PDA

View Full Version : Sharapova Benefits from Choke


Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 08:56 PM
Posted on January 25, 2005



"In stifling 90 degree heat Tuesday in Melbourne, Maria Sharapova outlasted fellow Russian Svetlana Kuznetsova 4-6, 6-2, 6-2 in a battle of 2004 slam champions to advance into the semifinals.

The current US Open holder Kuznetsova got out to a fast start in the first set, but the heat and nerves contributed to her failing to hold in her last eight service games, ending the match with a double fault.






"It was just terrible," Kuznetsova said. "I was very focused and I play very well first set. And after something happened, so I just stopped. I mean, like my body was there, but my mind wasn't there at all. It was just, I don't know, ball boy playing out there."

Sharapova seemed most affected in the heat, taking time between points and leaning on her racquet for support.

"I was a bit lazy at the beginning of the match. I didn't run for as many balls," Sharapova said. "But the third set, end of the second set, is when I think both of us started feeling the heat and feeling tired and we wanted the points to go a lot quicker."

Sharapova will now face Serena Williams, who rolled past the injury-plagued No. 2 seed Amelie Mauresmo 6-2, 6-2. "


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does anyone think Kuzzy choked this one away or was she just outplayed?

VSFan1 aka Joshua L.
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:02 PM
Probably a little of both - but Sharapova's only concern was the she could capitalize on Sveta's weakness, and she did.

tennislover
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:04 PM
it is very strange because sharapova is a siberian creature.......so she should suffer the heat......
Anyway she is phisically very strong as well......

pinkfrog
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:07 PM
But she's lived in florida most of her life. She also spent the week before the AO, in Melbourne practicing in the heat. I don't know if Sveta got there early or not.

katiektc
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:08 PM
Siberian, but bred and brought up in very hot LA.

CC
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:09 PM
If Kuzzy had kept up the same level she had in the first set there's no way Maria would have won. I think the strongest part of Maria's game is her mental fortitude. Her game is good and solid, but not exceptional.

cheesestix
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:09 PM
Well, we all know that Maria didn't choke in the Wimbledon final last year! :lol:

Also, where was your post/article called "Serena Benefits from Choke" in 2003 after Serena barely escaped Kim Clijsters in the semifinals of the AO? :rolleyes:

Man, you're STILL steamed about Maria winning Wimbledon, aren't you? :lol:

And where do you get "choke" from anyway? Maria just outlasted Kuznetsova by having better stamina/endurance/mental fortitude. There was no choke. Now, had she been up 5-0 and then lost a set, that would have been a choke.

faboozadoo15
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:10 PM
Probably a little of both - but Sharapova's only concern was the she could capitalize on Sveta's weakness, and she did.
really, that's what it's all about.

tennislover
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:11 PM
Siberian, but bred and brought up in very hot LA.

:lol: true

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:20 PM
Siberian, but bred and brought up in very hot LA.
LA is not that hot. Let her come on down to Texas to train in August. That'll get her little Siberian butt ready for the AO next year. ;)

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:21 PM
Well, we all know that Maria didn't choke in the Wimbledon final last year! :lol:

Also, where was your post/article called "Serena Benefits from Choke" in 2003 after Serena barely escaped Kim Clijsters in the semifinals of the AO? :rolleyes:

Man, you're STILL steamed about Maria winning Wimbledon, aren't you? :lol:

And where do you get "choke" from anyway? Maria just outlasted Kuznetsova by having better stamina/endurance/mental fortitude. There was no choke. Now, had she been up 5-0 and then lost a set, that would have been a choke.
Uhhhh, that's the title of the article you dumb fuck. :retard: :lol:

cheesestix
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:28 PM
Uhhhh, that's the title of the article you dumb fuck. :retard: :lol:

Oh, EXCUSE ME for not noticing, since you DID NOT POST THE ARTICLE! :rolleyes: Idiot!

No link? No quotes around the title? No author? No credits? Man, you are STUPID! :lol:

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:29 PM
Oh, EXCUSE ME for not noticing, since you DID NOT POST THE ARTICLE! :rolleyes: Idiot!

Man, you are STUPID! :lol:
Are you blind or just retarded? The article is the first post. :retard:

SjuTjuD
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:30 PM
Sharapova benefitted from Sveta being out of shape. That's all.

cheesestix
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:34 PM
Are you blind or just retarded? The article is the first post. :retard:

Like I said... NO LINK, NO QUOTES AROUND THE TITLE, NO AUTHOR, NO CREDITS!!!!!! :rolleyes:

At best, it looks like it could be excerpts from an article (or two), but you give no reference to the source and you don't quote the title, so how is anyone to know where the hell you got the title from? :retard:

backhanddtl4
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:34 PM
This article is exactly what I said yesterday, when I declared Sharapova to be, "Just simply lucky." I got tons of bad rep from it...lol

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:52 PM
Like I said... NO LINK, NO QUOTES AROUND THE TITLE, NO AUTHOR, NO CREDITS!!!!!! :rolleyes:

At best, it looks like it could be excerpts from an article (or two), but you give no reference to the source and you don't quote the title, so how is anyone to know where the hell you got the title from? :retard:
Here's the source: -- Tennis-X.com. There's no author listed, so I assume its from the AP wire. Feel better now, retard? No one else had a problem knowing that it was an article. But, I guess that just goes to show what an idiot you are. Nice display. :lol:

P.S. No one else quotes titles either when posting an article. :lol: Tell the truth, you didn't even know it was an article because you didn't bother to read it. You just saw an opportunity to attack me and it backfired on you. Now you're scrambling trying not to look stupid. But alas...too late. :lol:

Jaime Bahena
Jan 25th, 2005, 09:59 PM
LA is not that hot. Let her come on down to Texas to train in August. That'll get her little Siberian butt ready for the AO next year. ;)

Let's not forget beautiful Texas beaches [south padre island: aka spring break party central]. She could work on her tan, and aerobic conditioning by jogging in the sand. Come on down to Texas, Masha. Learn how great Texas is, just like Navratilova did in the 1980's.

Pureracket
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:04 PM
Well, we all know that Maria didn't choke in the Wimbledon final last year! :lol:

Also, where was your post/article called "Serena Benefits from Choke" in 2003 after Serena barely escaped Kim Clijsters in the semifinals of the AO? :rolleyes:

Man, you're STILL steamed about Maria winning Wimbledon, aren't you? :lol:

And where do you get "choke" from anyway? Maria just outlasted Kuznetsova by having better stamina/endurance/mental fortitude. There was no choke. Now, had she been up 5-0 and then lost a set, that would have been a choke.SWOOP!!!!!

cheesestix
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:05 PM
Here's the source: -- Tennis-X.com. There's no author listed, so I assume its from the AP wire. Feel better now, retard? No one else had a problem knowing that it was an article. But, I guess that just goes to show what an idiot you are. Nice display. :lol:

:music: You're such a good dancer! :lol:

P.S. No one else quotes titles either when posting an article. :lol: Tell the truth, you didn't even know it was an article because you didn't bother to read it.

I read your post, which just had a thread title (unquoted, giving the impression that you created it) and a group of two sets of paragraphs separated by odd spacing. Again, THERE WAS NO LINK! You never said "I got this from so-and-so", you just posted an odd looking collection of paragraphs.

You SHOULD have titled the thread: "Tennis-X.com: Sharapova Benefits from Choke" or something thereof. Next time, you'll know better.

You just saw an opportunity to attack me and it backfired on you. Now you're scrambling trying not to look stupid. But alas...too late. :lol:

No, I saw a stupid, hypocritical post that didn't have a source or a title, and I commented on it.

LeRoy.
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:06 PM
well Mauresmo was injured and she choked. Atleast Sveta "only" choked. So there ....

