Saturday, May 17, 2008

Early results

So any good results so far this weekend. At first glance High Point and Garland posted wins. Sisk and Smith lose big at line 1, was that for real guys?

Big woodshedding of the weekend so far was CC/Jolly sweeping Stonebridge. And you all said I was foolish for getting behind Jolly's team. I really was going off their strong results at the Tri Level since they beat some very good 3.5 teams there. Halverson and Reitzer seem to be doing well. They are my new favorite team, yes I am jumping on the bandwagon, don't let me down Mike.

71 comments:

  1. Congrats to Canyon Creek on a good win.

    We (Stonebridge) were up a set in three matches and ended up losing all three in third set tiebreakers.

    They are a strong team.

    ReplyDelete
  2. At 4.5 T-Bar tok down Village. 4 of 5 matches went to a 10 pointer.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Stonebridge really bent over for Canyon Creek today.

    ReplyDelete
  4. And then there were 4. We are down to 4 unbeatens.

    Canyon Creek has quietly gone from afterthought to contender.

    OC won 4-1 but there were several matches that could go either way. This flight is brutal.

    Some of those Garland scores were interesting/questionable. Is Sisk trying to get another year at 3.5? Regardless, they are 3.0 and the team to beat in their flight. They have nothing left until HP.

    Does the HP 5-0 win over JCC really mean anything? Both singles players went three sets while their solid doubles teams march on. It is apparent that they have very suspect singles and you can't win enough relying on sweeping doubles. They appear to be the weakest of the undefeateds.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Looks like Oak Creek Lucked out again in tie-breakers to beat Brookhaven. Also oc/bl marc klamecki got beat by a blooper,steady player with no pace.

    ReplyDelete
  6. no shocker that is how you beat Marc. I am a little surprised by the results from OC. I had them as my fav at 3.5 but that match was solid but not impressive but then again there are no style points in league tennis if so my team would be at the top of the charts and uhh.. we are not.

    HP is still in need of singles help but don't doubt they can sweep doubles if they need to but I think someone will arise as a threat at singles for them.

    Sisk,
    What's up with the beatdown you got today, are you getting nervous about our upcoming match, 6/1? Haven't heard from you on this, let me know so I can clear that date.

    Corey and Kirby both fell today as well, if I lose tomorrow v. Spk then we are just a bunch of losers getting together to challenge each other....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. I will do my best to grab that one win that one of our predictors said we would take off them.

    Sorry Rueben, I totally understand losing tough matches but you all are still in the mix.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Notice the way those creeps at Garland tank lines and play to keep the score close.

    Yesterday, they "barely" beat Canyon Creek 3-2 after their new ringer Harvey tanked his singles match. Pete Stein, far a far better player than Broach, managed to win in a third set tiebreak. Fat John & Smith TOTALLY TANKED against an extremely weak team. (Hell, Marshall was 0-4 in the fall league and never won even a set!) And even worse Key & Howk easily could have won their match 6-1, 6-1 but instead gave away enough games to finish 7-6, 6-2 against a very weak line. WTF???

    The prior match, Garland barely beat Hackberry (one of the weakest 3.5 teams in history) by a score of 3-2. In that match, rot jock Delira won 6-4, 6-1 against John Weaver. Weaver is terrible and got beat 6-0, 6-1 by Peter Chan. Way to keep it close rot jock! Welch & Key totally TANKED against a very weak team. This goes on and on . . .

    Garland, you guys are really pathetic.

    And I don't want to hear any crap from your lap dog, Corey, who will lie and cover up for you guys any time, any place.

    ReplyDelete
  8. TOP TEN 3.5 TEAMS
    1. Garland - Don't believe their scores. That's just a charade
    2. Oak Creek - They continue to beat all comers
    3. Oakridge - Improved by adding Ryan Curren
    4. Life Time - Should have beaten Oakridge. Bad luck in two tiebreaks cost them the match.
    5. Canyon Creek/Jolly - Very impressive win against Stonebridge
    6. High Point/Jameson - Excellent Doubles / Singles weak
    7. Brookhaven - Gave Oak Creek all they could handle!
    8. Greenhill/Kayser - Added Zach Stein
    9. Glen Eagles - Barely lost 2-3 to Canyon Creek, with the deciding match lost by tiebreak
    10. Stonebridge - Nervous, poor performance against Canyon Creek.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I don't like the name calling, but it is pretty obvious that Garland is "managing" their scores.

    They have a LOT of very fishy match scores involving a lot of players. This has to becoming from their captain, Sisk.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The issue about "managing scores" is made worse by the stupid way we treat the fall winners.

