current players who could be a g.o.a.t.

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by joshburger, Jan 10, 2009.

?

Who could be a future g.o.a.t.

  1. nadal

    12 vote(s)
    14.0%
  2. federer

    49 vote(s)
    57.0%
  3. djokavic

    2 vote(s)
    2.3%
  4. murray

    10 vote(s)
    11.6%
  5. other

    4 vote(s)
    4.7%
  6. no current player

    9 vote(s)
    10.5%
  1. joshburger

    joshburger Guest

    i say that murray or nadal could. nadal's knees worry me, because it could affect his longevity. i dont think djokavic will. federer is arguably already a g.o.a.t
     
    #1
  2. game set match 46 TIMES!!

    game set match 46 TIMES!! Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,808
    Location:
    Reporting the score as two bagels!!
    Nadal possible.

    Murray is already giving federer a hard time possible him.
     
    #2
  3. beckham

    beckham Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Messages:
    722
    Location:
    California
    Fed, Murray and/or Nadal.
     
    #3
  4. JeMar

    JeMar Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Messages:
    6,698
    Throwing around "Greatest of All Time" just lessens and degrades its meaning. Please stop using it like it's nothing. Out of the current generation, the only two that could possibly be even within the realm of consideration right now are Federer, who has a pretty strong case; and Nadal, who still has a lot of work to do on non-clay courts.
     
    #4
  5. 1st Seed

    1st Seed Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2008
    Messages:
    759
    Location:
    Toronto
    Nadal, most determined, out of the top 4 no one puts in the kind of effort he does.For that he get's my vote.
     
    #5
  6. J-man

    J-man Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,053
    Nadal I think could be.
     
    #6
  7. EPaps

    EPaps Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    235
    Location:
    Happy Valley
    I think Federer is right now.
     
    #7
  8. ESP#1

    ESP#1 Professional

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,093
    way to early to be giving murray such high praise, lets see how he handles the pressure of being on top and being a target before we give em too much credit, i do agree he does have the talent but then again so do alot of players
     
    #8
  9. phoenicks

    phoenicks Professional

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    No 1 can be a g.o.a.t until they beat sampras, that is u can't talk about that until any1 have won 15GS, even then, he may still not be a g.o.a.t
     
    #9
  10. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    No way Nadal will be considered a GOAT. He wont maintain a high enough level of tennis long enough. Also the odds of him winning a HC slam is stacked against him. If there is one player outside of Fed who COULD be a future GOAT could be Murray just based on his ability, improvement and increase in mental toughness opposed to a year ago. He still has to prove himself on grass and clay. But I would say Murray has a better chance at winning on both than Nadal win a HC slam
     
    #10
  11. thalivest

    thalivest Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,486
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    Nobody even though I am a big Nadal fan. The GOAT title is the most abused title around here it seems.
     
    #11
  12. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    ...ehh thats pretty lame. Quality over quanity. Someone comes along wins 12 with 3 of each..hey make the case. No offense Sampras can't be the g.o.a.t he never won big on clay.
     
    #12
  13. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    this thread is a fail..you list one guy who is allready goat candidate, one guy in his middle career adn two guys at the start. YOu chose todays top 4 and were like hey which one will be a goat? Hell out of those 4 everyone will pick Federer soley because right now he looks like he will be a goat. It is ridiculous this poll is stupid.
     
    #13
  14. KRFLegal

    KRFLegal Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    111
    Andy Murray was born: 15-May-87
    Nadal was born: 3-Jun-86

    Nadal is just one year older, but already has 5 Majors (4 FOs and a Wimbledon).

    Murray is rising nicely but is already facing an uphill battle to catch up with Nadal, let alone Federer and Sampras.

    I think Nadal has the better math on his side to get to GOATness. He can surpass Federer if Fed wins just one or two more Majors.

    I think Nadal is so strong minded that he will win the US Open one year. It seems that when Nadal focuses on something, he gets the job done .... Wimbledon ... becoming #1 ... Gold Medal...