"Serena benefits from a Choke job by an Injured Amelie" :)

Julia1968
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:08 PM
Posted on January 25, 2005


Does anyone think Kuzzy choked this one away or was she just outplayed?

Kuzzy needs to lose weight and stop making excuses. Similarly, the "Royal Court" needs to quit making excuses for those Sharapova defeats.

Pureracket
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:21 PM
Kuzzy needs to lose weight and stop making excuses. Similarly, the "Royal Court" needs to quit making excuses for those Sharapova defeats.SWOOP!!!!!

Lemonskin.
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:43 PM
Maria wanted it more than Sveta. That was obvious, especially in the last game. Sharapova was so exhausted, and she still beat Kuzzie who looked pretty fresh.

When you don't let your opponent hold serve at all in the match since they closed out the first set serving, that's remarkable.

LUIS9
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:54 PM
Yeah Kutz definitely choked in those last two sets, I mean she went from completely dominating the first set, eventhough the score would suggest otherwise, she broke Maria from the very beginning, went up 4-2 and had an opportunity to go up 5-2. She did win the 1st set comfortably, however she allowed Sharapova to get into it in the end. From there on from having the moomentum going, her serve just dissappear she was consistently hitting int the upper 170kmh's, then dropped to as low as the mid 150's. She was dominating from the baseline, she was playing pretty cleanly throughout most of the first set, had a differential of like 15 winners and 6 or 7 errors, not shabby for someone who goes for so much on their strokes, plus Sharapovas strokes are no pushover. From there on she just dissappeared, totally choked, kept flailing at the ball, making errors after errors, she kept going for winners and trying to remain aggresive but she should have won that match had she not choked. Guess Marias determination is something to watch out for when you play her, however its not that I think Sharapova doesnt have game, it's more that its so raw that players of Kutz caliber shouldnt lose to Sharapova, her shot selection is simply poor at best. She just hits real deep and real hard, most of the top 8 can do that, quite efficiently but this is a very disappoointing match from Svetzlana. Serena should get her revenge, and show her whos the boss, cause experience should give Serena the advantage.

Julia1968
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:58 PM
Uhhhh, that's the title of the article you dumb fuck. :retard: :lol:

Another example of elegance and grace from the Royal Court.

Pureracket
Jan 25th, 2005, 10:58 PM
Another example of elegance and grace from the Royal Court.SWOOP!!!!!

Rocketta
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:07 PM
Well, we all know that Maria didn't choke in the Wimbledon final last year! :lol:

Also, where was your post/article called "Serena Benefits from Choke" in 2003 after Serena barely escaped Kim Clijsters in the semifinals of the AO? :rolleyes:

Man, you're STILL steamed about Maria winning Wimbledon, aren't you? :lol:

And where do you get "choke" from anyway? Maria just outlasted Kuznetsova by having better stamina/endurance/mental fortitude. There was no choke. Now, had she been up 5-0 and then lost a set, that would have been a choke.
um, if you didn't join until June 2003 how do you know what was posted about the Clijsters match? Also, if Denise didn't join the board until November 2004......how was she suppose to make a post about the 2003 AO? :scratch:

Rocketta
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:08 PM
Another example of elegance and grace from the Royal Court.
Gosh you sooooo want an invite! :lol:

Maybe one the day the popular kids will let you be in the club. ;)

















or maybe not! :eek:

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:11 PM
:music: You're such a good dancer! :lol:



I read your post, which just had a thread title (unquoted, giving the impression that you created it) and a group of two sets of paragraphs separated by odd spacing. Again, THERE WAS NO LINK! You never said "I got this from so-and-so", you just posted an odd looking collection of paragraphs.

You SHOULD have titled the thread: "Tennis-X.com: Sharapova Benefits from Choke" or something thereof. Next time, you'll know better.



No, I saw a stupid, hypocritical post that didn't have a source or a title, and I commented on it.
Are you done making an ass of yourself? :lol:

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:14 PM
Gosh you sooooo want an invite! :lol:

Maybe one the day the popular kids will let you be in the club. ;)

















or maybe not! :eek:
:haha: :haha: :haha:

Denise4925
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:16 PM
Another example of elegance and grace from the Royal Court.
Sorry, but as soon as we get an opening in the Court, we'll send you an invitation to join. Just keep your fingers crossed. ;) :lol:

Mrs. Peel
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:17 PM
Gosh you sooooo want an invite! :lol:

Maybe one the day the popular kids will let you be in the club. ;)

















or maybe not! :eek:

Oh my god Rocketta...I was just thinking the same thing..her krusty ass feels left out!

Mrs. Peel
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:21 PM
Are you done making an ass of yourself? :lol:
Sheepdip can't help himself! :lol: Even though I have his crack ass on ignore...I enjoy seeing him get humiliated regularly when he tries to attack other posters and ends up looking like a damn shrill fool! :lol: :tape:

PaulieM
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:24 PM
kuznetsova definetly choked, it was sad

faboozadoo15
Jan 25th, 2005, 11:49 PM
Here's the source: -- Tennis-X.com. There's no author listed, so I assume its from the AP wire. Feel better now, retard? No one else had a problem knowing that it was an article. But, I guess that just goes to show what an idiot you are. Nice display. :lol:

P.S. No one else quotes titles either when posting an article. :lol: Tell the truth, you didn't even know it was an article because you didn't bother to read it. You just saw an opportunity to attack me and it backfired on you. Now you're scrambling trying not to look stupid. But alas...too late. :lol:
aren't you supposed to be a lawyer? :tape: no source, no citation? no quotations around the title?

i can't blame cheesestix for asking...

and here it is.
http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2005-01-25/i.php

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 12:24 AM
aren't you supposed to be a lawyer? :tape: no source, no citation? no quotations around the title?

i can't blame cheesestix for asking...

and here it is.
http://www.tennis-x.com/story/2005-01-25/i.php
:lol: Well, I wasn't submitting it to court. Besides faboo, I had more respect for you than associating yourself with cheesetix. He's a troll you know, or are you one also?

Why are y'all trippin on me, there are a lot of articles that get posted, that I've posted myself that don't get quotes around the title, there's no source and what are you talking about "citation"? :lol: Faboo, why are you trying to look stupid?

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 12:41 AM
Another example of elegance and grace from the Royal Court.

:lol:

So true! So true! :lol:

faboozadoo15
Jan 26th, 2005, 12:45 AM
i just responded because i was thinking the same thing. it looked weird. then i went, found the website, and posted the url.

it's just another case of sensational headlining. they didn't use the word "choke" anywhere in the article nor did they have quotes on it.
but i think it is best to paste the url, and many people do. things don't aslways transfer onto here very well, and some people want to see the website that it came from, especially if there are several other articles like there happens to be at tennis x.
and if you don't put quotations around the title or say where it came from, then it looks like you gave an article you found a title all by yourself. i didn't mean to be "trippin on" you, and that's why i just went ahead and got the url.

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 12:48 AM
um, if you didn't join until June 2003 how do you know what was posted about the Clijsters match? Also, if Denise didn't join the board until November 2004......how was she suppose to make a post about the 2003 AO? :scratch:

In the past, you didn't have to be a member to READ posts here.

As for Denise, I'm pretty sure that she's posted under at least one other alias here before. It was something similar to her current one. Do you know the creation date of ALL of her IDs? :scratch:

fammmmedspin
Jan 26th, 2005, 01:53 AM
The thing about sveta and the interview is she doesn't know why she stopped playing - the article assumes it was nerves or heat but Sveta never said that.

If you watch it as she breaks in the second set set she looks happier, Maria looks miserable and sluggish and Sveta does a little gig jogging up and down. Just before that she did her strange little jump in the air and gesture after after one ball. its as if she knew she was winning, thought the thought, got happy and forgot to play.

Don't think that was a choke, nerves or the heat. Its just not what to do?

