Showing posts with label what the. Show all posts
Showing posts with label what the. Show all posts
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
In celebration of Ana's first Slam Title...
...Scott Byrnes (strength and conditioning coach), Sven Groeneveld (tennis advisor) and Marcin Rozpedski (hitting partner) all promised that they would do something outrageous if Ana won the tournament.Ana's brother Milos joined in, and so the four gave their word that if Ana won the event, they would run around the Arc de Triomphe while each wearing one of Ana's adidas dresses.
Hahahahahaha....
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
RG Day 3.5: Now it's raining cats and rats...
Ladies and gentlemen, the match we've all been waiting for...
...has been officially suspended, yet again.
What a tease this day was. Just when we were getting into rhythm... not only does it rain but it pours. Tough luck.
Can someone just go do the raindance at centre-court? Or call a 'pawang hujan', they're usually more effective than reading weather forecasts.
(-_-)
In any case, here's a little something stupid that I found during today's prolonged rain delays. Hey, that sort of rhymed.
(Btw, I hated this ad. Super-aneh, ngeri, & tasteless. In what way would seeing this make anyone more interested in buying a Kia?)
Weirdness-ness continues tomorrow.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
More on the topic of retirement (tennis, not work) ;-)
Retiring Types: How often the top men quit a match
By Kamakshi Tandon
"Typical," went the reaction to Nikolay Davydenko and Novak Djokovic's recent retirements against Roger Federer. But were they? We took the raw data and used it to draw some rough conclusions.
Click here for a calculation of where the top men and women stood in this category 14 months ago. (Note: criteria varies slightly)
Roger Federer’s aura of invincibility may have been fading fast, but over the past week and a half he’s quite literally recovered some of it by default. Three times he's faced his nearest challengers in the rankings, and twice they've handed him victory.
First came Nikolay Davydenko, who quit with a leg injury in the Estoril final. He had lost the first set in a tiebreak and was up a break in the second set. Then in Monte Carlo last week, Novak Djokovic stopped after going down a set and a break to Federer in the semifinals.
The retirements attracted particular attention for two reasons. One was timing: neither involved a mid-match injury that made carrying on impossible. Davydenko still looked competitive in the match, while Djokovic was just a few games away from losing and seemed capable of playing till the end.
Here's how often the top 10 have retired during a match, compared to the amount of matches they've lost during their career. The total number of retirements is given in brackets.
*ATP main draw, Grand Slam and Davis Cup matches only.
The other was the players involved. Both Davydenko and Djokovic have acquired a reputation for dubious defaults in precisely such situations. “I have a little injury and I can't finish the match,” Davydenko told the Estoril crowd, later assuring reporters that he would be ready to play at Monte Carlo in three days’ time.
Djokovic, who received a few boos from the crowd as he left the court on Saturday, made his problem sound even more tepid. “It’s a sore throat. I feel dizziness a little bit in the last three days,” he said afterwards. “I asked the doctor yesterday but he said I don't have nothing, which I really don't believe. I think he didn't give me the right diagnosis, obviously.“But obviously when you're playing against the No. 1 player of the world, you get a lot of balls back and longer points, and I just couldn't get enough energy back after each point... the previous opponents were not that tough and I didn't have long rallies against the previous opponents like I had today.”
So were their actions typical? Yes and no. They've done it before, but it's hardly something they do all the time. They just do it a little more often than most, and a little more dramatically to boot.
The numbers show that Djokovic tends to retire more often than any other top-10 player, but just as significant is the fact that he chooses memorable occasions to do so. Three of his five retirements have come against either Federer or Nadal in the semifinals of big events. Those are also the only times he’s retired facing a big deficit in a match, suggesting he doesn’t want to give his biggest rivals a clean win when he’s unfit.
Most notorious is Djokovic’s French Open meeting with Nadal two years ago, when he pulled the plug after losing the first two sets but declared he felt he had been “in control” of the match. His retirement against the Spaniard at rain-hit Wimbledon last year was more understandable, given that he had played nine hours in the previous two days to defeat Lleyton Hewitt in four sets and Marcos Baghdatis in five. His other two retirements were attributed to the breathing difficulties that plagued him early on and were eventually fixed with corrective surgery.