    By putting fall winners directly into the City Championship, they have no incentive whatsoever to play their best. But fall winners have EVERY incentive to manage their scores in order to retain their NTRP ratings and/or avoid being DQed.

    - Hardcourt

    ReplyDelete
  11. Do you want some cheese with that whine?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Is Garland managing scores??? Probably. Are they alone? I doubt it.

    Admittedly, Garland is not doing a very good job of hiding it. Also, after the De La Rosa fiasco, they are not likely to get the beneift of the doubt and are more under the 3.5 tennis community microscope.

    ReplyDelete
  13. To the Anonymous Who during his ratings said Lifetime should have beaten Oak Ridge there was no luck in the tie break wins prather crushed marcus 10-4 and lifetime player choked on match point in the other. please get your facts straight. Other wise you ratings are spot on.

    ReplyDelete
  14. It is almost a toss-up among the 3.5 "Big Three" in Flight C.

    Oak Creek beat Oakridge 3-2. But ALL THREE lines won by Oak Creek were in third set tiebreaks!

    Oakridge beat Life Time 3-2. Life Time won 1st and 3rd doubles by lopsided scores. Oakridge won #2 singles by a lopsided score. The other two lines both went third set tiebreak and Oakridge won BOTH tiebreaks.

    If you re-played both matches with the exact same line-ups either match could go either way. That's pretty cool!

    Life Time vs Oak Creek should also be a hard-fought battle likely decided by third set tiebreaks.

    Brookhaven also has a very strong team but not quite as good as the "Big Three". Brookhaven really got screwed by the way the flights were set up this year.

    ReplyDelete
  15. in your poll: brookhaven/perlman vs lbhouston/spagnola, who were the losers that voted for brookhaven? it was not even a close match.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anon, What does not even close mean?

    ReplyDelete
  17. lifetime 4.0 pulls the borderline upset and wins 3-2 over TBar M. I believe there were 5, maybe 6? tiebreakers for the match.

    Okay, according to Thunder, you guys can go back to sleep now.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Its a shame about Garland. Seems to me that having competitive matches EVERY WEEK sounds like more fun as a player then playing below your level for a whole season JUST to have 3 competitive matches AFTER a whole season of play?

    Is it really fun to play 1 or 2 or 3 seasons below your level?

    ReplyDelete
  19. In Flight B, what happened to SP/Doyle, Lakes clobbered them, 5-0...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Impressive win by LBH over Pearlman. Coryy Walker must be solid beating Mel like that. Probably earned a strike today.

    As for the Garland 3.5 team you guys are pretty funny with your accusations. Unless you have personally been playing one of these guys and seen them "obviously" tanking games, which I know for a fact has not been happening, you need to back off. Does Garland play with their lineups on some weeks, probably; do they purposely lose games, no they do not.

    I dont care how good you are, no one that I know from that team is so good they are willing to take a chance on a 10 point tie breaker by throwing a set.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Oak Creek versus Brookhaven (Men's 3.5, Flight C) –

    We had a great match against Oak Creek on Saturday. The match was a lot of fun and a real nail biter! Oak Creek beat us 4 -1. The score really doesn’t indicate how close our matches were against Oak Creek. We had four matches go to third set tie breakers. We could only close one of the four. The scores for our matches were -

    S1 2-6, 6-4, 1-0 Brookhaven
    S2 7-5, 2-6, 1-0 Oak Creek
    D1 6-2, 6-2 Oak Creek
    D2 6-3, 3-6, 1-0 Oak Creek
    D3 6-7, 6-4, 1-0 Oak Creek

    I’m really proud of Evan Lukasik who played number one singles for us on Saturday. He was down 5-0 in the first set before he started to figure things out. He kept to the game plan, worked his ass off and pulled off a win, beating a very tough competitor. Way to go Evan!

    The 3.5 men’s flight C division is really going to heat up during the second half of the season!

    For us, we still have High Point, Eldorado, Oakridge and Lifetime to play. Oakridge and Lifetime will be tough!

    It will be interesting to see if someone can beat Oak Creek. Oak Creek still has Eldorado, Lifetime, Collin County and Greenhill to play. I believe Lifetime is the only team that will really challenge Oak Creek. Who knows, maybe Eldorado, Collin County or Greenhills will be able to make something happen.

    ReplyDelete
  22. concerning Garland's shady players/team.

    That must be horrible to play on that team. Instead of playing to WIN, you simply play NOT to win by too much?

    Is there a whole team practice on tanking properly? Is this practiced in drills? I would love to know.

