Apparently you are not interested in the merits of my argument and stick to the subject matter, instead of just engaging in petty quarrels. I have enough of dealing with bruised egos like yours.
nonsense it was clear indication of pain that she feels called tenicites go and hear her yesterday's interview.
I still think Justin is right but Arjevo played one hell of a match in the last two three pages, the best I have seen him so far. Arjevo's argument were steep and deceptive but it is clear he was struggling with Justin's drift. At the net, both were equal but Justin's style felt too defensive to the audience hence why some boos.
Being in SF is a quantitative attribute. Ever heard the term winning ugly? NO is building her career with a highlight reel of winning ugly matches. While being at 100% is a qualitative attribute, quite an oxymoron given the phrase contains a number in it. You can be at 100% and lose QF and you can win tourneys without being at 100%. Hope you get what I am trying to say. Maybe there is a culture gap here which is getting lost in translation.
I can quote an example from cricket which would be lost here. Sachin has many scores like 17, 18, 37 etc. where they were at 100%; which means middled every ball, looked composed, dominant, elegant, aesthetic till getting dismissed to a brilliant catch or unplayable ball or run out or something. Now that is 100%. That same Sachin once scored 241 not out at Sydney without a single cover drive. In that innings Sachin was highly restrictive. He wasnt at 100% in that innings since his strokeplay was curtailed and fluency was limited. Results wise 100% yielded say 17 runs and not being at 100% yielded 15 times that score. Hope this helps.
I do, in fact,I agree with what Cheung said in post #452 above. You just have to be better than your opponent that day to beat them.
merits of your arguments, really? who are you Mr? I always refrain from replying to your posts for that matter because I really don't find any substance in them, they are very one dimensional. and as far as egos are concerned you have a far too big one which always refrain you to accept others opinions even when they are right. I neither have that much time nor that much energy to make you understand that. enough said.
And 7 hr gap between SF1 and SF 2 that is disadvantage SWH or LD and even in the other disciplines the second semifinalist s are being penalised.The semifinals should be closer together or at least give a day off before the final....
Couldnt agree more and that fact has nothing to do with being at 100%. In badminton's context, being at 100% can be defined as having the ability to correctly execute all weapons in your arsenal. Net or movement or stamina werent there today.
Wasn't it? Weren't you playing NO vs CM fatigue card untill you thought she'll loose? Haven't you played CYF's inexperience card all along. Or LD's stamina card? There's no card Justin, it was apparent her legs didn't allow her to keep the G1 pressure on her opponent? And hence all those errors, since she couldn't challenge her at net nor could rally anymore? Because she wasn't fit enough. Yeah alas that's true. Lol that was toooo much, he didn't mean that.