Nadal out for another 2 months

@ socal: "I hate to be a jerk about it, but honestly my mind processes information in sentences and paragraphs. You garble your message and hide somewhere in a giant block of text that jumps from one thing to he next and brings in so much I dont' know where to begin. Concise please and in sentence form. You don't make it easy on me to read your post and respond to your criticisms when your response is in this form. "

Yes socal you're a jerk. I don’t see anything wrong with
Veejay’s writing at all. That’s his style.

I hate to be so harsh, but I just wonder if they spoon fed
you, take you by the hand and made it easy for you to read when you were young
at school? Is that why as a grown man now when you don’t understand a text you
blame it on the writer’s language structure? C’mon, if you cannot understand Veejay’s
words as they are now, you won’t understand the same words even if he organizes
them in any form of “sentences and paragraph”.

Boy, you make a damn good bluff. The meaning of a text resides
in the individual words themselves, not the “sentences and paragraphs” you made
a big deal of. And a writer is not supposed to make his work easy for you to
understand. You as a reader is suppose to do the thinking yourself. You can’t
think? Then surrender. Why go around heaping the blame on the writer?

Sorry, it is extremely bad form to blame your own reading handicap on a writer’s style. Just admit you don’t
measure up to the challenge Veejay put forth to you. Seriously, that would be a
far more honest and honorable thing to do.

Yes, it's Veejay's style to not use full stops or paragrpahing.
Meanwhile Socal is illiterate to complain about it.

Tenez and Veejay you again fail to look at it with the proper perspective in my mind. I understand the legal definitions of various peds or drugs as peds through various rules, laws, and conventions. That is not what I am talking about. The law generally tries to do what is reasonable and just. That is the basis or foundation of the law, at least that is what they taught us about the common law in law school. I am talking about the logical and real world concept of what is performance enhancing. For example, I consider a woman who gets botox or a boob job or a hymen reattachment to be performance enahncing. The last one is even cheating and commiting fraud.

No it is you that fails to understand,this is a tennis forum,we are talking about sport here,not Viagra or botox and acne medication.Everything in this debate has and will always be about PED's that are used in sport
You claimed "antibiotic is also a performance enahcing drug, so are anti inflammatories, and dozens of other approved medications"
I asked you to prove how any of the above is performance enhancing,you failed to do that
I asked you to name me at least of dozen of medications which are performance enhancing,you failed to do that
I asked you to give me a list of performance enhancing drugs which are approved for sport,you failed to do that
I asked you to explain to me how a drug can be approved and performance enhancing at the same time,you failed to do that
In short you have failed to do everything you claimed you did
You made some ridiculous comments and I immediately knew you were talking your usual crap which is why I have drilled you about this and asked you to back what youre saying up
You just wanted to sound smart and come across and being educated about the subject but boy didnt that backfire
Why not just admit you didnt know what you were talking about rather then try to twist this is so kind of legal matter?
This was never about the law

Why the hell would anyone who is debating the use of steriods and the performance enhancing factors come here and talk about botox? Who the hell does that?

There are only two, two possible motivations to do drugs. 1. For pleasure no one smokes two joints to enhance their performance in anything except eating ice cream 2. For increased physical performance from you natural normal level of health. So in the broad non legalistic, logical definition all of the examples I have given you are performance enhancing. Some more justified than others but all have very dangerous consequences for the individual in the use of the individual, and all used to gain in performance. Whether an unfair advantage is gained or not depends on the set of circumstances.

I disagree,there any many more reasons then just the 2 you mentioned why anyone uses drugs
What about cheating,which is the basis of my argument?
The by product of cheating by using the drugs may be enhancing your performance but the motive still remains to cheat,to get ahead of the rest of the pack

What about taking drugs because youre addicted? In many cases it may start off as pleasure,but believe me once youre an addict the drugs arent as fun as they were in the beginning.Forget about substances like Cocaine or Extacy,even drugs like Ritalin,Caffein or even sleeping pills are very addictive drugs.People drink coffee to get their caffein fix,just like they smoke cigarettes to get their Nicotine fix
How many people want to stop being addicted to a drug but find it hard to quit? That clearly suggests they arent doing ti for fun or to enhance them somehow
But this was never even the debate,you started talking about steriods ( when I was discussing poor sportsmanship),then suddenly you claimed you knew of dozens of performance enhancing medications and then when I asked you to name a few you came back with Viagra
Can you not see how stupid you look?

In fact the legal definition of what is a PED is irrelevant to my argument, that is precisely one of the things I am argueing to be changed the legal definition of PED and what is a proscribed PED. My argument to be a valid proposal for change must bre reasonable and just, and I think it is the best of both those areas of the choices we have.

Youre arguing to change the legal definition?
Why? So that helps defend your ridiculous comments?
It doesnt and never will regardless of whether you ever are able to have the legal definition changed because most if not all of what you mentioned can be achieved naturally without the use of any of the drugs you mentioned
Youre only trying to claim that its performance enhancing because the drugs "enhances your performance"
Well the performance those drugs "enhance" can be achieved naturally so theres no need to to even take those drugs to try and achieve some kind of "enhancement"

The other thing I forgot to mention about your proposal to legalise the drugs and control it...
The only drugs you will be able to try and control are the known drugs,what about the unknown drugs?
How are you ever going to stop anyone from taking the drugs that are way ahead of the curb that WADA or the USADA doesnt even know exists,if you dont even know they exist how are you going to prevent usage or try to control anyone using them?

Tetrahydrogestrinone is a prime example,used by Marion Jones prior to the 2000 Sydney Olympics,but it wasnt till 2003 that U.S. sprint coach Trevor Graham delivered a syringe containing traces of THG to USADA
This helped Don Catlin, MD, the founder and then-director of the UCLA Olympic Analytical Lab, to identify and develop a test for THG

SR: Yes socal you're a jerk. I don’t see anything wrong with
Veejay’s writing at all. That’s his style.

I hate to be so harsh, but I just wonder if they spoon fed
you, take you by the hand and made it easy for you to read when you were young
at school? Is that why as a grown man now when you don’t understand a text you
blame it on the writer’s language structure? C’mon, if you cannot understand Veejay’s
words as they are now, you won’t understand the same words even if he organizes
them in any form of “sentences and paragraph”.

Boy, you make a damn good bluff. The meaning of a text resides
in the individual words themselves, not the “sentences and paragraphs” you made
a big deal of. And a writer is not supposed to make his work easy for you to
understand. You as a reader is suppose to do the thinking yourself. You can’t
think? Then surrender. Why go around heaping the blame on the writer?

Excellent comment SR
Socal is really the biggest buffoon I have ever come across on any of the tennis forums.Its like he constantly types out of his anus...you dont even have to read anything he writes cause you can smell the manure a mile away
I aked him to name me some of the performance enhancing drugs he was comparing to the subject of steriods...he came back with Viagra!!!

I used to feel sorry for him over on v2,but the guy claims to have a law degree...now I feel sorry for the legal environment he works in

SR wrote:@ socal: "I hate to be a jerk about it, but honestly my mind processes information in sentences and paragraphs. You garble your message and hide somewhere in a giant block of text that jumps from one thing to he next and brings in so much I dont' know where to begin. Concise please and in sentence form. You don't make it easy on me to read your post and respond to your criticisms when your response is in this form. "

Yes socal you're a jerk. I don’t see anything wrong with
Veejay’s writing at all. That’s his style.

I hate to be so harsh, but I just wonder if they spoon fed
you, take you by the hand and made it easy for you to read when you were young
at school? Is that why as a grown man now when you don’t understand a text you
blame it on the writer’s language structure? C’mon, if you cannot understand Veejay’s
words as they are now, you won’t understand the same words even if he organizes
them in any form of “sentences and paragraph”.

Boy, you make a damn good bluff. The meaning of a text resides
in the individual words themselves, not the “sentences and paragraphs” you made
a big deal of. And a writer is not supposed to make his work easy for you to
understand. You as a reader is suppose to do the thinking yourself. You can’t
think? Then surrender. Why go around heaping the blame on the writer?

Sorry, it is extremely bad form to blame your own reading handicap on a writer’s style. Just admit you don’t
measure up to the challenge Veejay put forth to you. Seriously, that would be a
far more honest and honorable thing to do.

