PDA

View Full Version : Murray: "not playing my best tennis I could still win against him" (Djokovic)


DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 11:42 AM
Wow, is this a whole new cocky Andy Murray? Gotta like it. He just dismantled the world's #1 player quite easily. The 2nd set was not as close as the score indicates. Sure this was only an ATP500 but surely it bodes well for Murray after taking djoker to 5 sets at AO. With both Murray and Djoker stepping it up now, could this be the end of Nadal?

purge
03-02-2012, 11:49 AM
murray has yet to play a decent match against either federer or nadal at a slam. if he does we can talk -.-

batz
03-02-2012, 11:51 AM
murray has yet to play a decent match against either federer or nadal at a slam. if he does we can talk -.-

He's beaten Nadal twice at a slam. Can we talk now?

purge
03-02-2012, 11:56 AM
He's beaten Nadal twice at a slam. Can we talk now?

i meant since the "new murray" theme

Shaolin
03-02-2012, 12:19 PM
I like the attitude from Murray. Hope it doesn't backfire on him though.

Agassifan
03-02-2012, 12:23 PM
He's beaten Nadal twice at a slam. Can we talk now?

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Agassifan
03-02-2012, 12:24 PM
i meant since the "new murray" theme

weak comeback. You got owned

batz
03-02-2012, 12:30 PM
i meant since the "new murray" theme

Come on now... no you didn't.:) There has after all only been one slam since "new Murray".

Homeboy Hotel
03-02-2012, 12:35 PM
Just for clarification and to be a total utter kill-joy, let me clarify what Murray said...

'It wasn't an amazing standard [his own tennis quality]' Murray admitted. 'I think I could have played better and I'm sure Novak feels the same. Maybe it's a good sign for me that I could still win when not playing my best tennis against him.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2109275/Andy-Murray-beats-Novak-Djokovic-reach-Dubai-final.html#ixzz1nzuiWpha

purge
03-02-2012, 12:48 PM
weak comeback. You got owned

Come on now... no you didn't.:) There has after all only been one slam since "new Murray".

bollocks. i was watching those matches where murray beat nadal. but yeah it makes sense that you know better what i meant than i do.

and new murray for me is not just since hes teamed up with ivan. murrays pretty much been at this point since the start of the 2011 clay swing. that was the first time he really impressed me on clay and it was no coincidence that he was the only one besides federer who had djokovic at the edge of defeat during the first 3/4 of the season. yet he kept losing out to nadal in slam semis even worse than federer would.

this season is still young. and hes shown promise in his AO SF against djoker. but for the OP to take this as a basis of asking if that might be "the end of nadal" he would have to deliver against nadal (and/or federer) at the slam stage as well.

Tammo
03-02-2012, 12:49 PM
Lendl really has improved Murray's game bothe physically and mentally. I think Murray will take IW next week.

Fed Kennedy
03-02-2012, 12:51 PM
Murray looking strong: will win Wimbledon?

Mustard
03-02-2012, 12:52 PM
Sounds like a Lendl quote.

batz
03-02-2012, 12:57 PM
bollocks. i was watching those matches where murray beat nadal. but yeah it makes sense that you know better what i meant than i do.

and new murray for me is not just since hes teamed up with ivan. murrays pretty much been at this point since the start of the 2011 clay swing. that was the first time he really impressed me on clay and it was no coincidence that he was the only one besides federer who had djokovic at the edge of defeat during the first 3/4 of the season. yet he kept losing out to nadal in slam semis even worse than federer would.

this season is still young. and hes shown promise in his AO SF against djoker. but for the OP to take this as a basis of asking if that might be "the end of nadal" he would have to deliver against nadal (and/or federer) at the slam stage as well.

Fair enough - that's not what you said though. You could have said 'We can talk after he beats someone from the top 3 in a slam again' or even 'we can talk when he wins a slam' neither of which are unreasonable positions. You could also have qualified that you were talking about a specific time period. But you didn't.

Mustard
03-02-2012, 01:00 PM
and new murray for me is not just since hes teamed up with ivan. murrays pretty much been at this point since the start of the 2011 clay swing. that was the first time he really impressed me on clay and it was no coincidence that he was the only one besides federer who had djokovic at the edge of defeat during the first 3/4 of the season. yet he kept losing out to nadal in slam semis even worse than federer would.

Nadal was 2 points away from beating Djokovic in the 2011 Miami final. I'm simply amazed at the numbers of people who think Djokovic vs. Nadal is as one-sided as Lendl vs. Gilbert.

purge
03-02-2012, 01:03 PM
Fair enough - that's not what you said though. You could have said 'We can talk after he beats someone from the top 3 in a slam again' or even 'we can talk when he wins a slam' neither of which are unreasonable positions. You could also have qualified that you were talking about a specific time period. But you didn't.

is that supposed to be some sort of narrow eyed nitpicking? its common knowledge that murray has beaten nadal at slams in the past. how is it not obvious i wasnt talking about past events here? this thread is all about future prognosis.

thats as if id say "so long as fed cant get past nadal at a slam he wont be able to reclaim the #1 ranking" and you say "dude, hes beaten nadal twice at a slam. your point?"
well, duh.. i know he has. what does that matter now?

purge
03-02-2012, 01:05 PM
Nadal was 2 points away from beating Djokovic in the 2011 Miami final. I'm simply amazed at the numbers of people who think Djokovic vs. Nadal is as one-sided as Lendl vs. Gilbert.
the difference here is that murray was actually serving for it. and at least to me novak looked like he was going to win all along towards the end of that 3rd set of the miami final vs nadal

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:06 PM
Wow so now in the semis of events we got murray who can beat djokovic AND federer who can beat djokovic. So that means rafael nadalogram wins every masters and slam for rest of the year!

Tony48
03-02-2012, 01:07 PM
And the hype train begins. Can't wait for it to crash and burn (once again) come slam time.

batz
03-02-2012, 01:08 PM
is that supposed to be some sort of narrow eyed nitpicking? its common knowledge that murray has beaten nadal at slams in the past. how is it not obvious i wasnt talking about past events here? this thread is all about future prognosis.
thats as if id say "so long as fed cant get past nadal at a slam he wont be able to reclaim the #1 ranking" and you say "dude, hes beaten nadal twice at a slam. your point?"
well, duh.. i know he has. what does that matter now?

Chillout mate. You said something that wasn't what you meant - we've all done it.

PS you say you're not talking about past events yet you have previously said you are talking about the period since last year's clay season. Just saying.

stormholloway
03-02-2012, 01:09 PM
I think anyone who saw the match knows Murray has another gear. Djokovic didn't look all that good.

Deuces Wild
03-02-2012, 01:10 PM
Mark my words. Murray will win Wimbledon and the USO.

If he doesn't, it doesn't matter because this is an internet forum and nobody knows who I am anyway.

niff
03-02-2012, 01:10 PM
Sounds like a Lendl quote.
exactly what I was thinking :)

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:11 PM
exactly what I was thinking :)

Hahahahahahaha.

FlamEnemY
03-02-2012, 01:14 PM
Murray looking strong: will win Wimbledon?

Vol. 4

But I really think this year he will win a slam.

batz
03-02-2012, 01:16 PM
Vol. 4

But I really think this year he will win a slam.

Made me LOLz :)

10 slamless Murryas

niff
03-02-2012, 01:17 PM
Vol. 4

But I really think this year he will win a slam.
Everytime someone utters that phrase his chances decrease by a 1/10th :(

jackson vile
03-02-2012, 01:18 PM
It would be really nice to see a Federer Murray final, and then later a Murray Novak final for sure. Murray has failed against Federer many times in slams, would be nice to see some pay back for all of Federer's trash talking to and about Murray.:)

purge
03-02-2012, 01:19 PM
Chillout mate. You said something that wasn't what you meant - we've all done it.

PS you say you're not talking about past events yet you have previously said you are talking about the period since last year's clay season. Just saying.
its all good. im not trying to attack you personally. its just that way too often on here people just seem to be so eager to to try and pick statements apart with misleading smart*****y just fo the sake of it, even if it should be perfectly obvious what was meant. and all that serves is to blow up topics with needless back-and.forth trash talking sintead of discussing the actual point.

