US Open Day 11 Thursday

First topic message reminder :

Hope it's OK to get this going. Just the two men's quarters to think about today. While Fed and Berdych must be seen as favourites to win, it could be that an inspired Monfils could take out Rog, while Cilic is not without hope against Tomas.

To be fair to Monf, I think he is kicking on, actually. That's two qf performances in his last three slams, and he's pushed the big four for all their worth recently. I wouldn't discount a Stan-esque annus mirrabilis

summerblues wrote:

laverfan wrote:Amazing escape for the Old Man.

Monfils.

Amazing, though he did need a bit of help from Monfils.  Fed was not at his best the first four sets and on that first MP Monfils could have had him.  Plus all those DFs from Monfils - exactly when Fed needed them most - which is fine by me I suppose

My comment yesterday was

Monfils can keep his head screwed on and take the Old Man out.

That head completely fell off by the fifth set. Even the Monfils' Paris win was on Federer''s racquet with 5 MPs that he had.

Cilic will be a tough battle, but the Old Man has balls of steel now (unlike the Titanium Nadal ones).

Djokovic (most likely the other finalist) will be even tougher (but the result may be different from W).

(I am no longer certain that Lydian's cake walk Federer draw included being blown away for the first two sets by Monfils, did it Lyd?)

kingraf wrote:To be fair to Monf, I think he is kicking on, actually. That's two qf performances in his last three slams, and he's pushed the big four for all their worth recently. I wouldn't discount a Stan-esque annus mirrabilis

If Rashid was in his corner, perhaps. He needs discipline to get from where he is now to win a slam. Berdych would be a multi-slammer as well, if we go by one slam performance (remember Baghdatis? Gonzo? Nalbandian? Malisse?). I had much rather see a Thiem or Gulbis in that circle.

Federer has had an easy draw but the opponents have turned up and played well. Monfils played brilliantly for four sets. Yes it is erratic but that's him. He was.calmer.and more stable than usual and mistakes were more than compensated by periods of sustained brilliant play. You just have to admire fed for digging deep

Like I said Monfils doesn't need a coach, having one would have done nothing in those last two sets, it's a waste of money. Tying his shoes every time he messes up a point is as useful as anything he's tried in the last five years.

Fed you old git, well done

Cilic for the title

Everyone going on about errors - I went to bed after two games because I have to work hard today, but the wind was full on, far bigger than the day. The Stars & Stripes was starched out there.

Federer has winners > errors, Monfils not far off. That doesn't sound bad.

For the first time I'm detecting some irritation at the result amongst a few.

Well, well...I thought Fed would win but not make it that hard, lol. 5 sets but only 3hr 20m and Gael predictably was going to the well once too often after 2hr's. Hard to know what to say, sounds like Monfils let the match slip by throwing n too many errors at crucial moments but that's why he's serially underachieved his whole career and Federer hasn't. I predict Cilic will do the same...but I don't see Federer beating Novak unless it's windy. Well done Rodge...tough luck Gael...if only you had a bigger fuel tank and a clutch-brain you might have achieved something big in your career rather than being destined as the next Monsour Bahrami on the Champions entertainment tour. So, the cakewalk got a little rocky there for a moment but Federer stumbles on up the trail. Next stop on the walk Choke Cilic Chasm, lol. Fed is 5-0 H2H there, and Cilic has won 2 sets, so don't expect anything other than an extension of the processional walk into Sunday's final.

Anyway, this event was always going to be Fed-Djokovic final once the draws came out...we just had to wait a fortnight for the main event.

Bog - I think it's more the timing of the errors... Five double faults in one set... It was insane. Two at 4-4, then with everything still to play for in the fifth, he basically tanked. This wasn't a great match technically, though it was probably the best match in terms if heart in your mouth action. How often is a guy serving at around 50% gonna have match points against Federer? The match was more entertaining because it was strangely personal. Not in a confrontational way, but both players left their hearts on the court this morning. Federer shouted off at himself multiple times, he had a weird debate with the umpire (I mean if Fed thought It was out, why didn't he challenge?)... Monfils pretty much wore out his laces, he even got into a bit of a tiff with the crowd... It was real theatre... and like theatre if the performers put their hearts into it, it can make up for the lack of coherent action in front of you...

Just checked the second MP again, looked a much easier shot on second viewing.

A bit dismissive of Monfils (and Cilic) lydian. Wasn't it you who rounded on another poster for calling Goffin a 'lightweight', pointing out how good these guys have to be to get into the top 50 and that more respect should be shown?