LiliaLee-Frazier
Jan 26th, 2005, 01:59 AM
Cmmon guys...your running out of exusess for why Sharapova was so lucky to WIN Wimbledon, to WIN the end of year WTA TOUR championships and is now the #1 russian and #3 player in the world and in the SEMIS of the 2005 Ausie open.
Luck doesn't happin that many times on that many different occasions, on all of those different surfaces, against so many different players etc.
With that said...i am no big fan of Sharapova...these are just the facts...girl got game :wavey:

faboozadoo15
Jan 26th, 2005, 02:32 AM
i agree, FraziersFan. :wavey:

Rocketta
Jan 26th, 2005, 04:22 AM
In the past, you didn't have to be a member to READ posts here.

As for Denise, I'm pretty sure that she's posted under at least one other alias here before. It was something similar to her current one. Do you know the creation date of ALL of her IDs? :scratch:
Yeah, right you were reading the threads then and you happen to remember an alias of Denise's. :tape:

Also, I knew her on another board and she didn't join this one until late 2004. So yeah, I'm pretty sure she wasn't under an alias around the AO 2003. Now you on the other hand probably were reading threads using an alias which is why you are accusing others of having one. :rolleyes:

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 03:38 PM
Yeah, right you were reading the threads then and you happen to remember an alias of Denise's. :tape:

I'm 99.99% certain that she has used another alias on this board. And, she has used it as recently as a few months ago. And like I said, I DO NOT remember what the alias was, but it was close to her current one. I'm not saying that she's hiding anything. I'm just saying that her other alias could have been created before her current one (Denise4925), which means that she COULD have been here before 2004. :rolleyes:

Now you on the other hand probably were reading threads using an alias which is why you are accusing others of having one. :rolleyes:

This is the ONLY alias that I've ever used here.

It's a moot point anyway. Whether or not she was here for the AO 2003, doesn't really matter. Because you know as well as I that Denise would NEVER post an article which said that Serena was "lucky" to win a match, or that she ever won a match by anything other than her own doing. In her warped mind, Serena has never lost a match without some kind of excuse being the case (e.g. cheating, injury, etc). :rolleyes:

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 07:53 PM
I'm 99.99% certain that she has used another alias on this board. And, she has used it as recently as a few months ago. And like I said, I DO NOT remember what the alias was, but it was close to her current one. I'm not saying that she's hiding anything. I'm just saying that her other alias could have been created before her current one (Denise4925), which means that she COULD have been here before 2004. :rolleyes:



This is the ONLY alias that I've ever used here.

It's a moot point anyway. Whether or not she was here for the AO 2003, doesn't really matter. Because you know as well as I that Denise would NEVER post an article which said that Serena was "lucky" to win a match, or that she ever won a match by anything other than her own doing. In her warped mind, Serena has never lost a match without some kind of excuse being the case (e.g. cheating, injury, etc). :rolleyes:

My other ID was DeDe4925, since you're so obsessed with the issue. My account under that ID was hacked, this is why I have a new ID. I did not join WTAworld until late 2004 as Rocketta told you. Those are the facts.

Regarding your accusations about what I would and would not do, they are just that...accusations. You don't know me or anything about me. As I do not know you and could never speculate as to what you would or would not do, nor would I try.

Only a warped mind would stalk a person on a message board just to insult and berate her for her posts and opinions, often making his self look like an ass. Now who do you think that description fits better? Me or you?

darrinbaker00
Jan 26th, 2005, 08:33 PM
This is the ONLY alias that I've ever used here.
.....so far.
It's a moot point anyway. Whether or not she was here for the AO 2003, doesn't really matter. Because you know as well as I that Denise would NEVER post an article which said that Serena was "lucky" to win a match, or that she ever won a match by anything other than her own doing. In her warped mind, Serena has never lost a match without some kind of excuse being the case (e.g. cheating, injury, etc). :rolleyes:
Could you find such an article and post it for us, please? Thank you.

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 08:41 PM
My other ID was DeDe4925, since you're so obsessed with the issue. My account under that ID was hacked, this is why I have a new ID. I did not join WTAworld until late 2004 as Rocketta told you. Those are the facts.

Regarding your accusations about what I would and would not do, they are just that...accusations. You don't know me or anything about me. As I do not know you and could never speculate as to what you would or would not do, nor would I try.

Only a warped mind would stalk a person on a message board just to insult and berate her for her posts and opinions, often making his self look like an ass. Now who do you think that description fits better? Me or you?

Obsessed? No. Good memory? Yes. :lol: I was correct. You had another alias. I never said that it was created before 2004, just that it COULD have been. THOSE are the facts! You just proved me correct. Thanks. :wavey: And how the hell would Rocketta know what you do or do not do anyway? :rolleyes: Are you roommates or something?

Accusations? :rolleyes: Do you take it that personally/seriously? I never ACCUSED you of anything. :lol: I merely stated some assumptions...which I believe to be correct. I've read enough of your posts here to know that you have NEVER (to my recollection) given another player any credit for defeating Serena. You just come up with excuses for why she lost. You're a poor sport when Serena loses, and I think everyone here knows that. Heck, I think you've even admitted it too. You have issues. Did you give Maria any credit for beating Serena at Wimbledon? If not (which I'm almost certain of), then why do you think Serena lost to Maria?

Stalking? :rolleyes: So jumping into a thread/argument is called "stalking"? :rolleyes: Because your threads are almost always you arguing with someone. I guess all of your buddies jumping into our arguments is stalking too? :rolleyes: And one time, you said "hey, let's call a truce".....well, who was it that broke it and jumped on me again? Hmmmm, that would be YOU. And who was it that badrepped me once TOTALLY OUT OF THE BLUE? Oh yes, that was YOU again. But I guess THAT isn't "stalking" is it? :rolleyes:

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 09:16 PM
My other ID was DeDe4925, since you're so obsessed with the issue. My account under that ID was hacked, this is why I have a new ID. I did not join WTAworld until late 2004 as Rocketta told you. Those are the facts.

Those are the facts? :lol:

Here is a link to the profile page of DeDe4925:

http://www.wtaworld.com/member.php?userid=18571

The most interesting tidbit of all..... "Join Date: Apr 21st, 2003"

But I'm sure there's a perfectly good explanation, right? :lol:

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 09:20 PM
Also, I knew her on another board and she didn't join this one until late 2004. So yeah, I'm pretty sure she wasn't under an alias around the AO 2003.

Looks like you've been hornswaggled! :lol:

She wasn't around in January 2003, but she was here shortly thereafter.....

Her other ID was DeDe4925, and here's the profile link:

http://www.wtaworld.com/member.php?userid=18571

Take a gander at this.... "Join Date: Apr 21st, 2003"

You were saying? :rolleyes:

Rocketta
Jan 26th, 2005, 09:34 PM
Looks like you've been hornswaggled! :lol:

She wasn't around in January 2003, but she was here shortly thereafter.....

Her other ID was DeDe4925, and here's the profile link:

http://www.wtaworld.com/member.php?userid=18571

Take a gander at this.... "Join Date: Apr 21st, 2003"

You were saying? :rolleyes:
I was saying she wasn't here for the AO 2003. Let me see you can be reading the boards and not have an id but it isn't possible for people with id's to just be reading a board and not participate? :confused:
I also said you weren't here for the AO 2003?

How does any of this info change that fact? So you were saying? Here's your question, "Also, where was your post/article called "Serena Benefits from Choke" in 2003 after Serena barely escaped Kim Clijsters in the semifinals of the AO? :rolleyes:"

YOu have your answer and guess what you were still wrong. Unless you can prove she was posting in January of 2003 you were and are wrong. Unless you want to give up your previous troll id where you can prove you were reading the boards, you are still wrong.

So I was wrong about the day she created her account but I'm not about the date she started posting here more than a passing fancy. However, you still are wrong about the AO 2003 and you can try to deflect that you accused someone of something while not even being here on the board all you want. Keep dancing man....