Yes my reading handicap, buddy I have never been accused at any level of having a reading comprehension problem. Sorry it isn't incumbent on the reader to be forced to read whatever Veejay's keyboard vomits onto the screen. You fail to understand what the job of the writer is, but then again you fail so miserably in understanding the simplest things about tennis and writing that why am I not surprised. It is incumbent on the writer to actually write something the reader wants to read. Not something that requires a team of enigma code breakers to get to the end of a never ending sentence.

I don't really read his mind numbing text vomits anymore anyway. I just skim to first stupid comment that I can highlight to destroy what little credibility he has. Thankfully I usually don't have to read more than a line or two.

Veejay wrote:

SR: Yes socal you're a jerk. I don’t see anything wrong with
Veejay’s writing at all. That’s his style.

I hate to be so harsh, but I just wonder if they spoon fed
you, take you by the hand and made it easy for you to read when you were young
at school? Is that why as a grown man now when you don’t understand a text you
blame it on the writer’s language structure? C’mon, if you cannot understand Veejay’s
words as they are now, you won’t understand the same words even if he organizes
them in any form of “sentences and paragraph”.

Boy, you make a damn good bluff. The meaning of a text resides
in the individual words themselves, not the “sentences and paragraphs” you made
a big deal of. And a writer is not supposed to make his work easy for you to
understand. You as a reader is suppose to do the thinking yourself. You can’t
think? Then surrender. Why go around heaping the blame on the writer?

Excellent comment SR
Socal is really the biggest buffoon I have ever come across on any of the tennis forums.Its like he constantly types out of his anus...you dont even have to read anything he writes cause you can smell the manure a mile away
I aked him to name me some of the performance enhancing drugs he was comparing to the subject of steriods...he came back with Viagra!!!

I used to feel sorry for him over on v2,but the guy claims to have a law degree...now I feel sorry for the legal environment he works in

I passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot Veej, don't feel sorry for me. By the way, its funny you felt sorry for me on V2, what was that the entire 2-3 weeks they allowed you to pollute the site before kicking you out? I am sorry you don't understand the concept of analogy. Don't worry once I teach you how to use sentences you can then graduate up to understanding analogies.

@ Socal

I just skim to first stupid comment that I can highlight to destroy what little credibility he has.

When have you ever done that Socal?
Here or on v2?
If I remember correctly all I ever did was expose all your double standards over on v2
You call me a liar but almost everything you type turns out to be a lie

I don't really read his mind numbing text vomits anymore anyway.

Perhaps if you did you may actually learn something,but its quite clear that you would rather remain ignorant and make a fool of yourself so continue as is...

socal1976 wrote:Don't worry once I teach you how to use sentences you can then graduate up to understanding analogies.

POTD

Socal said:

I passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot Veej, don't feel sorry for me. By the way, its funny you felt sorry for me on V2, what was that the entire 2-3 weeks they allowed you to pollute the site before kicking you out? I am sorry you don't understand the concept of analogy. Don't worry once I teach you how to use sentences you can then graduate up to understanding analogies.

I seriously doubt that,you cant even back your own comments up,youve failed to answer every question I have asked you since you joined this forum and now you expect me to believe you can pass a test where someone asks you questions?
If you cant even answer 1 question here,how the hell did you get through an entire a bar exam?
Actually I was on v2 for a couple of months and told Gav he can delete my profile after trying to sensor the internet...but I am glad youre finally admitting that you had something to do with it...

Amritia3ee wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Don't worry once I teach you how to use sentences you can then graduate up to understanding analogies.

POTD

Im still waiting for you to tell me why I would use Xanax?
Why did you run away when I asked you that Amritia?
You accused me of using it by telling me to stop using it so why do you think I am using it?
What are you basing that on?

Veejay wrote:@ Socal

I just skim to first stupid comment that I can highlight to destroy what little credibility he has.

When have you ever done that Socal?
Here or on v2?
If I remember correctly all I ever did was expose all your double standards over on v2
You call me a liar but almost everything you type turns out to be a lie

I don't really read his mind numbing text vomits anymore anyway.

Perhaps if you did you may actually learn something,but its quite clear that you would rather remain ignorant and make a fool of yourself so continue as is...

Apparently, past steroid use damages long term memory skills. That is an interesting memory you created for yourself about how you used to expose my lies and double standards. Like I said when was this, the entire 2 weeks they tolerated you there is that when Don Quixote Veejay slayed the magical Socal dragons of his own making.