Here's how often the top 10 have retired while significantly behind in a match, compared to the amount of matches they've lost during their career. The number of retirements while trailing is given in brackets.
*ATP main draw, Grand Slam and Davis Cup matches only.
At other times, however, Djokovic has shown he’s willing to fight through physical problems, starting with a cult match against Gael Monfils at the 2005 US Open when he huffed and puffed his way to victory in five dramatic sets. A gasping Djokovic called numerous injury timeouts during the match, including one during the late stages that delayed Monfils’ service game. Monfils later admitted he had gone cold during the break.
That match also established another damaging perception that clings to the Serb – a habit of calling the trainer during tough contests. “I think he’s a joke, you know, when it comes down to his injuries. The rules are there to be used, not abused,” said Federer after a Davis Cup match in 2006.
Along with James Blake, Federer is the only member of the top ten never to have retired during a match.
Richard Gasquet comes out second on both lists, which only adds to the hits he’s taken for showing a lack of toughness. Accusing of ducking a Davis Cup match with Andy Roddick a couple of weeks ago, he could instead do with the kind of performance he produced against Roddick at Wimbledon last year, coming from two sets and a break down to win their quarterfinal match.
Davydenko stands out for the sheer number of times he’s abandoned a contest, but his marathon schedule means he also plays (and loses) the most matches. He owns the most infamous retirement in men’s tennis, a 6-2, 3-6, 1-2 defeat in the second round of Sopot that made headlines when betting exchange Betfair voided all wagers on the match because of strange betting patterns. Happily for his sporting reputation but intriguingly for match-fixing theorists, a number of Davydenko’s main draw retirements have come when he was even or leading in the match.
Clearly something had to give when Djokovic and Davydenko met in a Davis Cup match earlier this month. And so it proved: Djokovic retired up two sets to one at 4-6, 3-6, 6-4, 0-0.But while they’re high on the list of top-ten players, both fall short of some perennial offenders like Tommy Haas and Juan Martin del Potro, who have repeated retired a game or two away from losing a match. It’s tough to condemn either one too heartily given how many injuries they’ve had to content with, but still, reaching the finish line is clearly not one of their priorities.
Haas takes the cake for once retiring down 6-4, 5-0 to Andrei Pavel in Montreal because of a back injury which flared up during the first set. But it’s just as tricky not to start a match as it is to not finish it: he’s also taken flak for giving Federer walkovers in their past two meetings.
In del Potro’s case, a staggering one-fifth of his 40 career defeats have been unfinished matches, including perhaps the second-most famous retirement in men’s tennis - a 6-1, 3-1 loss to James Blake whose side-effects ended ATP’s experiment with round-robin events. The Argentine was earmarked as a future top-ten player before his physical frailties became obvious - if he ever does get there, he may end up making Djokovic look indefatigable.
from tennis.com
---
Djoker, you're such a Joker indeed. Or a Choker. Both apply.
OTOH, Fed has NEVER retired from a match. (And Blake, credit to you, too.) All 701 matches Fed's had in his career, he's played them to both the W and the L.
That says it all about who truly deserves to be #1.
-tmsh-
By Kamakshi Tandon
"Typical," went the reaction to Nikolay Davydenko and Novak Djokovic's recent retirements against Roger Federer. But were they? We took the raw data and used it to draw some rough conclusions.
Click here for a calculation of where the top men and women stood in this category 14 months ago. (Note: criteria varies slightly)
Roger Federer’s aura of invincibility may have been fading fast, but over the past week and a half he’s quite literally recovered some of it by default. Three times he's faced his nearest challengers in the rankings, and twice they've handed him victory.
First came Nikolay Davydenko, who quit with a leg injury in the Estoril final. He had lost the first set in a tiebreak and was up a break in the second set. Then in Monte Carlo last week, Novak Djokovic stopped after going down a set and a break to Federer in the semifinals.
The retirements attracted particular attention for two reasons. One was timing: neither involved a mid-match injury that made carrying on impossible. Davydenko still looked competitive in the match, while Djokovic was just a few games away from losing and seemed capable of playing till the end.
Here's how often the top 10 have retired during a match, compared to the amount of matches they've lost during their career. The total number of retirements is given in brackets.
