PDA

View Full Version : Murray is going to challenge federer on grass__HAHAHA


aphex
06-23-2009, 11:05 PM
after watching murray's match, i honestly (not just because i'm a fed fan) believe,
that if federer were to meet murray he would just crush him.
fortunately for (the overhyped) murray, he's not getting that far....

zagor
06-23-2009, 11:10 PM
Don't be so hasty to draw conlcusions.Each new match is a completely different situation due to many different factors(form of the day,match-ups etc.).Did you think Fed's gonna win the FO given in how much trouble he was against Chucho?

I'd favour Fed on grass if they meet as well but Murray is a problematic match-up for Fed,he has definitely proven that and will have enormous crowd support if they meet in the final.

Blinkism
06-23-2009, 11:10 PM
Totally 100% agree!!!

joeri888
06-23-2009, 11:14 PM
Don't be so hasty to draw conlcusions.Each new match is a completely different situation due to many different factors(form of the day,match-ups etc.).Did you think Fed's gonna win the FO given in how much trouble he was against Chucho?

I'd favour Fed on grass if they meet as well but Murray is a problematic match-up for Fed,he has definitely proven that and will have enormous crowd support if they meet in the final.
That's what I fear. If Federer believes that too, he could be in trouble. If not, I think he would just own Murray on grass. I saw a very passive Murray yesterday who let his opponent be aggressive. Federer should be able to make less unforced errors and to serve even better than Kendrick did. He also has a much better slice than Kendrick or Murray and should be able to grind out a part of the very long rallies as well. That said, I think Murray didn't play well against Kendrick and will do a lot better as the tournament progresses.

Blinkism
06-23-2009, 11:17 PM
That's what I fear. If Federer believes that too, he could be in trouble. If not, I think he would just own Murray on grass. I saw a very passive Murray yesterday who let his opponent be aggressive. Federer should be able to make less unforced errors and to serve even better than Kendrick did. He also has a much better slice than Kendrick or Murray and should be able to grind out a part of the very long rallies as well. That said, I think Murray didn't play well against Kendrick and will do a lot better as the tournament progresses.

Well, if you remember the end of the first set, Kendrick was 2 points away from taking it, and then he was able to take the tight second set.

I felt, while watching the match, that if Kendrick was just a bit better mentally and less sloppy, that he could have actually beat Murray. He had the right plan and a good aggressive approach, but he didn't put it all together for the entire match.

That's why I'm convinced that Federer will beat Murray in the final... that is, if Murray makes the final (and Fed for that matter, although I don't see who'll stop him)

joeri888
06-23-2009, 11:27 PM
Well, if you remember the end of the first set, Kendrick was 2 points away from taking it, and then he was able to take the tight second set.

I felt, while watching the match, that if Kendrick was just a bit better mentally and less sloppy, that he could have actually beat Murray. He had the right plan and a good aggressive approach, but he didn't put it all together for the entire match.

That's why I'm convinced that Federer will beat Murray in the final... that is, if Murray makes the final (and Fed for that matter, although I don't see who'll stop him)
I agree, he could have won the first set no doubt. He started off poorly and I believe that also cost him. However, I think Murray will vastly improve over these two weeks. The courts will slow down which might work in his favour against Federer as well. It's just not that easy that you can say; Let's see, Djoko, Roddick and Murry lost a set, Federer didn't, so he's gonna win easily. That's not the way it works.

Tennis_Bum
06-24-2009, 12:12 AM
I agree, he could have won the first set no doubt. He started off poorly and I believe that also cost him. However, I think Murray will vastly improve over these two weeks. The courts will slow down which might work in his favour against Federer as well. It's just not that easy that you can say; Let's see, Djoko, Roddick and Murry lost a set, Federer didn't, so he's gonna win easily. That's not the way it works.

Both you and Blinkism made good points, but I tend to agree with Blinkism more simply because I think had Kendrick tightened his forehand he could have own the 1st set. Murray looked so tight at 4-5. I mean Love-30 at 4-5 you got to really take good care of the point. Granted Murray served an ace at love-30, but I don't think Kendrick played a good game at 4-5 at let Murray escape. It would be interesting if Kendrick won the 1st set. I am not saying he would go on to win the 2nd as he did, but it would make thing interesting to say the least.

Joe is right too, just because some guys struggle with first round that doesn't mean they won't clean up their game later on. The is no guarantee for Fed at the later stage of the tournament. But if I am a betting man, I will bet that Fed will win Wimbledon if based solely on the first 2 days of the tournament.

I just hope that Fed continues to play that way and tighten his forehand even more. I think Fed's forehand is the shot that gets him into a lot of trouble. Sure he hits great shots with it, but a lot of times he makes life so difficult for himself with that sometimes erratic forehand, which happens more and more nowadays.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 12:13 AM
I agree, he could have won the first set no doubt. He started off poorly and I believe that also cost him. However, I think Murray will vastly improve over these two weeks. The courts will slow down which might work in his favour against Federer as well. It's just not that easy that you can say; Let's see, Djoko, Roddick and Murry lost a set, Federer didn't, so he's gonna win easily. That's not the way it works.

Not only that, but this guy had a 2 sets to love lead on Nadal in 2006, the year Rafa first made the final.

We're talking about an incinostent player, not a bad one. If he's serving well, he's a problem for anyone.

Murray's stats are actually very good for the match. Played better than I thought, simply because he was expected to blow Kendrick away.

Murray hit 52 winners and 19 UEs (minus 20 aces to make 32 winners from a rally). Murray also served huge. Kendrick barely got a sniff, while Andy was constantly in Kendrick's service games.

cork_screw
06-24-2009, 12:19 AM
If fed would have played murray at the French this year, he would have lost. And this is coming from a federer fan. I'll admit it. He's got his number. Murray would have played completely different. A lot of rolling the ball in and neutralizing balls and points. Murray plays with a lot of junk. He's somewhat of a professional pusher. But he's learned how to win that way, so all I can say is it's working for him. Not super fun to watch, but it gets the job done against a lot of players.

Love Game
06-24-2009, 12:24 AM
after watching murray's match, i honestly (not just because i'm a fed fan) believe,
that if federer were to meet murray he would just crush him.
fortunately for (the overhyped) murray, he's not getting that far....

Why do you say that? Just because he lost a set to Kendricks? Kendricks kicked out Simon from the French. I saw it and wouldn't be so quick to discount Kendricks as you apparently are.

Bottom line: Andy Murray won! :D

maximo
06-24-2009, 12:26 AM
after watching murray's match, i honestly (not just because i'm a fed fan) believe,
that if federer were to meet murray he would just crush him.
fortunately for (the overhyped) murray, he's not getting that far....

Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.

Blinkism
06-24-2009, 12:27 AM
I agree, he could have won the first set no doubt. He started off poorly and I believe that also cost him. However, I think Murray will vastly improve over these two weeks. The courts will slow down which might work in his favour against Federer as well. It's just not that easy that you can say; Let's see, Djoko, Roddick and Murry lost a set, Federer didn't, so he's gonna win easily. That's not the way it works.

I see what you're saying, but I still think that Murray is more flawed with his grass court game than Federer.

