Can Murray get to number 1 with no Slam

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

janipyt05

Professional
Just wondering if it is possible and how you guys felt about that? The WTA yes i know no comparision is having that problem however is it important to be number 1 with a slam or not? What does it say about British tennis? What does it say about Murray's REAL ability to be a contender?

i'm interested in your veiws they are som great people with some amazing posts
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
Yes - Murray could get to number 1 without winning a slam if:

Murray won Montreal and Cincy back to back, Roger had 2 early (R3 or sooner) exits from those tournaments.

And

Murray makes USO final and Roger goes out early.

What does it say about British tennis? Nothing.


For the record - I'd hate to see it happen. Murray gets enough mindless abuse without adding fuel to the fire.
 
CountryHillbilly

CountryHillbilly

Banned
batz said:
Yes - Murray could get to number 1 without winning a slam if:

Murray won Montreal and Cincy back to back, Roger had 2 early (R3 or sooner) exits from those tournaments.

And

Murray makes USO final and Roger goes out early.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's very unlikely.
For the record - I'd hate to see it happen. Murray gets enough mindless abuse without adding fuel to the fire.
Click to expand...

I was just gonna say that. The last thing Murray needs is to be a slamless No.1 on top of everything. :)
 
Commando Tennis Shorts

Commando Tennis Shorts

Hall of Fame
batz said:
Yes - Murray could get to number 1 without winning a slam if:

Murray won Montreal and Cincy back to back, Roger had 2 early (R3 or sooner) exits from those tournaments.

And

Murray makes USO final and Roger goes out early.

What does it say about British tennis? Nothing.


For the record - I'd hate to see it happen. Murray gets enough mindless abuse without adding fuel to the fire.
Click to expand...

Is that true?

It's times like these I wish I knew more about the rankings system...
 
T

TheMagicianOfPrecision

Guest
janipyt05 said:
Just wondering if it is possible and how you guys felt about that? The WTA yes i know no comparision is having that problem however is it important to be number 1 with a slam or not? What does it say about British tennis? What does it say about Murray's REAL ability to be a contender?

i'm interested in your veiws they are som great people with some amazing posts
Click to expand...
It would be a damn shame for all tennislovers,fans, the sport, well everyone...To me he is absolutely not no 1 material, he is an upsetter, a delayed supernova that will fade away soon when everyone figures out how to play him (of course not!!) I just dont fancy him very much...:?
 
T

tintin

Professional
that would be a bigger joke than the wta players getting there without winning jack:shock:
I mean a 4th round in Australia
4th round in Paris and a fluke semifinal in London and you're world #1?:roll:
worse that Safina who made 2 slam finals and choked in both;);)
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
tintin said:
that would be a bigger joke than the wta players getting there without winning jack:shock:
I mean a 4th round in Australia4th round in Paris and a fluke semifinal in London and you're world #1?:roll:
worse that Safina who made 2 slam finals and choked in both;);)
Click to expand...

See above for an excellent example of what I was alluding to.

Tintin - can I recommend countryhillbilly's link to you; the one that explains the ranking system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATP_Rankings


It's the place where the hard of thinking can find out that a player's ranking is not based on their results in the 3 previous slams - a notion that you seem to be labouring under.

I'm also trying to figure out why Murray's SF appearance was flukey.
 
Wolland

Wolland

Rookie
tintin said:
that would be a bigger joke than the wta players getting there without winning jack:shock:
I mean a 4th round in Australia
4th round in Paris and a fluke semifinal in London and you're world #1?:roll:
worse that Safina who made 2 slam finals and choked in both;);)
Click to expand...

Safina actually played 3 finals.

And no, he can't. He would have to do extraordinary well in other tournaments, and Roger, Rafa and Novak would have to lose before the semis, which is highly unlikely. Anyway, I think that Andy has a good chance of getting to that number one spot, but I don't reckon he'll be able to dominate the game like Federer or Nadal.
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
Wolland said:
Safina actually played 3 finals.

