faraday said:
In fairness he/she addressed your long post with a counter-argument. I thought it was quite an interesting debate so it's a pity you had to shut it down with a Straw Man argument.
Well, lets see what a great argument he makes shall we.
Jerkovin said:
Sorry, but I don't think I've ever read more BS in my entire life.
Hyperbole plus insulting me trying to belittle my opinion.
Jerkovin said:
Another internet blowhard trying to sound like he has more knowledge than others ?
Jerkovin said:
She has played many players who hit harder than her. Not least Kvitova who just won Wimbledon or Lisicki who beat her last year.
Considering Kvitova is an extremely likely doper her self, how does this prove Serena isn't doping ?
Jerkovin said:
Again, insulting me, trying to impress others that his opinion is more valid than mine.
Jerkovin said:
The irony of this post is that Henin had many more doping accusations from people in the know because of her dramatic weight gain that saw her go from the small 5ft5 toothpick to a huge piece of muscle capable of hitting just as hard as players almost a foot taller than her.
Henin has had some doping rumours surrounding her, granted. To say that she "had many more doping accusations" against her than Serena has can only be said by someone who is highly partisan. Serena is talked about MUCH more in places like "tennis has a steroids problem" than is Henin (even before Henin retired). As a matter of fact, Serena is probably the second most accused of doping after Nadal.
I don't believe that it is a "straw man" argument to say that Henin doping, DOES NOT prove that Serena isn't. It is in fact a logical fallacy. He clearly is bringing up the rumours about Henin to misdirect away from the accusations against Serena. Saying Henin is "a huge piece of muscle", implying Henin is doping and Serena isn't, when Henin was never anywhere nearly as bulky as Serena is ludicrous.
Jerkovin said:
But please stop embarrassing yourself.
Again, with the insults trying to belittle my opinion.
Jerkovin said:
Technically, her serve is probably the greatest motion ever alongside Federer.
Clearly trying to use Federer's talent (which the vast majority of tennis fans will agree), to "transfer" prestige to Serena (who has a hard, but hardly beautiful serve). Clear hyperbole again.
Anabolics are believed to increase serve speeds (a tennis serve has a similar motion to a baseball pitch, and pitchers were using anabolics to keep their pitch speeds up during baseballs steroids era - see Roger Clemens). Is some of her power from anabolics ?
Jerkovin said:
Off the ground, both her forehand and backhand are simple, small swings with very little wrong with them. And in many ways, she and Venus were trailblazers as far as technique goes, as they were the first to regularly hit with full-rotating open stance groundstrokes and early preparation.
Open stance uses less body torque (you can't spin your body as far with an open stance as a closed stance, since you are not "loading up" or turning in anticipation of the swing as much), therefore to get more power with an open stance (as Serena does relative to most other players), you MUST have more upper body strength than someone using a closed stance has. Open stances have become the norm, because it is the steroids era of tennis, NOT because the Williams sisters "invented" a better way to swing their rackets. So he is using evidence that implies doping to prove she isn't doping.
I used the Serena example as a reply to someone else, because they wanted to know why I thought doping was more prevalent in women's tennis than men's. Then he argues that Serena is supremely talented (outside of her strength). In the process, he (a brand new member) insults me, makes bold pronouncements of his own competence , and generally makes the same old lame subjective arguments that fanboys have been making here for years.
I choose not to "argue" with him when it is highly subjective, and an argument I didn't choose to make.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram