Who's career would you rather have if given a choice?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by MurrayMyInspiration, Aug 13, 2012.

?

Whos career would you rather have?

  1. Murray

    26 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. Delpo

    19 vote(s)
    36.5%
  3. Cedrik Marcel Stebe

    7 vote(s)
    13.5%
  1. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,003
    Location:
    Cologne
    But Andy has also achieved a lot more. 1 slam and 1 OB, doesn't trump 4 slam finals, 8 masters, 1 OG and an overall way more consistent career.

    It doesn't take 3 years to recover from an injury.
     
    #51
  2. BauerAlmeida

    BauerAlmeida Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
    Messages:
    566
    Location:
    Argentina
    I didn't say he did not achieve more, I'm saying that I wouldn't pick his career because of the money considering both are multi-millionaire despite Murray having more. If someone thinks his results are better it's understandable although I would pick Del Potro for the slam. If Murray wins a slam it's a no brainer, but for the moment I pick Del Potro.

    If Delpotro had 2 slams and Murray 1, or 3 and Murray 2 etc. I would go for Murray despite JMDP having more slams because the rest of his career is stronger but the fact that one is a slam-winner and the other one is not it's too important IMO. A grand slam is the biggest achievement in tennis.
     
    #52
  3. OrangePower

    OrangePower Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,049
    Location:
    NorCal Bay Area
    I personally would agree with you that both have a lot of money by my standards, and more than I personally would ever need... but by their standards... well, I guess pro players *are* greedy :) For example, many of them play exhibition matches, which comes at the expense of other events and their health... that is nothing but a money grab. Same with playing smaller events for the appearance fees. That's what makes me think that for their lifestyles they need more money than you or I can imagine.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2012
    #53
  4. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,464
    Yeah I agree with you there. Once you're in the slam club, the amount of slams has less importance vs overall achievments, as long as the different between slam numbers is not too great. But at the moment Del Potro has won at a higher level than Murray ever has.
     
    #54
  5. TTMR

    TTMR Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,941
    So Gaudio has won at a higher level than Murray ever has? Just wanted to be clear that you'd choose Gaudio's career over Murray's.
     
    #55
  6. Seany

    Seany Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,445
    lol at all this "Murray will eventually win a slam" bullcrap, says who? His chances of not winning one are much higher than winning one, and given his past history in slam finals I'm nto exactly filled with optimism for him. Amazing how Olympic Gold has totally shifted Murray opinion on these boards.
     
    #56
  7. TTMR

    TTMR Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,941
    There are many "one and done" slam winners in the history of tennis. I'd argue that making slam finals on four separate occasions, regardless of one's performance there, is more indicative of talent level than winning a slam once and never reaching even a quarterfinal before or after (Gaudio).

    Murray's career winning percentage exceeds that of numerous slam winners. Based on probability, he should end up with one eventually barring a career-altering injury.

    Your argument reminds me of the "LeBron isn't a great, he hasn't won a championship" point of view that was promoted throughout the duration of his career prior to 2012. In sports, nothing is a certainty, and circumstances and coincidences can cause certain players to overachieve their talent level (eg. Gaudio), and certain players to underachieve theirs (Murray), especially given the small sample sizes of grand slam tournaments (only eight weeks a year, deciding matches only a few hours and sudden death in nature) and team sport playoffs.
     
    #57
  8. Zarfot Z

    Zarfot Z Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    Messages:
    787
    Maybe so, but winning 1 slam goes down better in the history books than reaching 4 slam finals.

    I'd be willing to bet that if Murray were to never win a GS, 50 years later Gaston Gaudio would be better remembered than him.
     
    #58
  9. Seany

    Seany Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,445
    I was more referring to some of the previous posters who were voting for Murray based on the assumption he would win a slam. I would actually vote for murray myself, taking into account his numerous achievements and the name he has made for himself, unless Delpo wins more, Murray's legacy will be much stronger. However I can't stand how now everybody is saying he will almost certainly win a slam.
     
    #59
  10. Seany

    Seany Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,445
    For example...I mean come on !
     
    #60
  11. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,224
    Del Potro's. At the end of the day, he's the one with the slam (not to mention he took out Rafa and Roger back to back to get it.. Something Murray CAN'T do). The ultimate prize. I wouldn't want to be known as the "next murray".. You know, the guy who can win anywheres except on the big stage? Pathetic
     
    #61
  12. Towser83

    Towser83 Legend

    Joined:
    May 17, 2011
    Messages:
    9,464
    Erm let me see... YES. A slam is a higher level than Masters or an olympic gold. That is plain to see. Therefor Gaudio won at a higher level than Murray ever has.

    And yes I'd rather be a slam winner than a guy who won loads of titles but failed in 4 slam finals (if he never wins a slam) If I was Murray and failed to win a slam in my career, I would feel I'd wasted my potential, If I was Guadio I'd feel I'd exceeded my wildest dreams.

    Ultimately you do the best with the talent you have, but I guess some guys like Guadio do more with their lesser talent, than Murray has done with more talent. For guadio to win a slam was a huge achievment, if Murray doesn't win one it will look like a big failure to live up to his abilities.

    Now if you asked me who's talent I'd rather have, I'd say Murray. But what good is it if you don't fulfill the ultimate goal of winning a slam?
     
    #62
  13. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,003
    Location:
    Cologne
    What a load of bs. lol
     
    #63

Share This Page