Best player on Grass?

[Atennisone]

I saw this thread another place, and I think it was worthy debate.

Who is the best grass court player of Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic.

WB Titles:
Djokovic - 4
Murray - 2

Career titles on grass (ATP and Olympics):
Djokovic - 5
Murray - 8

Win/Loss % on grass.
Murray - 84%
Djokovic - 83%

H2H
Murray - 2-0 (and 5-0 in sets)

 

[NatF]

Djokovic. Not really close IMO.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Murray.

 

[chut]

Well, seeing them face eachother in 2014/2015 Wimbledon would have been interesting to settle this dispute, but i guess this can only go to Djokovic now.

 

[Towny]

Djokovic pretty clearly. I think Murray is quite underrated on the surface but there's no getting round 2 extra Wimbledon titles.

Murray has won 5 Queens titles and 1 OSG on the surface, but I'd take 2 Wimbledon titles over that

 

[GoldenSwing]

Probably Djokovic

He beat either Federer or Nadal every year he won Wimbledon. Both of them are top modern grass court players

Meanwhile Murray beat headcase 2013 Djokovic for his first title. Novak had also JUST played an excruciating thriller against a resurgent Del Potro
in the SF too

 

[Red Rick]

If both are playing bad, Murray.

If both are playing average, Murray

If both are playing well, Djokovic.

 

[triplefault]

Achievements: Djokovic
Peak level: Murray (proof? W2013 final both guys at peak, one was straight-setted).

 

[Tenez!]

Murray is an extraordinary defensive grass player, who can't really cope with Federer or Nadal's aggression, but was able to put the screws to Djokovic in 2012 and 2013.

So I'll go for Andrew between them, another case of non-transitive matchups (Murray>Djokovic>Nadal but Nadal demolishes Murray on grass anyday)

 

[KINGROGER]

Match ups I’d go for Murray directly. Djokovic has better skills for grass though. Better return, better serve, better ground game. Murray has better touch and slices that’s about it.

I think Nole is fortunate Dimitrov and Fed took out Andy for him in 2014-2015. It’s a game of match ups.

 

[tennisaddict]

We all know what happened Wimb 13 and Olympics 2012

 

[Mainad]

Murray is an extraordinary defensive grass player, who can't really cope with Federer or Nadal's aggression, but was able to put the screws to Djokovic in 2012 and 2013.

He coped quite well with Federer's aggression in the Olympic final.

So I'll go for Andrew between them, another case of non-transitive matchups (Murray>Djokovic>Nadal but Nadal demolishes Murray on grass anyday)

Anyday? Really? You really think post 2012 Nadal could have handled Murray on grass when Murray was beating Nadal twice in succession on clay at Nadal's home event?

 

[Poisoned Slice]

 

[tudwell]

Murray is the more natural mover on the surface and knows how to use the court surface well with all his slices, spins, and angles. But Djokovic has the better service game and overall more aggressive weapons, which I think allow him to reach a level that Murray just can't. Murray's more consistent and I think enjoys playing on the surface more than Djokovic does, but there's no getting around the fact that Djokovic is just the far greater player at Wimbledon.

 

[Mainad]

Djokovic has certainly achieved more on grass because 4 Wimbledon titles clearly surpasses 2.

On the other hand, in their personal encounters on grass, Murray clearly comes out ahead because he beat Djokovic twice in their only 2 grasscourt encounters both of which occurred at Wimbledon (1 at the 2012 Olympics) and remains the only player to beat Djokovic in a Wimbledon final. He also has a much more varied grasscourt portfolio and more grasscourt titles overall (8 v 5).

 

[Third Serve]

B-b-but... Murray leads H2H against him on grass. 2-0 tells all

 

[Jonas78]

B-b-but... Murray leads H2H against him on grass. 2-0 tells all

Yeah H2H is what counts. The extra titles are just weak competition

 

[TearTheRoofOff]

He coped quite well with Federer's aggression in the Olympic final.



