PDA

View Full Version : Murray's message to Federer and Nadal for Wimbledon: "Be Afraid, Be VERY Afraid"


Pages : [1] 2

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 07:42 PM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

Bud
06-11-2011, 07:43 PM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

I saw it.

Murray played well but Roddick also sucked :|

ernestsgulbisfan#1
06-11-2011, 07:43 PM
If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

I didn't see it, so I'm a loser. :(


On topic....urr......I hope the Wimbledon is a whole lot of fun. :):)

TennisBatman
06-11-2011, 07:47 PM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

Murray is the GOAT!!!

Wait, I didn't see the semi...nevermind.

Sentinel
06-11-2011, 07:47 PM
I did not hear Andy say anything of the sort. Or did he look towards Spain and shake his fist ?

But seriously, yes, i totally agree, everyone should be very afraid of Murray. He will win one slam this year.

sonicare
06-11-2011, 07:47 PM
Murray will buckle under pressure. He's gone 0-9 in slam final sets against guys who he matches up well against

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 07:50 PM
I saw it.

Murray played well but Roddick also sucked :|
What Roddick did didn't matter one bit. He could have been Nadal and Federer rolled into one and it wouldn't have mattered one bit. The way Murray played today on grass, he could have beaten Federer and Sampras 2-on-1. I've never seen either Federer nor Nadal play this well on grass. Murray's level today was something out of fantasy land. :shock:

BeHappy
06-11-2011, 07:51 PM
Roddick was appalling.

sonicare
06-11-2011, 07:52 PM
What Roddick did didn't matter one bit. He could have been Nadal and Federer rolled into one and it wouldn't have mattered one bit. The way Murray played today on grass, he could have beaten Federer and Sampras 2-on-1. I've never seen either Federer nor Nadal play this well on grass. Murray's level today was something out of fantasy land. :shock:

Lol. Not sure if serious

Spider
06-11-2011, 07:52 PM
Both Nadal and Djokovic will be praying to see Federer's name in their section for the semi's. Because if it is Murray, in his current form, it would be trouble.

Spider
06-11-2011, 07:53 PM
Lol. Not sure if serious

If you saw the match, you would realize the level of tennis he brought in it.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 07:54 PM
Lol. Not sure if serious
If you saw the match, you wouldn't be asking that question. :shock:

Spider
06-11-2011, 07:57 PM
Roddick was playing close to his best tennis in that match. And ended up winning just 4 games...

TheNatural
06-11-2011, 07:57 PM
Murray or Tsonga v Nadal Wimbledon final coming up.

Sid_Vicious
06-11-2011, 07:58 PM
http://images.sportinglife.com/07/06/330/murraywimbledontrophy_368367.jpg

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 07:58 PM
Roddick was appalling.
I think Murray had something to do with that. The level at which Murray was playing today, it made Roddick look like a South American claycourter playing his very first match of his life on grass, not someone who has won Queens 4 times and been to the Wimbledon finals 3 times.

Spider
06-11-2011, 07:59 PM
http://images.sportinglife.com/07/06/330/murraywimbledontrophy_368367.jpg

If he can bring this level of tennis for each match, I am pretty certain he will win Wimbledon this year. The question is can he bring this level for all matches?

MichaelNadal
06-11-2011, 08:00 PM
He's giving the brits a lot of hope that's for sure.

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 08:06 PM
What Roddick did didn't matter one bit. He could have been Nadal and Federer rolled into one and it wouldn't have mattered one bit. The way Murray played today on grass, he could have beaten Federer and Sampras 2-on-1. I've never seen either Federer nor Nadal play this well on grass. Murray's level today was something out of fantasy land. :shock:

Get real. Federer or Sampras in their primes would have easily demolished him.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 08:08 PM
Get real. Federer or Sampras in their primes would have easily demolished him.
I'm guessing you didn't see the semi today.

President
06-11-2011, 08:10 PM
Roddick was playing close to his best tennis in that match. And ended up winning just 4 games...

Ok now we know you're trolling...

SStrikerR
06-11-2011, 08:11 PM
I watched the first set this morning, then decided to eat and shower before coming back to watch the rest.

Yeah, the match was over before I got back. Murray = goat

Feņa14
06-11-2011, 08:19 PM
Murray was brilliant yesterday, I think Roddick's first serve percentage was 83, yet he just got blown away.

If Murray can bring that tennis to the second week of Wimbledon, he should be at least making the final. We'll have to see if he can.

TheTruth
06-11-2011, 08:21 PM
He was scary, without a doubt.

Mustard
06-11-2011, 08:26 PM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

We know Murray has the ability to beat anyone on his day, but we also know that he has days where he has terrible body language and that he can lose to anyone in the field on those days. He also struggles to win the most crucial points in many of the big matches he does play, see 2010 Wimbledon semi final against Nadal and the 3 slam finals he's played where he's been as flat as a pancake and seemingly content to just put the ball back into play.

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 08:27 PM
I'm guessing you didn't see the semi today.

You're right, I didn't, but Is saw the last two games where yes, Murray played very, very well. But implying he'd definitely beat Fed and Sampras in their primes? Fed and Sampras in their primes were almost destined to win. IMO Murray wouldn't have a chance. We're talking about a Grand Slam here. And not just any, but Wimbledon. Fed and Sampras both being GOATS step up their game and are/were true champions.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 08:39 PM
You're right, I didn't, but Is saw the last two games where yes, Murray played very, very well. But implying he'd definitely beat Fed and Sampras in their primes? Fed and Sampras in their primes were almost destined to win. IMO Murray wouldn't have a chance. We're talking about a Grand Slam here. And not just any, but Wimbledon. Fed and Sampras both being GOATS step up their game and are/were true champions.
Stop right there. Enough said. The rest of your post is irrelevant.

If you can imagine the absolute best any pro can possibly play, that was how Murray played today. Forget any of the matches that Djokovic won during his winning streak. Murray would have blown him away today. Murray's winner to unforced error ratio today must have been something like 10-to-1. He was hitting winners at will - off of any shot, from anywhere in the court, anytime he felt like hitting one. It was ridiculous! Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance. :shock:

Spider
06-11-2011, 08:43 PM
Ok now we know you're trolling...

Roddick's first serve was extremely high and yet was broken like he was some random player without serve. Watch the match again and then we will discuss.

powerangle
06-11-2011, 08:46 PM
Murray always had the ability to produce amazing tennis...but that mental block of his in slam finals....damn. It's almost as bad as Federer's mental crampage against Nadal.

Ambivalent
06-11-2011, 09:01 PM
Stop right there. Enough said. The rest of your post is irrelevant.

If you can imagine the absolute best any pro can possibly play, that was how Murray played today. Forget any of the matches that Djokovic won during his winning streak. Murray would have blown him away today. Murray's winner to unforced error ratio today must have been something like 10-to-1. He was hitting winners at will - off of any shot, from anywhere in the court, anytime he felt like hitting one. It was ridiculous! Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance. :shock:

Roddick was giving up sitters with his powderpuff tennis. He may as well have been feeding Murray shots.

I guarantee Murray will not win Wimbledon. He probably would be lucky to even make the semi.

Spider
06-11-2011, 09:04 PM
Roddick was giving up sitters with his powderpuff tennis. He may as well have been feeding Murray shots.

I guarantee Murray will not win Wimbledon. He probably would be lucky to even make the semi.

Murray reaching the semifinal is more of a certainty than Djokovic.

Magnus
06-11-2011, 09:07 PM
Didn't watch, but as long as Murray played better than his awful FO SF display, I'm happy.

Murrayfan31
06-11-2011, 09:16 PM
He was good but Roddick can make you look better than you are. Roddick gives you a great rhythm. :D Murray always was a great returner and after that, Murray just overpowers Roddick. It will be interesting though. Djokovic will be Murray's toughest challenge on any surface imo.

OTMPut
06-11-2011, 09:23 PM
we need this. we need people to talk about winning wimbledon. we need the press calling him the favorite. has done wonders before priming him up for the slaughter.

1970CRBase
06-11-2011, 09:26 PM
Stanislas Wawrinka AO 2011. 987th backhand winner!!!

:rolleyes:

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 10:04 PM
Roddick was giving up sitters with his powderpuff tennis. He may as well have been feeding Murray shots.

I guarantee Murray will not win Wimbledon. He probably would be lucky to even make the semi.
Murray was hitting clean return winners off of Roddick's serves CONSISTENTLY. Have you EVER seen ANYONE do that on GRASS or on any other surface for that matter?

MichaelNadal
06-11-2011, 10:06 PM
Murray was hitting clean return winners off of Roddick's FIRST serves CONSISTENTLY. Have you EVER seen ANYONE do that on GRASS or on any other surface for that matter?

Sounds pretty insane, I can't wait to see the highlights.

Rhino
06-11-2011, 10:12 PM
It will be interesting to see what Murray can do at Wimbledon this year but I still doubt that he could beat Nadal or Federer there. Djokovic maybe.

Bartelby
06-11-2011, 10:13 PM
Roddick is hardly in peak form, and every match-up has a different dynamic. And yes I saw it and was impressed, but also saw him against Nadal at RG so we await, to use a cliche, 'the moment of truth' at Wimbledon.

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 10:19 PM
Stop right there. Enough said. The rest of your post is irrelevant.

If you can imagine the absolute best any pro can possibly play, that was how Murray played today. Forget any of the matches that Djokovic won during his winning streak. Murray would have blown him away today. Murray's winner to unforced error ratio today must have been something like 10-to-1. He was hitting winners at will - off of any shot, from anywhere in the court, anytime he felt like hitting one. It was ridiculous! Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance. :shock:

1. BreakPoint: "If you can imagine the absolute best any pro can possibly play, that was how Murray played today."
Surely you are exaggerating here. The best possible means zero unforced errors (let alone hitting nearly every shot as a winner) and from the 2 games of the match that I saw, I saw Murray make at least one unforced error.

2. Sampras said he felt invincible/unbeatable. at Wimbledon 1999
Enough said. I'm willing to take Sampras' word over yours.

3. Murray played Roddick
Whilst I did notice Murray handling Roddick's huge serves very well (even though Federer can do this too), Roddick has weak, loopy groundstrokes, hits a terrible 'volley', and 'defends' poorly. So what's so special about Murray easily straight setting Roddick, apart from the fact that he returned his serve well?


And by the way, I definitely agree that Murray would have beaten Djokovic if his streak were still going and if they met. There is no doubt Murray played amazingly, but that in no way compares to playing a prime Federer or Sampras at WIMBLEDON (a slam) who are all time champions.

Terre Battu
06-11-2011, 10:22 PM
Murray's message: Be very afraid. Be very afraid, as I have no b@lls for the big stage.

syc23
06-11-2011, 10:29 PM
http://images.sportinglife.com/07/06/330/murraywimbledontrophy_368367.jpg

I've never seen a gayer photo. Shows you how pompous Federer looked in that jacket.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 10:50 PM
1. BreakPoint: "If you can imagine the absolute best any pro can possibly play, that was how Murray played today."
Surely you are exaggerating here. The best possible means zero unforced errors (let alone hitting nearly every shot as a winner) and from the 2 games of the match that I saw, I saw Murray make at least one unforced error.

2. Sampras said he felt invincible/unbeatable. at Wimbledon 1999
Enough said. I'm willing to take Sampras' word over yours.

3. Murray played Roddick
Whilst I did notice Murray handling Roddick's huge serves very well (even though Federer can do this too), Roddick has weak, loopy groundstrokes, hits a terrible 'volley', and 'defends' poorly. So what's so special about Murray easily straight setting Roddick, apart from the fact that he returned his serve well?


And by the way, I definitely agree that Murray would have beaten Djokovic if his streak were still going and if they met. There is no doubt Murray played amazingly, but that in no way compares to playing a prime Federer or Sampras at WIMBLEDON (a slam) who are all time champions.

1. The last time I saw anyone play this well on grass was the 1999 Wimbledon final when Sampras destroyed Agassi. Before that it was the 1984 final when McEnroe embarrassed Connors. Before that it was the 1978 final when Borg crushed Connors. That's about it.

2. Did Sampras have to play the June 11, 2001 Murray at Wimbledon in 1999?

3. Federer blocks Roddick's serves back to get into the point. Murray was ripping clean winners off of Roddick's serves. Big difference.

Yes, Roddick sucks so much on grass that he's won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals. Anyone with weak, loopy groundstrokes and terrible volleys and defends poorly can do that, right?

Again, you admitted you didn't see the match. Thus, you don't have a clue. How can you comment on the performance of a player in a match that you didn't see? :confused: How does that work?

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 10:55 PM
1. The last time I saw anyone play this well on grass was the 1999 Wimbledon final when Sampras destroyed Agassi. Before that it was the 1984 final when McEnroe embarrassed Connors. Before that it was the 1978 final when Borg crushed Connors. That's about it.

2. Did Sampras have to play the June 11, 2001 Murray at Wimbledon in 1999?

3. Federer blocks Roddick's serves back to get into the point. Murray was ripping clean winners off of Roddick's serves. Big difference.

Yes, Roddick sucks so much on grass that he's won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals. Anyone with weak, loopy groundstrokes and terrible volleys and defends poorly can do that, right?

Again, you admitted you didn't see the match. Thus, you don't have a clue. How can you comment on the performance of a player in a match that you didn't see? :confused: How does that work?

Ok whatever, you're still just saying stuff which comes down to your own perception/point of view. What will you say if Murray doesn't win Wimbledon?

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 11:00 PM
1. The last time I saw anyone play this well on grass was the 1999 Wimbledon final when Sampras destroyed Agassi. Before that it was the 1984 final when McEnroe embarrassed Connors. Before that it was the 1978 final when Borg crushed Connors. That's about it.

2. Did Sampras have to play the June 11, 2001 Murray at Wimbledon in 1999?

3. Federer blocks Roddick's serves back to get into the point. Murray was ripping clean winners off of Roddick's serves. Big difference.

Yes, Roddick sucks so much on grass that he's won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals. Anyone with weak, loopy groundstrokes and terrible volleys and defends poorly can do that, right?

Again, you admitted you didn't see the match. Thus, you don't have a clue. How can you comment on the performance of a player in a match that you didn't see? :confused: How does that work?

I decided to reply to your points anyway...

1. You're just saying your opinion and who you think was playing well and when. I'm sure many (if not most) people would disagree with you.

2. No, but the point is he said HE felt unbeatable. This has to do with what he feels about the way HE is playing, not his opponent.

3. You've got a point. But that doesn't mean Murray would beat a prime Fed or Sampras.

BreakPoint says: Yes, Roddick sucks so much on grass that he's won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals. Anyone with weak, loopy groundstrokes and terrible volleys and defends poorly can do that, right?

Roddick has been very successful on grass because he has an excellent serve (which is even better on grass), and consistency. He grinds. Yes you will do well against most players, but not the very best like Federer or Nadal. Hence why he hasn't WON Wimbledon.

Sid_Vicious
06-11-2011, 11:11 PM
I've never seen a gayer photo. Shows you how pompous Federer looked in that jacket.
Cool story bro.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 11:17 PM
Ok whatever, you're still just saying stuff which comes down to your own perception/point of view. What will you say if Murray doesn't win Wimbledon?
Nothing. If he doesn't in Wimbledon then he didn't play as well as he did today in the semis of Queens. Very simple.

But if he does play as well as he did today, Federer and Nadal are in big trouble.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 11:26 PM
I decided to reply to your points anyway...

1. You're just saying your opinion and who you think was playing well and when. I'm sure many (if not most) people would disagree with you.

2. No, but the point is he said HE felt unbeatable. This has to do with what he feels about the way HE is playing, not his opponent.

3. You've got a point. But that doesn't mean Murray would beat a prime Fed or Sampras.

BreakPoint says: Yes, Roddick sucks so much on grass that he's won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals. Anyone with weak, loopy groundstrokes and terrible volleys and defends poorly can do that, right?

Roddick has been very successful on grass because he has an excellent serve (which is even better on grass), and consistency. He grinds. Yes you will do well against most players, but not the very best like Federer or Nadal. Hence why he hasn't WON Wimbledon.
Therefore, everyone who hasn't won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals must suck worse than Roddick on grass, right? Um...that's about every pro on the ATP Tour.

Murray returned serve today as if Roddick has the worst serve in the history of tennis....and on grass!!! Think what he would do to Federer's or Nadal's serve.

Oh, and ONLY reason Roddick hasn't won Wimbledon is because of a certain guy named Federer. Murray beat Roddick today 6-3, 6-1, breaking Roddick's serve 3 times in a single set! The last time Federer beat Roddick on grass, he had to squeak out 2 tiebreaks and go 16-14 in the 5th set before he could get a single break!

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 11:28 PM
Nothing. If he doesn't in Wimbledon then he didn't play as well as he did today in the semis of Queens. Very simple.

But if he does play as well as he did today, Federer and Nadal are in big trouble.

How convenient since this is what will happen.

gold soundz
06-11-2011, 11:29 PM
Therefore, everyone who hasn't won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals must suck worse than Roddick on grass, right? Um...that's about every pro on the ATP Tour.

Murray returned serve today as if Roddick has the worst serve in the history of tennis....and on grass!!! Think what he would do to Federer's or Nadal's serve.

Oh, and ONLY reason Roddick hasn't won Wimbledon is because of a certain guy named Federer. Murray beat Roddick today 6-3, 6-1, breaking Roddick's serve 3 times in a single set! The last time Federer beat Roddick on grass, he had to squeak out 2 tiebreaks and go 16-14 in the 5th set before he could get a single break!

Federer played terrible for his standards in the 09 final. With his normal game he destroys Roddick which the results show.

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 11:30 PM
How convenient since this is what will happen.
And you know this for sure because....?

If you're so sure, why not bet a million dollars right now on Murray not to win? Easy guaranteed free money, right?

BreakPoint
06-11-2011, 11:33 PM
Federer played terrible for his standards in the 09 final. With his normal game he destroys Roddick which the results show.
And how do yo know he won't play at the same standard again this year?

You only think Federer played poorly because Roddick pushed him to 16-14 in the 5th set. If Federer played exactly the same but beat Roddick in straight sets, you'd be saying that Federer played great. :???:

batz
06-12-2011, 12:08 AM
I think BP is probably trolling us Murray fans :) but having watched a few hundred of Murray's matches, yesterday was definitely 'up there'. When Andy Roddick is serving 80% and you are hitting returm winners past him almost at will, then you're having a good day.

Murray himself said he 'got lucky' and that 'he could do nothing wrong'.

miyagi
06-12-2011, 12:30 AM
Hmmmmm I doubt Murray will win, maybe he will get to the final. But lets be honest here, playing very very well in a ATP 250 semi final against a guy who has been injured and you have a dominant winning H2H against.

Is very very different to handling the pressure of winning your home Slam against some of the best players in the history of the sport?

But by all means jump on the band wagon.....

Speranza
06-12-2011, 12:42 AM
Holmes: I did see the match. I was very impressed by Murray. However, the following points stuck with me:

1. Roddick is NOT the player he once was. Neither his serve, nor his forehand were weapons yesterday. His average 1st serve speed was 120 mph. Murray's was 119 mph. Murray hit 11 plus aces in the first set alone, I think Roddick hit 3 plus.

2. Roddick seemed slow in movement in comparison to his opponent. It was easier for Murray to hit passing shots when his opponent did NOT move well or was predictable. He also read Roddick's serve easily.

(Actually, it reminded me of a certain AO match between Federer and Roddick!)

3. Murray was in the zone, and I loved watching him, I hope he can bring that form to Wimbledon against the better players. (I'd like either him or Federer to take it this year.)

And as for Spider saying Roddick was near his best... Don't let your unending support for Murray taint or blind all else you see.

TennisFan3
06-12-2011, 12:52 AM
Holmes: I did see the match. I was very impressed by Murray. However, the following points stuck with me:

1. Roddick is NOT the player he once was. Neither his serve, nor his forehand were weapons yesterday. His average 1st serve speed was 120 mph. Murray's was 119 mph. Murray hit 11 plus aces in the first set alone, I think Roddick hit 3 plus.

2. Roddick seemed slow in movement in comparison to his opponent. It was easier for Murray to hit passing shots when his opponent did NOT move well or was predictable. He also read Roddick's serve easily.

(Actually, it reminded me of a certain AO match between Federer and Roddick!)

3. Murray was in the zone, and I loved watching him, I hope he can bring that form to Wimbledon against the better players. (I'd like either him or Federer to take it this year.)

And as for Spider saying Roddick was near his best... Don't let your unending support for Murray taint or blind all else you see.

Another thing with Roddick was that when he decided to approach to the net, he put the message on facebook, twitter, and emailed everyone on his address book for good measure. Heck, my grandma who's never picked a tennis racquet, would probably be prepared for Roddick approaching the net. No wonder Muzz made him look like a fool. I was astounded by the same pattern - hit a lame top spin approach shot (who the heck uses top spin in an approach shot?) , say a prayer and rush to the net.. Jeez.

W.r.t OP's post - as usual the truth is somewhere in the middle, Murray played an excellent match, where as Roddick was trash.

I'm not sure that Murray will definitely win Wimbledon based on his performance, but what I'm definitely sure of is that Roddick won't - and most likely won't even make it to the SF given his tennis level..

MichaelNadal
06-12-2011, 12:55 AM
Another thing with Roddick was that when he decided to approach to the net, he put the message on facebook, twitter, and emailed everyone on his address book for good measure. Heck, my grandma who's never picked a tennis racquet, would probably be prepared for Roddick approaching the net. No wonder Muzz made him look like a fool. I was astounded by the same pattern - hit a lame top spin approach shot (who the heck uses top spin in an approach shot?) , say a prayer and rush to the net.. Jeez.

W.r.t OP's post - as usual the truth is somewhere in the middle, Murray played an excellent match, where as Roddick was trash.

I'm not sure that Murray will definitely win Wimbledon based on his performance, but what I'm definitely sure of is that Roddick won't - and most likely won't even make it to the SF given his tennis level..

He's gonna have nightmares about the 2009 final for the rest of his life.

stingstang
06-12-2011, 12:56 AM
I saw highlights. He beat Roddick, big whoop de doo!

I like Roddick so this hurts but he is little more than a journeyman now. his serve has lost its explosiveness, his forehand is just spinny with no real power. Fed, Djoker, Nadal (after a rest) and loads others would have destroyed him easy.

Speranza
06-12-2011, 01:01 AM
Another thing with Roddick was that when he decided to approach to the net, he put the message on facebook, twitter, and emailed everyone on his address book for good measure. Heck, my grandma who's never picked a tennis racquet, would probably be prepared for Roddick approaching the net. No wonder Muzz made him look like a fool. I was astounded by the same pattern - hit a lame top spin approach shot (who the heck uses top spin in an approach shot?) , say a prayer and rush to the net.. Jeez.

W.r.t OP's post - as usual the truth is somewhere in the middle, Murray played an excellent match, where as Roddick was trash.

I'm not sure that Murray will definitely win Wimbledon based on his performance, but what I'm definitely sure of is that Roddick won't - and most likely won't even make it to the SF given his tennis level..

Holmes: Spot on.

I saw highlights. He beat Roddick, big whoop de doo!

I like Roddick so this hurts but he is little more than a journeyman now. his serve has lost its explosiveness, his forehand is just spinny with no real power. Fed, Djoker, Nadal (after a rest) and loads others would have destroyed him easy.

