PDA

View Full Version : Importance of an aura for Murray?


ark_28
10-14-2012, 12:28 PM
Guys before anyone shoots me down! I think Andy is playing some fantastic tennis right now he fully deserved to beat Federer and would have been a deserving champion had he won today!

My point however is that after he won the US Open following the Olympic Gold medal and his runner up effort at Wimbledon there was a sense IMHO that while hes always been a quality player of course now he has that aura! As in guys don't really believe they can win before he steps on court he always had locker room respect of that there is no doubt but it only grew further after he won in NyC and rightly so!

While I don't think there's any disgrace at all in losing to Djokovic or for that matter Raonic and let's be very clear these losses he would sign up for compared to what hes won!

BUT both matches he was considerably ahead and had 2 match points and 5 championship points respectively I accept that Raonic and Novak are both class players but great as Murrays level is I do wonder if these two loses but more so the way in which they occured while give other guys (perhaps falsely) who are desperately looking for positives or chinks in the top guys something to cling on and I do believe the last two weeks have ever so slightly taken away from the aura that he's built up!

All of that however can be put right if he wins the WTF and I think he has a great chance!

Steve0904
10-14-2012, 12:43 PM
I don't know if he ever had an "aura" built up. That's takes more consistency. I think he needs quite a bit in the accomplishment department before he reaches the stage of having an "aura." I'm not trying to hate on him here, that's honestly what I think. If you compare him to the other 3 it's just not the same IMO. Federer and Nadal really need no justification, but even Djokovic has a bit of an "aura" about him, and it took one of the better seasons in tennis history, and a good backup of it this season to really get that "aura."

The guy has 5 slams, and had a 43 match winning streak, and a bit of a rep for saving MP's. Plus his level at times is just ********. As of now Murray still only has 1 GS, and he's been beaten by Raonic twice this year. He also doesn't do well in IW and sometimes Miami in recent years, and he's nowhere near invincible on clay. He also lost in Toronto and Cincy to someone outside the top 3. Overall, I think he needs more consistency.

Mainad
10-14-2012, 12:47 PM
Well, I think all the guys on the tour will know by now that they must expect to play their best tennis if they are to have any hope of beating Murray (unless they catch him in a now increasingly rare post Slam depression or on the occasional off-day). The fact that Murray held match points in his matches with Raonic and Djokovic is telling. He may be prone to the odd choke as we've just seen but he DOES get to match point and it's going to be a bit of a risk expecting him to choke it away all the time!

So, while he may not quite have the aura of invincibility yet (and how long does that last with anybody?) he surely has the aura of a very tough guy to play against and one to be extremely wary of!

Oceansize
10-14-2012, 01:07 PM
I don't ever see Murray having an aura of invincibility like Fed, Nadal and Djokovic have had at various periods. He's still just too mentally up and down to consistently play near his best match after match. But if he can keep saving his best tennis for the Slams, like he's done this year, I don't think he'll mind too much.

tennisaddict
10-14-2012, 01:13 PM
Roger had aura for 5 long years (2003-2007) Nole had a fantastic aura in 2011. Rafa has clay court aura from 2005 till date.

1 Olympic Gold and 1 USO together make it an aura ?? Please stop the Murray hype.

smoledman
10-14-2012, 01:15 PM
Murray has too many emotions going on during a match. He needs to become stoic like Federer.

Mainad
10-14-2012, 01:18 PM
1 Olympic Gold and 1 USO together make it an aura ?? Please stop the Murray hype.

Well, if you were a player on the ATP tour, would you feel confident going into a match against a guy who has just won the Olympics and the USO?

Because, unless I was also a winner of equally big titles, I sure as hell wouldn't!

tennisaddict
10-14-2012, 01:22 PM
Well, if you were a player on the ATP tour, would you feel confident going into a match against a guy who has just won the Olympics and the USO?

Because, unless I was also a winner of equally big titles, I sure as hell wouldn't!

'Aura' indicates something special over a considerable period of time. Not winning 2 consecutive tournaments. Please see examples provided.

If Murray now has aura, Federer, Nole and Rafa also have aura at present. You dont have a bunch of players having an aura at the same time.

PS : Not even 2 consecutive tournaments. there was a loss to the great Chardy at Cincinnati, isnt it ?

Mainad
10-14-2012, 01:26 PM
'Aura' indicates something special over a considerable period of time. Not winning 2 consecutive tournaments. Please see examples provided.

If Murray now has aura, Federer, Nole and Rafa also have aura at present. You dont have a bunch of players having an aura at the same time.

You have a remarkably limited definition of 'aura'. Any player who is on a winning streak will exhibit an aura to his fellow players. They know they will have to play their best against them and will probably lose if they don't. That's an aura. A guy who you have an equal chance to beat obviously does not display an aura because you can feel confident you will beat him.

I ask again the same question to you. If you were an ATP player, would you currently feel confident going into a match against Murray or would the fact he lost to Chardy at Cincinnati give you confidence you could beat him? If not, then Murray is exhibiting an aura to you. It may not be as big an aura as Federer or Nadal, but it would still be an aura.