PS in my very first post, the one that was being picked apart, i was indeed talking about the future. not the past. that only started because i had to explain something that should have been clear in the first place. but whatever.. back to topic -.-

FlamEnemY
03-02-2012, 01:19 PM
Made me LOLz :)

10 slamless Murryas

;)

I meant it though, I had a feeling about him after watching him @AO, Wimbledon is the best place he could win a Major. It would make for such a good story though, Lendl's pupil managing to do what the Terminator alone couldn't achieve.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:19 PM
Slam finals are pretty nervous so i can see why people say he won't win one. It get so nervous when you lost in others and then you go to a new one. But people said same happened to lendl so anythings possible. Lendl is my favorite coach and i would get lessons from him if i had the dough.

batz
03-02-2012, 01:20 PM
its all good. im not trying to attack you personally. its just that way too often on here people just seem to be so eager to to try and pick statements apart with misleading smart*****y just fo the sake of it, even if it should be perfectly obvious what was meant. and all that serves is to blow up topics with needless back-and.forth trash talking sintead of discussion the actual point.

PS in my very first post, the one that was being picked apart, i was indeed talking about the future. not the past. that only started because i had to explain something that should have been clear in the first place. but whatever.. back to topic -.-

No worries mate - as you say - it's all good.

FlamEnemY
03-02-2012, 01:21 PM
Slam finals are pretty nervous so i can see why people say he won't win one. It get so nervous when you lost in others and then you go to a new one. But people said same happened to lendl so anythings possible.

Exactly. But Lendl knows how Murray feels - and probably knows how to overcome such barriers. This is why I think they could make a great team.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:23 PM
Exactly. But Lendl knows how Murray feels - and probably knows how to overcome such barriers. This is why I think they could make a great team.

Me too. Murray is dough in lendl's hands.

stormholloway
03-02-2012, 01:27 PM
Mark my words. Murray will win Wimbledon and the USO.

If he doesn't, it doesn't matter because this is an internet forum and nobody knows who I am anyway.

Don't be so sure about that.. Kevin (?)

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:28 PM
Don't be so sure about that.. Kevin (?)

Hahahhahaha kevin lol.

fundrazer
03-02-2012, 01:47 PM
Seems kind of silly. Obviously Djoker wasn't at his best. It's important to note that Murray was serving much much better than he usually does, maybe even his best serving performance ever? I think he was 70% for the match, he often hovers around the low 50s.

batz
03-02-2012, 01:51 PM
Seems kind of silly. Obviously Djoker wasn't at his best. It's important to note that Murray was serving much much better than he usually does, maybe even his best serving performance ever? I think he was 70% for the match, he often hovers around the low 50s.

Nah - that would be his R1 match v Fed @ Dubai in 2008 - 3 sets and I don't think he faced a BP.

Mainad
03-02-2012, 01:52 PM
murray has yet to play a decent match against either federer or nadal at a slam. if he does we can talk -.-

Beat Nadal 2008 USO semi and 2010 AO quarters. Should we talk?

Mainad
03-02-2012, 01:53 PM
Seems kind of silly. Obviously Djoker wasn't at his best. It's important to note that Murray was serving much much better than he usually does, maybe even his best serving performance ever? I think he was 70% for the match, he often hovers around the low 50s.

Just out of interest, is Murray allowed the same excuse whenever HE loses the match?

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 01:55 PM
I guess really its more important how you play when you are not at your best than how you play when you are at your best. Murray was not at his best today and neither wad djokovic and murray's not best was better.

celoft
03-02-2012, 02:13 PM
Time to back his words by winning a slam. Or 2.

sportsfan1
03-02-2012, 02:17 PM
Reading the full quote, it doesn't seem controversial - he said neither played as well as they could, and it was still a good result for him.

Regarding Nadal, Murray is 5-13 and iirc 2-6 in GS against him, including 3 consecutive losses in slams last year, so he has a lot of work to do there (and I hope he does go on and win against Nadal, but just stating the facts).

celoft
03-02-2012, 02:17 PM
Mark my words. Murray will win Wimbledon and the USO.

If he doesn't, it doesn't matter because this is an internet forum and nobody knows who I am anyway.

Brad Gilbert?

Clarky21
03-02-2012, 02:19 PM
Reading the full quote, it doesn't seem controversial - he said neither played as well as they could, and it was still a good result for him.

Regarding Nadal, Murray is 5-13 and iirc 2-6 in GS against him, including 3 consecutive losses in slams last year, so he has a lot of work to do there (and I hope he does go on and win against Nadal, but just stating the facts).


Humpty Dumpty had a similar record against Nadal up until last year. He had also never beaten him on clay,in a final,or in a slam yet we all have seen how lopsided that match-up has become. Murrya will end up doing the same thing,don't worry.

Nathaniel_Near
03-02-2012, 02:24 PM
Humpty Dumpty had a similar record against Nadal up until last year. He had also never beaten him on clay,in a final,or in a slam yet we all have seen how lopsided that match-up has become. Murrya will end up doing the same thing,don't worry.

That would be most pleasant, but come on, it isn't gonna happen!

zagor
03-02-2012, 02:30 PM
I like the attitude from Murray. Hope it doesn't backfire on him though.

Have you seen Murray's body language in the 3 slam finals he reached? It can hardly get much worse, better to see him overconfident than not showing up mentally.

Speaking about Murray specifically, I think he has to have this kind of attitude (probably inspired by Lendl) to finally win a slam.

celoft
03-02-2012, 02:33 PM
Humpty Dumpty had a similar record against Nadal up until last year. He had also never beaten him on clay,in a final,or in a slam yet we all have seen how lopsided that match-up has become. Murrya will end up doing the same thing,don't worry.

This...................

Top 2 at the end of the year will be Djokovic and Murray.

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=398633

zagor
03-02-2012, 02:35 PM
Nah - that would be his R1 match v Fed @ Dubai in 2008 - 3 sets and I don't think he faced a BP.

Don't forget also his match against Fed in 2008 Madrid SF as well, that was against Fed who was tearing throught the draw and was high on confidence after his USO win.

Murray has a pretty big 1st serve, when he has a decent percentage of 1st serves in (like 60%+) he's very hard to beat.

ZeroSkid
03-02-2012, 02:40 PM
Wow, is this a whole new cocky Andy Murray? Gotta like it. He just dismantled the world's #1 player quite easily. The 2nd set was not as close as the score indicates. Sure this was only an ATP500 but surely it bodes well for Murray after taking djoker to 5 sets at AO. With both Murray and Djoker stepping it up now, could this be the end of Nadal?

No it's the end for Djokovic, Murray is capable of beating Djokovic, Federer is too, and Nadal was extremely close at AO so ya it's the end for Nole

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 02:50 PM
This...................

Top 2 at the end of the year will be Djokovic and Murray.

Djokovic has 10 titles to defend so how can he be top 2 if murray is beating him?

celoft
03-02-2012, 02:56 PM
Djokovic has 10 titles to defend so how can he be top 2 if murray is beating him?

I think Djokovic and Murray will win more titles than Nadal this year. By far.

Nadal can barely win titles on clay and just on clay nowadays. And that's if he avoids Djokovic on clay. Has not won off clay since 2010.

Since most of the tour is played on HC.... Djokovic and Murray will win many more titles than Claydal will....

Besides, the last time Nadal played Murray, he lost. Even though he had won the first set in Tokyo. Even ate a bagel. :lol:

This year Nadal will have both Djokovic and Murray beating him.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 02:58 PM
No it's the end for Djokovic, Murray is capable of beating Djokovic, Federer is too, and Nadal was extremely close at AO so ya it's the end for Nole

LOL, Nadal was not close. Djoker was toying with him.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 03:01 PM
Rafael nadalogram was closer to beat djokovic than murray was, at the ao. Up 4-2 and serving is better than murray had.

celoft
03-02-2012, 03:04 PM
Rafael nadalogram was closer to beat djokovic than murray was, at the ao. Up 4-2 and serving is better than murray had.

Bullocks. Nadal was playing a tired Djokovic.

Murray had to deal with the fresh Djokovic.

I was more impressed by Murray.

MichaelNadal
03-02-2012, 03:05 PM
LOL, Nadal was not close. Djoker was toying with him.

You could have fooled me with your comments in the match thread, shall I remind you?

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 03:10 PM
You could have fooled me with your comments in the match thread, shall I remind you?

That was just to give you hope, after you claimed after the 3rd set that it was all over. You're no different dude.

MichaelNadal
03-02-2012, 03:13 PM
That was just to give you hope, after you claimed after the 3rd set that it was all over. You're no different dude.

