Originally posted by gzhpcu
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Pathological Losers: My Vic Braden Interview
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by licensedcoach View PostWhat can i say? His character was strong in some ways and weak in others. He was flawed. Love him or hate him he was compelling?
Did you refuse to watch him, Phil? Or did you like the rest of his critics just have to watch?
Many find it compelling viewing to watch someone implode or fall apart on a world stage. I cannot tell you the underlying reasons why people do but it's well known fact that we do. It probably has some thing to do with affirming ourselves.
He just should have kept his foul mouth shut. Never enjoyed watching his tantrums, just his tennis.
So, I ask the McEnroe fans: did you enjoy his cursing the weak (linesmen, ballboys, etc) on the tennis courts?Last edited by gzhpcu; 02-12-2016, 08:04 AM.
Comment
-
Over and out...
Originally posted by gzhpcu View PostAs I said, I never loved nor hated him. Just disliked his tantrums immensely. Sure I watched his matches. Tennis is one thing, atrocious behavior is something else. He played some great matches against Borg, Connors, Lendl, etc.
He just should have kept his foul mouth shut. Never enjoyed watching his tantrums, just his tennis.
So, I ask the McEnroe fans: did you enjoy his cursing the weak (linesmen, ballboys, etc) on the tennis courts?
But, of course, you're right. The bottom line was he was a bloody good player and great to watch. Jeff Tarango was not a bloody good player so no one was interested in him when he threw his toys out of the pram.
Bottom line....the tennis must come first.
I am over and out on this one. I am beginning to wish I had kept my big mouth shut.
Adios....Stotty
Comment
-
Disgraced His Genius!
It's astonishing to have you say that "McEnroe carried his genius well." That opinion is such an outlier that I bet you couldn't get even 10% of eligible voters to agree with you. I'd say that McEnroe disgraced his genius. Just because one's a genius does not give one the right to egregiously violate the rights of others.
In this whole McEnroe debate several other people, as well as yourself, have cited the entertainment value of his spectacles. Yes, when we watched him many of us not so secretly waited with baited breath, hoping that he would blow up. But at what price to himself, the game writ large, and innocent bystanders?
Ask yourself this question: What if even 25% of all aggrieved players behaved this way? And why shouldn't they when someone else constantly flipped out and got away with it? If one guy has the right to do it then everyone should have that right. That's how most societies are normally structured.
Clearly, if everyone had the right to behave like this it would be chaotic and anarchic. Societies like these don't persevere. Fortunately, self-policing contained within the impulse for survival normally mitigates against such societal de-evolution.
Extrapolated to sport, there might not even be a professional tennis circuit without norms, rules and conventions--which must be enforced for the maintenance and welfare of this sub-society. This behavior in a word is "wrong." Athletes who transgress are the sporting versions of criminals. And if its wrong for one guy, it should be wrong for everyone.
But, it was basically O.K. for one guy to do it back in the 80's. Because he was a "genius" and a cash cow. How utterly fatuous, irrational and unfair!
"You Cant Be Serious!!" McEnroe cultists and apologists flirt with deviance and absurdity. I wouldn't be surprised to discover that they also support Charles Manson, or anyone else whose amorality was spectacular and "entertaining," on a visceral level.
Originally posted by licensedcoach View PostIt never ceases to amaze me how genius often bestows itself on the most unlikely people. McEnroe was unlikely. He was a punk in many peoples' eyes and, therefore, undeserving of his genius in many peoples eyes. And, yes, he did epitomise how Americans were seen back then and, indeed, as they are often seen now (your action movies haven't helped you here). He was also very plain looking and had the face of a petulant, spoiled child. He was highly strung and edgy. He had nothing whatsoever to endear himself to the camera, media, women....or anything or anyone.
But he had character, strong character. Don't forget, when you are blessed with genius you then have to carry it. You cannot be a shrinking violet. Just imagine how many people have had genius of some kind and wilted...couldn't carry it. As a result the world never saw it....because the character of that person was not strong enough.
It wasn't easy being McEnroe, being so unpopular, even hated. and being pitted against your opposite...the handsome, nice, well-mannered, popular Bjorn Borg.
McEnroe was just being McEnroe in the way a cigar is just a cigar. He was clearly being himself, unlike Kyrgios who is just acting; a half-wit, who doesn't know who he is. McEnroe was edgy and highly strung and found himself pitted against the establishment. At least Nastase had charm and a sense of humour to alleviate things and endear himself. My mother loved Nastase.
McEnroe was never exerting his will against anyone in my view. He was just trying to win against all the odds...and by odds I mean by how he was seen by most of the world. It's not easy being downright unpopular.
Overall, McEnroe carried his genius well. He did a great job. I don't think it's his behaviour he will be remembered for years down the line, it will be his genius. I am certain of that....oh, and his theatre...he was compelling to watch, both for his tennis and 'on the brink of madness' personality.
It's strange because I love tennis but it can be insufferably boring to watch many of the matches on TV...past and present. Personally, I need people like McEnroe to add another dimension...liven things up.
Comment
-
Please...
Originally posted by JeffMac View PostIt's astonishing to have you say that "McEnroe carried his genius well." That opinion is such an outlier that I bet you couldn't get even 10% of eligible voters to agree with you. I'd say that McEnroe disgraced his genius. Just because one's a genius does not give one the right to egregiously violate the rights of others.
In this whole McEnroe debate several other people, as well as yourself, have cited the entertainment value of his spectacles. Yes, when we watched him many of us not so secretly waited with baited breath, hoping that he would blow up. But at what price to himself, the game writ large, and innocent bystanders?
