Favourite for Wimbledon?
- Thread starter joeri888
- Start date
FreeBird
Legend
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
Murray should get his mojo back, soon. Like his chances.
1. Murray
2. Fed
3. Djoker.
4. Rafa
1. Murray
2. Fed
3. Djoker.
4. Rafa
Edgecrusher
Professional
That's absolutely true. I guess it will depend on the question if he can win some tough matches against top 10 players before entering Wimbledon. On the other hand Murray is an excellent player especially on grass, everything can happen!
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Murray has a great shot to retain Wimbledon this year, he needs to get his fitness and confidence back a bit though.
Winning Queens would be the ideal build-up.
Winning Queens would be the ideal build-up.
Edgecrusher
Professional
That's exactly what I thought.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
I think Murray's camp need to focus on USO/AO performances more. I think those suit Murray better than Wimbledon. I know his win at Wimbledon holds a lot of weight with his followers here but I would call it fortunate (having to beat Verdasco and JJ to get to the final? What are the odds of that?), unlike his USO victory, which was really impressive.
I just can't see Murray as the favourite against any of the conventional top players. He would need major favours (not the zillion foot faults Karlovic received in their match, I mean upsets to players he would struggle/lose against).
I just can't see Murray as the favourite against any of the conventional top players. He would need major favours (not the zillion foot faults Karlovic received in their match, I mean upsets to players he would struggle/lose against).
Sir Shankalot
Rookie
Say what???
2013: Winner
2012: Finalist
2011: Semi Finalist
2010: Semi Finalist
2009: Semi Finalist
So five straight years when he has been in the last four at Wimbledon. Luck? Favours? I think not.
Well right now, the odds are equivalent to Nadal going out early at Wimbledon once in a row. The other two events have already passed, and therefore have a probability of 1.
The same goes for winning five straight RGs. To do it, he just has to win it once, this year. So this "nobody has won it five times in a row, so he is going down" stuff doesn't hold. I hope Djoker wins though.
M
monfed
Guest
Sure but the mental side of Nadal approaching Wimbledon this year will be far more dogged. And a dogged Nadal is dangerous.
This is probably a good year for Djoker to take a 2nd Wimbledon... or for Nadal to bounce back from the last 2 years of horrible results here and actually do well.
I hope neither one of those things actually happen... i'd love to see someone like Stan win it or another dark horse like Isner/Del Potro to win.
I seriously doubt Roger Federer wins it or is considered the bookmakers favorite even though I would fap to the idea of him winning #8
I hope neither one of those things actually happen... i'd love to see someone like Stan win it or another dark horse like Isner/Del Potro to win.
I seriously doubt Roger Federer wins it or is considered the bookmakers favorite even though I would fap to the idea of him winning #8
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
You are entitled to an opinion, so am I. Take away what I call a fortunate run of events and you get SF/SF/SF/F. Solid. Right where his belongs in the context of the big 4. My thought is that if he had focused 100% on the USO/AO stint, he could have won 4-5 Slams by now.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Grass is by far Murray's best surface at the moment. He is currently on an unbroken 18 match winning streak on grass (dating back to the 2012 Olympic win). Ever since he became a top player, Wimbledon has always been one of his most successful tournaments and he has never failed to reach at least the semi-finals for the last 5 years! You may choose to dismiss Verdasco and Janowicz but both were highly-in-form players at last year's Championships. Verdasco is a former top 10 player and can still be really dangerous when he chooses to and Janowicz was an in-form up and coming player and was seeded.
That's just the trouble with you Murray doubters. You just can never ever see Murray as the favourite to win anything. Despite all Murray's history and all he has won, you can never bring yourselves to think he will ever win a match until he actually does so. The fact remains is that he continues to have a positive H2H against all the top players with the exceptions of Nadal (who has?), Djokovic (still beats him in Slam finals) and Berdych (still beats him in Slams).
underground
G.O.A.T.