Again, I agree with this too.

To top it off, the grass at Wimbledon will be slower than the grass is at Queens. This only heightens the problems for Roddick and others that like to play on faster surfaces.

Big_Dangerous
06-12-2011, 01:02 AM
And how do yo know he won't play at the same standard again this year?

You only think Federer played poorly because Roddick pushed him to 16-14 in the 5th set. If Federer played exactly the same but beat Roddick in straight sets, you'd be saying that Federer played great. :???:

Stop trollin man. Yes Andy played well, but let's wait until he actually wins a slam.

Bartelby
06-12-2011, 01:10 AM
... and what if Tsonga beats Murray in the next few hours?

Tennis_Monk
06-12-2011, 01:36 AM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

Seen the match. Good stuff from Murray. I will leave it at that.

Obviosuly Murray doesnt need any messages from Nadal or Federer. he's been getting 'em for quite some time now.

tusharlovesrafa
06-12-2011, 02:01 AM
Mayday...mayday...mayday...mayday...mayday..mayday ...mayday...mayday.........
Plane Crashing....plane Crashing.......help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fedex
06-12-2011, 04:50 AM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

I saw it. It was an awesome display.
If he plays like that at Wimbledon then he'll be practically unstoppable.
However, Murray himself said it would be difficult to maintain that level.
If he plays near to that level then he'll still be difficult to stop.
Murray's also mentally stronger so a definite contender.

Praetorian
06-12-2011, 06:32 AM
Ok now we know you're trolling...

Or he was smoking some really good stuff...:shock:

coloskier
06-12-2011, 08:32 AM
If you saw the match, you wouldn't be asking that question. :shock:

So, Murray wasted his only "God Mode" level match of the year that he ever plays on a 250 level Semifinal where he matches up better against his opponent than probably any other opponent he plays against. Typical. Once he gets to 3 of 5 set matches he'll fold as usual. BP, are hope you are saying this "tongue in cheek", or I will start to wonder about you. :-)

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 10:43 AM
To top it off, the grass at Wimbledon will be slower than the grass is at Queens. This only heightens the problems for Roddick and others that like to play on faster surfaces.
Yeah, imagine what Murray would do to Roddick at Wimbledon if he could do what he did yesterday to Roddick on the faster grass of Queens. :shock: And Roddick has made 3 Wimbledon finals while Murray has made none.

When Murray is in "God-mode", I don't think anyone can touch him.

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 10:45 AM
... and what if Tsonga beats Murray in the next few hours?
Then Murray didn't play as well as he did against Roddick yesterday. That's how tennis works. You play well, you win. You don't play well, you lose. Simple. :)

sureshs
06-12-2011, 10:45 AM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

I saw part of it and seeing it again now due to the rain cancellation of the final - no

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 10:48 AM
So, Murray wasted his only "God Mode" level match of the year that he ever plays on a 250 level Semifinal where he matches up better against his opponent than probably any other opponent he plays against. Typical. Once he gets to 3 of 5 set matches he'll fold as usual. BP, are hope you are saying this "tongue in cheek", or I will start to wonder about you. :-)
Um...if you saw Murray's match versus Troicki at the French Open, how could you possibly say that Murray folds as usual in best 3 of 5 matches? :confused: And Murray did it with a torn ankle. :shock:

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 11:02 AM
Then Murray didn't play as well as he did against Roddick yesterday. That's how tennis works. You play well, you win. You don't play well, you lose. Simple. :)

So is there a possible scenario where Murray played as well as he did yesterday, but still lost?

And if it is possible, how would we evaluate his form?

Saying that his form was not the same as it was in the semis seems like taking the easy way out.

Mick
06-12-2011, 11:05 AM
well, murray plays great against other players but when he faces the top 3 (federer, djokovic, nadal), usually they would play greater than him.

Viking_Golfer
06-12-2011, 11:06 AM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

Look Murray had an ON day, Roddick had an OFF day.

You can't use this as nothing but one good match from Murray - and Roddick sucks a lot recently.

Murray will reach the Semi at Wimby maximum, he will never win Wimby, NEVER :)

FeVer
06-12-2011, 11:38 AM
Ok calm down. These days Roddick's just a serve and Murray's a good enough returner to counter that serve. Off the ground Roddick has nothing, even though he was playing well. There is nothing on his forehand, his backhand is nifty at times, but he has the game of 30-50 ranked player. Against Nadal, Federer and Djokovic, Murray can **** off.

And by the way, yes, I did see the match.

FeVer
06-12-2011, 11:40 AM
Yeah, imagine what Murray would do to Roddick at Wimbledon if he could do what he did yesterday to Roddick on the faster grass of Queens. :shock: And Roddick has made 3 Wimbledon finals while Murray has made none.

When Murray is in "God-mode", I don't think anyone can touch him.

I'm absolutely certain that Rafa, Novak or Roger in god mode could hammer Murray in god mode. They just have more game.

Tammo
06-12-2011, 11:50 AM
Federer should be afraid, but probably not Nadal.

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 11:53 AM
Federer should be afraid, but probably not Nadal.

This makes sense.

We all know Murray owns Fed at the slam finals and Rafa has never lost to Murray in slams.

Oh wait....

Noltae
06-12-2011, 12:02 PM
I think the semi against Roddick showed that Murray's best is yet to come - if anyone is claiming that Murray didn't totally play an amazing Match - well obviously they are just hating on him

syc23
06-12-2011, 12:04 PM
Look Murray had an ON day, Roddick had an OFF day.

You can't use this as nothing but one good match from Murray - and Roddick sucks a lot recently.

Murray will reach the Semi at Wimby maximum, he will never win Wimby, NEVER :)

Only seemed like yesterday when people said there was no chance in hell for Murray to ever reach a RG semi final. So don't write Murray off to ever reaching a Wimbledon final just yet.

Comet Buster
06-12-2011, 12:54 PM
The way Murray played today on grass, he could have beaten Federer and Sampras 2-on-1. I've never seen either Federer nor Nadal play this well on grass. Murray's level today was something out of fantasy land. :shock:

Taking this as my sig. SHOTGUN!!! MINE MINE MINE.

Tammo
06-12-2011, 01:02 PM
This makes sense.

We all know Murray owns Fed at the slam finals and Rafa has never lost to Murray in slams.

Oh wait....

We know Wimbledon is played on grass, and Federer and Murray have never played on grass.

We all know Murray has beaten Nadal at Wimbledon in 2008 and 2010 without dropping a set.

Oh wait....

Comet Buster
06-12-2011, 01:07 PM
When Murray is in "God-mode", I don't think anyone can touch him.

Federer, Nadal and Safin would probably disagree.

Richie Rich
06-12-2011, 01:10 PM
matches like murray hod don't happen too often. hopefully he didn't leave it all on the court this week and has some of that "magic" left for the 2nd week of wimbledon

Legend of Borg
06-12-2011, 01:10 PM
We know Wimbledon is played on grass, and Federer and Murray have never played on grass.

We all know Murray has beaten Nadal at Wimbledon in 2008 and 2010 without dropping a set.

Oh wait....



Based on their H2H in slams, Murray won't be the favorite against Fed.

He couldn't take him on HC, no way he takes him out on grass.

If he manages to keep his form, then he might put together a good performance against Nadal.

Either way, I don't see reason for Federer or Nadal to fear him at Wimby.


Edit: Give me one legitimate reason why Federer should "fear" Zero Man on grass, newb.

Just one.

Xizel
06-12-2011, 01:16 PM
Djo was playing God's tennis and they all thought he was going to crush Fed and Nadal in FO. That obviously didn't happen.

Marius_Hancu
06-12-2011, 01:16 PM
Let's get him to the SF first

Fedace
06-12-2011, 01:25 PM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

Andy always plays well when he goes deep into french open. Moment of truth, will be when he plays Rafa in the semi and possibly Federer in the finals. I see him getting past tired Rafa in the Semis but in the final, Federer will be Hungry for a win and Andy will have to put out the A+ game to come thru. but then he has a history of putting out B game in the slam finals so who knows ??

Fedex
06-12-2011, 01:49 PM
Federer, Nadal and Safin would probably disagree.

BreakPoint might be right.
Murray will take some stopping on current form.
He has occasionaly played like this against Federer, Nadal and Safin last year and they had no answers.
Murray destroyed them all so maybe BreakPoint has a valid point.
Ok you could go on about the fact it was in Masters tournaments but Murray has also beaten the likes of Nadal and DelPotro, pre injury, in Slams.
He's reached 3 Slam finals. Ok didn't perform great but bloody hell he got to 3 Slam finals! And losing them doesn't necesarily mean he's going to lose them in the future.
And current Murray is a good deal stronger.
I'm not basing this on one match btw.
I've noticed Murray get better and stronger pre French Open where he nearly took out Nadal and Djokovic on Clay and had a strong French Open reaching the semi final for the first time and giving Nadal a real battle.
Lost in three but put Nadal under pressure the whole match.
Murray will go far at Wimbedon and might even win the damn thing.

Comet Buster
06-12-2011, 01:55 PM
He has occasionaly played like this against Federer, Nadal and Safin last year and they had no answers.
Murray destroyed them all

You realise Safin retired in 2009? Right?

Fedex
06-12-2011, 02:08 PM
You realise Safin retired in 2009? Right?

Sorry was getting mixed up with Nalbandian but, anyway, you get my point.

jaggy
06-12-2011, 02:36 PM
As much as I want Murray to win this it is such a long shot I think, so much to overcome to do it.

zagor
06-12-2011, 02:58 PM
BreakPoint might be right.
Murray will take some stopping on current form.
He has occasionaly played like this against Federer, Nadal and Safin last year and they had no answers.
Murray destroyed them all so maybe BreakPoint has a valid point.
Ok you could go on about the fact it was in Masters tournaments but Murray has also beaten the likes of Nadal and DelPotro, pre injury, in Slams.
He's reached 3 Slam finals. Ok didn't perform great but bloody hell he got to 3 Slam finals! And losing them doesn't necesarily mean he's going to lose them in the future.
And current Murray is a good deal stronger.
I'm not basing this on one match btw.
I've noticed Murray get better and stronger pre French Open where he nearly took out Nadal and Djokovic on Clay and had a strong French Open reaching the semi final for the first time and giving Nadal a real battle.
Lost in three but put Nadal under pressure the whole match.
Murray will go far at Wimbedon and might even win the damn thing.

You might be getting ahead of yourself but honestly I have a feeling Murray has a real shot at this year's Wimbledon as well.He just had his best ever(by some margin)season on his worst surface and is displaying excellent form at Queens.We might both end up being wrong of course but no one can predict everything right.

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 03:22 PM
So is there a possible scenario where Murray played as well as he did yesterday, but still lost?

And if it is possible, how would we evaluate his form?

Saying that his form was not the same as it was in the semis seems like taking the easy way out.
I doubt it. If Murray plays as well as he did yesterday, I don't think anyone can beat him. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, etc. have all suffered at the hands of Murray when he was in "God-mode" in the past. Sometimes you'll see Murray beat someone who's not half bad by some ridiculous score like 6-0, 6-1 or something. That's when you know he was in "God-mode". Whether he can play like that for 7 straight matches at Wimbledon, well, we'll just have to wait and see. :)

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 03:23 PM
Look Murray had an ON day, Roddick had an OFF day.

You can't use this as nothing but one good match from Murray - and Roddick sucks a lot recently.

Murray will reach the Semi at Wimby maximum, he will never win Wimby, NEVER :)
You sound pretty certain about that. Then why not bet your life savings on it. You can't possibly lose, right? So why not win some free easy money?

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 03:30 PM
Federer, Nadal and Safin would probably disagree.
Murray has beaten Federer and Nadal when he was in "God-mode". :oops:

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 03:32 PM
Djo was playing God's tennis and they all thought he was going to crush Fed and Nadal in FO. That obviously didn't happen.
Djokovic was NOT in "God-mode" when he lost to Federer in the FO semis.

