Posters have already started with the old "easy draw"..

[Tennis_Maestro]

...nonsense ... with as far as Murray's Grandslam triumph was concerned.

Originally Posted by underground

Djokovic was the only worthy opponent in the whole USO though. Think again and look at the pathetic joke draw Murray got, don't forget about the wind...

Seen a lot of this type of drivel ^ flying around the forum in troll fashion.

It's fair you have an opinion and are able to share it so I am inviting people to share it in this thread. Let's disect Murray's draw...

Round 3: Feliciano Lopez on a medium pace hard-court, never easy.
Round 4: Raonic, arguably the best server in the World ATM only rivalled by Isner and Federer.
Quarter Finals: Cilic, consistently reaches the second week of Grand-slams and is certainly no slouch.
Semi Finals: Berdych, knocked the arguably GOAT player out in the Quarter finals and had been serving up bombs and making blistering forehands.
Final: Djokovic, hadn't lost on a hard-court in a slam since 2010 to Nadal in the final. 4 Grandslams ago.

There's my view. What's yours? I would love people to backup their statement about it being a supposed cake walk of a draw. So let's have it...

[Cup8489]

Yeah, the poster you quoted doesn't know jack. his final 4 opponents were all dangerous players. Nadal's draw in 2010 was much easier.

[Tennis_Maestro]

Originally Posted by Cup8489

Yeah, the poster you quoted doesn't know jack. his final 4 opponents were all dangerous players. Nadal's draw in 2010 was much easier.

He's not the only one that's started this nonsense though.

[TheF1Bob]

LOL at your imaginative butthurt.

I'm impressed.

[Danny_G13]

I don't agree there is an easy draw.

Ask Rosol/Nadal.

End of the day to win a slam you have to beat world class players - by the end of it you have to overcome top 10 seeds and higher.

I just find it absurd and insulting to every winner of a slam that there's any suggestion ANY of them ever got an easy draw.

No such thing - they all worked bloody hard, played hard opponents and earned/deserved their slams. And that includes Andy Murray.

[Fedex]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Maestro

...nonsense ... with as far as Murray's Grandslam triumph was concerned.

Seen a lot of this type of drivel ^ flying around the forum in troll fashion.

It's fair you have an opinion and are able to share it so I am inviting people to share it in this thread. Let's disect Murray's draw...

Round 3: Feliciano Lopez on a medium pace hard-court, never easy.
Round 4: Raonic, arguably the best server in the World ATM only rivalled by Isner and Federer.
Quarter Finals: Cilic, consistently reaches the second week of Grand-slams and is certainly no slouch.
Semi Finals: Berdych, knocked the arguably GOAT player out in the Quarter finals and had been serving up bombs and making blistering forehands.
Final: Djokovic, hadn't lost on a hard-court in a slam since 2010 to Nadal in the final. 4 Grandslams ago.

There's my view. What's yours? I would love people to backup their statement about it being a supposed cake walk of a draw. So let's have it...

Murray, for once, had a scheduling advantage starting one day earlier than Djokovic, however, Murray undoubtedly had a harder draw and two of Djokovic's possible tough opponents Wawrinka retired injured and Ferrer was exhausted after the Tipsarevic marathon.
Murray played 5 hours more tennis than Djokovic leading up to the final. Djokovic had one days less rest.
All things considering, you could say they started the final pretty even although the commentators were saying as the match progressed that Murray's extra 5 hours play was likely to take it's toll.
Fortunately for Murray just not in time.
It's interesting that Murray was hobbling badly right after winning match point.
How close was he to the precipice?

[MasturB]

Not gonna lie though,

While I give big props to Murray for not collapsing and winning his first major yesterday...

He didn't have to do what Djokovic and Delpo had to do, which was go through the Nadal-Federer, Federer-Nadal train to win.

Delpo blew Nadal off the court in 09 and beat Fed in 5 at 2009 USO. Yea 2009 Nadal wasn't the same post-Roland Garros but I still think it was an accomplishment to beat Fed who was at a huge confidence high after finally winning RG, then beating Pete's record at Wimby... if Fed had won that year, he would've been playing for the Roger Slam at AO '10.

Nole beat Roger and Rafa at USO last year. He survived Murray 1.5 and Rafa-Lite at AO this year.

[BigServer1]

It wasn't an easy draw, and he beat the defending champ...Not sure what else people want.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by Fedex

Murray, for once, had a scheduling advantage starting one day earlier than Djokovic, however, Murray undoubtedly had a harder draw and two of Djokovic's possible tough opponents Wawrinka retired injured and Ferrer was exhausted after the Tipsarevic marathon.