Gael is in the autumn of his career JHM, not its infancy (vis a vis Goffin) and I don't respect - to use your word - those that choose entertainment focus over hard graft on the practice court. Sure Gael has worked hard to get onto the pro tour - an achievement mais oui - but the guy has serially squandered his talent in desiring to show off to the gallery all these years rather than knuckle down behind the scenes. It's why serious coaches never stay with him long, he frustrates them all. Gael isn't a lightweight, no far from it, he's got burning ambition...to be the next Bahrami. Fair play, it's his choice but I'll never respect that type of career ambition.

23-year old Gael was world #7...

Exactly KR...#7 by 23...he's nearly 29 now and only 5 career titles for all that talent, all at 250 level. Sorry, that's serial underachievement and as discussed I don't respect lack of career effort. Once he got playing large stadia and the ladies in the front row were shouting "oooh la la Gael" at his vertical hangs he never looked back (at the court).

He fabulously flunked similarly vs Murray at this years French Open in the 5th, losing it 6-1, leading to one tennis observer writing "Monfils is an underachiever. He has the ability, but has perhaps been too keen to be a showman, rather than a tough competitor."

Nuff said. The cakewalk rolls on.

Surely though Lydian you can marvel at his shots and athleticism?

Also, you're assuming he is capable of the mental discipline you require to impart respect. Perhaps he has worked hard and already reached his maximum potential mental discipline (without which he might not have reached the top 50). The mind can be harder to train than the body.

I don't think that's what happened today. He got tight and lost. Simple as that, he didn't start going for Hollywood shots. In fact he was very consistent. Coulda played the first MP better, but

I think my knowledgeable and balanced friend Lydian has got out the wrong side of the bed!

I first noticed it when he dismissed my surprise at Feds longevity, and in answering lags he cited the trend to older success by referring to the dearth of young players in the top 100. All correct, except he and I have both identified the cause of that trend to be the lack of young talent, not that the elderly players are better than ever.

Now he's being a bit hard on Federer's opponents; this was never the toughest draw for Fed - there's been unanimity on that - but we really can't slam one poster for undermining anyone in the top 50 and then slaughter Federer's opponents who are much better than that.

Anyway, I thought this mental discipline thing was a "talent" (whenever we get into the Nadal talent thing). Surely poor Gael can't be criticised for a shortfall in his talent? Or is that aspect now an option rather than a talent?

Yes but Monfils was Junior #1 winning singles titles at French Open, Australian Open and Wimbledon. His star was always higher than merely getting into the top 50...this was no James Ward who's chuffed to get to #125.

This article http://www.sportskeeda.com/tennis/top-5-male-under-achievers-in-tennis puts it nicely.
Monfils is Exhibit #3...

"Gael Monfils: How ironical is it that the man with the most intimidating physique in men’s tennis seems perpetually afraid of imposing his will on the court and doggedly refuses to play attacking tennis? Perhaps the most athletic player ever seen in tennis history, Gael Monfils has so far continued the French tradition of producing eccentric, flamboyant tennis players who seem to care more about showmanship than winning matches. Content to stand meters behind the baseline, Monfils has turned acrobatic defense into an art, regularly conjuring up spectacular gets and shots from seemingly impossible positions. But his ultra-defensive play often backfires alarmingly, reducing him to a clownish showman who, apparently,  would rather wear himself out by running all day than step into the court and take charge of points. The man has tremendous power and can perhaps even outmuscle the likes of Juan Martin Del Potro, but for some unknown reason he has so far in his career shown an unflinching reluctance to use that power. Someone needs to tell him that lapsing into moonball rallies is not going to cut it in today’s baseline-hugging, aggressive game."

Indeed KR...but Fed was there for the taking today, when is the last time Fed made approx 50 UEs in a match? The wind was a match leveller, Fed underperformed, left the door open for Gael but the Frenchmen was scared to walk through it. Same old, same old...and Gael will know he won't get a better chance than that. Sacré bleu!

Fed played the third set as well as he's played all year. twelve winners one unforced error... He still needed a brain fart from Monfils to edge a set. There was a reason Fed hit 50 UE, Monfils had him spooked. Simple as. Fed probably played drop shots on half his short balls... Because for love or money he couldn't hit past or even outmanoeuver Monfils. It's simplistic to say Federer played badly.

