Which Andy's career would you rather have?

[joeri888]

Roddick obv. Murray vs. Gaudio is hard, but this is easy. It's like asking which is bigger, Olympic gold or a slam, world no 1 and ye no 1

[sonicare]

How is murray a better player than roddick?

[roberttennis54]

Originally Posted by sonicare

How is murray a better player than roddick?

This Roddick is a better player on grass and on faster hard courts. He also has the better career.

[clayman2000]

Originally Posted by sonicare

How is murray a better player than roddick?

Andy Murray has made the semis in 7 of the last 8 majors, and QF in all of those. The 7 semis losses were all to either Rafa, Novak and Djokovic, and his loss at RG this year was to Ferrer, who is top 4 on clay.

No offence to Andy, but Andy never had consistency like that, and even in his prime was not on the level of the big 3.

Murray has 8 Masters, and Olympic Gold, all in an era where he has to face the likes of Fed, Rafa and Novak. He will finish this season in the top 4 for the 5th straight year.

[SStrikerR]

I want babolat Barry's career since he's so good at tennis he can just perfect a stroke at will.

[roberttennis54]

Originally Posted by clayman2000

Andy Murray has made the semis in 7 of the last 8 majors, and QF in all of those. The 7 semis losses were all to either Rafa, Novak and Djokovic, and his loss at RG this year was to Ferrer, who is top 4 on clay.

No offence to Andy, but Andy never had consistency like that, and even in his prime was not on the level of the big 3.

Murray has 8 Masters, and Olympic Gold, all in an era where he has to face the likes of Fed, Rafa and Novak. He will finish this season in the top 4 for the 5th straight year.

Murray is a more consistent player, but he is not the threat that Roddick is at slams. You can play a great match against Roddick and lose. It's easier to face Murray at performing well than it is Roddick.

[smoledman]

The guy with the slam and YE #1.

[wilkinru]

Considering earnings increasing these days for the top players, Murray.

It's all about the upside there. Roddick's is done.

SStrikerR well you know

[zam88]

roddick seems to have a much more dynamic personality that will translate into him being able to comment on tennis if he wants (when mcenroe no longer wants to) and to be a media person for years to come.

I don't get any sense of personality with Murray.

Tennis-wise, I expect Murray to have accomplished more when it is all said and done... and possibly earn more money.

but Roddick's nice looks and robust personality should be worth more long term.

oh, and i'd pay really good money just to motorboat his wife's cans

[smoledman]

Originally Posted by zam88

roddick seems to have a much more dynamic personality that will translate into him being able to comment on tennis if he wants (when mcenroe no longer wants to) and to be a media person for years to come.

I don't get any sense of personality with Murray.

Tennis-wise, I expect Murray to have accomplished more when it is all said and done... and possibly earn more money.

but Roddick's nice looks and robust personality should be worth more long term.

oh, and i'd pay really good money just to motorboat his wife's cans

Please define exactly what that means...

[sonicare]

Originally Posted by clayman2000

Andy Murray has made the semis in 7 of the last 8 majors, and QF in all of those. The 7 semis losses were all to either Rafa, Novak and Djokovic, and his loss at RG this year was to Ferrer, who is top 4 on clay.

No offence to Andy, but Andy never had consistency like that, and even in his prime was not on the level of the big 3.

Murray has 8 Masters, and Olympic Gold, all in an era where he has to face the likes of Fed, Rafa and Novak. He will finish this season in the top 4 for the 5th straight year.

Roddick was taking sets off peak roger in slam finals. Same cannot be said of murray.

Frankly, I just dont see how murray is a better player than roddick.

[Fedex]

Originally Posted by Agassifan

Murray is the better player, but Roddick has had better results (so far). 1-5 > 0-3. Also, world #1.

This about sums it up.

[nhat8121]

Originally Posted by AnotherTennisProdigy

Roddick. Murray has the better career, but it sounds more impressive when you say to your friends "I won the U.S. Open!" than "I won a lot of Masters 1000 tournaments!".

this is true if your friends know nothing about tennis.

[90's Clay]

THe problem with Murray is even though he is a better overall player then Roddick, he still can't manage to even win a slam.

I wouldn't want to be known as the guy who can win everything in sight except for the most important big ones.

Roddick, while less talented then Murray, at least managed to bring the good to Fed in slams more then Murray ever has.

But then again... Roddick was projected to win a lot too.. Yet failed miserably slam wise.

[FD3S]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

THe problem with Murray is even though he is a better overall player then Roddick, he still can't manage to even win a slam.

I wouldn't want to be known as the guy who can win everything in sight except for the most important big ones.

Roddick, while less talented then Murray, at least managed to bring the good to Fed in slams more then Murray ever has.

But then again... Roddick was projected to win a lot too.. Yet failed miserably slam wise.

In all fairness, a lot of the people projecting Roddick to win a lot pretty went "OMG huge serve/forehand this guy's IT" without taking into consideration... well, a crapload of other factors. I think Roddick had talent, but the hype he was getting way back when was excessive.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by sonicare

Roddick was taking sets off peak roger in slam finals. Same cannot be said of murray.

Murray never played peak Fed in a Slam final but he did beat him at 2006 Cincinnati.

Originally Posted by sonicare

Frankly, I just dont see how murray is a better player than roddick.

It's a difficult one to quantify and Roddick does have the Slam and world #1 to his name which Murray has yet to achieve. On the other hand Murray is 9-8 in his matchup against Federer, the most consistent world #1 player for the last decade, while Roddick is only 3-21. Plus Murray is 8-3 v Roddick in their own matchup.

[ledwix]

Originally Posted by wilkinru

Considering earnings increasing these days for the top players, Murray.

It's all about the upside there. Roddick's is done.

But the top players play not for the money but to win. After all, what can you do for your family with 40 mil that you can't also do with 20 mil?

[okdude1992]

no question, as of right now. roddick was number 1 and has a slam. as well as more runner up appearances.

murray still has time, but right now roddicks career>>> murrays

[tudwell]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

Neither?????


Both failed to live up to their billing at the slams.. I wouldn't want that tied to my back the rest of my life. The money would be nice of course though. But you can make a killing just going far in tournaments without winning any of them so that means nothing

You realize that, in the grand scheme of things, both Andys have done phenomenally well, right? They're incredibly talented tennis players who both played elite level tennis for years and competed for some of the biggest titles on the tour. Why do you even watch tennis if you hate everybody who plays the game now?