Andy Murray next person to win a major?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by yonex90, Feb 16, 2007.

  1. yonex90

    yonex90 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    146
    Aside from Federer and Nadal who already hold titles, who will be the next to win one?

    Andy Murray is my vote. He has the most developed game, the best coach, and has already show that he can give Fed. and Nadal a lot of trouble. Beat Fed last year.
     
    #1
  2. ACE of Hearts

    ACE of Hearts G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    13,949
    I wanna see another Murray vs Fed match so Fed can kick his butt.I like Murray alot but he isnt ready for the Fed man just yet.
     
    #2
  3. ferocious4hand

    ferocious4hand Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    425
    Location:
    NorCal
    How can Murray give Fed a lot of trouble? I didn't see the Cincy match between Fed and Murray but from i was told Fed had no gas in his tank to compete
     
    #3
  4. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    Andy Murray, Richard Gasquet, Marcos Baghdatis, Tomas Berdych, and maybe the french teenager whose name I forgot...
     
    #4
  5. ceejay

    ceejay Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    401
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Did you see their previous match in Bangkok? Even though Fed won 6-3 7-5, Murray still caused him problems all match.

    Lets just all hope Murray beats him again in the Wimbledon final this year.
     
    #5
  6. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,385
    Location:
    England
    I don't think too many people would be surprised if he is the next winner of a major (other than Federer or Nadal)
     
    #6
  7. alienhamster

    alienhamster Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,658
    I think he's more likely to beat Nadal or Fed in a major than he is to get through 6 other consecutive matches against "lesser" players, to be honest. The mental consistency still isn't there for him to be declared the next likely slam winner.

    That being said, I wouldn't be totally shocked if he wins one soon. He's certainly got the talent.
     
    #7
  8. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,385
    Location:
    England
    He does indeed.

    To be honest, I can't see any of the other young guns being able to string together 6 other matches and then take out Federer or Nadal at the end. Baghdatis couldn't handle the pressure in Australia, Gasquet keeps on disappointing like he did today in losing to Soderling at home.

    I also think that Murray stands more of a chance than a guy like Ljubicic, Davydenko, Hewitt, Nalbandian who all have alot of baggage in losing in slams.

    I think the young, affraid of nobody attitude that Murray has is just what is needed to become a champion. I can't see him winning a slam this year but then again, I think Federer and Nadal will win all the slams between them this year so the next person to win a major may not be until 2008 onwards and Murray will surely be there or there abouts by then.
     
    #8
  9. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916
    He's too *****ly and not mentally there yet. Little things still bother him. I'd put my bets on Gonzalez and Roddick over Murray to be honest. Murray although he has a wide variety of weapons, doesn't have a big weapon such as the Gonzo forheand, Roddick Serve, Nadal's speed and topspin arsenal, etc. He'll be like Tim Henman, probably give you a scare or two, but will never win a slam because he doesn't have a weapon big enough to beat Federer with.


    He's got solid groundstrokes, and does excel at shots that require touch, such as passing shots, lobs, volleys, and dropshots, but those aren't going to win you a slam when professional tennis is all about baselining. He's solid, but not too dangerous from the baseline really.
     
    #9
  10. fastdunn

    fastdunn Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    6,294
    I know talent is an eye of beholder thing and very subjective matter but
    I've got so impressed when I saw the game of Murray, Gasquet
    (and Baghdatis somewhat).

    I never got that kind of impressiveness when I first saw Roddick,
    Lubjicic, or Davydenko playing...
     
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2007
    #10
  11. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    You think Roddick has a better shot of beating Roger than Murray?

    Is it the fact that Murray is simply a more talented tennis player than Roddick or because Murray has a better record against Federer than Roddick?

    Or perhaps it's Murray's absolute dismantling of Roddick at Wimbledon?

    Putting personal nonsense aside, isn't it obvious Murray is a hugely talented tennis player? He uses his head. Guys like Federer don't have trouble with big hitters like Gonzo and Roddick. I'll take smarts over power any day.
     
