Tennis

Page 121 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
Djokovic just cannot stop winning. The ease with which he trashes his fellow top 10 players is frightening. It's like in dungeon and dragons when you get a set amount of attribute points to allocate to strength, dexterity and constitution but there's this one guy who cheats and has the max score in every goddamn attribute and is thus unstoppable. That guy is Djokovic.
 
May 14, 2010
5,310
2
0
Re:

SeriousSam said:
Djokovic just cannot stop winning. The ease with which he trashes his fellow top 10 players is frightening. It's like in dungeon and dragons when you get a set amount of attribute points to allocate to strength, dexterity and constitution but there's this one guy who cheats and has the max score in every goddamn attribute and is thus unstoppable. That guy is Djokovic.
I call him Joke-ovic.
 
May 14, 2010
5,310
2
0
Re:

Tienus said:
First you send me your money and I then lose it to you on purpose. You can now prove you have won the money playing poker.
Thanks. So I suppose your partner in crime (the guy who's losing to you) gets some kind of cut? Whereas, if he just kept your cash something bad might happen to him?
 
Jan 30, 2016
1,048
0
0
Re:

Red Rick said:
That would be pretty unbelievable. He mostly played 6max and 9max plo if I'm correct. If you want to lose it all against one player, there's so many better ways to do it.
Yes the lower buy in 6 max and fullring do not seem the obvious choice. It could have been done to disguise because if Pokerstars suspect chipdumping they will confiscate your funds as it is against their policy. He was mostly playing deepstack tables (250BB) and he could have been playing HU on those tables so it could have worked fine. After analyzing it does not look like chipdumping although the way he played is most bizar.
 
Jan 30, 2016
1,048
0
0
Re: Re:

Maxiton said:
Tienus said:
First you send me your money and I then lose it to you on purpose. You can now prove you have won the money playing poker.
Thanks. So I suppose your partner in crime (the guy who's losing to you) gets some kind of cut? Whereas, if he just kept your cash something bad might happen to him?
I could not tell as unfortunately I have no experience with money laundring myself.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re: Re:

Maxiton said:
Tienus said:
First you send me your money and I then lose it to you on purpose. You can now prove you have won the money playing poker.
Thanks. So I suppose your partner in crime (the guy who's losing to you) gets some kind of cut? Whereas, if he just kept your cash something bad might happen to him?
In my street there's a restaurant that is so badly located that it hardly attracts any customers.
And so the restaurant goes bankrupt and changes owner every couple of months. I lived here for two years, and I've seen four or five different owners there. The restaurant went from serving local food, to Chinese, to Indian, and back to local food. Not shitting you.
Only recently somebody told me that nobody's actually trying to open a restaurant there, but that the place is in fact being used for money laundring.

Just saying, I never quite understood the mechanics of money laundring.
 
Re:

Red Rick said:
That would be pretty unbelievable. He mostly played 6max and 9max plo if I'm correct. If you want to lose it all against one player, there's so many better ways to do it.
Agreed, laundering large amounts of money in this fashion sounds farfetched and overly complicated. But say you want to pay a certain person a few thousand dollars and that person wants it laundered (immediately), then this is an excellent alternative payment or banking system whereby someone can always claim they didn't sell anything on the black market but rather just won the money playing poker against some loser.
 
May 14, 2010
5,310
2
0
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Maxiton said:
Tienus said:
First you send me your money and I then lose it to you on purpose. You can now prove you have won the money playing poker.
Thanks. So I suppose your partner in crime (the guy who's losing to you) gets some kind of cut? Whereas, if he just kept your cash something bad might happen to him?
In my street there's a restaurant that is so badly located that it hardly attracts any customers.
And so the restaurant goes bankrupt and changes owner every couple of months. I lived here for two years, and I've seen four or five different owners there. The restaurant went from serving local food, to Chinese, to Indian, and back to local food. Not shitting you.
Only recently somebody told me that nobody's actually trying to open a restaurant there, but that the place is in fact being used for money laundring.

Just saying, I never quite understood the mechanics of money laundring.
Yeah, same here. I still don't understand it, but your story reminds me of a neighborhood I used to live in, in San Francisco. This neighborhood had a high number of recent Chinese immigrants, and the main street in the neighborhood was lined on each side with restaurants and shops, all owned and run by some of these same people. The food in most of these restaurants was quite poor, in terms of taste and presentation, and the shops, most of them, sold cheap trinkets and junk.