Bc it looked to be all over, that was based on what was happening on court at the time. As were your comments bc it looked all over for Djokovic when u posted them.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 03:19 PM
Bc it looked to be all over, that was based on what was happening on court at the time. As were your comments bc it looked all over for Djokovic when u posted them.

Nah, you're just a drama queen who believes in jinxes.

jokinla
03-02-2012, 05:05 PM
Cocky Murray beating the #1 player in the world at the Mickey Mouse Invitational is nothing new, beating them at a major on the other hand.

jokinla
03-02-2012, 05:06 PM
Mark my words. Murray will win Wimbledon and the USO.

If he doesn't, it doesn't matter because this is an internet forum and nobody knows who I am anyway.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Mainad
03-02-2012, 05:23 PM
Cocky Murray beating the #1 player in the world at the Mickey Mouse Invitational is nothing new, beating them at a major on the other hand.

Well he has beaten the #1 player in the world at a major (Nadal at 2008 USO).
But he wasn't 'cocky' about it.

MichaelNadal
03-02-2012, 05:26 PM
Well he has beaten the #1 player in the world at a major (Nadal at 2008 USO).
But he wasn't 'cocky' about it.

Nope he was totally cool about it. Cockyvic is the cocky one.

jokinla
03-02-2012, 05:31 PM
Well he has beaten the #1 player in the world at a major (Nadal at 2008 USO).
But he wasn't 'cocky' about it.

Yes, congratulations, back in 2008 he beat Nadal at a major, and once every four years, we have leap year. Unfortunately he lost to that same Nadal 3 straight majors last year.

DjokovicForTheWin
03-02-2012, 05:32 PM
Nope he was totally cool about it. Cockyvic is the cocky one.

Cocky??? Did you see how Djoker greeted Murray at the net after he lost? Compare that to Nadal's poor sportsmanship. Talk about cocky.

Mainad
03-02-2012, 05:40 PM
Yes, congratulations, back in 2008 he beat Nadal at a major, and once every four years, we have leap year. Unfortunately he lost to that same Nadal 3 straight majors last year.

Yes, but he wasn't 'cocky' about it.

By the way, he didn't have to wait 4 years to beat Nadal again at a major (2010 AO) but he wasn't 'cocky' about that either.

Murrayalmagrofan
03-02-2012, 06:32 PM
Just for clarification and to be a total utter kill-joy, let me clarify what Murray said...

'It wasn't an amazing standard [his own tennis quality]' Murray admitted. 'I think I could have played better and I'm sure Novak feels the same. Maybe it's a good sign for me that I could still win when not playing my best tennis against him.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2109275/Andy-Murray-beats-Novak-Djokovic-reach-Dubai-final.html#ixzz1nzuiWpha
Thanks for posting that. Gives his statement a whole new meaning... ;)

bullfan
03-02-2012, 06:37 PM
Murray seemed to be like always saying what he thought.... Neither played their best but he won.

Evan77
03-02-2012, 06:56 PM
And the hype train begins. Can't wait for it to crash and burn (once again) come slam time.
yeah, it's Dubai. kudos to Andy for this win. but Andy really need to show up on the big scene. who really care that Nole lost this tournament? Djokovic shows up when it matters... Murray not.

monfed
03-02-2012, 07:05 PM
Wow so now in the semis of events we got murray who can beat djokovic AND federer who can beat djokovic. So that means rafael nadalogram wins every masters and slam for rest of the year!

Except that this new Murray is a threat to Ralph as well. Remember, Murray bagelled Nadal in their latest encounter in Tokyo and Murray wasn't even with Lendl then.

I know the Nadal fans are celebrating Novak's loss but it could spell doom for Ralph on two counts -

A) Novak would come fresher and more motivated in slams in theory anyway so trouble for Ralph. Last thing he wants to do is face a fresh Djokovic.

B) Murray will start winning masters(atleast HC masters) on a more consistent basis robbing Ralph off crucial ranking points thus him losing his #2 position(I'll leave the rest to your imagination).

I might retract my statements if Ralph beats Djokovic convincingly again/beat him in a slam again but the odds of that happening aren't good at all especially after AO 2012(when Ralph lost his first five setter in a long a** time ,his supposed forte).

Careful what you wish for, *******s. :lol:

SLD76
03-02-2012, 07:48 PM
The answer to this question is:

On Fast HC

Murray > Djoker 2.0

So, as long as they keep on meeting on fast HC then Murray is all good.

Oh, wait...

jokinla
03-02-2012, 07:50 PM
While watching the Acapulco semis right now on Tennis Channel, the analyst said that it didn't matter that Murray beat Djoker in Dubai, because he can't beat him in a major.

SLD76
03-02-2012, 07:52 PM
While watching the Acapulco semis right now on Tennis Channel, the analyst said that it didn't matter that Murray beat Djoker in Dubai, because he can't beat him in a major.

thats just stone cold...

Clarky21
03-02-2012, 08:03 PM
While watching the Acapulco semis right now on Tennis Channel, the analyst said that it didn't matter that Murray beat Djoker in Dubai, because he can't beat him in a major.


It was Doug Adler,who is a total a**.

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 08:03 PM
Except that this new Murray is a threat to Ralph as well. Remember, Murray bagelled Nadal in their latest encounter in Tokyo and Murray wasn't even with Lendl then.

I know the Nadal fans are celebrating Novak's loss but it could spell doom for Ralph on two counts -

A) Novak would come fresher and more motivated in slams in theory anyway so trouble for Ralph. Last thing he wants to do is face a fresh Djokovic.

B) Murray will start winning masters(atleast HC masters) on a more consistent basis robbing Ralph off crucial ranking points thus him losing his #2 position(I'll leave the rest to your imagination).

I might retract my statements if Ralph beats Djokovic convincingly again/beat him in a slam again but the odds of that happening aren't good at all especially after AO 2012(when Ralph lost his first five setter in a long a** time ,his supposed forte).

Careful what you wish for, *******s. :lol:

Yep same happened to djokovic last year he got donnutted after the us open but i guess thats just the way it is when both rafael nadalogram and djokovic gave all their body eggs to the french-wimbledon-us open basket.

Sentinel
03-02-2012, 08:12 PM
Cocky??? Did you see how Djoker greeted Murray at the net after he lost? Compare that to Nadal's poor sportsmanship. Talk about cocky.
Of course MN and Trollky and trollville know that, but they'll put that down as fake sportsmanship and PR.
"Nole tried too hard" is the mantra.

Povl Carstensen
03-02-2012, 09:31 PM
All of Federer's trash talking to and about Murray.:)Do you have some samples?

jokinla
03-02-2012, 10:19 PM
It was Doug Adler,who is a total a**.

He's not my favorite, much to whiny, but he finally said something intelligent.

sbengte
03-02-2012, 10:21 PM
Do you have some samples?

I think he means some of these trashy quotes :

Before Wimbledon last year (wonder whether this gave Murray ideas about hiring Lendl) :

Fed said: "Lendl lost many Grand Slam finals before he won his first. To me, Andy's way good enough to win a Grand Slam. It's just a matter of time.
He'll definitely have eight or 10 more years of chances to win Wimbledon. It would be nice if he won it this year for him and the British fans."

Again from early 2011 :

Sixteen-time Grand Slam champion Roger Federer has said that British tennis champion Andy Murray will come out of his worst form slump.

The Daily Express quoted Federer, as saying: "Andy not playing well is no big surprise to me - I really struggled between 19 and 23, so I don't feel it's a worry. He's too good a player to continue like this. He'll be OK."

PollyBallGirl
03-02-2012, 10:22 PM
I think he means some of these trashy quotes :

Before Wimbledon last year (wonder whether this gave Murray ideas about hiring Lendl) :

Fed said: "Lendl lost many Grand Slam finals before he won his first. To me, Andy's way good enough to win a Grand Slam. It's just a matter of time.
He'll definitely have eight or 10 more years of chances to win Wimbledon. It would be nice if he won it this year for him and the British fans."

Again from early 2011 :

Sixteen-time Grand Slam champion Roger Federer has said that British tennis champion Andy Murray will come out of his worst form slump.

The Daily Express quoted Federer, as saying: "Andy not playing well is no big surprise to me - I really struggled between 19 and 23, so I don't feel it's a worry. He's too good a player to continue like this. He'll be OK."

Those sound like nice comments!

batz
03-03-2012, 12:06 AM
He's not my favorite, much to whiny, but he finally said something intelligent.

Yes - it shows a huge amount of intelligence to say that someone who can make 3 slam finals can't win one - almost as much intelligence as it takes to agree with that view.

Hey Walter

If/when Murray wins a slam you'll call him a one slam wonder. If he wins 2, you'll say he'll never win 3. If he only wins on hardcourt you'll say he can't win on multiple surfaces. If he wins on grass and hardcourt you'll say he can't win on clay. If he wins 8 you'll sl@g him off for not winning 9.

And all the time whilst living under the delusion that you are in fact a tennis pro (by the way - what is your current ranking?) whose opinion is somehow more valid than the rest of us no-marks.

How sad.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 12:51 AM
Why getting so personal Batz?

Of course there'll always be haters. There are for Federer and Nadal right? Same for everybody. Youre as strong as your last results, so only way to not be questioned is by winning everything in sight for the last period of time. Everybody but Djokovic is questioned, and I'm sure that if Novak doesn't win in IW, the talk will start as well.

Question to everybody: Do you think the AO run took more out of Novak than just for a week or so? Is it possible that he will feel that effort for a long stretch of the season?

batz
03-03-2012, 01:27 AM
Why getting so personal Batz?

Of course there'll always be haters. There are for Federer and Nadal right? Same for everybody. Youre as strong as your last results, so only way to not be questioned is by winning everything in sight for the last period of time. Everybody but Djokovic is questioned, and I'm sure that if Novak doesn't win in IW, the talk will start as well.

Question to everybody: Do you think the AO run took more out of Novak than just for a week or so? Is it possible that he will feel that effort for a long stretch of the season?

When someone deploys an argument from authority where they claim to be the authority then that person makes their credibility a key factor in whether or not that argument holds water.

Jokinla has previously stated that he has special insight to Murray's slam chances because he (Jokinla) is a tennis pro and that this insight means more than stuff like empirical data that might suggest Murray's chances of winning a slam are somewhere North of zero.


That's why so personal Joeri.

Re your question - he definitely looked a bit jaded v Murray - I guess we'll know better after IW.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 01:29 AM
When someone deploys an argument from authority where they claim to be the authority then that person makes their credibility a key issue in whether or not that argument holds water.

Jokinla has previously stated that he has special insight to Murray's slam chances because he is a tennis pro and that this insight means more than stuff like empirical data that might suggest Murray's chances of winning a slam are somewhere North of zero.


That's why so personal Joeri.

Re your question - he definitely looked a bit jaded v Murray - I guess we'll know better after IW.

Okay, didn't completely follow the discussion then.

It's a tough time for Murray.. I think he really needs to make his move this year or the next. It's not that his window is closing, but new good players will emerge and you just don't get that many opportunities in your career.

batz
03-03-2012, 01:33 AM
Okay, didn't completely follow the discussion then.

It's a tough time for Murray.. I think he really needs to make his move this year or the next. It's not that his window is closing, but new good players will emerge and you just don't get that many opportunities in your career.

You have no reason to - it goes back several months.


You are however the second poster who I respect to have pulled me up for it (JBF#1 was the other) so I hereby commit never to rise to Jokinla's bait again and simply respect his opinion.

Agree 100% that Murray needs to win one sometime soon.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 01:35 AM
You have no reason to - it goes back several months.


You are however the second poster who I respect to have pulled me up for it (JBF#1 was the other) so I hereby commit never to rise to Jokinla's bait again and simply respect his opinion.

Well, it's not my business. Just didn't really seem like normal for you.

Anyway, I think yesterday showed that we are in for a more competitive season than last year.

Evan77
03-03-2012, 02:31 AM
again, kudos to Murray for beating Djok in Dubai, but he always fails when it really matters.

cc0509
03-03-2012, 03:24 AM
Okay, didn't completely follow the discussion then.

It's a tough time for Murray.. I think he really needs to make his move this year or the next. It's not that his window is closing, but new good players will emerge and you just don't get that many opportunities in your career.

Yes it is exactly that. Murray needs to make his move in the slams after talking about it for so long. Hopefully he can finally do it, but his window is definitely closing the older he becomes.

joeri888
03-03-2012, 03:26 AM
Yes it is exactly that. Murray needs to make his move in the slams after talking about it for so long. Hopefully he can finally do it, but his window is definitely closing the older he becomes.

Of course, eventually. But it's not exactly closing just yet. Murray has 5 years left in which he can win Slams, so it's not like if he doesnt do it this year, his window's closed.

interjim
03-03-2012, 03:44 AM
When someone deploys an argument from authority where they claim to be the authority then that person makes their credibility a key factor in whether or not that argument holds water.

Jokinla has previously stated that he has special insight to Murray's slam chances because he (Jokinla) is a tennis pro and that this insight means more than stuff like empirical data that might suggest Murray's chances of winning a slam are somewhere North of zero.


That's why so personal Joeri.

Re your question - he definitely looked a bit jaded v Murray - I guess we'll know better after IW.

Well said, Monsieur Batz.

jokinla
03-03-2012, 07:06 AM
Yes - it shows a huge amount of intelligence to say that someone who can make 3 slam finals can't win one - almost as much intelligence as it takes to agree with that view.

Hey Walter

If/when Murray wins a slam you'll call him a one slam wonder. If he wins 2, you'll say he'll never win 3. If he only wins on hardcourt you'll say he can't win on multiple surfaces. If he wins on grass and hardcourt you'll say he can't win on clay. If he wins 8 you'll sl@g him off for not winning 9.

And all the time whilst living under the delusion that you are in fact a tennis pro (by the way - what is your current ranking?) whose opinion is somehow more valid than the rest of us no-marks.

How sad.

Captain Murray, to the rescue!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jokinla
03-03-2012, 07:07 AM
again, kudos to Murray for beating Djok in Dubai, but he always fails when it really matters.

Be careful, Captain Murray is close by, ready to pounce.

jokinla
03-03-2012, 07:08 AM
Yes - it shows a huge amount of intelligence to say that someone who can make 3 slam finals can't win one - almost as much intelligence as it takes to agree with that view.

Hey Walter

If/when Murray wins a slam you'll call him a one slam wonder. If he wins 2, you'll say he'll never win 3. If he only wins on hardcourt you'll say he can't win on multiple surfaces. If he wins on grass and hardcourt you'll say he can't win on clay. If he wins 8 you'll sl@g him off for not winning 9.

And all the time whilst living under the delusion that you are in fact a tennis pro (by the way - what is your current ranking?) whose opinion is somehow more valid than the rest of us no-marks.

How sad.

I suppose it's my fault that Doug Adler shares my point of view, the one that until proven otherwise is the TRUTH, Murray doesn't show up when it matters.

jokinla
03-03-2012, 07:13 AM
Why getting so personal Batz?

Of course there'll always be haters. There are for Federer and Nadal right? Same for everybody. Youre as strong as your last results, so only way to not be questioned is by winning everything in sight for the last period of time. Everybody but Djokovic is questioned, and I'm sure that if Novak doesn't win in IW, the talk will start as well.

Question to everybody: Do you think the AO run took more out of Novak than just for a week or so? Is it possible that he will feel that effort for a long stretch of the season?

He is VERY sensitive with his precious Murray. I am not a hater, just a stater of the obvious. Murray is great at winning when it doesn't really matter, perhaps one day he will overcome this, but he hasn't come close yet.

NamRanger
03-03-2012, 09:59 AM
You have no reason to - it goes back several months.


You are however the second poster who I respect to have pulled me up for it (JBF#1 was the other) so I hereby commit never to rise to Jokinla's bait again and simply respect his opinion.

Agree 100% that Murray needs to win one sometime soon.



Murray can win one when he starts playing a more aggressive style game and doesn't allow his opponents to dictate the pace of the match. The problem is that he doesn't know how to play aggressive with MARGIN like a Djokovic, which is why he has so many unforced errors when he tries to play aggressive (he literally goes 95%-100% every time).


He just needs to find a balance and really needs to come to the net more often. He has a strong overall game for the most part (except his forehand on a fast court that is susceptible at times along with his second serve), he just needs to fully utilize it. He however seems content playing such a defensive style of play.

Homeboy Hotel
03-03-2012, 10:06 AM
Murray was doomed.

If he lost, as he did (and many have said above..)
"He doesn't win when it matters, and Murray's just not good enough"

But if he won,
"Federer's old and Dubai is a small tournament so it doesn't count. They don't put as much effort in as in the slams"

Notice the distinct overlap and contradiction?

This was always going to be a loose-loose situation. And forever for the rest of his career will face the opportunism in the form of the above comments whenever he plays Djokovic/Federer/Nadal in 250's-500-1000 or slams.

monfed
03-03-2012, 10:09 AM
Murray was doomed.

If he lost, as he did (and many have said above..)
"He doesn't win when it matters, and Murray's just not good enough"

But if he won,
"Federer's old and Dubai is a small tournament so it doesn't count"

Notice the distinct overlap and contradiction?

This was always going to be a loose-loose situation. And forever for the rest of his career will face the opportunism in the form of the above comments whenever he plays Djokovic/Federer/Nadal in 250's-500-1000 or slams.

Until the Muzzette wins a slam, you'll just have to deal with it. :)

dafinch
03-03-2012, 10:23 AM
Humpty Dumpty had a similar record against Nadal up until last year. He had also never beaten him on clay,in a final,or in a slam yet we all have seen how lopsided that match-up has become. Murrya will end up doing the same thing,don't worry.

One glaring difference is that Nole had won a Slam prior to last year, whereas Mr. Float-Garbage-Down-the-Middle-of-the-Court-and-Hope-the-Opponent-Topples-Over has not.

Povl Carstensen
03-03-2012, 10:30 AM
I think he means some of these trashy quotes :

Before Wimbledon last year (wonder whether this gave Murray ideas about hiring Lendl) :

Fed said: "Lendl lost many Grand Slam finals before he won his first. To me, Andy's way good enough to win a Grand Slam. It's just a matter of time.
He'll definitely have eight or 10 more years of chances to win Wimbledon. It would be nice if he won it this year for him and the British fans."

Again from early 2011 :

Sixteen-time Grand Slam champion Roger Federer has said that British tennis champion Andy Murray will come out of his worst form slump.

The Daily Express quoted Federer, as saying: "Andy not playing well is no big surprise to me - I really struggled between 19 and 23, so I don't feel it's a worry. He's too good a player to continue like this. He'll be OK."Yes that must be what Jackson had in mind.

Mainad
03-03-2012, 11:09 AM
Murray is great at winning when it doesn't really matter,

And it only 'matters' when it's a Slam of course? I guess we have to wonder why on earth anyone bothers playing any tourney that isn't a Slam? After all, winning them doesn't really 'matter' does it! Or do they only 'matter' when Federer or Nadal win one??

perhaps one day he will overcome this, but he hasn't come close yet

So in your world, reaching 3 Grand Slam finals doesn't constitute ' coming close yet' ?

Mainad
03-03-2012, 11:11 AM
Until the Muzzette wins a slam, you'll just have to deal with it. :)

Okay, but why just him? Why not Ferrer, Berdych, Tsonga or Soderling? Why don't they get it in the neck for winning things that aren't Slams? :twisted:

monfed
03-03-2012, 11:31 AM
Okay, but why just him? Why not Ferrer, Berdych, Tsonga or Soderling? Why don't they get it in the neck for winning things that aren't Slams? :twisted:

Because they aren't touted as much as Murray as the next big thing. Darkside of hype, I believe.

Also, many believe(including me) that Murray has the arsenal to win a slam but is failing due to lack of self belief.

Mainad
03-03-2012, 11:43 AM
Because they aren't touted as much as Murray as the next big thing. Darkside of hype, I believe.

Personally, I've never touted Murray as anything. To me, he's a solid, consistent world #4 with potential to go higher (well he has been higher but only briefly) and that's it! So I'm curious who it is that is doing all this hyping given that the majority of posters on here seem to be Murray sceptics (or out and out bashers)?


Also, many believe(including me) that Murray has the arsenal to win a slam but is failing due to lack of self belief.

Of course I agree with you but I think players like Tsonga,Soderling and Berdych also have the arsenal and both have also been in Slam finals to prove it. Del Potro has actually already proved it and has incurred hype about whether he is on the brink of doing it again. But I see no backlash against Delpo-Hype that is comparable with the severity of that against Murray! He really is singled out for some reason. But if so many people on here can't stand him and/or have so little respect for him (as seems to be the case) why on earth do they care one way or the other?

monfed
03-03-2012, 07:08 PM
Personally, I've never touted Murray as anything. To me, he's a solid, consistent world #4 with potential to go higher (well he has been higher but only briefly) and that's it! So I'm curious who it is that is doing all this hyping given that the majority of posters on here seem to be Murray sceptics (or out and out bashers)?

Media mostly. The Murray Mania really started around the time of Wimby 2009 and it reached dizzy heights before the AO 2010 final( I remember many thought that was his best chance to get the slam monkey off his back.). The hype is slowly receding but it picks up again at Wimby.



Of course I agree with you but I think players like Tsonga,Soderling and Berdych also have the arsenal and both have also been in Slam finals to prove it.

Yes, but they're big hitters which by default are streaky so the same standards don't apply.



Del Potro has actually already proved it and has incurred hype about whether he is on the brink of doing it again. But I see no backlash against Delpo-Hype that is comparable with the severity of that against Murray!

Because Delpo's coming back from a wrist injury that kept him out for a WHOLE year. He's also lost that pop on his FH(his main weapon) and thus never been the same player he was in 2009, so he's forgiven for not winning against the bigger guys,but as time goes on he'll be baptised too.
Currently,Delpo's doing quite well for himself , beating the likes of Tsonga and Berdych and I expect him to further improve in the clay season.


He really is singled out for some reason. But if so many people on here can't stand him and/or have so little respect for him (as seems to be the case) why on earth do they care one way or the other?


Let me guess -

- Playing way too much pusher tennis even when he has the arsenal to attack which drives people nuts(he inexplicably goes into a shell). This is the one thing that's improved the most since Lendl came onboard. I just think he hasn't found the right balance yet but he's making rapid strides towards it.

- Poor body language,constant whining for no apparent reason for a player of his caliber. This has improved since Lendl came on board so good progress.

- Being a *******, supporting Ralph for his ridiculous 2 year ranking system. The majority here are Federer fans so.... ;)

Mustard
03-03-2012, 07:14 PM
But I see no backlash against Delpo

Because del Potro has won a major and had injury problems less than 6 months after winning that major. Murray, by contrast, out of all the players who haven't won a major, has achieved more than any other player I know. Can you think of another non-major winning player who has achieved as much as Murray? He is in the same situation Lendl was in 1982 and 1983, winning many regularly tour events but no majors. Actually, Lendl was worse, as he was dominating week-to-week in 1982 yet not delivering when it mattered most. In 1983, he still couldn't win a major and the pressure was intense.

y12.pats
03-03-2012, 07:41 PM
its an ATP 500, I'd like to seem him get it done at a masters and then at a slam. He has lost to Nadal in the semis at the FO last year and Wimbledon. As well as 2010 US Open. He beat him at Tokyo 6-0 in the third I'll give you that, but I've said this before and I'll say it again, in Grand Slam pressure matches he performs poorly in key points. His AO Semifinal comes to mind where he had several chances to win in the 5th but didn't win necessary points. I just don't see him being a serious threat till he beats either Fed, Rafa or Djoko in a Slam or wins a Masters by beating one of them

Mainad
03-03-2012, 09:50 PM
its an ATP 500, I'd like to seem him get it done at a masters and then at a slam. He has lost to Nadal in the semis at the FO last year and Wimbledon. As well as 2010 US Open. He beat him at Tokyo 6-0 in the third I'll give you that, but I've said this before and I'll say it again, in Grand Slam pressure matches he performs poorly in key points. His AO Semifinal comes to mind where he had several chances to win in the 5th but didn't win necessary points. I just don't see him being a serious threat till he beats either Fed, Rafa or Djoko in a Slam or wins a Masters by beating one of them

What are you talking about? He beat Nadal at 2008 USO and at 2010 AO and has won EIGHT Masters tournaments beating Djokovic in the finals of Cincinnati 2008 & 2011 and Miami 2009. He beat Nadal in the semis and Federer in the final of Toronto 2010 and Federer again in the final of Shanghai 2010!!

Like many Murray critics on here, you appear to know very little about his career!! :twisted:

Evan77
03-03-2012, 11:49 PM
I really don't believe in this 'self believe' thing when it comes to Murray. I simply think he is not as good as Nole, Rog and Nadal. I'm a big fan of Murray. He really has to do something about that FH.

Mainad
03-04-2012, 04:44 AM
I really don't believe in this 'self believe' thing when it comes to Murray. I simply think he is not as good as Nole, Rog and Nadal. I'm a big fan of Murray. He really has to do something about that FH.