*ATP main draw, Grand Slam and Davis Cup matches only.
The other was the players involved. Both Davydenko and Djokovic have acquired a reputation for dubious defaults in precisely such situations. “I have a little injury and I can't finish the match,” Davydenko told the Estoril crowd, later assuring reporters that he would be ready to play at Monte Carlo in three days’ time.
Djokovic, who received a few boos from the crowd as he left the court on Saturday, made his problem sound even more tepid. “It’s a sore throat. I feel dizziness a little bit in the last three days,” he said afterwards. “I asked the doctor yesterday but he said I don't have nothing, which I really don't believe. I think he didn't give me the right diagnosis, obviously.“But obviously when you're playing against the No. 1 player of the world, you get a lot of balls back and longer points, and I just couldn't get enough energy back after each point... the previous opponents were not that tough and I didn't have long rallies against the previous opponents like I had today.”
So were their actions typical? Yes and no. They've done it before, but it's hardly something they do all the time. They just do it a little more often than most, and a little more dramatically to boot.
The numbers show that Djokovic tends to retire more often than any other top-10 player, but just as significant is the fact that he chooses memorable occasions to do so. Three of his five retirements have come against either Federer or Nadal in the semifinals of big events. Those are also the only times he’s retired facing a big deficit in a match, suggesting he doesn’t want to give his biggest rivals a clean win when he’s unfit.
Most notorious is Djokovic’s French Open meeting with Nadal two years ago, when he pulled the plug after losing the first two sets but declared he felt he had been “in control” of the match. His retirement against the Spaniard at rain-hit Wimbledon last year was more understandable, given that he had played nine hours in the previous two days to defeat Lleyton Hewitt in four sets and Marcos Baghdatis in five. His other two retirements were attributed to the breathing difficulties that plagued him early on and were eventually fixed with corrective surgery.
Here's how often the top 10 have retired while significantly behind in a match, compared to the amount of matches they've lost during their career. The number of retirements while trailing is given in brackets.
*ATP main draw, Grand Slam and Davis Cup matches only.
At other times, however, Djokovic has shown he’s willing to fight through physical problems, starting with a cult match against Gael Monfils at the 2005 US Open when he huffed and puffed his way to victory in five dramatic sets. A gasping Djokovic called numerous injury timeouts during the match, including one during the late stages that delayed Monfils’ service game. Monfils later admitted he had gone cold during the break.
That match also established another damaging perception that clings to the Serb – a habit of calling the trainer during tough contests. “I think he’s a joke, you know, when it comes down to his injuries. The rules are there to be used, not abused,” said Federer after a Davis Cup match in 2006.
Along with James Blake, Federer is the only member of the top ten never to have retired during a match.
Richard Gasquet comes out second on both lists, which only adds to the hits he’s taken for showing a lack of toughness. Accusing of ducking a Davis Cup match with Andy Roddick a couple of weeks ago, he could instead do with the kind of performance he produced against Roddick at Wimbledon last year, coming from two sets and a break down to win their quarterfinal match.
Davydenko stands out for the sheer number of times he’s abandoned a contest, but his marathon schedule means he also plays (and loses) the most matches. He owns the most infamous retirement in men’s tennis, a 6-2, 3-6, 1-2 defeat in the second round of Sopot that made headlines when betting exchange Betfair voided all wagers on the match because of strange betting patterns. Happily for his sporting reputation but intriguingly for match-fixing theorists, a number of Davydenko’s main draw retirements have come when he was even or leading in the match.
Clearly something had to give when Djokovic and Davydenko met in a Davis Cup match earlier this month. And so it proved: Djokovic retired up two sets to one at 4-6, 3-6, 6-4, 0-0.But while they’re high on the list of top-ten players, both fall short of some perennial offenders like Tommy Haas and Juan Martin del Potro, who have repeated retired a game or two away from losing a match. It’s tough to condemn either one too heartily given how many injuries they’ve had to content with, but still, reaching the finish line is clearly not one of their priorities.
Haas takes the cake for once retiring down 6-4, 5-0 to Andrei Pavel in Montreal because of a back injury which flared up during the first set. But it’s just as tricky not to start a match as it is to not finish it: he’s also taken flak for giving Federer walkovers in their past two meetings.