Federer struggling through the French Open was not because his game was poor, but more the fact that he played sloppy, unfocused, and uninspired in some of his matches. It was more mental than fundamental.

For Murray, however, it seems that if he's up a good grass courter and he can't play his service game as well as he possibly can, that he'd probably lose.

That's why I think Fed would beat him, granted that he is serving well.

eowyn
06-24-2009, 12:29 AM
murray will not appear in the final what is actually sad for roger because would be an easy point in the H2H

TennisFan481
06-24-2009, 12:37 AM
Federer does still have to (probably) get through Kohlschrieber, Soderling, and Tsonga/Verdasco/Karlovic. That's assuming Garcia-Lopez doesn't shock the world tomorrow (highly unlikely, but hey...tennis has certainly had its share of shocks).

As a fan of Federer, this draw is a bit unsettling with how the 3rd, 4th, and QF all look to be tough matches (possibly the semis, though Djokovic is so flawed mentally that it's really hard for me to see him actually taking out Federer there).

Love Game
06-24-2009, 12:39 AM
murray will not appear in the final what is actually sad for roger because would be an easy point in the H2H

if your prediction turns out to be true (which i have my doubts because just who do you think is gonna take andy out?) ... anyway, if that happens i think roger w/b blowing the ricola pipe! :D

Cesc Fabregas
06-24-2009, 12:41 AM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.

No worse than some of your posts.

Leublu tennis
06-24-2009, 12:54 AM
how interesting8

Love Game
06-24-2009, 12:56 AM
Pink elephant in the room:

head to head
Murray 6 - 2 Federer

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 12:59 AM
If fed would have played murray at the French this year, he would have lost. And this is coming from a federer fan. I'll admit it. He's got his number. Murray would have played completely different. A lot of rolling the ball in and neutralizing balls and points. Murray plays with a lot of junk. He's somewhat of a professional pusher. But he's learned how to win that way, so all I can say is it's working for him. Not super fun to watch, but it gets the job done against a lot of players.

He can play with that junk in other tournaments and maybe sneak wins but I doubt in Grand Slams that will happen especially not against great players like Nadal and Federer. It takes a LOT more than pushing and good defence to beat them over 5 sets when it matters most.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 01:00 AM
Pink elephant in the room:

head to head
Murray 6 - 2 Federer


Whats a pink elephant.

Leublu tennis
06-24-2009, 01:00 AM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.I second that12

ChanceEncounter
06-24-2009, 01:02 AM
If fed would have played murray at the French this year, he would have lost. And this is coming from a federer fan. I'll admit it. He's got his number. Murray would have played completely different. A lot of rolling the ball in and neutralizing balls and points. Murray plays with a lot of junk. He's somewhat of a professional pusher. But he's learned how to win that way, so all I can say is it's working for him. Not super fun to watch, but it gets the job done against a lot of players.

Murray has Fed's number on hard courts. He's never come close to taking 3 sets off of Federer anywhere, much less on his best surface: grass. Clay is both of their weakest surfaces, but Murray struggles much more on clay than Federer does.

Regarding their possible finals matchup, Federer plays nothing like Kendrick, so we can't assume. That said, Federer rarely so much as drops a set on grass against anyone other than Nadal, so I'm not sure why everyone feels Murray would beat him at Wimbledon.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 01:05 AM
Pink elephant in the room:

head to head
Murray 6 - 2 Federer


Head to Head: Grand Slams:

Federer 1 - 0 Murray

Underhand
06-24-2009, 01:05 AM
Whats a pink elephant.

What sits in a golden purse.

abmk
06-24-2009, 01:05 AM
If fed would have played murray at the French this year, he would have lost. And this is coming from a federer fan. I'll admit it. He's got his number. Murray would have played completely different. A lot of rolling the ball in and neutralizing balls and points. Murray plays with a lot of junk. He's somewhat of a professional pusher. But he's learned how to win that way, so all I can say is it's working for him. Not super fun to watch, but it gets the job done against a lot of players.

NO ways .. you realise you are talking about murray who hasn't reached a CC final till now ?????? Clay is his WORST surface and he is still not that comfortable playing on it

Plus Grand Slams are a different story from 3-setters

abmk
06-24-2009, 01:07 AM
@ topic :

Murray has NO chance if fed plays anywhere close to his best regardless of how well murray plays. However if fed's off, then murray'd have a chance . Let them get to the finals first

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 01:10 AM
Murray has Fed's number on hard courts. He's never come close to taking 3 sets off of Federer anywhere, much less on his best surface: grass. Clay is both of their weakest surfaces, but Murray struggles much more on clay than Federer does.

Regarding their possible finals matchup, Federer plays nothing like Kendrick, so we can't assume. That said, Federer rarely so much as drops a set on grass against anyone other than Nadal, so I'm not sure why everyone feels Murray would beat him at Wimbledon.


Its because the majority of people that think this simply are unable to grasp the difference between Grand Slams and lesser tournaments and keep thinking Federer is the same player in Grand Slams that he is in all the lesser tournaments. And no matter how many times Federer keeps doing the business in Grand Slams, they will still actually not get this.

To draw the analogy: What Murray and his supporters seem to think is because he beat Federer at Tiddlywinks that he will now automatically have a great chance to beat Federer at Chess, when Federer is the Master (Tiddlywinks being Non-Grand Slam tournaments and Chess being Grand Slams).

Breaker
06-24-2009, 01:11 AM
Federer fans already ******* themselves over the prospect of Murray in the final, quite sad really.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 01:13 AM
Its because the majority of people that think this simply are unable to grasp the difference between Grand Slams and lesser tournaments and keep thinking Federer is the same player in Grand Slams that he is in all the lesser tournaments. And no matter how many times Federer keeps doing the business in Grand Slams, they will still actually not get this.

To draw the analogy: What Murray and his supporters seem to think is because he beat Federer at Tiddlywinks that he will now automatically have a great chance to beat Federer at Chess, when Federer is the Master (Tiddlywinks being Non-Grand Slam tournaments and Chess being Grand Slams).

Yet more excuses. I can't wait for Murray to beat Federer in a GS just to put that idiotic excuse to bed once and for all. It might not be at Wimbledon (5 sets or 3 sets, Federer is the favourite on grass). I know who my money is on if they play at the US Open, though.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 01:15 AM
Really Breaker. So say you had to put your house on either Federer or Murray in the Wimbledon final, who would you pick?

I know who I would pick, without any hesitation.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 01:17 AM
Yet more excuses. I can't wait for Murray to beat Federer in a GS just to put that idiotic excuse to bed once and for all. It might not be at Wimbledon (5 sets or 3 sets, Federer is the favourite on grass). I know who my money is on if they play at the US Open, though.

No excuses, just plain and simple facts. Ive actually played in the top level at a different sport so I know more or less how the great players raise their game at the majors. Murray has yet to prove it so until he does your argument holds no water. Looks like you might have to wait a while longer.

Lol @ as if the US Open makes any difference. Federer has been just as dominant there as at Wimbledon if not more so.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 01:20 AM
No excuses, just plain and simple facts. Ive actually played in the top level at a different sport so I know more or less how the great players raise their game at the majors. Murray has yet to prove it so until he does your argument holds no water.

