PDA

View Full Version : Murray, Wimbledon 2009, Roddick or Wawrinka match, when did he play better?


TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 03:08 AM
I'm sick of these constant assertions that Murray played a great match vs Wawrinka in this years Wimbledon, but sucked vs Roddick in an effort to discredit how well Roddick played. A look at the numbers:

Roddick match: 74 winners, 20 UE, 82% 1st serve points won, 53% 2nd serve points won, 51% 1st serve percentage.

Wawrinka match: 49 winners, 38 UE, 74% 1st serve points won, 56% 2nd serve points won, 53% 1st serve percentage.

Seems pretty clear to me, but just FTR, where do you think he playe better?

maximo
08-11-2009, 03:08 AM
See you wanted to continue on following the other thread. :roll:

Hope you like my sig btw.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 03:11 AM
See you wanted to continue on following that other thread. :roll:

Hope you like my sig btw.

It annoys me that Murray fans are trying to discredit Roddick, who played outstanding. So yeah, I felt inclined to make this thread.

Your sig is kewl. Ya like mine?

Btw, thought you said you were done with me.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 03:13 AM
And about your sig---uh, you replied to the thread 27 times. I wouldn't be talking.

Fedfan1234
08-11-2009, 03:18 AM
Murray didn't play so well in both matches. Sure they were close matches with some good points, but I have seen Murray play better and more consistent. This is not to discredit Roddick, I think Roddick is a better player on grass and Murray is a better player on HC. I think Murray still has a bit to learn on grass if he wants to win Wimbledon, but I think he will learn in time and win it eventually.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 03:23 AM
Murray didn't play so well in both matches. Sure they were close matches with some good points, but I have seen Murray play better and more consistent. This is not to discredit Roddick, I think Roddick is a better player on grass and Murray is a better player on HC. I think Murray still has a bit to learn on grass if he wants to win Wimbledon, but I think he will learn in time and win it eventually.

Oh no doubt Murray has played better. But the point is, he showed up and played well. Which is something some Murray fans can't accept..

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:20 AM
Oh yeah . . . Murray hit 20 aces in the Roddick match, 7 in the Wawrinka match.

batz
08-11-2009, 04:24 AM
Oh no doubt Murray has played better. But the point is, he showed up and played well. Which is something some Murray fans can't accept..


Roddick was fully deserving of his win, but I don't think you can say Murray 'played well' in either of the matches you state. He was OK at best - he couldn't buy a pass against ARod for example. That was enough against Stan but not against ARod. That's all there is to it really.

CountryHillbilly
08-11-2009, 04:26 AM
Haha, you both have each other's sarcastic quotes in your signatures.

I think Murray's game looked cleaner in Roddick's match. Against Wawrinka he had a lot of errors. Maybe that's why he lost. He played safe against Roddick, and Roddick played aggressively and was successful with a little bit of luck.

Roddick did play well. His serve is a better weapon than Waw's backhand. It's not everyday ARod pushes Fed to 5 sets.

maximo
08-11-2009, 04:28 AM
Oh yeah . . . Murray hit 20 aces in the Roddick match, 7 in the Wawrinka match.

Love the way you changed your sig, again. :lol:

Getting a bit desperate i see.

This thread sucks. You have been known to deliberately manipulate stats. Go do something useful for once, troll.

CountryHillbilly
08-11-2009, 04:29 AM
btw do you have the stat on Waw and Rod's net play? How succesful were they at net approaches?

I think that's an important info for judging the matches.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:31 AM
Love the way you changed your sig, again. :lol:

Getting a bit desperate i see.

Still not done?

You changed your sig as well---consistency much?

I wanted to stick with the old one. Didn't think you would understand it. Consider it a personal favor. :)

maximo
08-11-2009, 04:34 AM
You changed your sig as well---consistency much?

It's the same one about you. I didn't change it one bit since it really shows us what kind of character you are. For a new user you really have done yourself a favor by trolling to the extreme.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:36 AM
btw do you have the stat on Waw and Rod's net play? How succesful were they at net approaches?

I think that's an important info for judging the matches.

