More minus money in Paris

To no one's surprise, Novak Djokovic of Serbia won the French Open men's singles tennis title yesterday. It was his 23rd "Grand Slam" championship, the most ever by a man. He trails Margaret Court, who won 24, but he'll likely pass her soon.

The Djoker defeated Caper Ruud of Norway, who was the runner-up for the second year in a row. Last year  he lost in the final to Rafael Nadal.

Ruud came out fast and cool, taking an early lead in the first set, but he made some mistakes and wound up in a tiebreaker. Against the Serbian, that's pretty much a guaranteed loss. Djokovic locked down and took the breaker, breezed through a second set, and pulled out a 7-5 win in the third.

For all his talent and all his trophies, Djokovic still isn't a likable figure. Every time I think I will warm up to him, something he does turns me off. His anti-vaccine stance cast a cloud over him for several years, and yesterday, just when that issue seemed to be fading, who did he have sitting next to his wife in the VIP box but that cheating bastard American football player Tom Brady. Yuck! In my eyes, that sets Novak back a few more years.

Anyway, now it's off to the grass courts. Wimbledon starts July 3, I hear. It will be Djokovic versus everyone else on the men's side. As for the women, the clay queen Iga Swiatek is far from invincible on grass, and so the big show in London should be interesting indeed.


  1. I guess there was a time when women were considered the 'weaker sex,' which seems like the only conceivable justification for their playing three set matches instead of five. Why does this persist? Pick a number. Everybody plays three or everybody plays five. Five seems better.

  2. I fully support anyone who refused to take an experimental jab that has proved to be ineffective and causing many health issues. Pfizer and Moderna lied about their test results and tried to hide the evidence for decades but were forced to release the data via court order. The data is not good, with many adverse effects being revealed.

    1. Please, oh please, cite to an actual, bona fide, reputable clinical study that shows the “data is (sic) not good, with many adverse effects being revealed.” Please also cite to the same level of clinical study that shows the vaccine “has proved to be ineffective” - what with hospitalizations decreasing significantly right about the time that a plurality of the country received at least one vaccine booster. Tired of this crap.


Post a Comment

The platform used for this blog is awfully wonky when it comes to comments. It may work for you, it may not. It's a Google thing, and beyond my control. Apologies if you can't get through. You can email me a comment at, and if it's appropriate, I can post it here for you.