Rocketta
Jan 26th, 2005, 09:34 PM
oh and posting something twice doesn't make it more effective. :tape: :unsure: :lol:

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 09:47 PM
I was saying she wasn't here for the AO 2003. Let me see you can be reading the boards and not have an id but it isn't possible for people with id's to just be reading a board and not participate? :confused:
I also said you weren't here for the AO 2003?

How does any of this info change that fact? So you were saying? Here's your question, "Also, where was your post/article called "Serena Benefits from Choke" in 2003 after Serena barely escaped Kim Clijsters in the semifinals of the AO? :rolleyes:"

YOu have your answer and guess what you were still wrong. Unless you can prove she was posting in January of 2003 you were and are wrong. Unless you want to give up your previous troll id where you can prove you were reading the boards, you are still wrong.

So I was wrong about the day she created her account but I'm not about the date she started posting here more than a passing fancy. However, you still are wrong about the AO 2003 and you can try to deflect that you accused someone of something while not even being here on the board all you want. Keep dancing man....

Oh, YOU are the one that's dancing.

I made an assumption, which still hasn't been proven incorrect. But she flat out lied about being here in 2003 at all (let alone April), so who knows the real truth?

But you said that she had not joined this board until late 2004. You were wrong. She just said the same thing...which was a total lie.

Oh, so BEFORE you were saying that she only "joined" in late 2004. But NOW you say that she only started posting here "more than a passing fancy" in late 2004. Thanks for the clarification....errrr...I mean, backpeddling. Anyway, WRONG AGAIN! Look at the profile for DeDe4925. :rolleyes: I'll save you the trouble....it says "Total Posts: 3,110". I'd say that's A LOT more than a "passing fancy", wouldn't you? :rolleyes:

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 10:23 PM
Those are the facts? :lol:

Here is a link to the profile page of DeDe4925:

http://www.wtaworld.com/member.php?userid=18571

The most interesting tidbit of all..... "Join Date: Apr 21st, 2003"

But I'm sure there's a perfectly good explanation, right? :lol:
Okay, I was mistaken on the date, so what? I thought it was 2004 when I joined. Besides, I didn't even know that profile still existed. Go figure. I can't even use that ID anymore. But only a stalker :scared: would bother to look it up. :lol:

Okay cheesestix, here's a rare moment. I made a mistake about the date I created that ID. Oh my, it must make your day. Would you like your gold star now or later. ;)

Pureracket
Jan 26th, 2005, 10:27 PM
Okay, I was mistaken on the date, so what? I thought it was 2004 when I joined. Besides, I didn't even know that profile still existed. Go figure. I can't even use that ID anymore. But only a stalker :scared: would bother to look it up. :lol:Dede,
Baby, be careful with this particular poster. Its has that old school hatred for the Williams. It's sad. I'm thinking it and Julia might be the same person. The poster also poster under "ooooOoooo" once. It has to be the same. Hatred can't be similar in two of the same people like that.

Rocketta
Jan 26th, 2005, 10:55 PM
Oh, YOU are the one that's dancing.

I made an assumption, which still hasn't been proven incorrect. But she flat out lied about being here in 2003 at all (let alone April), so who knows the real truth?

But you said that she had not joined this board until late 2004. You were wrong. She just said the same thing...which was a total lie.

Oh, so BEFORE you were saying that she only "joined" in late 2004. But NOW you say that she only started posting here "more than a passing fancy" in late 2004. Thanks for the clarification....errrr...I mean, backpeddling. Anyway, WRONG AGAIN! Look at the profile for DeDe4925. :rolleyes: I'll save you the trouble....it says "Total Posts: 3,110". I'd say that's A LOT more than a "passing fancy", wouldn't you? :rolleyes:
actually someone can post 3,000 posts in 3 to 4 months where have you been.

Also, I said I was wrong in the date she created her account which is more than you can admit to. You do know what ASSuming gets you right? I was not wrong in my general meaning that she didn't start posting regularly here until late 2004. That's the truth. I knew of Dede on other boards so I know when I started seeing her on the regular.

However, you have yet to show how this proves any of your ASSumptions? Let me get this right we can make assumptions and it's up to the people we make them about to prove them wrong?

Ok, well I'm assuming your on pychiatric medicine..............now prove me wrong. :o

Pureracket
Jan 26th, 2005, 10:56 PM
Ok, well I'm assuming your on pychiatric medicine..............now prove me wrong. :oLOL!!!!!

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 10:57 PM
Okay, I was mistaken on the date, so what?

So what? You're the one that was so insistent that it was late 2004, and "those are the facts". Remember? :rolleyes: Oh yeah....just a slight oversight....late 2004....April 2003....what's the difference, right?....it's only 18 months difference. :rolleyes: I guess you just *thought* that you'd only been here for a month or two? :rolleyes: You're a real stickler for details, eh? :lol:

I thought it was 2004 when I joined.

Yeah, I'm sure. Again, you said late 2004. You thought that you'd only been here for a couple of months? :rolleyes:

Besides, I didn't even know that profile still existed.

Exactly!

Go figure. I can't even use that ID anymore. But only a stalker :scared: would bother to look it up. :lol:

No. Just someone that KNEW that you'd been here for more than 2 or 3 months. And it took all of 2 minutes to dig up that tidbit.

Okay cheesestix, here's a rare moment. I made a mistake about the date I created that ID. Oh my, it must make your day. Would you like your gold star now or later. ;)

Now, please! :lol:

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:03 PM
Dede,
Baby, be careful with this particular poster. Its has that old school hatred for the Williams. It's sad. I'm thinking it and Julia might be the same person. The poster also poster under "ooooOoooo" once. It has to be the same. Hatred can't be similar in two of the same people like that.

Be careful? :rolleyes:

And what is "old school hatred"? :rolleyes:

I don't even hate them. It's mostly their fans that I don't care for. But I don't hate their fans. Some are okay. It's just the ones that refuse to acknowledge anything negative (and make excuses) about them that I don't care for.

And, NO, Julia and I are NOT the same person.

Furthermore, I've only posted under ONE ID here, that's cheesestix.

Look around, dude. There's are several people here that don't care for WS fans with all of their excuses. It ain't hatred. I just don't care for the arrogance. The irony is that some of you turn around and bash the die-hard Maria fans for the same thing that some of you WS are guilty of.

Pureracket
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:07 PM
Be careful? :rolleyes:

And what is "old school hatred"? :rolleyes:

I don't even hate them. It's mostly their fans that I don't care for. But I don't hate their fans. Some are okay. It's just the ones that refuse to acknowledge anything negative (and make excuses) about them that I don't care for.

And, NO, Julia and I are NOT the same person.

Furthermore, I've only posted under ONE ID here, that's cheesestix.

Look around, dude. There's are several people here that don't care for WS fans with all of their excuses. It ain't hatred. I just don't care for the arrogance. The irony is that some of you turn around and bash the die-hard Maria fans for the same thing that some of you WS are guilty of.Please. . .diehard Sharapova fan. . .LOL!!!! Don't try to use that as an excuse for your hatred of Williams Sisters, Williams fans, and Williams tennis. Maria is 17. I hope you aren't trying to veil yourself as one of her fans and using it to dichotomize your hatred. Not caring for a player is cool. Your kind of posts are hateful, though.

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:10 PM
Obsessed? No. Good memory? Yes. :lol: I was correct. You had another alias. I never said that it was created before 2004, just that it COULD have been. THOSE are the facts! You just proved me correct. Thanks. :wavey: And how the hell would Rocketta know what you do or do not do anyway? :rolleyes: Are you roommates or something?

