User Tag List

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 86 to 102 of 167
  1. #86
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    If you just pull LYB/TBY from 1990 and throw them on court, I agree that CY/FHF will beat them easily. However, things may change a lot if we give LBY/TBY several months to get used to the current styles and pace.

    LYB said he could bench press 130kg while CY(Chen Yu, not Cai Yun)'s 100kg is already among the best in today's team China. Is past player physically inferior to present ones?
    if lyb from the 1990's is transported into today time period, and let them get used to current life styles and conditioning, i say he'll be worst off. Why? Today life style will make him more 'fat' because of he'll be chauffeured around and eat bon bon, chasing better looking gals of today. Wahahalol

    u and other nay sayers may say i am joking around? i have the analogue proof, unlike some other people with hollow statement (about me)

    I pray that lyb doesn't read this thread, and hope LD don't squeal on me
    Last edited by cooler; 11-09-2009 at 03:06 PM.

  2. #87
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Now see who is using the A>B, B>C then A>C argument. LOL.

    In 2004 OG (within one week, yeah! ), Susilo beat LD 2:0, Boonsak beat Susilo easily (15:10, 15:1), TH toyed Boonsak (15:9, 15:2). So according to your logic, LD wouldn't even be able to push TH to the limit...

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    no disrespect to PG but lets get real.
    TH beat PG, then LD fling around TH, and i'm comparing all of them within the same week time framework, not what if's this and that years ago or decades ago.
    PG to push LD to the limitLOL, maybe in beer drinking or ice water swimming.

    Are u trying to out do Pjswift in the entertainment dept.?

  3. #88
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    Note: even today's PG, at age 33, considerably slower than 10 years ago, can still beat LCW once in a while and push LD to the limit.
    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    Now see who is using the A>B, B>C then A>C argument. LOL.

    In 2004 OG (within one week, yeah! ), Susilo beat LD 2:0, Boonsak beat Susilo easily (15:10, 15:1), TH toyed Boonsak (15:9, 15:2). So according to your logic, LD wouldn't even be able to push TH to the limit...
    i talk red apple vs red apple.
    U talk about PG of today and then use 2004 events to back up your comparision. Can u stay still and talk straight?

    I didn't say LD dominated in 04-05 era did i?
    I would say a peak LD can beat a peak TH, hands down.

  4. #89
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    A beat B, B beat C so A should be able to beat C, is a false argument, no matter how close "A beat B" and "B beat C" are.

    My 2004 OG example is not to "back up" my argument, it's to expose your "logic".

    Btw, if I remember correctly, you are among those people who always said TH's OG title is "luck" because LD lost early. Or you are not one of those people?

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    i talk red apple vs red apple.
    U talk about PG of today and then use 2004 events to back up your comparision. Can u stay still and talk straight?

    I didn't say LD dominated in 04-05 era did i?
    I would say a peak LD can beat a peak TH, hands down.

  5. #90
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    A beat B, B beat C so A should be able to beat C, is a false argument, no matter how close "A beat B" and "B beat C" are.

    My 2004 OG example is not to "back up" my argument, it's to expose your "logic".

    Btw, if I remember correctly, you are among those people who always said TH's OG title is "luck" because LD lost early. Or you are not one of those people?
    yes, i did say that, not hiding from it.
    Luck means it help TH, not 100% luck, nothing is 100%. TH still has to run around the court and hit the shuttle around to win.
    in 04 OG, LD, RS, boonsak are all new to big tournament, did poorly mainly because of inexperience and unsolified mental focus. I said luck meaning TH did not encounter any chinese. If u look at TH record recently, his record against the chineses are terrible. Luck also means stupid OG rules allowing only 3 top players from each country. China can field 4 to 5 chineses in 04 OG if that stupid rule isnt there.

    That is why TH do lousy in Opens like FO, AE, etc (except INA open of course) because there's no restriction on entry except withdrawal. Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there..
    Last edited by cooler; 11-09-2009 at 03:40 PM.

  6. #91
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Actually there are two. 2004 INA TH 2:1 LD in SF, 2005 Singapore TH 2:0 LD in SF.

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there..

  7. #92
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Btw, I don't see why the rule is stupid. Can Brasil blame the "stupid quota" when their team lost to France in 06 WC? Can they say, we have many many good players, but what the heck we can only field one team!

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    yes, i did say that, not hiding from it.
    Luck means it help TH, not 100% luck, nothing is 100%. TH still has to run around the court and hit the shuttle around to win.
    in 04 OG, LD, RS, boonsak are all new to big tournament, did poorly mainly because of inexperience and unsolified mental focus. I said luck meaning TH did not encounter any chinese. If u look at TH record recently, his record against the chineses are terrible. Luck also means stupid OG rules allowing only 3 top players from each country. China can field 4 to 5 chineses in 04 OG if that stupid rule isnt there.

    That is why TH do lousy in Opens like FO, AE, etc (except INA open of course) because there's no restriction on entry except withdrawal. Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there..

  8. #93
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    Actually there are two. 2004 INA TH 2:1 LD in SF, 2005 Singapore TH 2:0 LD in SF.
    1. i said exception to INA open

    2. ok in one case out of ?? H2H with TH? Does one case disprove that a peak LD can beat a peak TH? i have said before, TH peak years were 04 and 05. Even then, TH didn't dominated LD like LD dominate everybody else today. In 04/05 years, young LD vs peak TH is around 50/50 chance.