    #11
  12. travlerajm

    travlerajm Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,416
    I think Roddick has the best shot, but that is assuming that Fed stumbles to someone else like... Murray?
     
    #12
  13. BabolatFan

    BabolatFan Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    790
    Location:
    East Coast
    andy murray is my pick too. His game's got much variety.
     
    #13
  14. oscar_2424

    oscar_2424 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,239
    Location:
    Hallandale, Florida
    Nah, Gasquet will win one before Murray.
     
    #14
  15. iscottius

    iscottius Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    1,146

    Geal monfils........
     
    #15
  16. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,385
    Location:
    England
    There is no doubt he is hugely talented but to be honest, i'm getting a bit bored of him losing matches that he should be doing better in. He lost again today in France to Soderling (who is a decent player but Gasquet should be beating him)

    Murray generally wins the matches you would expect him to and then he goes on to really push (and sometimes even beat) the best players in the world.

    I've seen Murray live a few times and i've seen Gasquet live at Nottingham on 5 different occasions and although they are both amazing to watch, i'll take Murray's touch and tactics over Gasquet's big backhand. In a slam you usually have one or two matches where you aren't at your best and it's how you deal with those matches that makes the player, it's all well and good destroying someone when your at the top of your game but I really don't feel like Gasquet has the ability to grind out matches. I really hope he gets it together in the end but at the moment I don't think he has the package to win a slam, neither does Murray but he is more of the way there.
     
    #16
  17. ACE of Hearts

    ACE of Hearts G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2005
    Messages:
    13,949
    I never been overly impressed with the Gasquet serve.I like Murray's serve somewhat.
     
    #17
  18. Ronnie92

    Ronnie92 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Location:
    Chicago
    He's a whiny nerd that doesn't hit nearly hard enough. Roddick will be the next to win a slam (other than Federer).
     
    #18
  19. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916


    Tell me who else currently who has recently challenged Federer more other then Roddick or Nadal?


    Murray beat Federer once after he played over a week and a half of tennis against some of the toughest players in the world with no rest in between. That doesn't count. Did Murray beat Federer just after he pretty much demolished everyone at Wimbledon? No, he didn't. Roddick did.
     
    #19
  20. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    I would have to pick Gonzo, Roddick or Blake.
     
    #20
  21. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    I'd say it's only a matter of time before Murray wins something big.
     
    #21
  22. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    You mean 2003 Federer? Are you implying Roger was the same force in 2003 that he is today? I hope not.

    Murray absolutely dismantled Roddick at Wimbledon, and I would say that grass was not a Murray strong point.

    Murray has more variety than Roddick. Sure, power often puts pressure on even great players, but is it enough to beat them? Obviously not. Yeah, I know Roger was tired when Murray played him, but it's still Roger.

    That's ridiculous. Murray didn't play Federer after he won Wimbledon that year, so I don't see your point. Roddick beat Federer once in a 2003 season that saw a much more vulnerable Roger Federer. Technically speaking, Murray beat a much better Roger Federer at Cincy who had just dominated Wimbledon, so your point is moot.

    Murray has more talent. He has a better all court game and more variety. Murray also has the head-to-head record. Murray isn't consistent and isn't fit, but if he becomes so, he'll be a much larger threat to Roger than the other crop. Roddick has had plenty of time to beat Roger on the big stage and he hasn't done it.
     
    #22
  23. NamRanger

    NamRanger G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2005
    Messages:
    13,916

    Federer is human.


    I'd love to see Andy Murray against Roddick again. What happened last time they played? Oh, that's right, Roddick beat him soundly.


    Federer in 2003 was hot off a Wimbledon victory. Although he is not the Federer of today, he was heavily favored to beat Roddick in the Rogers Master because of their head to head and how well Roger was playing. Roddick beat a Federer that was playing well that year (not as well as he is now, but better then what most of the top 10 of today can do). Mind you this is a Federer that has not played 2+ weeks of intense tennis either.



    The only reason why Andy Murray won was because Federer had nothing left in the tank. He had no movement that day. The BIGGEST key to Federer's game is his movement. His strokes have EXACT timing, if he does not have it he frames the ball like nuts. Roddick would have won that match too, garunteed.



    Murray's got talent, but he does not have a big weapon. Look at the people who win slams. They all have some sort of X-Factor. Federer has his forehand, Roddick has his serve, Safin has his impressive shot making abilities and his power game, Agassi with his returns, Sampras with his serves, the list goes on and on. What does Murray have? Even Nadal has a weapon, his forehand is one of the best in the game when it's on. Murray just plays solid tennis. He'll float around in the top 20 to top 10, but he will not win a slam, and he defintely won't beat Federer playing even anywhere remotely near his best.
     
    #23
  24. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    I'll remember you said that if Murray wins a slam.

    Wilander won 8 slams. What was his weapon?

    Since when is variety and creativity not a weapon?

    Murray beat Roddick on the bigger stage buddy. That's what counts. Oh yeah, and Murray still has the head to head even though he only turned pro two years ago. Murray is top 15 right now. He has Gilbert as a coach and is only going to get better. He'll get fitter too.

    Obviously if Murray beat Roddick on his grass then his return is some sort of weapon. Who has beaten Roddick at Wimbledon since 2003? Federer and Murray.
     
    #24
  25. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,385
    Location:
    England
    The last time Murray played Roddick he was coming off the back of a finals appearance in Washington and a semi final of a Masters Series in Canada and then having to play Roddick. He played Wimbledon, Newport, Davis Cup, Washington, Canada and Cincy back to back playing 20+ matches in a month whilst Roddick was rested after him missing tournaments before their meeting.

    If you dismiss Murray's victory over Federer then you have to dismiss Roddick's victory over Murray. If you choose to go down the route of Federer having nothing left in the tank then say goodbye to your Roddick beating Murray argument.

    As for Murray not having a weapon. He is the best returner of a first serve this year statistically and 4th in return games won, he is one hell of a returner which is a weapon in it's own right. Added to that the fact he can crank his serve up into the high 130mph's, solid as you like off both wings, one of the top 5 passers on tour, he can also volley (he caused Nadal problems with his volleys) not to mention he has a fantastic tennis brain. If all that isn't enough, he also has that slight sprinkling of genius in him that allows him to hit shots that other players couldn't even comprehend attempting.

    He's going to do just fine.
     
    #25
  26. drakulie

    drakulie Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    24,466
    Location:
    FT. Lauderdale, Florida
    Fena, excellent post.
     
    #26
  27. jaggy

    jaggy G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    12,716
    Location:
    Carrboro, NC
    I am not a Roddick fan and consider myself a huge Murray fan but I think the loss at Wimbledon actually helped Roddick. Since then he has stopped his crazy 10 foot behind the baseline thing, taken the ball earlier and improved.
     
    #27
  28. illkhiboy

    illkhiboy Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,968
    Location:
    Karachi
    Just like Murray beat an exhausted Fed, he himself was exhausted when losing to ROddick. He barely got out of a match against Ginepri the previous day and had played the semis the previous week to Gasquet who lost to Federer the following day. Infact Murray had played the week before as well, losing to Clement in the final.
     
    #28
  29. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    And guess what? They play each other in the semis at San Jose tonight.

    I will say that neither player looks their best. Andy needed 3 sets for Spadea and Murray needed 3 for Taik-Lee. This match should be watched because I think it's basically the final. Karlovic/Becker doesn't interest me much.

    I really don't understand why people dog Murray. Finally someone comes along who plays more than just a power, bash-em-up game, and people trash him. Roddick only dreams of having Murray's backhand down the line.
     
