PDA

View Full Version : It's official - Murray can't win


Defcon
09-02-2011, 07:37 PM
Just saw on Tennis Channel :-

Lindsay Davenport jinxing him: I've been saying for years that Andy will win, and this is his year! Jim, thoughts?

Jim Courier: well he barely scraped by to win. There's a *huge* gap between Fed, Rafa, Djoker and then Andy.

That shut up Lindsay.

Clarky21
09-02-2011, 07:40 PM
I disagree. Right now he and Delpo are the only ones who can challenge Djokovic for the next few years. There isn't a prayer for anyone else that's for sure.

Cormorant
09-02-2011, 07:44 PM
Lindsay's just too good natured to argue venomously with fellow champs. I remember a WTA behind-the-scenes tour diary in which Davenport reminded Capriati they had a doubles match lined up, whereupon Jenny bluntly dismissed her with, "Well, I don't feel like doing that anymore." Cold stuff, but Davenport took it in her polite stride.

Don't read too much into this little defeat, OP, for a woman who's had to countenance a stream of petty cruelties in her career wouldn't pipe in with an opinion if she hadn't put some thought into it.

veroniquem
09-02-2011, 07:53 PM
Remind me how long Courier lasted on the tour? 2/3 years max. Murray has already had more longevity as a top player and top contender than Courier. And yeah I know he hasn't won a slam but Courier had zip longevity, so he should keep quiet.

Defcon
09-02-2011, 07:54 PM
Yeah, nothing against her. It was a bit funny and strange, she sounded like a fangirl and not commentator.

kanamit
09-02-2011, 07:55 PM
Remind me how long Courier lasted on the tour? 2/3 years max. Murray has already had more longevity as a top player and top contender than Courier. And yeah I know he hasn't won a slam but Courier had zip longevity, so he should keep quiet.

If you can't give your opinion unless you have longevity at the top of the game, why do you feel free to offer yours?

Defcon
09-02-2011, 07:56 PM
Remind me how long Courier lasted on the tour? 2/3 years max. Murray has already had more longevity as a top player and top contender than Courier. And yeah I know he hasn't won a slam but Courier had zip longevity, so he should keep quiet.

But Courier is one of the better commentators. Winning slams doesn't make you a good commentator, so I couldn't care less. Martina has won tons and been around since the stone age, and she's terrible with the microphone.

Defcon
09-02-2011, 07:57 PM
If you can't give your opinion unless you have longevity at the top of the game, why do you feel free to offer yours?

In his/her defense, its on a tiny little forum and not national tv :)

Mainad
09-02-2011, 08:03 PM
Just saw on Tennis Channel :-

Lindsay Davenport jinxing him: I've been saying for years that Andy will win, and this is his year! Jim, thoughts?

Jim Courier: well he barely scraped by to win. There's a *huge* gap between Fed, Rafa, Djoker and then Andy.

That shut up Lindsay.

Don't know whether Lindsay's jinxed him or not but I would point out to Jim that Fed, Rafa and Djoker have not yet played anybody remotely capable of testing them yet whilst Andy has just won a 5 setter against a guy who took Rafa to 5 sets at Wimbledon!

veroniquem
09-02-2011, 08:10 PM
If you can't give your opinion unless you have longevity at the top of the game, why do you feel free to offer yours?


I am not going on national TV to broadcast an opinion (as a specialist, no less) that a top 4 player for the last 4 years is not a slam contender.

This tough win will do Murray plenty of good. I think he'll make the semi.

veroniquem
09-02-2011, 08:17 PM
But Courier is one of the better commentators. Winning slams doesn't make you a good commentator, so I couldn't care less. Martina has won tons and been around since the stone age, and she's terrible with the microphone.


I agree that winning slams has nothing to do with being a good commentator. To me, Courier is not particularly good though. My favorite commentators are Darren Cahill and Brad Gilbert (over the top but so much fun!). I don't mind Becker, JohnnyMac can be entertaining but digresses a bit too much. I heard Agassi doing it once and he was awesome. I cannot figure out why they don't get rid of Carillo. She's an absolute disaster and that has been going on for years... It's a torture to have to listen to her :mad:
Fowler plays his role of candid well. Courier lacks charisma and is often wrong and prejudiced.

ernestsgulbisfan#1
09-02-2011, 08:19 PM
Murray looks like he's riding a bull....is anyone here good at photoshop? :)

http://gyazo.com/7272226fd09aab853542c33d51dd60ae.png

Defcon
09-02-2011, 08:31 PM
I agree that winning slams has nothing to do with being a good commentator. To me, Courier is not particularly good though. My favorite commentators are Darren Cahill and Brad Gilbert (over the top but so much fun!). I don't mind Becker, JohnnyMac can be entertaining but digresses a bit too much. I heard Agassi doing it once and he was awesome. I cannot figure out why they don't get rid of Carillo. She's an absolute disaster and that has been going on for years... It's a torture to have to listen to her :mad:
Fowler plays his role of candid well. Courier lacks charisma and is often wrong and prejudiced.

AFAIK Agassi has only done it once (USO when Fed was playing) and yes, he was awesome. There were articles in the paper about how great he was!

I also like the duo of PMac + CliffyB, they are like a comedy duo and play well off each other. I miss the days when PMac used his eye-droppah's and hello!'s every other sentence :)

Fowler has become quite the knowledgeable tennis geek. He is for sure a lot better than people like Ted Robinson, and nearly every female commentator. Pam Shriver is the worst ever, no contest.