Dream_On
06-12-2011, 03:33 PM
I doubt it. If Murray plays as well as he did yesterday, I don't think anyone can beat him. Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, etc. have all suffered at the hands of Murray when he was in "God-mode" in the past. Sometimes you'll see Murray beat someone who's not half bad by some ridiculous score like 6-0, 6-1 or something. That's when you know he was in "God-mode". Whether he can play like that for 7 straight matches at Wimbledon, well, we'll just have to wait and see. :)

Murray probably only needs to be in god mode for 2, maybe 3 of those 7 matches.

Tennis_Monk
06-12-2011, 04:27 PM
Stop right there. Enough said. The rest of your post is irrelevant.

If you can imagine the absolute best any pro can possibly play, that was how Murray played today. Forget any of the matches that Djokovic won during his winning streak. Murray would have blown him away today. Murray's winner to unforced error ratio today must have been something like 10-to-1. He was hitting winners at will - off of any shot, from anywhere in the court, anytime he felt like hitting one. It was ridiculous! Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance. :shock:

Awesome Statement. A player better than Federer AND Sampras can only be meaning one thing.....we have a GOAT !!!!

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-12-2011, 05:00 PM
Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance. :shock:

Yeah.....sure. One match and all that you know about Sampras and Federer's games would be shut down by Murray, based on one match....

Think about that...and who Murray was playing.

mellowyellow
06-12-2011, 05:13 PM
Yeah.....sure. One match and all that you know about Sampras and Federer's games would be shut down by Murray, based on one match....

Think about that...and who Murray was playing.

You have to understand that this "god mode" Murray. This is a match tough and prime Roddick we are talking about too........ facts is facts man.

Tammo
06-12-2011, 05:18 PM
Based on their H2H in slams, Murray won't be the favorite against Fed.

He couldn't take him on HC, no way he takes him out on grass.

If he manages to keep his form, then he might put together a good performance against Nadal.

Either way, I don't see reason for Federer or Nadal to fear him at Wimby.


Edit: Give me one legitimate reason why Federer should "fear" Zero Man on grass, newb.

Just one.

******** Doesn't stand a chace against Murray's consistency on grass.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-12-2011, 05:32 PM
You have to understand that this "god mode" Murray. This is a match tough and prime Roddick we are talking about too........ facts is facts man.

Oh! "God mode" Murray? That explains it! We may as well award the next 10 majors to him right now, and tell the rest of the field to go on vacation for the next few years!

Buckethead
06-12-2011, 05:42 PM
What Roddick did didn't matter one bit. He could have been Nadal and Federer rolled into one and it wouldn't have mattered one bit. The way Murray played today on grass, he could have beaten Federer and Sampras 2-on-1. I've never seen either Federer nor Nadal play this well on grass. Murray's level today was something out of fantasy land. :shock:
LOL, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are no Roddick.

Murray is no Federer , Nadal and Djokovic.

1. The last time I saw anyone play this well on grass was the 1999 Wimbledon final when Sampras destroyed Agassi. Before that it was the 1984 final when McEnroe embarrassed Connors. Before that it was the 1978 final when Borg crushed Connors. That's about it.

2. Did Sampras have to play the June 11, 2001 Murray at Wimbledon in 1999?

3. Federer blocks Roddick's serves back to get into the point. Murray was ripping clean winners off of Roddick's serves. Big difference.

Yes, Roddick sucks so much on grass that he's won Queens 4 times and made 3 Wimbledon finals. Anyone with weak, loopy groundstrokes and terrible volleys and defends poorly can do that, right?

Again, you admitted you didn't see the match. Thus, you don't have a clue. How can you comment on the performance of a player in a match that you didn't see? :confused: How does that work?

Roddick made Murray look good charging the net with horrible approaching shots like a bull charging at the bull fighter.

This result is irrelevant, the fact is, Murray needs to play perfect tennis for 2 weeks, 7 matches, which He won't do it, He will not beat Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic to win a major.

I bet you're thinking that Nadal VS Tsonga match was relevant as well right?

Federer has this one on his bag already, it is up to him to screw it up.

Tony48
06-12-2011, 05:45 PM
Is this the twilight zone?

mellowyellow
06-12-2011, 05:57 PM
Oh! "God mode" Murray? That explains it! We may as well award the next 10 majors to him right now, and tell the rest of the field to go on vacation for the next few years!

Were you laughing as hard as I was?

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 05:57 PM
Is this the twilight zone?
No, it is just "the zone". Ask Murray what it was like to be in "the zone" yesterday. :)

BreakPoint
06-12-2011, 06:01 PM
Oh! "God mode" Murray? That explains it! We may as well award the next 10 majors to him right now, and tell the rest of the field to go on vacation for the next few years!
Do you seriously think Murray will be in "God-mode" for each and every match for the next 70 consecutive Grand Slam matches? Get real. Not even Federer was in "God-mode" for all of those matches that got him to 23 consecutive Slam semis.

Mick
06-12-2011, 06:10 PM
the problem is there are bigger gods :)

Tennis_Monk
06-12-2011, 06:15 PM
Thanks to tennis channel. saw the match again today.

Too much ado about nothing. I wouldnt make any predictions about Murray's wimbledon results based on this match.

FedExpress 333
06-12-2011, 06:25 PM
I saw the OP.











20 minutes later, I am in the Emergency Department of my local hospital due to my lungs dying from laughing too hard.

TheNatural
06-12-2011, 07:03 PM
No, it is just "the zone". Ask Murray what it was like to be in "the zone" yesterday. :)

After witnessing this God mode Murray on grass, should Nadal and Djoko prefer to have ******** on their side of the draw???:shock:

Nadal beat both on grass last time he played either, and he beat both in their most recent matches so the draw will probably affect Djoko more. Djoko must be shaking in his boots.

Messarger
06-12-2011, 08:51 PM
Nadal's message to Murray for Wimbledon "for sure you are an amazing player no? You are one of the best defenders on the tour so sometimes it is very difficult to play against you. I am sure one day you will win a grand slam because you have a high level of tennis. continue to work hard and all the best for Wimbledon."

mandy01
06-12-2011, 09:22 PM
You might be getting ahead of yourself but honestly I have a feeling Murray has a real shot at this year's Wimbledon as well.He just had his best ever(by some margin)season on his worst surface and is displaying excellent form at Queens.We might both end up being wrong of course but no one can predict everything right.Yes,you're right.Andy did actually have a really strong clay season this time around.That has to have given him confidence already and apparently he's played extremely well in Queens.The British Press will be it's usual self and will need a little bit of tuning out but I won't be surprised if Any manages it.And I think working with Cahill has helped him a great deal so far.

Fedex
06-12-2011, 11:14 PM
It's impossible for Murray to maintain that standard throughout a Slam. Murray himself admitted that, otherwise he would stroll Wimbledon.
No one, not even prime Federer, could hit winners at will off 130mph plus serves, hit winners at will off groundstrokes and place perfect drop shots at will, and serve well for 7 matches.
The point is that Murray's general standard and mentality are very strong just now and someone's going to have to play extremely well to have a chance against him.
It doesn't matter that Murray has never won a Slam before.
The past is meaningless. What matters is current form, and as someone who follows Murray with an objective and very critical eye, I can honestly say that this is the best Murray I've ever seen heading into Wimbledon.
Doesn't mean he's going to win it but he'll be up there and looking at Semi Final and beyond.

MixieP
06-12-2011, 11:20 PM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

I saw it. The only threat to Muurya's victory is Djokovic.

Nadal's is burnt out ("I wake up with pressure every day for four months", or words to that effect in his Queen's interview; he's just moaning about pressure and anxiousness and nervousness so much that he has started to not only experience it but believe it: Nadal to reach the QF, if that.) Federer's last glorious moment came in the FO semi.

Andy and Nole to slug it out. Victory to Murray.

Fedex
06-12-2011, 11:35 PM
I saw it. The only threat to Muurya's victory is Djokovic.

Nadal's is burnt out ("I wake up with pressure every day for four months", or words to that effect in his Queen's interview; he's just moaning about pressure and anxiousness and nervousness so much that he has started to not only experience it but believe it: Nadal to reach the QF, if that.) Federer's last glorious moment came in the FO semi.

Andy and Nole to slug it out. Victory to Murray.

Bold statement to write off both Federer and Nadal at a Slam.

Legend of Borg
06-13-2011, 02:09 AM
Is this the twilight zone?

Once you enter, you can't turn back.

batz
06-13-2011, 02:23 AM
LOL, Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are no Roddick.

Murray is no Federer , Nadal and Djokovic.



Roddick made Murray look good charging the net with horrible approaching shots like a bull charging at the bull fighter.

This result is irrelevant, the fact is, Murray needs to play perfect tennis for 2 weeks, 7 matches, which He won't do it, He will not beat Nadal, Federer, and Djokovic to win a major.

I bet you're thinking that Nadal VS Tsonga match was relevant as well right?

Federer has this one on his bag already, it is up to him to screw it up.

This is not a fact, it's an opinion - and an incorrect one. He doesn't have to 'play his best tennis for 7 games' to win a major and he certainly doesn't have to beat Rafa, Novak and Roger to win a major - in fact it is impossible for him to play all 3 at a major currently - but when did you ever let facts or logic get in the way of your infantile posts?

Joe Pike
06-13-2011, 02:26 AM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.



No Brit will ever win a slam in your lifetime.
Live with it.

batz
06-13-2011, 02:27 AM
It's impossible for Murray to maintain that standard throughout a Slam. Murray himself admitted that, otherwise he would stroll Wimbledon.
No one, not even prime Federer, could hit winners at will off 130mph plus serves, hit winners at will off groundstrokes and place perfect drop shots at will, and serve well for 7 matches.
The point is that Murray's general standard and mentality are very strong just now and someone's going to have to play extremely well to have a chance against him.
It doesn't matter that Murray has never won a Slam before.The past is meaningless. What matters is current form, and as someone who follows Murray with an objective and very critical eye, I can honestly say that this is the best Murray I've ever seen heading into Wimbledon.
Doesn't mean he's going to win it but he'll be up there and looking at Semi Final and beyond.

This point seems to be beyond the hard of thinking on these pages. The meme that says 'Player X hasn't won a slam therefore player X can never win a slam' is refuted by the FACT that every 1st time slam winner was once in the same position as player X

batz
06-13-2011, 02:29 AM
No Brit will ever win a slam in your lifetime.
Live with it.

Don't you just love it when people post infantile absolutist assertions on the internetz? It raises the standard of debate so much.

Sentinel
06-13-2011, 02:32 AM
I saw it. The only threat to Muurya's victory is Djokovic.

Nadal's is burnt out ("I wake up with pressure every day for four months", or words to that effect in his Queen's interview; he's just moaning about pressure and anxiousness and nervousness so much that he has started to not only experience it but believe it: Nadal to reach the QF, if that.) Federer's last glorious moment came in the FO semi.

Andy and Nole to slug it out. Victory to Murray.
Poor kid. maybe too much fiber in his diet. Or maybe Uncle Phoni sleeping too close. Or morning sickness.
Cmon Andy versus Ajmo Noel in the Wimbly final -- I'll be rooting for Andy, although i fear it will be a cliff-hanger.

Gorecki
06-13-2011, 02:43 AM
huuuuuhhh Did anyone see Danny Trejo in Nadal & Federer's whereabouts?

Zelda
06-13-2011, 03:13 AM
Such a pleasure seeing Andy M playing at his magnificent best. Everything clicked into place and poor Roddick never got a look-in. It was almost surreal - Murray totally outclassed one of the best specialist grass court players on the planet. One of the BBC presenters had described Roddick's form coming into the semi-final as 'awesome'. Murray's talent was sumptuously displayed and no one in their right mind will want to play him at Wimbledon.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-13-2011, 06:52 AM
Don't you just love it when people post infantile absolutist assertions on the internetz? It raises the standard of debate so much.