I never tried to hide the fact that I had another ID. Hell, I created a thread about it. :lol: I can't answer for Rocketta, but I'm sure she knows her own mind and she doesn't need the likes of a troll/stalker like you to tell her what she knows or doesn't know. :lol:

Accusations? :rolleyes: Do you take it that personally/seriously? I never ACCUSED you of anything. :lol: I merely stated some assumptions...which I believe to be correct. I've read enough of your posts here to know that you have NEVER (to my recollection) given another player any credit for defeating Serena. You just come up with excuses for why she lost. You're a poor sport when Serena loses, and I think everyone here knows that. Heck, I think you've even admitted it too. You have issues. Did you give Maria any credit for beating Serena at Wimbledon? If not (which I'm almost certain of), then why do you think Serena lost to Maria?

What does "personally/seriously" have to do with accusations? :retard: You might want to look up the definitions of the words "accusation" and "assumption". You accused me of things I did, didn't, would and wouldn't do. You assume your accusations are correct. If I've posted over 3000 posts, including my other ID, you haven't nearly read enough of my posts to know what I'd post on any given day or what I have posted. :rolleyes: You are the one with issues, to think you know me so emphatically based on a few posts you've read. I'm not quite that shallow or transparent. You on the other hand are quite transparent. Can anyone say TROLL?? Why are you so concerned with me giving Maria credit? I should think her fans do enough of that. Also, are you really that concerned about why I think Serena lost to Maria at, I assume you're talking about, Wimby? Why do you think Maria lost to Serena at Miami?

Stalking? :rolleyes: So jumping into a thread/argument is called "stalking"? :rolleyes: Because your threads are almost always you arguing with someone. I guess all of your buddies jumping into our arguments is stalking too? :rolleyes: And one time, you said "hey, let's call a truce".....well, who was it that broke it and jumped on me again? Hmmmm, that would be YOU. And who was it that badrepped me once TOTALLY OUT OF THE BLUE? Oh yes, that was YOU again. But I guess THAT isn't "stalking" is it? :rolleyes:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
No, jumping into a thread/argument, as you put it, is not stalking. Looking for someone on the message board and only posting in threads they post in on that particular message board is stalking. Unless you're stalking me, how would you know "your threads are almost always you arguing with someone."? And, if that were true, what does it have to do with you? Why are you so concerned with what I do? What my friends on this board have said to you today, have absolutely nothing to do with stalking. Merely pointing you out as the ridiculous ass you are. Besides cheese, we don't have arguments. You stalk me, attack me and take off for periods of time. I assume during those times you are not stalking me, you are stalking some other poster and attacking them on another message board.

Can anyone guess why I bad repped cheesestix? Oh no, no way do you deserve to be bad repped. :lol:

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:12 PM
actually someone can post 3,000 posts in 3 to 4 months where have you been.

Also, I said I was wrong in the date she created her account which is more than you can admit to. You do know what ASSuming gets you right? I was not wrong in my general meaning that she didn't start posting regularly here until late 2004. That's the truth. I knew of Dede on other boards so I know when I started seeing her on the regular.

However, you have yet to show how this proves any of your ASSumptions? Let me get this right we can make assumptions and it's up to the people we make them about to prove them wrong?

Ok, well I'm assuming your on pychiatric medicine..............now prove me wrong. :o
:lol:

mboyle
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:28 PM
If Kuzzy had kept up the same level she had in the first set there's no way Maria would have won. .
The UBN played horribly in the first set. Maria was just god aweful, and couldn't keep a ball in court. In the second and third, UBN did wilt a bit, but Maria stepped it up so much it wouldn't have mattered.

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:36 PM
actually someone can post 3,000 posts in 3 to 4 months where have you been.

Who said they couldn't? I merely showed that her other ID usage was more than a "passing fancy".

But let me break it down. To post 3000 posts in 3 months would be over 30 posts per day....every single day. That would be pretty damn hardcore.

To post 3000 posts in 18 months is still over 5 posts per day.....every single day. That's still more than a "passing fancy".

Also, I said I was wrong in the date she created her account which is more than you can admit to. You do know what ASSuming gets you right?

Earlier you said that she joined in late 2004. Then, when I showed you that she had another account that was created in April 2003, you side-stepped/tap-danced around it and said that what you meant was that she didn't use that account anything more than a passing fancy.

My assumption (that she was here during the AO 2003) might be incorrect. But how do we really know? You guys can't get your facts straight.

I was not wrong in my general meaning that she didn't start posting regularly here until late 2004. That's the truth. I knew of Dede on other boards so I know when I started seeing her on the regular.

No. You were wrong about that, too. As I just showed, 3000 posts over 18 months is more than 5 posts per day...every single day. That's more than a passing fancy. That IS "posting regularly".

BTW, even if you assumed that she just lurked (did not post) for the first 9 of those 18 months, that would just mean that she posted 10+ times per day for the last 9 months, which is even MORE regular....and it would still still mean that she started posting regularly in early 2004.

Either way, you were wrong. Sorry.

However, you have yet to show how this proves any of your ASSumptions? Let me get this right we can make assumptions and it's up to the people we make them about to prove them wrong?

You're right. It doesn't prove that she was here during AO 2003. Nor does it prove that she was NOT here during AO 2003. You've both been proven to be either deceitful (worst case) or severely factually incorrect (best case).

Ok, well I'm assuming your on pychiatric medicine..............now prove me wrong. :o

:rolleyes:

Well, I'll do you one better. I'm assuming that you're NOT on pSychiatric medicine....and it shows, big time. Maybe you should get some. :lol:

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:44 PM
The UBN played horribly in the first set. Maria was just god aweful, and couldn't keep a ball in court. In the second and third, UBN did wilt a bit, but Maria stepped it up so much it wouldn't have mattered.
Why do you think that Maria was "god aweful" (sic) in the first set? Do you think that it may have something to do with the heat. Also, my impression is that Kuzzy did choke in the second and third set. Especially the second set and tried to regain the momentum in the third, but it was too late, because Maria is a good frontrunner. I feel that Kuzzy choked in the second because, she basically said so herself. I think she felt she could let up off the gas and take it easy and cruise to a straight set victory because Maria couldn't get anything to fall in the first. When she fell asleep at the wheel, Maria went into high gear and won.

cheesestix
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:48 PM
Please. . .diehard Sharapova fan. . .LOL!!!! Don't try to use that as an excuse for your hatred of Williams Sisters, Williams fans, and Williams tennis. Maria is 17. I hope you aren't trying to veil yourself as one of her fans and using it to dichotomize your hatred. Not caring for a player is cool. Your kind of posts are hateful, though.

Hateful? Show me ONE post that is hateful towards the WS or their fans???? :rolleyes: Hate is a strong word. You're exaggerating drastically.

Most of my posts boil down to telling these hardcore WS fans to quit making excuses every time a WS loses. Any name calling from me rarely goes any further than the word "idiot", and is usually in response to namecalling towards me. :rolleyes:

BTW, anything that you can dig up, I'll bet you that I can show that much and WORSE from WS fans towards Maria, JHH, etc and non-WS fans on this board.

I don't even have to look for THAT. Just look at a few of Denise's posts. She curses like a freaking sailor. And you don't get ANY MORE hateful than telling someone to kill themself, do you? I would NEVER say anything like that to anyone, here or otherwise.

Again, "hatred" is a strong word. You shouldn't throw it around so lightly. :rolleyes:

Denise4925
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:52 PM
:topic:

Can everyone please ignore the idiot behind the curtain and get back on topic? His whole aim was to get everyone off the topic of whether Kuzzy choked against Maria. I appreciate all those who tried to keep it on topic and apologize for letting myself get side-tracked in my own thread.

Pureracket
Jan 26th, 2005, 11:56 PM
Hateful? Show me ONE post that is hateful towards the WS or their fans???? :rolleyes: Hate is a strong word. You're exaggerating drastically.