Evan77
10-14-2012, 01:31 PM
meh, Murray has never had any aura to begin with. Yeah, Brits love him, they have nothing else but he'll never reach anything close to Fed, Djoko or Rafa glory thingy, and this is coming from a guy who likes him.

people say big 4. I still see it as big 3 plus Murray,

Novak thought him a lesson today. I'm so impressed with Djokovic. He kept his composure, behaved like a real champion, never giving up, wonderful stuff to watch.

tennisaddict
10-14-2012, 01:37 PM
You have a remarkably limited definition of 'aura'. Any player who is on a winning streak will exhibit an aura to his fellow players. They know they will have to play their best against them and will probably lose if they don't. That's an aura. A guy who you have an equal chance to beat obviously does not display an aura because you can feel confident you will beat him.

By your definition, every higher ranked player in a match has an 'aura' over his opponent because he has done better in the past. That is not called 'aura' , it just means the higher ranked guy is expected to win.

If you are saying Murray is ranked 4 and when he plays anyone ranked below 4, the opponent has to play his best game that is fine. But that is not aura.

A loss to Chardy in between the 2 wins and you call it a winning streak ? It is not even 2 consecutive tournament wins, for god sake.

I wonder what Murray fans will be up to when they have a Nole like streak of 41-0 or Rafa like clay court records.

The guy has not even won any tournament 3 times and Murray fans at the first oppurtunity try to make him part of the big 4, when all he has got is 1 major and this guy is 25 years old.

Mainad
10-14-2012, 01:39 PM
meh, Murray has never had any aura to begin with. Yeah, Brits love him, they have nothing else but he'll never reach anything close to Fed, Djoko or Rafa glory thingy, and this is coming from a guy who likes him.

Oh you like him do you? Why do I always forget that when I hear you talking about him? :confused:

And so you too would feel confident playing against Murray if you were on the ATP tour, would you?


people say big 4. I still see it as big 3 plus Murray

Okay. But that still gives Murray a kind of aura to all the players ranked below him doesn't it?


Novak thought him a lesson today. I'm so impressed with Djokovic. He kept his composure, behaved like a real champion, never giving up, wonderful stuff to watch.

What lesson was that then? Make sure you clutch serve on match point? I suspect Murray has already worked that one out for himself, don't you?

tennisaddict
10-14-2012, 01:42 PM
Change the thread title to Murray has aura over players ranked below 4.

Murray is just a decent No. 4 player today and that is it.

norbac
10-14-2012, 01:42 PM
Murray doesn't have the sort of game that can truly intimidate opponents. No huge topspin like Rafa, backboard defense and insane resilience like Djoker, or perfect attacking game like Roger. He is more prone to big hitters having a good day against him since he gives them so many shots to find their groove, plus he just isn't on the same level mentally as the other 3.

Steve0904
10-14-2012, 01:43 PM
The lessen here is that Murray has never had an aura, it's just the truth, no matter how harsh some of you make it out to be.

NJ1
10-14-2012, 01:50 PM
people say big 4. I still see it as big 3 plus Murray,

.

Then you are completely clueless. Try playing more, posting less-- you may learn something.

Mainad
10-14-2012, 01:53 PM
By your definition, every higher ranked player in a match has an 'aura' over his opponent because he has done better in the past. That is not called 'aura' , it just means the higher ranked guy is expected to win.

And that is a kind of aura. If you feel you will probably lose against your opponent, then they are exhibiting a kind of aura to you. If not, you would go into the match feeling confident you would have a good chance of winning it.


If you are saying Murray is ranked 4 and when he plays anyone ranked below 4, the opponent has to play his best game that is fine. But that is not aura.

I disagree, And I repeat that you have a very limited and narrow definition of what having an aura is. I agree they can be of varying sizes or magnitudes but if players in the lockeroom are wary of playing against someone becaue they feel they will probably lose to them, then that someone is exhibiting an aura to them.


A loss to Chardy in between the 2 wins and you call it a winning streak ? It is not even 2 consecutive tournament wins, for god sake.

Why are you getting so agitated? I repeat yet again: Do you think most players in the lockeroom think much about the Chardy match as opposed to their much more recent memory of the USO for instance? Nadal lost to Lukas Rosol at Wimbledon. Do you suppose that means that all the guys on tour now feel confident they can beat Nadal? Probably not and I don't wonder why.


I wonder what Murray fans will be up to when they have a Nole like streak of 41-0 or Rafa like clay court records.

I don't know. What do you mean?


The guy has not even won any tournament 3 times and Murray fans at the first oppurtunity try to make him part of the big 4, when all he has got is 1 major and this guy is 25 years old.

It's not just Murray fans who supposedly make him part of the Big 4. The other members of the Big 4 accept him as one of them and have said so many times. Or do you think you know better than the Big 4 themselves about who does and who doesn't deserve to be among their number?