    Nadal takes my vote for future GOAT.
     
    #14
  15. DoubleDeuce

    DoubleDeuce Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,288
    Location:
    South
    Murray as the goat? It's not even funny.
     
    #15
  16. KRFLegal

    KRFLegal Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Messages:
    111
    Well, quantity of Majors is objective, so that's simply an easy way to measure one player against another. No one is claiming it as science...

    If you start counting something else then it gets more subjective and useless --- today is the first day I've logged into Talk Tennis since around August, and the same debate was going on back then as now about how to measure GOAT. Never an agreement...so back to most Majors...

    Also, the players seem to put value on the most Majors stat. Federer is definitely trying to achieve the goal, so we have company in who considers quantity as important.
     
    #16
  17. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    Pancho Gonzales my friend Pancho Gonzales.

    Most majors is really bad, what happens if Nadal finishes with 14 French Opens and only 1 Wimbledon..do we call him GOAT? After all its quantity he will have the most..but 14 of them will be clay? Honestly Federer's resume and Pete's are nearly mirrors of each other..Fed has one more AO and Pete has two more Wimbledons..however Borg should go into GOAT consideration of the modern players and he only has 11. However Borg didn't go to Australia so in theory he was playing for 2 out of 3 a year so in theory what you can't play can't hurt you. I will not give him credit for it saying it helps it but that should not hurt him. Besides Pancho Gonzales has like 2 slams, because he was not allowed to play in them. There are more than just grand slams..
     
    #17
  18. FiveO

    FiveO Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2005
    Messages:
    3,260
    I maintain that there is no one GOAT. There are the greatest of their generation and by a lot of other subjective elements, separate themselves so far from their contemporaries that the qualify as GOATs, plural, an ultra elite group, who are worthy of sitting at the same table together.

    Yeah, the premise is a little odd on its face. But I think that may be the result of two contenders showing up back to back.

    While there were those kind of links in tennis history, there have also been gaps especially in the Open Era.

    For instance, many have Laver, Borg, Sampras and Fed on their top tier of candidates.

    (I consider Federer, winning nothing else as having qualified for consideration)

    What I think some younger fans are "spoiled" by and/or a victim of is the Federer followed almost immediately behind Sampras.

    What's lost on them is that guys in the etherial GOAT conversation are rare, very.

    There was a huge gap after Laver and until Borg. A bigger gap if one is of the mind to disqualify Lendl from this conversation, between Borg and Sampras.

    There was even a four or five year gap between Sampras and Federer.

    And that is not saying that Nadal is not a great player, he is, but if history again repeats itself it is unlikely that anyone near the top of the game right now will push the inside of the GOAT envelope, and if it happens it will probably be from a generation not yet having made a significant impact.

    5
     
    Last edited: Jan 11, 2009
    #18
  19. Leublu tennis

    Leublu tennis Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,429
    Location:
    Moldova
    I agree with this but don't hold out for Federer. He was great for a few years but I think its all over and he is a long reach from being great for all time. Nadal doesn't impress me at all. I don't think he will last a year at #1.
     
    #19
  20. Telepatic

    Telepatic Legend

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Messages:
    7,167
    Location:
    Serbia, Belgrade
    Well, first of all, please learn to pronounce players name.

    Since Federer is allready somewhat of a goat, Nadal is clay goat (and will probably remain like that), so next goat could be Murray/Djokovic.
     
    #20
  21. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    the fact that you say there will be the next goat shows your goat is not a goat. When someone is crowned goat..nobody ever goes there will be somebody better. Babe Ruth is the goat of baseball, because hell nobody all around can be better than Babe Ruth and it stands like that. The GOAT doesn't have to hold every single last record, but they should be the overall best player ever..someone who was feared..someone who dominated..someone who was the greatest of their generation. So that simply leaves Murray and Djoker out for now because Nadal is right now the greatest of their generation.
     