It's his average 1st serve percentages and 2nd serve that need to be worked on. He was averaging 71% in the semi-final but it was back down to 48% in the final. If he could have kept it at the same level as in the semi he would have had a really good chance of beating Federer just as he did Djokovic. Plus he doesn't have a reliable enough 2nd serve as a back-up unlike the other top players (wins far fewer points on it on average).

As for not being as good as the top 3, well nobody will be as good as them until they are able to match their results!

dafinch
03-13-2012, 11:15 AM
And it only 'matters' when it's a Slam of course? I guess we have to wonder why on earth anyone bothers playing any tourney that isn't a Slam? After all, winning them doesn't really 'matter' does it! Or do they only 'matter' when Federer or Nadal win one??



So in your world, reaching 3 Grand Slam finals doesn't constitute ' coming close yet' ?

Well, "coming close" means different things to different people: to some people, and I'm guessing you're one of them, you've come close merely by reaching a Slam final. Now, Murray has, indeed, reached 3 Slam finals-and he was massacred in straight sets each and every time. To ME, "coming close" means that you not only reach the finals, but you come close to winning 3 sets-which, let us not forget, is the requisite number to win a match in a Slam. To me, even Nadal didn't "come close" to winning the Aussie Open-had he not choked on the 30-15 point up 4-2 in the final set, and gone on to win that game, that would've put him only a game away. But if you're more than a game away from winning, how close are you, really? I guess if you're up 4-0 in the 5th, you're close, but we've all seen double service break leads squandered by the very best players, so I hestitate to include even that. But Murray? Hell, if they had changed the rules of tennis just for him to say if he won so much as a SET in the finals, he'd be declared the winner, he STILL would be Slamless, so, no, he hasn't "come close" in my eyes.

lbjames23
03-13-2012, 11:28 AM
He's beaten Nadal twice at a slam. Can we talk now?

good point ! hey, let s be real , we don need to talk to purge

CDestroyer
03-13-2012, 12:57 PM
Murray reminds me of Nalbandians career.

BeHappy
03-13-2012, 01:01 PM
This is the same Murray who said he was a claycourt specialist in 2005 and 2006, and that his serve was his best shot in 2007 along with his forehand, and that his backhand was his weakness.

Strange guy.

Mainad
03-13-2012, 02:46 PM
This is the same Murray who said he was a claycourt specialist in 2005 and 2006, and that his serve was his best shot in 2007 along with his forehand, and that his backhand was his weakness.

Strange guy.

So what? He spent most of his formative years training in Spain on clay courts so back in '05-06 maybe he thought that clay was going to be his best surface. Then he found his game was better attuned to hard courts. Again, maybe at that time he thought his serve and forehand were better than his backhand. Then his backhand evolved and got better. Players and their games do often evolve slightly as they make the transition from their formative years to their prime.

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 09:09 AM
ahem..... ahem

So what does My.Murray think now after the Miami result?

batz
04-03-2012, 09:21 AM
ahem..... ahem

So what does My.Murray think now after the Miami result?

He thinks Novak was the better player over the week.

batz
04-03-2012, 09:23 AM
Murray reminds me of Nalbandians career.

Apart from the 8 Masters Series wins and 3 slam finals? Nalbandian's career doesn't even come close - despite the fact it's nearly over and Murray still has a few years to go.

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 09:35 AM
He thinks Novak was the better player over the week.

But people& fans think otherwise.

He jumped the gun too soon to write off Novak just based on one result . That's exactly not what he should be doing.

Novak has learn't to keep himself grounded after his recent successes. It would be good if Murray does the same.

monfed
04-03-2012, 09:36 AM
Apart from the 8 Masters Series wins and 3 slam finals? Nalbandian's career doesn't even come close - despite the fact it's nearly over and Murray still has a few years to go.

WHOA, bit of a sweeping statement there. Nalbandian is the more talented of the two. Nalbandian has the GOAT BH imo. He's had terrific indoor results,better on HCs than Murray and yes Murray is the more consistent at slam level no doubt. But using that as the sole criteria would be selling Nalbo short. Nalbandian beat a peak Federer at TMC in 05(though Fed had his ankle injury but still), one of Federer's only 4 defeats that year BTW.
And umm if Murray doesn't win a slam,as much as you don't wanna hear it, his career will be remembered like Nalbandian's or even Henman.
A little credit for Nalbandian,please.

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 09:37 AM
Murray reminds me of Nalbandians career.

not really....Murray>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nalb if you compare achievements according to their ages.

Also Murray has been consistently in Top 4 for almost last 3-4 years. Nor sure if Nalb was any closer. Absurd comparison IMO.

batz
04-03-2012, 11:04 AM
WHOA, bit of a sweeping statement there. Nalbandian is the more talented of the two. Nalbandian has the GOAT BH imo. He's had terrific indoor results,better on HCs than Murray and yes Murray is the more consistent at slam level no doubt. But using that as the sole criteria would be selling Nalbo short. Nalbandian beat a peak Federer at TMC in 05(though Fed had his ankle injury but still), one of Federer's only 4 defeats that year BTW.
And umm if Murray doesn't win a slam,as much as you don't wanna hear it, his career will be remembered like Nalbandian's or even Henman.
A little credit for Nalbandian,please.

Arguing over who is 'more talented' is like arguing over the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin.

Facts:

Murray has won twice as many titles as Nalby.

Murray has won 4 times more masters series than Nslby.

Murray has made 3 times more slam finals than Nalby

Murray has been ranked higher than Nalby - all of this at age 24 versus Nalby's 30.

Really - it's not even close, nor is Tim.

FlamEnemY
04-03-2012, 11:17 AM
Arguing over who is 'more talented' is like arguing over the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.


None.

Angels simply don't dance. It's one of the distinguishing characteristics that marks an angel. They may listen appreciatively to the Music of the Spheres, but they don't feel the urge to get down and boogie to it.

--Taken from "Good Omens" by N. Gaiman and T. Pratchett.

Cup8489
04-03-2012, 11:22 AM
ahem..... ahem

So what does My.Murray think now after the Miami result?

You know, I can tell that this new poster is going to annoy me. He's like LOLville .5, the less evolved version.

batz
04-03-2012, 11:31 AM
None.

Angels simply don't dance. It's one of the distinguishing characteristics that marks an angel. They may listen appreciatively to the Music of the Spheres, but they don't feel the urge to get down and boogie to it.

--Taken from "Good Omens" by N. Gaiman and T. Pratchett.

+1 top post! :)

The Bawss
04-03-2012, 11:36 AM
Arguing over who is 'more talented' is like arguing over the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin.

Facts:

Murray has won twice as many titles as Nalby.

Murray has won 4 times more masters series than Nslby.

Murray has made 3 times more slam finals than Nalby

Murray has been ranked higher than Nalby - all of this at age 24 versus Nalby's 30.

Really - it's not even close, nor is Tim.

Still, Murray is a talentless overachiever.

Mainad
04-03-2012, 12:16 PM
WHOA, bit of a sweeping statement there. Nalbandian is the more talented of the two. Nalbandian has the GOAT BH imo. He's had terrific indoor results,better on HCs than Murray and yes Murray is the more consistent at slam level no doubt. But using that as the sole criteria would be selling Nalbo short. Nalbandian beat a peak Federer at TMC in 05(though Fed had his ankle injury but still), one of Federer's only 4 defeats that year BTW.

Murray beat a peak Federer at Cincinnati in 2006, the only guy to beat him that year! :)


And umm if Murray doesn't win a slam,as much as you don't wanna hear it, his career will be remembered like Nalbandian's or even Henman.
A little credit for Nalbandian,please.

Rather better than Henman's I think. There can be no doubt Nalbandian is a very talented player but far too inconsistent unfortunately. More inconsistent than Murray for sure and that's saying something. Consistency is one of the hallmarks of the great champion players. You can have all the talent in the world but if you don't employ it consistently enough, it means diddly squat.

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 12:47 PM
You know, I can tell that this new poster is going to annoy me. He's like LOLville .5, the less evolved version.

Easy Mr.Cup. Just by looking up this post, you are already annoyed....wow!!

This an open forum where people are entitled to post or pull up old threads that they want. You can totally choose to ignore old bumped up threads or my post to be more specific.

The way some posters behave here..... gosh! Don't be judgmental, Grow up!!

Take it easy!!!

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 12:50 PM
Still, Murray is a talentless overachiever.

