PDA

View Full Version : 2012: The year Murray wins a slam?


celoft
12-27-2011, 03:18 PM
He also could hit double digits at the master series in 2012.

Clarky21
12-27-2011, 03:28 PM
He will have to beat **** to do it. He is the only player standing in his way of winning a slam. Maybe Fed as well,so if he can get through both of them he has a shot.

Mustard
12-27-2011, 03:41 PM
I think the Australian Open is his best bet.

roundiesee
12-27-2011, 05:43 PM
Tennis fans have been talking about this the last few years, but it hasn't happened yet. Murray needs to sort out his "head" first before he can achieve this. He certainly has the talent to win a slam tournament that's for sure.

tennnnis
12-27-2011, 05:51 PM
He will have to beat **** to do it. He is the only player standing in his way of winning a slam. Maybe Fed as well,so if he can get through both of them he has a shot.


What about Nadal? He lost to Nadal in last 2 grand slams. Fed, Djoker, Nadal are problem for him for important matches. He needs to get over this pressure to win a slam.

AhmedD
12-27-2011, 06:06 PM
What about Nadal? He lost to Nadal in last 2 grand slams. Fed, Djoker, Nadal are problem for him for important matches. He needs to get over this pressure to win a slam.

Last 3, beat him the French too :/

Murray can beat Nadal in a slam, we know that, but so far he hasn't shown he's capable of overcoming Federer or Djokovic.

His best chances are in the AO and the USO, if he gets a good draw, and can sort his head out, he could make it this year.

Eternity
12-27-2011, 06:17 PM
Last 3, beat him the French too :/

Murray can beat Nadal in a slam, we know that, but so far he hasn't shown he's capable of overcoming Federer or Djokovic.

His best chances are in the AO and the USO, if he gets a good draw, and can sort his head out, he could make it this year.

He's only played Novak and Fed in finals. I have no real way of knowing this but I think he'd put up a better showing against them in an earlier rd (at least be able to take a set).

I think Murray winning Wimbledon would be amazing.

Clarky21
12-27-2011, 06:30 PM
What about Nadal? He lost to Nadal in last 2 grand slams. Fed, Djoker, Nadal are problem for him for important matches. He needs to get over this pressure to win a slam.


Murray is more than capable of beating Nadal in slams or anywhere else for that matter. He needs to worry about how he will beat **** or Fed. He doesn't need to worry about Nadal whatsoever.

MichaelNadal
12-27-2011, 06:34 PM
He's only played Novak and Fed in finals. I have no real way of knowing this but I think he'd put up a better showing against them in an earlier rd (at least be able to take a set).

I think Murray winning Wimbledon would be amazing.

I do too, he'll win a slam someday, 2012 is as good of a time as ever I think. If Novak has a slip-up it's there for the taking.

MichaelNadal
12-27-2011, 06:36 PM
Murray is more than capable of beating Nadal in slams or anywhere else for that matter. He needs to worry about how he will beat **** or Fed. He doesn't need to worry about Nadal whatsoever.

What kind of statement is this when Nadal beat him at the last 3 slams straight? If u don't think he has to worry about him, that's your opinion, but adding "whatsoever" to the end made it complete NONSENSE. 2 out of 3 matches, Nadal beats Murray.

smiley_face
12-27-2011, 06:43 PM
Definitely Murray can win at least a slam in his career. He's one of the best players in his generation (maybe only after Nole) so sooner or later we'll see him lift a slam cup.

I think it'll happen this AO 12.

Tammo
12-27-2011, 06:51 PM
No, Nadal, Djokovic and Delpo will dominate with Murray getting to 2 or 3 slam finals.

PascalMariaFan
12-27-2011, 06:56 PM
Imagine Murray ending up with 18 masters to Agassi's 17. But 0 slams to Agassi's 8.

jaggy
12-27-2011, 07:00 PM
Id love to see it but just dont xpect it

Clarky21
12-27-2011, 07:21 PM
What kind of statement is this when Nadal beat him at the last 3 slams straight? If u don't think he has to worry about him, that's your opinion, but adding "whatsoever" to the end made it complete NONSENSE. 2 out of 3 matches, Nadal beats Murray.


We shall see,but I am pretty certain that the tide has turned in that match-up after what happened in Tokyo. Murray need not worry one iota about facing Nadal anywhere.

OddJack
12-27-2011, 07:38 PM
should've been a public poll

If I were to bet I would say no

bullfan
12-27-2011, 07:57 PM
I'm staying optimistic that he'll win one, and this is the year.

Sentinel
12-27-2011, 09:28 PM
No telling what can happen.

Mainad
12-27-2011, 10:25 PM
No, Nadal, Djokovic and Delpo will dominate with Murray getting to 2 or 3 slam finals.

You were doing okay with the first 2 but lol at Delpo. Delpo is not going to dominate anybody in 2012 although he does have a good chance of getting back into the top 10!

celoft
12-28-2011, 05:29 AM
Where does Murray have better chances? AO or USO?

batz
12-28-2011, 05:37 AM
Mibbes aye, mibbes naw. Will 2012 be an easier place to win a slam than the last 3 or 4 years have been? I don't see many signs of things getting easier for him.