    #21
  22. ben_friendz

    ben_friendz New User

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Messages:
    80
    What

    How can you guys call federer a G.O.A.T.? Has any pro player been consistantly dominant for their entire career? No, all of them had ups and downs, Federer's game relies much less on physical ability, however, he still needed it, I will personally vouch that he will win at least three more slams by the end of his career if not more. He will figure it out. Nadal will for sure putter out and die if he does not drastically change his game soon, he is good, but man is he hard on his body.
     
    #22
  23. coloskier

    coloskier Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    5,541
    The only way Murray will become a goat is if he lets his facial hair continue to grow.
     
    #23
  24. Carlo Colussi

    Carlo Colussi New User

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2008
    Messages:
    42
    Location:
    Milano
    Agree one hundred percent :twisted:
     
    #24
  25. christos_liaskos

    christos_liaskos Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,473
    Location:
    Sheffield, England
    I'm a big Murray fan but this is stupid. GOAT means greatest of all time right?

    As things are, most people find it hard to settle on 1 single player as GOAT but it has to go to one of three; Federer, Sampras and Laver. That is 3 players from a sport which has spanned over 100 years! 1 generation does not throw up multiple contenders for the title of GOAT. We have been extremely lucky that Federer just happened to come in the generation after Sampras. That frequency of contenders for the GOAT title alone is pretty amazing. Not every generation throws up a contender for the title, and certainly doesnt throw up multiple contenders.

    From this generation, Nadal will go down in history as being in the level just below contenders for the title, along with players like Borg and Agassi. And again, please have some respect for what Rafa is doing. I dont see Murray or Djokovic equalling him in their careers either. They will probably end up on the "3rd tier" of all time greats. Who would that be? Players like Becker maybe?

    If this generation where to throw up 3 or 4 contenders for the GOAT title (WHICH IT WONT, IMPOSSIBLE!) then we certainly would be living in the golden era of tennis right now.
     
    #25
  26. NickC

    NickC Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    East Coast, USA. Formally Tucson, AZ
    Greatest of all time? Federer. That's it.
     
    #26
  27. Murray_fan1

    Murray_fan1 Professional

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Messages:
    899
    Location:
    Pacific North West
    I think Federer is the closest thing to a GOAT currently playing. Murray I think has the tools to be a GOAT but time will tell...
     
    #27
  28. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    Its one of the three who have legit claims for sure. (laver, sampras, fed).. Probably Laver has the most legit claim outside of the slam count. No fault of his own though.. he would have that if he could have played the slams in his prime. Close to 20 slams I would say for Laver. But what separates laver is the Grand Slam. Something Pete and Roger dont have. Laver is the GOAT or has the most legit claim to the title. Moreso than Pete and Roger. I will admit that. IF we go by just GS count, that isnt fair to laver
     
    #28
  29. edmondsm

    edmondsm Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    6,902
    Location:
    In an in between place.
    Federer IS the GOAT. Only Laver has the same accolades, but he did not compete against the depth that modern players have too so I cannot put him above Fed. Sampras is second to those two, because of his lack of clay court accomplishments.
     
    #29
  30. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    How could Fed or Sampras compete with Laver for the GOAT spot? Your domination is only as big as the era you are in and nobody Surpasses Laver in this regard. And Fed's domination in "his era" 04-07 didnt have the upper top talent as say what Pete was competing with in the early -mid 90s.

    Unless you want to suggest Hewitt, Ljubicic, Roddick, Baghaditis Blake, young Nadal, Nalbandian is better competition than the guys like Becker, Edberg, Courier, etc which doesnt hold much water.

    The competition today is better than the competition of 04-07. I mean 35 year old, plastic hipped, cortizone shot taking, Andre was in the top 10. That should say something
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
    #30
  31. vtmike

    vtmike Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,658
    Location:
    Texas
    Agree +1

    :) tht was funny
     
    #31
  32. edmondsm

    edmondsm Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    6,902
    Location:
    In an in between place.
    There is no way to prove that Federer's era of dominance was due to a weak field. Actually, it's tin-hat, conspiracy theory, fanboy stuff to suggest it. Roddick could have had 4 or 5 slams without losing to Fed. Lleyton could have had more, just because Federer dominated more then Sampras is in no way proof that it was a weak era. If Federer doesn't stop Roddick and Hewitt from winning more slams then we are talking about them being just as good as Becker and Edberg today. Laver on the other hand is another story. The top levels of tennis were nowhere near as competive back then as they are now. It's like suggesting that Pete Marovich was better then Michael Jordan.


    You're talking about maybe the greatest ballstriker in tennis history, who was as committed to his fitness as anybody on tour. You wanna talk about old men competing in a weak era? Take a look at Rosewall and Laver winning pro titles around the age of 40.
     
    #32
  33. Alexio92

    Alexio92 Professional

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    1,120
    Murray, Djokovic, Simon, del Potro
     
    #33
  34. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689

    First I will admit Pete's competition suffered the late 90s. No question. It certainly wasnt what it was early to mid 90s. Youre impying like Hewitt, Murray, Blake, are better top rivals than say a Murray, Djoker, or prime Nadal or an Edberg, Becker, Agassi, etc? These guys were NOT better players and these were the only competition Fed had to deal with during his dominance. These guys didnt have the talent of some the names I mentioned. People want to say, Fed's passed his prime blah blah... How about the fact that Nadal has primed or peaked? How about the fact that guys like Murray and Djoker are just plain flat out BETTER PLAYERS than the likes of Hewitt, Roddick, Blake etc?

    Its DENIAL if you think the likes of Roddick, Hewitt etc are better top competition than the top 4 today that Fed deals with. We have seen how Murray and Djoker took care of Roddick like yesterday's garbage. Murray and Djoker at ANY TIME would give Fed his fair share or problems. More than a Roddick, hewitt, baghaditis, Gonzales or Blake.

    Of course when regarding the GOAT, all you can look at is domination over a certain era and no one really comes close to Laver regardless nor his accomplishments on all surfaces
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
    #34
  35. QFT

    10 char.
     
    #35
  36. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973

    Please take your bias bull and back off. What on earth has Murray or Djokovic done that allows you to say they are better than a prime Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Nalbandian, Ferrero, Moya I refuse to continue the list. Aruging with you is pointless because you talk like you know everything. Murray had an above average season. One slam final, one other slam finish quarter final, 4 or 5 titles, 2 ms? Big deal. You are saying him in his prime is better than Hewitt or Safin who actually won slams to go with their master series? Last time I chekced between Djokovic and Murray they have one slam? Between Hewitt and Safin there are 4. 4>1. It could still very well wind up that none of these guys finish with another slam in their life and Djokovic and Murray finish with no more than they have. I would kill to see Federer come back and win 3 out of 4 again this year just so you would have to eat your words. If you honestly say Murray right now in his prime has done more than Safin you nothing about tennis. Safin in his prime beat a prime Federer in a five set slam match...Murray what did he do to an out of prime Fed in a slam match..oh yea lost in straight sets.
     
    #36
  37. Lefty5

    Lefty5 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,662
    What about the guy who holds the current Grand Slam Record? Fed's got 2 more to go to be in contention.
     
    #37
  38. nevisben

    nevisben Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    Kirrie
    Some unfairness here on Federer. When he was in his prime he looked unbeatable.

    I agree with an earlier poster who said the next goat won't be along any time soon.

    Anyway I would rather have 3 or 4 potential winners for each slam than one domininant player.

    I switched off to tennis during Sampras's reign.
     
