this bull crap..You are making excuses for Anderson..He had two full days to recover and Novak barely had less than 20 hours.. To call my post illogical is WEAK..anyone who co signed your post has exposed themselves as being bias and simple as your reply..

LOL Anderson was exhausted for the final. The first couple of sets he was zombie mode.

 

[monfed]

*Edited because I answered you originally before I had coffee so wasn't thinking straight.

When do you ever?

 

[Michael;Kiwi]

I can name quite a few Fed fans who must be on “something “that ain’t legal “ in most states besides Colo and California if they actually believe that the World’s # 1 is using PEDs but the world’s #2 who is almost 6 years older is pure as the driven Snow.

Sorry, I’m a little bit confused by this post. I said I didn’t think any of them are doping.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Sorry, I’m a little bit confused by this post. I said I didn’t think any of them are doping.

My post wasn’t directed at you. They know who they are..you’re all good

 

[the AntiPusher]

Let's be real here....you're ultra pissed off that a less than great Djokovic beat Nadal and the only way to make yourself feel better is by proclaiming Novak was actually better than what we all saw. Newsflash, he wasn't. Federer lost to Anderson also. It happens.

I stand by the content of my post..you know I won’t back down..

 

[the AntiPusher]

Let's be real here....you're ultra pissed off that a less than great Djokovic beat Nadal and the only way to make yourself feel better is by proclaiming Novak was actually better than what we all saw. Newsflash, he wasn't. Federer lost to Anderson also. It happens.

Again. address my reply ..you’re sayin a less than 80 % Novak would’ve kick da Rodge ole junk into the dirt..correct..Answer the question or get GSM to speak up for you if I make you nervous..”Remember Front if my answers frightened you than cease to asking scary questions!”

 

[monfed]

I stand by the content of my post..you know I won’t back down..

What a warrior you are.

 

[Front242]

Again. address my reply ..you’re sayin a less than 80 % Novak would’ve kick da Rodge ole junk into the dirt..correct..Answer the question or get GSM to speak up for you if I make you nervous..”Remember Front if my answers frightened you than cease to asking scary questions!”

If I even knew what this post meant I'd answer it but I'm stumped. I didn't mention anything about Novak beating Roger anywhere and Roger was already knocked out so why would I even bother? I said Novak wasn't anywhere close to great against Rafa and he beat an exhausted Anderson. To quote the Mallorcan ball bag "iz the true, no?"

 

[the AntiPusher]

If I even knew what this post meant I'd answer it but I'm stumped. I didn't mention anything about Novak beating Roger anywhere and Roger was already knocked out so why would I even bother? I said Novak wasn't anywhere close to great against Rafa and he beat an exhausted Anderson. To quote the Mallorcan ball bag "iz the true, no?"

You said that Novak was less than 80 % of his talent level to defeat Rafa.. ok you are dodgy on Owning your post.. if Novak was in less than great form, why did he proclaim that Nadal deserved to be the number one ranked player in the world..You and I know that’s all about guilt.. First, Novak doesn’t make that declaration unless he truly feels that and no way a player of his caliber would’ve ever said that afterwards the epic match vs Rafa. Second, that’s Guilt that’s consuming Novak.. He knows he took advantage of those blokes who are part of that tennis establishment.

 

[Front242]

You said that Novak was less than 80 % of his talent level to defeat Rafa.. ok you are dodgy on Owning your post.. if Novak was in less than great form, why did he proclaim that Nadal deserved to be the number one ranked player in the world..You and I know that’s all about guilt.. First, Novak doesn’t make that declaration unless he truly feels that and no way a player of his caliber would’ve ever said that afterwards the epic match vs Rafa. Second, that’s Guilt that’s consuming Novak.. He knows he took advantage of those blokes who are part of that tennis establishment.

Have you actually lost the plot? He deserves to be number 1 based on accumulated points lol (RG, all clay season etc). That said, if either Novak, Roger or Rafa win the US Open then whoever does will have been the best player this year having won 2 slams and no amount of points won will be better than having 1 more slam than the other 2 in 2018.