Opening a business in San Francisco is an expensive proposition, and business rents are among the highest in the country. But the funny thing is, many of these restaurants, and all the shops that sold cheap junk, were totally empty of customers. All the time empty. After a while I began to wonder, are these shops being used to launder money? On the face of it, it seems they were - even though I still don't know exactly how it works. How else to account for restaurateurs who don't know how to cook and have no clientele, and expensive shops full of inventory but with never any customers?
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Re: Re:

Maxiton said:
sniper said:
Maxiton said:
Tienus said:
First you send me your money and I then lose it to you on purpose. You can now prove you have won the money playing poker.
Thanks. So I suppose your partner in crime (the guy who's losing to you) gets some kind of cut? Whereas, if he just kept your cash something bad might happen to him?
In my street there's a restaurant that is so badly located that it hardly attracts any customers.
And so the restaurant goes bankrupt and changes owner every couple of months. I lived here for two years, and I've seen four or five different owners there. The restaurant went from serving local food, to Chinese, to Indian, and back to local food. Not shitting you.
Only recently somebody told me that nobody's actually trying to open a restaurant there, but that the place is in fact being used for money laundring.

Just saying, I never quite understood the mechanics of money laundring.
Yeah, same here. I still don't understand it, but your story reminds me of a neighborhood I used to live in, in San Francisco. This neighborhood had a high number of recent Chinese immigrants, and the main street in the neighborhood was lined on each side with restaurants and shops, all owned and run by some of these same people. The food in most of these restaurants was quite poor, in terms of taste and presentation, and the shops, most of them, sold cheap trinkets and junk.

Opening a business in San Francisco is an expensive proposition, and business rents are among the highest in the country. But the funny thing is, many of these restaurants, and all the shops that sold cheap junk, were totally empty of customers. All the time empty. After a while I began to wonder, are these shops being used to launder money? On the face of it, it seems they were - even though I still don't know exactly how it works. How else to account for restaurateurs who don't know how to cook and have no clientele, and expensive shops full of inventory but with never any customers?
exactly.
a bit like women.
we think we understand them, yet we don't.

as for Mark de J.
My money is on money laundring rather than on him being epically bad at poker.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re: Re:

Maxiton said:
sniper said:
Maxiton said:
Tienus said:
First you send me your money and I then lose it to you on purpose. You can now prove you have won the money playing poker.
Thanks. So I suppose your partner in crime (the guy who's losing to you) gets some kind of cut? Whereas, if he just kept your cash something bad might happen to him?
In my street there's a restaurant that is so badly located that it hardly attracts any customers.
And so the restaurant goes bankrupt and changes owner every couple of months. I lived here for two years, and I've seen four or five different owners there. The restaurant went from serving local food, to Chinese, to Indian, and back to local food. Not shitting you.
Only recently somebody told me that nobody's actually trying to open a restaurant there, but that the place is in fact being used for money laundring.

Just saying, I never quite understood the mechanics of money laundring.
Yeah, same here. I still don't understand it, but your story reminds me of a neighborhood I used to live in, in San Francisco. This neighborhood had a high number of recent Chinese immigrants, and the main street in the neighborhood was lined on each side with restaurants and shops, all owned and run by some of these same people. The food in most of these restaurants was quite poor, in terms of taste and presentation, and the shops, most of them, sold cheap trinkets and junk.

Opening a business in San Francisco is an expensive proposition, and business rents are among the highest in the country. But the funny thing is, many of these restaurants, and all the shops that sold cheap junk, were totally empty of customers. All the time empty. After a while I began to wonder, are these shops being used to launder money? On the face of it, it seems they were - even though I still don't know exactly how it works. How else to account for restaurateurs who don't know how to cook and have no clientele, and expensive shops full of inventory but with never any customers?
have you heard of Tyler Cowan. Accomplished economist, quasi autistic spectrum aspergers, Harvard grad and now a academic and public intellectual, when he writes for Economist and New Yorker his title or copyline is as the food economist... youtube his lectures of food economics and the immigrant quarters and the small peasant food restaurants... he has some thoughts running counter to yours. Now the chinese quarter in san fran may not exactly be haight ashbury

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJspYSFBxtk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCW8KJxHBhY
 
Mar 12, 2009
2,527
0
0
Re:

frenchfry said:
Monte Carlo semi-finals.

Between Nadal sneering and scratching and Murray pouting and slouching, I think the more interesting to watch will be between the Frenchies.
Tsonga was a huge let down, what happened in a day?
Monfils should give Rafa a hard test
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
1
0
Great and grueling tennis in the first two sets. Nadal and Monfils have quite similar characteristics in that they can run down a great many balls.
The third set, of course, was won by Nadal 6-0. Great stamina, lesser players like Gael cannot maintain the pace for a full 3 sets.