Most of my posts boil down to telling these hardcore WS fans to quit making excuses every time a WS loses. Any name calling from me rarely goes any further than the word "idiot", and is usually in response to namecalling towards me. :rolleyes:

BTW, anything that you can dig up, I'll bet you that I can show that much and WORSE from WS fans towards Maria, JHH, etc and non-WS fans on this board.

I don't even have to look for THAT. Just look at a few of Denise's posts. She curses like a freaking sailor. And you don't get ANY MORE hateful than telling someone to kill themself, do you? I would NEVER say anything like that to anyone, here or otherwise.

Again, "hatred" is a strong word. You shouldn't throw it around so lightly. :rolleyes:Most of your posts, like so many other posters', are based on your hatred for them. Look @ them yourself. It's almost like you don't have anything else to talk about on the board. I will guarantee you that most of the posts on the board about the Williams Sisters come from sick, demented, "non-fans" of the Williams Sisters like yourself.

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 12:05 AM
No, jumping into a thread/argument, as you put it, is not stalking. Looking for someone on the message board and only posting in threads they post in on that particular message board is stalking.

You're lying! I don't *only* post in threads that you post in. Look around. Look at my previous posts. :rolleyes:

Unless you're stalking me, how would you know "your threads are almost always you arguing with someone."? And, if that were true, what does it have to do with you? Why are you so concerned with what I do?

I READ many threads on this board. I don't reply to all of them. But when I read, I often notice YOU arguing with someone about something...usually making excuses about why Serena or Venus lost.

What my friends on this board have said to you today, have absolutely nothing to do with stalking. Merely pointing you out as the ridiculous ass you are.

Nice hypocrisy there. :rolleyes: When I see you arguing with someone and jump in, it's "stalking". But when your friends do the SAME EXACT THING, it's something else. Did you ever think that maybe I'm "pointing you out as the ridiculous ass [that] you are"? :lol: You don't know how many good reps I get from people telling me how much of a psycho you are...and I think you'd be VERY surprised at some of the people that have done so.

Besides cheese, we don't have arguments. You stalk me, attack me and take off for periods of time. I assume during those times you are not stalking me, you are stalking some other poster and attacking them on another message board.

That's so idiotic. Think back. A while ago, you said to me something like "Okay, let's call a truce. You don't bother me, I won't bother you". I TOTALLY remember that. I also remember YOU breaking that truce, and jumping on me.

Can anyone guess why I bad repped cheesestix? Oh no, no way do you deserve to be bad repped. :lol:

Maybe that's why I get so many good reps? :rolleyes: It doesn't surprise me that YOU bad-repped me. The point is that you act like it's *me* who's always starting it and jumping on you...but your bad-rep came OUT OF THE BLUE. It had probably been weeks since we'd chatted. :rolleyes:

CC
Jan 27th, 2005, 12:07 AM
The UBN played horribly in the first set. Maria was just god aweful, and couldn't keep a ball in court. In the second and third, UBN did wilt a bit, but Maria stepped it up so much it wouldn't have mattered.
I still feel the same way, even if I don't know what UBN is.

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 12:12 AM
Most of your posts, like so many other posters', are based on your hatred for them. Look @ them yourself. It's almost like you don't have anything else to talk about on the board. I will guarantee you that most of the posts on the board about the Williams Sisters come from sick, demented, "non-fans" of the Williams Sisters like yourself.

That's what you ASSUME. :rolleyes: I think I know where YOU are coming from. :rolleyes:

Like I said, show me ONE post that is "hateful" towards WS or their fans. You can't. All you can now say is that my posts are "based on [my] hatred for them"? :rolleyes: That just shows that it's your assumption.

It's funny how you can call non-WS fans "sick" and "demented", when you have WS fans that totally fit that description....e.g. Denise. What kind of rational, normal person would tell ANYONE to go kill themself? :rolleyes:

Pureracket
Jan 27th, 2005, 12:28 AM
That's what you ASSUME. :rolleyes: I think I know where YOU are coming from. :rolleyes:

Like I said, show me ONE post that is "hateful" towards WS or their fans. You can't. All you can now say is that my posts are "based on [my] hatred for them"? :rolleyes: That just shows that it's your assumption.

It's funny how you can call non-WS fans "sick" and "demented", when you have WS fans that totally fit that description....e.g. Denise. What kind of rational, normal person would tell ANYONE to go kill themself? :rolleyes: http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=140248
http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=141967
http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=144065


Just a few: :eek:

They REALLY caught you up in the first thread.

Rocketta
Jan 27th, 2005, 12:54 AM
Who said they couldn't? I merely showed that her other ID usage was more than a "passing fancy".

But let me break it down. To post 3000 posts in 3 months would be over 30 posts per day....every single day. That would be pretty damn hardcore.

To post 3000 posts in 18 months is still over 5 posts per day.....every single day. That's still more than a "passing fancy".


Earlier you said that she joined in late 2004. Then, when I showed you that she had another account that was created in April 2003, you side-stepped/tap-danced around it and said that what you meant was that she didn't use that account anything more than a passing fancy.

My assumption (that she was here during the AO 2003) might be incorrect. But how do we really know? You guys can't get your facts straight.



No. You were wrong about that, too. As I just showed, 3000 posts over 18 months is more than 5 posts per day...every single day. That's more than a passing fancy. That IS "posting regularly".

BTW, even if you assumed that she just lurked (did not post) for the first 9 of those 18 months, that would just mean that she posted 10+ times per day for the last 9 months, which is even MORE regular....and it would still still mean that she started posting regularly in early 2004.

Either way, you were wrong. Sorry.Where did I say she didn't post like a mad woman after late 2004? I said she didn't start posting on the regular that means everyday and a lot until late 2004. Once again how does that prove that she was around during the AO? How does that prove you were around during the AO 2003? You were the one making assumptions about who was doing what during a time when you or her weren't even on the board. I don't care if she posted 1000 posts a day still doesn't change the fact that your accusation was based on your ASSumptions which were wrong. The discussion isn't about if she posts alot, she does. The discussion was about what she did or did not do around AO 2003 which if I'm not mistaken is what 'you' broght up.

Like I said I was wrong about the date she joined the board. Ok, but I wasn't wrong about the fact that your assumption wasn't based in reality. 30 posts a day or not you made a faulty ASSumption. 4/2003 create date or 11/2004 create date doesn't matter either because you still made a faulty ASSumption and the fact that you can't admit is well typical of you. :)



You're right. It doesn't prove that she was here during AO 2003. Nor does it prove that she was NOT here during AO 2003. You've both been proven to be either deceitful (worst case) or severely factually incorrect (best case).The questions is who says she has to prove anything? Like I said so all we have to do is make assumptions and it's up to the other prove it wrong?

ok, I assume during the AO 2003, you were writing excuses for kim about how Serena put Voodoo on Kim to win that match. Now prove me wrong? :o



:rolleyes:

Well, I'll do you one better. I'm assuming that you're NOT on pSychiatric medicine....and it shows, big time. Maybe you should get some. :lol:actually that's not one better that's weak can't even come up with your own sarcastic remarks....:lol: Still using my lines I see. Dang, why don't you at least ask somebody. No creativity. Sad really.

I'm not even going to get into the lameness of a comeback that consists of correcting a spelling error except to say find some creativity I know there has to be some in there somewhere. It's probably way down deep but if you spent less time worrying about what William's fans are doing and more time developing a personality you may find some one day. :o

btw, still waiting on the proof that you are not on psychiatric medicine...come on prove me wrong. I mean if Denise has to prove your assumptions wrong surely you have to prove mine. :wavey:

Denise4925
Jan 27th, 2005, 01:00 AM
Any name calling from me rarely goes any further than the word "idiot", and is usually in response to namecalling towards me. :rolleyes:



I don't even have to look for THAT. Just look at a few of Denise's posts. She curses like a freaking sailor. And you don't get ANY MORE hateful than telling someone to kill themself, do you? I would NEVER say anything like that to anyone, here or otherwise.

