HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Byron Rakitzis <byron@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: US Open - General Observations
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 18:15:29 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Reply-To: byron@netapp.com

In article <1992Sep10.151021.1328@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> clc5q@hemlock.cs.Virginia.EDU (Clark L. Coleman) writes:
>Exhibit B: Becker mishits a topspin forehand from the baseline. It makes
>    a crazy dive through the air with underspin, lands just over the net,
>    and Lendl is unable to get to it.  The announcer says, "Look at this
>    drop shot from Becker!"  Then, they show Becker hitting it in a slow
>    motion replay.  You can see Becker making a looping forehand topspin
>    shot, which is why Lendl did not anticipate what happened. As the
>    racket hits the ball, you can clearly see the frame making contact.
>    The announcer says, "Becker put so much backspin on this drop shot
>    that Lendl just couldn't get to it!"

If you were watching the USA coverage of this point, I don't think you
were paying attention. McEnroe and Gerulaitis were jokingly talking
about this new shot: the "topspin dropshot". It was pretty obvious
that they were making fun of Becker's fortunate mishit.

Besides, it's not clear to me how you can hit any kind of underspin,
even with a mishit topspin drive, and still have the ball go in the
direction of the net. (as you suggest in the second sentence of
Exhibit B)

(I've hit underspin with topspin drives by catching the ball with
the top of the frame, but usually the ball shoots straight up)

I don't doubt that there are many poor tennis commentators. You could
take McKay, Shiras, most of the non-tennis gravelly-voice commentators,
(e.g., Dick Enberg) and roast them on a spit for all I care.

In any case, I must say that I have managed to listen to Trabert
explain the tie-break rules a few times over the past two weeks without
being offended. Same goes for his explanations about what constitutes
a good approach shot or a good second serve.

It was Trabert's & Newk's commentary in the mid-80s that suckered me
into tennis in the first place. I think your snobbish attitude towards
ignorant fans is uncalled for. Get a grip.

Byron.
From: dan@mks.com (Dan Latendre)
Subject: Re: Agassi
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 17:16:20 GMT

In article <18i99dINNh0r@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> khs3@po.CWRU.Edu (Karthik H. Subramanian) writes:
>
>	Andre Agassi is the biggest fag in this hemisphere.  He can't play
>a lick of tennis.  The only reason he won Wimbledon was because for seven
>matches he played incredible tennis and his opponents happily self-
>destructed.  I don't think Goran Ivanisevic should have lost to him or
>that Agassi should have even come close to beating him.  Agassi is a 
>teeny-bopping fame-seeker that uses tennis to get endorsement money.
>Agassi will never again win a grand slam title because someone will
>constantly rise up and beat the skank.  Agassi does not have the mental
>stability of other great players to stay on top of the game.  

Do you want to put some money on that BIG MOUTH? Agassi, no matter
what anyone thinks of him is a GREAT tennis player. I did not like
Agassi at the beginning of his career -- too much of the show boat, but 
now he has come into his own and is playing superb tennis.

You say that he has no mental stability, just look at his record in
grand slam events over the last 2 years! 



-- 
     ||  // // ,'/~~\'   Dan Latendre		dan@mks.com 
    /||/// //|' `\\\     Strings, strings -- damn those strings!!
   / | //_// ||\___/     "Tennis is a stroke of genius", unknown.

Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: AS.TLK@forsythe.stanford.edu (Timmer)
Subject: Re: What's out?
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 23:28:04 GMT

>        In tennis, when is a ball out or in?  I mean, what part of the
>ball & what part of the line do you use?  Both ball & line are fairly
>thick objects, but I have never known anyone to address this fine point.
>
>        I used to call balls in if any part of the ball seemed to touch
>any part of the line, but I found that this put me at a disadvantage
>because most people seem to use the center of the ball & the center
>of the line.
>
>                Jeff Hanson (jph@u.washington.edu)


Sounds like you're being cheated.  As far as I know, the court
includes the entire line, to its outer edge.