    #38
  39. tintin

    tintin Professional

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Messages:
    1,438
    Location:
    none of your damn business
    unlike Sampras who managed just 1 semis his whole career at Roland Garros,Federer had it not been for Nadal who he keeps losing to since the semis of 2005 has made 3 straight finals.
    he's won Hamburg and again has lost to Nadal in Rome and Monte Carlo

    with all due respect to Sampras but imho his win in Rome was nothing but a big fat FLUKE!

    I'll take Federer making ALL 4 major FINALS(winning 3 out 4 and losing in the finals against the same opponent in Paris) when he made ALL 4 slam finals then Sampras record and not even a final at RG

    unlike Sampras we know Federer can play on clay;either fast or slow(Rome/Hamburg or Monte Carlo)
    ain't no shame in losing to the GCCPOAT(greatest clay court player of all time)

    had it not been for Nadal in his way;this whole GOAT thing would have been settled since 2005 because with all due respect to Mariano Puerta;I don't a crap about him being on the juice and all but Federer would have whooped his bum and won RG.

    Federer would have beaten anyone and won 4 Coupe des Mousquetaires right now and not only tie but surpassed Sampras
     
    #39
  40. game set match 46 TIMES!!

    game set match 46 TIMES!! Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,808
    Location:
    Reporting the score as two bagels!!
    well i forgot somthing here. i think federer is one. if not then hes one.
     
    #40
  41. christos_liaskos

    christos_liaskos Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,473
    Location:
    Sheffield, England
    Just as a bit of extra info to you all, I'm currently reading Sampras' autobiography and his contenders for GOAT are; Laver, Borg, Lendl, Federer and himself
     
    #41
  42. veroniquem

    veroniquem Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2008
    Messages:
    30,970
    Location:
    New York
    It's funny he doesn't put Connors in the mix. I agree with him but I would have added Connors: amazing longevity, won on all surfaces, only player to have won more than 100 tournaments in his career...
     
    #42
  43. edmondsm

    edmondsm Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2005
    Messages:
    6,902
    Location:
    In an in between place.
    Well, Laver won almost 200, the majority of which are not counted by the ATP. Connors was around a long time and only won 8 slams. IMO you don't get to being the GOAT by managing to play tennis long enough to win a million dinky little tournaments. Connors had serious losing records against all his "rivals" (Borg, Lendl, McEnroe, Becker, even Nastase). Not anywhere near being the GOAT.
     
    #43
  44. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689
    LOL.. Sorry but Fed aint winning 3 a year anymore. Not with an prime Nadal, Murray, and Djoker around. More like 3 more the rest of his career.


    I cant believe you can sit there and say Hewitt and Safin are greater than Murray and Djoker. LOL. Thats hillarious. Safin may have more talent than both but when does Safin play like he did at the US OPEN 2000, AO 2005? Once every 5 years? old Safin spent more times in the bars and partying and more outside of the top 10 then he did IN IT. So Safin was never a rival. He had no work ethic and had mental issues. Similiar to Nalbandian.
    When it comes right down to it in the end.. I would bet 100 bucks that Murray and Djoker will have TWICE the careers that Safin and Hewitt ever had.

    Did Safin even have a prime?? Was Safin even EVER a RIVAL to anyone? A player who brings his A game once every 4-5 years is not a rival or even very relevant. Nalbandian and Safin showed us that you can have exceptional talent, but if you cant bring it all together and have the focus, drive, consistency, determination, its means JACK DIDDLY SQUAT!
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
    #44
  45. NickC

    NickC Professional

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,436
    Location:
    East Coast, USA. Formally Tucson, AZ
    Anyone? Like Guga? As in the Guga that's never lost to him on Clay? That Guga?
     
    #45
  46. Emelia21

    Emelia21 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    401


    Just out of interest who do you support now?
     
    #46
  47. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973
    Yea leaving out key fact Fed is out of prime.

