You just have to click your heels three times Fredrick for your dreams to come true. I know it works for me even without ruby slippers. ( trick is you have to believe it )
The bright yellow (the easiest color to see) ball with fuzz may often rotate as it travels, in a forward ‘topspin’ direction if brushed upwards with the racquet; this pushes it down during flight and so it can but rarely go out past the baseline; when it hits the ground it bites and bounces extra high. Some might need a ladder to reach it. Bjorn Borg used extreme versions of topspin. Austin, too.
If, on other hand, which is really the same hand, it is undercut as a ‘slice’, it floats with this underspin as a thing of beauty that dies when it lands, skidding and staying extra low; on grass it is devastating. One would like to dig underground for a place to stand to get a swing at it. Ken Rosewall was a master of slicing.
I once witnessed the holy grail of tennis, the severe slice, performed by a friend at IBM who escaped from Vietnam. This severe slice landed and never came up but just squiggled sideways. The top pro at our club, now, Carol, maybe 70 now, who once played Chris Evert and was first on the men’s team at college, said such a slice was impossible, but, I saw it performed against me many times, although never seen again.
Flat shots with no spin are risky since they barely clear the net, but Jimmy Connors was a master at this and this ball comes the fastest of them all.
In serving, the same effects can be accomplished.
When hitting a ball still in flight, or ‘volleying’, one sometimes has to counter the spin with the opposite spin.
Tips:
'Tis better to serve than to receive.
Watch the ball hit the racquet.
(Often we think we are looking but are really not.)
Watch how the opponent hits the ball.
(What else is there to do.)
Become the ball.
(Zen)
See the ball in flight as an arc.
If the ball hits the top of the net and wavers there, try to blow it across or cause an earthquake by stomping on the ground.
Stay sideways when hitting.
Take racquet back early.
Catch a bad toss when serving.
(The only play you can take back.)
Play the ball machine to refine your shots.
Push the volley with a locked wrist.
Use all the parts of your racauet, even the edges, for you paid for the whole thing.
Have a ball!
Don’t think much at all during play except when learning something for the first time.
TOE
=
Ball of Energy Moving through Space
(Father Anthony)
Gee Austie....could not help but notice those two little insignificant bugs in the one pic....would that be a subliminal plant by any chance...?????? they just kind of stick right out from the context....smiles
Yeh looks like they might be Mr. and Ms...Bug....must be attracted to each other also...kind of looks like nature's about to take its course....chuckles
Austin since they appear to be lady bugs can we assume they are lesbian? ( womens tennis and all that with Billy Jean King and that Russian girl whose name I can't pronounce much less spell )
Prof, I don't think lesbian bugs can do that, but I suppose that Billie Jean was a King, and Martina, too, an accident of birth.
Though not an expert myself, but lesbians can bug like that. And Martina was not a King, she was a Navratilova, and always well-shaved.
__________________ The difference between a structure based on unification and a structure without unification hinges on the question if nothing is just plain nothing or if nothing is mighty fundamental. Read In Search of a Cyclops with titillating mathematical evidence (see homepage) to find out if separation belongs to the fundamental basics of our universe - or not.
I believe it was you who mentioned about the difficulty if not impossibilty about making predictions regarding 3 bodies:
The chaotic movement of 3 interacting particles
This is also true regarding the 3 quarks and their asymptotic freedom, which says the force that binds them becomes weaker the closer they get together and stronger when they become more distant. My model of the quarks being attached would help explain that phenonomena. The positive and negative charges would enlarge and therfore be stronger the more they tried to seperate, which of course since they are bound to each other would be impossible.
Any thoughts from anyone regarding the asyptotic freedom and chaotic patterns of the quarks?
WE ARE MOST FREE WHEN
WE ARE ASYMPTOTICALLY CO-JOINED
The strong family unit, as the three quarks,
Is bonded by the power of its grouping,
But loses identity if the home breaks—
Other pairs soon forming of divorcing.
Or comes the prison of solitude—
Chained to isolation with fortitude,
Floating, lost, without effects of affects,
Losing the identity conferred by others.
Within the proton, gentleness becomes strength,
For the members are free to explore at length,
Never smothering, but building unity,
The unit’s direction adding to the one.
The strong force grows weaker near the quarks,
And so we may observe them someday,
Shining in their primordial glory—
The beginning of all things composite.
Identity is not lost in the co-joining—
True loves don’t crowd the hearts of the others,
But, rather, look outward, in the same direction,
Close, joined, but not in the others’ section.
It is a seeming arithmetic violation,
That in summation we become greater;
We don’t merge, having supported freedom,
Yet still share the same good vibrations.
Love matures when partners let it flow beyond—
Free to wend its way to places dear and fond.
Love’s butterfly prospers when winds blow free;
Unconditional love never binds—it bonds.
Linear Mode