Sometimes with people the package is not negotiable; what makes Monfils successful is what makes him fall short, perhaps. We don't know what would happen if he played the way we all think he should; maybe he'd burn out mentally because of pressure, or do himself in like JMDP.

I do agree generally though, I recall him taking the first set off Nadal here once and doing so in such a deliberately insane manner that he had no chance by the 2nd set. He is a nutcase, but then again if he wasn't maybe he'd have got a regulation beating last night.

bogbrush wrote:this was never the toughest draw for Fed - there's been unanimity on that - but we really can't slam one poster for undermining anyone in the top 50 and then slaughter Federer's opponents who are much better than that.

Don't broaden the discussion out, my issue - specific thrust here - is that Gael is much better than his perennial ranking...whatever top 50 it is. Here's a thing...type into google "Monfils" and "Underachiever" and you'll find I'm not the only tennis observer making withering assessments of the guy. Indeed, Gael makes it into just about every tennis underachiever list you can care to mention. That's my beef with the guy...he simply lacks discipline and I would think a guy like you BB knows exactly why that's so irksome in someone with early ambition for the top table seats.

lydian wrote:

bogbrush wrote:this was never the toughest draw for Fed - there's been unanimity on that - but we really can't slam one poster for undermining anyone in the top 50 and then slaughter Federer's opponents who are much better than that.

Look, don't broaden the discussion out or I will get p*ssed. My issue - specific thrust here - is that Gael is much better than his perennial ranking...whatever top 50 it is. Here's a thing...type into google "Monfils" and "Underachiever" and you'll find I'm not the only tennis observer making withering assessments of the guy. Indeed, Gael makes it into just about every tennis underachiever list you can care to mention. That's my beef with the guy...he simply lacks discipline and I would think a guy like you BB knows exactly why that's so irksome in someone with early ambition for the top table seats.

Well if you'll get p*ssed that'll really upset me.

I think you HAVE got out the wrong side. Try this but decaff.

Probably...4-5 business trips in 2 weeks has probably roughened the edges....I tried to edit back that opening line but too late. Apols. Ok...let's move on. Points made either side.

OK, but I still contend that mental discipline is extraordinarily difficult to achieve for some people and to label someone as an under-achiever for that (rather than, say, having a very poor serve) is very unfair without detailed knowledge of that person's mental potential.

Too anxious even to follow the scores on the ATP website, I slept through this one, fully expecting to wake up to hear than Monfils had won.
I had Gael down for a 3-1 win, so I wasn't that far off! Can't recall Fed ever winning a GS match after being MPs down.
Have to agree with some of the above comments about Monfils. He just loves playing the showman. He should take a leaf out of Tsonga's book and only start playing around AFTER he's won.

who the heck cares why Monfils lost.

the old man marches on into yet another semi. all's right with the world, temporarily.

Funny enough the ill mental discipline didn't cost him too much. Volley on the baseline? Winner. Brain fade drop shots? Got away with almost all of them by serving big the next point. Think in hindsight he shouldn't have slowed the game up on match point. Federer wasn't hitting a first serve for love or money, and that extra bit of time might have cleared the red mist. Maybe Federer hits first serves anyway... but it was a little naive to think a guy whose faced Djokovic and Nadal for the best part of a decade would be put off by some time wasting tactics

kingraf wrote:Funny enough the ill mental discipline didn't cost him too much. Volley on the baseline? Winner. Brain fade drop shots? Got away with almost all of them by serving big the next point. Think in hindsight he shouldn't have slowed the game up on match point. Federer wasn't hitting a first serve for love or money, and that extra bit of time might have cleared the red mist. Maybe Federer hits first serves anyway... but it was a little naive to think a guy whose faced Djokovic and Nadal for the best part of a decade would be put off by some time wasting tactics

This is what I'm thinking; it's what he is, it's what makes him good and you can't turn him into Berdych level conformity and still keep the good stuff.

Yeah I like Monfils warts and all. He does things no one else can, and while his consistent incarnation probably puts away Gasquet types, and even Dimi-level players, as it did this fortnight... I don't think he has a chance against the really good guys without going bezerk. Unfortunately came up short tonight.

Cheers BB, did the trick...I was admittedly like that Joan Collins Snickers-eating man in the locker room on the TV ads first thing this morning.