Anyday? Really? You really think post 2012 Nadal could have handled Murray on grass when Murray was beating Nadal twice in succession on clay at Nadal's home event?

Federer's aggression.
The Olympic final.
Pick one.

Seriously, though, Murray wrecked everything at that event, and went toe to toe with Fedr at the Wimbledon just before anyway.

 

[MeatTornado]

I want to see 2013 Murray vs 2015 Novak on Centre Court

 

[CentreCourt]

Head to head I think Murray beats him quite convincingly, but Djokovic having more two more Wimbledons is hard to overlook. I think even outwith the extra Wimbledon titles you can still make the case for Murray outside of H2H. Djokovic has one solitary grass title outside Wimbledon and that was at Eastbourne, despite several attempts elsewhere (has played Halle, Queens, London Olympics). As is the way, Djokovic probably gets the nod for being as clinical as he is.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

Always fun to see people meme Andy's two wins over Novak.

 

[Deon Sanders]

Always fun to see people meme Andy's two wins over Novak.

Well you cant really meme his current play on the tour

Actually. You can.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Djoel of course. 2013 bulldone final actually loses in significance because it was in straights, obviously a good prime Djokovic isn't losing a slam final in str8s so he was shyt, which he rather was given the expectations. Now the Lolympix win was super cool and clutch by Mandrew, and that was surely his peak (rather than barely beating Grassdasco at Wimbull), while Djovak was not at peak. Thus the idea that Mooray has a higher grass peaky peak than ****** is silly and entertained by knowlessmen and murygoateers.

 

[TheAssassin]

It's Djokovic.

Murray has obviously done very well in their two meetings but it's not a big sample size, and more importantly you can't go against a player with twice as many Wimbledon titles.

 

[Artificial Grass]

Djokovic pretty clearly. I think Murray is quite underrated on the surface but there's no getting round 2 extra Wimbledon titles.

Murray has won 5 Queens titles and 1 OSG on the surface, but I'd take 2 Wimbledon titles over that

Career-wise, I completely agree. But if we're strictly talking about who the superior player is on grass, then I think Murray's achievements actually prove he's the better player. Having more career titles om the surface and a higher winning percentage show that. And correct me if I'm wrong, but from purely a difficulty standpoint, I'd say it's just about as difficult to win an OSG on grass than it is to win Wimbledon. Prestige aside. Plus, more importantly, Murray is 2-0 in their head to head, winning all five sets in those meetings. I think it's hard to argue then that he's not the better player on grass.

 

[Towny]

Career-wise, I completely agree. But if we're strictly talking about who the superior player is on grass, then I think Murray's achievements actually prove he's the better player. Having more career titles om the surface and a higher winning percentage show that. And correct me if I'm wrong, but from purely a difficulty standpoint, I'd say it's just about as difficult to win an OSG on grass than it is to win Wimbledon. Prestige aside. Plus, more importantly, Murray is 2-0 in their head to head, winning all five sets in those meetings. I think it's hard to argue then that he's not the better player on grass.

What do you mean by superior? Better peak level? Better average level? You seem to admit that you agree Djokovic has the better grass career.

Djokovic rarely plays grass warm ups, while Murray tends to. As such, Murray has won more titles. It's as simple as that. It's not as though Djokovic plays Queens every year but comes up short. I'm not saying Murray shouldn't get credit for playing and winning all these titles. All I'm saying is that it's not a simple matter of more titles = higher level.

OSG was impressive, but it's not the same difficulty as a slam. A slam is 7 Bo5 matches. The 2012 Olympics was 5 Bo3 matches followed by a Bo5 final. And Wimbledon is of course more prestigious and important, as you allude to. It's an overlooked win of Murray's but it really isn't a substitute for a slam.

