31 Aug 2007 12:27:35
Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
there. Then he goes on to say this:

"There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
part of the court open.

At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"



LOL. Suck it, jaros.



31 Aug 2007 12:37:32
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 2:27 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> part of the court open.
>
> At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> LOL. Suck it, jaros.

so now McEnroe the pyscho needs to be taken seriously?



31 Aug 2007 12:51:15
Adam Thirnis
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 8:27 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> part of the court open.
>
> At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> LOL. Suck it, jaros.

so sampras was unwell 2 uso finals running? sheesh that's bad luck...



31 Aug 2007 13:06:14
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
> Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> part of the court open.
>
> At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> LOL. Suck it, jaros.

When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
anecdote.



31 Aug 2007 13:16:32
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 3:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > part of the court open.
>
> > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I think it was the combination of age, a couple of emotionally and
physically intense battles with Rafter and Agassi (especially
with Agassi) and the stupid TV-dictated scheduling of playing the
semis and finals on back to back days.

All that plus stamina was always Pete's Achilles heel.



31 Aug 2007 13:34:01
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 3:51 pm, Adam Thirnis <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Aug 31, 8:27 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > part of the court open.
>
> > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> so sampras was unwell 2 uso finals running? sheesh that's bad luck...- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I never said that. I have praised Safin's performance vs. Sampras in
his win. 2 different matches and circumstances. I know that is hard
for you to wrap your brain around, but give it a try.



31 Aug 2007 13:36:56
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > part of the court open.
>
> > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.





31 Aug 2007 14:01:18
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
> On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > > part of the court open.
>
> > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.

Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.

I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:

The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
groundstrokes.

Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.

This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
these comfortably on better days.

One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
before the final.

Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
make the precise passing shot.

Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
errors from Sampras.



31 Aug 2007 14:06:34
Adam Thirnis
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 10:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> groundstrokes.
>
> Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> these comfortably on better days.
>
> One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> before the final.
>
> Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> make the precise passing shot.
>
> Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> errors from Sampras.

plus hewitt beat sampras twice running before this match - and again
afterwards. it was hardly a surprise he won



31 Aug 2007 14:18:59
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> groundstrokes.
>
> Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> these comfortably on better days.
>
> One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> before the final.
>
> Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> make the precise passing shot.
>
> Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.

It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
anywhere near full strength? Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
wanted under the circumstances.

When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.



31 Aug 2007 14:22:00
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 5:06 pm, Adam Thirnis <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Aug 31, 10:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > groundstrokes.
>
> > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > these comfortably on better days.
>
> > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > before the final.
>
> > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > make the precise passing shot.
>
> > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > errors from Sampras.
>
> plus hewitt beat sampras twice running before this match - and again
> afterwards. it was hardly a surprise he won- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Those were not slam finals. Hewitt was a tough opponent at the time,
no doubt. Tough match up and eager as a young beaver. But it was
indeed a surprise that he won so easily. 1 and 1 in the last 2 sets.
Let's be real...



31 Aug 2007 14:34:17
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > groundstrokes.
>
> > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > these comfortably on better days.
>
> > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > before the final.
>
> > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > make the precise passing shot.
>
> > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> anywhere near full strength?

Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.

> Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> wanted under the circumstances.
>

Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.

This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.

> When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.

May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.



31 Aug 2007 14:40:20
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 5:34 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > > > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> > > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> > > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> > > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> > > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > > groundstrokes.
>
> > > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> > > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > > these comfortably on better days.
>
> > > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > > before the final.
>
> > > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > > make the precise passing shot.
>
> > > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > anywhere near full strength?
>
> Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
>
> > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > wanted under the circumstances.
>
> Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
>
> This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
>
> > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Why are we here when we can just read the match scores and be done
with it? I have my own match to go play now, so I will let you read
the match scores and feel like you have the whole story.



31 Aug 2007 21:47:01
Richard Eich
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

[email protected] wrote...
> On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

[....]

> > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
> >
> > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > anywhere near full strength?
>
> Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.

...in your opinion, of course. Fine. We all know about opinions.

Even so, "hands full" doesn't mean Sampras would have lost, or lost
so badly.

> > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > wanted under the circumstances.
>
> Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.

So make the case using something more than mere assertions, then?

> This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.

It would have been. What's the fault in saying that?

> > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.

Please go study up on the difference between "mitigating
circumstances" and "excuses", Mr Post Hoc Reasoning.


