Originally Posted by timnz
Agree with this list except point 3
Murray only beat Federer over 5 sets at the AO. Federer at 31 recovery time isn't as good as it used to be. Having played 5 sets the previous round...he was a bit jaded. Haven't seen any evidence about this Murray level you refer to. Olympics was a bit of the same thing....though Federer genuinely was having an off day that day (not to take away anything from Andy's great play that day). Concerning point 1 I think it is a shame that the range of surfaces/conditions they played on wasn't more evenly spread especially during Federer's prime (many more indoor clashes would have evened out the clay). I think we would have a completely different result then. I do agree though that Nadal is a very tough brick for Federer to knock over.
I've seen the level that the OP is referring to - 1st half of 1st set at WTF last year and in parts of the AO semi. Comes out firing and bossing Fed; makes Federer look like twilight Agassi when he played prime Fed. But I think this is somewhat a surprise tactic and requires a level of agression and risk that Murray is not really comfortable with, thus his failure to keep it up for more than a set. That said, he's clearly more dangerous to Fed now than he ever has been, and he's always given Fed trouble. That he finally beat him in a slam, albeit while in a better-rested condition than Fed, could spell trouble down the road. But if Federer plays his best I don't think Murray has a level that can match that, even today. But he does have a level to stick with him, and over five sets that may be enough.
I do agree with the placing, though - Murray is a worse matchup than Djokovic for Federer, but Djokovic is the better player, so I'd put my money on Djoker over Fed before I'd put anything on Murray over Fed.