Justin Gimelstob Says That Andy Murray is Not Elite Player.......

[nikdom]

Originally Posted by Mainad

Well, given that the Slam H2H between them is Wilander 7-0 Gimelstob, I'm personally inclined to give Wilander's opinion just that little bit more weight!

Wilander says the darndest things all the time. Got nothing to do with his slams.

Murray is a two hander who happens to be able to hit a single handed backhand slice. Never seen him do anything with that slice that would be remarkable let alone the best.

Roger's slice BH on the other hand is a legitimate weapon.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by nikdom

Wilander says the darndest things all the time. Got nothing to do with his slams.

Oh I agree and he often contradicts himself too. All I am saying is that if I had to choose between the opinions of two former tennis players, I'd probably go with the one who is a former multi-Slam winning champion.

Originally Posted by nikdom

Murray is a two hander who happens to be able to hit a single handed backhand slice. Never seen him do anything with that slice that would be remarkable let alone the best.

Oh I don't know, I've seen him hit many sliced backhand drop shots over the years, many of them quite remarkable. Strangely though, he doesn't seem to employ them as much as he used to do.

Originally Posted by nikdom

Roger's slice BH on the other hand is a legitimate weapon.

Again, he was far more effective with it in the past. Nowadays, it doesn't seem quite the weapon it once was IMO.

[nikdom]

Originally Posted by Mainad

Oh I agree and he often contradicts himself too. All I am saying is that if I had to choose between the opinions of two former tennis players, I'd probably go with the one who is a former multi-Slam winning champion.



Oh I don't know, I've seen him hit many sliced backhand drop shots over the years, many of them quite remarkable. Strangely though, he doesn't seem to employ them as much as he used to do.



Again, he was far more effective with it in the past. Nowadays, it doesn't seem quite the weapon it once was IMO.

Yeah, but to say that Murray's slice is more "natural" than Roger's is ridiculous.

If you're speaking of his topspin 2HBH, yeah, I'll totally agree that Murray's is a better shot, but sorry in my book that's just as ridiculous as calling Murray a non-elite player just because he doesn't go DTL more.

[Steve0904]

Originally Posted by Retaliation

You know what? Murray won a grand slam and a gold medal whereas Federer, Nadal, nor Djokovic did neither recently. His career is pointing upward, and I think that it's far too soon to say he's not an elite player. Claiming that he is, however, is also premature.

What are you defining as recently?

As recently as the beginning of 2012 all of those players have won slams, and the Olympics is once every 4 years. Not to mention that Nadal won the 2008 Olympics.

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by nikdom

I watched the same match on the Tennis channel and Wilander is commentating alongside Gimelstob and Shiras, and Wilander says "Murray's slice BH is more natural than Roger's". I'm like WTF??!

Wilander needs to be kicked into touch after a comment like that.

[Bobby Jr]

Not sure why people are using the logic that because Gimbelstob wasn't as successful as whoever when he played that his opinion are therefore void. If he's right he's right regardless, and vice versa.

Remember, Toni Nadal was never a top tennis player and he managed to impart enough lessons to nurture Rafael into one of the greatest players of all time. Richard Williams wasn't, either, nor Adolf Kacovsky - two guys who clearly knew something about tennis.

[TennisD]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

Not sure why people are using the logic that because Gimbelstob wasn't as successful as whoever when he played that his opinion are therefore void. If he's right he's right regardless, and vice versa.

Remember, Toni Nadal was never a top tennis player and he managed to impart enough lessons to nurture Rafael into one of the greatest players of all time. Richard Williams wasn't, either, nor Adolf Kacovsky - two guys who clearly knew something about tennis.

This is incredibly true, and a point that people overlook entirely too often. However, Gimelstob has proven over and over again that just about every time he opens his mouth, something stupid and baseless comes flying out. These comments don't do anything to reverse that trend.

[bjsnider]

Tossing around ad-hominem attacks on Gimelstob doesn't falsify his statement.

[single_handed_champion]

Originally Posted by smoledman

Murray can't hit the inside-in forehand to save his life.

Why would he want to hit it?? His backhand is one of the best in the world and he can go anywhere with it. Inside-ins are used by players who obviously prefer their forehands and want to keep their opponents honest by not going high-percentage crosscourt (inside-out) all the time.

Down the line from the forehand side of the court is a different matter. He is rather passive when he hits that (infrequently) but it has improved.

[ark_28]

[jrs]

Forget about what Justin Gimlstob said - what are the "elite" tennis commentators saying about Murray?

[ark_28]

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/...=G354&oId=MC10

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by ark_28

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/...=G354&oId=MC10

Golden post.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by ark_28

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/...=G354&oId=MC10

Lol...now I know why he doesn't consider Murray an elite player!