Well, if Dodig, Raonic, Cilic and Berdych/Federer are considered 'easy draws', I wonder who this guy would consider to be 'tough' opponents?

Originally Posted by Fedex

Murray played 5 hours more tennis than Djokovic leading up to the final. Djokovic had one days less rest.
All things considering, you could say they started the final pretty even although the commentators were saying as the match progressed that Murray's extra 5 hours play was likely to take it's toll.
Fortunately for Murray just not in time.
It's interesting that Murray was hobbling badly right after winning match point.
How close was he to the precipice?

Djokovic played less tennis than Murray in the run-up to the final and yet he was the one, I think, who cracked first physically. Murray was clearly tired and cramping too at the end but he held up better which seems to be an encouraging sign of improved physical and mental toughness on his part.

[90's Clay]

It was an easy draw under the circumstances. Tornado-like conditions vs. Berdych makes it a god-send for Murray.. When you're a pusher like Murray you are going to have a huge advantage vs a guy who tosses his serve high as hell, relies on big hitting, and precision to win points like Berdych.

Id like to see that match without those BULLCRAP conditions. I think the result would have been much different.. Djoker-Ferrer didn't have to play on it.. Why they should Berdych-Murray have to?


Not to mention, he avoids the 2 of the 3 other top players.. Murray had it pretty easy outside of Nole in the finals. Then he had absolute chokers like Cilic etc. to contend with. Nothing like Djoker had to contend with last year at the USO when he won.

And also a big luck thing for Murray, Djoker ended up getting cramps late in the match

[batz]

Originally Posted by MasturB

Not gonna lie though,

While I give big props to Murray for not collapsing and winning his first major yesterday...

He didn't have to do what Djokovic and Delpo had to do, which was go through the Nadal-Federer, Federer-Nadal train to win.

Delpo blew Nadal off the court in 09 and beat Fed in 5 at 2009 USO. Yea 2009 Nadal wasn't the same post-Roland Garros but I still think it was an accomplishment to beat Fed who was at a huge confidence high after finally winning RG, then beating Pete's record at Wimby... if Fed had won that year, he would've been playing for the Roger Slam at AO '10.

Nole beat Roger and Rafa at USO last year. He survived Murray 1.5 and Rafa-Lite at AO this year.

Nole didn't have to play both Roger and Rafa to win his first slam - Rafa only had to beat Roger, and don't even ask who Roger beat to win his first slam.

Why must Murray beat Roger and Rafa to win his 1st?

[rainingaces]

I think its plain to see his draw was not a easy one, his ozzie open draw was much easier so was wimbly. Without the tornado though murrays chances wouldnt look as good so the guy has a point. Berdych and nole play more attacking tennis and murrays a ball retriver.

[kishnabe]

Murray had the second hardest draw....if you start looking from the first day.

Raonic, Lopez, Clic/Tsonga, Federer/Berdych, Djokovic/Ferrer/DelPotro!

[Nathaniel_Near]

Ahahahahaha.

Murray had to beat a bunch of really good players to win his Major, and then Nole in the final. He navigated a tough draw in my opinion, so well done to him.

[Emet74]

i wrote sth to that effect in another thread but I didn't mean it the way you seem to have taken it. Murray has fallen in the SF or F stage multiple times over these past few years in GS's against the other top three playing at/near their best.

All I meant is that this tournament's draw of Berdych / a diminished Djoko compared to last year was relatively easier as compared to some of Murray's FORMER draws, not that it wasn't hard enough to be worthy of a slam, or that it was easier than lots of draws the other top 3 have had over the years.

Murray's record speaks for itself and no doubt he's a worthy slam winner and may have won earlier had he not faced some super-tough competition in late rounds over the years.

[Tennis_Maestro]

Originally Posted by rainingaces

I think its plain to see his draw was not a easy one, his ozzie open draw was much easier so was wimbly. Without the tornado though murrays chances wouldnt look as good so the guy has a point. Berdych and nole play more attacking tennis and murrays a ball retriver.

Sorry this is so much of a cliched view and myth, I cannot take this anaylsis seriously because of it.

If you watched the match with one eye open you would have clearly seen that yes there were points where Murray was hustling, harrying and chasing everything down to then counter punch Djokovic, but there were also quite any moments during those long exchanges where Murray upped the anti and indeed took the initiative by stepping up with his inside out forehand.

Murray had never been as aggressive in a final as he had been yesterday, Djokovic asked him all the questions and he came up with all the answers. @ two sets up Murray became a little tight and nervous as expected and started to revert back to his default setting of playing it safe and being consistent. After that 3rd set and particularly the 4th however, the blokes stepped it back up to the controlled aggressive style.