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...2&postcount=10
    Last edited by cooler; 11-09-2009 at 04:10 PM.

  9. #94
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    1,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    A beat B, B beat C so A should be able to beat C, is a false argument, no matter how close "A beat B" and "B beat C" are.

    My 2004 OG example is not to "back up" my argument, it's to expose your "logic".

    Btw, if I remember correctly, you are among those people who always said TH's OG title is "luck" because LD lost early. Or you are not one of those people?
    I remember you also used the ABC logic to claim that ZJH were better than today's player. Did u???

  10. #95
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    South Town
    Posts
    365
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    There certaintly isn't any contest here. The older generation player did not have the opportunity to reach their top potential. Plus the newer player have the benefit of "knowledge" such as hold and flick, double wrist action etc.

    I will have to agree that the sheer physical superiority of today's player will overwelm the player of the past, especially in men singles. It doesn't even have to be a endurance race. Fast player like LCW and Lindan will just reach the net early with a tight spinning net shot, force a short lift and then smash winners.

  11. #96
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You must be kidding... This is what you said

    "That is why TH do lousy in Opens like FO, AE, etc (except INA open of course) because there's no restriction on entry except withdrawal. Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there.."

    The "(except INA open of course)" is effective for both sentences?!

    04-05 TH vs LD is 3:1. If we follow your criterion and take away those matches in Indonesia and China, it's 2:0. How come it's 50-50?!

    Let's say 3:1(2:0) indeed is close to 50-50 . Now take a look at LD vs LCW. LD vs LCW in 2008 is 3:1 (Swiss, Thomas, OG, China). If we take away those matches held in China and Malaysia, it's 1:1; LD vs LCW in 2009 is 3:1 (AE, Swiss, Sudirman, China Masters). If we take away those held in China and Malaysia, it's again 1:1. So LD vs LCW should be like 45-55, right?


    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    1. i said exception to INA open

    2. ok in one case out of ?? H2H with TH? Does one case disprove that a peak LD can beat a peak TH? i have said before, TH peak years were 04 and 05. Even then, TH didn't dominated LD like LD dominate everybody else today. In 04/05 years, young LD vs peak TH is around 50/50 chance.

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...2&postcount=10

  12. #97
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Actually I never did so. You should read my posts more carefully.

    My argument is as follows.

    First, everyone knows, if A is much superior to B in speed/power, there is no way B can match A.

    Now suppose there is evidence showing that A and B have close matches.

    Conclusion: There cannot be huge gap between A and B in speed/power.

    Solid logic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wong8Egg View Post
    I remember you also used the ABC logic to claim that ZJH were better than today's player. Did u???

  13. #98
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ye333 View Post
    You must be kidding... This is what you said

    "That is why TH do lousy in Opens like FO, AE, etc (except INA open of course) because there's no restriction on entry except withdrawal. Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there.."

    The "(except INA open of course)" is effective for both sentences?!

    04-05 TH vs LD is 3:1. If we follow your criterion and take away those matches in Indonesia and China, it's 2:0. How come it's 50-50?!

    Let's say 3:1(2:0) indeed is close to 50-50 . Now take a look at LD vs LCW. LD vs LCW in 2008 is 3:1 (Swiss, Thomas, OG, China). If we take away those matches held in China and Malaysia, it's 1:1; LD vs LCW in 2009 is 3:1 (AE, Swiss, Sudirman, China Masters). If we take away those held in China and Malaysia, it's again 1:1. So LD vs LCW should be like 45-55, right?
    explain why TH, the super magician, can not win an AE? or a superseries (yet) even when LD isn't there? Even uncle Peter gade has won a SS before. In big tournaments after 2006, TH often can't get pass the QF.
    Last edited by cooler; 11-16-2009 at 11:08 AM.

  14. #99
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    malaysia
    Posts
    22,181
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    explain why TH, the super magician, can not win an AE? or a superseries (yet) even when LD isn't there? Even uncle Peter gade has won a SS before. In big tournaments after 2006, TH often can't get pass the QF.
    hmm
    is that ye333 job to explain that?

  15. #100
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by limsy View Post
    hmm
    is that ye333 job to explain that?
    he went this far, why not?
    he should finish his job, even if TH can't

  16. #101
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You aim at the wrong guy. I never claimed TH is "the super magician".

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    explain why TH, the super magician, can not win an AE? or a superseries (yet) even when LD isn't there? Even uncle Peter gade has won a SS before. In big tournaments after 2006, TH often can't get pass the QF.

  17. #102
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    US
    Posts
    2,613
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    As always, it's cooler's job to change topic when the old one is done.

    Quote Originally Posted by limsy View Post
    hmm
    is that ye333 job to explain that?

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Most UNDER-RATED rackets? Past or/and Present
    By allyjack110 in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 35
    : 05-29-2011, 03:40 AM
  2. Christmas Present
    By bad_fanatic in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 8
    : 12-23-2008, 03:17 PM
  3. Some past and present HK players
    By Cheung in forum Professional Players
    Replies: 25
    : 10-16-2007, 10:12 PM
  4. Present for the Vikings
    By demolidor in forum Badminton Tournament Video Sharing
    Replies: 4
    : 01-18-2006, 09:15 AM
  5. Best Doubles of Past and Present
    By V1lau in forum Professional Players
    Replies: 1
    : 04-17-2005, 08:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •