PDA

View Full Version : Is Murray the most aesthetic grinder in history?


monfed
02-29-2012, 05:31 AM
Traditionally, grinders aren't the most aesthetically pleasing players to watch imo unless I missed someone in the 60s, apologies if I did.

However, Murray seems to diverge from that trend.
He's got a lovely service motion(one of the best looking on tour right now imo). Stylish pusher FH(which he can flatten out if the need arises), stable yet somewhat aesthetic BH. Decent volleys,looks good at the net when he occasionally comes in.

So, most stylish grinder ever?

pc1
02-29-2012, 05:57 AM
Traditionally, grinders aren't the most aesthetically pleasing players to watch imo unless I missed someone in the 60s, apologies if I did.

However, Murray seems to diverge from that trend.
He's got a lovely service motion(one of the best looking on tour right now imo). Stylish pusher FH(which he can flatten out if the need arises), stable yet somewhat aesthetic BH. Decent volleys,looks good at the net when he occasionally comes in.

So, most stylish grinder ever?

What's your definition of a grinder? You can call Borg, Orantes, Rosewall, Agassi (late in his career especially), Vilas, Wilander and Lendl grinders but perhaps not. You can call a lot of the players of today like Nadal and Djokovic grinders also. Are these players grinders in your opinion? Federer may be a grinder at times also.

Rozroz
02-29-2012, 06:02 AM
Aesthetic??
Murray??
Huh??

nereis
02-29-2012, 06:07 AM
If by grinding you mean getting balls back in play deep and putting pressure on the opponent to not make the error first then no, plenty of other players have played his game in a more pleasing manner.

A sample list in no particular order of players I think are more enjoyable to watch if they're just grinding out points.

Borg
Vilas
Wilander
Ferrer
Agassi
Coria

Reasoning being: floating balls up the centre and grimacing/swearing after losing a point isn't a mainstay.

Murray is far more fun to watch when he's being aggressive.

monfed
02-29-2012, 10:21 AM
What's your definition of a grinder? You can call Borg, Orantes, Rosewall, Agassi (late in his career especially), Vilas, Wilander and Lendl grinders but perhaps not. You can call a lot of the players of today like Nadal and Djokovic grinders also. Are these players grinders in your opinion? Federer may be a grinder at times also.

Isn't it reasonable to consider that Murray at his core is a grinder? He's not known for his shotmaking ability atleast he doesn't do it consistently enough for me to consider him one.
At times several players(even Pete) have grind-ed out matches but at their core they're not.
Borg is considered by most to be athletic than aesthetic.

vive le beau jeu !
02-29-2012, 10:25 AM
Traditionally, grinders aren't the most aesthetically pleasing players to watch imo unless I missed someone in the 60s, apologies if I did.

However, Murray seems to diverge from that trend.
He's got a lovely service motion(one of the best looking on tour right now imo). Stylish pusher FH(which he can flatten out if the need arises), stable yet somewhat aesthetic BH. Decent volleys,looks good at the net when he occasionally comes in.

So, most stylish grinder ever?
aesthetic...... you mean... himself, or his game ?
'cause i surely wouldn't put him above my fireplace, even after a visit at the taxidermist.

monfed
02-29-2012, 10:28 AM
If by grinding you mean getting balls back in play deep and putting pressure on the opponent to not make the error first then no, plenty of other players have played his game in a more pleasing manner.

This is precisely what I mean and I should've put it in my OP, my mistake.




A sample list in no particular order of players I think are more enjoyable to watch if they're just grinding out points.

Borg
Vilas
Wilander
Ferrer
Agassi
Coria

Reasoning being: floating balls up the centre and grimacing/swearing after losing a point isn't a mainstay.

Murray is far more fun to watch when he's being aggressive.

How is Ferrer/Coria more aesthetic than Murray? :shock:

Also Agassi is an allcourter, he takes the ball very early so I fail to understand how he could be considered a grinder.

Look guys, let's not take one/two matches to determine if they're grinders or not. Let's look at their core playing style please.

Examples of grinders would be - Hewitt,Nadal, Murray,Ferrer, Simon. That should get you started.

monfed
02-29-2012, 10:36 AM
aesthetic...... you mean... himself, or his game ?

His game(sorry If I didn't bring that out clearly in my OP).


'cause i surely wouldn't put him above my fireplace, even after a visit at the taxidermist.

LOL! The muzzette could certainly do with a shave(although I'm not sure if that'd do it for you. ;) )


A thread on aesthetics without your opinion is incomplete,vive. Glad you took a peek! ;)

Homeboy Hotel
02-29-2012, 10:57 AM
I think he has a pretty attractive ('interesting') game to watch. The guy is on the positive end of the variety spectrum and has many options on all his shots. I like watching him and like his tactical mindset about how he approaches matches.

He likes to predict what a players gonna do, get into the opponents head by forcing them to make mistakes and just use his calibre to open up the court.

His volleying is pretty underrated, and just generally everything is pretty good to justify his ranking (if not 1-2 places higher in the next few months).

Say Chi Sin Lo
02-29-2012, 11:18 AM
This is precisely what I mean and I should've put it in my OP, my mistake.




How is Ferrer/Coria more aesthetic than Murray? :shock:

Also Agassi is an allcourter, he takes the ball very early so I fail to understand how he could be considered a grinder.

Look guys, let's not take one/two matches to determine if they're grinders or not. Let's look at their core playing style please.

Examples of grinders would be - Hewitt,Nadal, Murray,Ferrer, Simon. That should get you started.

The only thing that qualifies Agassi as a "grinder" is the fact that he played at the baseline. Other than that, he's not a grinder. Also, when you play a grinder, it doesn't turn into a punishing track meet.

Ferrer and Coria's game are/were effective, but there's nothing pretty about their strokes.

Funbun
02-29-2012, 12:03 PM
Don't forget that Murray also has taken the ball earlier to be a bit more aggressive and even with Djokovic. However, I do agree he is a sort of "grinder".

Murray is a different sort, in the sense that he doesn't really rely on high, loopy, spinny rally shots to set up. He just hits around with almost the same pace every time, making an opponent move until they break. That, or Murray runs around himself.

I read on Youtube that Murray is practically the Tim Duncan of tennis, and it's true. His strokes look so ridiculously normal, clean efficient, that it's boring. His style of play looks so stable that it doesn't look like high level tennis.

Yet, Murray remains my favorite player simply because amongst all the other players on the tour, he tries to stay stable, going mildly aggressive or rather defensive. He's not fancy or rough or majestic or pure. He's the epitome of normal, so much that he's fun to watch, especially when he faces the more aggressive players.

laughingbuddha
02-29-2012, 12:29 PM
The only aesthetically pleasing players in the top 10 are Federer, and occasionally Tsonga.

TheOneHander
02-29-2012, 12:44 PM
Also Agassi is an allcourter, he takes the ball very early so I fail to understand how he could be considered a grinder.

I've seen it all now.

dominikk1985
02-29-2012, 12:47 PM
borg is easily the most aesthetic grinder in history.

mucat
02-29-2012, 12:50 PM
You mean anesthetic?




Well, he is not that bad. ;)

bc-05
02-29-2012, 01:13 PM
i dislike his forehand. period!

Bobby Jr
02-29-2012, 01:14 PM
He's got a lovely service motion(one of the best looking on tour right now imo).
Unfortunately the only thing that matters with serves is consistent effectiveness and Murray's lets him down all the time when he's not playing bunnies.

celoft
02-29-2012, 01:16 PM
Murray makes pushing look elegant and stylish.

Nathaniel_Near
02-29-2012, 01:23 PM
Borg, probably.