I can't quote the rulebook, but it's hard enough to see whether the
ball hits some white.  How are you supposed to judge whether it
touched some imaginary, infinitely thin line down the middle of the
real line?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: bnataraj@uceng.UC.EDU (Bhaskar  Natarajan)
Subject: Re: US OPEN Women's Singles Draw, round of 16
Organization: University of Cincinnati, Engineering College
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 19:43:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep6.141426.7068@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung) writes:
>         1992 US Open Women's Singles Draw, round of 16
>
>               Seles (1) --------+
>                                 |--------+
>            G. Fernandez --------+        |
>                                          |--------+
>             Sukova (13) --------+        |        |
>                                 |--------+        |
>                      Hy --------+                 |
>                                                   |--------+
>            Sabatini (4) --------+                 |        |
>                                 |--------+        |        |
>               Appelmans --------+        |        |        |
>                                          |--------+        |
>             Pierce (16) --------+        |                 |
>                                 |--------+                 |
>      M.J. Fernandez (7) --------+                          |
>                                                            +--------> Champion
>              Cunningham --------+                          |
>                                 |--------+                 |
>   Maleeva-Fragniere (9) --------+        |                 |
>                                          |--------+        |
>                   Rubin --------+        |        |        |
>                                 |--------+        |        |
>       Magdalena Maleeva --------+                 |        |
>                                                   |--------+
>     Sanchez-Vicario (5) --------+                 |
>                                 |--------+        |
>           Garrison (14) --------+        |        |
>                                          |--------+
>                   Labat --------+        |
>                                 |--------+
>                Graf (2) --------+

	What happened of Jennifer ??  I didn't see any posting saying 
Jennifer lost...but apparently she did. ( or did she drop out ?) And
who beat her?

Thanx
Bhaskar.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: PH412000@brownvm.brown.edu
Subject: Re: the best
Organization: Brown University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:06:14 GMT


>all i can say is that there were many great matches that
>were played and i really enjoyed watching it.

Agree completely. But I will give it a try for fun, here is my pick:

1. Lendl-Becker
2. Edberg-Lendl
3. Edberg-Chang
4. Edberg-Sampras
............

Quan
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: donna@bae.bellcore.com (Donna Feliciano)
Subject: Re: Weather report at New York?
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 14:12:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.132914.2621@cs.brown.edu>, PH412000@brownvm.brown.edu writes:
|> Would anybody from New York City(or N.J.) give us a weather report?
|> If there is no rain delay, we should be able to watch the completion
|> of Edberg-Lendl match live around 1:30pm this afternoon on CBS.
|> 
|> Thanks.
|> 
|>  Quan"It's painful to watch my two most favorite players to battle each
|>       other."


The weather forecast for today is: a little cloudy, then clearing.
No rain is in the forecast.  Cooler, less humidity (mid 70s).

This weekend is also supposed to be reasonable nice and cooler.
No rain in the forecast as of this morning.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donna V. Feliciano                 email: donna@bae.bellcore.com
Bellcore                           Phone: (908) 699-2161
444 Hoes Lane Room RRC 4A741       FAX:   (908) 336-2828
Piscataway, NJ 08854
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ssubrama@dante.nmsu.edu (SUBRAMANIAM)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: Edberg Is In the Final
Date: 14 Sep 92 14:44:20 GMT
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM

In article <1992Sep13.005951.26131@mercury.cair.du.edu> lbrahm@denver.cba.du.edu (Lans Brahmantyo) writes:
>What a semifinal match today between Edberg and Chang. Edberg won it after  
>trailing 3-0 in the final set.
>
>Final score, I think, is: 6-7 7-5 7-6 4-6 6-4
>
The final score was 6-7, 7-5, 7-6, 5-7, 6-4

Siva
From: clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles Lin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: The Future of Women's Tennis
Date: 8 Sep 92 15:35:36 GMT
Reply-To: clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles C. Lin)
Organization: College of Engineering, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park

In article <1992Sep8.093933.13181@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>, shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung) writes:
> 
> After Martina, Steffi, Gaby, ... all retire, will this be the only
> type of tennis left among the women?

   The funny thing is that after the match, after Tracy had said that
keeping a few balls in play was a better strategy than hitting
hard all the time,  Mary Joe felt that it was her aggresiveness
that kept her in the match, and that to beat Sabatini, she needed
to be more aggressive.  Maybe they should take a page out of
Courier's book and learn to wait for the big shot.