...much like BreakPoint's

Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance

A textbook example of the absolutist assertion.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-13-2011, 06:57 AM
Were you laughing as hard as I was?

Yes! Murray had a good day, but some of the claims in this thread...:)

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-13-2011, 06:57 AM
Were you laughing as hard as I was?

Yes! Murray had a good day, but some of the claims in this thread...:)

FeVer
06-13-2011, 07:20 AM
Funny, I thought Murray was in god mode? Today his "god mode was barely enough to beat Tsonga.

He won't win Wimbledon even if he continues the "God mode" from the Roddick match. He was bullied by Tsonga for almost two-thirds of the final. If he'd played a fresh Rafa or Roger today, they'd have cleaned him up in under an hour.

Setmatch45
06-13-2011, 07:27 AM
Murray needs to learn to handle the big spot. Until than nothing matters in regards to him and slams.

citrixscu
06-13-2011, 07:28 AM
Funny, I thought Murray was in god mode? Today his "god mode was barely enough to beat Tsonga.

He won't win Wimbledon even if he continues the "God mode" from the Roddick match. He was bullied by Tsonga for almost two-thirds of the final. If he'd played a fresh Rafa or Roger today, they'd have cleaned him up in under an hour.

Agreed. Murray can put up a nice match or two, or even a nice two weeks, but he just seems to crack when it really counts. I'd be quite surprised if he makes it to the SF.

1970CRBase
06-13-2011, 07:30 AM
Looked to me Tsonga was the better player for most of this match. Got careless/too impatient.

Comet Buster
06-13-2011, 07:32 AM
Murray has beaten Federer and Nadal when he was in "God-mode". :oops:

Yep. Silly me for thinking Murray at his peak would beat Federer, Nadal and Safin at their peaks. I'm such an idiot.

Fedex
06-13-2011, 07:32 AM
Funny, I thought Murray was in god mode? Today his "god mode was barely enough to beat Tsonga.

He won't win Wimbledon even if he continues the "God mode" from the Roddick match. He was bullied by Tsonga for almost two-thirds of the final. If he'd played a fresh Rafa or Roger today, they'd have cleaned him up in under an hour.

And you think Murray was fresh?!
And Tsonga played fantastic tennis.
I can see how he also bullied Nadal.
Would have been nice for Tsonga if he'd beaten Murray then he'd have the number 1 nad 4 ranked scalps going into Wimbledon.

BreakPoint
06-13-2011, 12:37 PM
No Brit will ever win a slam in your lifetime.
Live with it.
Well, I was certainly alive when I saw Virginia Wade win Wimbledon in 1977. :oops:

BTW, weren't you the one who said 10 years ago that no Swiss nor Serbian will ever win a Slam in my lifetime? :shock:

cknobman
06-13-2011, 01:02 PM
I thought Murray's message was "Dont worry about Roddick fellas, this guys sucks (like I needed to tell you that anyways)!!!!!!!!!"

Joe Pike
06-13-2011, 01:25 PM
Don't you just love it when people post infantile absolutist assertions on the internetz? It raises the standard of debate so much.


No, I don't think these crazy Brits who still dream about a Brit winning a slam (!) do raise the standard of debate in any regard.

BreakPoint
06-13-2011, 01:27 PM
...much like BreakPoint's



A textbook example of the absolutist assertion.
Not the same thing at all. My opinion is based on quantifiable and observed levels of play. To claim that Murray will "NEVER" win a Grand Slam is stating that you are the only person on the planet that can infallibly predict the future with 100% certainty. You cannot predict the future with any quantifiable proof nor observation because it hasn't happened yet. Whereas, I based my claim on observations of levels of play that have already happened and been documented.

What if Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic all died in a plane crash next month? Then your claim today that Murray will never win a Slam will seem pretty short-sighted, wouldn't it?

Magnus
06-13-2011, 01:32 PM
I think Murray will win a slam. Like the great Roger Federer once said, he is just too good of a player not to. I think Murray is better on the hard courts than the grass though, but he could win on any surface given the right play and state of mind. Go Murray! And Roddick too!

Magnus
06-13-2011, 01:34 PM
Looked to me Tsonga was the better player for most of this match. Got careless/too impatient.

That's Tsonga for you. Too careless, too inconsistent, raises his level once or twice a year and fades away for the rest. We know this guy can bring the heat (AO 08 against Nadal anyone?). He's got the strokes, the net play, the serve. I'm not sure about will though.

BreakPoint
06-13-2011, 01:35 PM
Looked to me Tsonga was the better player for most of this match. Got careless/too impatient.
Tsonga was on fire and in the zone for most of the match (just like he was when he pummeled Nadal at the '08 AO semis), but guess what? Murray still won. :)

Feņa14
06-13-2011, 01:44 PM
I was never worried for Murray during the final, he was playing solid and consistent throughout. Tsonga was his usual mix of highs and lows, then predictably got tight whenever it was his chance to raise his game and get the win.

Whilst it wasn't as explosive from Murray, it was a great display of match play, which complemented his all out destructive form he showed against Roddick in the semi.

FeVer
06-13-2011, 01:45 PM
And you think Murray was fresh?!
And Tsonga played fantastic tennis.
I can see how he also bullied Nadal.
Would have been nice for Tsonga if he'd beaten Murray then he'd have the number 1 nad 4 ranked scalps going into Wimbledon.

Far fresher than Rafa was during Queens. Rafa had to play the RG final and come straight to Queens. He barely had a couples of days' rest. Murray, on the other hand, had about 4 days rest. Murray was playing supposedly the best tennis of his life against Roddick. You telling me he managed that without being fresh? ********. And he was defending as well as he's ever done. He was pretty much fresh.

Tsonga PLAYED fantastic tennis. But Fedalovic pretty much ALWAYS play fantastic. And over 5 sets, they'll beat Murray. Murray can't allow himself to be thumped around for the best part of 2 sets against those two.

Fedex
06-13-2011, 01:57 PM
Far fresher than Rafa was during Queens. Rafa had to play the RG final and come straight to Queens. He barely had a couples of days' rest. Murray, on the other hand, had about 4 days rest. Murray was playing supposedly the best tennis of his life against Roddick. You telling me he managed that without being fresh? ********. And he was defending as well as he's ever done. He was pretty much fresh.

Tsonga PLAYED fantastic tennis. But Fedalovic pretty much ALWAYS play fantastic. And over 5 sets, they'll beat Murray. Murray can't allow himself to be thumped around for the best part of 2 sets against those two.

Murray's been involved in the finals and semi finals of the last three clay court tournaments.
He's not as fresh as you would like to make out. And only slightly fresher than Nadal so don't give it.

Nadalfan89
06-13-2011, 02:01 PM
Murray hype this early in the year? That doesn't usually start until July...

Well after he crashes out of the next slam like usual, it should keep the hype at bay at least until Cincy.

Fedex
06-13-2011, 02:06 PM
Murray hype this early in the year? That doesn't usually start until July...

Well after he crashes out of the next slam like usual, it should keep the hype at bay at least until Cincy.

What hype?
Only saying he has a good chance not saying he'll win it so what hype you talking about?

Fedex
06-13-2011, 02:08 PM
What's that on your T-shirt Naf fan 89?

Marius_Hancu
06-13-2011, 03:24 PM
M played OK, nothing special, with Tsonga.
We'll see.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-13-2011, 03:58 PM
Not the same thing at all. My opinion is based on quantifiable and observed levels of play. To claim that Murray will "NEVER" win a Grand Slam is stating that you are the only person on the planet that can infallibly predict the future with 100% certainty.

I'm not the one of the members in this thread stating whether he will win a major or not. My criticism of your post centers on:

Federer or Sampras wouldn't have had a chance

...which is a Herculean leap based only on one match versus the abilities of Sampras 7 Federer--particularly on their best surface? This ignores the wealth of major offensive weapons and intangibles both have developed over the course of their careers, not to mention solid tactical minds. All of this, and Murray vs. an older Roddick who is about 4 or 5 years past his playing expiration date, and has one of the most lead-footed games in a couple of generations--somehow is evidence Sampras and Federer would not have a chance?

Roddick's failings, level of game and effort are his own, which are inapplicable to other players.


What if Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic all died in a plane crash next month? Then your claim today that Murray will never win a Slam will seem pretty short-sighted, wouldn't it?

Damn! You're pretty much arguing the case for Murray's critics. If the only way Murray has a chance to win a major is through the demise of his central competition, then you're saying he's really not majors material at all, because there would always be players he will not overcome.

BreakPoint
06-13-2011, 04:37 PM
...which is a Herculean leap based only on one match versus the abilities of Sampras 7 Federer--particularly on their best surface?

Hello? My whole post was based on the premise of that one match! Do you understand the meaning of the word "if"? I said "if" Murray played the way he did in the semis, "Federer and Sampras wouldn't have a chance". NOT that Federer or Sampras would NEVER have a chance ANYTIME that they played Murray at Wimbledon. Now, it may turn out that Murray is only able to play at that ridiculously high level ONCE in his entire career, but that is the one match that I based my claim on. Get it now?


Damn! You're pretty much arguing the case for Murray's critics. If the only way Murray has a chance to win a major is through the demise of his central competition, then you're saying he's really not majors material at all, because there would always be players he will not overcome.
No, I'm arguing that it's pretty stupid to say "never". A lot of things can happen between now and ever after. I would have thought that after Soderling beat Nadal at the French Open 2 years ago that no one would be dumb enough to ever say "never" again when it comes to tennis. Anything can happen in tennis.

mellowyellow
06-13-2011, 05:54 PM
Damn! You're pretty much arguing the case for Murray's critics. If the only way Murray has a chance to win a major is through the demise of his central competition, then you're saying he's really not majors material at all, because there would always be players he will not overcome.

I guess if you think long enough, you can find something to be optimistic about.....

Sentinel
06-13-2011, 08:01 PM
Positive vibes from Sir Andy...

Andy Murray won the grass-court title at the AEGON Championships, and afterwards stated, "I'm going to Wimbledon with the feeling that I'm going to win the tournament." Murray, a two-time semi-finalist at the All England Club, is looking to become the seventh player to complete The Queen's Club-Wimbledon double, a feat last accomplished by Rafael Nadal in 2008. Defeated finalist Jo-Wilfried Tsonga continues his grass-court campaign this week as the top seed at the AEGON International.

Feņa14
06-13-2011, 09:42 PM
Positive vibes from Sir Andy...

Andy Murray won the grass-court title at the AEGON Championships, and afterwards stated, "I'm going to Wimbledon with the feeling that I'm going to win the tournament." Murray, a two-time semi-finalist at the All England Club, is looking to become the seventh player to complete The Queen's Club-Wimbledon double, a feat last accomplished by Rafael Nadal in 2008. Defeated finalist Jo-Wilfried Tsonga continues his grass-court campaign this week as the top seed at the AEGON International.

Yeah, I wouldn't really expect anything else. If he didn't think he could win it, there wouldn't be much point in turning up :)

batz
06-14-2011, 12:50 AM
Murray hype this early in the year? That doesn't usually start until July...

Well after he crashes out of the next slam like usual, it should keep the hype at bay at least until Cincy.

Really? That's odd, given that Wimbledon always starts in mid-June.

just out of interest, did you complain as much about the Henman hype?

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-14-2011, 02:21 AM
Hello? My whole post was based on the premise of that one match! Do you understand the meaning of the word "if"? I said "if" Murray played the way he did in the semis, "Federer and Sampras wouldn't have a chance".