    ReplyDelete
  23. WE DO NOT TANK OUR MATCHES, it may appear like if your watching the match and in the box scores, but this is simply NOT TRUE. We do NOT tank our matches

    Sincerely,
    Bill Clinton

    ReplyDelete
  24. I watched Mel Parekh (Brookhaven) play Corry Walker (LB Houston) this afternoon.

    Yes, Corry Walker is very good! Corry has a great forehand & backhand and runs everything down. Mel was playing his ass off and was making some incredible shots. Corry would just run down Mel’s shots and come back with an even better shot for a winner. It was a very good match to watch. Corry beat Mel, 6-1, 6-2.

    ReplyDelete
  25. t mckinney

    You don't know what you are talking about.

    When you say: "no one that I know from that team is so good they are willing to TAKE A CHANCE on a tiebreak by throwing a set".

    Garland was the fall winner. They can lose all their matches and still advance to City Playoffs. When they drop games and sets and tank matches they are not taking any chance at all _ because NONE OF THESE MATCHES COUNT AT ALL FOR THEM.

    When you say you "know for a fact" that they are not intentionally losing some games, sets and matches _ you are totally full of crap! Or you are just lying to cover up for them.

    ReplyDelete
  26. The Fake John SiskMay 18, 2008 at 8:24 PM

    Tanking does take alot of practice. We spend the last 30 minutes of every practice going over the different ways to tank. Some of you guys suck so bad it is hard to lose games.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Will Garland be the only team in USTA history to receive the Lifetime ban for 3.5 tennis?

    ReplyDelete
  28. HP got lucky today. Overated

    ReplyDelete
  29. I know. HP seems to get lucky alot! It seems to me that the better you are the luckier you get.

    ReplyDelete
  30. On a related note,
    I was on Craigslist looking for a cheap tennis pro,
    and I came across one dude and decided to email him,
    Turns out he's on the Garland 4.0 team.
    I don't know about you guys, but I'm not going to take advise from a Garland sandbabger that I might have to play in a league match!
    www.scottrusselltennis.com
    he is cheap though $25/hr

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous says Trey does not know what he's talking about, but anonymous does not know GTC. I wish I was good enough to control lines and matches, but you guys are crazy. Just focus on your match at hand and move forward. Corey is not my lap dog, stand tall post your name and don't hide.
    How can you call him a lap dog and you don't know anything about the people your'e talking about?
    Sisk

    ReplyDelete
  32. oc bl my money is on Scott, name the place and time. Do you know the difference between advise and advice?
    Sisk

    ReplyDelete
  33. What HP team got lucky?

    ReplyDelete
  34. All of them, lol

    ReplyDelete
  35. But, I think they were refering to the 4.0 Somabut team with their 4-1 win.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Advise vs. Advice

    You're vs. Your'e

    Always great to have the grammar gestapo.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Somabut's teams have been getting lucky nearly every week for about 6years.

    ReplyDelete
  38. that's it OC BL. any more mistakes from you and we are sentencing you to 20 hours of hard time blog skool. Your going to be busting up adjective and adverbs for a LONG LONG TIME son.

    the gramar gestapo

    ReplyDelete
  39. 4-1, 2 easy singles wins and a dominate doubls performance and that's lucky? Sure the line 3 doubs looked close but they easily had 3 lines.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Jim,

    thanks for a good match today. I know this wasn't our A+ lineups against each other but it turned out to be a very good match. We look forward to playing you all again. Gene was nice to us but decided to flip the switch down 2-4 in the 2nd set. He is a tough player but Kyle and I felt good about our play today but you and Will were just too tough.

    LBH/BH match. I wouldn't knock BH from what I see that was not their A+ lineup either out of availability or choice and LBH is a good team, we haven't talked much about them but they are quietly moving towards the top

    Sorry for starting the tanking talk w/ Garland but I have to call them like I see them. Truly we have no idea and I hope it isn't true but.....

    ReplyDelete
  41. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Leave it to Sisk to miss the point,
    I'm not challenging any one.

    I am asking how ethical it is to be a paid tennis pro and also compete against your clientèle,
    At best your a sandbagger,
    At worst your no better than 4.0,

    And I would not want to work on my weaknesses with someone and then have to play them in a competitive match,

    Please correct my spelling and grammar and get back to me, Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  43. Damn the Gig is up. Scott went and got certified to give lessons and help people learn the game of tennis just so he could hopefully find a few other 3.5 and 4.0 players to mistakenly give him a call with the hopes he could infiltrate other 4.0 teams and learn their weaknesses.