And Raonic. :twisted:
tennisfan17
Professional
:razz:dimitrov for Wimby :razz:
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Well, I was talking about the top 10 in particular. But if you want to include Raonic, fine. He still beats him at the Slams, though!
tennisfan17
Professional
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
well Raonic is a future slam winner and a good player
I don't know about that. I actually doubt it tbh.
batz
G.O.A.T.
He didn't express an opinion Russ - he stated some facts. You are of course entitled to your opinion - but let's not pretend it has any empirical data to support it.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
Murray is clearly struggling with his form now. If it was Murray of early 2013, I would've picked Murray for this year, but he's just not there yet physically. Djokovic then Federer should be the favorites. Nadal has a chance and if Murray can somehow recover miraculously, he may have some chance as well. I would love to see some new slam winner personally.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
I chose to discount Queens and Olympics. One has a weak field (yet still almost defeated by Mahut) and the other had a broken Federer. Why would those make him the favourite? Your H2H assertions remain amusing as ever.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
There is no fact that says I am wrong that he would have achieved more. It's an opinion. Nowhere did I pretend in the manner you suggest.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Yes, I've noticed that you like to ignore things that inconveniently don't back up your opinions. Is Federer always 'broken' when he loses? As usual, no such excuses ever allowed whenever Murray loses, of course!
Well, some of us tend to think that winning Queens (the leading warm-up event for Wimbledon) and beating the guy who just beat you a few weeks earlier on the same court and without need for a roof this time, plus winning Wimbledon itself and winning your last 18 matches on grass might just about make you a bit of a favourite for winning Wimbledon again! I'm sure you would have no hesitation in making Federer a favourite in those circumstances. But, oh, there I go again, daring to suggest Murray be given equal treatment to the great Roger. How very naughty of me!
Nice to know they amuse you. They continue to remain a fact, all the same!
Last edited:
NADALRECORD
Banned
Nadal's knees have had the best start to a year maybe ever in his career (thanks to stem-cell therapy in December 2013). And since he said last year that he was afraid to bend his knees at Wimbledon, I think 2014 may be Nadal's year. Although.....I personally don't value Wimbledon, so I don't care either way, as long as he wins Roland Garros and US Open again.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, I've noticed that you like to ignore things that inconveniently don't back up your opinions. Is Federer always 'broken' when he loses? As usual, no such excuses ever allowed whenever Murray loses, of course!
Well, some of us tend to think that winning Queens (the leading warm-up event for Wimbledon) and beating the guy who just beat you a few weeks earlier on the same court and without need for a roof this time, plus winning Wimbledon itself and winning your last 18 matches on grass might just about make you a bit of a favourite for winning Wimbledon again! I'm sure you would have no hesitation in making Federer a favourite in those circumstances. But, oh, there I go again, daring to suggest Murray be given equal treatment to the great Roger. How very naughty of me!
Nice to know they amuse you. They continue to remain a fact, all the same!
Federer played that marathon match with Del Potro, which he won despite, maybe, being the lesser player. How many matches has Murray won against Federer in a best of 5 format? So why would I need an excuse for Federer's loss? It was a surprise result and no matter how you spin it, Murray was the underdog performing the upset.
I don't know why you take offense every time I share an opinion on Andy Murray. I am sure he is nowhere near insecure enough to be browsing here and take a lethal dose of 'confidence loss' due to my contributions. Therefore the fanatical defense is quite redundant, again my opinion.
DolgoSantoro
Professional
Can't imagine being able to pick one so soon. I just hope Murray's in top form by then.
merlinpinpin
Hall of Fame
Nobody yet, but things can change quickly in tennis.
Federer is back in contention, which he wasn't a couple of months ago. On the right track, obviously, but still a ways to go.
Djokovic may seem to be, too, after last week, but it's still too soon to say, imho (plus, he's the worst grass player of the four anyway).