I see not the Nadal of old, but a Nadal who would probably win RG if Djokovic somehow drops out.
 
Mar 12, 2009
2,527
0
0
Re:

:rolleyes:
[
/img]
SeriousSam said:
Great and grueling tennis in the first two sets. Nadal and Monfils have quite similar characteristics in that they can run down a great many balls.
The third set, of course, was won by Nadal 6-0. Great stamina, lesser players like Gael cannot maintain the pace for a full 3 sets.

I see not the Nadal of old, but a Nadal who would probably win RG if Djokovic somehow drops out.
Who has he repeatedly lost in 5th set, often in bagel?
 
Jun 21, 2015
377
0
0
Murray's statements were hard core, and went further than the other leading men have. He's implying that he's been playing (and maybe losing to) dopers at the highest levels of the sport...

He specifically mentioned 6 hour matches.. How many high profile 6 hour matches have we had in tennis???? Answer = very few. Is he thinking about Djokovic / Nadal ?

http://www.therichest.com/sports/tennis-sports/top-10-longest-tennis-matches-of-all-time/?view=all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_tennis_match_records
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
Re:

arcus said:
Murray's statements were hard core, and went further than the other leading men have. He's implying that he's been playing (and maybe losing to) dopers at the highest levels of the sport...

He specifically mentioned 6 hour matches.. How many high profile 6 hour matches have we had in tennis???? Answer = very few. Is he thinking about Djokovic / Nadal ?

http://www.therichest.com/sports/tennis-sports/top-10-longest-tennis-matches-of-all-time/?view=all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_tennis_match_records
thats because he was losing to dopers, and he knows he was equal the player to nole djokovic all thru juniors and to rafa nadal even tho he is two years under nadals age.

but then murray started hardcore doping to win wimbledon cost he was sick and tired of losing to the full genius dopers. I think they accept some, but not the full genius ones. So when would have Murray started? Sometimes when he came to the realisation that he was losing to the hardcore dopers when he was 21ish, then he upp-ed his program when he realised he was losing to the full genius dopers Nadal and Joker and he NEEDED to win Wimbledon, so he upped it to hardcore. Then he backed off a tad.

just intuition folkx, no evidence
 
Jan 10, 2010
1,716
0
0
But Becker, who coaches world No 1 Novak Djokovic, insisted all the top players are clean, to the best of his knowledge.

"It's a very dangerous subject. I can only repeat that tennis is clean. I believe 100% Andy is clean," said Becker, speaking at the Laureus World Sport Awards, "Roger is clean, Rafa (Nadal) is clean, Stan (Wawrinka) is clean, all these guys are clean.

"There was always a suspicion of Rafa and I find that so unbelievably disrespectful about one of greatest players of all time.

"I can only speak for Novak and believe me he gets tested a lot! That can mean twice in a Grand Slam.


Good enough for me.... :rolleyes:
 
Mar 13, 2015
2,637
0
0
Re: Re:

blackcat said:
arcus said:
Murray's statements were hard core, and went further than the other leading men have. He's implying that he's been playing (and maybe losing to) dopers at the highest levels of the sport...

He specifically mentioned 6 hour matches.. How many high profile 6 hour matches have we had in tennis???? Answer = very few. Is he thinking about Djokovic / Nadal ?

http://www.therichest.com/sports/tennis-sports/top-10-longest-tennis-matches-of-all-time/?view=all
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_tennis_match_records
thats because he was losing to dopers, and he knows he was equal the player to nole djokovic all thru juniors and to rafa nadal even tho he is two years under nadals age.

but then murray started hardcore doping to win wimbledon cost he was sick and tired of losing to the full genius dopers. I think they accept some, but not the full genius ones. So when would have Murray started? Sometimes when he came to the realisation that he was losing to the hardcore dopers when he was 21ish, then he upp-ed his program when he realised he was losing to the full genius dopers Nadal and Joker and he NEEDED to win Wimbledon, so he upped it to hardcore. Then he backed off a tad.

just intuition folkx, no evidence
He was never an equal player to Rafa Nadal.
 
How do you know what Nadal was like before PEDs? Dunno if it was here or on a tennis board, but I've heard stories that he stopped playing juniors when he was like 16, so he could juice up and bulk up and go straight to the men's Tour
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS