PDA

View Full Version : Nadal doesnt feel he can beat Murray on Grass or HC


miyagi
04-07-2009, 01:41 PM
Simon Reed is at it again!

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/07042009/58/reed-murray-s-chance-number.html

Interesting...perspective.

I do think Murray has a great chance this year to be #1 'if' and it is a big if he can keep this form up!

But I dont see him winning wimbledon I just cant see it!

Cesc Fabregas
04-07-2009, 01:45 PM
Thats such a poor article.

Cesc Fabregas
04-07-2009, 01:50 PM
Yep Nadal doesn't think he can beat Murray outside clay I mean its not like he just beat Murray 6-1 6-2 at Indian Wells and destroyed Murray at Wimbledon last year:rolleyes: the Murray hype is a joke.

miyagi
04-07-2009, 01:54 PM
well he has got it wrong before but whilst I'm not a fan of Murray but he is playing well this year!

He does deserve alot of credit!

Leublu tennis
04-07-2009, 01:56 PM
Lets see, Murray is #4 but he is already #1. Why stop there? Go for GOAT!! Do it now. Don't wait for the record to catch up. GOAT! GOAT! GOAT!

helloworld
04-07-2009, 01:57 PM
Murray has no chance against Nadal on grass. Dream on.

Cesc Fabregas
04-07-2009, 01:59 PM
Murray has no chance against Nadal on grass. Dream on.

Agreed just watch the match last year Nadal destroyed Murray.

fps
04-07-2009, 02:01 PM
Agreed just watch the match last year Nadal destroyed Murray.

yep, if there's one thing we've learnt about grass from Nadal, it's that however good you are on the surface when you've just turned 21, that's how good you'll be on it for the rest of your career.

SteveI
04-07-2009, 02:02 PM
Murray has no chance against Nadal on grass. Dream on.

No chance.. wow that is pretty bold. I think this year the Big W will be very interesting. ARod playing well along with Rafa, Fed and maybe even Dent..

Can't wait to see it.

Regards,

SteveI
04-07-2009, 02:04 PM
yep, if there's one thing we've learnt about grass from Nadal, it's that however good you are on the surface when you've just turned 21, that's how good you'll be on it for the rest of your career.

You mean Murray might improve?

cucio
04-07-2009, 02:08 PM
I think this article is a bit premature and more wishful thinking than serious analysis. Nadal gave Murray a very competitive match in Rotterdam until his knee gave up and thoroughly spanked him in Indian Wells.

Murray weak spot is not his 2nd serve, but his lapses in concentration, and there is where top players can sink their teeth.

But yeah, he has been impressive these last months, let's see how his game translates to the natural surfaces. It is true that he hasn't had good results on clay or grass yet, but his game looks good and solid enough for any surface, this year will be interesting with a solid top 4 and some sleepers (Tsonga, Roddick, Simon...) ready to pull an upset.

Lotto
04-07-2009, 02:13 PM
I'd love to see Federer-Murray at Wimbledon

Nadalfan89
04-07-2009, 02:15 PM
How dare he make Nadal out be some one tricky pony that only excels on clay. Did he not just win a hard court grand slam and a hard court masters within the last four months? Not to mention that thrashing that he gave Murray on grass last year.

British writer writing about a British tennis player is all this is.

alonsin
04-07-2009, 02:20 PM
I don't know much about English journalists, but I really hope Simon Reed is not one of Britain's top tennis commentators as it is said in the article. I though Eurosport was a serious channel.

If this article was posted in this forum he would be banned for trolling.

Cesc Fabregas
04-07-2009, 02:23 PM
I like the bit where he says every other tournment Murray will be favourite I mean Federer has been in the last 6 Wimbledon finals winning 5 of them and Nadal the last 3 winning 1 of them, worst article I have read in a long time.

julesb
04-07-2009, 02:24 PM
What an idiotic article. Major British homer.

clayman2000
04-07-2009, 02:24 PM
First let me say again that Murrays loss to Nadal at last years wimbledon will not happen again.
While this idiot of a reporter is clearly underestimating Nadal, there is no doubt in my mind that if Nadal goes out unexpentantly like in Miami, Murray should win.

Murray should become no 3 by RG, and if he does even remotely well there, than his chances of taking no 2 will be even higher.

tacou
04-07-2009, 02:27 PM
how is Murray better than Nadal on grass? stupid article.

gj011
04-07-2009, 02:27 PM
LOL. The article writer forgot what happened just couple of weeks ago in IW. :shock:
I like Murray, he is OK, and he is in great form ATM, but all this hype around him is a bit too much.

pound cat
04-07-2009, 02:38 PM
Don't pay any attention to what Simon Reed writes. He makes eurosport.co.uk , an otherwise reliable source of tennis news, look foolish.

Lionheart392
04-07-2009, 02:48 PM
I don't know much about English journalists, but I really hope Simon Reed is not one of Britain's top tennis commentators as it is said in the article. I though Eurosport was a serious channel.

If this article was posted in this forum he would be banned for trolling.

As a Brit myself, I have to say the shameless way in which the British commentators kiss Murray's *** all the time and have almighty orgasms whenever he hits a winner really makes me cringe.

Gugafan
04-07-2009, 02:57 PM
[QUOTE=gj011;3298206]LOL. The article writer forgot what happened just couple of weeks ago in IW. :shock:QUOTE]

The Indian wells final was a joke. It was an ugly match in horrible conditions. If you want to start overanalysing, then I suggest you recall the beatdown Murray gave Nadal in Rotterdam.

gj011
04-07-2009, 03:05 PM
The Indian wells final was a joke. It was an ugly match in horrible conditions. If you want to start overanalysing, then I suggest you recall the beatdown Murray gave Nadal in Rotterdam.

Well if IW match was a joke, then Rotterdam match was a joke too since Nadal was obviously injured. At least they were both healthy in IW.

Clydey2times
04-07-2009, 03:09 PM
LOL. The article writer forgot what happened just couple of weeks ago in IW. :shock:
I like Murray, he is OK, and he is in great form ATM, but all this hype around him is a bit too much.

Simon Reed is a joke and he has gone completely over the top. However, I wish people would stop bringing up the Indian Wells final. Did anyone even watch it? The conditions were farcical and it would be idiotic to read anything into it other than Nadal is able to handle gale force winds better than Murray.

If people really think that Nadal would hammer Murray 6-1, 6-2 in normal conditions, they really need their head looked at. That match isn't relevant to future hard court matches.

Nadalfan89
04-07-2009, 03:48 PM
[QUOTE=gj011;3298206]LOL. The article writer forgot what happened just couple of weeks ago in IW. :shock:QUOTE]

The Indian wells final was a joke. It was an ugly match in horrible conditions. If you want to start overanalysing, then I suggest you recall the beatdown Murray gave Nadal in Rotterdam.


Are you talking about the time Nadal limped off the court after playing out the game like the sportsman he is?

Oh you are?

Carry on.

Serpententacle
04-07-2009, 03:51 PM
As a Brit myself, I have to say the shameless way in which the British commentators kiss Murray's *** all the time and have almighty orgasms whenever he hits a winner really makes me cringe.

:cool:...Respect...8-)

RCizzle65
04-07-2009, 04:32 PM
No chance.. wow that is pretty bold. I think this year the Big W will be very interesting. ARod playing well along with Rafa, Fed and maybe even Dent..

Can't wait to see it.

Regards,

Can't forget about Tsonga, and Gasquet serve and volleying well at the Australian Open can only mean good at Wimbledon. This year is going to be interesting.

rubberduckies
04-07-2009, 05:06 PM
That wasn't even an article.

That was more like a lengthy TW forum post.

pc1
04-07-2009, 05:31 PM
Give the British writer a break. Murray's the most talented British player since their beloved Fred Perry in the 1930's. Aside from Nadal, Murray's been the best player in the world this year and I do think Murray has a chance to win a few majors over the years.

The men's field really looks very interesting, unlike past years in which, unless it was on clay, it was Federer and no one else has much chance.

Now the field has Nadal, Murray, Federer, Djokovic and even Roddick among other have a shot to win majors.

Josherer
04-07-2009, 05:35 PM
Yep Nadal doesn't think he can beat Murray outside clay I mean its not like he just beat Murray 6-1 6-2 at Indian Wells and destroyed Murray at Wimbledon last year:rolleyes: the Murray hype is a joke.

It's not a joke but people really need to step back a bit.... No doubt Murray is good, but still, he's no where near the likes of Fed or Nadal yet...

nadal for number1
04-07-2009, 05:36 PM
simon reed lol.
its gonna be interesting wimb this year and see how murray handles all the pressure he definitely has bc of everyone saying how he can be 1

breadstick
04-07-2009, 05:38 PM
The reporter is biased as hell...

It's just because Murray is from Great Britain and they haven't had much success in the top 5 recently.

Nadal_Freak
04-07-2009, 06:15 PM
LOL Look at the haters trying to discount Nadal's win in Indian Wells. Nadal is a beast. Face the facts.

Lendl and Federer Fan
04-07-2009, 06:36 PM
You know that the reason Nadal was able to win at IW but not Miami is that IW's courts are slower than Miami's, right? :wink:

Nadal_Freak
04-07-2009, 06:43 PM
You know that the reason Nadal was able to win at IW but not Miami is that IW's courts are slower than Miami's, right? :wink:
It didn't use to be that way. Miami altered their courts to just make it another typical US hardcourt that is too fast. Indian Wells was just right. ;)

bolo
04-07-2009, 07:02 PM
That wasn't even an article.

That was more like a lengthy TW forum post.

simon reed has it ***-backwards. The question with murray in grandslams is purely physical imo. He will never blow anyone away and his grinding style is going to take a toll in 5 set matches as he goes deeper into the draws of Grandslams.

dincuss
04-07-2009, 07:10 PM
Murray is a great player, but Nadal is a much better player.

Lendl and Federer Fan
04-07-2009, 08:05 PM
Murray is a great player, but Nadal is a much better player.

Are you being sarcastic or need to change your avatar? :)

Lendl and Federer Fan
04-07-2009, 08:06 PM
It didn't use to be that way. Miami altered their courts to just make it another typical US hardcourt that is too fast. Indian Wells was just right. ;)

Of course, any tournament Nadal can win is just about right! :wink:

Ronny
04-07-2009, 08:13 PM
Are you being sarcastic or need to change your avatar? :)

No, he's just speaking the truth.

Gen
04-07-2009, 11:48 PM
Proud Britts have been hyping about Murray for at least 2 years. And what? They are not very good with facts and figures either:

points to date
Nadal - 14 470
Murray - 8 840

H2H to date:
6:2

most recent encounter:
thorough beating of Murray by Nadal in straight sets 6:1, 6:2.

How many slams will poor Murray have to win to close this gap?

Josherer
04-07-2009, 11:55 PM
Simon Reed is at it again!

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/07042009/58/reed-murray-s-chance-number.html

Interesting...perspective.

I do think Murray has a great chance this year to be #1 'if' and it is a big if he can keep this form up!

But I dont see him winning wimbledon I just cant see it!

Haha what a silly article...

DOES ANYONE ON THIS BOARD THINK THAT NADAL HIMSELF, FEELS LIKE HE CAN BEAT MURRAY ON GRASS OR HC?

batz
04-08-2009, 12:06 AM
Here's an idea. why don't we start a thread about what a TW poster thinks Simon Reed said, rather than what he actually said, that'll be fun.

TW Poster: "Nadal doesnt feel he can beat Murray on Grass or HC "

What Reed actually said:"Rafael Nadal's a bit different as he knows he can beat anyone on clay. But I'm not convinced that he'd feel secure playing Murray on any other surface."

Now I don't have a degree in english, or anything like that, but I can figure out that Reed is saying Nadal KNOWS he will beat Murray on clay, but doesn't have the same level of confidence on any other surface. This is patently NOT the same thing as saying Nadal doesn't think he can beat Murray on grass or hardcourt. Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly needs remedial classes on their English comprehension.

Cesc Fabregas
04-08-2009, 12:14 AM
Here's an idea. why don't we start a thread about what a TW poster thinks Simon Reed said, rather than what he actually said, that'll be fun.

TW Poster: "Nadal doesnt feel he can beat Murray on Grass or HC "

What Reed actually said:"Rafael Nadal's a bit different as he knows he can beat anyone on clay. But I'm not convinced that he'd feel secure playing Murray on any other surface."

Now I don't have a degree in english, or anything like that, but I can figure out that Reed is saying Nadal KNOWS he will beat Murray on clay, but doesn't have the same level of confidence on any other surface. This is patently NOT the same thing as saying Nadal doesn't think he can beat Murray on grass or hardcourt. Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly needs remedial classes on their English comprehension.

Reed in that article made out Rafa to be a one trick pony and his comment Murray is favourite everywhere else outside of clay irked me.

batz
04-08-2009, 12:20 AM
Reed in that article made out Rafa to be a one trick pony and his comment Murray is favourite everywhere else outside of clay irked me.

Which is fair enough, I disagree with most of the article too. But let's have debate over what was said rather than make stuff up - the OP's 'headline' would not be out of place in a British tabloid!

The headline wasn't "Reed says Rafa is one trick pony" or "Reed says Murray favourite everywhere except clay". It was "Rafa doesn't feel he can beat Muuray on grass and HC" - when nobody had made such claim.

Josherer
04-08-2009, 12:25 AM
Which is fair enough, I disagree with most of the article too. But let's have debate over what was said rather than make stuff up - the OP's 'headline' would not be out of place in a British tabloid!

The headline wasn't "Reed says Rafa is one trick pony" or "Reed says Murray favourite everywhere except clay". It was "Rafa doesn't feel he can beat Muuray on grass and HC" - when nobody had made such claim.

Fabregas said he 'made out' not he actually said.

batz
04-08-2009, 12:37 AM
Fabregas said he 'made out' not he actually said.

I've already agreed with what Cesc said, but that is beside the point. My point is that the OP started this thread with the title "Nadal doesn't feel he can beat Murray on grass or hard court" When no such claim had been made.

Josherer
04-08-2009, 12:44 AM
I've already agreed with what Cesc said, but that is beside the point. My point is that the OP started this thread with the title "Nadal doesn't feel he can beat Murray on grass or hard court" When no such claim had been made.

Yeah no worries, but we know a majority of the people that start these kind of threads are idiots anyway..

rafan
04-08-2009, 12:45 AM
Well Murray is going to have to play a darn lot better than when I saw him last year against Nadal at Wimbledon Nadal dominated the whole time. Agreed Murray had some good powerful returns but where do these people go when it comes to the five setters? The press are mean to Murray here. They hype him up and then if he doesn't deliver - heaven help him. I shudder at the adulation he is getting at the moment because they are already putting him on a pedastal and making him out to be THE player who will dominate the scene the whole year. O K it may happen but I still think he performs at his best on HC.

jelle v
04-08-2009, 12:59 AM
Not a fan of Murray with his boring game, but I have to agree that Murray -outside the clay season- is favorite to win. That how it is at this moment in my opinion anyway, I feel he simply is the best player at this moment.

edit:
I love how Nadal-fans throw in the last encounter with Murray and keep hammering on that 6-1 6-2 :lol:

batz
04-08-2009, 01:19 AM
Well Murray is going to have to play a darn lot better than when I saw him last year against Nadal at Wimbledon Nadal dominated the whole time. Agreed Murray had some good powerful returns but where do these people go when it comes to the five setters? The press are mean to Murray here. They hype him up and then if he doesn't deliver - heaven help him. I shudder at the adulation he is getting at the moment because they are already putting him on a pedastal and making him out to be THE player who will dominate the scene the whole year. O K it may happen but I still think he performs at his best on HC.



This is not meant as a pop at you, but isn't it the case that Murray has been and is playing a darn lot better than he was back then? The guy that Nadal crushed had 5 ATP titles to his name, had never made a MS final and was playing in his first slam QF. Today's Murray is a slam finalist, a four time MS finalist, has won 6 more titles (3 of them masters series) and is the guy with the best win/loss record since Wimbledon and for the season to date.

Josherer
04-08-2009, 01:36 AM
Not a fan of Murray with his boring game, but I have to agree that Murray -outside the clay season- is favorite to win. That how it is at this moment in my opinion anyway, I feel he simply is the best player at this moment.

edit:
I love how Nadal-fans throw in the last encounter with Murray and keep hammering on that 6-1 6-2 :lol:

How is Murray outside the clay season favoutite to win?

Grass? Hello No!
Carpet? Hell No!
Indoor Hard? Hell No!

Hard Court? Maybe... In the last two slams he played he got beaten by an on fire verdasco, and smashed by Fed...

He just beat Delpotro and Djokovic to win Miami but got smashed the week before by nadal 6-1 6-2

HOW IS HE THE BEST PLAYER ON ALL SURFACES EXCEPT CLAY? YOUR STATEMENTS RIDICULOUS

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 01:46 AM
Simon Reed is never going to hear the end of this when Nadal demoralizes Murray on a windy US Open day. Any player who can't win in the wind is incapable of ever being number one.

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 01:48 AM
As for grass, lets see Murray take a set off Nadal at Wimbledon before we even entertain the idea of him being a title threat. This is where Reed really falls flat on his face.

Josherer
04-08-2009, 01:49 AM
Simon Reed is never going to hear the end of this when Nadal demoralizes Murray on a windy US Open day. Any player who can't win in the wind is incapable of ever being number one.

No. Any player who can't win in the wind is MENTALLY WEAK

They can still be number one but not play many windy matches..

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:00 AM
That is an incredible biased and stupid article. Murray should be considered the favourite for every tournament outside of clay? Did that guy already forget what happened on AO? Or that Nadal defends Wimbledon, because, you know, he has actually proved himself on grass, unlike Murray? Nothing against Murray because he seems like a good guy, but this kind of articles make it difficult to root for him.

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 02:05 AM
I actually appreciate guys like Simon Reed more than someone who knows what they're talking about (a proper tennis analyst like John McEnroe or John Alexander), because guys like Reed are really fun to make fun of when the last ball is hit. He's putting his journalistic reputation completely on the line, all for Murray, a guy who hasn't even won a slam and choked in his one slam Final. It is great to see a misguided member of the media learn his lesson.

jelle v
04-08-2009, 02:13 AM
How is Murray outside the clay season favoutite to win?

Grass? Hello No!
Carpet? Hell No!
Indoor Hard? Hell No!

Hard Court? Maybe... In the last two slams he played he got beaten by an on fire verdasco, and smashed by Fed...

He just beat Delpotro and Djokovic to win Miami but got smashed the week before by nadal 6-1 6-2

HOW IS HE THE BEST PLAYER ON ALL SURFACES EXCEPT CLAY? YOUR STATEMENTS RIDICULOUS

I'm not stating he is the best player.. I'm stating he is the favorite.. there's a thin line between those two..

And again.. I love how the loss to Nadal with 6-1 6-2 gets thrown around here :lol:

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:17 AM
I'm not stating he is the best player.. I'm stating he is the favorite.. there's a thin line between those two..

And again.. I love how the loss to Nadal with 6-1 6-2 gets thrown around here :lol:

Why is he the favourite? Being the favourite means he has the best chance to win said tournament, how does he have a better chance to win Wimbledon than Nadal? The only tournament he would be a favourite above Nadal would be USO because it's Nadal's worst surface, and even then I'm not so sure.

Saying Murray is the favourite for anything outside of clay is ridiculous.

batz
04-08-2009, 02:18 AM
As for grass, lets see Murray take a set off Nadal at Wimbledon before we even entertain the idea of him being a title threat. This is where Reed really falls flat on his face.

And where you fall flat on your face is that you don't seem to recognise or accept that the Murray of a year ago and the Murray of today are 2 completely different beasties. As I said only 3 or 4 posts ago, there is no comparison to be made between the guy that Rafa played at Wimbledon last year and the guy who's on the cusp of becoming world number 3. The have the same name, that's about it. In terms of achievements, game level and confidence, they may as well be two different guys.

Just for the record and in case you think I'm some kind of hater; I love Rafa. He's a worthy number 1 and strikes me as an all round good guy.

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:21 AM
And where you fall flat on your face is that you don't seem to recognise or accept that the Murray of a year ago and the Murray of today are 2 completely different beasties. As I said only 3 or 4 posts ago, there is no comparison to be made between the guy that Rafa played at Wimbledon last year and the guy who's on the cusp of becoming world number 3. The have the same name, that's about it. In terms of achievements, game level and confidence, they may as well be two different guys.

Just for the record and in case you think I'm some kind of hater; I love Rafa. He's a worthy number 1 and strikes me as an all round good guy.

He may be a different player, but he still has not proved anything on grass, so indeed Reed's claims that he should be favourite for Wimbledon, over Rafa and Federer, are outlandish.

jelle v
04-08-2009, 02:24 AM
Why is he the favourite? Being the favourite means he has the best chance to win said tournament, how does he have a better chance to win Wimbledon than Nadal? The only tournament he would be a favourite above Nadal would be USO because it's Nadal's worst surface, and even then I'm not so sure.

Saying Murray is the favourite for anything outside of clay is ridiculous.

Gamewise, confidence, beating Nadal, Djokovic and Federer more than once recently.. Yes I think that Murray has the best odds to win a tournament when it's not on clay if he keeps up this level of play of course.

I'm not stating that he will win every tournament he enters, but imo every tournament he enters outside of clay, he will be favorite. Maybe at Wimbledon "one of" the favorites.

Again, I don't like the guy and I think his game is very boring, but i do not understand why it is so difficult to give Murray praise for his game and the tennis he is playing right now.

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:29 AM
Gamewise, confidence, beating Nadal, Djokovic and Federer more than once recently.. Yes I think that Murray has the best odds to win a tournament when it's not on clay if he keeps up this level of play of course.

I'm not stating that he will win every tournament he enters, but imo every tournament he enters outside of clay, he will be favorite. Maybe at Wimbledon "one of" the favorites.

Again, I don't like the guy and I think his game is very boring, but i do not understand why it is so difficult to give Murray praise for his game and the tennis he is playing right now.

Nadal recently spanked him too, and the only surfaces where Murray has beaten Nadal are fast hardcourts, which if you don't remember are Nadal's worse surface. Sorry but your claims have no basis.

jelle v
04-08-2009, 02:33 AM
Nadal recently spanked him too, and the only surfaces where Murray has beaten Nadal are fast hardcourts, which if you don't remember are Nadal's worse surface. Sorry but your claims have no basis.

Again, I love how the loss to Nadal with 6-1 6-2 gets thrown around..