31 Aug 2007 15:03:47
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 3:47 am, Richard Eich <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote...
> > On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [....]
>
> > > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> > > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > > anywhere near full strength?
>
> > Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> > have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
>
> ...in your opinion, of course. Fine. We all know about opinions.
>

Not just an opinion. An informed opinion. Hewitt was young, full of
speed, making very few errors (13 UEs in 3 sets).

> Even so, "hands full" doesn't mean Sampras would have lost, or lost
> so badly.
>

Of course not. It's impossible to tell. But Sampras wouldn't have
found it easy. All we can say is Sampras suffered a pretty bad loss
and Hewitt's game played a big part in it, otherwise we will be
discounting Hewitt's efforts more than it deserves.

> > > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > > wanted under the circumstances.
>
> > Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> > past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> > newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
>
> So make the case using something more than mere assertions, then?
>

What case? I was merely demonstrating how the same piece of
information (e.g., Sampas's three wins against past USO champs) can be
used for him and against him in the lead up to the Hewitt match. So,
it's not exactly a great premise to build one's argument on.

> > This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> > those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> > like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
>
> It would have been. What's the fault in saying that?
>

It's indicative of a line of fallacious reasoning that fits the same
facts, post hoc, to support a conclusion biased in favor of Sampras.
Therefore faulty.

> > > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> > May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> > make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.
>
> Please go study up on the difference between "mitigating
> circumstances" and "excuses", Mr Post Hoc Reasoning.

Being unfit for match play (especially in a Slam final) or choking on
bread-and-butter volleys is not "mitigating circumstances". At least
Sampras didn't use that phrase, nor did he make any excuse.



01 Sep 2007 00:34:54
Richard Eich
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

[email protected] wrote...
> On Sep 1, 3:47 am, Richard Eich <[email protected]> wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote...
> > > On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > [....]
> >
> > > > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > > > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > > > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > > > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > > > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > > > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
> >
> > > > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > > > anywhere near full strength?
> >
> > > Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> > > have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
> >
> > ...in your opinion, of course. Fine. We all know about opinions.
>
> Not just an opinion. An informed opinion.

<Rolls Eyes >. OK. Sure. Later.


31 Aug 2007 17:58:39
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 6:34 am, Richard Eich <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote...
> > On Sep 1, 3:47 am, Richard Eich <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > [email protected] wrote...
> > > > On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > [....]
>
> > > > > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > > > > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > > > > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > > > > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > > > > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > > > > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> > > > > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > > > > anywhere near full strength?
>
> > > > Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> > > > have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
>
> > > ...in your opinion, of course. Fine. We all know about opinions.
>
> > Not just an opinion. An informed opinion.
>
> <Rolls Eyes>. OK. Sure. Later.

Sigh. Teenies.



01 Sep 2007 02:08:40
RuPEDski
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO


"[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the
first
> > > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised
from
> > > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
> >
> > > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in
big
> > > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that
you're
> > > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You
don't
> > > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and
leave
> > > > > > part of the court open.
> >
> > > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to
cover
> > > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people
will
> > > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with
Sampras
> > > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open:
Pete
> > > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
> >
> > > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
> >
> > > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description
of
> > > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game
plan
> > > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked
in
> > > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was
quite
> > > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would
get
> > > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was
completely
> > > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
> >
> > > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
> >
> > > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
> >
> > > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > > groundstrokes.
> >
> > > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
> >
> > > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > > these comfortably on better days.
> >
> > > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > > before the final.
> >
> > > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > > make the precise passing shot.
> >
> > > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
> >
> > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > anywhere near full strength?
>
> Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
>
> > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > wanted under the circumstances.
> >
>
> Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
>
> This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
>
> > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.

LOL!!! That's exactly why he didn't. In fact he over praised Hewitt in many
people's opinion. Unlike so many other players, he didn't insinuate that it
was injuries or his poor play that was the problem.





01 Sep 2007 02:09:22
RuPEDski
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO


<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the
first
> > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised
from
> > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
> >
> > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in
big
> > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that
you're
> > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You
don't
> > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and
leave
> > > > > part of the court open.
> >
> > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to
cover
> > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people
will
> > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open:
Pete
> > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
> >
> > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
> >
> > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was
quite
> > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
> >
> > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
> >
> > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
> >
> > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > groundstrokes.
> >
> > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
> >
> > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > these comfortably on better days.
> >
> > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > before the final.
> >
> > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > make the precise passing shot.
> >
> > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> anywhere near full strength? Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> wanted under the circumstances.
>
> When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.

It was so obvious, it is unbelievable that even here, some would argue it.




31 Aug 2007 19:24:03
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 8:08 am, "RuPEDski" <[email protected] > wrote:
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]
>
>
>
> > On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the
> first
> > > > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised
> from
> > > > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in
> big
> > > > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that
> you're
> > > > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You
> don't
> > > > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and
> leave
> > > > > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to
> cover
> > > > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people
> will
> > > > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with
> Sampras
> > > > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open:
> Pete
> > > > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description
> of
> > > > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game
> plan
> > > > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked
> in
> > > > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was
> quite
> > > > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would
> get
> > > > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was
> completely
> > > > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> > > > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > > > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> > > > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> > > > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > > > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > > > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > > > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > > > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > > > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > > > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > > > groundstrokes.
>
> > > > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > > > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > > > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > > > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > > > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > > > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> > > > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > > > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > > > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > > > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > > > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > > > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > > > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > > > these comfortably on better days.
>
> > > > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > > > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > > > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > > > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > > > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > > > before the final.
>
> > > > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > > > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > > > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > > > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > > > make the precise passing shot.
>
> > > > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > > > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > > > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> > > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > > anywhere near full strength?
>
> > Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> > have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
>
> > > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > > wanted under the circumstances.
>
> > Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> > past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> > newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
>
> > This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> > those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> > like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
>
> > > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> > May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> > make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.
>
> LOL!!! That's exactly why he didn't. In fact he over praised Hewitt in many
> people's opinion. Unlike so many other players, he didn't insinuate that it
> was injuries or his poor play that was the problem.

Er, yeah. Which is why it's silly to bring up the same excuse here. If
Sampras himself didn't think of making that excuse, his fans shouldn't
either.



31 Aug 2007 19:27:15
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 1, 8:09 am, "RuPEDski" <[email protected] > wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]
>
>
>
> > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the
> first
> > > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised
> from
> > > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in
> big
> > > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that
> you're
> > > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You
> don't
> > > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and
> leave
> > > > > > part of the court open.
>
> > > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to
> cover
> > > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people
> will
> > > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open:
> Pete
> > > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> > > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> > > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> > > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> > > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was
> quite
> > > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would get
> > > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was completely
> > > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
>
> > > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
>
> > > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
>
> > > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > > groundstrokes.
>
> > > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
>
> > > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > > these comfortably on better days.
>
> > > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > > before the final.
>
> > > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > > make the precise passing shot.
>
> > > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > anywhere near full strength? Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > wanted under the circumstances.
>
> > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> It was so obvious, it is unbelievable that even here, some would argue it.

Nobody's arguing that Sampras had a bad day at the office. The obvious
response to the thread starting post is, "so what?" Although it will
make sense if Jaros erroneously claimed in some other thread that
Sampras was at prime from in that final. If that is the case, I
understand Blanders's motivation behind this thread.