MariaRafael
12-28-2011, 05:37 AM
No, he can't. We've already decided that 2012 will be the year for Nadal to win his YCGS. The golden one because the this year is Olympic.

celoft
12-28-2011, 05:50 AM
No, he can't. We've already decided that 2012 will be the year for Nadal to win his YCGS. The golden one because the this year is Olympic.
http://gifsoup.com/view7/2952818/serena-williams-laughing-o.gif

MariaRafael
12-28-2011, 05:54 AM
I've forgotten in which thread it was proposed and unanimously sustained, but it has happened today.

And, please, can you find some other smile. This one is to fat.

Homeboy Hotel
12-28-2011, 06:49 AM
Where does Murray have better chances? AO or USO?

Australia. Courts are much more suited to him and the scheduling is much better, prioritising rest and not effected by bad weather. And I think the support is way better for him there too.

celoft
01-29-2012, 06:59 AM
Bump...........

celoft
02-23-2012, 07:15 AM
Bump.......................

slowfox
02-23-2012, 01:47 PM
Voted no cuz I have visions of Tim Henman's career...
But I sincerely hope Murray does win one or multiple. I like his game a lot.

ZeroSkid
02-23-2012, 01:50 PM
He was prett close at AO, he was very close to beating Djokovic

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-23-2012, 02:00 PM
His best chances are at Wimbledon and USO in my opinion this year. RG seems out of reach with both Nadal and Djoker gunning in such epic fashion for the title. Higher chances at USO than Wimbledon since he won't have the pressure of G.B. on his shoulders and we might see a tired Nadal and Djoker heading into the USO after the RG/Wimbly/Olympics swing. Should beat Federer if they meet in a Slam again, no way Lendy Murray Verison 2012 will go down in straight sets again, but you almost feel like Lendy needs one of his "pigeons" like Del Potro or Berdych to knock out some Top 4 players in order for Lendy to have a chance. Even still, I'd give the edge to Del Potro in a GS final vs Murray, despite the horrific match-up and H2H record, just based on past "big match" moments from the two.

Of course, will re-assess again after Dubai/IW/Miami. If Lendy scores some big victories against the Top 4 there (especially vs Federer and Nadal), then I truly believe he'll take USO this year. He already matches up very well against Djoker as we saw in Cincy last year and AO 2012. He's looking very impressive to me so far in 2012.

MG1
02-23-2012, 02:55 PM
No, he can't. We've already decided that 2012 will be the year for Nadal to win his YCGS. The golden one because the this year is Olympic.


ROFLMAO !!

Do u enjoy embarrassing nadal fan in such a way )

MG1
02-23-2012, 02:59 PM
By the way IMO 2012 will be year when everyone will be convinced that lendy/Andy or whatever murray is not going to win a slam.

From next year onwards Henman hill will be officially renamed as Murray mud at wimbledon.

Sorry andy just focus at playstation. you look very happy over there.

Mainad
02-23-2012, 06:56 PM
By the way IMO 2012 will be year when everyone will be convinced that lendy/Andy or whatever murray is not going to win a slam.

From next year onwards Henman hill will be officially renamed as Murray mud at wimbledon.

Sorry andy just focus at playstation. you look very happy over there.

Is that so? I've a better idea. How about you stick to playstation rather than boring us all on here with your rather puerile comments! :rolleyes:

RAFA2005RG
02-23-2012, 07:15 PM
He will have to beat **** to do it. He is the only player standing in his way of winning a slam. Maybe Fed as well,so if he can get through both of them he has a shot.

Looks like he will then, based on the closeness of his SF at the AO vs Djokovic. Although Nadal has a much bigger mental edge over Murray. Imagine Murray beating Nadal in a GS final :lol: after not being able to beat Nadal in 3 GS semis last year....

RAFA2005RG
02-23-2012, 07:19 PM
In fact, Murray hasn't even been able to take Rafa to 5 sets in those last 3 slam semis. He matches up a lot better with Djokovic.

Deuces Wild
02-23-2012, 07:49 PM
You could see a change in Murray's mentality and aggression in this year's AO. Give Lendl more time to work with Murray and I'm thinking a Wimbledon or USO title is a real possibility.

phnx90
02-23-2012, 08:07 PM
In fact, Murray hasn't even been able to take Rafa to 5 sets in those last 3 slam semis. He matches up a lot better with Djokovic.

That should be funny, because that was pretty much the same situation with Djokovic until 2011.

IMO Murray and Djokovic are almost identical, so if Murray somehow overcomes that mental block, he'd be as poor a matchup for Nadal as Djokovic is.

However, if Rafa finds an answer to Djokovic, Rafa can employ virtually the same strategy against Murray.

Looks like a potential win-all or lose-all situation for Rafa.

Clarky21
02-23-2012, 08:25 PM
Looks like he will then, based on the closeness of his SF at the AO vs Djokovic. Although Nadal has a much bigger mental edge over Murray. Imagine Murray beating Nadal in a GS final :lol: after not being able to beat Nadal in 3 GS semis last year....


Murrya can beat Nadal much easier than he can beat Djesus. I don't see Nadal being much of an obstacle this year when they meet. The tables turned in that match-up after Nadal lost badly in the final in Tokyo.

And my comment still stands. Murrya will have to go through Djesus if he wants to win a slam. It still remains to be seen if he can do it or not.