Veejay wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Don't worry once I teach you how to use sentences you can then graduate up to understanding analogies.

POTD

Im still waiting for you to tell me why I would use Xanax?
Why did you run away when I asked you that Amritia?
You accused me of using it by telling me to stop using it so why do you think I am using it?
What are you basing that on?

Bravo Veejay, real sentences with a beginning and an end, we are making progress. Next week's lesson will be paragraphs.

Apparently, past steroid use damages long term memory skills. That is an interesting memory you created for yourself about how you used to expose my lies and double standards. Like I said when was this, the entire 2 weeks they tolerated you there is that when Don Quixote Veejay slayed the magical Socal dragons of his own making.

What a comeback..almost as good as telling me Viagra is performance enhancing....almost

Bravo Veejay

Thanks...but theres really no need to tell me how wonderful I am,I already know that.Praising my genius is not news or new to me

So lets see what you have to say in response to the crap you wrote about Botox being performance enhancing

Veejay wrote:Socal said:

I passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot Veej, don't feel sorry for me. By the way, its funny you felt sorry for me on V2, what was that the entire 2-3 weeks they allowed you to pollute the site before kicking you out? I am sorry you don't understand the concept of analogy. Don't worry once I teach you how to use sentences you can then graduate up to understanding analogies.

I seriously doubt that,you cant even back your own comments up,youve failed to answer every question I have asked you since you joined this forum and now you expect me to believe you can pass a test where someone asks you questions?
If you cant even answer 1 question here,how the hell did you get through an entire a bar exam?
Actually I was on v2 for a couple of months and told Gav he can delete my profile after trying to sensor the internet...but I am glad youre finally admitting that you had something to do with it...

Another Smearjay job. You really can't read or write, can u Smearjay? When exactly did I admit to having something to do with you being kicked out? As usual you made that up. We already know you are liar and smear merchant Veej, adding even more lies to your rich CV is probably not a good idea.

Another Smearjay job. You really can't read or write, can u Smearjay? When exactly did I admit to having something to do with you being kicked out? As usual you made that up. We already know you are liar and smear merchant Veej, adding even more lies to your rich CV is probably not a good idea.

How do you know I was "kicked out"?

I assumed because of all the talk on here about who got who kicked out of 606, I have no information on whether you were or not, all I know is you stopped posting and with your behavior over there and what the majority of posters thought of your posts I assumed you were kicked out. Not a bad assumption, as I assume you have been kicked out of every single moderated tennis site you have ever posted on for any length of time. Chalk that up to your lack of evidence for your smearjay jobs on people and your winning charm. Just a good guess I suppose.

I have no evidence you were kicked out of MTL and ja606 either, but my guess is you probably have been kicked out of one or the other of those sites as well. Am I right? I wonder how every single tennis site you visit fails to appreciate you?

socal1976 wrote:I assumed because of all the talk on here about who got who kicked out of 606, I have no information on whether you were or not, all I know is you stopped posting and with your behavior over there and what the majority of posters thought of your posts I assumed you were kicked out. Not a bad assumption, as I assume you have been kicked out of every single moderated tennis site you have ever posted on for any length of time. Chalk that up to your lack of evidence for your smearjay jobs on people and your winning charm. Just a good guess I suppose.

So who is making things up now?
I already told you I told Gav he can stick his forum up his ass and told him to delete my profile and you still went on and told that lie.It doesnt however hurt your credibility because you have already proven through your comments that you have none


This is what I said to YOU a few days ago:
Veejay
Posts: 757
Join date: 2012-06-19
"Everyone here knows I told Gav he could shove his forum up his ass and told him to delete my profile"

So Im sorry to disappoint you but I was NEVER kicked out of your "moderate v2"
I left out of choice,because that forum is the least "moderate" I have ever come across

socal1976 wrote:I have no evidence you were kicked out of MTL and ja606 either, but my guess is you probably have been kicked out of one or the other of those sites as well. Am I right? I wonder how every single tennis site you visit fails to appreciate you?