31 Aug 2007 19:30:04
Carey
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO


[email protected] wrote:
> On Sep 1, 8:08 am, "RuPEDski" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >
> > news:[email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Sep 1, 2:36 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > > > > On Aug 31, 4:06 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the
> > first
> > > > > > > > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised
> > from
> > > > > > > > there. Then he goes on to say this:
> >
> > > > > > > > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in
> > big
> > > > > > > > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that
> > you're
> > > > > > > > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You
> > don't
> > > > > > > > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and
> > leave
> > > > > > > > part of the court open.
> >
> > > > > > > > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to
> > cover
> > > > > > > > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people
> > will
> > > > > > > > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with
> > Sampras
> > > > > > > > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open:
> > Pete
> > > > > > > > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
> >
> > > > > > > > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
> >
> > > > > > > When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> > > > > > > physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> > > > > > > physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> > > > > > > Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description
> > of
> > > > > > > mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> > > > > > > volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game
> > plan
> > > > > > > around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked
> > in
> > > > > > > the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> > > > > > > with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was
> > quite
> > > > > > > novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> > > > > > > sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> > > > > > > anecdote.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > > > > His legs were shot, plain and simple. I have no idea how you would
> > get
> > > > > > the impression that you did from Mac's recount, but it is totally
> > > > > > offbase. Mac could not have been more clear about what he meant.
> > > > > > Sampras was simply out of gas--his serve was off and he was
> > completely
> > > > > > unable to get in good position for the first volley. Hewitt played
> > > > > > his role, but let's keep it in reasonable perspective.
> >
> > > > > Even if his legs were shot, I am afraid it takes nothing away from the
> > > > > Hewitt win, or somehow absolves Sampras of his below-par performance.
> >
> > > > > I have found a somewhat even-handed analysis of the match:
> >
> > > > > The quality of play in the men's singles final on Sunday was decidedly
> > > > > unbalanced. Lleyton Hewitt won 7-6(7-4), 6-1, 6-1, handing Pete
> > > > > Sampras his worst defeat at a U.S. Open since 1989. Hewitt played a
> > > > > smart, clean match, committing only 13 unforced errors while
> > > > > repeatedly forcing Sampras to handle low volleys and occasionally
> > > > > passing him outright. Sampras, though, made Hewitt's work much too
> > > > > easy, missing an incredible number of playable volleys and
> > > > > groundstrokes.
> >
> > > > > Sampras credited Hewitt's speed and consistency, and one could attempt
> > > > > an argument that Sampras missed so many shots because he felt he had
> > > > > to hit too good a shot, one that Hewitt would not run down. It's more
> > > > > accurate, though, to say that Sampras just played exceptionally
> > > > > poorly. He missed dozens of volleys that he should have put away, even
> > > > > against the world's fastest player, which Hewitt may well be.
> >
> > > > > This match is being widely compared to last year's final, in which
> > > > > Marat Safin, who was 20, the same age as Hewitt this year, defeated
> > > > > Sampras, now 30, quite easily. The difference is that Sampras did not
> > > > > play badly against Safin. Safin overpowered him. Hewitt did not
> > > > > overpower Sampras, nor did he hit many clean winners, including
> > > > > passing shots. Hewitt did a great job of making Sampras hit volleys on
> > > > > low balls without a lot of pace, but we've all see Sampras handle
> > > > > these comfortably on better days.
> >
> > > > > One explanation for Sampras's poor performance might be fatigue. In
> > > > > the three previous rounds, he had defeated three former U.S. Open
> > > > > champions, Patrick Rafter, Andre Agassi, and Marat Safin. The Agassi
> > > > > and Rafter matches, in which Sampras looked brilliant, both went four
> > > > > sets, then the Safin match went a fairly long three, just one day
> > > > > before the final.
> >
> > > > > Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
> > > > > This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
> > > > > more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
> > > > > favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
> > > > > make the precise passing shot.
> >
> > > > > Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
> > > > > earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
> > > > > errors from Sampras.- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
> >
> > > > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > > > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > > > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > > > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > > > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > > > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
> >
> > > > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > > > anywhere near full strength?
> >
> > > Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> > > have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
> >
> > > > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > > > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > > > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > > > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > > > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > > > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > > > wanted under the circumstances.
> >
> > > Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> > > past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> > > newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
> >
> > > This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> > > those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> > > like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
> >
> > > > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > > > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > > > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
> >
> > > May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> > > make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.
> >
> > LOL!!! That's exactly why he didn't. In fact he over praised Hewitt in many
> > people's opinion. Unlike so many other players, he didn't insinuate that it
> > was injuries or his poor play that was the problem.
>
> Er, yeah. Which is why it's silly to bring up the same excuse here. If
> Sampras himself didn't think of making that excuse, his fans shouldn't
> either.

Yep. Sampras said after the USO Final loss to Safin he was
"overpowered",
but against Hewitt he was "outplayed". As Casey Stengel would say,
you can
look it up. :-)



01 Sep 2007 22:34:24
Richard Eich
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

[email protected] wrote...

> > > LOL!!! That's exactly why he didn't. In fact he over praised Hewitt in many
> > > people's opinion. Unlike so many other players, he didn't insinuate that it
> > > was injuries or his poor play that was the problem.
> >
> > Er, yeah. Which is why it's silly to bring up the same excuse here. If
> > Sampras himself didn't think of making that excuse, his fans shouldn't
> > either.
>
> Yep. Sampras said after the USO Final loss to Safin he was
> "overpowered", but against Hewitt he was "outplayed". As
> Casey Stengel would say, you can look it up. :-)

Actually, Sampras also cited his "old legs" in the runner-up speech.

But hey, even so, we all know that the comments athletes make after a
match are 100% reflective of what they really think, and can be cited
at face value in all bullshit arguments on Usenet.


