CAMELOT FANTASIES

it looks like they carved this home out of a mountain.

Quote from: Clay Death on September 30, 2014, 05:44:58 pm

I posted this at Marilyn's thread also. she looks great in this picture.

She does. Love the fact that it's black and white. You and I should do a top 10 most beautiful females of all time. I already have 5 in my mind ready to go! Ha ha.

I am a fan of the underdog and misunderstood as well. But, my reasoning for supporting the Big Four is their dedication to their craft. They understand that they have a limited shelf life and do whatever they can to both extend it and maximize their potential. It is the maximizing that I am a fan of, and the dedication to do it for such a long period of time. It speaks to their mental strength, which I am also a fan of.

As much as I like players like Berdych, Lopez, Verdasco, etc. I have no hope for them stringing a great week together that will culminate in a major in the end. So, since competitiveness ranks very high on my list, the "never wills" don't get my unbridled loyalty.

I haven't seen Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a friend of mine and I were just discussing Jim's movies and their depth. We were going to rent it, but we couldn't remember the name of this one for anything. I have seen The Truman Show, though. And yes, I loved The Mask and Liar, Liar. Only Jim can make comedy and wild plots seem like "what if it did happen?" And nope, not a fan of Dumb and Dumber or the Ace Ventura series, but overall, Jim seems to be not only a great actor, but a great human being as well. He even looks like a caring, expressive person. It's in his eyes.

Quote from: thetruth on September 28, 2014, 02:24:11 am

I agree with all of this. 2003-2007 was a dismal period in tennis, not just because of the one man domination, but the pure lack of competitiveness and belief. I remember opponents talking about how it wasn't a shame to lose to Federer. What kind of crock is that? It's your job to try to beat your opponent. That's the nature of sport. Or, saying they couldn't concentrate on their own game for watching his beautiful shots.

Of course, a lot of this was influenced by the McEnroes, who both giveth and taketh away. It's not a surprise to see JMac backing off the claim since his "job" is to hold people's interests.

Yes, big props to Nole for having belief and finding a way. Another round of one man domination wouldn't be good for the sport either, so I take the wins and the losses with equal grace. Beatdowns are boring. I watch sports for competition, not to see players walking onto the court without belief. 

From a player's perspective, it's a great shame to lose to Federer again and again and again. From a fanatic's perspective, there's no shame in losing to Federer. That's how I see it.

Me, too.

Of course it was a weak period in tennis history. There are lots of fans who always claim there's no such thing as 'weak era' but there is and there will always be.

Of course it is. When Pete and Andre retired there was a huge chasm in the sport. It was like how when the Chief is felled the Indians stop fighting. No one knew what to do until Federer stepped up. Then the "legend" began.


Let me put it this way and ask these very fans again, if Nadal, Federer, Djokovic, Murray, Hewitt, Safin were all to pick up at the same time and if they were of same age, would that have been considered a weak era or very strong era? Or what if we take Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro, Wawrinka etc. away and leave only Federer and Nadal in the mix since 2008? Would that make it a strong era or weak? Clearly this makes the era weak since Nadal has total domination over Federer by 2008 and he would have no else to deal with. Who other than Nadal would have won all these Slams?

Wouldn't have been fun at all for me. It would've been boring.


I really and honestly think JMac does a lot of it because he was told as he's the most recognized commentator out there and he's a legend in his own right and people especially casual fans will believe every word he says. This very JMac is now fully behind Nadal and once someone else comes and becomes popular he'd suddenly become his biggest fan. I really it's all a set up to lure casual fans in and also an attempt to increase the TV rating. They see it as a win/win since it increases tennis popularity. I highly doubt it. Yeah, the bring fans but they are unlikely to stick to the sport. Just wait until both Federer and Nadal retire. I am not a fan of any of these strategies. If anything, they damage the sport. A lot of the fans who became Sampras fans back in the  90s are still watching the sport even after their idol's departure, because they fell in love with the game too. That's highly unlikely to happen in Federer's case. I'd like to bet all my money on it in fact.