--
Charles Lin
clin@eng.umd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung)
Subject: Re: Women's Draw Updated (quarter-final matchups)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 09:10:02 GMT



               Seles (1) --------+  Seles
                                 |--------+
            G. Fernandez --------+        |
                                          |--------+
             Sukova (13) --------+        |        |
                                 |--------+        |
                      Hy --------+   Hy            |
                                                   |--------+
            Sabatini (4) --------+ Sabatini        |        |
                                 |--------+        |        |
               Appelmans --------+        |        |        |
                                          |--------+        |
             Pierce (16) --------+        |                 |
                                 |--------+                 |
      M.J. Fernandez (7) --------+ MJ Fernandez             |
                                                            |
                                                            +--------> Champion
                                                            |
              Cunningham --------+ Maleeva-Fragniere        |
                                 |--------+                 |
   Maleeva-Fragniere (9) --------+        |                 |
                                          |--------+        |
                   Rubin --------+        |        |        |
                                 |--------+        |        |
       Magdalena Maleeva --------+ Maleeva         |        |
                                                   |--------+
     Sanchez-Vicario (5) --------+ Sanchez-V.      |
                                 |--------+        |
           Garrison (14) --------+        |        |
                                          |--------+
                   Labat --------+        |
                                 |--------+
                Graf (2) --------+ Graf


Prediction: Maleeva will be a semi-finalist :-).  Actually, this
US Open will be the first time a Maleeva reaches the semi of a
Grand Slam event.
-- 
-- Shun Cheung,    electronic: shun.cheung@att.com    voice: (908) 615-5135
     HR 1A-304, AT&T Bell Labs, 480 Red Hill Road, Middletown, NJ, 07748 USA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: mou@nova1.stanford.edu (Alex Mou)
Subject: US open trivia
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:25:00 GMT

The four semifinalits are seeded 1 to 4. Has this happend before at US
open? If yes, I doute it is a frequent case. Anybody knows how often
this happens?
From: guillory@crhc.uiuc.edu (Stanford Guillory)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: Sanchez Vicario
Date: 13 Sep 1992 00:52:01 -0500
Organization: Center for Reliable and High-Performance Computing, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
NNTP-Posting-Host: bach.crhc.uiuc.edu

mamohamm@vela.acs.oakland.edu (SKEPTICAL) writes:


>	I would not count Sanchez Vicario out. Seles has lost 
>	in her last 3 final appearences and Vicario was the 
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Notice how cavalierly this is thrown out, "her last 3 FINAL
appearances"! OOOOOoooooh. Seles is in a slump, she is only
making it to the finals of EVERY tournament she enters!

Well, you may not be willing to count Sanchez out, but Seles 
did it for you. OOOOoooooh, did she ever. It wasn't even a contest.
Graf may not have guts, buts she does have predictive skills.
From: shun@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (shun.cheung)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Chris Evert's picks
Date: 13 Sep 92 12:26:43 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

At the French Open, Evert picked Steffi Graf initially but
changed her pick to Monica Seles in the last minute. Before
Wimbledon, she said Martina would win; then she changed to
Seles in the first week of the tournament. When it turned out
that Graf was playing very well towards the end, Evert simply
kept quiet about her picks before the final.

When Seles was winning the US Open yesterday, Evert said that
she picked Seles from the beginning. Actually, in an US Open Preview
program on CBS, Evert said Graf, then she switched to Seles
the day before the US Open during NBC's Mazda coverage. However,
the USA Today reported Evert predicted that either Martina
or Capriati would win.

Those of us who have trouble picking/predicting winners can
use the Chris Evert method from now on, namely the shot-gun
approach. You'll be correct 100% of the time.

Prediction: one of the 128 perple in the main draw will win
the US Open in 1993. :-)
-- 
-- Shun Cheung,    electronic: shun.cheung@att.com    voice: (908) 615-5135
     HR 1A-304, AT&T Bell Labs, 480 Red Hill Road, Middletown, NJ, 07748 USA
Organization: Middle East Technical University - Computer Center
Date: Tuesday, 8 Sep 1992 14:15:20 TUR
From: <E55721@TRMETU.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: Automatic Tennis line calling


SORRY | I don^t know your quest`on , but I want to learn some da`ly news about
tenn`s `n the world. Could you sent me ? ( you can sent here|)

Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: hari@robios.me.wisc.edu (Kambainathan Hari)
Subject: Re: ATP Men's Ranking: September 13th
Organization: U. Wisconsin-Madison, Robotics Laboratory
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:11:00
In-reply-to: gess@knex.Gwinnett.COM's message of 14 Sep 92 16:23:06 GMT


> The ATP top 50 ranked singles players:  
>    (Through September 13th):
 
> 1. Stefan Edberg, Sweden, 3,577
> 2. Jim Courier, United States, 3,574
> 3. Pete Sampras, United States, 3,442

Whew! That's a close #1. I guess we should see Edberg falling back to #2 or
#3 in a couple of weeks unless he defends the titles he won following
the US open. I remember he went on a `roll' after the open in '91
winning 2 or 3 tournaments (until I Becker beat him). Any idea what
the tournaments are and what will happen to the rankings if Edberg fails to defend
them ?