    #29
  30. tennus

    tennus Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2006
    Messages:
    318
    I kind of agree with you about Gasquet. Hugely talented (he's beaten Federer before) but lacks the consistency to win slams. Murray is a little in the same boat at the moment but I was very impressed in that 5 setter he lost against Nadal in the AO. Has a bit of mongrel in him which I think you need against the big 2 (Federer/Nadal). Murray reminds me a lot of McEnroe, ranting to himself and playing the self vs world card.

    By way Fena, England's getting it's act together in the one dayers. You must be disappointed it's a couple of months too late. :)
     
    #30
  31. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,385
    Location:
    England
    Yeah i'm sure Gasquet will get it together at some point and become a major champion but I thought we would be seeing more fight in him by now. Murray last night really fought out a victory against an unusual opponent in Lee, after losing the first set he came back to take the second and then hold his nerve in a final set tie-break. I wouldn't of fancied Gasquet to of won that match if he wasn't playing at his best and a set down.

    As for England, well I can't believe it to be honest! We've barely won a ODI over the last 2-3 years and now we have beaten Australia 3 times in a row and New Zealand once to take the tri nations tournament. Now Australia are really under pressure after their loss to New Zealand and a squad that looks pretty weak, are we witnessing a glimpse of the new Australia without their old players? I sure hope we are, i'm enjoying it :)
    I think any team would be licking their lips at the prospect of playing against Haddin and White in the longer form of the game as opposed to Gilchrist and Warne! Maybe it's time for a different team to step up and dominate like West Indies and then Australia did, I nominate England ;)
     
    #31
  32. unjugon

    unjugon Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    Jesuschrist, no. How many times does it need to be said?

    How can a guy who has not won a SINGLE five setter have a chance to win a grand slam?
     
    #32
  33. justineheninhoogenbandfan

    justineheninhoogenbandfan Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    898
    Murray is much younger then Roddick and is an impressive 2-1 over him head to head. Sure Roddick is still better now, and probably for another couple years will be anyway, but you are far too dismissive of Murray and his potential.

    As for Roddick's win over Federer vs Murray's, it is harder to beat a weary Federer in 2006 then a fresh Federer in 2003. Murray's win also was straight sets, as opposed to a 3rd set tiebreaker. Both were impressive wins, I wouldnt sell Murray's win short by comparision due to circumstances when you could argue circumstances that made it harder for Murray to win too, like actually playing Federer when he was the games dominant player as oppose to a player who lost 4th rounder or sooner in 3 of his 4 slams and didnt win a single Masters title all year.

    Murray's backhand and return of serve are weapons IMO.
     
    #33
  34. Noveson

    Noveson Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,241
    I think that Murray is going to win one sooner or later. He has a wonderful game and once he gets over his mental issues he'd be hard pressed to not win a slam. I think Gael Monflis is going to be a constant in the grand slam race sooner or later in his career. He might pull a Safin and waste all of his natural talent, but I hope not. He is probably the most athletic of any of the top players.
     
    #34
  35. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    Monfils' game is kind of blah to watch IMO.

    I think Berdych has a real shot. That guy hits huge.
     
    #35
  36. Andrew

    Andrew Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2006
    Messages:
    101
    I'll say that while Murray may not win a major this year or next year, he definitely has the most potential I've seen of all the younger generation players.

    At this moment in time, I would say Roddick has a better chance of winning a slam than Murray. The two play tonight, so we'll see how it turns out. Roddick beat Murray in their last match (when Murray was tired), and Murray beat Roddick when Roddick was at his absolutely lowest point both confidence and skill wise that he'd been in in a couple years, so those two matches cancel out.
     
    #36
  37. The Gorilla

    The Gorilla Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,495
    does no one else think it's interesting that they've sped up san jose to mid 1990's speed and 3 of the 4 semifinalists are 3 of the 4 best servers in the world:

    benjamin becker

    ivo karlovic

    Roddick


    apart from lubijic all the best servers in the worldo have made it through to the semis of a fast court tournament,
    I think this shows there is a fine balance to be struck in terms of court speed.
     
