Originally Posted by cc0509
Yes and no. True that his place in the pantheon of tennis greats may have nothing to do with whether or not he wins a slam in 2013, but at the same time, you have to understand the hesitation on the part of some fans to predict his future slam chances because of his record with other greats in the past. The bottom line is Murray has to prove he is capable of being a multiple slam winning champion and until he does people will be skeptical and rightly so. Personally, I think he will win more slams in the future and defeat the other top three or four.
Why does he have to win multiple slams before people can reasonably state he has a chance to win another? Forgive me, but I'm just not seeing the link, and moreover, plenty of people seem to agree with me as many are tipping him to win a slam next year. For clarity, I'm not saying I'm one of those people - my gripe was with Bobby Junior's claim that Murray only really performed at the USO in 2012 - my personal opinion is that Murray may well struggle to win a slam next year - but not because Roger has won 17 and Rafa has won 11.
Do Murray's career achievements pale in comparison to the other members of the top 4? Absolutley. Does this have any bearing on Murray's chances of winning a slam in 2013? Absolutely not. Roger's 17 slam wins don't change the fact that he has only made 1 slam final in the last 2 years - so why would he be favoured ahead of Murray whose record over that period is better? If you check the bookies you'll see that Roger is behind Murray in the betting for al four slams next year - yes, even RG.