If Murray is not talented, then who is? Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer? Murray is just notch below the top three at the slams. Otherwise he has a well rounded game to knock out anyone outside of top 3 with ease!!

jokinla
04-03-2012, 02:14 PM
ahem..... ahem

So what does My.Murray think now after the Miami result?

Whoops!!! Perhaps he spoke too soon.

MG1
04-03-2012, 02:34 PM
Murray needs to win majors seriously otherwise his fans should always be ready to see him compared with nalbandian,henman,rios or tsonga/bedych etc.

djokovic2008
04-03-2012, 03:00 PM
Easy Mr.Cup. Just by looking up this post, you are already annoyed....wow!!

This an open forum where people are entitled to post or pull up old threads that they want. You can totally choose to ignore old bumped up threads or my post to be more specific.

The way some posters behave here..... gosh! Don't be judgmental, Grow up!!

Take it easy!!!

Welcome, and get used to this guy he is a djoker/nadal hater but worships federer's every breath.

jokinla
04-03-2012, 03:59 PM
Murray needs to win majors seriously otherwise his fans should always be ready to see him compared with nalbandian,henman,rios or tsonga/bedych etc.

True, they are all in the same boat of good players who couldn't win the big one, Murray is no exception.

Mainad
04-03-2012, 04:09 PM
If Murray is not talented, then who is? Berdych, Tsonga, Ferrer? Murray is just notch below the top three at the slams. Otherwise he has a well rounded game to knock out anyone outside of top 3 with ease!!

QFT. Spot on!

Cup8489
04-03-2012, 04:33 PM
Welcome, and get used to this guy he is a djoker/nadal hater but worships federer's every breath.

Still wrong. I like all three guys. I just cant stand you or LOLville. Mostly because you're both completely uneducated and have no idea what you're talking about, ever.

Cup8489
04-03-2012, 04:34 PM
Easy Mr.Cup. Just by looking up this post, you are already annoyed....wow!!

This an open forum where people are entitled to post or pull up old threads that they want. You can totally choose to ignore old bumped up threads or my post to be more specific.

The way some posters behave here..... gosh! Don't be judgmental, Grow up!!

Take it easy!!!

Fair enough. LOLville just bumps threads all the time when he thinks he has a point to make, and it just gets really annoying. Mostly because he's not actually right most of the time, but simply thinks he is.

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 04:59 PM
Fair enough. LOLville just bumps threads all the time when he thinks he has a point to make, and it just gets really annoying. Mostly because he's not actually right most of the time, but simply thinks he is.


I will also bump Djokovic threads if needed. I'm joker/nadal fan, but that deosn't mean I won't criticize them. Time will tell.

And Thank you djokovic2008 :)

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 05:38 PM
True, they are all in the same boat of good players who couldn't win the big one, Murray is no exception.

That doesnt mean Delpo is a notch above Murray just coz he won a slam. Infact Delpo is pathetically inconsistently nor has be come close to being rated except for that one off slam against Fed.

I still have faith in Murray in winning. But I think that will happen after Fed retires and Nadal/Joker Burn themselves out.

Cup8489
04-03-2012, 05:58 PM
I will also bump Djokovic threads if needed. I'm joker/nadal fan, but that deosn't mean I won't criticize them. Time will tell.

And Thank you djokovic2008 :)

For the record, i also don't 'worship federer's every breath'

I find it downright frustrating some of the things he does against Rafa, for instance.. and think he can be extremely stubborn and unrealistic about his game. But djokovic2008, on the other hand, thinks that Djokovic is the second coming of Jesus, and has nothing but obsessive devotion to him.

jokinla
04-03-2012, 06:02 PM
That doesnt mean Delpo is a notch above Murray just coz he won a slam. Infact Delpo is pathetically inconsistently nor has be come close to being rated except for that one off slam against Fed.

I still have faith in Murray in winning. But I think that will happen after Fed retires and Nadal/Joker Burn themselves out.

Sure it does, Delpo is a US Open champion, and will be known as such in the history books, the title will always precede him, versus Murray who can win all the Mickey Mouse Opens he wants, and the only thing he will be in the history books for is losing slams.

TTMR
04-03-2012, 06:08 PM
Sure it does, Delpo is a US Open champion, and will be known as such in the history books, the title will always precede him, versus Murray who can win all the Mickey Mouse Opens he wants, and the only thing he will be in the history books for is losing slams.

If Murray retired today, he would go down in the history books as being clearly the best player to never win a slam. If Del Potro retired today, he would go down as a one slam wonder, along with so many forgettable past comparables.

Djokodal Fan
04-03-2012, 06:26 PM
True, they are all in the same boat of good players who couldn't win the big one, Murray is no exception.

If Murray retired today, he would go down in the history books as being clearly the best player to never win a slam. If Del Potro retired today, he would go down as a one slam wonder, along with so many forgettable past comparables.

I think Jokinla has a point.... if any tennis fan were to turn back 40 years later and look at records for example, nobody would remember Murray unless he wins a slam.

Even me... I don't look back some 70's or 80's record and tell myself.... oh Mr.X used to be really consistent but was just unlucky to not win a slam. Records are records no matter what.

So agree with you Jokinla :)

jokinla
04-03-2012, 06:54 PM
If Murray retired today, he would go down in the history books as being clearly the best player to never win a slam. If Del Potro retired today, he would go down as a one slam wonder, along with so many forgettable past comparables.

As I said, Murray will be in the history books for LOSING slams, and Delpo will be a US Open champion, which you can label forgettable all you want, but you won't forget him just like you won't forget Thomas Johannson, because they WON slams, and everytime you watch the US Open or the Aussie Open, you will see their names listed as champions, and you will see Murray's as the loser.

Mainad
04-03-2012, 08:52 PM
As I said, Murray will be in the history books for LOSING slams, and Delpo will be a US Open champion, which you can label forgettable all you want, but you won't forget him just like you won't forget Thomas Johannson, because they WON slams, and everytime you watch the US Open or the Aussie Open, you will see their names listed as champions, and you will see Murray's as the loser.

I don't think they list the losers do they?

I remember Thomas Johansson but I didn't even realise he won a Slam until someone mentioned it on here! I also remember players like Thomas Enqvist, Anders Jarryd, Jonas Bjorkman, Miloslav Mecir, Cedric Pioline, Guy Forget, Guillermo Coria etc. None of them won Slams though. I was going to include Roscoe Tanner until I checked and found he won the AO in 1977 which I didn't even remember but I still recall him a a great player!

Are players like David Nalbandian, David Ferrer, Fernando Gonzalez, Ivan Ljubicic, James Blake, Nikolay Davydenko all much talked about and admired on here going to be completely forgotten 30 years from now because they didn't win a Slam?

Truly people who think winning Slams is the sole criterion for being remembered are shallow beyond belief. They are not true tennis fans in my opinion!

ZeroSkid
04-03-2012, 09:00 PM
murray beat him last year at Cincinnati not playing his best

abmk
04-03-2012, 09:10 PM
If Murray retired today, he would go down in the history books as being clearly the best player to never win a slam. If Del Potro retired today, he would go down as a one slam wonder, along with so many forgettable past comparables.

of course people are just going to forget his slam run beating fedal along the way, oh wait :oops:

jokinla
04-03-2012, 10:14 PM
I don't think they list the losers do they?

I remember Thomas Johansson but I didn't even realise he won a Slam until someone mentioned it on here! I also remember players like Thomas Enqvist, Anders Jarryd, Jonas Bjorkman, Miloslav Mecir, Cedric Pioline, Guy Forget, Guillermo Coria etc. None of them won Slams though. I was going to include Roscoe Tanner until I checked and found he won the AO in 1977 which I didn't even remember but I still recall him a a great player!

Are players like David Nalbandian, David Ferrer, Fernando Gonzalez, Ivan Ljubicic, James Blake, Nikolay Davydenko all much talked about and admired on here going to be completely forgotten 30 years from now because they didn't win a Slam?

Truly people who think winning Slams is the sole criterion for being remembered are shallow beyond belief. They are not true tennis fans in my opinion!

Losers are listed often when they show the final versus just a list of champions. I've been around tennis in every way for 30 years, so I can list off players from all eras, whether or not they won slams, so I certainly won't forget them, but the casual fan in 20 years might remember them or might not, however the US Open champion will linger on in the casual fans mind much longer than someone who came close will, and of course the US Open champ will never leave the history books.

Juan Ma Del Pony
04-03-2012, 10:40 PM
Murray = Pre-2005 Kim Clijsters right now.