The H2H is an interesting one. I have never been an advocate of making H2H the decider in this kind of comparison, as it is often skewed by context. For instance, Nadal leads the outdoor hard court H2H against Federer. But no one would ever say he's the better outdoor hard court player. It can be a useful stat, but it's only one factor. In this instance, both of the matches they played took place in the space of a single year. Around/during this time period, Djokovic also lost to Federer in 4 sets at Wimbledon and Del Potro in straights, also at the Olympics. He wasn't exactly at his grass peak, although he was prime. 2011, 14 and 15 were all better years in terms of Novak's grass level. Novak really didn't play particularly well against Murray in 2013. I'm not simply trying to play down Murray's achievements; he won those matches fair and square, and seems to match up well against Djokovic on grass. But 2012-13 Djokovic wasn't peak Djokovic, on any surface.

If we look at the grass H2H, Djokovic is 2-1 against Federer and 2-2 against Nadal. Murray is 1-2 against Federer and 0-3 against Nadal. Again, context is important. Federer and Nadal both beat Murray en-route to the Wimbledon final in 2011 and 2015 respectively, before losing in 4 to Djokovic.

Murray's great on grass, but we have good evidence Djokovic's peak is higher, plus he has double Murray's Wimbledon title haul. As such, he's the better/greater grass player in my book. A far closer comparison is Nadal and Murray

 

[Luka888]

Djokovic of course. I love Murray btw. I hope he does come back . I'd love to see Andy winning another SW17.

I wish that more tournaments were played on grass. Still, you can't deny that Novak is just a better player.

 

[TheMaestro1990]

Murray’s game is more suited to grass (better slice, volley), but Djokovic being the far superior player overall also mean he has had greater results on the surface.

 

[Artificial Grass]

What do you mean by superior? Better peak level? Better average level? You seem to admit that you agree Djokovic has the better grass career.

Djokovic rarely plays grass warm ups, while Murray tends to. As such, Murray has won more titles. It's as simple as that. It's not as though Djokovic plays Queens every year but comes up short. I'm not saying Murray shouldn't get credit for playing and winning all these titles. All I'm saying is that it's not a simple matter of more titles = higher level.

OSG was impressive, but it's not the same difficulty as a slam. A slam is 7 Bo5 matches. The 2012 Olympics was 5 Bo3 matches followed by a Bo5 final. And Wimbledon is of course more prestigious and important, as you allude to. It's an overlooked win of Murray's but it really isn't a substitute for a slam.

The H2H is an interesting one. I have never been an advocate of making H2H the decider in this kind of comparison, as it is often skewed by context. For instance, Nadal leads the outdoor hard court H2H against Federer. But no one would ever say he's the better outdoor hard court player. It can be a useful stat, but it's only one factor. In this instance, both of the matches they played took place in the space of a single year. Around/during this time period, Djokovic also lost to Federer in 4 sets at Wimbledon and Del Potro in straights, also at the Olympics. He wasn't exactly at his grass peak, although he was prime. 2011, 14 and 15 were all better years in terms of Novak's grass level. Novak really didn't play particularly well against Murray in 2013. I'm not simply trying to play down Murray's achievements; he won those matches fair and square, and seems to match up well against Djokovic on grass. But 2012-13 Djokovic wasn't peak Djokovic, on any surface.

If we look at the grass H2H, Djokovic is 2-1 against Federer and 2-2 against Nadal. Murray is 1-2 against Federer and 0-3 against Nadal. Again, context is important. Federer and Nadal both beat Murray en-route to the Wimbledon final in 2011 and 2015 respectively, before losing in 4 to Djokovic.

Murray's great on grass, but we have good evidence Djokovic's peak is higher, plus he has double Murray's Wimbledon title haul. As such, he's the better/greater grass player in my book. A far closer comparison is Nadal and Murray

You make some really good points. If we're talking better peak level, then I would agree now based on what you said that Djokovic is the better grass court player.