Federer beats Murray in one major and you cling to that like a security blanket.

"But, but, but they played once in a major and Federer won!"

Yeah, and he's lost 4 times since then. If Federer beating Murray at majors becomes a trend, you have a point. Until then, you're basing everything on a sample of one. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that you're not a scientist.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 01:22 AM
No excuses, just plain and simple facts. Ive actually played in the top level at a different sport so I know more or less how the great players raise their game at the majors. Murray has yet to prove it so until he does your argument holds no water. Looks like you might have to wait a while longer.

Lol @ as if the US Open makes any difference. Federer has been just as dominant there as at Wimbledon if not more so.

It's a better surface for Murray and he has proven in the last year that he is the better hard court player right now. That includes their H2H and the points accrued on hard courts.

Breaker
06-24-2009, 01:24 AM
Really Breaker. So say you had to put your house on either Federer or Murray in the Wimbledon final, who would you pick?

I know who I would pick, without any hesitation.

Murray .

malakas
06-24-2009, 01:26 AM
Federer is NOT going to crush Murray on the final.

Because Andy won't reach the final.:)

Cesc Fabregas
06-24-2009, 01:27 AM
Its not forgone conclusion that either is in the final lets wait and see eh?

joeri888
06-24-2009, 01:28 AM
I see what you're saying, but I still think that Murray is more flawed with his grass court game than Federer.

Federer struggling through the French Open was not because his game was poor, but more the fact that he played sloppy, unfocused, and uninspired in some of his matches. It was more mental than fundamental.

For Murray, however, it seems that if he's up a good grass courter and he can't play his service game as well as he possibly can, that he'd probably lose.

That's why I think Fed would beat him, granted that he is serving well.

I can see too that Federer should hold a clear advantage on a grasscourt. However, the murray serve won't be easy to break, and it will be down to Federer to bring his best if that match pops up on final sunday. If he brings his best there's no doubt in my mind TMF will win, but if he doubts himself and their matchup, he could be in trouble.

I disagree with the part about Federer struggling at the FO because he was uninspired. Maybe against acasuso and PHM, but not against Del Potro or Haas. He was very inspired and wanted it so badly. It just doesn't come that easy anymore today. it's not 2006 anymore and if his forehand doesn't work the way he wants it to work, he can have a tough time on any given day against good players.

I agree though that I think the chances of Murray being upset in this tournament are a lot higher than Federer's. I give Federer like a 95% chance of making the semis at least, while I can see Murray losing to guys like Gulbis, Gonzales or maybe even Wawrinka if he doesn't play his best.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 01:29 AM
Its not forgone conclusion that either is in the final lets wait and see eh?

Exactly. Murray needs to raise his game. I'm sure he will, but it just shows that he did look a little nervous yesterday, given all the pressure.

Still, if he keeps serving like that, he'll be hard to beat.

Leublu tennis
06-24-2009, 01:34 AM
Why do you say that? Just because he lost a set to Kendricks? Kendricks kicked out Simon from the French. I saw it and wouldn't be so quick to discount Kendricks as you apparently are.

Bottom line: Andy Murray won! :DCongrats on making GOAT, Love.

Leublu tennis
06-24-2009, 01:37 AM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.This is a pattern by this character. Set up threads that are insulting to some player in order to inflame the readers. It has nothing to do with tennis and people like that should not be allowed to participate at TW.

malakas
06-24-2009, 01:40 AM
This is a pattern by this character. Set up threads that are insulting to some player in order to inflame the readers. It has nothing to do with tennis and people like that should not be allowed to participate at TW.

how he insulted?He thought so,and I have seen around much worse threads than this!And maximo asking for someone's banination is at least LAUGHABLE!
since he has more than a couple times personally offended others.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 01:40 AM
Lol @ Scientist comment. :)

No im not a scientist but I have also experienced being a top player at another sport so Im well aware how the truly great players raise their level at the biggest majors. Ive seen it time and time again. Its not just tennis. Ever heard of Stephen Hendry. He was the same as Federer. Brilliant at majors but so-so at lesser events, but boy did he turn it on when on the biggest stage.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 01:48 AM
Lol @ Scientist comment. :)

No im not a scientist but I have also experienced being a top player at another sport so Im well aware how the truly great players raise their level at the biggest majors. Ive seen it time and time again. Its not just tennis. Ever heard of Stephen Hendry. He was the same as Federer. Brilliant at majors but so-so at lesser events, but boy did he turn it on when on the biggest stage.

I'm Scottish. Of course I've heard of Hendry, the greatest player ever.

Hendry has won 36 ranking titles and 36 non-ranking titles. Therefore, your assertion is false.

joeri888
06-24-2009, 01:58 AM
Lol @ Scientist comment. :)

No im not a scientist but I have also experienced being a top player at another sport so Im well aware how the truly great players raise their level at the biggest majors. Ive seen it time and time again. Its not just tennis. Ever heard of Stephen Hendry. He was the same as Federer. Brilliant at majors but so-so at lesser events, but boy did he turn it on when on the biggest stage.

Are you Ronnie O'sullivan?

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:00 AM
I'm Scottish. Of course I've heard of Hendry, the greatest player ever.

Hendry has won 36 ranking titles and 36 non-ranking titles. Therefore, your assertion is false.


Now I understand why your a Murray fan. :twisted:

I have played against Hendry.

Your take on his non-ranking titles is rather misleading. part of those non ranking events were his 6 Benson & Hedges Masters titles, which is regarded as the next most prestigious event after the World championship basically alongside the UK championship.

What I meant about Hendry was that he excelled at the "Big 3" i.e. World Championships, Masters, and UK Championships. Those were where he really produced the goods time and time again. Just like Federer does at the Grand Slams. Those 3 events are Snookers equivalent of Grand Slams.

Hence why I compare Federer to Hendry. Hendry used to routinely lose to lesser ranked players in lesser events, but come the World Championship you just knew it would take an astounding performance to beat him, no matter if he played against a player he had lost to ten times at lesser events, it would not matter, because he was a different animal when it really mattered.

jelle v
06-24-2009, 02:03 AM
Are you Ronnie O'sullivan?

That would be so cool, snooker is my second favorite sport to watch after tennis.. Ronnie is the GOAT of snooker.. he is the Federer of snooker, or Federer is the Ronnie O'Sullivan of tennis.. both are heroes in my book anyway.. please let it be Ronnie O'Sullivan :)

joeri888
06-24-2009, 02:04 AM
That would be so cool, snooker is my second favorite sport to watch after tennis.. Ronnie is the GOAT of snooker.. he is the Federer of snooker, or Federer is the Ronnie O'Sullivan of tennis.. both are heroes in my book anyway.. please let it be Ronnie O'Sullivan :)

Don't get too excited. Ronnie's kinda cool though.:)

Leublu tennis
06-24-2009, 02:05 AM
As a fan of Federer, this draw is a bit unsettling with how the 3rd, 4th, and QF all look to be tough matches (possibly the semis, though Djokovic is so flawed mentally that it's really hard for me to see him actually taking out Federer there).

Flawed mentally? Thats a new one but I suppose you are well qualified to make judgments of something so familiar to you. Right?

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 02:06 AM
Now I understand why your a Murray fan. :twisted:

I have played against Hendry.