In del Potro’s case, a staggering one-fifth of his 40 career defeats have been unfinished matches, including perhaps the second-most famous retirement in men’s tennis - a 6-1, 3-1 loss to James Blake whose side-effects ended ATP’s experiment with round-robin events. The Argentine was earmarked as a future top-ten player before his physical frailties became obvious - if he ever does get there, he may end up making Djokovic look indefatigable.
from tennis.com
---
Djoker, you're such a Joker indeed. Or a Choker. Both apply.
OTOH, Fed has NEVER retired from a match. (And Blake, credit to you, too.) All 701 matches Fed's had in his career, he's played them to both the W and the L.
That says it all about who truly deserves to be #1.
-tmsh-
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Spot-on article about Djoker's SF retirement
April 26th, 2008
Djokovic Taps Out Again, Sets Up Federer v. Nadal Monte Carlo Final
by Sean Randall
When the going gets tough, sometimes the tough and the not so tough quit. And that’s just what the not so tough Novak Djokovic did today, just as he has done before, hitting the eject button when things turned against him in a big match.
Today in the Monte Carlo semifinals, Djokovic retired with a breathing illness to Roger Federer after getting broken to go down 6-3, 3-2. The retirement follows a mysterious pattern of in-match withdrawals by the Serb, who pulled a similar act against Nadal at the French Open, Nadal at Wimbledon and even against Davydenko this year in Davis Cup.
And I feel confident in speaking for many tennis fans in saying that we are tired of this act.
You play to win. You don’t play to quit. If Novak’s looking to make fans and gain their respect, this isn’t how to do it.
In Novak’s defense, I understand he’s had a breathing problem, one that was serious enough to require surgery. So it’s there. That’s a fact. It’s been an issue. But Novak, what I cannot understand is if it’s that serious how come you don’t ever retire when you are winning? And why is it only against the top guys and at moments when you feel like the match is no longer within grasp that decide to wave the white flag?
I think it’s safe to say the guy has a game of a No. 1 player, but much like Richard Gasquet, his fate is going to be determined by what goes on between his ears. And right now he’s not right up there.
Sure there’s a physical component, but it’s seems to be more mental with Novak because he feels it more in the tougher times. And his ego maybe does get the best of him.
Part of being a great tennis player is being a great fighter. And Novak really hasn’t shown much of that fighting spirit up to this point in his career. Even today, if this guy needed to draw some inspiration to continue and possibly come back – it wasn’t like he was playing bad either! – all he needed to do was to look across at the net at Federer who could have easily mailed it in when in the second round Ruben Ramirez-Hidalgo had him by the throat up 5-1 in the third set. To his credit Federer didn’t quit and now look how nicely it’s paid off. Federer didn’t get to No. 1, didn’t win 12 Slams, by being a great frontrunner. There’s more to it.
Novak is going to need to learn that. And last I checked - and I’m no tennis historian - but I don’t recall too man guys with a history of retirements ever reaching the No. 1 ranking. Marcelo Rios had a lot of injuries, so did Gustavo Kuerten. Andy Roddick had issues early in his career, but he’s overcome them. And has Roger Federer ever retired from a match? I can’t remember.
So Novak, you can’t retire your way to No. 1. It’s not going to happen that way. Few doubt your game, but what’s going on between your ears is another matter. You have a lot of money now, hire a psychologist or two and a good trainer and get it worked out in your head. And stop sapping your strength by bouncing the ball a thousand times (I get dizzy also just watching that!), re-adjusting your hat and doing imitations. Save your energy for actual play.
(Imitating Novak would be easy. Just bend over in exhaustion, take a few deep breaths, fall to your knees a few times, look distressed and then signal to the chair umpire. That’s Novak. You don’t even need to do the ball bounce routine.)
As for the match, Federer continued his high level he had set from his Nalbandian win. He looked that good, that impressive. (Did Fed really yell at Novak’s parents telling them to “Shut up” as the announced hinted? If so that was great!). But will it be enough tomorrow against Nadal? Will he continue on this revenge tour? Probably not. I have to stick with Nadal in that one.