Roddick was 48-75 on net approaches---64%, not bad. Wawrina 36-54---67%, a tad better.

Murray was 29-39 (74%) in the Wawrinka match, 15-20 in the Roddick match (75%).

thejoe
08-11-2009, 04:38 AM
Shows his normally depressing 1st serve %.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:39 AM
It's the same one about you. I didn't change it one bit since it really shows us what kind of character you are. For a new user you really have done yourself a favor by trolling to the extreme.

I meant the P_Agony one. Was the sig indicitive of my character? Not sure what you mean---you made the inane claim that Federer had cakewalk draws enroute to slam finals. I countered my comparing draws. Simple enough, not really that provocative.

Reply #3. Thought you said you were done with me.

Zeppy
08-11-2009, 04:40 AM
I'm sick of these constant assertions that Murray played a great match vs Wawrinka in this years Wimbledon, but sucked vs Roddick in an effort to discredit how well Roddick played. A look at the numbers:

Roddick match: 74 winners, 20 UE, 82% 1st serve points won, 53% 2nd serve points won, 51% 1st serve percentage.

Wawrinka match: 49 winners, 38 UE, 74% 1st serve points won, 56% 2nd serve points won, 53% 1st serve percentage.

Seems pretty clear to me, but just FTR, where do you think he playe better?

Judging from the stats, it seems like Murray played better against Roddick than he did against Wawrinka at this year's wimbledon. Ironically he lost.

CountryHillbilly
08-11-2009, 04:40 AM
Roddick was 48-75 on net approaches---64%, not bad. Wawrina 36-54---67%, a tad better.

Murray was 29-39 (74%) in the Wawrinka match, 15-20 in the Roddick match (75%).

It's about the same, then. Only Roddick had a lot more approaches than Waw (75>54) and sometimes went for it with bad approach shots. Murray should have gotten more passing shots in IMO. That's at least what I remember.

maximo
08-11-2009, 04:42 AM
I meant the P_Agony one. Was the sig indicitive of my character? Not sure what you mean---you made the inane claim that Federer had cakewalk draws enroute to slam finals. I countered my comparing draws.


Reply #3. Thought you said you were done with me.

Federer did indeed have a cakewalk draw to the finals of both the Slams. You deliberately put down Murray's draw while doing the exact opposite with Federers. You were anything but not biased. You really are pathetic.

Clydey2times
08-11-2009, 04:44 AM
My personal opinion is that he played better against Roddick. I thought he let himself down on the big points, but other than that he played well.

That said, people cannot accuse Murray of pushing in the Roddick match and then point to his winners/UE count in that match when it is convenient for them (he hit more winners and less UEs than Roddick). You can't have it both ways.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:46 AM
It's about the same, then. Only Roddick had a lot more approaches than Waw (75>54) and sometimes went for it with bad approach shots. Murray should have gotten more passing shots in IMO. That's at least what I remember.

Roddick has improved his net play big time. I thought he was going to get passed at will in the final. Murray however almost always hits his passing shots crosscourt, and I felt Roddick was ready for that.

Clydey2times
08-11-2009, 04:52 AM
Roddick has improved his net play big time. I thought he was going to get passed at will in the final. Murray however almost always hits his passing shots crosscourt, and I felt Roddick was ready for that.

Roddick wasn't ready for anything. Murray netted a huge percentage of his passes. Roddick didn't even have to volley most of the time.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:52 AM
Federer did indeed have a cakewalk draw to the finals of both the Slams. You deliberately put down Murray's draw while doing the exact opposite with Federers. You were anything but not biased. You really are pathetic.

Reply #4.


Roddick, Haas, and Karlovic have a combined 7 career titles on grass. Soderling nearly beat Nadal a few years back, nearly beat Federer in the early rounds in '05 at Halle.

I didn't put down Murray's draw at all. There was little positive to say about his draw. You have Kendrick, who almost beat Nadal in 2006, but is 4-12 on grass. And Murray was given a tough match. Gulbis---took Nadal to four sets last year, hasn't advanced past the third round once this year. Troicki, 6-5 career record on grass. Wawrinka, 8-10 career record on grass. JFC has made the QF's of Wimby two times, that's not bad. He also has won only one title overall in the past six years.