Oh,I would like to ask you just how many accounts you have on this forum,*********? It's got to be more than a dozen by now. :lol:

MG1
02-23-2012, 11:27 PM
Is that so? I've a better idea. How about you stick to playstation rather than boring us all on here with your rather puerile comments! :rolleyes:

Why are you so much obsessed with murray and i didn't suggest you anything so please don't advice me what should i do.

RAFA2005RG
02-24-2012, 12:11 AM
Murrya can beat Nadal much easier than he can beat Djesus. I don't see Nadal being much of an obstacle this year when they meet. The tables turned in that match-up after Nadal lost badly in the final in Tokyo.

And my comment still stands. Murrya will have to go through Djesus if he wants to win a slam. It still remains to be seen if he can do it or not.

Oh,I would like to ask you just how many accounts you have on this forum,*********? It's got to be more than a dozen by now. :lol:

Yeah that Tokyo match reminded me of when the Japanese player bagelled Djokovic in the 3rd set at Basel. That was funny. Djokovic won 2 points lol. Really though the most impressive performance I ever saw from Murray was when he thrashed Rafa at 2010 AO.

Evan77
02-24-2012, 12:22 AM
That should be funny, because that was pretty much the same situation with Djokovic until 2011.

IMO Murray and Djokovic are almost identical, so if Murray somehow overcomes that mental block, he'd be as poor a matchup for Nadal as Djokovic is.

However, if Rafa finds an answer to Djokovic, Rafa can employ virtually the same strategy against Murray.

Looks like a potential win-all or lose-all situation for Rafa.
as much as I love Murray, I disagree that Novak and Andy are 'almost identical'. Novak is a better player. Better 1st and 2nd serve, MUCH BETTER FH and that's a big deal. Nole covers the court better (although Murray is great too). Djokovic simply is doing everything a bit better than Andy.

RAFA2005RG
02-24-2012, 12:39 AM
Murray look like a giant from 2-5 in the 5th set, racing back to 5-5. Was an unbelievable level with clean winners galore.

celoft
02-24-2012, 07:37 AM
we might see a tired Nadal and Djoker heading into the USO after the RG/Wimbly/Olympics swing.

That could be advantage Federer as well.

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 08:04 AM
That could be advantage Federer as well.

Not in my opinon. This is not 2008. I really don't think Federer is winning a Slam again, even if Djoker and Nadal are tired from Olympics and he draws Lendy in the final. Lendy Murray Version 2012 will not lose 3-0 to Fed in a Slam final again.

Of course this is just my opinion and I could be wrong. Time will tell...

sbengte
02-24-2012, 08:21 AM
Not in my opinon. This is not 2008. I really don't think Federer is winning a Slam again, even if Djoker and Nadal are tired from Olympics and he draws Lendy in the final. Lendy Murray Version 2012 will not lose 3-0 to Fed in a Slam final again.

Of course this is just my opinion and I could be wrong. Time will tell...

I have to agree. Fed isn't getting any younger and Murray certainly showed glimpses of what he is capable of in the AO semifinal. The next time Fed and Murray meet at a slam, I think Murray will most likely pull off a win. If Murray meets Nadal in a semifinal , it will be advantage Murray as well.

Mainad
02-24-2012, 08:40 AM
Why are you so much obsessed with murray and i didn't suggest you anything so please don't advice me what should i do.

I'm not obsessed with Murray but I do get irritated when posters like you show him no respect. You felt free to offer him 'advice' about sticking to playstation, why? Would you advise all the other players ranked below him to do the same, the vast majority of whom have never and probably will never come as close to winning a Slam as Murray has?

No-one's asking you to like Murray or expect you to say he will win a Slam, just to treat him with the respect justified by his #4 ranking and achievements to date.

If you can't do that then go and post on another thread about a player you do like!

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 08:45 AM
I'm not obsessed with Murray but I do get irritated when posters like you show him no respect. You felt free to offer him 'advice' about sticking to playstation, why? Would you advise all the other players ranked below him to do the same, the vast majority of whom have never and probably will never come as close to winning a Slam as Murray has?

No-one's asking you to like Murray or expect you to say he will win a Slam, just to treat him with the respect justified by his #4 ranking and achievements to date.

If you can't do that then go and post on another thread about a player you do like!

The amount of disrespect I see for Murray EVERYWHERE online is disgusting. I'm not a huge fan but I respect the guy a lot, he has had some great matches/tourneys and just hasn't pulled off a Slam *yet*. Totally believe in him, though. Can't believe some other idiot Delpo fans claiming that Delpo is "real" Top 4 now that he's back. What bull****. Even as a Delpo fan I feel that Murray is the more crafty player and more consistent and has a better overall career so far. Plus, Murray has much more respectable H2H against Feds, ******, Djoker than Delpo does.

Just don't listen to these trolls. Lendy's time is coming.

sbengte
02-24-2012, 09:23 AM
It is a matter of time before Murray wins a slam. There will be a lot of threads to be bumped and crow to be eaten when that happens :)

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 09:25 AM
It is a matter of time before Murray wins a slam. There will be a lot of threads to be bumped and crow to be eaten when that happens :)

If Delpoopoo ever wins a 2nd Slam, I'll be bumping the "Delpo: A One Slam Wonder?" thread and trolling the SHIZNIT out of Delpo bashers lol.

