L32:  (8) Paul Jubb WR 614 defeated (JR) Matheus de Almeida (BRA) WR 1034 by 6-3 7-6(4)

 

Paul wins 7-6 6-2

QF:  (3) Jorge Panta (PER) WR 518 (CH = 512 in April 215) vs (8) Paul Jubb WR 614

No jinx, Bob. 

QF:  (8) Paul Jubb WR 614 defeated (3) Jorge Panta (PER) WR 518 by 1 & 1 

*****

SF:  (Q) David Volfson (CAN) WR 1010 (CH = 920 in July 2017) vs (8) Paul Jubb WR 614

Wouldn't surprise me if they came back out later today for the SF. That might work in Paul's favour as Volfson took out the Top seed in a fairly lengthy 3 setter whereas Paul's match was over in about 1 hour.

Stircrazy wrote:

---

Bob in Spain wrote:

---

Stircrazy wrote:

---

No jinx, Bob. 

QF:  (8) Paul Jubb WR 614 defeated (3) Jorge Panta (PER) WR 518 by 1 & 1 

*****

SF:  (Q) David Volfson (CAN) WR 1010 (CH = 920 in July 2017) vs (8) Paul Jubb WR 614

---

But was Panta "double breadsticked" or "double breadstuck" ?

Bob ducks for cover

---

Pass!  Personally, as I have very strong feelings about nouns used as verbs (& vice versa), I think both are unforgivable & would say that Paul handed out a double breadstick to his Peruvian opponent (or that the latter was on the receiving end of a double breadstick).  

---

I'm with you on that one SC, but couldn't resist asking

Bob in Spain wrote:

---

Stircrazy wrote:

---

No jinx, Bob. 

QF:  (8) Paul Jubb WR 614 defeated (3) Jorge Panta (PER) WR 518 by 1 & 1 

*****

SF:  (Q) David Volfson (CAN) WR 1010 (CH = 920 in July 2017) vs (8) Paul Jubb WR 614

---

But was Panta "double breadsticked" or "double breadstuck" ?

Bob ducks for cover

---

 If we can have 'bagled' i.e. Z got bagled by his opponent, or Y bagled him for the second week in a row, then I'm happy with 'breadsticked'

Or breadstuck, or whatever you like.

Long live making up new words !