I have never been kicked ot of JA606 either

You can see the comments I made there today...

http://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/163711

Sorry you guessed wrong,but that doesnt surprise me,you seem to be wrong on just about all your guesses

Kicked out, forced out, same difference. Tell me Veej how many sites have you been permanently banned on? By the way you really do need to read the definition of lie because you don't understand what it means. A lie is a knowing misrepresentation, if I don't know the circumstances and I assume you got booted that is a mistake, hence the lack of knowledge it can't be a lie.

Making up out of nowhere that I work for Pfizer to pump their drugs to the ten people who visit this site is a lie because you made it up and you know you made it up. I took a guess and it was wrong, but it was good guess because like I said I am sure you have been kicked out of many moderated sites prior to this one.

So how many times have you been permanently banned?

socal1976 wrote:Kicked out, forced out, same difference. Tell me Veej how many sites have you been permanently banned on? By the way you really do need to read the definition of lie because you don't understand what it means. A lie is a knowing misrepresentation, if I don't know the circumstances and I assume you got booted that is a mistake, hence the lack of knowledge it can't be a lie.

Making up out of nowhere that I work for Pfizer to pump their drugs to the ten people who visit this site is a lie because you made it up and you know you made it up. I took a guess and it was wrong, but it was good guess because like I said I am sure you have been kicked out of many moderated sites prior to this one.

So how many times have you been permanently banned?

And you telling me I have a problem reading...I left out of choice because that forum is the least "moderate" I have ever come across
Who the hell tries to sensor the internet??..thats a dictatorship..and Gav along with you and your Vamos brigade are the tyrants
Sorry Socal I actually live in a REAL free society where freedom is speech is cherished,even if you have to hear things you dont like hearing
How can you assume I got the boot when I already told you I asked for my profile to be deleted?

I never said you worked for Pfizer,I said youre promoting their products,youve done that by claiming Viarga and Cialis is performance enhancing.
You know its possible to promote a company's product without them employing or paying you by simply talking the quality of the product up? You do understand that right?

Veejay wrote: sensor

censor

When did I talk up the quality of any Pfizer products, you just made that smear up, again. You know when you get caught lying the Richard Nixon strategy of doubling down with more lies is usually not smart. Tell me how have I pumped up a single Pfizer product? And why the hell if I am not getting paid would I choose to pump their company? The more you type the less understandable you become.

mikeyM1000 wrote:

Veejay wrote: sensor

censor

Be easy on him mikey he has come a long way, this week he has learned how to write complete sentences. Lets hope he puts his new found skills to better use than what we have currently witnessed.

socal1976 wrote:When did I talk up the quality of any Pfizer products, you just made that smear up, again. You know when you get caught lying the Richard Nixon strategy of doubling down with more lies is usually not smart. Tell me how have I pumped up a single Pfizer product? And why the hell if I am not getting paid would I choose to pump their company? The more you type the less understandable you become.

You claimed it was performance enhancing.......when its not
That is talking up the quality of a product beyond the truth and what it says on the tin

I would have made a brilliant lawyer eh Socal?
I'm ripping the person who "passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot" to shreds here...

socal1976 wrote:

mikeyM1000 wrote:

Veejay wrote: sensor

censor

Be easy on him mikey he has come a long way, this week he has learned how to write complete sentences. Lets hope he puts his new found skills to better use than what we have currently witnessed.

Wow,a typo...is that all you have?
I would have thought someone who "passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot" would naturally challenge the actual debate,rather then try to win it by pointing out typos..
Is this how you defend or argue a case Socal?
By pointing out typos?

"excuse me your honour,objection!!!...TYPO.."

Veejay wrote:

socal1976 wrote:When did I talk up the quality of any Pfizer products, you just made that smear up, again. You know when you get caught lying the Richard Nixon strategy of doubling down with more lies is usually not smart. Tell me how have I pumped up a single Pfizer product? And why the hell if I am not getting paid would I choose to pump their company? The more you type the less understandable you become.

You claimed it was performance enhancing.......when its not
That is talking up the quality of a product beyond the truth and what it says on the tin

I would have made a brilliant lawyer eh Socal?
I'm ripping the person who "passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot" to shreds here...

Are you an idiot, or do you just play one online? This is the most amusing premature declaration of victory since George Bush dressed up as Maverick from Top Gun and flew down on the aircraft career.

Your winning, your winning, yeah! And your also learning to write in complete sentences, that is a good boy Veej. Here is a gold star for you now drink you milk and go to sleep.