Roger isn't a grinder as his play is never really monotonous. Even when he is playing it safer and isn't attacking a whole lot, it's still never grinder tennis.

li0scc0
02-29-2012, 02:38 PM
Murray makes pushing look elegant and stylish.

That's because he doesn't push, and usually hits more winners than his opponent.

vive le beau jeu !
02-29-2012, 02:51 PM
LOL! The muzzette could certainly do with a shave(although I'm not sure if that'd do it for you. ;) )


A thread on aesthetics without your opinion is incomplete,vive. Glad you took a peek! ;)
it's always a pleasure to modestly contribute to quality threads. ;)

(a shaved muzzette ?... ummm i'm not sure if it would really be better......)

ace_pace
02-29-2012, 03:27 PM
If you think Murray is aesthetically pleasing, what do you think of the Nadal/Fed?

celoft
02-29-2012, 03:31 PM
That's because he doesn't push, and usually hits more winners than his opponent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pusher_(tennis)

I like him.

Hope he can win a slam this year and stop Djokodal's reign of terror.

monfed
02-29-2012, 07:21 PM
Murray makes pushing look elegant and stylish.

Basically this. Well said. :)

Sentinel
02-29-2012, 07:31 PM
Murray makes pushing look elegant and stylish.
I believe this thread was created to bait Blnkism.

btw, how come batz has not commented.

Djokodal's reign of terror.Well put, we need someone to put an end to that scourge, so Nadal can reclaim his throne. Oh wait, i thought you said Djokovic.

Sentinel
02-29-2012, 07:33 PM
If you think Murray is aesthetically pleasing, what do you think of the Nadal/Fed?
Nadal - artistic, athletic
Federer - pathetic, finished

Rozroz
02-29-2012, 11:37 PM
Nadal - artistic

http://awesomegifs.com/wp-content/uploads/mr-t-lol.gif

MixieP
02-29-2012, 11:52 PM
Don't forget that Murray also has taken the ball earlier to be a bit more aggressive and even with Djokovic. However, I do agree he is a sort of "grinder".

Murray is a different sort, in the sense that he doesn't really rely on high, loopy, spinny rally shots to set up. He just hits around with almost the same pace every time, making an opponent move until they break. That, or Murray runs around himself.

I read on Youtube that Murray is practically the Tim Duncan of tennis, and it's true. His strokes look so ridiculously normal, clean efficient, that it's boring. His style of play looks so stable that it doesn't look like high level tennis.

Yet, Murray remains my favorite player simply because amongst all the other players on the tour, he tries to stay stable, going mildly aggressive or rather defensive. He's not fancy or rough or majestic or pure. He's the epitome of normal, so much that he's fun to watch, especially when he faces the more aggressive players.

A nice read, thank you. And I agree with your assessment.

nereis
03-01-2012, 01:49 AM
Ferrer has a nice curve to his shots, trades groundstrokes in a metronomic fashion and smokes balls with regularity.

Coria had an amazing ability to move and stay on balance in addition to being very balanced off both wings and had great feel to mask and execute drop shots.

Nathaniel_Near
03-01-2012, 02:00 AM
If you think Murray is aesthetically pleasing, what do you think of the Nadal/Fed?

Nadal is glorious, gladiatorial and flawless, Federer is vulnerable, mercurial and flaky.

Sentinel
03-02-2012, 03:59 AM
Nadal is glorious, gladiatorial, glamorous, gracious, garrulous, generous, gorgeous and flawless, Federer is vulnerable, mercurial and flaky.
You forgot a few there in your otherwise perfect post.

tacou
03-02-2012, 04:05 AM
OP I'm not going to give you a hard time like everyone else, you're clearly onto something...

However 2 things, first Murray's game "looks" and IS better when he's aggressive, which is becoming more often the case thankfully.

Secondly, there's got to be other pretty grinders because look no further than Gilles Simon. Gilles' backhand is so simple it's breathtaking, and when he's aggressive on his forehand out of nowhere it's a thing of beauty.