Where does the hell does guilt come into any of this? Like I said, he won playing less than great and was nowhere even close to as good as he was against Roger in 2014 and 2015. Anyone could see that and Novak himself knows that and is probably as shocked as most of us are that he won it.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Have you actually lost the plot? He deserves to be number 1 based on accumulated points lol (RG, all clay season etc). That said, if either Novak, Roger or Rafa win the US Open then whoever does will have been the best player this year having won 2 slams and no amount of points won will be better than having 1 more slam than the other 2 in 2018.

Where does the hell does guilt come into any of this? Like I said, he won playing less than great and was nowhere even close to as good as he was against Roger in 2014 and 2015. Anyone could see that and Novak himself knows that and is probably as shocked as most of us are that he won it.

I didn’t loose anything..plus there was no plot to loose..This isn’t a mystery or True or dare..This is Pass or Fail..Rafa played winning Tennis but the combination of Novak’s defense and a distinct competitive advantage that was enforced by club ancient rules made him fail. Of all Rafa’s Wimbledon tournament matches, this one is the 2nd match besides his defeat of Roger at the 08 final is the one I am most proud of. Rafa’s tenacity and determination was truly an admirable experience which will not be overshadowed by some non Tennis playing fans who Never competed for anything but who gets the biggest piece of chicken at their dining room table.

 

[the AntiPusher]

Front,Darth and Federerberg, I value what TiM Henman just said in Tennis World 7/24 and what was written in Tennis.com. 7/14..Only some misguided troll is gonna buy into the your narrative that match wasn’t played at a high quality level. The three of you willl learn that humility is the most admirable trait of a human being. Remember Darth what Wendy Rhodes taught you during the “Golden Frog” episode, Strength is right next to Foolishness “.

 

[DarthFed]

Front,Darth and Federerberg, I value what TiM Henman just said in Tennis World 7/24 and what was written in Tennis.com. 7/14..Only some misguided troll is gonna buy into the your narrative that match wasn’t played at a high quality level. The three of you willl learn that humility is the most admirable trait of a human being. Remember Darth what Wendy Rhodes taught you during the “Golden Frog” episode, Strength is right next to Foolishness “.

Aside from the first set Djokovic wasn't anywhere near what you are making him out to be. Did you see how bad his ROS was, especially in big moments? Did you see how poor his movement was at times, especially moving forward? I mean, we could've mistook him for Isner on some of those drop shots he was a mile away from getting to. And in the last two sets as soon as he got tight he started pushing the ball, it was obvious for anyone to see.

If Nole was all the way back he'd have won that in straights as we are talking indoor grass which is Rafa's worst nightmare.

 

[monfed]

faker will never be back to his 2015 level, let alone his 2011 level. He's basically at the same stage as Fed was in 2011-2012.

 

[Moxie]

Front,Darth and Federerberg, I value what TiM Henman just said in Tennis World 7/24 and what was written in Tennis.com. 7/14..Only some misguided troll is gonna buy into the your narrative that match wasn’t played at a high quality level. The three of you willl learn that humility is the most admirable trait of a human being. Remember Darth what Wendy Rhodes taught you during the “Golden Frog” episode, Strength is right next to Foolishness “.

I'm not sure what match you were watching, A-P, but Saturday was dreck. Are you trying to posit that Nadal lost because Novak was so good? I don't even know if that works in your favor. But, realistically, I think Nadal had that match in the bag more than one way, and he duffed it. And it was purely psychological. He never should have lost that match. And it was far from classic or enjoyable to watch.

 

[DarthFed]

I'm not sure what match you were watching, A-P, but Saturday was dreck. Are you trying to posit that Nadal lost because Novak was so good? I don't even know if that works in your favor. But, realistically, I think Nadal had that match in the bag more than one way, and he duffed it. And it was purely psychological. He never should have lost that match. And it was far from classic or enjoyable to watch.

He should have won mainly because Novak's level on Saturday was terrible. But with that said it was never close to in the bag because Rafa literally was never ahead in the match. You have to be ahead for it to be said that you have it in the bag.

 

[Moxie]

He should have won mainly because Novak's level on Saturday was terrible. But with that said it was never close to in the bag because Rafa literally was never ahead in the match. You have to be ahead for it to be said that you have it in the bag.

But, if you're going to complain about Novak's level: Didn't Rafa have several set points in the 3rd set TB? He could have walked out on Friday night 2 sets to the good, and finished on Sat in an hour. That is not a huge leap of faith.