    You guys take this league stuff way too seriously. Although I am sure he appreciates the free marketing, how about we try and avoid affecting a man's lively hood in a negative way. Just for the record, there are quite a few teaching pros playing on league teams throughout the city. I could name them, but since you feel it is so unethical I will spare them your slander.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Good win for LB Houston Spagnola 4.0 team. If they make it to the playoffs, they could be dangerous!

    ReplyDelete
  45. For maybe the first time, I agree with OC BL, it would be a little like a lawyer working with you on a case and then using the attorney client priv. against you in court with your opponent. If someone is supposed to be " your " teacher, helper then do it for that reason only and not against you.

    ReplyDelete
  46. it would be a little like a lawyer working with you on a case and then using the attorney client priv.

    Horrible analogy. Lets be honest not alot of 4-0 and 4.5 guys take lessons. The pros are probably more interested in how to steal your wives and girlfriends than your weak strokes.

    ReplyDelete
  47. anonymous OR only Semi anonymous?May 19, 2008 at 8:22 AM

    Obviously there are 1 million other players out there besides league players, guys. Sorry.

    And I know at $25/hour, my gf could appreciate something like that, because as we ALL KNOW, choosing between my advice and a stranger's exact same advice, the stranger's advice is going to carry a lot more weight.

    and he won't have to hear about it for the next 5 days str8 if she didnt like his advice.

    After all that though. Point taken w/ OC BL. I think OC BLs point was he coached a high school team. Based off of that, you would think he under-rated his play, but I don't know. I haven't even looked up his record.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Yes, I guess I do take it way to seriously,

    I only play once a week,
    No tournaments,
    We don't have any certified pros on our team,

    All anybody here that is bitch'in wants is a level playing field,
    Is that request that "Taking it to Seriously"?

    Will Garland go to no ends to defend themselves,

    So do you have to pay him to come to team practices?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Isn't Somabut a teaching pro too? I thought a teaching pro must self rate at least a 4.0; other than that there were no restrictions.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I tried to post this about thirty minutes ago, but I guess I did something wrong.

    Wow. I have checked this site a few times, but am not a regular. A buddy texted me this morning, telling me to check the blog.

    I will say this...
    I did become a certified tennis professional, but I only teach part time. Mainly, I teach because I love the sport and love helping others improve. Do I thik I'm a great player? Heck no. On an average day, I'm a good 4.0 player. Having said that, I'm a great teacher. I have a knack for identifying weaknesses and helping people correct their errors. That's it. Nothing more or less. I love tennis.

    I'm not sure who OC BL is. I'm sure he's a great guy. Let me put your mind at ease. I would NEVER play one of my clients in a 4.0 league match or tournament. I wouldn't do it. Nor would I tell my teammates what my client's strengths or weaknesses are. If a situation like that ever game up, I would default. Seriously. I love the sport, but I wouldn't do anything to jeopardize a relationship like that.

    Scott R

    ReplyDelete
  51. You play on a 3.5 team and are complaining about a 4.0 player which you will most likely never face in competetive play - unless of course you are suggesting he would rush over to the 3.5 guys and tell them your weaknesses.

    Pretty comical. Get over yourself, players from higher levels could care less what the guys under them are doing.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Wow. I have a lot of typos. Sorry about that!

    Scott

    ReplyDelete
  53. Thanks for sticking up for yourself,

    If you played for another County Club or team, I probably would not have even brought it up,

    But since you play for Dirty Garland,
    And Garland bashing seems to be the flavor of the day, I thought I would jump on the band wagon,

    I think most certified pros tend to stay away from tournaments because if they lose it can effect people perception of their playing level,

    I have a friend who takes lessons with Val Wilder, who is like #1 in the nation in 45 and over,
    which sounds a little better that Plays line #2 singles for the El Dorado 4.0 team,

    Best of Luck Scott with the teaching thing,
    I like your website it looks pretty nice.

    ReplyDelete
  54. guys there is nothing that prohibits a teaching pro from rating 4.0, which is the lowest a USPTA pro can rate. Hell anyone rated at 4.0 or higher can go out spend the money to take the test and get certified to be a teaching.
    So put your weiners away and stop trying to measure yourself against everyone else, because your only embarassing yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  55. speaking of score management take a look at #1D for Branch, 2 5.0 Appeals losing to a 4.0/4.5 combo.
    pretty blatant, unless the Branch players were injured.
    Makes Garland seem tame

    ReplyDelete
  56. Branch's team manages scores? Tell me it isn't true... No way.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Anyone have results for the Royal Oaks/Spring Park match?
    Only match that has not been updated.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  58. I can't believe what I am reading! You lame anonymous guys bitching about me and our team tanking matches..WOW You say you know for a fact that is what we are doing. I can speak for myself in that I have been playing like shit these last few months. I been beaten by Bert Beford and Phillip Key in our league matches up here at GTC. No, disrespect to them or how they played..oh let me see..I tanked those matches too...just so I do not raise any suspicions around the Garland Tennis center or the city as a whole. You whiny ass bitches can kiss my rot jock ass. I have never heard so many grown ass men whine over such stupid made up bullshit. Go figure...I guess it comes with the territory of being the team to beat.