However, perhaps my caveat would be that Murray is the better grass court player relative to his average overall tennis level. Djokovic is better than Murray on grass mostly because his average overall level is just that much higher than Murray's. But in terms of who excels the most on the surface in relation to their average performance on other surfaces, I would maybe still give the nod to Murray. But I realize that's probably not the heart of the matter that we're trying to get at here.

 

[King No1e]

Grass is Murray's best and Djokovic's weakest. Still Djokovic, though....he thoroughly beats Andy in every metric.
Murray is to Djokovic as Roddick is to Federer; initially touted as the better one but proceeded to get his career completely, absolutely owned by the other.

 

[EloQuent]

Djokovic's weakest

huh? he has a clearly better record on grass than on clay

 

[King No1e]

huh? he has a clearly better record on grass than on clay

Debatable. He's done really well at Wimbledon but he's done even better at Rome and won a lot of clay masters + RG, despite dealing with peak Nadal.

 

[Shaolin]

Fedr

 

[EloQuent]

Debatable. He's done really well at Wimbledon but he's done even better at Rome and won a lot of clay masters + RG, despite dealing with peak Nadal.

Everything is debatable but he has a career 83% on grass to 79% on clay. 4 slams to 1 (and losses on clay include to Stan). He's won 8 clay masters but of course there's no grass masters to compare. (And btw 4 Rome titles ≠ "even better" since 4=4.)

https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=4920

 

[Nadalgaenger]

Murray’s Olympic Gold on grass deserves mention as well.

Murray also plays Nole better on fast surfaces (Cincy, Wimbledon)

But really this belongs to Nole.

 

[MeatTornado]

Murray’s Olympic Gold on grass deserves mention as well.

Murray also plays Nole better on fast surfaces (Cincy, Wimbledon)

But really this belongs to Nole.

Yet 0-2 in Shanghai.

Even though 2012 was in the bag...

 

[Mainad]

Yet 0-2 in Shanghai.

Even though 2012 was in the bag...

I still feel mad when I think about that one!

 

[Mainad]

Grass is Murray's best and Djokovic's weakest. Still Djokovic, though....he thoroughly beats Andy in every metric.
Murray is to Djokovic as Roddick is to Federer; initially touted as the better one but proceeded to get his career completely, absolutely owned by the other.

Come off it. Murray vs Djokovic is in no way similar to Roddick v Federer. Murray has beaten Djokovic in 8 big title matches (2 Slams, 1 WTF and 5 Masters). Roddick never beat Federer in any title match. On grass, Murray is 2-0 against Djokovic and is the only player to beat him in a Wimbledon final. As I said earlier, Djokovic gets the nod because he has twice as many titles on the biggest grass event of all but in their personal H2H on grass Murray definitely comes out ahead.

 

[titoelcolombiano]

Nadal - but out of the options given... Djokovic

 

[Towser83]

Obviously Djokovic. 2 extra Wimbledon titles is better than a few queens titles especially considering Djokovic has hardly played queen or Halle. Murray does have the H2H but 2 matches in the space of less than a year are not much to go on

 

[Towser83]

Nadal - but out of the options given... Djokovic

Nadal is arguably not even better than Murray, certainly not better than Djokovic. Both have won more big titles, though with Murray it's at least close

 

[True Fanerer]

Hunter.. Kiss my arse.

 

[True Fanerer]

Okay here it is:

Murray h2h beats Djokovic 6-4 out of 10.

Djokovic is better vs Federer.

Damn close.

 

[Mainad]

Obviously Djokovic. 2 extra Wimbledon titles is better than a few queens titles especially considering Djokovic has hardly played queen or Halle.

Although he didn't play either Queen's or Halle from 2011-2017 he still made 2 finals at the former (2008,2018) and 1 at the latter (2009).

Murray does have the H2H but 2 matches in the space of less than a year are not much to go on

True but it's all we have to go on and Djokovic couldn't even make it close on either occasion.