Murray actually played aggressively on the big points and that was the key for me, he was outlasting his opponent throughout middle parts of games and winning rallies, but if you recap, you'll note he actually play aggressive on every crucial point.

Also, Djokovic is less of a retriever than Murray? That's an absurd statement, both player's have proven over the years they are counter punchers who work their opponent into submission. Djokovic's tennis is to keep the ball deep consistently moving his opponent left to right over the court even when he (Djokovic) is being made to chase the ball. (Its called offensive defence) once the player is struggling and hits a shallow shot, that is when Novak steps in and bam, lays the winner. Much like Murray. Both counter-punchers, with both, the ability to be aggressive. All this pusher crap is a product of rubbish myths.

[Tennis_Maestro]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

It was an easy draw under the circumstances. Tornado-like conditions vs. Berdych makes it a god-send for Murray.. When you're a pusher like Murray you are going to have a huge advantage vs a guy who tosses his serve high as hell, relies on big hitting, and precision to win points like Berdych.

Id like to see that match without those BULLCRAP conditions. I think the result would have been much different.. Djoker-Ferrer didn't have to play on it.. Why they should Berdych-Murray have to?


Not to mention, he avoids the 2 of the 3 other top players.. Murray had it pretty easy outside of Nole in the finals. Then he had absolute chokers like Cilic etc. to contend with. Nothing like Djoker had to contend with last year at the USO when he won.

And also a big luck thing for Murray, Djoker ended up getting cramps late in the match

What makes you feel Berdych under non-windy conditions would have beaten Murray on a hardcourt best of 5 grandslam match?

Clay = Murray's worst surface and Berdych's only beats Murray on clay.

[Mainad]

Originally Posted by 90's Clay

And also a big luck thing for Murray, Djoker ended up getting cramps late in the match

But surely you must know by now that Murray wins ALL of his matches by sheer luck! He has no skills or abilities. He just relies on his opponents either being tired or injured or both tired and injured or bothered by the wind or tanking the match because they just couldn't be arsed!

He's won 24 titles including 1 Slam, 1 Olympic gold medal amd 8 Masters tournaments because in every case his opponents were either one or all of the above.

Murray must be the luckiest guy in the entire history of the planet!

[Russeljones]

Originally Posted by Tennis_Maestro

...nonsense ... with as far as Murray's Grandslam triumph was concerned.



Seen a lot of this type of drivel ^ flying around the forum in troll fashion.

It's fair you have an opinion and are able to share it so I am inviting people to share it in this thread. Let's disect Murray's draw...

Round 3: Feliciano Lopez on a medium pace hard-court, never easy.
Round 4: Raonic, arguably the best server in the World ATM only rivalled by Isner and Federer.
Quarter Finals: Cilic, consistently reaches the second week of Grand-slams and is certainly no slouch.
Semi Finals: Berdych, knocked the arguably GOAT player out in the Quarter finals and had been serving up bombs and making blistering forehands.
Final: Djokovic, hadn't lost on a hard-court in a slam since 2010 to Nadal in the final. 4 Grandslams ago.

There's my view. What's yours? I would love people to backup their statement about it being a supposed cake walk of a draw. So let's have it...

Didn't have to play against 2 of the top 4. Why argue about it, you're just setting yourself up for a world of aggravation,

[rajah84]

Originally Posted by MasturB

Not gonna lie though,

While I give big props to Murray for not collapsing and winning his first major yesterday...

He didn't have to do what Djokovic and Delpo had to do, which was go through the Nadal-Federer, Federer-Nadal train to win.

Delpo blew Nadal off the court in 09 and beat Fed in 5 at 2009 USO. Yea 2009 Nadal wasn't the same post-Roland Garros but I still think it was an accomplishment to beat Fed who was at a huge confidence high after finally winning RG, then beating Pete's record at Wimby... if Fed had won that year, he would've been playing for the Roger Slam at AO '10.

Nole beat Roger and Rafa at USO last year. He survived Murray 1.5 and Rafa-Lite at AO this year.

This is an interesting way of evaluating the worthiness of slam victories given you're a Federer fan. Roger was piling up slams before Rafa came into stride. His draw's were as comical as anything we see today. Did Roger play Nadal to win RG? Roger's career is filled with cake walk draws and weak competitors. Nadal, Kiefer, Haas, Davydenko, Agassi, were some of a very small group of players who challenged Roger regardless of how well he was playing. The rest were content to play him.