- Hari

K.R.Harinarayan
Robotics Lab., Dept. of Mech. Engg.
Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison

Fone  : (608) 262-7463, (608) 262 - 9056
e-mail: hari@robios.me.wisc.edu

Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: haas@wam.umd.edu (The Future Mr. Graf)
Subject: Re: speed of a serve
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 00:26:11 GMT

Ok, I'll tell you what I know.  The "gun" used to clock the speed of 
the ball is similar to the guns used by police to clock cars(however
that works).  The speed is recorded about 3 feet off the servers 
racquet.  Any other information would be appreciated.

                                    Jeffrey

-- 
***********************************************************************
*                                                                     *
*  Jeffrey Haas         "You're Honey Child To A Swarm Of Bees
*  HAAS@WAM.UMD.EDU      Gonna Blow Right Through You Like A Breeze"
From: dlee@iti.gov.sg (Dennis Lee (Sch 4/93))
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: US Open Final
Date: 15 Sep 92 00:14:05 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Information Technology Institute, National Computer Board, Singapore.

I think the "condition" didn't act up on Sampras in the second or third 
sets, he played pretty solid and mentally focussed tennis in the first 
three sets.

The thing about Sampras is that when he wins, his shots seem so
effortless and graceful that they are a wonder to watch, but when he
loses, he looks really bad.  All the times I've watched him lose:

US Open 91: against Courier,
Davis Cup final against Leconte and Forget,
Wimbledon 92 against Goran,
and this time against Edberg,

he *always* held his head down and looks totally dejected when he is
prepared to give up the game.  It's one thing when you feel dejected,
it's quite another when you let your opponent know so clearly that what
kind of mental state you are in, especially in men's tennis which is a
very psychological game.  How often do we see Michael Chang, or Ivan
Lendl, or Stefan Edberg give up when trailing?  Pete's got to pick up his
mental attitude toward the game, and he has one thing going his way:
TIME... he is still young, and has a bright future in the game.

Just my $0.02 worth.

>Dennis.
From: milleman@athena.cs.uga.edu (Richard Milleman)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Re: 5th set tie-breaks ?
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:03:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: athena.1992Sep8.140304.22802
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Sep7.050202.654@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> int281x@mdw039.cc.monash.edu.au (Mr S. Fox) writes:
>Why are they playing 5th set tie-breaks at the U.S. Open.  As long as I've
>known 5th sets are played to advantage aren't they ? Is this exclusive to the
>U.S. open and if so why ?
>
>Simon

Advantage only exists in the 5th set of the French and Wimbledon.

						     Rick
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: nick@socrates.umd.edu (Nick Lemberos)
Subject: Re: US Open Prize Money/Women
Organization: University of Maryland University College
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 23:26:33 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.173638.9993@walter.bellcore.com> donna@bae.bellcore.com (Donna Feliciano) writes:
>In article <1992Sep15.160204.3073@src.umd.edu>, clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles Lin) writes:
>|> In article <1992Sep15.142547.5052@walter.bellcore.com>, donna@bae.bellcore.com (Donna Feliciano) writes:
>|> > In article <1992Sep15.021858.19076@src.umd.edu>, clin@eng.umd.edu (Charles Lin) writes:
>|> > |>    I'm not sure why there's so much money in tennis (compared
>|> > |> to golf, for example), though the money is quite top-heavy.


After hearing that Seles played about 5 hours of tennis during the WHOLE
US Open, im beginning to rethink my stand on equal pay for women.  There is
just so much more tennis going on w/ the men and more competition throughout
the top 20.

I know this is an old topic, but "hours played" is pretty amazing this US
Open.


nick

-- 
Nick Lemberos					nick@socrates.umd.edu 
   Academic Computing				     ^ sew-crates
      "Doing life with no chance for parole"       -L. Anderson
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: mou@nova1.stanford.edu (Alex Mou)
Subject: Chang would be happy! (Re: Lendl vs. Edberg )
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:18:53 GMT

>>Edberg beat Lendl. Final score:
>>
>>    6-3, 6-3, 3-6, 5-7, 7-6
>                         ^^^

I guess Chang would be happy to play Edberg instead of Lendl who beated
him in their last 3 consecutive meetings a couple of weeks ago.

I think Chang is a good candidate for the championship for the simple
reason that he has never lost a Grand Slam semi and final yet.

BTW, what is the career record between Chang-Edberg?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
From: venky@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (venkatesh.krishnaswamy)
Subject: Re: Grand Slam Cup
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 15:26:02 GMT

This is the current points situation for the Compaq Grand Slam cup
that will be held in December. This is a 16 player tournament
for which players qualify on the basis of their performance
in the Grand Slam tournaments.

Australian Open					French Open
---------------					-------------
Jim Courier		600		Jim Courier		600
Stefan Edberg		450		Petr Korda		450
Wayne Ferreira		300		Henri Leconte		300
Richard Krajicek	300		Andre Agassi		300
Ivan Lendl		150		Pete Sampras		150
Amos Mansdorf		150		Niklas Kulti		150
John McEnroe		150		Andrei Cherkasov	150
Michael Stich		150		Goran Ivanisevic	150
Christian Bergstrom	 75		Carlos Costa		 75
Omar Camporese		 75		Andrei Mevedev		 75
Andrei Chesnokov	 75		Carl Uwe-Steeb		 75
Aaron Krickstein	 75		Emilio Sanchez		 75
Wally Masur		 75		Diego Perez		 75
Marc Rosset		 75		Marcello Fillipini	 75
Emilio Sanchez		 75		Jaime Oncins		 75
David Wheaton		 75		Cedric Pioline		 75


Wimbledon				US Open
---------				-------

Andre Agassi		600		Stefan Edberg		600
Goran Ivanisevic	450		Pete Sampras		450
John McEnroe		300		Michael Chang		300
Pete Sampras		300		Jim Courier		300
Boris Becker		150		Ivan Lendl		150
Stefan Edberg		150		Alexander Volkov	150
Guy Forget		150		Wayne Ferriera		150
Michael Stich		150		Andre Agassi		150
Christian Sacaenu        75		Richard Krajicek	 75
Ivan Lendl		 75		Guy Forget		 75
Andrei Olhovsky		 75		Malivai Washington	 75
Arnaud Boetsch		 75		John McEnroe		 75
Wayne Ferreira		 75		Boris Becker		 75
Henrik Holm		 75		Brad Gilbert		 75
Jeremy Bates		 75		Emilio Sanchez		 75
Wally Masur		 75		Carlos Costa		 75


			Current Top 16
			---------------
			Jim Courier		1500
			Stefan Edberg		1200
			Andre Agassi		1050	
			Pete Sampras		 900
		   	Goran Ivanisevic	 600
			John McEnroe	     	 525
			Wayne Ferreira		 525
			Petr Korda		 450
			Ivan Lendl		 375
			Richard Krajicek	 375
			Michael Chang		 300
			Henri Leconte		 300
			Michael Stich		 300
			Boris Becker		 225
			Guy Forget 		 225
			Emilio Sanchez	   	 225


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

Venkatesh Krishnaswamy

venky@vax135.att.com
From: adolce@bbn.com (Anne Dolce)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis
Subject: Tuesday's On-Line News
Date: 15 Sep 92 19:19:19 GMT
Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcsun24.bbn.com

Source:  USA Today, Tuesday, September 15th
-------------------------------------------
  * Arthur Ashe remained in stable condition in New York
    Hospital on Monday after suffering a minor heart attack
    last Thursday.  There was no word on when he will be
    released.

  * CBS's ratings for this past weekend's TV coverage
    of the US Open dropped significantly from last year. 
    Friday's ratings fell 30%, Saturday's 10.5 hour show 
    dropped 42%, and the men's final on Sunday dropped 23%.

    The USA cable network's ratings remained the same
    from last year.  A spokesman from the USA Network 
    indicated that CBS's ratings suffered because 
    neither Connors, McEnroe, or Agassi made it to the
    semi-finals.

Anne
----
Newsgroups: rec.sport.tennis