Your take on his non-ranking titles is rather misleading. part of those non ranking events were his 6 Benson & Hedges Masters titles, which is regarded as the next most prestigious event after the World championship basically alongside the UK championship.

What I meant about Hendry was that he excelled at the "Big 3" i.e. World Championships, Masters, and UK Championships. Those were where he really produced the goods time and time again. Just like Federer does at the Grand Slams. Those 3 events are Snookers equivalent of Grand Slams.

Hence why I compare Federer to Hendry. Hendry used to routinely lose to lesser ranked players in lesser events, but come the World Championship you just knew it would take an astounding performance to beat him, no matter if he played against a player he had lost to ten times at lesser events, it would not matter, because he was a different animal when it really mattered.

Throughout the 90s, Hendry was consistent everywhere. Maybe you're referring to the 00s.

And I'm a Murray fan for reasons that go beyond patriotism. Plenty of Scottish people dislike Murray. Bit insulting to be so presumptuous.

On another note, how did you fare against Hendry?

Sarzy
06-24-2009, 02:07 AM
Federer is NOT going to crush Murray on the final.

Because Andy won't reach the final.:)

I agree. But if they do both make the final, I'd bet that Fed would win in 3 or 4.

Pidgeon
06-24-2009, 02:10 AM
federer will crush murray mark my words
after his match yesterday he really did NOT leave a good impression
weak defensive play

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:15 AM
No Im not Ronnie O'Sullivan, lol. I admire his game though. I was a fan of Hendry since I was 11 years old, that was in 1988. I followed his career basically everywhere he went. I turned Professional but being an overseas player there was not easy with the UK exchange rate. I gave up playing tennis at the age of 14 to focus on my sport but I always followed Sampras and Agassi and Federer and enjoy the game.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:20 AM
I played Hendry in 1996 which seems like a lifetime ago. He spanked me (as he did everybody at that time, lol).

I must have well over 80 video cassettes and around 20+ dvds of his matches and championship wins and documentaries of his career, collected over 20 years. Which being in South Africa wasn't easy to do seeing as BBC coverage of the sport here ended in 2000/01.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 02:26 AM
A bunch of posts got deleted from this thread. What the hell just happened? My response to cueboyzn is gone.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 02:28 AM
I played Hendry in 1996 which seems like a lifetime ago.

I must have well over 80 video cassettes and around 20+ dvds of his matches and championship wins and documentaries of his career, collected over 20 years. Which being in South Africa wasn't easy to do seeing as BBC coverage of the sport here ended in 2000/01.

What was your highest rank and what was the score against Hendry? He was playing very will still in 1996.

Sentinel
06-24-2009, 02:30 AM
Since we are discussing hte Kendrick match ... what was that issue about a footfault.

McEnroe kept saying it could cost Kendrick the match .... i seem to have missed that.

Mac was saying he wished one could challenge footfaults.

haha, johnny mac has never heard of Mohammed Lahyani -- was asking the other commen "The umpire, whats his name ?"

mandy01
06-24-2009, 02:33 AM
Aphex why do you keep starting these ****** threads?
If Murray wins Wimbledon you'll be eating your words.

Sentinel
06-24-2009, 02:34 AM
Exactly. Murray needs to raise his game. I'm sure he will, but it just shows that he did look a little nervous yesterday, given all the pressure.

Still, if he keeps serving like that, he'll be hard to beat.

Wait, isn;t there some guy called Soderling still playing (in Fed's draw)

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:35 AM
In 1996 Hendry was well still in his pomp as they call it. I rather not put specifics on this forum, i like anonymity :twisted:

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:37 AM
But the real discussion is about tennis and Wimbledon and how Roger is a different player at Grand Slams and thats why I believe he will win Wimbledon come Murray in the final or not. But hey its just my opinion.

Underhand
06-24-2009, 02:37 AM
In 1996 Hendry was well still in his pomp as they call it. I rather not put specifics on this forum, i like anonymity :twisted:

Ok Ronnie, no problem... :wink: :wink: :nudge: :nudge:

jelle v
06-24-2009, 02:41 AM
I played Hendry in 1996 which seems like a lifetime ago. He spanked me (as he did everybody at that time, lol).

I must have well over 80 video cassettes and around 20+ dvds of his matches and championship wins and documentaries of his career, collected over 20 years. Which being in South Africa wasn't easy to do seeing as BBC coverage of the sport here ended in 2000/01.

Where did you play Hendry? Big or small tournament?

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:42 AM
Ok Ronnie, no problem... :wink: :wink: :nudge: :nudge:

Ronnie last time I checked was British not South African. :wink: :wink:

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:43 AM
Where did you play Hendry? Big or small tournament?

Big tournament in Thailand.

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 02:44 AM
Can anyone help me with advice on my Racquet question (in the Racquets Forum). I would appreciate it. Title: K-factor 6.1 Team 95.

I would appreciate it if anyone can add anything that could help me make a selection..

aphex
06-24-2009, 02:50 AM
Aphex why do you keep starting these ****** threads?
If Murray wins Wimbledon you'll be eating your words.

mandy why do you keep reading these ****** threads.

yes, if murray wins wimbledon, i will be eating my words. kthx.

aphex
06-24-2009, 02:53 AM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.

it's "you're".

how many times do i have to correct you?

you're not very bright, are you?

Pidgeon
06-24-2009, 03:02 AM
it's "you're".

how many times do i have to correct you?

you're not very bright, are you?

err no his sentence is correct as well

aphex
06-24-2009, 03:03 AM
err no his sentence is correct as well

err, no, it's not.

malakas
06-24-2009, 03:06 AM
xaxa kaneis mathimata grammatikis stous agglous twra lol!:mrgreen:

Pidgeon
06-24-2009, 03:07 AM
err, no, it's not.

yes IT IS
i would love to see you banned
i would love to see you get banned

all correct ! ! !
and now back to tennis :)

aphex
06-24-2009, 03:08 AM
xaxa kaneis mathimata grammatikis stous agglous twra lol!:mrgreen:

:):):)...............

malakas
06-24-2009, 03:14 AM
yes IT IS
i would love to see you banned
i would love to see you get banned

all correct ! ! !
and now back to tennis :)

your nothing but a troll
You're nothing but a troll

aphex
06-24-2009, 03:19 AM
yes IT IS
i would love to see you banned
i would love to see you get banned

all correct ! ! !
and now back to tennis :)

you're a tool.

Dutch-Guy
06-24-2009, 03:26 AM
It's not a forgone conclusion that both fellas 'll make it to the final.
Last year Nadal had a shaky start too(lost the first set to Gulbis) but went on to win Wimby.So expect Muzza to get his act together as the tourny progresses.Fed fans should not get ahead of themselves...yet.

jelle v
06-24-2009, 03:45 AM
Can anyone help me with advice on my Racquet question (in the Racquets Forum). I would appreciate it. Title: K-factor 6.1 Team 95.

I would appreciate it if anyone can add anything that could help me make a selection..

Done :)

(now I want 10 free snooker lessons, cause my highest break is something like 32 and I especially suck at potting when pocket, object ball and white ball are in a straight line :mrgreen: )

cueboyzn
06-24-2009, 06:30 AM
hahaha :)

Thanks for the help

Underhand
06-24-2009, 06:40 AM
you're a tool.