Of course, I will also participate in the bumping of threads and Muzza-hater-trolling when (not if, it's a question of when) Muzza wins a Slam LOL. :)

batz
02-24-2012, 09:47 AM
The amount of disrespect I see for Murray EVERYWHERE online is disgusting. I'm not a huge fan but I respect the guy a lot, he has had some great matches/tourneys and just hasn't pulled off a Slam *yet*. Totally believe in him, though. Can't believe some other idiot Delpo fans claiming that Delpo is "real" Top 4 now that he's back. What bull****. Even as a Delpo fan I feel that Murray is the more crafty player and more consistent and has a better overall career so far. Plus, Murray has much more respectable H2H against Feds, ******, Djoker than Delpo does.

Just don't listen to these trolls. Lendy's time is coming.

You are really starting to grow on me :)

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 09:52 AM
You are really starting to grow on me :)

Great! We can join forces in bumping the "Murray -- A No Slam Wonder" and "Delpo -- A One Slam Wonder" threads when these 2 guys win their next Slam(s)....

batz
02-24-2012, 09:56 AM
Great! We can join forces in bumping the "Murray -- A No Slam Wonder" and "Delpo -- A One Slam Wonder" threads when these 2 guys win their next Slam(s)....

Got yourself a deal mate. Had a soft spot for the big fella since I saw him at the WTF - be happy to see him win another slam.

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 10:00 AM
Got yourself a deal mate. Had a soft spot for the big fella since I saw him at the WTF - be happy to see him win another slam.

And I really want to see Murray beat Federer at least once in a Slam before Feds retires. I really think Lendy Murray Version 2012 will be able to do it. Had my doubts before Twilight became Lendy, but not anymore!!

Murrayalmagrofan
02-24-2012, 10:18 AM
I'm keen to see how Murray does at the Masters events at Indian Wells and Miami. If he has good finishes, it could give him great momentum going into the rest of the season.

I think his best chance will come at the US Open.

Yourtenniscoach
02-24-2012, 02:38 PM
Andy does everything really well but does nothing great. He needs a Great shot or two to elevate him to the next stage.

kaku
02-24-2012, 02:49 PM
I believe that I said this in another thread: Murray wins a Masters title beating Nole/Rafa/Roger in the process, people disregard it saying that they were injured/"Only majors matter". Tsonga/Delpo/Berdych lose in the finals of a masters and everybody claims they will win the upcoming slam.

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 02:51 PM
I believe that I said this in another thread: Murray wins a Masters title beating Nole/Rafa/Roger in the process, people disregard it saying that they were injured/"Only majors matter". Tsonga/Delpo/Berdych lose in the finals of a masters and everybody claims they will win the upcoming slam.

Technically, that's exactly what Delpo did -- lost in the finals of Montreal to Murray and then won the USO a couple weeks after that ;)

But I agree with you that Murray gets bashed unnecessarily. IMO it's harder to win a Masters than it is to win a Slam since you gotta beat the best in the game back-to-back with no rest days in between, and there aren't even any "easy" 1st rounds like there are in Slams.

kaku
02-24-2012, 03:05 PM
Technically, that's exactly what Delpo did -- lost in the finals of Montreal to Murray and then won the USO a couple weeks after that ;)

But I agree with you that Murray gets bashed unnecessarily. IMO it's harder to win a Masters than it is to win a Slam since you gotta beat the best in the game back-to-back with no rest days in between, and there aren't even any "easy" 1st rounds like there are in Slams.

Haha I didn't even realize that about Delpo until you told me. I just listed a couple players that are always hyped to win Majors, sometimes unnecessarily, although not taking any credit away from Delpo at all.

But yeah, I guess Murray just irks people, although personal dislike should not obscure their actual results. I dislike Fed's attitude at times, but I don't deny he's the GOAT.

Juan Ma Del Pony
02-24-2012, 03:07 PM
I dislike Fed's attitude at times, but I don't deny he's the GOAT.

Bingo! My new favorite poster!

And I used to think Murray was really obnoxious when he yelled obscenities at his mother and such, but I'm really liking Lendy Murray Version 2012. Also, I think he's insanely talented. It would be great to see him snatch a Wimbly or USO this year, especially if he beat Federer in the finals. Hahahaa that'll shut the haters up....

Mainad
02-24-2012, 04:37 PM
Andy does everything really well but does nothing great. He needs a Great shot or two to elevate him to the next stage.

You really don't think he's capable of great shots? How many Murray matches have you watched? I personally recommend...

...the final of Cincinnati 2008, the semi-final of the 2008 USO, the quarter-final of the 2010 AO, the semi-final and final of Toronto 2010, the final of Shanghai 2010, the semi-final of the 2010 WTF, the semi-final of Rome 2011, the final of Tokyo 2011 and the recent semi-final of the 2012 AO.

That's just for starters!

MG1
02-25-2012, 01:11 AM
I'm not obsessed with Murray but I do get irritated when posters like you show him no respect. You felt free to offer him 'advice' about sticking to playstation, why? Would you advise all the other players ranked below him to do the same, the vast majority of whom have never and probably will never come as close to winning a Slam as Murray has?

No-one's asking you to like Murray or expect you to say he will win a Slam, just to treat him with the respect justified by his #4 ranking and achievements to date.

If you can't do that then go and post on another thread about a player you do like!


I don't like underachiever and he is the biggest underachiever at the moment.The day murray would win a slam i'll stop bashing him.

Respect earns by player by their achievements which justified their talent.

batz
02-25-2012, 02:12 AM
I don't like underachiever and he is the biggest underachiever at the moment.The day murray would win a slam i'll stop bashing him.

Respect earns by player by their achievements which justified their talent.

Ah - you use an inherently subjective term like 'underachiever' as the club with which to bash Murray. That's clever.

You don't think there's a context around Murray's 'underachievement'? Which GOAT candidate/slam champions did Roger, Rafa and Noel beat to win their first slam? Roger beat the world number 46, Rafa beat the world number 37, and Noel beat the world number 33 - none of whom were slam champions.

Are you really saying that Murray would still be an 'underachiever' if he'd had the opportunity to play someone from outside the top 30 in a final - in he same way as the other 3 did?

sbengte
02-25-2012, 02:27 AM
You don't think there's a context around Murray's 'underachievement'? Which GOAT candidate/slam champions did Roger, Rafa and Noel beat to win their first slam? Roger beat the world number 46, Rafa beat the world number 37, and Noel beat the world number 33 - none of whom were slam champions.


Couldn't agree more. It is so easy to overlook that. Who knows where Fed would have been had he not faced Philippousis in his first slam final ? Who knows what might have happened if Murray who was in such great form till the final in AO 2010 had faced someone other than Fed ,say, had Fed gone out in the quarters like he did at the next two slams.

Speaking of the above, Delpo's first slam victory at USO stands out all the more as he beat Nadal and Fed to get it. Of course Nole did it too but not for his first slam which is the most important for a player. Once the first slam comes, it is much easier to win the subsequent ones, at least from the confidence aspect.

batz
02-25-2012, 02:38 AM
Couldn't agree more. It is so easy to overlook that. Who knows where Fed would have been had he not faced Philippousis in his first slam final ? Who knows what might have happened if Murray who was in such great form till the final in AO 2010 had faced someone other than Fed ,say, had Fed gone out in the quarters like he did at the next two slams.

Speaking of the above, Delpo's first slam victory at USO stands out all the more as he beat Nadal and Fed to get it. Of course Nole did it too but not for his first slam which is the most important for a player. Once the first slam comes, it is much easier to win the subsequent ones, at least from the confidence aspect.

Absolutely - and he gets a lot of credit for that; as he should.

MonfilsMadness
02-25-2012, 04:23 AM
Love to see him do it, if only to inject some interest in the top-three club.

Jim Courier fan
02-25-2012, 04:58 AM
:) no, he will not :)

Crazy man
02-25-2012, 05:13 AM
Ah - you use an inherently subjective term like 'underachiever' as the club with which to bash Murray. That's clever.

You don't think there's a context around Murray's 'underachievement'? Which GOAT candidate/slam champions did Roger, Rafa and Noel beat to win their first slam? Roger beat the world number 46, Rafa beat the world number 37, and Noel beat the world number 33 - none of whom were slam champions.

Are you really saying that Murray would still be an 'underachiever' if he'd had the opportunity to play someone from outside the top 30 in a final - in he same way as the other 3 did?

Murray isn't an underachiever. He's done incredibly well for someone who has hardly any firepower, plays a defensive ground game, a very poor second serve and a non-existent net game. A lot of his victories have come because he reads the game almost Federer-esque and has great hand/eye coordination along with having the best anticipation and return on tour by a clear mile.


Now if JMDP in 5 years time doesn't add to his slam count he would be a definition of an underachiever (permitting injuries of course). He has huge imposing weapons, a big serve, mental strength and has that kind of game where he can potentially steamroll anyone IF he plays well.



Your premise is not very accurate as I don't see Murray winning slams in stronger era's anyway. At the end of the day, if you can't win a slam when Federer is past his prime, Nadal who is no hard court or grasscourt GOAT (clay is different as Murray has no shot at the FO) and an era where Djokovic is the best player and is winning Wimbledon titles (lol) then you're not going to win slams in any other era. Even from 2000-2003 (or other years like 04-06) he still wouldn't have won a slam with this kind of form.

batz
02-25-2012, 05:19 AM
Murray isn't an underachiever. He's done incredibly well for someone who has hardly any firepower, plays a defensive ground game, a very poor second serve and a non-existent net game. A lot of his victories have come because he reads the game almost Federer-esque and has great hand/eye coordination along with having the best anticipation and return on tour by a clear mile.


Now if JMDP in 5 years time doesn't add to his slam count he would be a definition of an underachiever (permitting injuries of course). He has huge imposing weapons, a big serve, mental strength and has that kind of game where he can potentially steamroll anyone IF he plays well.



Your premise is not very accurate as I don't see Murray winning slams in stronger era's anyway. At the end of the day, if you can't win a slam when Federer is past his prime, Nadal who is no hard court or grasscourt GOAT (clay is different as Murray has no shot at the FO) and an era where Djokovic is the best player and is winning Wimbledon titles (lol) then you're not going to win slams in any other era. Even from 2000-2003 (or other years like 04-06) he still wouldn't have won a slam with this kind of form.

You're right. I'm sure Murray would also have struggled to win a slam at the same time as Johansson was winning his. It was just as tough to win one then as it is now - you'd have to be crazy to think otherwise. The difference between Johansson and Murray is that Johansson had a champion's mentality - it was definitely not due to the era he was playing in. In fact, unlike Murray, Johansson would probably be winning slams now if he was in his prime.