I think it will help Federer in getting such a quick match today after a few three setters this week, but this is Nadal’s surface, Nadal’s time of year. He’s built for clay supremacy. And of course Nadal’s got Fed’s number, especially on clay.
Federer, though, I think is playing at a level now where if Nadal is off his game the Swiss can take it. And he’ll be playing without a lot of pressure. But Roger’s going to have to play impeccably and aggressively. Attacking when it’s right and even using that new drop shot of his.
I guess the one bright side of Novak’s retirement is that we do get the Federer-Nadal matchup.
And we are assured no one’s going to hit the eject button during tomorrow’s final.
Source: tennis-x.com
---
Man, this guy voiced my thoughts exactly.
-tmsh-
Djokovic Taps Out Again, Sets Up Federer v. Nadal Monte Carlo Final
by Sean Randall
When the going gets tough, sometimes the tough and the not so tough quit. And that’s just what the not so tough Novak Djokovic did today, just as he has done before, hitting the eject button when things turned against him in a big match.
Today in the Monte Carlo semifinals, Djokovic retired with a breathing illness to Roger Federer after getting broken to go down 6-3, 3-2. The retirement follows a mysterious pattern of in-match withdrawals by the Serb, who pulled a similar act against Nadal at the French Open, Nadal at Wimbledon and even against Davydenko this year in Davis Cup.
And I feel confident in speaking for many tennis fans in saying that we are tired of this act.
You play to win. You don’t play to quit. If Novak’s looking to make fans and gain their respect, this isn’t how to do it.
In Novak’s defense, I understand he’s had a breathing problem, one that was serious enough to require surgery. So it’s there. That’s a fact. It’s been an issue. But Novak, what I cannot understand is if it’s that serious how come you don’t ever retire when you are winning? And why is it only against the top guys and at moments when you feel like the match is no longer within grasp that decide to wave the white flag?
I think it’s safe to say the guy has a game of a No. 1 player, but much like Richard Gasquet, his fate is going to be determined by what goes on between his ears. And right now he’s not right up there.
Sure there’s a physical component, but it’s seems to be more mental with Novak because he feels it more in the tougher times. And his ego maybe does get the best of him.
Part of being a great tennis player is being a great fighter. And Novak really hasn’t shown much of that fighting spirit up to this point in his career. Even today, if this guy needed to draw some inspiration to continue and possibly come back – it wasn’t like he was playing bad either! – all he needed to do was to look across at the net at Federer who could have easily mailed it in when in the second round Ruben Ramirez-Hidalgo had him by the throat up 5-1 in the third set. To his credit Federer didn’t quit and now look how nicely it’s paid off. Federer didn’t get to No. 1, didn’t win 12 Slams, by being a great frontrunner. There’s more to it.
Novak is going to need to learn that. And last I checked - and I’m no tennis historian - but I don’t recall too man guys with a history of retirements ever reaching the No. 1 ranking. Marcelo Rios had a lot of injuries, so did Gustavo Kuerten. Andy Roddick had issues early in his career, but he’s overcome them. And has Roger Federer ever retired from a match? I can’t remember.
So Novak, you can’t retire your way to No. 1. It’s not going to happen that way. Few doubt your game, but what’s going on between your ears is another matter. You have a lot of money now, hire a psychologist or two and a good trainer and get it worked out in your head. And stop sapping your strength by bouncing the ball a thousand times (I get dizzy also just watching that!), re-adjusting your hat and doing imitations. Save your energy for actual play.
(Imitating Novak would be easy. Just bend over in exhaustion, take a few deep breaths, fall to your knees a few times, look distressed and then signal to the chair umpire. That’s Novak. You don’t even need to do the ball bounce routine.)
As for the match, Federer continued his high level he had set from his Nalbandian win. He looked that good, that impressive. (Did Fed really yell at Novak’s parents telling them to “Shut up” as the announced hinted? If so that was great!). But will it be enough tomorrow against Nadal? Will he continue on this revenge tour? Probably not. I have to stick with Nadal in that one.
I think it will help Federer in getting such a quick match today after a few three setters this week, but this is Nadal’s surface, Nadal’s time of year. He’s built for clay supremacy. And of course Nadal’s got Fed’s number, especially on clay.