You're not getting it: the statement was wildly off in fantasyland, even if based on Murray playing that way against either in only one match. I saw that Murray match, and while some say perception is subjective, the overwhelming evidence of Sampras and Federer's skills strongly suggest Murray would not be much trouble. I still maintain you were easily impressed due to the notably inferior opponent's fading skills rendered ineffective.

No, I'm arguing that it's pretty stupid to say "never". A lot of things can happen between now and ever after. I would have thought that after Soderling beat Nadal at the French Open 2 years ago that no one would be dumb enough to ever say "never" again when it comes to tennis. Anything can happen in tennis.

Frankly, at this point in time, Murray deserves the doubt--or even being written off to a degree after so many years as a top player--a player his fans and talking heads predicted was so sure to have won a major by now. This does not mean he will never win a major, but he has not lived up to inflated expectations.

chrischris
06-14-2011, 02:31 AM
Anyone who saw the semi between Murray and Roddick at Queens today knows EXACTLY what I mean. :shock: :)

If you didn't see the semi, your comments in this thread are irrelevant.

Saw it. Do you work for the tabloids by any chance?

The propping up of Muzza has begun.

I like his game but to be honest the pressure is not to his favor. Let the guy be.

Fedex
06-14-2011, 03:15 AM
Saw it. Do you work for the tabloids by any chance?

The propping up of Muzza has begun.

I like his game but to be honest the pressure is not to his favor. Let the guy be.

BreakPoint is not a Murray fan btw.
Quite the opposite in fact so you could say he is speaking objectively.

tusharlovesrafa
06-14-2011, 03:27 AM
Actually i think murray can win wimbeldon but he needs to................................................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...................

aphex
06-14-2011, 03:35 AM
Break Point?

http://l.yimg.com/i/i/eu/sp/eptb30.jpg

tusharlovesrafa
06-14-2011, 03:38 AM
Break point??
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zyvi2CumljY/TcEC7YpphLI/AAAAAAAAAo4/eln4ft109xQ/s1600/osama_lord+of+the+ring.jpg

aphex
06-14-2011, 03:42 AM
Break point??


You really are a moron.

tusharlovesrafa
06-14-2011, 03:49 AM
You really are a moron.
lets try one of this and find who's the real moron!!!..
http://iphoneapps.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/the-moron-test.jpg

Kunohara
06-14-2011, 05:27 AM
I cant wait to see Murray get demolished at Wimbledon.

ksbh
06-14-2011, 08:03 AM
If the King shows up in form at Wimbledon, Murray can say goodbye to his title hopes but after falling in the quarters of the FO to Rafa, will the King discover his touch? Wait and see!

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 12:07 PM
You're not getting it: the statement was wildly off in fantasyland, even if based on Murray playing that way against either in only one match. I saw that Murray match, and while some say perception is subjective, the overwhelming evidence of Sampras and Federer's skills strongly suggest Murray would not be much trouble. I still maintain you were easily impressed due to the notably inferior opponent's fading skills rendered ineffective.

Oh, really? The same guy that Federer couldn't break at Wimbledon just 2 years ago and had to win two tiebreaks and go to 16-14 in the 5th set before he finally broke Roddick? And the grass at Wimbledon is even much slower after two weeks of play than the grass at Queens? Federer would crush a "God-mode" Murray even though he couldn't even break a "has-been" Roddick while Murray broke Roddick 3 times in a single set on faster grass? Oh, really? :???:

BrooklynNY
06-14-2011, 12:13 PM
Oh, really? The same guy that Federer couldn't break at Wimbledon just 2 years ago and had to win two tiebreaks and go to 16-14 in the 5th set before he finally broke Roddick? And the grass at Wimbledon is even much slower after two weeks of play than the grass at Queens? Federer would crush a "God-mode" Murray even though he couldn't even break a "has-been" Roddick while Murray broke Roddick 3 times in a single set on faster grass? Oh, really? :???:

For the record...."Just 2 years ago" was a very long time ago.

I wouldn't put that much stock in Murrays win over Roddick. Roddick is losing to any and everybody, on any surface.

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 12:21 PM
For the record...."Just 2 years ago" was a very long time ago.

I wouldn't put that much stock in Murrays win over Roddick. Roddick is losing to any and everybody, on any surface.
Isn't it for Federer as well? Federer could barely beat Roddick 2 years ago, yet somehow he's going to crush "God-mode" Murray this year? Is Roddick the only one who gets older?

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 12:28 PM
I wouldn't put that much stock in Murrays win over Roddick. Roddick is losing to any and everybody, on any surface.
How does one lose to "everybody" and still be ranked #10 in the world? :confused: Then does everyone ranked #11 and below lose to everybody and their grandmother? :) LOL

FYI, Roddick has wins this year over Del Potro, Raonic, Hewitt, Dolgopolov, Isner (who almost beat Nadal this year), Anderson, Baghdatis, Verdasco, Lopez (who took out Nadal on the same surface last year).

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-14-2011, 12:38 PM
Isn't it for Federer as well? Federer could barely beat Roddick 2 years ago, yet somehow he's going to crush "God-mode" Murray this year? Is Roddick the only one who gets older?

Federer is in the twilight of his career, but he's not in complete career free fall like Roddick. You cannot seriously compare the two in any way.

Even going back to that Wimbledon match, Roddick had to play the match of his life and still fell on his face, which just proves one thing: Roddick is the weak link in this assessment. His skills are vanishing as we exchange posts, so Murray seemingly outplaying Roddick is not a result indicating some great play, as his opponent is just about "said and done" as a pro of any skill worth mentioning.

Comet Buster
06-14-2011, 12:43 PM
Federer is in the twilight of his career, but he's not in complete career free fall like Roddick. You cannot seriously compare the two in any way.

Even going back to that Wimbledon match, Roddick had to play the match of his life and still fell on his face, which just proves one thing: Roddick is the weak link in this assessment. His skills are vanishing as we exchange posts, so Murray seemingly outplaying Roddick is not a result indicating some great play, as his opponent is just about "said and done" as a pro of any skill worth mentioning.

Breakpoint doesn't understand that Roddick played much better in the Wimbledon final in 2009 than he did against Murray a few days ago. Better to 'debate' around him at this point. And Roddick would have gotten a beatdown from any other top player. I really miss the Roddick of 03/04.

sdont
06-14-2011, 12:46 PM
How does one lose to "everybody" and still be ranked #10 in the world? :confused: Then does everyone ranked #11 and below lose to everybody and their grandmother? :) LOL

FYI, Roddick has wins this year over Del Potro, Raonic, Hewitt, Dolgopolov, Isner (who almost beat Nadal this year), Anderson, Baghdatis, Verdasco, Lopez (who took out Nadal on the same surface last year).

Roddick hasn't beaten a top 10 player in 2011.

In fact, I believe he hasn't beaten a top 20 player in 2011.

I just checked, this streak goes back to Cincy last year when he beat Novak in the quarters.

Last year on grass, he was beaten by Dudi Sela in Queen's and Lu in Wimby... The facts may be hard to digest, but they're here.

nadalbestclass
06-14-2011, 01:50 PM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/132/rafamurray.jpg

RogerRacket111
06-14-2011, 02:02 PM
Yawn... He will get beat by Federer, Nadal and Djoko. Andy is not in the same league.

batz
06-14-2011, 02:06 PM
Yawn... He will get beat by Federer, Nadal and Djoko. Andy is not in the same league.

:shock: Bloody hell - Murray is going to get beaten 3 times during this Wimbledon - that's tough on him.

zagor
06-14-2011, 02:07 PM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/132/rafamurray.jpg

I thought Nadal is in decline so doesn't that mean Murray stands a chance against him now?

Legend of Borg
06-14-2011, 02:08 PM
:shock: Bloody hell - Murray is going to get beaten 3 times during this Wimbledon - that's tough on him.

Obviously he's referring to Topspin 4.

Murray may be PlayStation God, but he underestimates the top 3's video game abilities.

The-Champ
06-14-2011, 02:13 PM
I thought Nadal is in decline so doesn't that mean Murray stands a chance against him now?

nadal is declining on clay. He is still pretty much in his prime on other surfaces. But yeah...Murray has all the tools to beat Nadal and everyone else for that matter.

nadalbestclass
06-14-2011, 02:14 PM
I thought Nadal is in decline so doesn't that mean Murray stands a chance against him now?

:confused: Is this you joking again? Lol. Cuz I never said that he was declining!

sureshs
06-14-2011, 02:15 PM
How does one lose to "everybody" and still be ranked #10 in the world? :confused: Then does everyone ranked #11 and below lose to everybody and their grandmother? :) LOL


That is a sexist remark

sureshs
06-14-2011, 02:16 PM
lets try one of this and find who's the real moron!!!..
http://iphoneapps.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/the-moron-test.jpg

Are you saying all colorblind people are morons?

RogerRacket111
06-14-2011, 02:19 PM
:shock: Bloody hell - Murray is going to get beaten 3 times during this Wimbledon - that's tough on him.

Win a set in a major slam final and u can talk mate... Till then he is not going to win any slam ...

MichaelNadal
06-14-2011, 02:19 PM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/132/rafamurray.jpg

Epic picture :) It says 1000 words.

Mainad
06-14-2011, 02:33 PM
Win a set in a major slam final and u can talk mate... Till then he is not going to win any slam ...

He was close.He had at least one break of serve (possibly two,I can't quite recall) in the 3rd set of the 2010 AO final but couldn't serve it out.He then held at least one set point in the ensuing tie-breaker but double faulted while serving.Erratic service has been one of Murray's chronic weaknesses.

Of course,he'll need to win three sets to win a Slam final,not just one.

batz
06-14-2011, 02:40 PM
He was close.He had at least one break of serve (possibly two,I can't quite recall) in the 3rd set of the 2010 AO final but couldn't serve it out.He then held at least one set point in the ensuing tie-breaker but double faulted while serving.Erratic service has been one of Murray's chronic weaknesses.

Of course,he'll need to win three sets to win a Slam final,not just one.

He also had set point in last year's semi v Rafa. We're talking very fine margins here.

Mainad
06-14-2011, 02:42 PM
http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/132/rafamurray.jpg

Lol...it looks to me like Rafa's piles have begun to play up probably from too much butt-picking. Andy looks as if he's nodded off,probably bored while waiting for Rafa's trainer to come on and apply the anusol! :lol:

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 02:56 PM
Federer is in the twilight of his career, but he's not in complete career free fall like Roddick. You cannot seriously compare the two in any way.
Federer failed to make the finals of 4 consecutive Slams. For a guy that has made the finals of just about every Slam for the past 6 years, THAT IS A COMPLETE CAREER FREEFALL! It's all relative. Roddick hasn't fallen any deeper than Federer has. Federer hasn't been #1 for a while now.


Even going back to that Wimbledon match, Roddick had to play the match of his life and still fell on his face, which just proves one thing: Roddick is the weak link in this assessment. His skills are vanishing as we exchange posts, so Murray seemingly outplaying Roddick is not a result indicating some great play, as his opponent is just about "said and done" as a pro of any skill worth mentioning.
I knew it. You didn't really see that Queens semi. Either that or you have no idea how to analyze tennis play. When a guy has a 10-to-1 winners to errors ratio against a guy in the Top 10, I'd say that's playing pretty darn well. :???:

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 02:59 PM
Breakpoint doesn't understand that Roddick played much better in the Wimbledon final in 2009 than he did against Murray a few days ago. Better to 'debate' around him at this point. And Roddick would have gotten a beatdown from any other top player. I really miss the Roddick of 03/04.
This isn't about Roddick. This is about Thundervolley's claim that Murray even in "God-Mode" would have zero chance of beating Federer on grass, which is ludicrous. For one thing, how do you know Federer will play as well against Murray as he did against Roddick in 2009?

