Originally Posted by NadalAgassi
Roddick, Rafter, Kafelnikov are all highly questionable.
Roddick- Only edge is his year end #1. Otherwise Murray's career trumps Roddick in everyway now.
Rafter- 2 slams but something like only 11 singles titles. Not much longevity as a top player, not much in the way of achievements outside his U.S Open titels and Wimbledon finals.
Kafelnikov- 2 slams but couldnt even win a single Masters vs the 8 Murray has won, many less slam finals and semis than Murray, and Murray also has Olympic Gold.
It's true. Roddick's only edge is being #1. But that's good enough, at least untill Murray wins another slam or reachs #1 himself. Rafter and Kafelnikov have 2 slams and #1. Murray may defeat them in everything else, but those are the most important things.
Originally Posted by Razoredge
Roddick is better than Murray? HAHAHAHAHAHAH
Take a look at Roddick's h2h against Fed, Nadal, and Djokovic. Now take a look at Murray's h2h.
Andy's head to head against Roddick himself is 8-3.
NOT TO MENTION MURRAY MADE RODDICK LOOK LIKE A SECOND RATE FOOL AT WIMBLEDON WHEN HE WAS JUST A TEENAGER
And Roddick beat Murray at Wimbledon when Murray was in his prime and Roddick was in decline, so?? Murray has a negative H2H against 2 of the 3 players you mentioned. Don't know why you even bring it up. He only has the positive H2H against Federer but facing a much worse Federer than Roddick. And despite the H2H he never beat him at a slam. H2H are more important than being #1?? No.
And let's say Murray is better than Roddick, well, put Newcombe, Kodes or Stan Smith. Multiple slam winners and were ranked #1 (except Kodes).
There you have more than 20 players better than Murray only in the Open Era.