You're a tool.

aphex
06-24-2009, 07:08 AM
You're a tool.

http://www.tagmag.info/images/towelie.gif

:)

viduka0101
06-24-2009, 07:41 AM
i was expecting a thread like this when i saw that murray lost a set and it was actually the first thing that came to mind because every time a player that is a threat to "the genius" has a shaky match some fed troll has to make a stupid thread, there were how many when threads like this at RG featuring del potro, monfils etc ?
some of these people want the times of ljubicic, robredo and blake in the top 5 to return like the year 2006 when federer had no real competition so he can win every match he contests in,face it apex federer is an overachiever and the times when he could win a tournament without having to really show his best and fight for the win are over
i am really hoping that murray beats the *ucker in the final,not because i hate federer which i don't,but because i hate guys like you that keep polluting these forums

JeMar
06-24-2009, 07:43 AM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mfl/lowres/mfln130l.jpg

zagor
06-24-2009, 07:48 AM
i was expecting a thread like this when i saw that murray lost a set and it was actually the first thing that came to mind because every time a player that is a threat to "the genius" has a shaky match some fed troll has to make a stupid thread, there were how many when threads like this at RG featuring del potro, monfils etc ?
some of these people want the times of ljubicic, robredo and blake in the top 5 to return like the year 2006 when federer had no real competition so he can win every match he contests in,face it apex federer is an overachiever and the times when he could win a tournament without having to really show his best and fight for the win are over
i am really hoping that murray beats the *ucker in the final,not because i hate federer which i don't,but because i hate guys like you that keep polluting these forums

Zero from what I remember.Most Fed fans(like me)though that both Monfils and even Del Potro were a threat.But come now,it's plainly obvious you dislike Fed and that's fine but don't hide behind "evil" Fed fans.This is the exact reason I respect someone like N_F,atleast he's honest-he doesn't like Fed's personality and game and that is completely fine with me.

Even know it's mostly Nadal fans who say Fed's gonna just breeze to the title and claim Wimbledon's gonna be "boring" this year.

malakas
06-24-2009, 07:59 AM
Zero from what I remember.Most Fed fans(like me)though that both Monfils and even Del Potro were a threat.But come now,it's plainly obvious you dislike Fed and that's fine but don't hide behind "evil" Fed fans.This is the exact reason I respect someone like N_F,atleast he's honest-he doesn't like Fed's personality and game and that is completely fine with me.

Even know it's mostly Nadal fans who say Fed's gonna just breeze to the title and claim Wimbledon's gonna be "boring" this year.

oh goshh now we're going to say that N_F is a good example to follow!:)

zagor
06-24-2009, 08:04 AM
oh goshh now we're going to say that N_F is a good example to follow!:)

Of course N_F has his faults and ridiculous moments but again atleast he's honest while you have this poster Viduka or whatever's his name that calls Fed f****r and takes a dump on Fed's competition and achievements but it's not that he really "dislikes" him,it's just that he doesn't like his fans :rolleyes: .It's pathetic to hide behind "terrible" Fed's fans.IMO if you don't like the guy just say it straight up and N_F atleast does that.

endbegin
06-24-2009, 08:32 AM
Murray v/s Gulbis will be very interesting. If Gulbis plays like he is capable of, it could be a really good match. Unfortunately, Gulbis hasn't been playing well pretty much all year.

DRII
06-24-2009, 08:56 AM
Federer does still have to (probably) get through Kohlschrieber, Soderling, and Tsonga/Verdasco/Karlovic. That's assuming Garcia-Lopez doesn't shock the world tomorrow (highly unlikely, but hey...tennis has certainly had its share of shocks).

As a fan of Federer, this draw is a bit unsettling with how the 3rd, 4th, and QF all look to be tough matches (possibly the semis, though Djokovic is so flawed mentally that it's really hard for me to see him actually taking out Federer there).

Nole might suprise!!!

BreakPoint
06-24-2009, 08:57 AM
Why do you say that? Just because he lost a set to Kendricks? Kendricks kicked out Simon from the French. I saw it and wouldn't be so quick to discount Kendricks as you apparently are.

Bottom line: Andy Murray won! :D
Huh? Simon kicked Kendrick's butt at the French: 7-5, 6-0, 6-1

http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/scores/stats/day9/1080ms.html

BreakPoint
06-24-2009, 09:05 AM
Pink elephant in the room:

head to head
Murray 6 - 2 Federer
Yeah, but what is it in Grand Slams?

Lots of players have beaten Federer (e.g., Roddick, Fish, Blake, Hewitt, Gonzalez, etc.) but have any of them done so in a Slam?

Case closed.

NamRanger
06-24-2009, 09:17 AM
Not only that, but this guy had a 2 sets to love lead on Nadal in 2006, the year Rafa first made the final.

We're talking about an incinostent player, not a bad one. If he's serving well, he's a problem for anyone.

Murray's stats are actually very good for the match. Played better than I thought, simply because he was expected to blow Kendrick away.

Murray hit 52 winners and 19 UEs (minus 20 aces to make 32 winners from a rally). Murray also served huge. Kendrick barely got a sniff, while Andy was constantly in Kendrick's service games.



For Murray to beat Federer here he's going to have to serve well and play aggressive off both wings. You simply cannot beat Federer on grass playing defensive tennis. It's a surface that still favors the attacking player. Murray definitely knows this though, but he's got a tough road ahead (if his opponents decide to show up) before he even gets there.

Sovereignty
06-24-2009, 09:24 AM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.


Oh really???

Wimbledon's fun without Federer.

viduka0101
06-24-2009, 10:01 AM
Zero from what I remember.Most Fed fans(like me)though that both Monfils and even Del Potro were a threat.But come now,it's plainly obvious you dislike Fed and that's fine but don't hide behind "evil" Fed fans.This is the exact reason I respect someone like N_F,atleast he's honest-he doesn't like Fed's personality and game and that is completely fine with me.

Even know it's mostly Nadal fans who say Fed's gonna just breeze to the title and claim Wimbledon's gonna be "boring" this year.

well i never said i don't dislike him i just said i don't hate him in the previous post,and i don't dislike him to the point that I'm hoping he loses every match he plays
so yeah i dislike him but i do respect him as a great tennis player
i would like to see someone like Murray win the title, more so because of guys like apex and there was talk about "he isn't a threat to Federer" unfortunately i don't remember from who exactly but I'm sure of it

maximo
06-24-2009, 10:04 AM
Oh really???