If so, what an 'aura' of arrogance you are exhibiting! :wink:

tennisaddict
10-14-2012, 01:53 PM
Then you are completely clueless. Try playing more, posting less-- you may learn something.

Fed, Nole and Rafa have won 32 majors amongst them because they were able to beat the others consistently.

Murray has 1 major. Almost consistenly loses to the top 3 in majors for like 5+ years now.

Mainad
10-14-2012, 01:58 PM
Change the thread title to Murray has aura over players ranked below 4.

But are you sure that's an aura? :)


Murray is just a decent No. 4 player today and that is it.

Actually, he is currently ranked #3. :cool:

Evan77
10-14-2012, 01:59 PM
Then you are completely clueless. Try playing more, posting less-- you may learn something.
sure, London exists in California. even in Toronto area, somewhere :shock::):).

NJ1
10-14-2012, 02:04 PM
Fed, Nole and Rafa have won 32 majors amongst them because they were able to beat the others consistently.

Murray has 1 major. Almost consistenly loses to the top 3 in majors for like 5+ years now.

Is it still 2008? Hell, maybe that John Mcenroe fella should make a comeback. Federer was the best player in tennis and I remain a fan of his, but 2013 will show whether he's officially slipped to being the 4th best now. Let's see how he stacks up to Murray from now onwards, certainly hasn't managed the last two meetings.

Djokovic looks to be the top player, but the gap to Murray is wafer thin. Hopefully Nadal will come back almost 100%. The now and the future are what matters, the past has already happened.

Evan77
10-14-2012, 02:08 PM
Then you are completely clueless. Try playing more, posting less-- you may learn something.
right, learn how to know tennis more than punks like you. sure, I'll go with that :twisted:

Federina sucks (too many female hormons for my taste), Murray sucks .. Rafa is on PEDs (only silly girls like Clarky can love him) . Nole is da man. :)

NJ1
10-14-2012, 02:09 PM
right, learn how to know tennis more than punks like you. sure, I'll go with that :twisted:

Federina sucks (too many female hormons for my taste), Murray sucks .. Rafa is on PEDs (only silly girls like Clarky can love him) . Nole is da man. :)

Ah, so you're 12 years old (mentally at least) and angry at the hand life dealt you. Makes sense now. Thanks for clearing that up.

tistrapukcipeht
10-14-2012, 05:56 PM
Nobody has an aura right now, let alone Murray.

We can say Fed/Nadal/Djokovic have had an aura for the past few years since they won everything except for Murray and Del Po taking one slam each.

tennisaddict
10-14-2012, 06:33 PM
Is it still 2008? Hell, maybe that John Mcenroe fella should make a comeback. Federer was the best player in tennis and I remain a fan of his, but 2013 will show whether he's officially slipped to being the 4th best now. Let's see how he stacks up to Murray from now onwards, certainly hasn't managed the last two meetings.

Djokovic looks to be the top player, but the gap to Murray is wafer thin. Hopefully Nadal will come back almost 100%. The now and the future are what matters, the past has already happened.

Hell, it is not 2008 and we are at 2013. Yet until 2 months back, it was the same 3 players who kept winning. Not your dear Murray.

1 slam does not make him a lock or a sure contender for the future.

NadalAgassi
10-14-2012, 08:14 PM
Murray never had an aura. He isnt that great yet. An aura is what Nadal had midway through 2008, the first half of 2009, and most of 2010, what Djokovic had in 2011, what Federer had for years outside of clay or Nadal. This year just showed he can win the biggest titles, not that he is now the best player in the World, let alone the scary and overbearing and near unbeatable man of the game just yet.

cc0509
10-14-2012, 08:52 PM
Murray never had an aura. He isnt that great yet. An aura is what Nadal had midway through 2008, the first half of 2009, and most of 2010, what Djokovic had in 2011, what Federer had for years outside of clay or Nadal. This year just showed he can win the biggest titles, not that he is now the best player in the World, let alone the scary and overbearing and near unbeatable man of the game just yet.

Federer always had an aura even against Nadal. Nadal knew that if he wanted to be one of the best players he had to come up with a way to beat Federer over and over again. Credit to Nadal that he was one of the few players who did not seem afraid of Federer off clay from the very beginning, i.e. at Miami or Dubai. But, Federer still had an aura in off clay slams even for Nadal. Remember Federer defeated Nadal at W in 2006 and 2007 and Nadal could not even reach the final of a HC slam to meet Federer or anybody before 2009. Nobody has dominated like Federer has for many years on two different surfaces not even Nadal.

Re Murray, he does not have the aura of a Federer, Nadal or even a Djokovic but I think Murray will likely win more slams in the future and players know he is very tough to beat more often than not. Remember there is a great divide between the top four players and everybody else.

NJ1
10-14-2012, 09:44 PM
Hell, it is not 2008 and we are at 2013. Yet until 2 months back, it was the same 3 players who kept winning. Not your dear Murray.

1 slam does not make him a lock or a sure contender for the future.

Another example that 99% of posters on Talk Tennis need comprehension lessons.