Dream last night - interpretations welcome

Ok, I was at some big event, it wasn't clear what it was except Ivan Lendl was playing Andy Murray in some kind of promotional match.
Roger Federer was there in a non-playing capacity and was wearing probably the most expensive looking suit ever, though it was very classy, not any kind of Wimbledon faux pas.

I got chatting to him and conversation flipped between business and tennis (I deliberately avoided being a tennis bore and was steering the conversation off tennis unless there was something he was particularly keen to discuss). He didn't talk much about his rivals though he didn't seem impressed with Djokovic. He said he reckoned he'd be playing at the top level for at least another 5/6 years which I said would be some doing but he just shrugged his shoulders and said it was 'no big deal' (I remember the words).
We were all talking about heading off somewhere - I think a casino was mentioned - (he had his whole entourage including friends I hadn't seen before) when suddenly Lendl came in laughing his head off because he'd just beaten Murray in straight sets!

We got chatting and Lendl was buzzing at winning and showing Andy who was boss, he was quite good company. I told Federer that Lendl was screwing with his 'legacy' by beating a rival at his age which he thought was really funny. Lendl ribbed him about it but then said something quite dismissive about Murray, though they both thought he had a lot of potential.

Then it gets fuzzy and confusing involving Lendl flipping between being young (wearing his cool diamonds shirt from way back) and old, and I started thinking about some work issues I am pondering.


Ok, what's it all mean?

You sure it was a dream? Apart from the last sentence it all sounds very plausible.

Late night 606v2ing comined with cheese and lot of alcohol?

Step away from the bar/fridge and keyboard before you go to bed!

Could be, but I don't drink or eat cheese.

I think 606v2 is wholly to blame.

That's strange because I had a dream where I was at some big event and Roger Federer was there. I tried to listen in on his conversation to find out his views on his rivals but the bloke he was with kept talking about business.

I went outside and saw Andy Murray was about to play Ivan Lendl in some kind of promotional match. For a laugh, I tied Andy's shoe laces together but for some reason he didn't notice what I had done and ended up losing in straight sets.

I then realised there had been a mix up. I had been drinking Lendl's energy drink and Lendl had been drinking my vodka and was now plastered. He wandered off buzzing and laughing and making dismissive comments about Andy.

Ana Ivanovic then approached me and asked me if I wanted to buy her a drink but we then heard Federer laughing at a joke someone had made and she went inside to find out what was so funny.

I followed her in but then Ivan Lendl jumped me and nicked my retro diamonds shirt. I managed to get it back a little later but he kept on on taking it from me.

It all gets a bit fuzzy after that.

BB u gonna sue LF and JM for it , we can forgive JM to some extent, but LF could be the prime reason for all these nightmares coz she posts a lot of stats to keep the 606v2 members brain engaged.

I have very limited financial resources to be worth a law suit for damages and litigation costs, iC.

Stats is what keeps me going.

laverfan wrote:

Stats is what keeps me going.

and thats what giving nightmares to BB, you making his brain think a lot.

bogbrush wrote:... Ok, what's it all mean?

a) You have been thinking about tennis recently.
b) You have watched tennis recently as well as in the past: enough to build visual memories of some matches.
c) You are some sort of Murray supporter. You have some sort of interest as to whether or not he will win a Grand Slam; perhaps you watched the Wimbledon final and perhaps you thought Murray would win after watching the first set. However ultimately you saw that there was still quite a gap in class between the two players.
d) That you think Roger Federer as well as Ivan Lendl are/were much better players than Murray.
e) There is a small element of dismissiveness in there regarding Murrays attempt to reach the top. I think you need a little persuading to believe he is still capable of it.
f) That you think Federer and Lendl are two of the best players to have played the game.
g) That you associate expensive suits with authority and class. That you think casinos are associated with a bit of class.
h) That you don't want Federer to retire.
i) That you are not too impressed with Djokovic as a tennis player.
Maybe the dream was partly brought on by considering the prospect of Murray winning the Olympics - which you doubt he is capable of at the moment.

You feel the Olympics is all a bit of a lottery for Fed (you're off to the casino) and danger lurks in unexpected, maybe overlooked, opponents (Llendl), or (see below) maybe an surprise opponent will upset Murray and so rid Fed of that particular threat in final?

Or maybe you are scared of Czechs in Murray's draw???

uhm.... well.....I think this request was probably directed to me as you may remember the interpretation I gave to another fellow poster's dream in the past...

The thing is: when I interpreted that dream I pointed out how, according to the freudian theory, dreams have always an hidden sexual message. It could be therefore difficult to interpret such dream, which is only male populated, according to such view......

In reality I failed to mention that Freud revised dramatically his theory in a later period, to embrace a more comprehensive approach based on a duality of pulsions: Eros and Thanatos.

Yours is clearly a dream based on a Thanatos pulsion imo.

In your memories you have removed the true protagonist of the dream: Socal.

Federer and Lendl are only idealised projections of your ego: when Federer tells you that Djokovic "is no big deal", it gives you an ambiguous assurance to have finally won the debate over Djokovic greatness against Socal.

This feeling of self-assurance is in turn slightly underminded when Federer adds "he'll stay on top for 5 to 6 years". Eg: you fear Socal will be back and win the argument later on.

Lendl winning over Murray represents the symbolic victory over another long standing argument: the golden era debate. If 50 yrs old Lendl,
can beat Murray in his prime, it's clear this is not a strong tennis era. Again you score a victory on Socal, who is one of the biggest supporter of the golden era theory. When Lendl becomes young though, you becomes doubtful again:ti wasn't an old Lendl who won, but a player "in his prime": Eg: you fear this might turn out to be a strong era, that Socal will be back and win this argument.

Hope everything is clear now!!

I think we may have to call PM the Dream Master or perhaps the Dream Logician. Shame I missed PM's earlier analysis.

I'm dreaming about socal?! How can at be? Do I miss him perhaps?

By the way, it was Federer himself who was going to be playing at the top level for the next 5/6 years, and when I questioned that he said he saw it as no big deal (ie easy), nothing about Djokovic, who was only touched on briefly.

According to your analysis I suspect that means I consider the debate cooked.

I think the location etc may also have been prompted by that interview Fed gave, which was unusually informative from a sportsman and obviously set in a wealthy setting. But, yes, there were a lot of blatant wealth associations in the dream.

By the way, Thanos is going be in the next Avengers movie.