Fedex
06-14-2011, 03:00 PM
Just thought I'd point out that BreakPoint is NOT a Murray fan, far from it, so he's coming at this from an objective point of view.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-14-2011, 03:12 PM
Federer failed to make the finals of 4 consecutive Slams. For a guy that has made the finals of just about every Slam for the past 6 years, THAT IS A COMPLETE CAREER FREEFALL! It's all relative. Roddick hasn't fallen any deeper than Federer has. Federer hasn't been #1 for a while now.

What is the last majors final Federer appeared in?

What is the last majors final Roddick appeared in?

Case closed, BP.


I knew it. You didn't really see that Queens semi. Either that or you have no idea how to analyze tennis play.

BS. I watched the match, but I do not have Murray-colored glasses on, so my conclusions are based in fact, not some laughable fantasy of Murray's play that day being enough to defeat Sampras and Federer--the very thing you suggested.

Murray defeated a weak Roddick, so it is no credit to Murray at all. You are just so hell-bent on finding ANY item you can use to pump Murray, that you will use results against a Roddick long past his professional expiration date.

That's just desperate.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-14-2011, 03:13 PM
This isn't about Roddick. This is about Thundervolley's claim that Murray even in "God-Mode" would have zero chance of beating Federer on grass, which is ludicrous. For one thing, how do you know Federer will play as well against Murray as he did against Roddick in 2009?

How do you know Federer would not at Wimbledon? You do not even consider that, because you are trying to handicap Federer to the degree where Murray would have a chance.

Mainad
06-14-2011, 03:30 PM
Murray defeated a weak Roddick, so it is no credit to Murray at all. You are just so hell-bent on finding ANY item you can use to pump Murray, that you will use results against a Roddick long past his professional expiration date.

That's just desperate.

So if Federer or Nadal had beaten Roddick in that semi-final by the same margin you would have completely discounted the result as being in any way indicative of their readiness to win Wimbledon?

mellowyellow
06-14-2011, 04:29 PM
So if Federer or Nadal had beaten Roddick in that semi-final by the same margin you would have completely discounted the result as being in any way indicative of their readiness to win Wimbledon?

No one would have even made a thread about it.......

jaggy
06-14-2011, 04:36 PM
To be fair he is Scottish, no one can understand them, he may have said anything

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FFRoYhTJQQ

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-14-2011, 04:57 PM
So if Federer or Nadal had beaten Roddick in that semi-final by the same margin you would have completely discounted the result as being in any way indicative of their readiness to win Wimbledon?

Yes, because Roddick is no challenge, and more to the point, above the rest of the field, Nadal and Federer quickly get themselves in a psychological/physical position to play the event, warm-up or no warm-up. At Wimbledon, they are that much above the rest as of this date.

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 08:07 PM
What is the last majors final Federer appeared in?

What is the last majors final Roddick appeared in?

Case closed, BP.
How many Slam titles does Federer have?

How many Slam titles does Roddick have?

Before last week, what was the last Major final Federer was in? Not far off from the last Major final Roddick was in?

Case closed, TV.


BS. I watched the match, but I do not have Murray-colored glasses on, so my conclusions are based in fact, not some laughable fantasy of Murray's play that day being enough to defeat Sampras and Federer--the very thing you suggested.

Murray defeated a weak Roddick, so it is no credit to Murray at all. You are just so hell-bent on finding ANY item you can use to pump Murray, that you will use results against a Roddick long past his professional expiration date.

That's just desperate.
Hello? I'm NOT even a fan of Murray!! I don't have Murray-colored glasses. I am just being a totally objective tennis analyst.

There's nothing I would love more than for Federer to beat Murray every time they play until Federer retires.

Um...your conclusions are based on "fact"? LMAO!!! When has a "God-mode" Murray EVER played either Federer or Sampras at Wimbledon? Um...like NEVER?? How can it be a "fact" when it has never happened? Facts are based on recorded data. The SF Giants won the World Series in 2010. That is a fact. So show me the "fact" that Federer or Sampras would definitely beat "God-mode" Murray at Wimbledon.

BreakPoint
06-14-2011, 08:15 PM
How do you know Federer would not at Wimbledon? You do not even consider that, because you are trying to handicap Federer to the degree where Murray would have a chance.
Because I've already defined it as "God-mode" Murray. I said nothing about Federer's level of play.

I'd bet you thought Berdych had no chance whatsoever of beating Federer at Wimbledon last year, too, didn't you? If a "God-mode" Berdych could take out Federer at Wimbledon, why couldn't a "God-mode" Murray? How many times has Berdych ever beaten Federer in his career and how many times has Murray beaten Federer in his career?

Defcon
06-14-2011, 10:55 PM
Ah yes, the expected 'Murray is favorite for yet another slam afer having achieved absolutley nothing in slams'.

Seriously, I'm sure the guy will win some day, but the hype is too much.

Fedex
06-15-2011, 12:09 AM
Murray seemingly outplaying Roddick

BS. I watched the match

Did you watch the match or didn't you?
Remember you repeatedly called TMF a liar yesterday.
I wouldn't be so disrespectful as to call you the same but I do think you may be a little bit confused here.


BS. I do not have Murray-colored glasses on.
You are just so hell-bent on finding ANY item you can use to pump Murray.

That's just desperate.

Ah yes, the expected 'Murray is favorite for yet another slam afer having achieved absolutley nothing in slams'.

Seriously, I'm sure the guy will win some day, but the hype is too much

If you want to have some credibility then you should know who is creating the so called hype.
I have to laugh at this because you must know by now that BreakPoint is not a Murray fan.
He actually really dislikes the guy but is still big enough and objective enough to say his honest tennis opinion.
You have to respect him for that.
The guy has taken dog's abuse for his comments on Murray and he doesn't even like the guy.
He said himself there is nothing he would like better than for Federer to beat Murray every match until Federer retires.

zagor
06-15-2011, 01:05 AM
y now that BreakPoint is not a Murray fan.
He actually really dislikes the guy .

I doubt that,Murray plays similar to how players in the past did,constantly varying depth and pace,trying to outsmart and outmanever the other guy instead of hitting through him,can play well at the net,has a good slice etc.

That said I'm sure he doesn't like him(or anyone else for that matter)nearly as much as Federer so your point still stands.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-15-2011, 04:53 AM
How many Slam titles does Federer have?

How many Slam titles does Roddick have?

Before last week, what was the last Major final Federer was in? Not far off from the last Major final Roddick was in?

Case closed, TV.

"Not far off" blows your case to pieces. Federer won a major (AO) last year, and was in the FO final this year. Roddick's last major final was 2009. After that...nothing.

Roddick is in career free fall, as he is utterly incapable of playing at Fed's level, so your little comparison lost its air.


Hello? I'm NOT even a fan of Murray!! I don't have Murray-colored glasses. I am just being a totally objective tennis analyst.[/quote]

The wholly fannish "God mode" nonsese removes any objectivity you claim to posess, as it ignores the abilities of Sampras and Federer--the two best Wimbledon champs of the last 18 years--have abilities Murray cannot match on his best day. Your argument also implies he's never played this well before, which makes Murray--long jocked as a majors winner just waiting to happen--no so great after all.

So show me the "fact" that Federer or Sampras would definitely beat "God-mode" Murray at Wimbledon.

Sampras: 7 Wimbledon titles featuring some of the most fantastic displays of grass court tennis in history.

Federer: the most dominant Wimbledon champ of his generation.

Case closed.

FeVer
06-15-2011, 04:59 AM
So if Federer or Nadal had beaten Roddick in that semi-final by the same margin you would have completely discounted the result as being in any way indicative of their readiness to win Wimbledon?

Of course not, because when Rafa and Roger play like that it's likely that they'll threaten for major titles because they've a proven track record of winning slams. Murray does not.

Ace Ocelot
06-15-2011, 08:13 AM
Hopefully Murray's mental game isn't as bad as it was in Rome. :mrgreen:

Fedex
06-15-2011, 09:30 AM
Yep 2010. Sorry.

ksbh
06-15-2011, 09:50 AM
Really? Well then, they need some courage from this man-

http://s.chakpak.com/se_images/22663_-1_564_none/sunny-deol.jpg

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 10:16 AM
"Not far off" blows your case to pieces. Federer won a major (AO) last year, and was in the FO final this year. Roddick's last major final was 2009. After that...nothing.
Um...you do realize that "last year" was 2010, don't you? So Roddick was in a Major final in July 2009 and Federer won his last Major in January 2010. Yes, that is not that far apart. If Roddick had last been in Major final in 1999 instead of 2009, then you may have a case. And I did clearly state that Federer had not made a final in 4 consecutive Majors BEFORE last week. For a guy that makes just about EVERY Major final, that's a pretty big drop-off.


Roddick is in career free fall, as he is utterly incapable of playing at Fed's level, so your little comparison lost its air.
How many Major finals has Federer made in his career and how many has Roddick made? Given where they've been, I'd say the "free-fall" for Federer is much steeper than it is for Roddick. When you live at the top of the mountain, your fall to the bottom is much steeper than when you already live at the bottom.


The wholly fannish "God mode" nonsese removes any objectivity you claim to posess, as it ignores the abilities of Sampras and Federer--the two best Wimbledon champs of the last 18 years--have abilities Murray cannot match on his best day. Your argument also implies he's never played this well before, which makes Murray--long jocked as a majors winner just waiting to happen--no so great after all.
Murray has played this well before, not often but he has. And IF he's able to play like that for 7 straight matches, he'll likely win Wimbledon, but that is a BIG IF.


Sampras: 7 Wimbledon titles featuring some of the most fantastic displays of grass court tennis in history.

Federer: the most dominant Wimbledon champ of his generation.

Case closed.
So show me again when Federer or Sampras have EVER played Murray at Wimbledon?

Before last year, Berdych had achieved much less than Murray at Wimbledon, so there's absolutely no way in a million years he could ever beat Federer, "the most dominant Wimbledon champ of his generation", right? :oops:

Oh, and if George Bastl can beat Sampras at Wimbledon, who in their right mind would think that "God-mode" Murray wouldn't have a chance? :???:

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 10:18 AM
Of course not, because when Rafa and Roger play like that it's likely that they'll threaten for major titles because they've a proven track record of winning slams. Murray does not.
What was Federer's proven track record of winning Slams prior to Wimbledon 2003?

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 02:46 PM
...and this debate centered on Wimbledon, so the h2h elsewhere means nothing--indicating just how much you're itching to give a nod to Murray.
So what you're saying is that Nadal would have ZERO chance of beating Federer if they ever met for the first time at the US Open because Federer has been so much more successful at the US Open than Nadal in the past so that their head-to head elsewhere means "nothing"?

OK, gotcha. :oops:

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-15-2011, 02:55 PM
So what you're saying is that Nadal would have ZERO chance of beating Federer if they ever met for the first time at the US Open because Federer has been so much more successful at the US Open than Nadal in the past so that their head-to head elsewhere means "nothing"?

OK, gotcha. :oops:

It is clear you are running away from your own (flawed) premise:

Murray's message to Federer and Nadal for Wimbledon: "Be Afraid, Be VERY Afraid"

...as you are now attacking Nadal regarding a surface/major which was not a part of your claim!

Dude, is it so difficult to admit your Murray ideas were not well reasoned?

ollinger
06-15-2011, 03:04 PM
BreakPoint
I've done the math; posting here has done some damage. If you spent 3 minutes writing each of your 31,000+ posts (and some of the more elaborate posts surely take longer), then you have spent more than 70 days (that's 24 HOURS A DAY, for 70 days) writing posts here. This is a spectacular waste of one's time, particularly given the point of this thread; as was said in post #2 here, I too saw the match and Murray won largely because Roddick was dreadful.

sureshs
06-15-2011, 03:15 PM
Breakpoint stimulates others to think with his posts

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 03:20 PM
It is clear you are running away from your own (flawed) premise:

...as you are now attacking Nadal regarding a surface/major which was not a part of your claim!