My claims have very sound basis, you're just not willing to acknowledge them. All you are poiinting out are past results and disgarding the fact that Murray's game has gone sky high. It's ok, doesn't matter. We'll agree to disagree.

batz
04-08-2009, 02:36 AM
He may be a different player, but he still has not proved anything on grass, so indeed Reed's claims that he should be favourite for Wimbledon, over Rafa and Federer, are outlandish.

I agree Reed's claims are outlandish - I'm not saying Murray is favourite for Wimby, but I dispute that Murray 'has not proved anything on grass'. If by this you mean he hasn't won a grass tournament then you're right; but I would counter that by saying that he's never played in a grass tournament since entering the upper echelons of the game. It's a bit disingenuous to accept my point that Murray is a much better player now but then go on to say he's not yet proved himself on grass when he hasn't yet had the opportunity!

I would also point out that Murray made his breakthrough on grass, that he has improved on grass every year he's played on it and that his win/loss ratio on grass is only marginally worse than his win/loss ratio on hardcourt.

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:37 AM
Again, I love how the loss to Nadal with 6-1 6-2 gets thrown around..

My claims have very sound basis, you're just not willing to acknowledge them. All you are poiinting out are past results and disgarding the fact that Murray's game has gone sky high. It's ok, doesn't matter. We'll agree to disagree.

Sorry but they don't. They only have basis if you said he should be favourite in fast hardcourts. On any other surface Murray has not proved he can trouble Nadal. But it doesn't matter, time will put everyone in their place, won't it?

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 02:37 AM
And where you fall flat on your face is that you don't seem to recognise or accept that the Murray of a year ago and the Murray of today are 2 completely different beasties. As I said only 3 or 4 posts ago, there is no comparison to be made between the guy that Rafa played at Wimbledon last year and the guy who's on the cusp of becoming world number 3. The have the same name, that's about it. In terms of achievements, game level and confidence, they may as well be two different guys.

Just for the record and in case you think I'm some kind of hater; I love Rafa. He's a worthy number 1 and strikes me as an all round good guy.

You should realise how close Wimbledon last year was to US Open last year. Murray at the US Open was the same beast but on hardcourt.

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:45 AM
I agree Reed's claims are outlandish - I'm not saying Murray is favourite for Wimby, but I dispute that Murray 'has not proved anything on grass'. If by this you mean he hasn't won a grass tournament then you're right; but I would counter that by saying that he's never played in a grass tournament since entering the upper echelons of the game. It's a bit disingenuous to accept my point that Murray is a much better player now but then go on to say he's not yet proved himself on grass when he hasn't yet had the opportunity!

I would also point out that Murray made his breakthrough on grass, that he has improved on grass every year he's played on it and that his win/loss ratio on grass is only marginally worse than his win/loss ratio on hardcourt.

And I could say he has proved inconsistent in GS so far,even in his favourite surface, so what chance does he have in Fed's favourite surface, and Nadal's 2nd favourite? Nadal has also improved his game. It seems like the loss to Del Potro has really made people understimate Nadal lately. Luckily the clay and grass season will start soon and he'll shut up his critics again (not saying you're criticizing Nadal, just speaking in general).

Gen
04-08-2009, 02:49 AM
Again, I love how the loss to Nadal with 6-1 6-2 gets thrown around..

My claims have very sound basis, you're just not willing to acknowledge them. All you are poiinting out are past results and disgarding the fact that Murray's game has gone sky high. It's ok, doesn't matter. We'll agree to disagree.

Can I point out that Nadal's game has also grossly improved since last year?
And outside the last spanking, grasswise speaking, Murray lost to Nadal in QF at Queens and again in SF at Wimbledon. Nadal is two times runnerup and a champ at Wimbley. Sorry, but you have nothing to support your claim.

batz
04-08-2009, 02:51 AM
And I could say he has proved inconsistent in GS so far,even in his favourite surface, so what chance does he have in Fed's favourite surface, and Nadal's 2nd favourite? Nadal has also improved his game. It seems like the loss to Del Potro has really made people understimate Nadal lately. Luckily the clay and grass season will start soon and he'll shut up his critics again (not saying you're criticizing Nadal, just speaking in general).


Woah there, I'm not dissing Rafa for a minute - he's clear favourite for Wimby as far as I'm concerned. Not sure about Fed, as a Murray fan, it's my dearest hope that Andy is drawn in Roger's half at Wimbledon.

Murray has only played 1 slam since entering the top 4. Yes he has had a poor AO, but I don't think you can call someone inconsistent on the back of one event!

batz
04-08-2009, 02:52 AM
Can I point out that Nadal's game has also grossly improved since last year?
And outside the last spanking, grasswise speaking, Murray lost to Nadal in QF at Queens and again in SF at Wimbledon. Nadal is two times runnerup and a champ at Wimbley. Sorry, but you have nothing to support your claim.