    Keep hiding too! But, please at least let President Bush know when and where you see Osama Bin Laden. You Blog terrorist!

    ReplyDelete
  59. Keith and Steven,

    Jim congratulated me on hanging with Gene at least at times and said Kyle and I at least made him sweat a little bit. Ok there's a little motivation for you and we will probably see them in mixed doubles as well.

    BTW Gene I had a beer and burger after our match and then I couldn't move for three hours, today I am still groggy and sore. I wouldn't mind all that pain if we had actually won, getting old really SUX! I admire Walters for getting out there and playing singles, you are completely nuts, I will stick with doubles. although after watching your match with Noaman I wouldn't mind playing you sometime. not that I am guaranteeing a win or anything but you play the same ugly tennis that I do.

    ReplyDelete
  60. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  61. So how in the world is there a Double Default? Was it the 48 hour Rule??
    Royal Oaks v. Spring Park

    ReplyDelete
  62. Royal Oaks 3- Spring Park 2

    ReplyDelete
  63. ROT Jock,

    You are full of crap and everyone knows it!

    ReplyDelete
  64. Cary that sounded dangerously close to a challenge my friend.

    --Steven

    ReplyDelete
  65. Cary,

    I would have preferred to play you on Sunday. Noaman played well and even at the end when he was tired he hit out and made his shots. I would rate him as the second best player we have come up against. Walker of LBH looked better and has some impressive results. Doesn't mean much as we only get to see 2 singles players each week.
    If we play, it has to be at SP where it's not so windy and you can have a beer after. By the way, I don't play ugly, I play old man's tennis and at almost 60, I have the right.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Anyone know who won the HP-Brookhaven match from flight B??

    ReplyDelete
  67. Actually it appears it was Brookhaven 3-2, which means them and Lakes are both 4-0 coming into this weeks match against each other.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Week 5 4.5 Rankings:

    1) OC Branch (1) (5-0)
    2) OC Feldman (2) (4-0)
    t3) TBar (3) (4-0)
    t3) Royal Oaks (4) (3-1)
    5) Brookhaven (6) (3-1)
    6) Village (5) (2-2)
    7) Greenhill (10) (3-1)
    8) Spring Park (9) (2-3)
    9) High Point (7) (2-2)
    10) OC Boverman (8) (2-2)
    11) DFW (16) (1-3)
    12) LBH (12) (2-3)
    13) OC Juhn (15) (1-3)
    14) Hackberry (13) (1-4)
    15) Collin County (11) (1-4)
    16) Canyon Creek (14) (0-5)
    17) Lakes (17) (0-4)

    Best Week 6 matches:
    4.5A- OCF v. Greenhill- probably an easy OCF win- Greenhill is in a good battle with Spring Park for the last PQ City spot

    Lakes (0-4) v. Canyon Creek (0-5)- the zero bowl- both are fighting for the right to be the only 4.5 winless team in Dallas and to receieve the first draft pick in next year's draft- prediction- CC

    4.5B
    TBar v. Brookhaven- TBar's last real test to see if they can go undefeated for the season- Brookhaven has the guns to win if they bring the "A" Team- Plus they had a big win vs. High Point (a woodshed candidate- A Brookhaven win could push them into contention for the first place buy to the city playoffs- should be a barn burner. prediction- TBAR 3-2-

    Village v. OC Boverman- first I must comment on the big oops- OCB losing to OC Juhn allowing OC Juhn to get their first win. Proof again that OC Boverman can beat just about anyone and lose to just about anyone- they may regret losing this match when they find themselves fighting for the last spot for the PQ city playoffs- They really need this win to make the city playoffs again. Prediction Village 3-2. Village needs this one to get back on the winning side of things after 2 straight loses. If this one comes down to Coman's, you have to put the money on Village- OC Boverman continued to lose the Coman in its lose. OC Boverman will easily win the year end anti-Coman award.

    Watch out for the mid-year awards and predictions- we are half way done.

    ReplyDelete