Delpo, as much as I love him, = Anastasia Myskina right now.

They are both young and talented, and time will tell how many Slam(s) they will add to their totals. Right now it's preposterous to say that Murray is not more accomplished than DelPo on ALL levels, including Grand Slams. Murray also has more "raw" tennis talent, but unfortunately, his "mental" talents are poor compared to young (2009) DelPo, who took his one and only chance on the biggest stage of the sport.

Who knows...Murray could blossom and win several Slams, while DelPo retires as a Juan Slam Juander. Just wait and see. We'll bump this thread in 2020 after they've both retired...

Sentinel
04-03-2012, 11:07 PM
If Murray retired today, he would go down in the history books as being clearly the best player to never win a slam. If Del Potro retired today, he would go down as a one slam wonder, along with so many forgettable past comparables.
Del who ? ...

Evan77
04-03-2012, 11:24 PM
I'm not sure any more. DP winning at the USO 2009 beating both Nadal and Fed was great. Sure, unfortunately, he got injured etc. but he hasn't won anything significant since. Murray hasn't won a slam but he did win 8 masters. DP never won any masters.

Murray has been more consistent overall...

A.Motoki.S
04-04-2012, 12:10 AM
I believe it's possible that murray could beat him in maybe the near future if his game keeps progressing as it is

tank_job
04-04-2012, 12:28 AM
The truth is that even if Murray won more Masters than any player in history and made every slam final from now until his retirement at the age of 38 (but lost them all) - therefore making around 55 slam finals - he would be forgotten instantly after retirement whereas the legacy of one-slam wonders like Gaudio and Johansson will live on forever.

You may think it shallow - but it's the truth. Win one slam and you don't have to do anything else: you're immortal. No slam, and it doesn't matter what else, what ever other amazing records you've set - you're instantly forgettable.

TTMR
04-04-2012, 03:23 AM
The truth is that even if Murray won more Masters than any player in history and made every slam final from now until his retirement at the age of 38 (but lost them all) - therefore making around 55 slam finals - he would be forgotten instantly after retirement whereas the legacy of one-slam wonders like Gaudio and Johansson will live on forever.

You may think it shallow - but it's the truth. Win one slam and you don't have to do anything else: you're immortal. No slam, and it doesn't matter what else, what ever other amazing records you've set - you're instantly forgettable.

Rios never won a slam and he has far more cachet than Johansson, Costa or Gaudio. And Murray, given the competition, has been much more impressive than Rios. Murray will not be forgotten. Hell, even the less successful Tim Henman and certainly James Blake are significantly more notable names than the three one slam wonders above. Ergo, there are other things that make a player memorable than one great tournament.

Winning a slam does not make you "immortal". I doubt you even remember most names of one slam wonders on the ATP or WTA since the start of the Open Era. I know I sure don't.

nadal_slam_king
04-04-2012, 03:58 AM
I don't think people play tennis to be remembered. Playing tennis is about competing to win the current title on offer, and of course to earn money. After your career is over you won't know whether people 'remember you' because you aren't a mind reader of the general population anyway. Whether you are Murray or Sampras, makes no difference.

BeHappy
04-04-2012, 06:10 AM
Cedric Pioline and Todd Martin lost 2 finals each.

batz
04-04-2012, 09:34 AM
The truth is that even if Murray won more Masters than any player in history and made every slam final from now until his retirement at the age of 38 (but lost them all) - therefore making around 55 slam finals - he would be forgotten instantly after retirement whereas the legacy of one-slam wonders like Gaudio and Johansson will live on forever.

You may think it shallow - but it's the truth. Win one slam and you don't have to do anything else: you're immortal. No slam, and it doesn't matter what else, what ever other amazing records you've set - you're instantly forgettable.

Another intellectual colossus presenting his opinion as fact. If I didn't know better I'd say it was Tennis_Fan_182 re-incarnated.

Has Tim Henman been instantly forgotten? Has Fernando Gonzalez? Marcallo Rios? Thought not.

That's a serious amount of arsegravy you just posted.

Djokodal Fan
04-04-2012, 03:12 PM
Another intellectual colossus presenting his opinion as fact. If I didn't know better I'd say it was Tennis_Fan_182 re-incarnated.

Has Tim Henman been instantly forgotten? Has Fernando Gonzalez? Marcallo Rios? Thought not.

That's a serious amount of arsegravy you just posted.

You do have a point .... but for a casual tennis fan Tim Henman, Fernando Gonzalez, Marcallo Rios will definitely be forgotten.

I atleast almost forgot Rios. Fernando gonzalez, yes I have seen him couple of times, but I woud never remember him 10 years down the line. I still remember Tim Henman for the way he lost in Wimbledon Semis everytime he reached there. Nothing more to remember anything significant of them.

But I for sure remember Goran Ivanisevic, whom I never rated except for his serve.

But Murray is definitely not in their category. He is a notch above and surely is a grand slam material.

goober
04-04-2012, 03:24 PM
The truth is that even if Murray won more Masters than any player in history and made every slam final from now until his retirement at the age of 38 (but lost them all) - therefore making around 55 slam finals - he would be forgotten instantly after retirement whereas the legacy of one-slam wonders like Gaudio and Johansson will live on forever.

You may think it shallow - but it's the truth. Win one slam and you don't have to do anything else: you're immortal. No slam, and it doesn't matter what else, what ever other amazing records you've set - you're instantly forgettable.

Troll much?

Seriously if someone got to 55 slam finals in a row, they will NEVER be forgotten. That is a record that will stand forever.

Brian Teacher, Mark Edmondson and Andres Gomez are not names that will stand out in the annals of Tennis as "immortals".

jackson vile
04-04-2012, 03:30 PM
You do have a point .... but for a casual tennis fan Tim Henman, Fernando Gonzalez, Marcallo Rios will definitely be forgotten.

I atleast almost forgot Rios. Fernando gonzalez, yes I have seen him couple of times, but I woud never remember him 10 years down the line. I still remember Tim Henman for the way he lost in Wimbledon Semis everytime he reached there. Nothing more to remember anything significant of them.

But I for sure remember Goran Ivanisevic, whom I never rated except for his serve.

But Murray is definitely not in their category. He is a notch above and surely is a grand slam material.

Hell, take a good look around here. There are plenty of tennis nuts/geeks that don't know who Rios was or how amazing or what an SOB the guy was.

So there is a lot of truth to say what is remembered and what is not. I like Murray a lot, he is an amazing player and far better player than the likes of Nalbandian, Safin, Hewitt, etc. However, without that slam he is though of as being inferior even though it could not be farther from the truth.

jokinla
04-04-2012, 03:32 PM
Rios never won a slam and he has far more cachet than Johansson, Costa or Gaudio. And Murray, given the competition, has been much more impressive than Rios. Murray will not be forgotten. Hell, even the less successful Tim Henman and certainly James Blake are significantly more notable names than the three one slam wonders above. Ergo, there are other things that make a player memorable than one great tournament.

Winning a slam does not make you "immortal". I doubt you even remember most names of one slam wonders on the ATP or WTA since the start of the Open Era. I know I sure don't.

Rios is the previous generation's Wozniacki, the only thing he is noted for is being an a@#hole, nothing more, perhaps he won some 1000's, who cares, if he walked into a bar with any of the 3 slam champions, they could say they won their majors, he could say, well I was a #1 a-hole, that's it.

Crisstti
04-04-2012, 03:59 PM
Rios never won a slam and he has far more cachet than Johansson, Costa or Gaudio. And Murray, given the competition, has been much more impressive than Rios. Murray will not be forgotten. Hell, even the less successful Tim Henman and certainly James Blake are significantly more notable names than the three one slam wonders above. Ergo, there are other things that make a player memorable than one great tournament.

Winning a slam does not make you "immortal". I doubt you even remember most names of one slam wonders on the ATP or WTA since the start of the Open Era. I know I sure don't.

Exactly, Ríos, one of the most talented players to play the game, is much more memorable a player than Gaudio...

I don't think people play tennis to be remembered. Playing tennis is about competing to win the current title on offer, and of course to earn money. After your career is over you won't know whether people 'remember you' because you aren't a mind reader of the general population anyway. Whether you are Murray or Sampras, makes no difference.

I don't know, I'd think players do care quite a lot about their "legacy".

DjokovicForTheWin
04-04-2012, 04:08 PM
If Murray doesn't win a slam he will be remembered less.