Originally Posted by batz
Erm, it was Murray's DTL/inside out forehand that won him Wimbledon OG and possibly the USO.
For the lazy detractors (I'm looking at you here Smoledman) - I posted the day that Murray lost to Ferru @ RG that I felt it was a turning point, and the reason it was a turning point was because whilst Murray had gone out, he'd gone out swinging - and in particular swinging his forehand DTL/IO. For a seasoned Murray watcher, this was something new and significant - Murray going for his forehand DTL - even when he was missing? Unheard of.
It has become a key shot in the development of Murray 2.0 and will continue to improve, alongside his 2nd serve.
I remember you saying that after Murray's loss to Ferrer at the FO and agree in general regarding his improvement of the shot under Lendl but it isn't what bothers me the most about this statement from Gimelstob though as a supposed tennis analyst he should have remarked on the improvement from Murray in that regard this year.
What irks me the most is when media heads like Gimelstob say something which they know is outlandish just to generate controversy and get the attention they seek.
Saying Murray's not an elite player is beyond dumb, he became an elite player back in 2008 when he got into top 5, won Cincy and Madrid, reached USO final etc. what changed with him winning USO this year is that he became a hall of famer.
You can't define elite as 3 best people in the world in their chosen profession.