Crazy man
02-25-2012, 05:22 AM
You're right. I'm sure Murray would also have struggled to win a slam at the same time as Johansson was winning his. It was just as tough to win one then as it is now - you'd have to be crazy to think otherwise.

Johansson won because Safin choked. Safin wouldn't choke against Murray. Now, because Murray is so overhyped, he would have been made the favourite. Safin enjoys being the 'underdog' and that's when he plays his best tennis. That's my theory anyway. You think Murray would beat Safin at AO? Consider the matchup before talking crap please.

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 05:25 AM
Johansson won because Safin choked. Safin wouldn't choke against Murray. Now, because Murray is so overhyped, he would have been made the favourite. Safin enjoys being the 'underdog' and that's when he plays his best tennis. That's my theory anyway. You think Murray would beat Safin at AO? Consider the matchup before talking crap please.

I don't think Safin choked, it looked like he was barely moving at the end of the 3rd set + of course Johansson played really well in the final.

Crazy man
02-25-2012, 05:29 AM
I don't think Safin choked, it looked like he was barely moving at the end of the 3rd set + of course Johansson played really well in the final.

His fitness 'wasn't great'. let's just say that. Regardless, it was a tournament to forget as a Safin fan. His attitude and his temper amongst other things hindered him. Johansson deserved it obviously. If Safin had the fitness & focus he showcased at AO 2004 and 2005 he would have easily won that tournament IMO.

batz
02-25-2012, 05:30 AM
Johansson won because Safin choked. Safin wouldn't choke against Murray. Now, because Murray is so overhyped, he would have been made the favourite. Safin enjoys being the 'underdog' and that's when he plays his best tennis. That's my theory anyway. You think Murray would beat Safin at AO? Consider the matchup before talking crap please.

:-)


Your theories are quite something, as detached from any empirical evidence to support them as they often are.

You just posited that Safin choked against Johansson - so I'm going to say that he would also choke against Murray. Murray wins 7-5 in the 5th after Marat serves for it at 5-2. You said yourself he was choker mate.

So - would Johansson be winning slams now if he was still playing?

Crazy man
02-25-2012, 05:35 AM
:-)


Your theories are quite something, as detached from any empirical evidence to support them as they often are.

You just posited that Safin choked against Johansson - so I'm going to say that he would also choke against Murray. Murray wins 7-5 in the 5th after Marat serves for it at 5-2. You said yourself he was choker mate.

So - would Johansson be winning slams now if he was still playing?

The thing is, Safin doesn't choke when playing the higher echelon of players (not taking anything away from Johansson, he wasn't as highly rated as Murray is. Murray is a very good player). I really doubt Safin would choke against someone like Murray. Murray wouldn't ever beat Safin at a slam. He would tighten up a lot more than Safin.




Lol at Murray beating Safin in 5.......hahaha. Have you seen Marat's record in five setters against top quality opponents?

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 05:37 AM
:-)

Your theories are quite something, as detached from any empirical evidence to support them as they often are.

You just posited that Safin choked against Johansson - so I'm going to say that he would also choke against Murray. Murray wins 7-5 in the 5th after Marat serves for it at 5-2. You said yourself he was choker mate.

So - would Johansson be winning slams now if he was still playing?

Batz your theory is also pretty interesting. You assume that all the majors won by fluke (a la Gaudio, Johansson) would automatically be Murray's if he happened to play at the time. You know it doesn't happen a whole lot of a time but of course Murray would've taken them. He proved 3 times that no matter who he plays in the final he goes down the moment it gets tough. To be honest, I'm not sure he would beat Carlos Moya in a major final, not to mention the players of Hewitt's, Safin's, 30's Agassi's, Roddick's or Ferrero's caliber.

batz
02-25-2012, 05:38 AM
The thing is, Safin doesn't choke when playing the higher echelon of players (not taking anything away from Johansson, he wasn't as highly rated as Murray is. Murray is a very good player). I really doubt Safin would choke against someone like Murray. Murray wouldn't ever beat Safin at a slam. He would tighten up a lot more than Safin.




Lol at Murray beating Safin in 5.......hahaha. Have you seen Marat's record in five setters against top quality opponents?

Murray isn't in the upper echelon of players remember - he's an overachiever with no weapons, so Marat would be hot favourite. The more I think about it the more I think you're right - Marat would definitely choke.

batz
02-25-2012, 05:42 AM
Batz your theory is also pretty interesting. You assume that all the majors won by fluke (a la Gaudio, Johansson) would automatically be Murray's if he happened to play at the time. You know it doesn't happen a whole lot of a time but of course Murray would've taken them. He proved 3 times that no matter who he plays in the final he goes down the moment it gets tough. To be honest, I'm not sure he would beat Carlos Moya in a major final, not to mention the players of Hewitt's, Safin's, Agassi's, Roddick's or Ferrero's caliber.

This is a strawman of such gargantuan proportions that it could probably be seen from space. Please stop rebutting arguments I haven't made.

My argument is that it is easier to win a slam final against a player from outside the top 30 who has never won as slam than it is to play someone from the top 3 who has won a slam. If you have some points that refute my argument then feel free to make them, but to repeat; please don't try and refute something I haven't said.

Crazy man
02-25-2012, 05:43 AM
Murray isn't in the upper echelon of players remember - he's an overachiever with no weapons, so Marat would be hot favourite. The more I think about it the more I think you're right - Marat would definitely choke.