Ask yourself this question: What if even 25% of all aggrieved players behaved this way? And why shouldn't they when someone else constantly flipped out and got away with it? If one guy has the right to do it then everyone should have that right. That's how most societies are normally structured.
Clearly, if everyone had the right to behave like this it would be chaotic and anarchic. Societies like these don't persevere. Fortunately, self-policing contained within the impulse for survival normally mitigates against such societal de-evolution.
Extrapolated to sport, there might not even be a professional tennis circuit without norms, rules and conventions--which must be enforced for the maintenance and welfare of this sub-society. This behavior in a word is "wrong." Athletes who transgress are the sporting versions of criminals. And if its wrong for one guy, it should be wrong for everyone.
But, it was basically O.K. for one guy to do it back in the 80's. Because he was a "genius" and a cash cow. How utterly fatuous, irrational and unfair!
"You Cant Be Serious!!" McEnroe cultists and apologists flirt with deviance and absurdity. I wouldn't be surprised to discover that they also support Charles Manson, or anyone else whose amorality was spectacular and "entertaining," on a visceral level.don_budge
Performance Analysthttps://www.tennisplayer.net/bulleti...ilies/cool.png
Comment
-
I agree with the spirit of the post above and most of the details. Having been a fan both before and after the Rude Era, I can only look back in wonder at the horrible behavior that was countenanced by the tennis establishment purely for the sake of filthy lucre.
I would not, however, lay the blame straight on McEnroe. Instead I would introduce the Rude Era with its pied piper, Illie Nastase. He, it seems to me, was the first to make shouting, clowning, and mimicry of his opponent standard fare. McEnroe's time really came as Illie's was ending. The money was growing at a tremendous rate. This incentivized big ego attention grabbing on the player's part and tolerance on the tournament director's. IMHO.
Comment
-
The other Scapegoat…Ilie Nastase
Originally posted by curiosity View PostI agree with the spirit of the post above and most of the details. Having been a fan both before and after the Rude Era, I can only look back in wonder at the horrible behavior that was countenanced by the tennis establishment purely for the sake of filthy lucre.
I would not, however, lay the blame straight on McEnroe. Instead I would introduce the Rude Era with its pied piper, Illie Nastase. He, it seems to me, was the first to make shouting, clowning, and mimicry of his opponent standard fare. McEnroe's time really came as Illie's was ending. The money was growing at a tremendous rate. This incentivized big ego attention grabbing on the player's part and tolerance on the tournament director's. IMHO.
don_budge
Performance Analysthttps://www.tennisplayer.net/bulleti...ilies/cool.png
Comment
-
Originally posted by gzhpcu View PostOK, but skip the hero worship please.Last edited by bottle; 02-13-2016, 05:43 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by licensedcoach View PostIt never ceases to amaze me how genius often bestows itself on the most unlikely people. McEnroe was unlikely. He was a punk in many peoples' eyes and, therefore, undeserving of his genius in many peoples eyes. And, yes, he did epitomise how Americans were seen back then and, indeed, as they are often seen now (your action movies haven't helped you here). He was also very plain looking and had the face of a petulant, spoiled child. He was highly strung and edgy. He had nothing whatsoever to endear himself to the camera, media, women....or anything or anyone.
But he had character, strong character. Don't forget, when you are blessed with genius you then have to carry it. You cannot be a shrinking violet. Just imagine how many people have had genius of some kind and wilted...couldn't carry it. As a result the world never saw it....because the character of that person was not strong enough.
It wasn't easy being McEnroe, being so unpopular, even hated. and being pitted against your opposite...the handsome, nice, well-mannered, popular Bjorn Borg.
McEnroe was just being McEnroe in the way a cigar is just a cigar. He was clearly being himself, unlike Kyrgios who is just acting; a half-wit, who doesn't know who he is. McEnroe was edgy and highly strung and found himself pitted against the establishment. At least Nastase had charm and a sense of humour to alleviate things and endear himself. My mother loved Nastase.
McEnroe was never exerting his will against anyone in my view. He was just trying to win against all the odds...and by odds I mean by how he was seen by most of the world. It's not easy being downright unpopular.
Overall, McEnroe carried his genius well. He did a great job. I don't think it's his behaviour he will be remembered for years down the line, it will be his genius. I am certain of that....oh, and his theatre...he was compelling to watch, both for his tennis and 'on the brink of madness' personality.
It's strange because I love tennis but it can be insufferably boring to watch many of the matches on TV...past and present. Personally, I need people like McEnroe to add another dimension...liven things up.Last edited by stroke; 02-13-2016, 06:12 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bottle View PostWhat gives you the arrogance to assume that John McEnroe is my hero? It is the parts of his game that I can (and have!) utilized in my own game that interest me. Miguel de Cervantes and Michel de Montaigne are my heroes. Besides, I don't think most of the people in this thread are really discussing McEnroe but rather Donald Trump. And furthermore, angry etiquette speeches whether from Donald Trump or anyone else suck worse than John McEnroe's worst behavior while in his youth out on the court (and on the Plowshares tour, too). You guys should get long poles with feathers on them and go to church in Salem and tickle anyone who is falling asleep. And then use the feathers to irritate everyone else. But don't forget to wear black hats and long black robes. Say hello to Donald for me.
Comment
Who's Online
Collapse
There are currently 8868 users online. 2 members and 8866 guests.
Most users ever online was 139,261 at 09:55 PM on 08-18-2024.
Comment