Federer, though, I think is playing at a level now where if Nadal is off his game the Swiss can take it. And he’ll be playing without a lot of pressure. But Roger’s going to have to play impeccably and aggressively. Attacking when it’s right and even using that new drop shot of his.
I guess the one bright side of Novak’s retirement is that we do get the Federer-Nadal matchup.
And we are assured no one’s going to hit the eject button during tomorrow’s final.
Source: tennis-x.com
---
Man, this guy voiced my thoughts exactly.
-tmsh-
Monday, April 21, 2008
FED'S FIRST TROPHY OF THE YEAR (Djoko-book parody, anyone?)
Weirdest win ever
Got home from church, showered, and turned on my laptop to check Estoril final live scores.
Turned out Fed won the first set 7-6(5), but the second set was 0-2 in favor of Denko.
After 5 minutes of me scoreboard-staring, Fed broke back to make the score 1-2. Now he just needs to hold serve to even it out to 2-all and try to get a break later. Or so I thought.
2 (unsuspecting) minutes later, my faithful and trusty laptop screen shows this:
Winner by RETIREMENT? At a tournament final? Did I read that correctly? O_o;;;;;
Obviously can't say much as I didn't actually watch the match. But one thing's for sure - this was clearly one of the most flabbergasting, dissatisfying, jawdrop-worthy ways for Rog to win a title.
With all that's happened this 2008, I guess anything can happen. Anomalies galore. Let's do a recount of the year's Roger-strangeness, shall we:
Got home from church, showered, and turned on my laptop to check Estoril final live scores.
Turned out Fed won the first set 7-6(5)
After 5 minutes of me scoreboard-staring, Fed broke back to make the score 1-2. Now he just needs to hold serve to even it out to 2-all and try to get a break later. Or so I thought.
2 (unsuspecting) minutes later, my faithful and trusty laptop screen shows this:
Winner by RETIREMENT? At a tournament final? Did I read that correctly? O_o;;;;;
Obviously can't say much as I didn't actually watch the match. But one thing's for sure - this was clearly one of the most flabbergasting, dissatisfying, jawdrop-worthy ways for Rog to win a title.
With all that's happened this 2008, I guess anything can happen. Anomalies galore. Let's do a recount of the year's Roger-strangeness, shall we:
- Rog was diagnosed with chicken poisoning
- Rog was diagnosed with mononucleosis
- Rog didn't reach a GS final for the first time in the last 13 GS's
- Rog didn't reach any final for that matter, let alone win anything
- Rog loses in R1 of Dubai where he was supposedly defending champion
- Rog loses to Mardy Fish who was then-ranked 98
- The low-down: Rog loses to Andy Roddick whom he's owned since 2003
- Rog's forehand died and went to heaven
- Rog's backhand followed suit
- Rog's serve showed similar symptoms (lacked the saving grace it used to have)
- Rog trial-hires a coach (...an anomaly that makes sense, finally!)
- Rog displays repeated attempts at nonsensical drop shots
- Rog's first title of the year comes, ironically, on CLAY
- Rog is currently sporting the world's biggest pimple/zit/bee-sting/whatchamacallit, which for all we know might have actually been the secret to this victory O_o;;
It's been a year of 'reverse-karma' for Rog so far (...probably to make up for having had four too-good years. Selfish guy, eh.) ^^;;
Ah well. You win some you lose some. What matters right now is this: a W is a W :-)
Cheers and beers for all,
-tmsh-
Friday, April 11, 2008
Is that a racquet or a rubber band?
Tennis Racquet Put to New Use Onstage
A tennis racquet prominently features in a different light in the production Afrika! Afrika!, currently being played in London alongside the O2 Arena – the future home of the ATP World Tour Finals.
Angola’s Huit Huit, one of more than 100 performers from 17 different African nations in the acclaimed circus-style theatre sponsored by South African Airways, showcases his acrobatic skill as he contorts his entire body to pass through the head of an unstrung tennis racquet.
Read full article here (London, England, April 10, 2008)
-tmsh-
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Why did the chicken cross the road?
Not to get to the other side.
ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.
BUDDHA: Asking this question denies your own chicken nature.
THE BIBLE: And God came down from the heavens and He said unto the chicken, "Thou shalt cross the road." And the chicken crossed the road and there was much rejoicing.