01 Sep 2007 16:31:28
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Aug 31, 5:47 pm, Richard Eich <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote...
> > On Sep 1, 3:18 am, [email protected] wrote:
> > > On Aug 31, 5:01 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [....]
>
> > > The author sort of misses the point that the number of low volleys
> > > Sampras had to take were increased by his inability to get better
> > > position. Any serve/volley player knows how deadly it is to be missing
> > > a step to net as Sampras very clearly was that day. Sampras also
> > > sprayed a shitload of groundies in horrific fashion. This is not
> > > entirely explained by wind, but more by the legs.
>
> > > It is match analysis, that is all. Why pretend that Sampras was
> > > anywhere near full strength?
>
> > Er, nobody did. But even the "full strength" mythical Sampras would
> > have had his hands full against Hewitt on that day.
>
> ...in your opinion, of course. Fine. We all know about opinions.
>
> Even so, "hands full" doesn't mean Sampras would have lost, or lost
> so badly.
>
> > > Hewitt earned the title, but in fact it
> > > is not as sweet in my mind as the one Safin won vs. Sampras because
> > > Sampras was indeed shot vs. Hewitt for reasons that the author you
> > > cite mentions--playing 3 USO champions and beating 3 USO champs in a
> > > row--Rafter, Agassi and Safin. That's what you call a tough draw for
> > > an old guy and Hewitt was probably the last opponent he would have
> > > wanted under the circumstances.
>
> > Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> > past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> > newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
>
> So make the case using something more than mere assertions, then?
>
> > This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> > those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> > like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
>
> It would have been. What's the fault in saying that?
>
> > > When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
> > > saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
> > > stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> > May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> > make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.
>
> Please go study up on the difference between "mitigating
> circumstances" and "excuses", Mr Post Hoc Reasoning.

Nice.



02 Sep 2007 19:21:34
Whisper
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

[email protected] wrote:
> Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> part of the court open.
>
> At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
>
>
> LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>


This is a perfect eg of why rst needs to be split into tiers to save b/w
(a point like this is obvious & no need for scrutiny) - an elite rst for
tier 1-3 analysis to discuss more complex issues without non-player
newbies polluting threads with garbage, & a lower tier for the rest.
Eventually members from the lower group will gain expertise & be allowed
to progress to the elite group.

Raja & Hazel are the types who can head up the lower group - moderating
threads on rock groupLendl lists & anti-BushUS propoganda.


02 Sep 2007 19:22:34
Whisper
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

[email protected] wrote:
> On Sep 1, 1:27 am, [email protected] wrote:
>> Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
>> time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
>> there. Then he goes on to say this:
>>
>> "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
>> tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
>> simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
>> want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
>> part of the court open.
>>
>> At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
>> that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
>> think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
>> when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
>> had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>>
>> LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> When Mac says Pete "ran out of gas", does he mean mentally or
> physically? He cannot possibly mean physically, because Sampras
> physical condition wasn't so bad that he would not get it up for a
> Slam final. To me, the quote above sounds like a good description of
> mental choking. Sampras had consciously switched to the serve and
> volley style in late 90s and kinda re-oriented his entire game plan
> around that concept. He battled through the draw and then choked in
> the final. When Hewitt exposed the shortcoming of his S/V approach
> with incredible speed and tenacious retrieval capacity that was quite
> novel at that point in the tour, Sampras had no more tricks up his
> sleeve and folded. That's the impression I get from this McEnroe
> anecdote.
>


I'm not surprised.



02 Sep 2007 19:26:23
Whisper
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

Adam Thirnis wrote:
>> Another explanation might be the windy conditions during the final.
>> This could account for Sampras's inability to hit his big forehand
>> more than a few times, but not his problems at the net. Wind normally
>> favors the serve-and-volleyer, because it's harder for the opponent to
>> make the precise passing shot.
>>
>> Regardless of how easy Sampras made it for him, Lleyton Hewitt clearly
>> earned his title, playing exactly the right game to draw continuing
>> errors from Sampras.
>
> plus hewitt beat sampras twice running before this match - and again
> afterwards. it was hardly a surprise he won
>


er, Hewitt's parents were shocked he won. His mum said 'We dreamed
maybe somehow in a 5 setter, but never this.'

The only people who wouldn't have been surprised are trolls or
completely clueless newbies.