Murray has never played Nadal at Queens or made the semis of Wimbledon.

Pirao
04-08-2009, 02:55 AM
Woah there, I'm not dissing Rafa for a minute - he's clear favourite for Wimby as far as I'm concerned. Not sure about Fed, as a Murray fan, it's my dearest hope that Andy is drawn in Roger's half at Wimbledon.

Murray has only played 1 slam since entering the top 4. Yes he has had a poor AO, but I don't think you can call someone inconsistent on the back of one event!

His game was already top 4 when he played USO too, and he failed to win that too even though people were saying Fed was done and should retire. And like I said I'm not saying you're dissing Nadal, just speaking in general because it's a trend I've noticed in the forum lately.

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 02:57 AM
It should be pointed out that Murray hasn't improved on grass since last year's Wimbledon. Has he even stood on a grasscourt since Wimbledon? It was no accident that the Rafa lost 2 Wimbledon Finals before he won it, he was gaining experience each time. Murray is yet to gain experience on grass, and let me be the first to say Murray's game doesn't suit grass.

Gen
04-08-2009, 03:03 AM
[QUOTE=batz;3299586]Murray has never played Nadal at Queens or made the semis of Wimbledon.[/QUOTE

Sorry, it was QF which doesn't change much.

batz
04-08-2009, 03:04 AM
It should be pointed out that Murray hasn't improved on grass since last year's Wimbledon. Has he even stood on a grasscourt since Wimbledon? It was no accident that the Rafa lost 2 Wimbledon Finals before he won it, he was gaining experience each time. Murray is yet to gain experience on grass, and let me be the first to say Murray's game doesn't suit grass.

Murray won 2 matches in the Davis on grass last September.

Please enlighten us as to the intrinsic drawbacks that Murray faces on grass that he doesn't face on hardcourt. There was me thinking having a killer first serve, good volleys, great passing ability and 1st class movement would be an advantage on grass, but I'm willing to be educated: over to you.

SteveI
04-08-2009, 03:05 AM
Can't forget about Tsonga, and Gasquet serve and volleying well at the Australian Open can only mean good at Wimbledon. This year is going to be interesting.

Yes.. I agree.. did not mean to leave anyone out. It should be a great two weeks. Can't wait!

batz
04-08-2009, 03:07 AM
[QUOTE=batz;3299586]Murray has never played Nadal at Queens or made the semis of Wimbledon.[/QUOTE

Sorry, it was QF which doesn't change much.

Whether it was the semis or the quarters doesn't change much. Whether or not a match happend at all (Queens QF!) changes quite a lot. Your post implied Rafa had owned Murray twice on grass within a couple of weeks of each other - but that didn't happen did it?

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 03:07 AM
Murray won 2 matches in the Davis on grass last September.

Please enlighten us as to the intrinsic drawbacks that Murray faces on grass that he doesn't face on hardcourt. There was me thinking having a killer first serve, good volleys, great passing ability and 1st class movement would be an advantage on grass, but I'm willing to be educated: over to you.

Murray tactically is too varied in his approach to grass, he needs to play simpler tennis to win (Nadal and Federer play simple grasscourt tennis, not all inventive). He is too adventurous on grass, he thinks he needs to be, he is wrong. He has too many tactical options, and he screws it up (rather than just playing high% grass tennis, taking care of his serve and getting balls back on return). Murray is trying to make things happen, when really it is best to be completely reactive and just play off instinct. Agassi at Wimbledon is a good example, he just tries to hit clean returns, not mix things up.

batz
04-08-2009, 03:20 AM
Murray tactically is too varied in his approach to grass, he needs to play simpler tennis to win (Nadal and Federer play simple grasscourt tennis, not all inventive). He is too adventurous on grass, he thinks he needs to be, he is wrong. He has too many tactical options, and he screws it up (rather than just playing high% grass tennis, taking care of his serve and getting balls back on return). Murray is trying to make things happen, when really it is best to be completely reactive and just play off instinct. Agassi at Wimbledon is a good example, he just tries to hit clean returns, not mix things up.


:) Seriously mate, have you been watching a different Andy Murray to the rest of us?

Murray too adventurous...:):):) that's a belter that is.

THERAFA
04-08-2009, 03:29 AM
^^^ Murray mixes up his pace too much on a grasscourt (and hardcourt sometimes), that is not the way to win Wimbledon. He won't take a set off Federer or Nadal. Meat and potatoes tennis works best, keep it simple, stupid.

jelle v
04-08-2009, 04:10 AM
Sorry but they don't. They only have basis if you said he should be favourite in fast hardcourts. On any other surface Murray has not proved he can trouble Nadal. But it doesn't matter, time will put everyone in their place, won't it?