Veejay wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

mikeyM1000 wrote:

Veejay wrote: sensor

censor

Be easy on him mikey he has come a long way, this week he has learned how to write complete sentences. Lets hope he puts his new found skills to better use than what we have currently witnessed.

Wow,a typo...is that all you have?
I would have thought someone who "passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot" would naturally challenge the actual debate,rather then try to win it by pointing out typos..
Is this how you defend or argue a case Socal?
By pointing out typos?

"excuse me your honour,objection!!!...TYPO.."

I don't point out typos I make them myself and could care less. Mikey pointed it out and I told him to take it easy on you since you have made so much progress in the last week. So add this to your rich CV of lies. I never pointed out your typo and don't care about them. But I am sorry I can't wade through a 500 word runon sentence post, it has nothing to do with grammar it has to do with boring the reader to the point of tears.

Are you an idiot, or do you just play one online? This is the most amusing premature declaration of victory since George Bush dressed up as Maverick from Top Gun and flew down on the aircraft career.

Your winning, your winning, yeah! And your also learning to write in complete sentences, that is a good boy Veej. Here is a gold star for you now drink you milk and go to sleep.

Why dont you try to address the comment I made to you regarding the actual subject Socal?
Come on you claim to have "passed the hardest bar examination in the country first shot" so lets see you argue your case here
I dare you...

Ill debate you when you write in a cogent and concise manner and take the time to write in sentences and in paragraphs. Like I said it is not incumbent on the reader to be forced to read whatever enormous block of text that is vomitted out of your keyboard and addled mind. It is incumbent on the writer to actually make the reader want to read his work without boring him to tears. If you don't write concisely and cogently, I will do what I have always done with your posts and others who write like you. I quickly skim to the first line that exposes your buffoonery in said text, I highlight that line and use it to destroy what little credibility you have. Then I just ignore the rest after that.

socal1976 wrote:Ill debate you when you write in a cogent and concise manner and take the time to write in sentences and in paragraphs. Like I said it is not incumbent on the reader to be forced to read whatever enormous block of text that is vomitted out of your keyboard and addled mind. It is incumbent on the writer to actually make the reader want to read his work without boring him to tears. If you don't write concisely and cogently, I will do what I have always done with your posts and others who write like you. I quickly skim to the first line that exposes your buffoonery in said text, I highlight that line and use it to destroy what little credibility you have. Then I just ignore the rest after that.

I dont think I have ever seen a more pathetic cop out Socal...
Youre a disgrace to the legal system and lawyers everywhere
I believe a lawyer would jump at the opportunity to expose me as some kind of fraud,point out how wrong I was in this debate and shut me down for good
All youre doing is looking for excuses and ways to duck and dive
Come on show me this infamous list of dozens of approved medications which are performance enhancing...
Show me how antibiotics are performance enhancing and show me how muscle inflammatories are performance enhancing
You made these claims so it really shouldnt be so hard to back it up and prove it

PLease try to be nice to each other....even if it seems impossible.

I think we can easily agree that drugs can be so complex and getting more complex that it can be difficult at the end to identify the PEDs from the others that are not.

This is why I think drug use shoudl be extremely limited. Athletes shoudl have access to no more than 3 or 5 type of drugs during competition. And all using the same ones delivered by the same doctors. There is no way athletes could have access to their own doctors. That is wrong. We do not want to buy the excuses that such and such conditions requires special treatments and special doctors. AN athlete shoudl be extremely healthy to start with...if he/she is not then it's not an athlete.

In my view during competition An athlete should have at best access to Aspirin and anti inflamm but nothing else. If flue or else antibiotic.

We should try to simplify the list of drug they can take instead of increasing the list of what they cannot take.

The reason it's not the case is because athletes and organisers are just happy to abuse the system.

...and steak with chunky chips and salad, washed down with full-bodied red.

After dinner cigars optional

Exactly. What's the point watching athletes on steroids? Isn't it fun to watch a real physical battle or simply a talent v physique fight like teh Borg v McEnroe hoping both were clean?

I think those days are definitely gone. Not because there isn't enough the likes of us, but because the new generation wants different things.
An average youngster today can't hold a basic polite coversation thanks to the magic of twitter, facebook texting.
Let alone start one and develop a debate....
I used to read Kafka's Trial at school at 15, they read Horrid Henry....

