Originally Posted by THUNDERVOLLEY
Reasonable theory, however some significant differneces may be that which derails Murray's chances in this comparioson/projection:
Jim Courier did not take "forever" to win a major. He was 21years old and only 4 years into his pro career when he won the French Open in 1991.
Murray turned pro in 2005, yet he took the better part of a deacade to win now--in 2012 at the age of 25.
Murray is older, and theoretically has a shorter window of time remaining to win another three (if that). Unlike Courirer--who had a rather large body of legendary competition to deal with in his majors-winning years, Murray only had three legitimate threats.
Of course, competiton like Federer is fading in his twilight years (bolstered by Murray's Olympics beatdown of Federer)leaving Djokovic and Nadal as the only real threats, but again, Murray himself is older, so he may not win four.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Well Pete emerged (and some others) which helped knock Courier out.. There is no one around (other then Nole but still I question how long we will last too really), that could totally stop Murray dead in his tracks. Fed will decline even more heavily soon, its inevitable.. Will Nadal return to top form? With all the mileage and injuries he has had he could be borderline retirement too.. Theres two guys who can stop Murray leaving the ranks eventually soon or at least declining