Yes, really....

zagor
06-24-2009, 10:09 AM
well i never said i don't dislike him i just said i don't hate him in the previous post,and i don't dislike him to the point that I'm hoping he loses every match he plays
so yeah i dislike him but i do respect him as a great tennis player
i would like to see someone like Murray win the title, more so because of guys like apex and there was talk about "he isn't a threat to Federer" unfortunately i don't remember from who exactly but I'm sure of it

Yes,apex did make a horrible BS thread but not all Fed fans are like that,some of us respect Murray for his great tennis brain,variety,competitiveness etc.I'm personally hoping for Fed-Murray final cause the atmosphere will be amazing,crowd would get involved and you would either see first Brit since Perry win Wimbledon or Fed breaking Pete's slam record.However I also wouldn't mind if someone like Novak,Tsonga or Roddick won cause that would be a great story as well-Tsonga winning his maiden slam or Novak or Roddick moving away from one slam wonder category.

viduka0101
06-24-2009, 10:10 AM
Of course N_F has his faults and ridiculous moments but again atleast he's honest while you have this poster Viduka or whatever's his name that calls Fed f****r and takes a dump on Fed's competition and achievements but it's not that he really "dislikes" him,it's just that he doesn't like his fans :rolleyes: .It's pathetic to hide behind "terrible" Fed's fans.IMO if you don't like the guy just say it straight up and N_F atleast does that.

can't i have an opinion about Federer's achievements, he is a great player but he is an overachiever IMO, how is that taking a dump

i didn't say i don't like Federer fans i said i hate guys like apex, you should learn how to read

Sovereignty
06-24-2009, 10:10 AM
Yes, really....

Nice try. Might as well change your name to Hypocrite.

viduka0101
06-24-2009, 10:11 AM
Yes,apex did make a horrible BS thread but not all Fed fans are like that,some of us respect Murray for his great tennis brain,variety,competitiveness etc.I'm personally hoping for Fed-Murray final cause the atmosphere will be amazing,crowd would get involved and you would either see first Brit since Perry win Wimbledon or Fed breaking Pete's slam record.However I also wouldn't mind if someone like Novak,Tsonga or Roddick won cause that would be a great story as well-Tsonga winning his maiden slam or Novak or Roddick moving away from one slam wonder category.

neither would I

zagor
06-24-2009, 10:13 AM
can't i have an opinion about Federer's achievements, he is a great player but he is an overachiever IMO, how is that taking a dump

i didn't say i don't like Federer fans i said i hate guys like apex,you should learn how to read

OK,I don't like guys like apex and Conquistador as well,doesn't matter that they're Fed fans same as me.

And sorry about the bolded part,yes you're entitled to your opinion about Fed.

maximo
06-24-2009, 10:20 AM
Nice try. Might as well change your name to Hypocrite.

You *******s can't bare when others find flaws with your beloved icon.

DRII
06-24-2009, 10:22 AM
You *******s can't bare when others find flaws with your beloved icon.

Exactly!!!

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 10:30 AM
For Murray to beat Federer here he's going to have to serve well and play aggressive off both wings. You simply cannot beat Federer on grass playing defensive tennis. It's a surface that still favors the attacking player. Murray definitely knows this though, but he's got a tough road ahead (if his opponents decide to show up) before he even gets there.

I don't think Murray will win if he tries to basically play Federer's game against him. It has to be controlled aggression. Not neessarily going for lots of winners, but rather hitting deep into Federer's backhand side and merely keeping him honest with a few to the forehand. That is the tactic that has worked best for Murray against Federer, since Federer can't consistently hurt Murray off the backhand.

Cyan
06-24-2009, 10:47 AM
after watching murray's match, i honestly (not just because i'm a fed fan) believe,
that if federer were to meet murray he would just crush him.
fortunately for (the overhyped) murray, he's not getting that far....

Fed wins in starights...:oops:

NamRanger
06-24-2009, 10:48 AM
I don't think Murray will win if he tries to basically play Federer's game against him. It has to be controlled aggression. Not neessarily going for lots of winners, but rather hitting deep into Federer's backhand side and merely keeping him honest with a few to the forehand. That is the tactic that has worked best for Murray against Federer, since Federer can't consistently hurt Murray off the backhand.



Well, of course he has to be careful and pick his shots. But he can't simply wait for Federer to make an error here; it's simply not going to happen. To have a shot at beating Federer here, you've got to take it to him. The closest I've seen Federer lose here (other than to Nadal) was against Roddick in 2004, where he really took it to Federer the first two sets, with some big serving and big hitting.



Hewitt tried to play the waiting game against Federer and simply got blown away. And he's a much more accomplished grasscourt player than Murray too. I think Murray's going to have to play aggressive and take to the net if he wants a chance at beating Federer.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 10:50 AM
Well, of course he has to be careful and pick his shots. But he can't simply wait for Federer to make an error here; it's simply not going to happen. To have a shot at beating Federer here, you've got to take it to him. The closest I've seen Federer lose here (other than to Nadal) was against Roddick in 2004, where he really took it to Federer the first two sets, with some big serving and big hitting.



Hewitt tried to play the waiting game against Federer and simply got blown away. And he's a much more accomplished grasscourt player than Murray too. I think Murray's going to have to play aggressive and take to the net if he wants a chance at beating Federer.

More aggressive than usual, sure. Not as aggressively as he plays Nadal, though. He can't stray too far from his natural game. One thing's for sure, Federer will be playing more backhands than he ever has in a single match on grass if he ends up facing Murray. Andy avoids that shot like the plague most of the time.

NamRanger
06-24-2009, 10:55 AM
More aggressive than usual, sure. Not as aggressively as he plays Nadal, though. He can't stray too far from his natural game. One thing's for sure, Federer will be playing more backhands than he ever has in a single match on grass if he ends up facing Murray. Andy avoids that shot like the plague most of the time.



I think it would be an interesting match-up, but I definitely think Murray will have to play better if he does reach the final. Against Kendrick, he got pinned back deep a few times and was passive for the first set and a half or so.



He managed to pull through against Kendrick, but if he does the same thing against Federer, I don't think Federer will make as many unforced errors, nor will he let Murray off the hook for being too passive.

Clydey2times
06-24-2009, 11:01 AM
I think it would be an interesting match-up, but I definitely think Murray will have to play better if he does reach the final. Against Kendrick, he got pinned back deep a few times and was passive for the first set and a half or so.



He managed to pull through against Kendrick, but if he does the same thing against Federer, I don't think Federer will make as many unforced errors, nor will he let Murray off the hook for being too passive.

If Murray plays like he did against Kendrick, he would probably lose. However, it's always going to be hard to beat Murray when he's serving like he did in that match. Had Murray served at, say, 50%, I wouldn't have been surprised if it had went to a 5th and got really tight. Andy looked pretty nervous, given all the talk before the match.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-24-2009, 12:58 PM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.

...so, aphex is a troll for stating an honest opinion--one that is not in line with your Murray-is-the-2009-Wimbledon-champion fantasies?

maximo
06-24-2009, 12:59 PM
...so, aphex is a troll for stating an honest opinion--one that is not in line with your Murray-is-the-2009-Wimbledon-champion fantasies?

Your Federer fantasies are deeply worrying.

You make me chuckle child...

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-24-2009, 01:29 PM
Your Federer fantasies are deeply worrying.

You make me chuckle child...

The only thing chuckle-inducing around here is the absurd notion Murray is some grass court wonder destined to dominate. Talk about smoking something.....

The OP was justified, but of course, defensive Murray fanboys cannot stand even a mere theory ending with the immature Murray losing.

maximo
06-24-2009, 01:30 PM
The only thing chuckle-inducing around here is the absurd notion Murray is some grass court wonder destined to dominate. Talk about smoking something.....