Lazy new generation has low and basic expectations, and many know no better, so if Nadal is served up as the best thing since sliced bread, than that must be it!
He is so humble and such a warrior!

Veejay i answered your list of questions and explained to you that all drugs are either for pleasure or for enhanced physical health and performance. I went line for line and answered your entire list of 5 questions. Why don't you bother reading the thread properly before making even more baseless accusations. If you are sick and you take an antibiotic and get well sooner has your performance not been enhanced? What I keep trying to explain to you is the following:

If a drug's purpose isn't to get you high, it is to increase and ENHANCE your performance over what the natural body's response would be. In the end if you don't want to accept an answer provided to you on multiple occassions and in 40 different ways that is on you.

Tenez I understand you position, let me ask you a broader philosophical question. Should there be some sort of statute of limitations or time limit on all of these never ending investigations. Because that is personally and ethically the biggest issue I have with the current system or going for even stricter enforcement. There is something morally repugnant to me to damn a man today for something he did 30 years ago, even assuming that what he did 30 years ago was wrong. (Some actions of course at the extremes like murder and genocide should be prosecuted forever, but I am not talking about extreme violent criminality here)

Actually it wasn't really a list of 5 questions, more like 3 questions, one of which you repeated 3 times over and over again.

noleisthebest wrote:I think those days are definitely gone. Not because there isn't enough the likes of us, but because the new generation wants different things.
An average youngster today can't hold a basic polite coversation thanks to the magic of twitter, facebook texting.
Let alone start one and develop a debate....
I used to read Kafka's Trial at school at 15, they read Horrid Henry....

Lazy new generation has low and basic expectations, and many know no better, so if Nadal is served up as the best thing since sliced bread, than that must be it!
He is so humble and such a warrior!

I think a "fight" between athletes/personalities is what it's all about and that is what gets people interested. If the 100m record was 20 seconds then we would all be in awe of the athlete breaking the 20s. Honestly I think Nadal is not that bad cause he can bring people to watch the game more and that is what really matters. Borg was the one who got me into it but like Nadal he was a bore from the baseline. I am still a big fan cause he is simply an icon of my youth but frankly when I think I supported him instead of the others, it's weird cause the others were more talented. Nadal has had his role...maybe overall a good one though there is a lot of negative as well attach to him.

Well, Nadal has done nothing for me in terms of liking tennis more, quite the opposite, in fact.
I was never into Fedal rivalry, anyway, just don't like the guy, full stop.

Imagine tennis without Federer and just Nadal. That's how I see him all the time.

I have a natural dislike for all things imposed by the media and Federer Nadal rivalry was definitely a very blown-out one.

I suppose it's a matter of taste, for some something is better than nothing.

socal1976 wrote:There is something morally repugnant to me to damn a man today for something he did 30 years ago, even assuming that what he did 30 years ago was wrong. (Some actions of course at the extremes like murder and genocide should be prosecuted forever, but I am not talking about extreme violent criminality here)

I can see the point but it's not about the man who cheated 30 years, it's about those who would be tempted to cheat now knowing they could get away with it, especially after a long period. This is why we need to be relentless about those cheats. That should apply in sport, business and politics.

noleisthebest wrote:Imagine tennis without Federer and just Nadal. That's how I see him all the time.

That was roughly tennis during Borg before McEnroe arrived.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Imagine tennis without Federer and just Nadal. That's how I see him all the time.

That was roughly tennis during Borg before McEnroe arrived.

I didn't follow it that closely then...but from the little I know, Borg was smart and knew how to carry on. Wasn't a humble, grunting, doctored tennis eyesore.

Tenez wrote:

socal1976 wrote:There is something morally repugnant to me to damn a man today for something he did 30 years ago, even assuming that what he did 30 years ago was wrong. (Some actions of course at the extremes like murder and genocide should be prosecuted forever, but I am not talking about extreme violent criminality here)

I can see the point but it's not about the man who cheated 30 years, it's about those who would be tempted to cheat now knowing they could get away with it, especially after a long period. This is why we need to be relentless about those cheats. That should apply in sport, business and politics.