JHM, I have to disagree where Monfils is concerned. This guy reached Junior #1 (ok, many do and flunk later you say...), but he also won the boys titles at Wimbledon, Australian Open and French Open...not many have done that and not gone onto senior glory too. That early success showed he had real steel once upon a time, that he had John Wayne-esque true grit and focus inside him when people weren't fawning over him in large stadia. But then the big bucks rolled in, the inevitable hangers on closed in, and he probably got told what a talent he was by perennial internal yes-men within the ATP Tour. All this I bet unearthed the "entertainment centre" in his brain, a flamboyant star was born and he simply couldn't think straight again on a tennis court thinking he had to pick up the mantle of Henri Leconte.

Its not like he's a focused choker, e.g. like Berdych used to be, either. He simply makes bizarre decisions because his mind is all over the place. Its not that he has NO discipline as he clearly used to, he's lost it...and lost the plot with it (relative to his clear potential). Yes it may be unfair to judge the guy if he's got some underlying Asperger's or lord knows what under the surface, but I don't think there's anything wrong inside other than something changed in the guy and he decided to become "GOAT Show-off"...that's his legacy I'm afraid. Unlike guys like James Ward where people might say looking back "wow, the guy got to #120 ranking...amazing grit and determination to get that far", with Gael they wont be saying "Amazing career, he got into the Top 10, won 5 titles, etc"...they'll always write about flamboyance and underachievement. Maybe he's starting to realise this too...

Anyway, Federer toughed it out...saving 2 MPs shows a coolness of mind and he deserves his place in the semi. Cilic is in good form and has a chance but its unchartered territory for him...can he overcome his choking nature of the past, can Goran instil that extra bit of steel to push into a slam final? Certainly Goran knows what its like to face a GOAT-level player given he squared off against Sampras often enough. It might just be the difference. However...if/when Cilic stares at the finishing line will he blink before Federer - like Goran did vs Sampras - my feeling is yes he will, and only 2 sets won vs Fed (1 a TB) speaks to that. Should be interesting nonetheless.

Just watched some highlights of Fed-Gael on YouTube including the two MPs saved game. Reckon Monfils had a chance on that first MP as Fed hit his drive volley too close to his opponent. Then at deuce, Monfils looked like he was quite glad to push the ball back and stay back (story of his career?) and didn't really do anything.
Can't help feeling that for Rog this will, to an extent, make up for those MPs that Fed missed v Djoko in New York.

I knew Federer would be facing his hardest match but 2 MP's?

Must be karma for Novak doing it to him

Cilic Fed!! As I said before both of them start. Please serve better sir!

Gael had a good run, see if he goes up a gear and makes more runs, I would think he won't.

@Lydian - Monfils beat Dimitrov (as KR said with the new found "X-factor"). He had just played to Federer in a close three-setter prior to this @Cincy. He used the "same" brain that is undisciplined, to smoke Federer the first two sets and Federer tried baseline/net and was being outplayed. Monfils is where he deserves to be given the full package. He may pull off one-offs, but that is where he will retire. He cannot sustain it. There are many Juniors who will never make it (Vesely is doing well though).

Tsonga has done more with available tools, then Monfils has done his entire career. Monfils' lack of discipline is obvious.

BTW, does Andujar have discipline or Nalbandian?

bogbrush wrote:I think my knowledgeable and balanced friend Lydian has got out the wrong side of the bed!

I first noticed it when he dismissed my surprise at Feds longevity, and in answering lags he cited the trend to older success by referring to the dearth of young players in the top 100. All correct, except he and I have both identified the cause of that trend to be the lack of young talent, not that the elderly players are better than ever.

Now he's being a bit hard on Federer's opponents; this was never the toughest draw for Fed - there's been unanimity on that - but we really can't slam one poster for undermining anyone in the top 50 and then slaughter Federer's opponents who are much better than that.

There's been a subtle anti-Federer vibe building from certain posters over the last ten days, for whatever reason. Sorry lydian, but BB is right - that's how it looks. Nothing wrong with admitting you don't want him to reach 18, by the way. I've never known you to be so very disparaging about the general competition on the ATP before, as frustrating as Monfils is at times. This has actually been a reasonable year for him though, as kingraf pointed out. I wonder where he goes from here? Lesser defeats have shattered players, but I think he'll be back.

Nice stats on the winners to UEs, I didn't realise that. Thanks BB.

Cilic has me more confused than Monfils. One minute he's a World beater, but the next I notice Berdych is playing awful so I'm wondering if it really is Cilic winning, then he hit those incredible serves, then the minute after than Cilic starts blowing it (start of 3rd set) but after that he's pounding them in again.