Again, "hatred" is a strong word. You shouldn't throw it around so lightly. :rolleyes:
I particularly like this exchange: :lol:

You don't know me, ASSHOLE. Or should I say ASSLICK, ASSPLUG or ASSRAM (or all of the above)? I personally don't give a shit about gay marriage, and I'm on the fence about abortion. How's THAT for fundamentalism?



Is Sam L a b!tch, or what? Thanks for setting his ass straight!

The height of hypocrisy and lies. :lol:

darrinbaker00
Jan 27th, 2005, 01:07 AM
The height of hypocrisy and lies. :lol:
And that's just here. There's not enough bandwidth to discuss his history of lies, deceit and general "trollishness" on the Yahoo tennis boards. ;)

Melly Flew Us
Jan 27th, 2005, 01:13 AM
Yeah Kutz definitely choked in those last two sets ...she was playing pretty cleanly throughout most of the first set. totally choked... Guess Marias determination is something to watch out for when you play her...
i don't think so.
her stats, particularly e/w ratio and return points won from the previous rounds, weren't as good as sharapova's.
during the walk to the court she was looking at the posters whereas sharapova was focussed.
the only reason sharapova didn't win in 2 was because of the heat - sveta was always gonna lose control of her game.

Denise4925
Jan 27th, 2005, 01:32 AM
You're lying! I don't *only* post in threads that you post in. Look around. Look at my previous posts. :rolleyes:

When you come in GM you do. If you look closely, I clarifed my statement, because I knew how you'd respond. :lol:


I READ many threads on this board. I don't reply to all of them. But when I read, I often notice YOU arguing with someone about something...usually making excuses about why Serena or Venus lost.

And you only feel the need to post, after reading so many threads :rolleyes: , in the threads I post in to attack me. Let me get this straight, you come in GM and read many threads on the board until you find my posts, where you notice that I am arging with someone about something, but usually "making excuses about why Serena or Venus lost". Hmmmm, sounds like stalking to me. I think you're pretty selective in your stalking though, because you only choose to post in the threads where I'm defending my favs. Which means you hate the Williams' sisters. :lol:


Nice hypocrisy there. :rolleyes: When I see you arguing with someone and jump in, it's "stalking". But when your friends do the SAME EXACT THING, it's something else.

The difference being genius is that they don't go looking for you, you come looking for me.

Did you ever think that maybe I'm "pointing you out as the ridiculous ass [that] you are"? :lol:
Again, the difference being where they've succeeded, you've failed miserably. :lol:

You don't know how many good reps I get from people telling me how much of a psycho you are...and I think you'd be VERY surprised at some of the people that have done so.

Same here. :lol: How many rep points to do you have? You tell me yours and I'll tell you mine. ;) Never mind, I'm No. 55 on the list for the highest ranking points, i.e. good reps. I don't see you anywhere near the top 60. And, this is just for this ID, not the previous one. Needless to say the few good reps you've gotten are from trolls and idiots like you and I wouldn't be surprised at all at who the people are that have done so. :)





That's so idiotic. Think back. A while ago, you said to me something like "Okay, let's call a truce. You don't bother me, I won't bother you". I TOTALLY remember that. I also remember YOU breaking that truce, and jumping on me.

So that gives you carte blanch to attack me at will. Oh nooo, you're not hateful and revengeful. :lol:



Maybe that's why I get so many good reps? :rolleyes: It doesn't surprise me that YOU bad-repped me. The point is that you act like it's *me* who's always starting it and jumping on you...but your bad-rep came OUT OF THE BLUE. It had probably been weeks since we'd chatted. :rolleyes:

Again, the difference being I don't go looking for you, you come looking for me. Have a nice evening. :)

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 01:52 AM
http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=140248
http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=141967
http://www.wtaworld.com/showthread.php?t=144065


Just a few: :eek:

They REALLY caught you up in the first thread.

First of all, earlier you said that I show hatred towards WS and their fans.

So why is it that the 3 threads that you produce have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with WS or WS fans? :rolleyes:

Secondly, where is the "hatred"? :rolleyes:

So, you produced 3 threads from the "Non-Tennis" board (which, as stated earlier, obviously have NOTHING to do with WS or WS-fans) that I participated in. But where's the "hatred"? There's no hatred. Arguments? Certainly. But no hatred. Show me what you define to be "hatred" in any of my posts?

What do you mean by "caught [me] up in the first thread"? A little wishful thinking by you? The best they could do was call me "racist" and "threatened" by Cynthia and Billy McKinney. :rolleyes:

These 3 threads do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to support your earlier claim!

Again...

Need I refresh your memory? You said:

Most of your posts, like so many other posters', are based on your hatred for them. Look @ them yourself.

That's BS! And you only prove that it's BS by the threads that you reference. All 3 that you reference have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with WS or WS-fans! In fact, most of my posts over the last several months have been on the NON-TENNIS boards. :rolleyes:

It's almost like you don't have anything else to talk about on the board.

That's why the 3 threads that you found were all political threads which had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with WS or WS-fans? :rolleyes: Again, that makes no sense. And like I said, most of my posts (I'll bet that at least 90% of them) over the last 3 months are on the NON-TENNIS boards. :rolleyes:

I will guarantee you that most of the posts on the board about the Williams Sisters come from sick, demented, "non-fans" of the Williams Sisters like yourself.

Count 'em up. I'll bet there's just as much Maria-bashing from WS fans as there is WS-bashing from non-WS fans. Does that mean that WS fans are "sick" and "demented" too?

Furthermore, take a look at THIS THREAD! It only proves my point.....WS FAN BASHING MARIA. ( In fact, I just noticed that....how apropos! :lol: )

Julia1968
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:03 AM
LOL!!!!!

So there is something more in your vocabulary besides, "Swoop". Amazing!

Julia1968
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:14 AM
Be careful? :rolleyes:

And what is "old school hatred"? :rolleyes:

I don't even hate them. It's mostly their fans that I don't care for. But I don't hate their fans. Some are okay. It's just the ones that refuse to acknowledge anything negative (and make excuses) about them that I don't care for.

And, NO, Julia and I are NOT the same person.

Furthermore, I've only posted under ONE ID here, that's cheesestix.

Look around, dude. There's are several people here that don't care for WS fans with all of their excuses. It ain't hatred. I just don't care for the arrogance. The irony is that some of you turn around and bash the die-hard Maria fans for the same thing that some of you WS are guilty of.

Hey, Cheese:

Very good point.

What you'll notice about most of these Royal Court Williams Fans is their bitterness because they've not had anything to cheer about in a VERY long time. They don't really know tennis all that well, are perpetually negative about their latest obsession, Maria, and will quickly fade as tennis fans once the Willy Sis' retire.

Their basic discussions revolve around race and how wronged the Willy sis' are and then proclaim that anyone who isn't an avid supporter of either sister 'hates' or is 'racist'.

How miserable they must be. How pathetic their lives must be.

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:15 AM
Where did I say she didn't post like a mad woman after late 2004? I said she didn't start posting on the regular that means everyday and a lot until late 2004.

So YOU define what "regular" is? And NOW "regular" = "post[ing] like a mad woman"?

"Regular" is a relative term. 5 posts per day, every single day seems pretty "regular" to me.

ok, I assume during the AO 2003, you were writing excuses for kim about how Serena put Voodoo on Kim to win that match. Now prove me wrong? :o

First of all, I NEVER make excuses for players. I can't say the same for a lot of WS fans.

