Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by TenTan, Mar 2, 2012.
Will Murray the great finally do it. Surely its now or never know.
It's too late, Djokovic already won the Australian Open. Maybe next year.
If he can consistently beat Humpty Dumpty he can. He will be his biggest obstacle,and if he can overcome it he should be able to win one for sure.
He's the 3rd fav IMO. So definitely possible.
Yes. Wimbledon or USO.
Next year he will overtake the number 1 ranking if my intuition is accurate. As for winning a major this year, it would surprise me.
I have him for 2013 AO and WB.
2012....maybe US Open.
I would say Murray wins 2, Wimbledon and Cincy +#1 ranking at the end of the year.
If the Muse beats Ralph in the Wimby SF then he should be the favourite in the final,unless ofcourse Fed turns in another vintage performance. :twisted:
Yes, he will win Wimbledon or the U.S Open this year. Only 1 slam but he will get that first one.
Probably has a good shot. Olympics might suit him even better, since it's best of three. Don't see him win RG, but the other two are possible. The AO always seems his best chance to me though. Especially matching up against Nadal or Federer.
I wish, but I'm not sure any more. It seems like Nole, Rafa and Rog simply raise their game to another level at majors. yeah, Andy can win some masters, but he always fails when it really matters (GS).
Yes he can.
No he won't.
I think he probably will.
Would have agreed last year, but he has impressed since AO.
Of course he is older and there is the aged 25 issue, and Djiokovich of course, but everything else is much more positive.
I don't think so, no.
Djokovic and Nadal will share them out.
Not gonna happen, he beat Djokovic in a nothing 500 tournament,
when it counts he can't win big big matches.
Nadal and Djokovic to share the remaining slams this year - FACT.
No, not fact, facts are concrete. There are still 3 more slams yet. You can't declare something as fact if it hasn't already happened. You are however entitled to say that it's your own opinion and your could be right. At least have some decency to retain some sense of logic in your post. That is all.
didn't he say:
"when it counts he can't win big big matches."?
you can also say the whole thread is illogical in it's concept.
The overwhelming evidence indicates that Murray does not have 5th gear as do the top 3 and until he can develop that, he will never win a slam.
Lendl was a choker at first, losing the first 4 Slam finals in which he played, but while 0-3 in such finals, he's also 0-9 in even winning a set, so, I'm gonna say, no.
The Muzzette had everything going for him coming into the final(beating Novak, favourable conditions) but still lost quite convincingly to grandpa Fed.
Everytime I get my hopes up with the Muzzette, he anti-climaxes. So don't think so.
maybe.If he plays the WTA tour he has a bit of a chance.Of course, not if Williams is fit enough.
I would say no.
Hey, he just got beaten in a 'crappy lil 'ol 500 tourney' by Old Man Fed so that means he has no chance of ever winning a Slam, right?
Of course if he had beaten Old Man Fed in that 'crappy lil 'ol 500 tourney' , that wouldn't have counted either because it's just a crappy lil 'ol mickey-mouse tourney isn't it? So it means he still would have no chance of doing it in a Slam, right?
So let's all just agree that the answer is 'NO' and close this thread and move on to discuss those players we really think CAN win a Slam!
(But I do wonder: Does winning this crappy little 'ol 500 tourney' mean that Old Man Fed has a better chance of winning another Slam!)
I do think it is imporant for him to win a slam in the next 2 years. If he hasnt won one by then, I dont think he ever will. Some players win their first slam at 27 or older, but it isnt going to happen to somenoe who has been near the top so long, had so many chances, and still not won one. If he has already won atleast one slam he could of course win more at 27 or older, but if he hasnt won atleast one by then it is highly unlikely he ever will.
I agree with this. If he does win after 27 it will probably be a one off win
The difference is Federer already has 16 of them. Who knows if Federer will ever win a slam again but winning the little 500 titles can't hurt.
So are you saying that 16-Slam winner Federer gives proof that he can win another by winning in Dubai today whereas if Murray had won Dubai that would have been no proof at all that he is capable of ever winning one?
Its just tough to see Murray winning back to back 5 setters over any 2 of the 3 above him and delp could soon be added to that mix.
No I am not saying that at all. Just saying that there is more pressure for Murray to win his first slam than there is for Federer to win his 17th. I think most Federer fans would consider a 17th slam a bonus.
To answer the question of whether Murray will win a slam, someone like cc0509 needs for Murray to have won a slam first
For your information I answered earlier in this thread that I do think Murray may win a slam this year.
So there you go, if Murray wins a slam that's one less shot for Nadal. Use your head.
I swear to God you are obsessed with Nadal and whether he will win more slams. Why don't you worry about something else?
Why don't you stop worrying about what I worry about?
you are right about Ivan. he started winning late in his career, I think he was 25 when he won his first major. It's just everything in tennis nowadays is different. I really hope that Lendl will help Murray to somehow break down his mental issues. on the other hand, as much as I like Murray, he is simply not as good as the top 3
Done! That was easy!
I think it's pretty up-in-the-air whether he wins one this year or not. I certainly don't see why it should be "Now or never" this year for him. Murray is 24; he probably has another three more years or so left as a top player. I don't think something magic is going to happen at the end of this year to create a new anti-Murray barrier at the Slams.
just because djoker enjoys long matches doesn't mean murray and federer are winning masters series, olympics and lucky slams. djoker was the one who let the crowd in 2007 and 2008 hurt him against federer.
murray is too awkward for a strong man lendl to control.
Slow hard-court vs Medium paced hard court
I think the US Open is Murray's best Grand Slam in terms of chance. The Australian Open these days is on too slow a surface for Murray (Even though he got close this year). The US Open has been slowed down from being fast hard to medium hard - I think Murray does better on faster hard courts. The fact that he pushed Djokovic so hard (7-5 in the fifth) should concern Djokovic.
djoker is sometimes passive on every court so it doesn't matter if he should win in 3 or 4 sets. he admits he needs to be aggressive, despite any pain he has.he always wants drama in 5 setters, while risking injury and losing the will to fight in other tournaments.
I really don't get this new Murry-Ivan hype.
No way he is gonna beat Nadal/Djokovic/Federer in ANY slam final (Murray to win W? LOL!) IMO he has no mental strenght to pull this off. I would like to be wrong on this one but I only see Nadal and Djokovic as possible slam winners for this year.
NO HE WILL NOT. I do not see any difference from last year or from 2009.
I do not know why a lot of people expect him to win a major. Please look what happened in the past.
Well we gotta do this every year, it's tradition lol.
You're not a fan of tradition then?
Separate names with a comma.