The serves down the middle were especially intimidating, if he could do that reliability nobody - not even Djokovic, Murray or whoever - is breaking him. But he can't do it all the time.

I really don't know what will happen. It was close the other week between them, as it was between Federer and Monfils in Cincinnatti, so why shouldn't this also be tight? I hope not as no way can Federer come through two tight matches and be in any useful state for the final. If it goes to 5 he may as well let the younger guy take it (I know he wouldn't but you know what I mean).

Well, the average age of the top 100 has gone up considerably in recent years. One argument is that it will continue to go up as the younger players are having their energy conserved and therefore their longevity lengthened by continually losing to the older guys!
So we could well see the likes of Nishikori and Dmitorv being much better in two or three years than now, with the younger chaps like Thiem and Kyrgios also blossoming later.
In the meantime, Berdych and Stan the Man are among those joining the 30-something crowd next year, but are still likely to feature strongly, while the "really old" players like Fed and Ferrer carry on, too.

The biggest change Ivanisevic has made to Cilic is the serve.  He used to have a horrible back bend during it where he'd pretty much fold his back into a 'c' shape.  Goran's changed his serve motion and he no longer has that bend which has allowed him to develop a more consistent and quicker serve.  He used to have an average serve for a big guy but now it's a weapon.  Couple with his very solid groundstrokes and good court coverage we've now got a very good player.

I believe that ban allowed him time to work on aspects of the game he would otherwise not have had he still been competing.

This Marin is awesome. 6 sets in a row he's taken off Tomas now, I think roger will struggle getting placement on the returns. I really believe his run is gonna end now and Marin gets his first final of a slam

lydian wrote:Well, well...I thought Fed would win but not make it that hard, lol. 5 sets but only 3hr 20m and Gael predictably was going to the well once too often after 2hr's. Hard to know what to say, sounds like Monfils let the match slip by throwing n too many errors at crucial moments but that's why he's serially underachieved his whole career and Federer hasn't. I predict Cilic will do the same...but I don't see Federer beating Novak unless it's windy. Well done Rodge...tough luck Gael...if only you had a bigger fuel tank and a clutch-brain you might have achieved something big in your career rather than being destined as the next Monsour Bahrami on the Champions entertainment tour. So, the cakewalk got a little rocky there for a moment but Federer stumbles on up the trail. Next stop on the walk Choke Cilic Chasm, lol. Fed is 5-0 H2H there, and Cilic has won 2 sets, so don't expect anything other than an extension of the processional walk into Sunday's final.

Anyway, this event was always going to be Fed-Djokovic final once the draws came out...we just had to wait a fortnight for the main event.

WOW,

You really got all your caveats in.. just in case Federer does win number 18. Anything else you wanna throw in there?

You really are a bunch of contradictory, self-serving, agenda-driven statements. I pointed this out a couple of years ago when it was pretty obvious to me in your debates with Socal that you don't actually make much sense. And as much as I used to be at loggerheads with Socal I could respect and appreciate his points (when he wasn't on the deliberate wind up).

Anyway, bitter much, and increasingly shrill, is how your arguments sound.

But don't worry, I'm sure Rafa will miraculously heal, and notch up a few more RG titles so you can triumphantly declare him the greatest thing since sliced bread.



emancipator

Silver wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I think my knowledgeable and balanced friend Lydian has got out the wrong side of the bed!

I first noticed it when he dismissed my surprise at Feds longevity, and in answering lags he cited the trend to older success by referring to the dearth of young players in the top 100. All correct, except he and I have both identified the cause of that trend to be the lack of young talent, not that the elderly players are better than ever.

Now he's being a bit hard on Federer's opponents; this was never the toughest draw for Fed - there's been unanimity on that - but we really can't slam one poster for undermining anyone in the top 50 and then slaughter Federer's opponents who are much better than that.

There's been a subtle anti-Federer vibe building from certain posters over the last ten days, for whatever reason. Sorry lydian, but BB is right - that's how it looks. Nothing wrong with admitting you don't want him to reach 18, by the way. I've never known you to be so very disparaging about the general competition on the ATP before, as frustrating as Monfils is at times. This has actually been a reasonable year for him though, as kingraf pointed out. I wonder where he goes from here? Lesser defeats have shattered players, but I think he'll be back.

Nice stats on the winners to UEs, I didn't realise that. Thanks BB.

Last 10 days silver?