PAT BUCHANAN: To steal a job from a decent, hardworking American.
GEORGE W. BUSH: I don't think I should have to answer that question.
BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with THAT chicken. What do you mean by chicken? Could you define "chicken" please?
DARWIN: Chickens, over great periods of time, have been naturally selected in such a way that they are now genetically dispositioned to cross roads.
EINSTEIN: Whether the chicken crossed the road or the road moved beneath the chicken is a matter of relativity.
RALPH WALDO EMERSON: The chicken did not cross the road. It transcended it.
JERRY FALWELL: Because the chicken was gay! Isn't it obvious? Can't you people see the plain truth in front of your face? The chicken was going to the "other side." That's what "they" call it: the "other side." Yes, my friends, that chicken is gay. And if you eat that chicken, you will become gay too. I say we boycott all chickens until we sort out this abomination that the liberal media whitewashes with seemingly harmless phrases like "the other side." That chicken should not be free to cross the road. It's as plain and simple as that.
LOUIS FARRAKHAN: The road, you will see, represents the black man. The chicken 'crossed' the black man in order to trample him and keep him down.
FREUD: The fact that you are at all concerned that the chicken crossed the road reveals your underlying sexual insecurity.
BILL GATES: I have just released the new eChicken 2000, which will not only cross roads, but will also lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your checkbook; and Internet Explorer is an inextricable part of eChicken 2000.
GRANDPA: In my day, we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Someone told us that the chicken had crossed the road, and that was good enough for us.
ERNEST HEMINGWAY: To die. In the rain. Alone.
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.: I envision a world where all chickens will be free to cross roads without having their motives called into question.
CAPTAIN JAMES T. KIRK: To boldly go where no chicken has gone before.
MACHIAVELLI: The point is that the chicken crossed the road. Who cares why? The end of crossing the road justifies whatever motive there was.
KARL MARX: It was a historical inevitability.
FOX MULDER: You saw it cross the road with your own eyes. How many more chickens have to cross before you believe it?
RICHARD M. NIXON: The chicken did not cross the road. I repeat, the chicken did NOT cross the road.
RONALD REAGAN: What chicken?
JERRY SEINFELD: Why does anyone cross a road? I mean, why doesn't anyone ever think to ask, "What the heck was this chicken doing walking around all over the place, anyway?"
DR. SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes! The chicken crossed the road but why it crossed, I've not been told.
KEN STARR: I intend to prove that the chicken crossed the road at the bequest of the President of the United States in an effort to distract law enforcement officials and the American public from the criminal wrongdoing our highest elected official has been trying to cover up. As a result, the chicken is just another pawn in the President's ongoing and elaborate scheme to obstruct justice and undermine the rule of law. For that reason, my staff intends to offer the chicken unconditional immunity provided he cooperates fully with our investigation.
OLIVER STONE: The question is not, "Why did the chicken cross the road?" Rather, it is, "Who was crossing the road at the same time, whom we overlooked in our haste to observe the chicken crossing?"
COLONEL SANDERS: I missed one???
Here's to crossing our own roads,
-tmsh-
Friday, March 28, 2008
My First Time... errr, Grand Slam
Wow, It's His First
One slam, and a book is out.
.....Hilarious. XDDDDD
Does this mean Roger has to publish 12 of his own 'memoirs' now? ^^;
And what does he mean by "monography"? Is that what a biography's called these days?
And what in the world are "oppenents"? Hahahaaaa...
(No offense to Djoker-vic fans... hehe... I just couldn't resist poking fun at the.. well, funny.) *peace*
Man, this guy is just making me LOL today... ^^
-tmsh-
One slam, and a book is out.
.....Hilarious. XDDDDD
Does this mean Roger has to publish 12 of his own 'memoirs' now? ^^;
And what does he mean by "monography"? Is that what a biography's called these days?
And what in the world are "oppenents"? Hahahaaaa...
(No offense to Djoker-vic fans... hehe... I just couldn't resist poking fun at the.. well, funny.) *peace*
Man, this guy is just making me LOL today... ^^
-tmsh-
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Brokeback-parody (just for fun) ;-p
...So that explains the ass-picking!
(sorry Raf, this was just too funny) :-p
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