Murray is very iffy, to say the least.
Nadal is a big question mark, too. I think this is the year he stumbles on clay, we'll see if this affects him positively or negatively (probably the latter, although he'll be hard-pressed to "beat" his last two appearances there as far as bad results are concerned) for the grass season (provided it happens, of course).
Federer is back in contention, which he wasn't a couple of months ago. On the right track, obviously, but still a ways to go.
Djokovic may seem to be, too, after last week, but it's still too soon to say, imho (plus, he's the worst grass player of the four anyway).
Murray is very iffy, to say the least.
Nadal is a big question mark, too. I think this is the year he stumbles on clay, we'll see if this affects him positively or negatively (probably the latter, although he'll be hard-pressed to "beat" his last two appearances there as far as bad results are concerned) for the grass season (provided it happens, of course).
NADALRECORD
Banned
Last year was the year Nadal stumbled on clay. His knees were not good at all in the 1st half of 2013. People overlook this, but he lost Monte Carlo and the media hype was big for Djokovic in the 1st week of Roland Garros. That was Djokovic's big chance. This year whereas, Nadal's knees have become a non-factor. His retrieving skills this year are the best I've seen since 2010. His shot execution hasn't been consistent, but that's common for Nadal early in the year obviously. And he's already won 2 titles, Doha and Rio.
Monte Carlo has always been the 1st big event of the year, almost the essential win (yet he lost last year and still won Roland Garros). Whereas the AO has always been the event you expect Nadal to be injured at, and Nadal has won Indian Wells multiple times but also lost to Federer 6-3 6-4 in 2012 (and Nadal beat Federer at the AO that year). So not a shock to see Nadal lost at Indian Wells to a hot Dolg (and Nadal led 4-2 in the 3rd set tie-breaker). So I see nothing unfamiliar so far in Nadal's season, nothing to indicate a bad Roland Garros. It looks more likely that Djokovic will have a bad Roland Garros (Djokovic lost his pet slam event, and that doesn't help mentally at all).
Monte Carlo has always been the 1st big event of the year, almost the essential win (yet he lost last year and still won Roland Garros). Whereas the AO has always been the event you expect Nadal to be injured at, and Nadal has won Indian Wells multiple times but also lost to Federer 6-3 6-4 in 2012 (and Nadal beat Federer at the AO that year). So not a shock to see Nadal lost at Indian Wells to a hot Dolg (and Nadal led 4-2 in the 3rd set tie-breaker). So I see nothing unfamiliar so far in Nadal's season, nothing to indicate a bad Roland Garros. It looks more likely that Djokovic will have a bad Roland Garros (Djokovic lost his pet slam event, and that doesn't help mentally at all).
Last edited:
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Well, it was you who said Federer was 'broken' and attempted to dismiss Murray's win on that account. But I'm glad you now agree that Federer needs no excuses for his losses. I actually agree with you that Murray's win on that occasion came as a bit of a surprise given that Federer had just beaten him on the same court at the same venue just a few weeks earlier.
Glad we can finally agree on something about them!
It's perfectly okay to offer your opinion but you have to accept that you may be challenged on it or on the logic you use to arrive at it. That's why we have these discussions on TTW. If you want to challenge my opinion, go right ahead, but be prepared for me to defend it unless you can present enough facts to make me think again about it.
I don't ask or expect you to like Murray either as a player or as a person. But when criticising his record, I like to hear factual and logical justifications for it and when I know or feel these are wrong or misguided, I will say so, that's all, and I will do exactly the same for any other player, not just Murray. As for being a 'fanatic', I am amongst the first to criticise him when I feel he deserves it. I support him, yes, but I am not and never will be like the Fed and Nadal fanatics who can never see anything bad in their idols or good in their chief rivals!
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
So after all this, can I have your definitive say on my view that Murray would have been a more prolific Slam champion if he had focused exclusively on the USO and AO?