And no, he can't. He would have to do extraordinary well in other tournaments, and Roger, Rafa and Novak would have to lose before the semis, which is highly unlikely. Anyway, I think that Andy has a good chance of getting to that number one spot, but I don't reckon he'll be able to dominate the game like Federer or Nadal.
Click to expand...

And Murray made quarters @ RG, but internet player bashers don't let facts get in the way of anything.
 
T

TheMagicianOfPrecision

Guest
maximo said:
And then TMOP tells me that Fed fans are the most knowledgeable on these boards. :roll:
Click to expand...
Even the Fed-fan can be wrong about facts, and i think the Sampras fans are the most knowledgeable...some, not GameSampras though
 
zagor

zagor

Bionic Poster
Theoretically it's possible but not likely to happen,I do think Murray will reach #1 sometime in the future though.
 
deltox

deltox

Hall of Fame
8260 - 1000 for madrid + 2000 for cin and montreal (winning both) + 600 for the uso (if he wins) = 9860 after the uso for andy best case scenario

for roger it looks like this

11060 - 450 (madrid) - 1600 for early round loss in USO = 9010 now this is saying of course that roger gets no points from cinnci or montreal and goes out third round of the uso.

possible scenasrio but HIGHLY unlikely
 
D

dropshot winner

Hall of Fame
I don't think that this will happen, but it could.

If Murray goes far in Flushing Meadows and in Melbourne he'll have a lot of points, as he alwasy does well in the hardcourt masters that could be enough to overtake Federer.
 
Last edited:
D

dragonfire

Banned
i would actually like it if murray got to #1 without a slam. it would prove that even in the era of the 2 greatest players, anything is possible.
 
drwood

drwood

Professional
janipyt05 said:
Just wondering if it is possible and how you guys felt about that? The WTA yes i know no comparision is having that problem however is it important to be number 1 with a slam or not? What does it say about British tennis? What does it say about Murray's REAL ability to be a contender?

i'm interested in your veiws they are som great people with some amazing posts
Click to expand...

Its possible if for example:
1. He wins Montreal and/or Cinci
2. He loses to Roddick in the US Open final (meaning Fed loses about 1100 of the 2000 points he has to defend from last years's title)
3. He defends his points from last year's carpet season
4. He wins the year-end championship

Then yes, its possible.

However, I expect him to have a very good shot at winning the US Open...I still think Roddick will do it -- only Fed, Nadal, Murray or Roddick have a realistic chance to win US Open IMO.

And if Fed played as sparingly in non-Slams as Serena, Murray would have a shot much sooner.
 
D

dragonfire

Banned
drwood said:
Its possible if for example:
1. He wins Montreal and/or Cinci
2. He loses to Roddick in the US Open final (meaning Fed loses about 1100 of the 2000 points he has to defend from last years's title)
3. He defends his points from last year's carpet season
4. He wins the year-end championship

Then yes, its possible.

However, I expect him to have a very good shot at winning the US Open...I still think Roddick will do it -- only Fed, Nadal, Murray or Roddick have a realistic chance to win US Open IMO.

And if Fed played as sparingly in non-Slams as Serena, Murray would have a shot much sooner.
Click to expand...

agree

10 chars
 
drwood

drwood

Professional
batz said:
As someone pointed out a few days ago, Lendl was also number 1 for over a year before winning a slam.
Click to expand...

He first became #1 in 83, but he wasn't year-end #1 in 83 (first slam was 84 French, and he wasn't year-end #1 then either, b/c of McEnroe's 82-3 yr)
 
J

janipyt05

Professional
drwood said:
Its possible if for example:
1. He wins Montreal and/or Cinci
2. He loses to Roddick in the US Open final (meaning Fed loses about 1100 of the 2000 points he has to defend from last years's title)
3. He defends his points from last year's carpet season
4. He wins the year-end championship

Then yes, its possible.