But it doesn't Tenez. In every civilized country civil and criminal liability at some point for pretty much all but a few of the most egregious types of conduct is limited in time. (kidnapping and murder are the only two main common law crimes that are prosecuted no matter what, traditionally even rape or grievous assault is limited in time.) And the argument you made that it needs to be done as detterent can be used to justify prosecuting any serious rule violation to the end of time.

And very clearly in business this rule is not followed in most jurisdictions no matter how egregious the civil wrong you have 1-3 years in bringing up the case. It isn't true for any types of crimes or administrative hearings either. I am telling you whether you like to believe me or not this is really something that legally and morally is a big issue. Time limits on prosecution serve many purpose. It is much harder to defend an old charge, people forget, people die, documents are lost , etc. There is a real purpose both moral and legal to this time limit on old dirt.

Deterrent value is not a valid argument, you can make an argument that there are many other worse activities IE rape that is still limited time wise for prosecution. Don't we want to deter rape, or white collar fraud that maybe has billions or even trillions in losses?

socal1976 wrote:Actually it wasn't really a list of 5 questions, more like 3 questions, one of which you repeated 3 times over and over again.

So why dont you answer at least the "3" of the "5" questions?
None of the answers you gave me answers the questions I asked,nor is it a legitimate answer for what you think there questions were either
Where is this infamous lost of dozens of approved medications?
You can even given me a list of dozens of approved medication that you back ups your claim of day to day "performance enhancing" let alone performance enhancing in terms of sport
All you ever do is talk about everything else but the subject,spin spin spin...
I mean how the hell are you a lawyer,if youre meant to defend someone of a crime like murder and then you Socal go on some kind of cruse and start defending him about rape because you cant defend him on the murder charges?
Thats exactly what youre doing here,thats exactly what you do in almost every debate I have ever had with you on here and v2

Let it go, talking to a brick wall is more rewarding.

Oh, btw, did you see Peter Ho’s come back from hiding and still saying at BR that Fed
will have to prove he didn’t play in a weak era. I tell you, the total farce some
of these wishful tennis fans are capable of! It does get rather surreal.

@ VJ, "I aked him to name me some of the performance enhancing drugs he was comparing to the subject of steriods...he came back with Viagra!!! "

What do you expect? He doesn’t understand the word “performance” refers to different things
in different contexts. The PED in the specific sports context in question is not his area,
that’s why he keeps getting out of the context, from sports to sex. What’s more
he keeps attacking your “sentences and paragraphs” as an excuse to avoid the core issues and to save face. Then comes the
best part: he declared himself the victor out of thin air. What a total farce.

Veejay wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Actually it wasn't really a list of 5 questions, more like 3 questions, one of which you repeated 3 times over and over again.

So why dont you answer at least the "3" of the "5" questions?
None of the answers you gave me answers the questions I asked,nor is it a legitimate answer for what you think there questions were either
Where is this infamous lost of dozens of approved medications?
You can even given me a list of dozens of approved medication that you back ups your claim of day to day "performance enhancing" let alone performance enhancing in terms of sport
All you ever do is talk about everything else but the subject,spin spin spin...
I mean how the hell are you a lawyer,if youre meant to defend someone of a crime like murder and then you Socal go on some kind of cruse and start defending him about rape because you cant defend him on the murder charges?
Thats exactly what youre doing here,thats exactly what you do in almost every debate I have ever had with you on here and v2

Veejay the fact that i answered your idiotic questions line item per line item and you fail to accept the answer shows what a dishonest peron you are in general or that you lack the reading comprehensions skills to understand basic english.



For the one thousand time, when I said APPROVED PED my definition was broad definition of many household and prescription drugs that people use to ENHANCE THEIR PERFORMANCE EVERY DAY LIFE. But you don't care about that because like the known liar you are i answered your question so quit your badgering. Obviously you have a problem understanding both analogies and formulating sentences. Although good work this was your least mind numbing post in regards to sentence structure probably in history, keep up the good work and one day you may be qualified enough to take a high school equivalency test.

Lets try this again Smearjay,



PEDs that everyday people use either via prescription or otherwise: caffeine, antihistamines, pain killers, asthma inhalers, antibiotics, boner medication, sleep medication, growth hormones, and sterioids. So there is you list now stick it in between the two human pin cushions you call your ass cheeks and twirl.