The OP was justified, but of course, defensive Murray fanboys cannot stand even a mere theory ending with the immature Murray losing.

Who you calling immature!?

Your a fool for posting these false assumptions...

Your a *******, just admit it.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-24-2009, 01:38 PM
Who you calling immature!?

Your a fool for posting these false assumptions...

Your a *******, just admit it.

I'm calling you immature for the example provided above: a mindless flame when you fail to address topics with rationality--which will not lead to Murray-love.

Thanks for the example, kid.

malakas
06-24-2009, 01:42 PM
I'm calling you immature for the example provided above: a mindless flame when you fail to address topics with rationality--which will not lead to Murray-love.

Thanks for the example, kid.

she's not a kid!!!She's maximommy,mother of Andy Murray Wimbledon Champion 2009 and GOAT.
So please show some respect!

Dedans Penthouse
06-24-2009, 01:54 PM
after watching murray's match, i honestly (not just because i'm a fed fan) believe,
that if federer were to meet murray he would just crush him.
fortunately for (the overhyped) murray, he's not getting that far....
aphex, why bother at this early juncture starting "Fed vs Murray" fanboyz fights?

Hell, even if both of 'em made it through the draw (most likely), that's gonna prompt a slew of "bring it!!" fanboy posts anyway.....in the meantime, enjoy the 'Wimbledon' grass.

Sovereignty
06-24-2009, 02:05 PM
You *******s can't bare when others find flaws with your beloved icon.

Who said I was a ******* ;)

Its sad to see someone flail around attempting to make pointless assumptions about who people support or their opinions. Its ironic that when someone states an opinion on someone other than your pick, you get all defensive. Why do you hate federer so much? I am sure that your comment back will have something about his personality, even though were watching tennis. I find it odd that you try so hard to make sure that no one else can have a fair say about murray.

I just cant wait to see your answer that has nothing relevant or worthy of talking about. It will probably be some post that always come from you saying that we are wrong, even though you cant provide sufficient evidence to prove what you are saying.

:)

I love tennis as a whole, I am not a "*******"

TennisFan481
06-24-2009, 06:59 PM
Flawed mentally? Thats a new one but I suppose you are well qualified to make judgments of something so familiar to you. Right?

Yeah, who am I kidding? That's totally a new one...nobody has EEEEEEVER questioned Djokovic's MENTAL game.

Oh no...not Mr. Injury Timeout/Retirement. Not Mr. "Boo hoo, da cwowd doesn't wike me....and Andy Woddick was meeeean." Not Mr. "Lost before the QF in 3 of the last 4 majors."

The tennis guy
06-24-2009, 07:09 PM
He's got his number. Murray would have played completely different. A lot of rolling the ball in and neutralizing balls and points. Murray plays with a lot of junk. He's somewhat of a professional pusher. But he's learned how to win that way, so all I can say is it's working for him. Not super fun to watch, but it gets the job done against a lot of players.

Well, unfortunately for Murray, you can't win on grass by playing junk balls. Those tactics that worked for him against Federer on hardcourt won't work on grass.

cueboyzn
06-25-2009, 02:02 AM
Well, unfortunately for Murray, you can't win on grass by playing junk balls. Those tactics that worked for him against Federer on hardcourt won't work on grass.

I agree. Especially because the wins on hardcourt were over 3 sets not 5. Add the fact its Grass and add the best of 5 factor in and it looks even worse. Even if they played at the US Open Federer would be the winner 9 times out of 10 in my opinion simply because its best of 5 and federer is a different player in Grand Slams where he really has the desire.

joeri888
06-25-2009, 02:05 AM
I just think the low bounce is heaven to the Federer backhand, and hell to his opponent when Federer brings in his slice.

Rob_C
06-25-2009, 03:33 AM
Murray is a pusher at heart, yeah he can hit with pace when he wants to, but he doesn't, cause he's a pusher. Nothing wrong with that, its a strategy that's successful at many levels, and one that has gotten him to #3 in the world.

His game takes advantage of the inability of the majority of today's pros to volley effectively. If people could volley, whenever he's hitting slice backhands, back into play they would be coming to net to put away the volley.

Even Fed, who can volley well, chooses to stay back and try to hit winners from the baseline. The match they played in IW, Fed allowed Murray to start pts over repeatedly, by shoveling balls back when he was in trouble, instead of coming to the net.

If Fed would have come to net about 10-15 times more in that IW match, total, I think he would have won.

Also, from listening to BGs commentary during Murray's match against Kendrick, and starting to look for it myself, Murray favors going crosscourt on his FH passing shots. If I were Fed I'd make a mental note of that, along with, whenever he has Murray on the run to his backhand and he sees him take one hand off the racket to hit a slice backhand, to get to the net.

OTMPut
06-25-2009, 03:45 AM
^^^
Good observation. Kendrick came to the net quite a bit and could finish points quick.
Where is 2001 wimby Fed? He showed such a good touch at the net against sampras.

Clydey2times
06-25-2009, 03:48 AM
Murray is a pusher at heart, yeah he can hit with pace when he wants to, but he doesn't, cause he's a pusher. Nothing wrong with that, its a strategy that's successful at many levels, and one that has gotten him to #3 in the world.

His game takes advantage of the inability of the majority of today's pros to volley effectively. If people could volley, whenever he's hitting slice backhands, back into play they would be coming to net to put away the volley.

Even Fed, who can volley well, chooses to stay back and try to hit winners from the baseline. The match they played in IW, Fed allowed Murray to start pts over repeatedly, by shoveling balls back when he was in trouble, instead of coming to the net.

If Fed would have come to net about 10-15 times more in that IW match, total, I think he would have won.

Also, from listening to BGs commentary during Murray's match against Kendrick, and starting to look for it myself, Murray favors going crosscourt on his FH passing shots. If I were Fed I'd make a mental note of that, along with, whenever he has Murray on the run to his backhand and he sees him take one hand off the racket to hit a slice backhand, to get to the net.

Everyone knows that Murray goes cross court. There's just not a hell of a lot you can do to stop it when the pass is too good. Unless you hug the net, there's not much you can do.

And he's not a pusher. A pusher just waits for mistakes. Murray is a counter-puncher.

Sentinel
06-25-2009, 04:21 AM
Just saw the interview of Roger with Vijay Amritraj on Espn-Star. He gives Murray a good chance when asked how he felt about AM.

He also mentioned Nole, Tsonga, and Verdasco with a chance to take him out.

He mentioned he could not sleep or eat, before the match with Monfils (RG) legs were heavy. he had serious doubts of whether he could beat Monfils.

Rob_C
06-26-2009, 01:56 AM
Everyone knows that Murray goes cross court. There's just not a hell of a lot you can do to stop it when the pass is too good. Unless you hug the net, there's not much you can do.

And he's not a pusher. A pusher just waits for mistakes. Murray is a counter-puncher.

Sure u can, u can get a jump on it and anticipate it, instead of playing him honest and trying to cover both sides. Just like if someone has a tendency to serve to a certain spot, like Nadal against Fed, take that shot away first.

And Murray is absolutely a pusher. Did u see how many slice forehands he hit today against Gulbis???

valiant
06-26-2009, 02:03 AM
Just saw the interview of Roger with Vijay Amritraj on Espn-Star. He gives Murray a good chance when asked how he felt about AM.