You've just completely misunderstood my post. Murray is a very good player. He is a top player. From a matchup mentally and technically Marat schools Murray in both these departments, even mentally. I don't see Safin choking to Murray because of the occassion. I'm happy with your opinion that Murray would beat Safin, loads of kids who haven't watched Safin play would probably say the same. However I've seen Safin take down Sampras, Agassi, Federer, Roddick, Hewitt etc at the AO, I'm pretty sure he would deal with Murray who would allow Safin to play his game more so than these guys.

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 05:46 AM
This is a strawman of such gargantuan proportions that it could probably be seen from space. Please stop rebutting arguments I haven't made.

My argument is that it is easier to win a slam final against a player from outside the top 30 who has never won as slam than it is to play someone from the top 3 who has never won a slam. If you have some points that refute my argument then feel free to make them, but to repeat; please don't try and refute something I haven't said.

It would be easier but he still wouldn't've won one. Apart from 2002 AO and maybe 1998 AO (both depending on the draw of course), there are no majors in the open era which Murray would've won. He's just not good ENOUGH. Obviously he's a top top player but just not the elite, he will always be behind the top 3 (if the trend continues)

batz
02-25-2012, 05:50 AM
You've just completely misunderstood my post. Murray is a very good player. He is a top player. From a matchup mentally and technically Marat schools Murray in both these departments, even mentally. I don't see Safin choking to Murray because of the occassion. I'm happy with your opinion that Murray would beat Safin, loads of kids who haven't watched Safin play would probably say the same. However I've seen Safin take down Sampras, Agassi, Federer, Roddick, Hewitt etc at the AO, I'm pretty sure he would deal with Murray who would allow Safin to play his game more so than these guys.

Mate - stop doing yourself down and take the credit due to you.

You were 100% correct the first time - Marat choked against Johansson, and Murray is such a good matchup for Marat for the reasons you state above that the Russian would definitely be hot favourite, and as you also said earlier, Marat only chokes against players he would be expected to beat - so Marat would definitely choke v Murray; it's so obvious now you've pointed it out.

batz
02-25-2012, 05:52 AM
It would be easier but he still wouldn't've won one. Apart from 2002 AO and maybe 1998 AO (both depending on the draw of course), there are no majors in the open era which Murray would've won. He's just not good ENOUGH. Obviously he's a top top player but just not the elite, he will always be behind the top 3 (if the trend continues)

So you don't have any points that refute my argument then? Didn't think you did. And why the qualifier in brackets? Don't you have the courage of your own absolutist assertions? You are saying that unless Murray wins a slam, he'll never win a slam. You're not exactly going out on a limb there mate.

Crazy man
02-25-2012, 05:52 AM
Mate - stop doing yourself down ans take the credit due to you.

You were 100% correct the first time - Marat choked against Johansson, and Murray is such a good matchup for Marat for the reasons you state above that the Russian would definitely be hot favourite, and as you also said earlier, Marat only chokes against players he would be expected to beat - so Marat would definitely choke v Murray; it's so obvious now you've pointed it out.

It's only my opinion dude. I'm happy and understand yours. I just happen to view this 'scenario' differently to yours. You ok?

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 05:53 AM
Mate - stop doing yourself down ans take the credit due to you.

You were 100% correct the first time - Marat choked against Johansson, and Murray is such a good matchup for Marat for the reasons you state above that the Russian would definitely be hot favourite, and as you also said earlier, Marat only chokes against players he would be expected to beat - so Marat would definitely choke v Murray; it's so obvious now you've pointed it out.

It's funny how you're ardently arguing about the 2002 AO like it was the only major in the last 40 years Murray might have a chance of winning :D

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 05:58 AM
So you don't have any points that refute my argument then? Didn't think you did. And why the qualifier in brackets? Don't you have the courage of your own absolutist assertions? You are saying that unless Murray wins a slam, he'll never win a slam. You're not exactly going out on a limb there mate.

Murray is almost 25 and usually one's "tennis" mentality is shaped by then. I've seen him choke too many times, tho, to think it might change in the future.

BUT, there's nothing certain in tennis, thus the brackets.

batz
02-25-2012, 06:04 AM
It's funny how you're ardently arguing about the 2002 AO like it was the only major in the last 40 years Murray might have a chance of winning :D

No, what I'm arguing about is the idea that Murray would have a better chance of winning slam final against someone from outside the top 30 than someone from within the top 3.

You seem to be having several other arguments with yourself but none of them seem to be in any way related to my argument if the number of strawmen you are posting is anything to go by.

batz
02-25-2012, 06:05 AM
It's only my opinion dude. I'm happy and understand yours. I just happen to view this 'scenario' differently to yours. You ok?

Fine by me mate.

Love all
02-25-2012, 06:06 AM
He would most likely win when Federer retires.

Mainad
02-25-2012, 06:09 AM
I don't like underachiever and he is the biggest underachiever at the moment.The day murray would win a slam i'll stop bashing him.

And I repeat...what about all the other players on the tour who haven't won a Slam? Why aren't you bashing them too? What's so special about Murray other than you perhaps don't like him and therefore draw the erroneous conclusion (which so many other Murray-bashers on here do) that he must be crap and should therefore stick to Playstation!?


Respect earns by player by their achievements which justified their talent.