However, I expect him to have a very good shot at winning the US Open...I still think Roddick will do it -- only Fed, Nadal, Murray or Roddick have a realistic chance to win US Open IMO.

And if Fed played as sparingly in non-Slams as Serena, Murray would have a shot much sooner.
Click to expand...

Thank you so much :)
 
Cyan

Cyan

Hall of Fame
janipyt05 said:
Just wondering if it is possible and how you guys felt about that? The WTA yes i know no comparision is having that problem however is it important to be number 1 with a slam or not? What does it say about British tennis? What does it say about Murray's REAL ability to be a contender?

i'm interested in your veiws they are som great people with some amazing posts
Click to expand...

I hope Murray wins a slam. I don't want him to be the new Rios.... He deserves better than that :oops:
 
T

tintin

Professional
maximo said:
He made the QF's in Paris, dodo.

And how was it fluke making the Semis?

Federer winning RG and Wimbledon is what i call fluke.
Click to expand...

no buddy Murray making the finals last year in NY was a fluke and you can't duplicate it?:roll:
when you make annual finals in Paris for years it ain't no fluke; but nice try bozo:roll::roll:;)
 
N

NamRanger

G.O.A.T.
If Murray makes it to world #1 and doesn't win a slam in his career than it would be hard to defend that he isn't overrated.



However, I don't expect either to happen.
 
D

dragonfire

Banned
NamRanger said:
If Murray makes it to world #1 and doesn't win a slam in his career than it would be hard to defend that he isn't overrated.



However, I don't expect either to happen.
Click to expand...

you can't defend that he's not overrated right now, according to die hard murray fans like maximo, he's the best in the world
 
F

FedFan_2009

Banned
Murray says NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

1250000388.jpg
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
dragonfire said:
you can't defend that he's not overrated right now, according to die hard murray fans like maximo, he's the best in the world
Click to expand...

A couple of questions if I may.

Who 'over-rates' Murray (Max excepted) on here, or in the tennis media in general?

What form does this 'over-rating' take and why can we call this over-rating, rather than just being rated as the world number 3 should be?

Thanks.
 
GameSampras

GameSampras

Banned
What would people actually say about this era now? If Murray actually reaches Number 1in the world without winning a slam..


Would this era be regarded in the same vain of the Rios era where he spent some time at number 1 without winning a slam?


Nope... People around here will still try and convince how strong the era is.. Regardless if the #1 player in the world is slamless
 
N

nadalfan4life

Rookie
maximo said:
He made the QF's in Paris, dodo.

And how was it fluke making the Semis?

Federer winning RG and Wimbledon is what i call fluke.
Click to expand...

Did you really just call him a dodo? Besides we all know Murray will never get to number one until he can win a couple grand slams which does not look likely for a while.
 
batz

batz

G.O.A.T.
GameSampras said:
What would people actually say about this era now? If Murray actually reaches Number 1in the world without winning a slam..

Would this era be regarded in the same vain of the Rios era where he spent some time at number 1 without winning a slam?


Nope... People around here will still try and convince how strong the era is.. Regardless if the #1 player in the world is slamless
Click to expand...

Chill - he won't. It would involve the occurence of a highly unlikely combination of events.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
Lack of relationship between weeks #1 and Slam Titles
2 3 4
Replies
168
Views
5K
BGod
BGod
Towerofpower205
Why can no one be happy with the WTA?
Replies
38
Views
5K
kragster
kragster
Towser83
If Murray or Federer wins AO, would you consider them the real number 1?
Replies
39
Views
3K
Carsomyr
Carsomyr
B
Why number of year end no. 1s is more important than total weeks at no. 1
Replies
40
Views
5K
THE FIGHTER
THE FIGHTER
T
What's up with No. 1 ranking for Ivanovic?
Replies
21
Views
1K
rk_sports
rk_sports
Top