Among the men that Murray beat, you have 0 grasscourt titles. How can I say something positive about his draw if his draw has achieved essentially nothing on grass?

thejoe
08-11-2009, 04:53 AM
Federer did indeed have a cakewalk draw to the finals of both the Slams. You deliberately put down Murray's draw while doing the exact opposite with Federers. You were anything but not biased. You really are pathetic.

Murray had an easy run both RG and Wimbledon. He had a FAR harder semi-final than Federer, but I would have much rather had Murray's draw to the semi at Wimbledon and the quarters at RG.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 04:56 AM
My personal opinion is that he played better against Roddick. I thought he let himself down on the big points, but other than that he played well.

That said, people cannot accuse Murray of pushing in the Roddick match and then point to his winners/UE count in that match when it is convenient for them (he hit more winners and less UEs than Roddick). You can't have it both ways.

I don't think he pushed vs Roddick. I felt that both men played very good matches.

Roddick did a lot of key things better though---played better on the big points, 75% 1st serve percentage (causing a lot of unreturnable serves.) Overall I felt it was a fairly high-quality match.

CountryHillbilly
08-11-2009, 05:06 AM
I don't think he pushed vs Roddick. I felt that both men played very good matches.

Roddick did a lot of key things better though---played better on the big points, 75% 1st serve percentage (causing a lot of unreturnable serves.) Overall I felt it was a fairly high-quality match.

I think he pushed more against Roddick. Especially on big points. The last point in the match was Murray's serve and he let Roddick dominate.

Many of Murray's winners come from Roddick's unsuccessful aggressive play. Even in 1st set, which Roddick won convincingly, Murray had more aces and winners.

TheFifthSet
08-11-2009, 05:20 AM
I think he pushed more against Roddick. Especially on big points. The last point in the match was Murray's serve and he let Roddick dominate.

Many of Murray's winners come from Roddick's unsuccessful aggressive play. Even in 1st set, which Roddick won convincingly, Murray had more aces and winners.

Convincingly . . . . meh, Roddick only won six more points, less winners but one more ace, one less error.

85% 1st serve percentage, that's what won him the first set.

CountryHillbilly
08-11-2009, 05:30 AM
Convincingly . . . . meh, Roddick only won six more points, less winners but one more ace, one less error.

85% 1st serve percentage, that's what won him the first set.

Yeah, of course, I'm not denying that. That's the main reason, and then those net approaches.

P_Agony
08-11-2009, 05:35 AM
I think Murray played a great match against Roddick for the most part but was unlucky in a few key points. Credit has to go to Roddick as well who didn't let go.

However, Murray outserved Roddick in the first sets, it was an odd sight.

dragonfire
08-11-2009, 05:40 AM
murray played really well, even though murray fans will deny it. Roddick just played better.

sh@de
08-11-2009, 06:35 AM
Murray was better in the Roddick match.

dragonfire
08-11-2009, 06:37 AM
lets not forget, roddick was a step up from wawrinka, a GS champ, former number 1. Murray always gets beat by a red hot player unfortunately.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-11-2009, 07:29 AM
Murray played better against Roddick without a doubt, except for the big points, then he was wayyyy to defensive, and lets not forget that Roddick is a much better grasscourt-player than Wawrinka.

NamRanger
08-11-2009, 07:34 AM
I think Murray played a great match against Roddick for the most part but was unlucky in a few key points. Credit has to go to Roddick as well who didn't let go.

However, Murray outserved Roddick in the first sets, it was an odd sight.



Roddick's return game sucks and Murray's positioning does not allow him to be aced easily. I don't think Murray outserved Roddick at any point in that match at all.

TheMagicianOfPrecision
08-11-2009, 07:36 AM
Roddick's return game sucks and Murray's positioning does not allow him to be aced easily. I don't think Murray outserved Roddick at any point in that match at all.
Agree, he didnt outserve him, maybe he had a few more aces but Roddick is a lot easier to ace than Murray. Id say Roddick served better that match.