Will Murray ever be in the 100 Greatest of All Time

[Phoenix1983]

The men who have reached more consecutive semis - Federer, Djokovic and Lendl ?

[Gonzo_style]

We need a Prisoner of Birth to tell us how many GS titles will Murray win and how long will be Murray's peak and prime.

[kishnabe]

He needs another slam to be in the list.

[kalyan4fedever]

Originally Posted by Gonzo_style

We need a Prisoner of Birth to tell us how many GS titles will Murray win and how long will be Murray's peak and prime.

seeing your post reminded that hes been not posting for sometime, guess got banned

[BauerAlmeida]

Originally Posted by MonkeyBoy

Roddick reached #1, but in a weaker era, and didn't keep it that long. Living in Federer's shadow aside, Roddick always had a very inconsistent career. Since 72 only five players have reached more consecutive Grand Slam quarter finals than Murray, only three have reached more consecutive semis.

Roddick inconsistent??? Roddick was TOP 10 for 9 straight years. Won a title for 11 straight years and reached at least a QF in a slam for 11 consecutive years....How's that for consistency?

And yes, Murray is very consistent too, and that record is impressive. But surface homogenization has a lot to do with it.

Originally Posted by firepanda

I'd say he is already in the Top 10 greatest of all time.

This gotta be a bad joke.

[MichaelNadal]

He's already great, but I do think he needs a couple more slams, and then he's good to go.

[Razoredge]

I don't know how you can even argue Andy Murray isn't top 100 greatest tennis players of all time.

[Sabratha]

Originally Posted by Gonzo_style

Probably, I think he needs another GS title, but he won the Olympic gold medal, so in my opinion, Murray is already in the top hundred.

I think he will be top fifty if he wins a second major.

[MonkeyBoy]

Originally Posted by BauerAlmeida

Roddick inconsistent??? Roddick was TOP 10 for 9 straight years. Won a title for 11 straight years and reached at least a QF in a slam for 11 consecutive years....How's that for consistency?

And yes, Murray is very consistent too, and that record is impressive. But surface homogenization has a lot to do with it.

Okay, by the standards of professional tennis in general Roddick was consistent, but not in comparison to Murray. If I'm not mistaken Roddick never made more than 2 consecutive GS semi finals. Both Murray/Rod worked better on fast courts, but Murray has been much more successful at the French. He has a better direct HTH, and a WAY better HTH vs Federer.

[smoledman]

Fed is #1!

[NadalAgassi]

Michael Chang was ranked as something like the #67 man all time and Murray is already better than him.

[BauerAlmeida]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Michael Chang was ranked as something like the #67 man all time and Murray is already better than him.

Chang is over-rated cause he is american. He is even in the hall of fame and Kafelnikov isn't being clearly a better player.

[NadalAgassi]

Originally Posted by BauerAlmeida

Chang is over-rated cause he is american. He is even in the hall of fame and Kafelnikov isn't being clearly a better player.

Chang may be overrated in some circles but he isnt overrated on that list. Can you name alot (or any) players who werent ranked above him by the TC list who should have been? Even Kafelnikov and Roddick (who I dont even agree with you are superior to Chang or Murray and who I think you drastically overrate, especialy Kafelnikov the worst 2 slam winner in history by far excluding Kriek) were ranked above him. It is pretty safe to say Chang is at worst a top 70 player all time, and Murray is definitely better than Chang. Sorry I think the idea Murray isnt a top 100 mens player of all time is laughable at this point, even for those who think he is weaker than people like Roddick and Kafelnikov, those people themselves are way inside the top 100 so it doesnt matter.

[powerangle]

Of course is in the top 100, even if you include the women. I'd say Murray is probably pretty close to being in the top 50 as well (just the men).

[Hawkeye7]

Originally Posted by NadalAgassi

Chang may be overrated in some circles but he isnt overrated on that list. Can you name alot (or any) players who werent ranked above him by the TC list who should have been? Even Kafelnikov and Roddick (who I dont even agree with you are superior to Chang or Murray and who I think you drastically overrate, especialy Kafelnikov the worst 2 slam winner in history by far excluding Kriek) were ranked above him. It is pretty safe to say Chang is at worst a top 70 player all time, and Murray is definitely better than Chang. Sorry I think the idea Murray isnt a top 100 mens player of all time is laughable at this point, even for those who think he is weaker than people like Roddick and Kafelnikov, those people themselves are way inside the top 100 so it doesnt matter.

Hatred is blind. I wouldn't even try to argue with him, he is known for not liking Murray. Fate of using the same username on every website.

Even if Murray retired tomorrow he should still be included, he is in IMO the best one-slam-wonder there is. I guess you could make a case for Roddick, because he won more titles and was ranked #1, but then again, does that really make up for 3 Masters titles, a worse winning percentage and H2H records against all of his main rivals?

[syc23]

You could make a case for both Murray and Roddick that had they not been born earlier and coincided with Federer at his peak, Nadal and Djokovic, both Andy's would have collected more slams already.

These 2 could have been mulitple Wimbledon champions if it wasn't for the above guys.

The fact that Murray has had to win his slam the hard way in the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era is enough to include him in the top 100 already.

[Steve0904]

Originally Posted by MonkeyBoy

Okay, by the standards of professional tennis in general Roddick was consistent, but not in comparison to Murray. If I'm not mistaken Roddick never made more than 2 consecutive GS semi finals. Both Murray/Rod worked better on fast courts, but Murray has been much more successful at the French. He has a better direct HTH, and a WAY better HTH vs Federer.

I agree with most of your post, but I don't think comparing H2H's with one player (let alone Federer) adds much to the argument. Granted Murray is a better matchup for Federer than Roddick ever was, but Roddick faced prime Federer a lot more than Murray ever did. True, Federer's prime probably truly ended in 2010, but his best years in terms of playing ability were easily 2004-2007. Murray won the match in Cincinnati in 2006 yes, but the point still stands.

Besides, I could say that Roddick has a winning H2H with Djokovic and Murray doesn't. Both are in their primes I think you would agree, and it could be argued that Murray has blown some of the most recent matches he's had with Djokovic.

[The Bawss]

Originally Posted by syc23

You could make a case for both Murray and Roddick that had they not been born earlier and coincided with Federer at his peak, Nadal and Djokovic, both Andy's would have collected more slams already.

These 2 could have been mulitple Wimbledon champions if it wasn't for the above guys.

The fact that Murray has had to win his slam the hard way in the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era is enough to include him in the top 100 already.

Who cares that he won in a tough era. History wants cold facts not opinions and hearsay. Truth is Murray lucked out in unplayably windy conditions. Murray is not even close to Noah or Gaudio yet because they won their slams in decent conditions at least.

[Phoenix1983]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

Murray is not even close to Noah or Gaudio yet because they won their slams in decent conditions at least.

Gaudio is probably the worst slam winner of the Open Era, Murray is far above him. He has probably surpassed Noah as well.

[batz]

Originally Posted by The Bawss

Who cares that he won in a tough era. History wants cold facts not opinions and hearsay. Truth is Murray lucked out in unplayably windy conditions. Murray is not even close to Noah or Gaudio yet because they won their slams in decent conditions at least.