 

[Towny]

You make some really good points. If we're talking better peak level, then I would agree now based on what you said that Djokovic is the better grass court player.

However, perhaps my caveat would be that Murray is the better grass court player relative to his average overall tennis level. Djokovic is better than Murray on grass mostly because his average overall level is just that much higher than Murray's. But in terms of who excels the most on the surface in relation to their average performance on other surfaces, I would maybe still give the nod to Murray. But I realize that's probably not the heart of the matter that we're trying to get at here.

I think as several posters have articulated here, Murray is better on grass relative to his average level than Djokovic. It is his best surface, and his game is quite suited to it. Djokovic is more suited to grass than some like to give him credit for. However, he's considerably better on hard court.

Murray also has a far more diverse grass career than Djokovic or Nadal . He really has been great on the surface

 

[Djokovic2015]

Everything is debatable but he has a career 83% on grass to 79% on clay. 4 slams to 1 (and losses on clay include to Stan). He's won 8 clay masters but of course there's no grass masters to compare. (And btw 4 Rome titles ≠ "even better" since 4=4.)

https://www.ultimatetennisstatistics.com/playerProfile?playerId=4920

An interesting point to consider is that the discrepancy between Novak's career grass and clay win % is almost entirely the result of Nadal.

Novak's career clay record vs everyone but Nadal: 193-36 (84.27%)
Novak's career grass record vs everyone but Nadal: 86-16 (84.31%)

 

[Sputnik Bulgorov]

Nadal - but out of the options given... Djokovic

Nadal might just be the worst among the 3. You can argue for Nadal over Murray because of more Wimbledon finals and the h2h between the two of them, but that's about all he has. Murray has the better win%, more grass titles, OSG, and better consistency.

 

[Sport]

Nadal is arguably not even better than Murray, certainly not better than Djokovic. Both have won more big titles, though with Murray it's at least close

Not arguable at all.

Grand Slam achievements >>> achievements outside Grand Slams.

Nadal dominates Murray 3-0 at Wimbledon. Plus, Nadal has 2 Wimbledon titles and 5 Wimbledon finals. Murray has 2 Wimbledon titles but only 3 finals. The H2H domination at Wimbledon plus the 2 extra Wimbledon finals give Nadal a clear edge in Grand Slam achievements.

I agree the comparison is reatively close, but the fact that Nadal is better is clear if we pay attention to the crucial details.

 

[MajesticTennisManiac]

Not arguable at all.

Grand Slam achivements >>> ATP 500 achievements.

Nadal dominates Murray 3-0 at Wimbledon. Plus, Nadal has 2 Wimbledon titles and 5 Wimbledon finals. Murray has 2 Wimbledon titles but only 3 finals. The H2H domination at Wimbledon plus the 2 extra Wimbledon finals give Nadal a clear edge in Grand Slam achievements.

Queens is not a "big title" by the way, so Murray does not have more "big titles" than Nadal on grass. Queens is an ATP 500, and nowhere is it defined as a big title by the ATP (which is the organization that organizes Queens and others ATP 500). Plus, Murray never faced any member of the Big 3 in his Queens paths to the title. ATP 500 achievements are less relevant than Grand Slam achievements.

I agree the comparison is reatively close, but the fact that Nadal is better is clear if we pay attention to the crucial details.

Some players like Steffi Graf, Serena Williams, Agassi, Djokovic or Murray say the Olympic Gold Medal in singles is so prestigious or even more than a GS.

So by your own logic,

2 slams and 1 Olympics >>> 2 slams

Hence, Murray >>> Nadal on grass.

 

[Noletheking]

Djokovic pretty clearly. I think Murray is quite underrated on the surface but there's no getting round 2 extra Wimbledon titles.

Murray has won 5 Queens titles and 1 OSG on the surface, but I'd take 2 Wimbledon titles over that

True but I think Murray game bothers Nole on grass more than any other players game.