02 Sep 2007 19:29:44
Whisper
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

[email protected] wrote:
>
> Not Hewitt's fault. Not an excuse for Sampras. If Sampras could battle
> past 3 USO champs, the case can be made that he could battle past a
> newbie like Hewitt as well. Didn't happen.
>
> This is post hoc reasoning. Had Sampras won against Hewitt, I am sure
> those 3 wins against past USO champs AND the win against an young gun
> like Hewitt would have been lauded as the quality of a great champ.
>
>> When I saw the match live I saw basically the same thing that Mac
>> saw. Sampras' feet appeared to be glued to the ground--I call it
>> stepping in shit, but same idea. He was shot.
>
> May be. But that's just poor excuse making. Sampras himself wouldn't
> make excuses like that. It would make him look bad.
>



er, Sampras said he wished he had those 10 yr younger legs in
presentation - what does that tell you?

To me it doesn't say the game had passed him by & Hewitt was in fact
playing the best tennis ever seen, like it does to some rst morons.







02 Sep 2007 02:30:45
[email protected]
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 2, 3:21 pm, Whisper <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > part of the court open.
>
> > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> This is a perfect eg of why rst needs to be split into tiers to save b/w
> (a point like this is obvious & no need for scrutiny) - an elite rst for
> tier 1-3 analysis to discuss more complex issues without non-player
> newbies polluting threads with garbage, & a lower tier for the rest.
> Eventually members from the lower group will gain expertise & be allowed
> to progress to the elite group.

Good idea. I think you should immediately form that elite group and
leave this one...for the best interest of everybody.



02 Sep 2007 09:40:26
Amy
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 2, 2:21 am, Whisper <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > part of the court open.
>
> > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> This is a perfect eg of why rst needs to be split into tiers to save b/w
> (a point like this is obvious & no need for scrutiny) - an elite rst for
> tier 1-3 analysis to discuss more complex issues without non-player
> newbies polluting threads with garbage, & a lower tier for the rest.
> Eventually members from the lower group will gain expertise & be allowed
> to progress to the elite group.
>
> Raja & Hazel are the types who can head up the lower group - moderating
> threads on rock groupLendl lists & anti-BushUS propoganda.

We can't go with this scheme. If this happens, where would a retard
like you go? And it will be a big blow to you since you spend most of
your awake time posting here.



02 Sep 2007 04:58:08
Scott
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

i think Sampras fanboys belong on the lower tier group, too. we'll
put them with the ones posting threads in favor of nuking Iran.



On Sep 2, 5:21 am, Whisper <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> This is a perfect eg of why rst needs to be split into tiers to save b/w
> (a point like this is obvious & no need for scrutiny) - an elite rst for
> tier 1-3 analysis to discuss more complex issues without non-player
> newbies polluting threads with garbage, & a lower tier for the rest.
> Eventually members from the lower group will gain expertise & be allowed
> to progress to the elite group.
>
> Raja & Hazel are the types who can head up the lower group - moderating
> threads on rock groupLendl lists & anti-BushUS propoganda.- Hide quoted text -
>





02 Sep 2007 05:03:36
Adam Thirnis
Re: Another tidbit from Mac's book--Sampras/Hewitt USO

On Sep 2, 10:21 am, Whisper <[email protected] > wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Mac talks about seeing the wind go out of Borg's sails, for the first
> > time ever, when he broke back in the 3rd set final. He cruised from
> > there. Then he goes on to say this:
>
> > "There are times--usually in exhibitions, but sometimes even in big
> > tournaments--when you feel so bad physically and mentally that you're
> > simply not able to go all-out. It's a tricky situation. You don't
> > want to lose by just missing every ball, so you hit a shot and leave
> > part of the court open.
>
> > At that point you body language clearly says, 'I'm not going to cover
> > that--just hit it there, and it'll be a winner, and the people will
> > think, 'Look, he was too good'. That's what happened with Sampras
> > when he played Lleyton Hewitt in the finals of last year's Open: Pete
> > had just run out of gas--he looked asif he had glue on his feet"
>
> > LOL. Suck it, jaros.
>
> This is a perfect eg of why rst needs to be split into tiers to save b/w
> (a point like this is obvious & no need for scrutiny) - an elite rst for
> tier 1-3 analysis to discuss more complex issues without non-player
> newbies polluting threads with garbage, & a lower tier for the rest.
> Eventually members from the lower group will gain expertise & be allowed
> to progress to the elite group.
>
> Raja & Hazel are the types who can head up the lower group - moderating
> threads on rock groupLendl lists & anti-BushUS propoganda.

good idea. have fun with raja and haze. i'll email you if you're
accepted to the top group.