No.. only thing bad results will achieve is that at a certain point Murray won't be favorite for the tournament anymore. It takes nothing away from being (or not being) the favorite in previous tournaments.

If i remember correctly, Murray was favorite to win the Australian Open with the bookies. He didn't win the tournament, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he was favorite to win the Australian Open. Would Murray have mounted loss after loss since then, he would not be favorite for a while. But he has had a pretty good year so far with imo the best tennis (boring tennis though). You keep pounding on results of the past or lack of results, but you discard Murray's form. I'm not saying I always agree with the bookmakers, but the point is that they do not only look at past results, as you are doing, otherwise Murray wouldn't have been favorite at the AO.

batz
04-08-2009, 04:21 AM
^^^ Murray mixes up his pace too much on a grasscourt (and hardcourt sometimes), that is not the way to win Wimbledon. He won't take a set off Federer or Nadal. Meat and potatoes tennis works best, keep it simple, stupid.

So is he too adventurous or does he mix it up too much? You've now claimed both.

Of course even if your assertions were correct, these are only tactical nuances rather than any fundamental weakness in Murray's grass game. I'm sure you know better than Murray.

Whatever you say coach, whatever you say.

Gen
04-08-2009, 04:51 AM
[QUOTE=Gen;3299600]

Whether it was the semis or the quarters doesn't change much. Whether or not a match happend at all (Queens QF!) changes quite a lot. Your post implied Rafa had owned Murray twice on grass within a couple of weeks of each other - but that didn't happen did it?

No, you're right, it didn't. I remember Murray playing Queens last year and that Nadal and Djokovic played in the final, so automatically concluded that he lost to Nadal. Actually don't remember who it was.

batz
04-08-2009, 05:01 AM
[QUOTE=batz;3299606]

No, you're right, it didn't. I remember Murray playing Queens last year and that Nadal and Djokovic played in the final, so automatically concluded that he lost to Nadal. Actually don't remember who it was.

No worries mate, I make mistakes on here every day. Murray was scheduled to meet roddick in the quarters @ Queens but Roddick got the w/o after Murray withdrew as a precaution for Wimbledon - he'd fell the previous day in his win against Gulbis and had a bit of a light sprain on his thumb.

Gen
04-08-2009, 05:14 AM
[QUOTE=Gen;3299756]

No worries mate, I make mistakes on here every day. Murray was scheduled to meet roddick in the quarters @ Queens but Roddick got the w/o after Murray withdrew as a precaution for Wimbledon - he'd fell the previous day in his win against Gulbis and had a bit of a light sprain on his thumb.

Yeah, thanks. What I do remember about Murray in that tourney was his absolutely nasty fall. He didn't toss the racket, and the handle went right into his belly. I thought he might have internal injuries.

BTW I haven't been saying all this time that Murray doesn't have a chance in Wimbledon. He has. Still I don't think that he is quite in the same league with Nadal and Federer. If I make the list of potential winners, I'd say
1. Nadal
2. Federer
3. Murray
4. Djokovic (early exit last year doesn't eliminate the fact that he's fairly good on grass)
5. Roddick

batz
04-08-2009, 05:26 AM
[QUOTE=batz;3299775]

Yeah, thanks. What I do remember about Murray in that tourney was his absolutely nasty fall. He didn't toss the racket, and the handle went right into his belly. I thought he might have internal injuries.

BTW I haven't been saying all this time that Murray doesn't have a chance in Wimbledon. He has. Still I don't think that he is quite in the same league with Nadal and Federer. If I make the list of potential winners, I'd say
1. Nadal
2. Federer
3. Murray
4. Djokovic (early exit last year doesn't eliminate the fact that he's fairly good on grass)
5. Roddick

And I'm not saying he's the favourite or anything daft like that. Agree 100% with your list above. Rafa is a winning machine, and while I'd love Andy to be in Roger's half, only a fool would write off the guy who made the last 6 finals and won 5 in a row, so Murray is third favourite at best.

I think ARod could do pretty well this year too.

miyagi
04-08-2009, 07:12 AM
Dont you love when you start a thread that you think hardly anyone will respond to and you come back and all hell has broke loose :)

Anyway here's my opinion....

Murray will now be "one" of the favourites for all tournaments that he takes part in becuase he is part of the big four!

But none of that matters because look at what happened in the A.O

Favourite is just a word lets see if he can actually be #1

Cyan
04-08-2009, 08:12 AM
Murray has never even reached a final on grass or clay.....