    Cool when they have better careers fine..lets see it happen. Murray still has done nothing and even if he wins one slam thats still behind Safin and Hewitt. Your 100 dollar bet shows how ridiculous you are..you think you are intimidating and proving a point. The point is nobody knows how Murray's career will play out, because every said the same thing about Safin they said he will have 5 or 6 slams and same goes for Hewitt and what happened they ran into Federer. Federer shut down their careers. Murray and Djoker are now playing when Federer is out. If you are telling me Federer now is playing just as good in 2004 then you are just as stupid as that 100 dollar bet you made. Federer is an image of his former self. Besides Safin probably beat two of the greatest players ever in slam finals, Sampras and Federer. Murray still hasn't won a slam, made it to more than one final yet you are quick to jump on this bandwagon. Stop being such a bandwagon jumper and wait till facts appear. Hell if Murray wins all 4 slams this year hey you were right Murray was better than Federer omg but don't say Fed's career is not highlighted by good competition. Because a Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, Nalbandian and crew were all pretty damn good in their prime, and b Nadal has be in his prime for quite some time now whether you Nadaltards like to believe it or not. Making Wimbledon finals 3 times in a row if you are a claycourter shows you are in your prime, winning at least 2 master series every year shows prime. Nadal peaked, which is different from prime. Like 2006 Fed peaked, 2004-2005 Fed is simply prime. Yet this was all a waste of time it will go right in and right out. As you will continue to go YOU ARE STUPID HOW DO YOU SAY SAFIN IS BETTER THAN MURRAY? and some other stuff say I know nothing about tennis.

    Face it as of right now Safin's career is far greater than Murray's and same goes for Hewitt and hell Roddick has even has had a better career.

    Safin - 2 slams, 2 runner ups, 5 MS
    Hewitt- 2 slams, 2 runner ups, 2 MS, 2 master cups (2 time year end no.1)
    Roddick - 1 slam, 3 runner ups, 4 Ms (1 time year end no.1)

    Lets see Murray have his year 3 or 4 times..hell have him win a slam before you diss Safin and Hewitt.
     
    #47
  48. GameSampras

    GameSampras Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2008
    Messages:
    4,689

    Ok But Djoker and Murray are just beginning theirs. And Safin is on the last leg of his career. Djoker already has a YEC and a slam under his belt. Murray will start getting his. Hasnt Murray and Djoker even at the beginning of their careers spent more time in the top 5 than Safin has his ENTIRE CAREER? LOL. Most including myself, are very certain when its all said and done djoker and murray will have a much greater career than Safin.

    Im not even going to mention Roddick.. Hes been trashed on quite a few occasions by Murray and Djoker. Hes nowhere NEAR Djoker and Murray level as a player. As for Hewitt, Djoker and Murray are like Cyborg versions of Hewitt. They have close to his speed but they have a much more rounded game, much more strength and 100 times the arsenal Hewitt ever had. Hewitt had a very good few years.. But was pretty insignifcant thereafter once the wheels went and he never had the game to back it up once his speed left him
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2009
    #48
  49. egn

    egn Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    4,973

    Murray does not have a rounded game...do we watch the same tennis player, or are our definitions of rounded different. Murray stands behind the baseline and hits the ball. Murray barely moves in, the fact that Nadal actually played net against him in the US Open SF proves that Murray is stuck at the baseline. He plays a very good baseline game but he is not well rounded. Djokovic yes, but even look at Federer vs. Murray at Doha, Murray never really approached the net and spent most of the time hitting balls deep back at Federer. Oh yea he throws in a drop shot or two, but Murray plays like most of the rest of the top 10 just he is slightly better at it. At least rounded to me means someone who can incorporate and arsneal of shots, Murray hits the same stuff over and over again. I will be glad for you to prove me wrong though but from what I have seen from Murray is the same thing.
     
    #49
  50. jaggy

    jaggy G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    12,716
    Location:
    Carrboro, NC
    I am really excited by Murrays talent so ticked him, time will tell however.
     
    #50

Share This Page