Dude, is it so difficult to admit your Murray ideas were not well reasoned?
Your logic in dismissing Murray's H2H with Federer outside of Wimbledon is exactly the same as the logic dismissing Nadal's H2H with Federer outside of the US Open.

I'm not attacking Nadal in the least. I'm pointing out how your logic is so obviously flawed.

Dude, just admit that your logic (or lack thereof) is a massive FAIL.

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 03:24 PM
BreakPoint
I've done the math; posting here has done some damage. If you spent 3 minutes writing each of your 31,000+ posts (and some of the more elaborate posts surely take longer), then you have spent more than 70 days (that's 24 HOURS A DAY, for 70 days) writing posts here. This is a spectacular waste of one's time, particularly given the point of this thread; as was said in post #2 here, I too saw the match and Murray won largely because Roddick was dreadful.
Returning Roddick's huge first serves on grass for clean winners consistently has nothing to do with Roddick being dreadful. How many other players can do that?

TheNatural
06-15-2011, 03:57 PM
The big question now is how many games could GOD MODE Murray take from the God Mode Stepanek who just made the same Tsonga that Murray struggled with, look like a school kid.

TheBoom
06-15-2011, 03:58 PM
Murray doesn't play like he did against roddick enouh so not much to worry about

mellowyellow
06-15-2011, 03:59 PM
My feeling is that someone is inciting a post war by purposefully talking with their head in their face.....

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-15-2011, 04:11 PM
No, when you reference "god mode" to any player and claim that they would best the 2 greatest open era grass players on that surface you are in fact inviting a beating....

Quoted for truth.

Antonio Puente
06-15-2011, 04:37 PM
To be fair he is Scottish, no one can understand them, he may have said anything

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FFRoYhTJQQ

That's not as bad as a Geordie. Now, if you put a Scot and a Geordie on an elevator together, you would have comedic gold. Could they understand each other?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSHHbfY6MVc

mellowyellow
06-15-2011, 04:41 PM
Anybody is getting a beating is thundervolley, where BP had stripped every of his failed logics. Thundervolleys is no match against BreakPoint. It's no contest.

Wait, did I post in the TT forums or is this the Bizzaro Superman Marvel Comics forum? That is the only way your post could make sense.....

BreakPoint
06-15-2011, 04:57 PM
Incorrect, as Nadal's H2H with Federer had nothing to do with your premise centering on Wimbledon--that surface and Murray's chances against Sampras and Federer, which was the heart of your entire point, which remains the most woeful application of illogic one could ever employ.

You cannot backpedal now.

I'm not backpedaling whatsoever. You just don't have a clue about logic.

The "heart of my entire point" is that based on their H2H's,. Murray has just as much chance of beating Federer if they meet for the first time at Wimbledon as Nadal has of beating Federer if they meet for the first time at the US Open. Federer has been the dominant player at both Majors for the past 7-8 years. I know that point is way over your head.

If I said the sky is blue and the grass is green, therefore, the grass is green and the sky is blue, that would confuse you.

mellowyellow
06-15-2011, 05:00 PM
So did someone get banned?

kishnabe
06-15-2011, 05:09 PM
Really? Well then, they need some courage from this man-

http://s.chakpak.com/se_images/22663_-1_564_none/sunny-deol.jpg

That looked like Surya for a second!

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-15-2011, 05:44 PM
I'm not backpedaling whatsoever.

You are doing anything other than sticking to your premise.

The "heart of my entire point" is that based on their H2H's,. Murray has just as much chance of beating Federer if they meet for the first time at Wimbledon as Nadal has of beating Federer if they meet for the first time at the US Open. Federer has been the dominant player at both Majors for the past 7-8 years. I know that point is way over your head.

Your premise:

Murray's message to Federer and Nadal for Wimbledon: "Be Afraid, Be VERY Afraid"

Which had nothing to do with H2H results on other surfaces, and you argued with Wimbledon in mind over the course of 12 pages. Now, you're attempting to make utterly irrelevant comparisons to other surfaces after you so activly pursued the fallacious notion of Murray--using his form which defeated an already crumbling Roddick (so in a sense, Roddick gifted the win to Murray by being his opponent) somehow would beat the best grass court players of the past 18 years.

The premise was flawed and full of wild ideas with no bearing on the historical evidence of two grass court monsters who were less likely to suffer a fluke loss to anyone, thus your hypothetical Murray-as-grass-champ-beater is not realistic at all.

If I said the sky is blue and the grass is green, therefore, the grass is green and the sky is blue, that would confuse you.

Come on, BP--enough with the nonsense.

ksbh
06-16-2011, 07:48 AM
Didn't notice it but you're right. But the comparison ends there ... paaji is a legend and the other's just a look alike! :)

That looked like Surya for a second!

sureshs
06-16-2011, 08:14 AM
Didn't notice it but you're right. But the comparison ends there ... paaji is a legend and the other's just a look alike! :)

Sort of like Ramarajan and Federer both wearing white jackets and trousers at Wimbledon.

ksbh
06-16-2011, 08:17 AM
Are you saying Roja Federer is as handsome as Ramarajan? :)



http://mimg.sulekha.com/ramarajan/stills/ramarajan-stills031.jpg

Sort of like Ramarajan and Federer both wearing white jackets and trousers at Wimbledon.

Sentinel
06-20-2011, 02:26 AM
Instilling fear and terror in his opponents ... :D

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/sp/getty/c6/fullj.5107b687aa1e88e3288dce48f58cff0c/5107b687aa1e88e3288dce48f58cff0c-getty-tennis-gbr-wimbledon.jpg

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/sp/getty/cc/fullj.ae959e8eb5a3f0e5370af0eac8f1d092/ae959e8eb5a3f0e5370af0eac8f1d092-getty-tennis-gbr-wimbledon.jpg

Bud
06-20-2011, 10:30 AM
Murray loses set 1 in the first round to Gimeno-Traver (who is playing his 10th grass court match ever) :lol:

BreakPoint
06-20-2011, 11:56 AM
Murray loses set 1 in the first round to Gimeno-Traver (who is playing his 10th grass court match ever) :lol:
Yeah, who would have guessed? :lol:

He didn't lose 18 games in a row but only 15. :shock:

Mustard
06-20-2011, 12:00 PM
Murray doesn't like the conditions of playing under the roof. He said so after the 2009 Wawrinka match and he said it again tonight.

BreakPoint
06-20-2011, 12:02 PM
Murray doesn't like the conditions of playing under the roof. He said so after the 2009 Wawrinka match and he said it again tonight.

Once Murray got the butterflies out from playing his first match in his national championships and the tremendous pressure that goes along with that, it was steamroll city.

Legend of Borg
06-20-2011, 12:03 PM
Yeah, who would have guessed? :lol:

He didn't lose 18 games in a row but only 15. :shock:

Keep hyping him up, just like the jackasses on BBC.

He's getting set up for another BIG fall, Murray style.

Expect the expected come crunch time.

Zero Man will live up to his name.

MixieP
06-20-2011, 12:04 PM
Once Murray got the butterflies out from playing his first match in his national championships and the tremendous pressure that goes along with that, it was spank city.

Murray is magic.

Fedex
06-20-2011, 12:14 PM
Keep hyping him up, just like the jackasses on BBC.

He's getting set up for another BIG fall, Murray style.

Expect the expected come crunch time.

Zero Man will live up to his name.

You are a disgrace to the Borg.

batz
06-20-2011, 12:14 PM
Keep hyping him up, just like the jackasses on BBC.

He's getting set up for another BIG fall, Murray style.

Expect the expected come crunch time.

Zero Man will live up to his name.

But that's not his name. You're the only person in the world who calls him that. If it doesn't appear on google then it ain't true.

batz
06-20-2011, 12:15 PM
You are a disgrace to the Borg.

He clearly decided that resistance was futile.

Legend of Borg
06-20-2011, 12:18 PM
My bad, guys.

I forgot the drill.

Murray will win Wimby and then tennis will enter into the Golden Era, much like England during Queen Elizabeth's reign.

Andy will show us new heights in tennis, unseen before by mere mortals.

Pretenders like Federer and Nadal will fade away when Murray shows us his class and style.

Sid_Vicious
06-20-2011, 12:18 PM
..................

Legend of Borg
06-20-2011, 12:19 PM
You are a disgrace to the Borg.

Data is possibly the best character in the whole franchise.

Fedex
06-20-2011, 12:20 PM
He clearly decided that resistance was futile.

Yeh I think that was Murray's moto in the first set and a half.
Glad he got rid of the cobwebs early.
Mind Fed and Nadal were taken to 5 first round last year.

THUNDERVOLLEY
06-20-2011, 12:21 PM
Keep hyping him up, just like the jackasses on BBC.

...along with Cahill and Gilbert on ESPN.

Sid_Vicious
06-20-2011, 12:21 PM
Yeh I think that was Murray's moto in the first set and a half.
Glad he got rid of the cobwebs early.
Mind Fed and Nadal were taken to 5 first round last year.

Nadal straight setted Kei in the first round last year.

BreakPoint
06-20-2011, 12:23 PM
...along with Cahill and Gilbert on ESPN.
Yeah, and what are the odds that they know more about tennis than you do?

MixieP
06-20-2011, 12:24 PM
Murray will win Wimby and then tennis will enter into the Golden Era, much like England during Queen Elizabeth's reign.

Andy will show us new heights in tennis, unseen before by mere mortals.

Pretenders like Federer and Nadal will fade away when Murray shows us his class and style.

Finally he's talking sense.
:)

Legend of Borg
06-20-2011, 12:26 PM
Yeah, and what are the odds that they know more about tennis than you do?

Cahill is a chilled tennis commentator and I find him much better to listen to than Gilbert.

Didn't BG predict Roddick for the Wimby final of 2008?

Then Tipsy worked his magic. :lol:

Legend of Borg
06-20-2011, 12:27 PM
Finally he's talking sense.
:)

I remembered that we're just visitors in Murray's universe.

We might as well enjoy the stay.

BreakPoint
06-20-2011, 12:35 PM
Cahill is a chilled tennis commentator and I find him much better to listen to than Gilbert.

Didn't BG predict Roddick for the Wimby final of 2008?

Then Tipsy worked his magic. :lol:
Not a bad prediction (if he ever made it).

Roddick was 2 points away from winning Wimbledon a few times in 2009. Heck, he never lost his serve in the entire match until the last game at 14-15 in the 5th. He deserved to win that match more than Federer did.

Legend of Borg
06-20-2011, 12:38 PM
Not a bad prediction (if he ever made it).

Roddick was 2 points away from winning Wimbledon a few times in 2009. Heck, he never lost his serve in the entire match until the last game at 14-15 in the 5th. He deserved to win that match more than Federer did.

And yet the "undeserved" Federer took his 15 GS that day.

I don't get this reasoning.

That someone "deserves" a title more that the other player.

It's annoying, just like praying or crossing yourself after a match.

Yes, I actually agree with Agassi on this particular point.

ttbrowne
06-20-2011, 12:38 PM
...and Fed's answer was, "I've already seen that movie. It's old."

Fedex
06-20-2011, 12:38 PM
Nadal straight setted Kei in the first round last year.

Really. I thought Nadal struggled early too?

gregor.b
06-20-2011, 12:39 PM
What Roddick did didn't matter one bit. He could have been Nadal and Federer rolled into one and it wouldn't have mattered one bit. The way Murray played today on grass, he could have beaten Federer and Sampras 2-on-1. I've never seen either Federer nor Nadal play this well on grass. Murray's level today was something out of fantasy land. :shock:

Could he have beaten Sampras,Federer AND Nadal three on one?

Rippy
06-20-2011, 12:40 PM
Really. I thought Nadal struggled early too?

He was taken to 5 against Petzschner (OMG MEDICAL TIMEOUT!!!11) and Haase.