    #37
  38. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,385
    Location:
    England
    S P O I L E R





















    Well Murray beats Roddick again. Before the match even started I just had that feeling that I used to get when Hewitt played Roddick a few years back when you were pretty confident that Hewitt was going to cause Roddick some real problems. I wouldn't of stayed up until 5am to watch a match with no sound if i wasn't confident of Murray winning and he didn't let me down. Murray now has a 3-1 head-to-head with Roddick and has won 7 out of the 9 sets they have played, including dismantling Roddick at Wimbledon which was a fantastic achievement.​

    Murray is really starting to grind out matches now and not get down on himself as much as he used to, added to that he seems to have a real knack of performing on the big stage like beating Roddick, Hewitt, Federer, Ljubicic, Davydenko, Safin etc..










     
    #38
  39. Fedexeon

    Fedexeon Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    1,950
    He lost in 2nd round of Indian Wells last year and first round in Monte Carlo and Miami. He has many points to gain next few months. Should see him in top 10 very SOON.
     
    #39
  40. jjl

    jjl Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    118
    Murray's game reminds me of Miloslav Mecir, he sort of just glides around the court hitting off-speed stuff mixed in with power that drives his opponents crazy. I think he has a better chance of beating Fed than Roddick does, his game is more of a puzzle than Roddick's. i think he's closer to breaking through at a major than Gasquet, whose game i also love.
     
    #40
  41. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    Well that settles that. Two years in a row Murray clowns Roddick at San Jose.

    I really don't see how Karlovic could pose problems considering Murray's return. I'm pretty sure Murray also hit more aces than Roddick. Jimmy Arias mentioned that Murray has the best return in the game statistically speaking.

    Is that the kind of weapon you were talking about NamRanger?
     
    #41
  42. yonex90

    yonex90 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    146
    For all the people who must not watch tennis who thinks Andy Roddick could ever win a title again you should look at today's results. Roddick is awful and will never come close to winning a major. The days are over when a serve alone will win against top players. Now someone like Blake does have a great game, and Gonzo was on fire in Australia.
     
    #42
  43. stormholloway

    stormholloway Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,832
    Location:
    New York City
    I guess NamRanger magically evaporated.
     
    #43
  44. yonex90

    yonex90 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    146
    Murray must have shut him and Andy up with a straight set win.
     
    #44
  45. arnz

    arnz Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,228
    Murray is my pick to become number 2.

    The problem with talking too big on these boards is that it can bite you on the behind, right Namranger? :-D
     
    #45
  46. Ross K

    Ross K Legend

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,232
    I don't know how far exactly he'll go exactly, but I'd say his potential just about exceeds everyone.
     
    #46
  47. ShcMad

    ShcMad Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Messages:
    1,540
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    Even though Murray may not have any easily-noticeable weapons, he has far more natural talent than Roddick. Murray's ability to read the court and the opponent's game and adjust to it accordingly is something Roddick would not be able to do in 100 years. So, please, let's not compare them. ; )
     
    #47
  48. yonex90

    yonex90 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Messages:
    146
    I'm surprised that Roddick's name came up. I thought that there would be more Gasquet, Baghdatis supporters though. Or maybe most people see the same thing I do in Murray's game.
     
    #48
  49. Pisolino227

    Pisolino227 Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2005
    Messages:
    241
    Berdych still has a Berd-brain.........Monfils is fast, he can slide on hardcourts, but GS anytime soon, I don't think so..................Murray is a smart player but he can act like a whiny b i otch sometimes.............I'm going with Roddick or Gonzo to be the next non-Fed slam winner. Let the haterade consumption begin!
     
    #49
  50. Nick Irons

    Nick Irons Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2007
    Messages:
    577
    Location:
    Cape Fear

    Absolutely

    I stated this in another thread:

    Roddick is done.
     
    #50

Share This Page