And your analogy is failed. :rolleyes: If I WAS posting excuses for Kim, you'd be able to prove it by digging up that post. But there's NO WAY to prove that Denise DID NOT post about Clijsters choking, other than the absence of a post (which I claim)...so the burden would be upon you to prove that she DID post it.

actually that's not one better that's weak can't even come up with your own sarcastic remarks....:lol:

Who said I was being sarcastic? :lol:

Still using my lines I see. Dang, why don't you at least ask somebody. No creativity. Sad really.

No, it's lame really, on your part. I took your cut-down and flipped it on you. That IS creative, and oh-so easy. :wavey:

Julia1968
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:17 AM
:topic:

Can everyone please ignore the idiot behind the curtain and get back on topic? His whole aim was to get everyone off the topic of whether Kuzzy choked against Maria. I appreciate all those who tried to keep it on topic and apologize for letting myself get side-tracked in my own thread.

I don't understand what you are biotching about. You do the exact similar thing in every thread which is positive about Maria Sharapova. Hate and Envy. Hate and Envy.

Stop, you are telling on yourself.

darrinbaker00
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:18 AM
Hey, Cheese:

Very good point.

What you'll notice about most of these Royal Court Williams Fans is their bitterness because they've not had anything to cheer about in a VERY long time. They don't really know tennis all that well, are perpetually negative about their latest obsession, Maria, and will quickly fade as tennis fans once the Willy Sis' retire.

Their basic discussions revolve around race and how wronged the Willy sis' are and then proclaim that anyone who isn't an avid supporter of either sister 'hates' or is 'racist'.

How miserable they must be. How pathetic their lives must be.
Oh, no, he's found someone who agrees with him. If we thought he was obnoxious before..... :eek:

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:19 AM
I particularly like this exchange: :lol:





The height of hypocrisy and lies. :lol:

Re-read my post. I said thtat it rarely goes beyond "idiot", and I said that it's usually in reponse to namecalling towards me. You obviously ignore what SamL said to me to deserve such a response.

Where's the hypocrisy? Where's the lies?

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:43 AM
I think you're pretty selective in your stalking though, because you only choose to post in the threads where I'm defending my favs. Which means you hate the Williams' sisters. :lol:

Oh, this is classic!

Hey, dum dum, why don't you focus your eyes on the title of THIS THREAD??? :lol:

The title? Sharapova Benefits from Choke, started by none other than Denise4925. :lol:

So, you "defend" the WS by bashing Maria Sharapova? :scratch:

Yeah, you're really "defending" the WS with this thread! :lol: All of my posts to you over the last 2 days have been in THIS THREAD. :retard:

The difference being genius is that they don't go looking for you, you come looking for me.

So when we made that truce (suggested by you, and agreed upon by me), and YOU broke it, you're saying that I came looking for you and MADE you reply to me by not posting to- or about- you? :scratch:

How many rep points to do you have? You tell me yours and I'll tell you mine. ;) Never mind, I'm No. 55 on the list for the highest ranking points, i.e. good reps. I don't see you anywhere near the top 60. And, this is just for this ID, not the previous one.

Now, this is just pathetic. :rolleyes: Wow! You sure are popular! I'm so jealous of you! :rolleyes: I'll bet that in Junior High you got more signatures in YOUR yearbook than anyone else in the whole entire school! Yippeee! :retard: I couldn't really give a rip how many points I have. My point is that if I'm so deserving of bad reps, why do I get so many good ones?

Needless to say the few good reps you've gotten are from trolls and idiots like you and I wouldn't be surprised at all at who the people are that have done so. :)

I'll bet you would be surprised. ;) Let's just say that not all WS fans are "trolls and idiots" (your words, not mine) and not all agree with you. ;) I can't blame 'em. You're embarrassing.

So that gives you carte blanch to attack me at will. Oh nooo, you're not hateful and revengeful. :lol:

Geez! Look at the thread title! Look at the creator! That's YOU! :rolleyes:

I only came into this thread to defend Maria Sharapova. Gee! Guess who gets responded to? That would be YOU! You're the one that posted the article! :rolleyes:

What do you expect? Idiot!

Again, the difference being I don't go looking for you, you come looking for me. Have a nice evening. :)

Yes, you do. You broke the truce by responding to me first. Then, after weeks of no chatting, you bad rep me out of the blue. :rolleyes:

Furthermore, again, look at the damn thread title and starter! :rolleyes: I saw a post that I didn't agree with, and I responded. :rolleyes:

~ The Leopard ~
Jan 27th, 2005, 02:44 AM
I keep reading the thread title as being about "coke". I guess the association between poor, derided Kuzzy and illicit drugs has already got that strong .... :eek:

UDiTY
Jan 27th, 2005, 03:03 AM
Maria=her opponent will choke

cheesestix
Jan 27th, 2005, 03:11 AM
Maria=her opponent will choke

So she intimidates here opponents?

fammmmedspin
Jan 27th, 2005, 03:11 AM
God knows what Serena is thinking about - being beaten I think. Sveta thought about winning. Nadia thought about being mad at Serena. Nastya thought about Elena losing. Elena thought about winning and how hot it was. Momo thought about her injury and played accordingly. Maria is about the only one who thinks about playing the next point for 3 sets.

fammmmedspin
Jan 27th, 2005, 03:14 AM
So she intimidates here opponents?
No because they can beat her and often fall apart after beating her up for a set - its weirder than that?

Pureracket
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:31 AM
Hey, Cheese:

Very good point.

What you'll notice about most of these Royal Court Williams Fans is their bitterness because they've not had anything to cheer about in a VERY long time. They don't really know tennis all that well, are perpetually negative about their latest obsession, Maria, and will quickly fade as tennis fans once the Willy Sis' retire.

Their basic discussions revolve around race and how wronged the Willy sis' are and then proclaim that anyone who isn't an avid supporter of either sister 'hates' or is 'racist'.

How miserable they must be. How pathetic their lives must be.SWOOP!!!!!

Rocketta
Jan 28th, 2005, 10:57 PM
Oh, no, he's found someone who agrees with him. If we thought he was obnoxious before..... :eek:
pssst.....same person...:o

Denise4925
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:03 PM
pssst.....same person...:o
Oh I get it, he's trying to disguise himself with the bold print. :lol:

cheesestix
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:28 PM
pssst.....same person...:o

Yeah, because I'm the ONLY one that thinks that you people are psychotic whiney idiots. :rolleyes:

Yeah, and I'm all of the other IDs that don't agree with you too. :rolleyes:

(psssst....those 2 statements are what is called "sarcasm"...look it up, before you go taking it literally)

You are a f*cking idiot! :retard:

Pureracket
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:32 PM
Cheesy is back! Cheesy is back!:):bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::)

Rocketta
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:46 PM
Cheesy is back! Cheesy is back!:):bounce::bounce::bounce::bounce::)
and back with his original reparté.....:lol:

Rocketta
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:47 PM
Yeah, because I'm the ONLY one that thinks that you people are psychotic whiney idiots. :rolleyes:

Yeah, and I'm all of the other IDs that don't agree with you too. :rolleyes:

(psssst....those 2 statements are what is called "sarcasm"...look it up, before you go taking it literally)

You are a f*cking idiot! :retard:and there were/are people who agreed with Hitler? What's your point? That there's as delusional people in the world as you? :shrug:

This we already knew.

Pureracket
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:50 PM
and there were/are people who agreed with Hitler? What's your point? That there's as delusional people in the world as you? :shrug:

This we already knew.LOL!!!!!

darrinbaker00
Jan 28th, 2005, 11:50 PM
Yeah, because I'm the ONLY one that thinks that you people are psychotic whiney idiots. :rolleyes:
Judging from what's been posted the last 48 hours, you are.
You are a f*cking idiot! :retard:
As opposed to what, a celibate one like yourself?

darrinbaker00
Jan 29th, 2005, 12:00 AM
If you good people will excuse me, I'm going to the GF's house and watch the match. Have a wonderful weekend! ;)