Jump to content

theentomologist

Gold Members
  • Posts

    1,007
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by theentomologist

  1. Federer has a far superior record at grand slams than Djokovic, does this mean that Federer is certainly going to win? Nadal also has a much better record than Djokovic, would Nadal inevitably beat Djokovic too?

    Rallying is working fine here for Murray. Going for ridiculous winners too early in the point would be stupid. Murray has said himself that the key thing about his improvement on clay this year is that he is prepared to be patient and only take the ball on at the right time. Doing this, he absolutely thrashed Nadal in the second set of the match they played in Monte Carlo. Murray also very nearly beat Djokovic in Rome play this way.

    The key point is, you can look at results from 2005-2010 and think you know it all but that's nonsense. Murray's level on clay right now is as good as it has ever been. Nadal's level is lower than it has been for the past five or six years. Therefore Murray had more chance coming into this match than he would've done at any time previously.

    I also did not say that Murray was going to win, all I was saying is that he had some sort of chance when lots of people here seems to be completely writing him off.

    Bjorn Borg has won more titles here, sorry. Federer has won more grand slams than anyone else ever, does that me he is unbeatable right now?

    There's no reason why Murray couldn't play the big points better, but the key reason why Murray doesn't win these sort of matches is the mental issues he has. He folds under pressure in the big matches and fails when it really matters. Nadal is the opposite, which is obviously a big thing in Nadal's favour. Right now, Murray's level of tennis can compete with Nadal's on this service. To say Murray had no chance was simply wrong.

    well we can agree on that. he has some sort of chance.

  2. I take it you haven't watched him play for the past two months then. It seems you have the people who watch tennis a handful of times per year out in force just because Murray happens to be in the semi finals.

    Your so right, with your superb in depth tennis following knowledge, rallying him is working so well.:rolleyes:

    regardless of whether anyone has seen him in the past few months. he's clearly, statistically better at the slams than Murray. Tell me that's wrong.

    2-0 see.

  3. Why is Nadal inevitably going to win? Why should Murray start going for ridiculous winners when he is having plenty of success rallying with him? Some strange comments on this thread today.

    its not inevitable its just statistically probable.

    how is he 'having plenty of success rallying' do you have the rally length/points won stat there?

  4. he played crap. he was too self flagellating in public. he gave sucker to his opp. BUT he's still in it. and tomorrow is another day. rest, food, good talking to from mum, and I reckon he should take the 5th tomorrow.

    and yes. he will have to play better to bt nadal but he'd have to play better to beat my granny and she's been dead some 8 years.

  5. They said on Confidential that she was taken before The Impossible Astronaut, so perhaps as far back as The Eleventh Hour or the Angel episodes? There is a few unexplained things from Flesh and Stone that was never resolved.

    I also think the Ganger Doctor will be back. The line the Doctor mentioned about 'flesh stabilising' surely can't be a throwaway one. Perhaps he dies and the Ganger replaces him in the diner?

    Also, if Amy was telling the 'Ganger' about his death then the Doctor knew the entire time that he was heading for his death, so he has definitely prepared a plan!

    The Doctor gave them bunk beds. ;)

    what if he wanted the illusion of dying and needed something which wouldn't really die....;)

  6. 1 - The "Repost this if . . . . " type posts

    2 - Being tagged in pictures that dont even have you in them

    3 - Old firm pish

    4 - Crap like farmville posts and begging for new neighbours

    5 - liking your own status

    YES!

    I hate being tagged in pictures I AM in ffs. why would I be happy to be tagged in ones I'm not? I have the strongest facebook settings available for professional reasons and tagging just lets your non entity pals (not yours noct groove but the people who do this) at least get as far as my facebook front door -which is impossible through any other means.

  7. 1. There's a girl on my FB who posts almost weekly "Why did i let him use me again? Do i neva learn????!!!" - Well clearly not you stupid c**t or you wouldn't keep shagging him then getting ignored you fucking bunny boiler. This reminds me, must delete her.

    2. Old Firm Fuckwits. It's either "Mon the Gers WATP Celtic scum" or "Lennon is ghod. TAL!!!" f**k off and die you c***s. Slowly.

    3. Farmville. "I need help to raise my barn". No you don't. You need a life you fucking tragic individual. Only eclipsed by people who have farmville photos in their albums which look worse than the grapics in a Spectrum 48K game.

    4. Those long statuses about stuff like mental illness, disability or cancer that end with "97% of people on Facebook that read this won't repost this as their status". You're fucking right i won't.

    5. Text talk. One of my mates is especially guilt of this. I geniunely can barely understand any of his statuses at all. Whats more annoying is that when he posts one, most of the other comments tend to be answered with either "f**k aye mate" or similarly worded answers.

    this is a fucking brilliant post. and I second it almost entirely. you know you can block farmville cityville mafia and all that shite?

    I have to concede to being prone to long morose rants though and using it a bit like twitter. though I have got right into that now. so do that less.

  8. Perhaps because of the quality of writer for last weeks episode?

    I felt this week's was ok, but entirely predictable.

    Did anyone NOT see the clone Doctor coming? Surely they won't use this as the get out clause for the Astronaut shooting him?

    The real question has to be:

    Did the Doctor DELIBERATELY cause a clone??

    nah. its the lack of quality in this weeks rather than Gaiman being great. which he is.

    yes. yes he did.

  9. Thart's my understanding of how they're getting round it. The thirteen regens was a timelord imposed law not a physical one.

    Quite enjoyed tonight's episode anyway. Not as much as last week's, but it was a decent old-style bit of Who.

    this weeks was ok. but they're clearly building to the mid season hiatus now. and it wasn't as good as last week. speaking with my whovian associates. we fear last week was a unequal-able peak.

  10. Hmmm, that would be a bit of a cop out. Realistically, surely the BBC realise that there could be an incredible story arc for the 13th Doctor discovering if he's mortal or not.

    oh I agree with you. but we're not the ones who created the problem.

  11. I didn't see that. What was the get out?

    I know that it's been suggested that the 13 was always a limit imposed by the Time Lords themselves, and that since he's the last one then it no longer applies. And also in Trial of a Timelord it's suggested that a Time Lords regens can be handed to another person.

    Was the Master not given a whole new set of regens as well at one point?

    here <_<

    I wonder if we could argue that *technically* there's no limit c.f. the master incident you cite but that he's a last of the timelords so there's no one to *give* him a new set.

×
×
  • Create New...