He also mentioned Nole, Tsonga, and Verdasco with a chance to take him out.

He mentioned he could not sleep or eat, before the match with Monfils (RG) legs were heavy. he had serious doubts of whether he could beat Monfils.

Did the interview happen after the Federer's last match.

Clydey2times
06-26-2009, 02:15 AM
Sure u can, u can get a jump on it and anticipate it, instead of playing him honest and trying to cover both sides. Just like if someone has a tendency to serve to a certain spot, like Nadal against Fed, take that shot away first.

And Murray is absolutely a pusher. Did u see how many slice forehands he hit today against Gulbis???

I saw Murray destroy Gulbis in straight sets. That's kind of the point. If you can't appreciate the tactical side of the game, go watch some ballbashers.

Clydey2times
06-26-2009, 02:25 AM
double post.

shadows
06-26-2009, 03:10 AM
I've been thinking, Murray has been accused of being very passive in his play so far at Wimbledon by a number of people, and I'm wondering if that could be a sign of some nerves afterall.

The last thing Andy wants is to go out of the tournament making errors and playing sloppy tennis, particularly given the maelstrom in the british press about the way our other players performed. I just think maybe his strategy so far has seen him be a bit more cautious to avoid silly mistakes.

I hope he does open up a little more with these opening hurdles out of the way, though he can pretty much walk it into the 1/4s however he plays

batz
06-26-2009, 03:47 AM
I saw Murray destroy Gulbis in straight sets. That's kind of the point. If you can't appreciate the tactical side of the game, go watch some ballbashers.

You're wasting your breath mate. There are a rump of guys on here who think tennis is about hitting the ball as hard as you possibly can, whenever you can.

It's pointless to respond to the Murray is a pusher brigade. After his rise up the rankings, it's one of the few things they feel they have left to throw at him.

Blinkism
06-26-2009, 03:48 AM
You're wasting your breath mate. There are a rump of guys on here who think tennis is about hitting the ball as hard as you possibly can, whenever you can.

It's pointless to respond to the Murray is a pusher brigade. After his rise up the rankings, it's one of the few things they feel they have left to throw at him.

You make a good point batz

but Murray's still a pusher

batz
06-26-2009, 03:49 AM
You make a good point batz

but Murray's still a pusher

LOL

Nice one Blink:)

mandy01
06-26-2009, 07:59 AM
this thread such ****...idiotic assumptions when not even the first week of Wimbledon is over.

Rob_C
06-26-2009, 02:07 PM
I saw Murray destroy Gulbis in straight sets. That's kind of the point. If you can't appreciate the tactical side of the game, go watch some ballbashers.

I wouldnt say he destroyed Gulbis, thats an exaggeration. And whats tactical about pushing, or about moonballing???

And its no so much about Murray's 'ability' as it is about the rest of the players' inability to play the net effectively and put away volleys.

Its kinda like a good % of female pros cant hit overheads so they either let it bounce, or go for the high swinging forehand volley instead.

We all have our likes and dislikes, and as a player, I know I dont like playing pushers, and I dont like watching people push or moonball.

I dont find it entertaining to watch, just like if Im watching a boxing match,, and one guys is just running and backpedaling the whole fight.

Just for irony's sake, I would like to see Murray play another pusher and get out-pushed tho, that would be funny.

SempreSami
06-26-2009, 02:36 PM
I wouldnt say he destroyed Gulbis, thats an exaggeration. And whats tactical about pushing, or about moonballing???

And its no so much about Murray's 'ability' as it is about the rest of the players' inability to play the net effectively and put away volleys.

Its kinda like a good % of female pros cant hit overheads so they either let it bounce, or go for the high swinging forehand volley instead.

We all have our likes and dislikes, and as a player, I know I dont like playing pushers, and I dont like watching people push or moonball.

I dont find it entertaining to watch, just like if Im watching a boxing match,, and one guys is just running and backpedaling the whole fight.

Just for irony's sake, I would like to see Murray play another pusher and get out-pushed tho, that would be funny.

Is it Murray's fault that Gulbis is inept at anything other than hitting the ball really hard?

Rob_C
06-26-2009, 02:45 PM
Is it Murray's fault that Gulbis is inept at anything other than hitting the ball really hard?

Not at all. But people are saying he's a great tactician, this and that. I disagree. Since when is pushing and waiting for the other guy to miss first strategy???? Isnt that 'jr tennis'????

And its not just Gulbis, its the majority of pros, men and women, who cant really volley these days.

SempreSami
06-26-2009, 02:47 PM
Federer slices a lot from his backhand, does that make him a pusher?

フェデラー
06-26-2009, 03:05 PM
Your nothing but a troll.

I would love to see you banned.

Shut up Maximo. No one gives a damn that you are the biggest murray fan boy ever. your reaching veroniquem status:shock:

maximo
06-26-2009, 03:06 PM
Shut up Maximo. No one gives a damn that you are the biggest murray fan boy ever. your reaching veroniquem status:shock:

My word, you have a very large vocabulary...

All-rounder
06-26-2009, 03:07 PM
Federer slices a lot from his backhand, does that make him a pusher?
Slicing doesn't make you a pusher

フェデラー
06-26-2009, 03:11 PM
My word, you have a very large vocabulary...

you act quite pompous and pretentious. maybe its just the english?

maximo
06-26-2009, 03:14 PM
maybe its just the english?

No need to generalise, it just makes you seem incompetent...

フェデラー
06-26-2009, 03:19 PM
No need to generalise, it just makes you seem incompetent...

maybe its just you then:) but in any event andy murray is scottish, but there is the umbrella term "british"

SempreSami
06-26-2009, 03:44 PM
Slicing doesn't make you a pusher

Apparently when Murray does it makes him one.

vtmike
06-26-2009, 04:11 PM
Shut up Maximo. No one gives a damn that you are the biggest murray fan boy ever. your reaching veroniquem status:shock:

You got that right... :grin:

Purostaff
06-26-2009, 04:29 PM
sheers OP! Tuuk dem wurds roight oot of me molph

Rob_C
06-26-2009, 07:47 PM
Federer slices a lot from his backhand, does that make him a pusher?

Slicing ur backhand, no. Slicing ur forehand, YES!!!

Would u say Santoro is a pusher, or not???

FedFan_2009
06-26-2009, 07:55 PM
Santoro is THE magician.

markmurray
06-27-2009, 06:03 AM
I'm Scottish. Of course I've heard of Hendry, the greatest player ever.

That would be Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Snooker is different to tennis in that it is Player vs. a set of balls. It's easier to see who does it the best without relying on stats. There is no "but how would he have matched up against X player in his prime?" argument to contend with. The only thing that mitigates things is that equipment is better now than it was making break-building easier. But that doesn't come into it with O'Sullivan / Hendry as they're of the same era.

The fact is that Ronnie can play Snooker better than Hendry can or ever could. I'm not going to say it isn't close but it's plain enough to see, that I'm very confident in my assertion.

(sorry, I couldn't let that go by)

galactico
06-27-2009, 06:06 AM
murray will never win a slam. maybe in his dreams, but not in reality