More like the last 10 years.

Lydian is not half as balanced as he likes to make out. I, on the other hand, fully own up to be being biased.



emancipator

And why do you feel the need to apologise? Just say it as it is - I always do.



emancipator

Yes, we need more unbiased and neutral posters, like me

It's impossible to be completely neutral whilst watching any sporting contest or following any sport. Show me someone who is and I'll show you a liar.

The Special Juan wrote:It's impossible to be completely neutral whilst watching any sporting contest or following any sport.  Show me someone who is and I'll show you a liar.

Totally agree. Better to just own up to your biases instead of engaging in long-winded semantics only to tie yourself up in knots.

I think there's five levels of poster bias amongst members.

1. Neutral or near-neutral posters (laverfan springs to mind). These barely allow favouritism into their posts and uninitiated posters wouldn't have a clue where they stood.

2. Biased posters who make no secret of their favouritism but who base statements on unbiased analysis even if they go against their hopes. This covers many of us; modesty forbids bringing myself into it but I think Murdoch is a great example.

3. Posters who frequently contort facts to squeeze them into a shape they can live with. For some reason I've just thought of my dear friend Caledonian Craig, surely just coincidence.

4. Haddie & Hawkeye

5. Lunatic fringe posters no longer with us.

I'm biased... Although I'm not too sure anyone has ever thought otherwise.

lydian wrote:I predict Cilic will do the same...but I don't see Federer beating Novak unless it's windy. .

Yea yea Fed cannot beat Nole and if he beats it might have been windy

Yea yea Cilic is a choker he choked his lead against Simon Giles [who beat ever green David Ferrer] and choked his lead against Berdych and won only cause Berdych choked and Federer doesn't choke so Cilic is lost even before the match started.

Alas lets safely forget kei, who has no say in this tournament and just making up numbers, I remember the time Kei beat Nole [bagel in the last set] Nole was injured but this time around there is no possibility Nole might get injured and even if he gets injured we will still see Fed vs Nole finals that includes Fed losing to Cilic as well.

USO is not having the staturday as a warmup event for Fed and Nole's Monday final.

Re-watching the 11th game of the 4th set in Monfils-Federer after two MPs were saved is a fascinating study in Sports psychology. Federer yells at Ramos and gets his tension off his chest, while Monfils seems to spiral down with the negativity towards him when the crowd decides on a standing ovation including Federer's box (including Edberg).

If Monfils had a coach, he could have provided some positive energy to La Monf to get to a TB, rather than tamely surrender the set, by playing atrocious shots (he did get away with the drop shot though).

Federer fed off the 4th set win, but Monfils pushed himself into a hole bigger than himself by playing base-line safe tennis  giving up what he was doing in set 1 and 2.

Absolute mental collapse from LaMonf.

emancipator wrote:You really are a bunch of contradictory, self-serving, agenda-driven statements. I pointed this out a couple of years ago when it was pretty obvious to me in your debates with Socal that you don't actually make much sense. And as much as I used to be at loggerheads with Socal I could respect and appreciate his points (when he wasn't on the deliberate wind up).

Anyway, bitter much, and increasingly shrill, is how your arguments sound.

But don't worry, I'm sure Rafa will miraculously heal, and notch up a few more RG titles so you can triumphantly declare him the greatest thing since sliced bread.  

Looks like we wont be sending each other Christmas cards then. Shame, I'm gutted.

Lets keep discussion or attacks on players, biased or unbiased, not posters...wouldn't want you sounding shrill or anything.

bogbrush wrote:I think there's five levels of poster bias amongst members.

1. Neutral or near-neutral posters (laverfan springs to mind). These barely allow favouritism into their posts and uninitiated posters wouldn't have a clue where they stood.

2. Biased posters who make no secret of their favouritism but who base statements on unbiased analysis even if they go against their hopes. This covers many of us; modesty forbids bringing myself into it but I think Murdoch is a great example.

3. Posters who frequently contort facts to squeeze them into a shape they can live with. For some reason I've just thought of my dear friend Caledonian Craig, surely just coincidence.

4. Haddie & Hawkeye

5. Lunatic fringe posters no longer with us.

lol bogbrush. You are categorizing posters through your heavily tinted Federer glasses. Anyone who posts anything positive about Federer's scariest rival will obviously be just one step short of the lunatic fringe. From a certain angle you are in the crazed fan boy category. You know the sort that sleeps on a cushion with an imprint of their idol