And so you don't think 22 titles including 8 masters and 3 Slam final appearances don't justify his talent? I'm getting a bit confused here. Are you saying you think Murray is too good not to win a Slam and is therefore wasting his talent and your respect or are you saying he's such an overrated, crap player he shouldn't even be thinking of trying to win one? If the former, I think you're being a bit blasť about the value of winning other tournaments that don't happen to be a Slam; if the latter, then I repeat again, why aren't you busy bashing all the other non-Slam hopers out there on the tour who have far less of a chance to win one than Murray??? :confused:

batz
02-25-2012, 06:09 AM
Murray is almost 25 and usually one's "tennis" mentality is shaped by then. I've seen him choke too many times, tho, to think it might change in the future.

BUT, there's nothing certain in tennis, thus the brackets.

You may well be right - I said earlier on this thread that I don't see things getting any easier for him. Time will tell.

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 06:09 AM
No, what I'm arguing about is the idea that Murray would have a better chance of winning slam final against someone from outside the top 30 than someone from within the top 3.

You seem to be having several other arguments with yourself but none of them seem to be in any way related to my argument if the number of strawmen you are posting is anything to go by.

If that's the case, then you're right, obviously. That doesn't change the fact that he probably wouldn't've won any majors in any era no matter what the competition is (apart from maybe 2 Australian Open's in the last 30 years) which makes the whole discussion pointless.

Having said that, he has showed some promise at the 2012 AO. The question is - can he keep up the good work or fall into an even bigger slump? Only time will tell.

batz
02-25-2012, 06:14 AM
If that's the case, then you're right, obviously. That doesn't change the fact that he probably wouldn't've won any majors in any era no matter what the competition is which makes the whole discussion pointless.

That's not a fact - it's your opinion, and as such it's something that is impossible to refute so I'm not going to try, but please stop presenting your opinions as facts. They aren't.

tennis_pro
02-25-2012, 06:17 AM
That's not a fact - it's your opinion, and as such it's something that is impossible to refute so I'm not going to try, but please stop presenting your opinions as facts. They aren't.

Ok, let's leave it at that. Next stop, Dubai. Let's see how Murray performs there.

batz
02-25-2012, 06:18 AM
Ok, let's leave it at that. Next stop, Dubai. Let's see how Murray performs there.

Works for me mate.

Clarky21
02-25-2012, 08:06 AM
Ah - you use an inherently subjective term like 'underachiever' as the club with which to bash Murray. That's clever.

You don't think there's a context around Murray's 'underachievement'? Which GOAT candidate/slam champions did Roger, Rafa and Noel beat to win their first slam? Roger beat the world number 46, Rafa beat the world number 37, and Noel beat the world number 33 - none of whom were slam champions.

Are you really saying that Murray would still be an 'underachiever' if he'd had the opportunity to play someone from outside the top 30 in a final - in he same way as the other 3 did?


True,but he also had to beat prime Fed in the semi just to make that final. That at least counts for something.

Evan77
02-25-2012, 08:16 AM
well, it's too bad that Murray is playing in the era of Nole, Rog and Nadal. I think that under the right circumstances he could win a slam.

MG1
02-25-2012, 08:27 AM
And I repeat...what about all the other players on the tour who haven't won a Slam? Why aren't you bashing them too? What's so special about Murray other than you perhaps don't like him and therefore draw the erroneous conclusion (which so many other Murray-bashers on here do) that he must be crap and should therefore stick to Playstation!?



And so you don't think 22 titles including 8 masters and 3 Slam final appearances don't justify his talent? I'm getting a bit confused here. Are you saying you think Murray is too good not to win a Slam and is therefore wasting his talent and your respect or are you saying he's such an overrated, crap player he shouldn't even be thinking of trying to win one? If the former, I think you're being a bit blasť about the value of winning other tournaments that don't happen to be a Slam; if the latter, then I repeat again, why aren't you busy bashing all the other non-Slam hopers out there on the tour who have far less of a chance to win one than Murray??? :confused:


Murray is better player than any player except top 3 thats why his achievements can not be compared with other lower ranked player. It will not make him any better player if succeed to win another 10 MS but fail to win another GS.

You can find alot of excuses/reason to say that other top 3 player were lucky to play their 1st GS final against lower ranked player but you have to find the way to win whoever across the net in front of you.

He even failed to make any RG/wimbledon final..whats your reasoning for that??

Mainad
02-25-2012, 11:34 AM
Murray is better player than any player except top 3 thats why his achievements can not be compared with other lower ranked player.

Well, if he's not as good as the top 3 then it's unlikely he will win a Slam will he? Does that make him a bad person or a failure when he's won so much else?


It will not make him any better player if succeed to win another 10 MS but fail to win another GS.

Winning a MS title IS an achievement no matter how many times you win one just like winning another GS is an achievement no matter how many you've already won! Not winning a GS will mean Murray will never be in the class of the top 3 but that doesn't mean his career has been a failure anymore than the careers of lower ranked players are failures even though most of them will never even win an MS!


You can find alot of excuses/reason to say that other top 3 player were lucky to play their 1st GS final against lower ranked player but you have to find the way to win whoever across the net in front of you.

Agreed.


He even failed to make any RG/wimbledon final..whats your reasoning for that??

That he was beaten by the (then) no.1 player in the world?? No shame or disgrace in that!!