Tennis_Monk
09-02-2011, 09:28 PM
I disagree. Right now he and Delpo are the only ones who can challenge Djokovic for the next few years. There isn't a prayer for anyone else that's for sure.

two words : Roger M Federer (ok 3 words)

TopFH
09-02-2011, 09:35 PM
What does the M stand for?

SystemicAnomaly
09-02-2011, 09:56 PM
Remind me how long Courier lasted on the tour? 2/3 years max. Murray has already had more longevity as a top player and top contender than Courier. And yeah I know he hasn't won a slam but Courier had zip longevity, so he should keep quiet.

Reminder: JC was on the tour for 12 yrs. Top 25 or 30 for 9 of those 12 yrs and top 10 for most of '91 thru '95 (and part of '96). Reached #1 in '92 and has 29 carreer titles (6 doubles). 4 GS titles and another 5 Master Series titles. Reached QF or better in 15 slams. I'd say that the man had a bit of credibility (and decent longevity to boot).


If you can't give your opinion unless you have longevity at the top of the game, why do you feel free to offer yours?

Priceless.

veroniquem
09-02-2011, 10:59 PM
AFAIK Agassi has only done it once (USO when Fed was playing) and yes, he was awesome. There were articles in the paper about how great he was!

I also like the duo of PMac + CliffyB, they are like a comedy duo and play well off each other. I miss the days when PMac used his eye-droppah's and hello!'s every other sentence :)

Fowler has become quite the knowledgeable tennis geek. He is for sure a lot better than people like Ted Robinson, and nearly every female commentator. Pam Shriver is the worst ever, no contest.



Oops I forgot Pam Shriver. She looks mean on top of being mediocre. She almost scares me :shock:

cc0509
09-02-2011, 11:01 PM
Remind me how long Courier lasted on the tour? 2/3 years max. Murray has already had more longevity as a top player and top contender than Courier. And yeah I know he hasn't won a slam but Courier had zip longevity, so he should keep quiet.

Who cares about his longevity? Bottom line is Courier has 4 slams and he is qualified to give his opinion even if he is wrong.

cc0509
09-02-2011, 11:05 PM
I agree that winning slams has nothing to do with being a good commentator. To me, Courier is not particularly good though. My favorite commentators are Darren Cahill and Brad Gilbert (over the top but so much fun!). I don't mind Becker, JohnnyMac can be entertaining but digresses a bit too much. I heard Agassi doing it once and he was awesome. I cannot figure out why they don't get rid of Carillo. She's an absolute disaster and that has been going on for years... It's a torture to have to listen to her :mad:
Fowler plays his role of candid well. Courier lacks charisma and is often wrong and prejudiced.

I disagree, Courier has tons of charisma. I do agree that he is often prejudiced but who isn't?

Fowler is the worst commentator ever IMO. Can't stand to listen to him. All he does is defer to other experts such as McEnroe (Pat or John), Gilbert or Cahill. He is the most annoying ever.

veroniquem
09-02-2011, 11:06 PM
Reminder: JC was on the tour for 12 yrs.






Not as a top player, he wasn't. Only 3 years of winning either masters or slams: 1991, 1992, 1993. His results were not significant after that and non existent before that. Murray is already having his 4th year at winning masters. Remember we're talking longevity at the top here (rather than comparing quality of achievements).
Courier achieved more (so far) but was a flash in the pan compared to Murray who I think will stay around for a while longer...

cc0509
09-02-2011, 11:10 PM
Not as a top player, he wasn't. Only 3 years of winning either masters or slams: 1991, 1992, 1993. His results were not significant after that and non existent before that. Murray is already having his 4th year at winning masters. Remember we're talking longevity at the top here.

Who cares? Murray has zero slams thus far and that is all people care about.

Courier has 4.

veroniquem
09-02-2011, 11:12 PM
We're talking LONGEVITY.
Murray: 4 seasons at winning masters (and beating top players) , still active.
Courier: 3 seasons total at winning either slams or masters.

Courier was a power baseliner (like Agassi with less talent and versatility). It was efficient to start but it was easy to figure out after a while and other players adjusted.

cc0509
09-03-2011, 01:42 AM
We're talking LONGEVITY.
Murray: 4 seasons at winning masters (and beating top players) , still active.
Courier: 3 seasons total at winning either slams or masters.

Courier was a power baseliner (like Agassi with less talent and versatility). It was efficient to start but it was easy to figure out after a while and other players adjusted.

But at the end of the day who really cares about longevity if he does not win a slam, other than his mother and immediate family. If Murray remains slamless he will be remembered as having a nice career but will be forgotten quickly in history. In the meantime, Courier may not have had longevity but at least he won 4 slams.

TopFH
09-03-2011, 06:42 AM
Well, Courier has more slams than Murray...

MLB_MOB
09-03-2011, 06:55 AM
We're talking LONGEVITY.
Murray: 4 seasons at winning masters (and beating top players) , still active.
Courier: 3 seasons total at winning either slams or masters.

Courier was a power baseliner (like Agassi with less talent and versatility). It was efficient to start but it was easy to figure out after a while and other players adjusted.

Being in the top 25 alone is an incredible feat, its not all about winning slams and masters to have a good career. Courier peaked in those couple years and won slams and masters, however his down fall was not his longevity. His downfall was Pete Sampras. The fact that Courier could not beat Sampras ate him alive, and in a sense ruined his career because he became obsessed with the idea of beating him (and only training this way) he forgot about the other 100 guys that were going to give him trouble.

This being said Courier certainly had a part of his career that he could not emulate again however, he remained in the top 25 most of the remainder and posted great results