Without a doubt.


Beatdowns are horrible. It's very unattractive. Shame on those fans who prefer beatdowns. They don't understand that tennis is a game not a show.

Quote from: thetruth on September 28, 2014, 02:30:14 am

I am a fan of the underdog and misunderstood as well. But, my reasoning for supporting the Big Four is their dedication to their craft. They understand that they have a limited shelf life and do whatever they can to both extend it and maximize their potential. It is the maximizing that I am a fan of, and the dedication to do it for such a long period of time. It speaks to their mental strength, which I am also a fan of.

As much as I like players like Berdych, Lopez, Verdasco, etc. I have no hope for them stringing a great week together that will culminate in a major in the end. So, since competitiveness ranks very high on my list, the "never wills" don't get my unbridled loyalty.

I like the longevity (like the way Agassi was and Hewitt is - it's adorable) but I don't like domination. It doesn't please me at all that both Nadal and Federer are still on top of this game and are ranked 2 and 3. From my perspective, thank God for Nole otherwise these two would have been ranked 1 and 2 and that would have been since 2005 and Federer since 2003. That's a bit too long for my taste and utterly boring.

Most importantly, things should change or else there will be no improvement and we'd still be slaving our way. I am a big fan of change. If things don't change and remain the same then we learn nothing. A flower is beautiful but if it doesn't change its colour and take other forms, then it will become boring and will eventually lose its beauty or we won't be able to see it anymore. There's a reason why things don't last forever because it's not meant to be that way. You lose sense of things and you can no longer appreciate it.

I learn many things by associating myself with different things in life. It's been many years I've spent time with own culture, people etc. There's nothing to learn, nothing to venture, nothing to gain - it's pretty same old, same old. How does one evolve and grow in that typical environment? Change is great. It means we are learning something new, we are moving forward, we are evolving just as much the Universe evolving itself since the Big Bang. Out with the old and in with the new. Old is gold no doubt as we have experienced things and learned valuable lessons but we must let the new in as there are many things yet to experience and new lessons yet to learn. It's very exciting at least to me.

In fact, I am so much in for changes that I don't even keep the same job more than 3 years. I either change the job or I take a new position where the environment is somewhat new. I don't hang out with my old friends because I feel I know everything about them and there's not much there for me to learn from them. Reason why I don't have a Facebook where the very idea is to keep in touch with your old friends. I don't even stay on the same forum for too long and I never want to date the same guy or be in the same relationship forever. I change houses every few years. I love meeting new people because there's so much to learn from them and I explore many things for the same reason. I love learning the most. It's my greatest passion and might just be my true purpose in this life as well because of the way I live it.

So that's me but I am very respectful about the way you feel too. This is what I like because I most certainly don't want everyone to feel the same way as I do. Then we'd be living in such a boring world. Contrast is beautiful. This is why it's great to meet new people since it gives different perspectives of things and you get to learn something new.

Quote from: thetruth on September 28, 2014, 02:06:51 am

I haven't seen Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a friend of mine and I were just discussing Jim's movies and their depth. We were going to rent it, but we couldn't remember the name of this one for anything. I have seen The Truman Show, though. And yes, I loved The Mask and Liar, Liar. Only Jim can make comedy and wild plots seem like "what if it did happen?" And nope, not a fan of Dumb and Dumber or the Ace Ventura series, but overall, Jim seems to be not only a great actor, but a great human being as well. He even looks like a caring, expressive person. It's in his eyes.

I forgot to mention Man on the Moon - just as good as the Spotless mind. I had a feeling I was leaving out something good and then it came to me just yesterday. It happens as he's done so many films it's hard to remember all of them.

Anyway, the likes of Jim Carreys are changing the world - slowly but steadily. He's one of the few and will always be remembered by the brave new world in the future.

On the other hand, it's the intellectual fools like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins that are holding us back but they play an important part in this game of ours so will have to leave things at that.