Put Sir Andrew Barron Murray in the 2003-2009 era instead of Federer, how does he do?

aldeayeah said:

he'd lose even more often to Rafa lol

I'd expect nice matches against the likes of oldassi, roddick, safin, hewitt, nalby, davydenko though

Murrovic finals are a historic inevitability, of course

Click to expand...

RF-18 said:

Would win most of the HC slams, fails to win a couple here and there, might edge out a few wimbledons. I'd say option 3 in the poll.

Click to expand...

tudwell said:

I don’t think he’d win most of the hard court slams. More than one, yes, but not a ton of them. He’s always vulnerable to big hitters in the zone a la Verdasco, Cilic, Wawrinka (even before his Stanimal phase).

Click to expand...

Sysyphus said:

the totally serious answer is that he'd surely win a good deal less than Fred (duh), but more than the Orthodox Church of Federer would have you believe

Click to expand...

Sysyphus said:

the totally serious answer is that he'd surely win a good deal less than Fred (duh), but more than the Orthodox Church of Federer would have you believe

Click to expand...

PilotPete said:

He would do a lot worse in that era than 2016 and forward.

Click to expand...

Third Serve said:

That's the Holy Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Church of Federer, Council of 2003 to you!

Click to expand...

Poisoned Slice said:

''He'd'' is the answer that stands out to me.

Click to expand...

aldeayeah said:

I mean he did lose to Verdasco in AO 2009, that match was an epic itself, and this was close to peak Mury

Click to expand...

Kralingen said:

had some time on lunch break:

'10 - 2003
'11 - 2004
'12 - 2005
'13 - 2006
'14 - 2007
'15 - 2008
'16 - 2009

working off these assumptions - also assuming Murray gets Federer's draw... I don't believe he'd be able to keep #1 as long, but I really don't want to re-shuffle draws like that.

'03 - Murray gets to AO final but loses to Agassi most likely, could possibly win Wimbledon but likely loses to Roddick in the SF. IIRC he was good at the '10 YEC so could possibly win that.
0 Slams, 1 YEC. Roddick = 2 Slams (lol)
'04 - Murray gets to AO final and pulls it out vs. dead leg Safin in 5. Loses to Guga at FO, loses to Roddick at Wimbledon, loses to Agassi/Hewitt at US Open. 1 Slam. Roddick = 1 Slam
'05 - Murray loses to Safin in 5 in epic AO match, loses in FO, and finally beats Roddick/Hewitt at Wimbledon. Also wins US Open. 2 Slams. Roddick = 0 Slams.
'06 - Murray wins AO. Wimbledon is a toss-up - Nadal owned him on the grass but babydal in '06 wasn't that great. Could win USO but likely doesn't. 2 Slams. Roddick = 1 Slam (USO).
'07 - Murray doesn't win any Slams. However Roddick comes up short to Gonzo in '07 AO. Roddick's '07 USO QF voted greatest match of the decade as he triple bagels Murray with a golden set, but he comes up short to Djokovic in the final. Murray/Roddick = 0 Slams
'08 - Murray doesn't win anything, '15 AO form loses to '08 Djokovic as well. However he wins Olympic Gold. Murray/Roddick = 0 Slams
'09 - Wins YEC, Wimbledon is toss-up but have to go with Roddick bc he beat real-life Murray in Wimby '09. However he wasn't good enough to beat Nadal/Del Potro in AO/FO/USO.
Murray = 0 Slam, YEC, Roddick = 1 Slam


Murray total - 5 Slams. Roddick total - 5 Slams. Waiting for @NatF to tell me how wrong I am about peak Murray vs. Hewitt

Click to expand...

NatF said:

Think AO 2004 and USO 2005 are toss-ups at best. Think theoretical Fedless tour has a much more confident and better Arod at Wimbledon in 2005 as well.

Impossible to say really how this goes. He probably wins a few on consistency but not sure how many.

Click to expand...

Kralingen said:

yeah this is one where the implications are far more than just a different player in the draw, we're looking at different rankings, probably more diverse challengers, and of course a different Roddick and Hewitt as well.

Another thing to note here is I think Murray's playstyle would be a lot closer to the USO '08 form he had than the slow court stuff he was playing in the mid- '10s. I really don't think any player except maybe Nadal would play the same.

Click to expand...

RF-18 said:

Would win most of the HC slams, fails to win a couple here and there, might edge out a few wimbledons. I'd say option 3 in the poll.

Click to expand...

ForehandRF said:

The serious answer would be that Murray would be a different player without the battles against Fedalovic.One cannot assume that he would have the same level that he actually had in the actual timeline because things would be much different.Just my 2 cents

Click to expand...

Kralingen said:

yeah this is one where the implications are far more than just a different player in the draw, we're looking at different rankings, probably more diverse challengers, and of course a different Roddick and Hewitt as well.

Another thing to note here is I think Murray's playstyle would be a lot closer to the USO '08 form he had than the slow court stuff he was playing in the mid- '10s. I really don't think any player except maybe Nadal would play the same.

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

He only has 1 HC slam in his entire career and underperformed at the USO, but sure, he wins most of them

Click to expand...

RF-18 said:

He is not gonna play Djokovic and Federer now. He is gonna be up against players he is better than, and with his consistency in his prime he will put himself in alot of chances to win. I'm favouring Murray here but like I said I don't see him winning like Federer did but he is gonna win his fair share of slams, in the vicinity of 6-8.

Click to expand...

RF-18 said:

He is not gonna play Djokovic and Federer now. He is gonna be up against players he is better than, and with his consistency in his prime he will put himself in alot of chances to win. I'm favouring Murray here but like I said I don't see him winning like Federer did but he is gonna win his fair share of slams, in the vicinity of 6-8.

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

2011 in 2005:

- Wimb: wins it. Hewitt and Roddick were unconvincing.

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

2013 in 2007:
- AO: wins it.

Click to expand...

Sysyphus said:

there is no question in my mind that he would

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

Let's say Murray is born in 1981 like Federer. So it's 2008-2016 Murray in 2002-2010.

2008 in 2002: don't think he's a slam contender before the USO and at the USO he loses to PETE anyway.

2009 in 2003: only chance is at Wimb where I think Roddick beats him.

2010 in 2004:

- AO: 50/50. Does he beat Hewitt and Nalbandian? We'll never know
- FO: nope
- Wimb: loses to Roddick again
- USO: loses to Agassi if he gets that far.

2011 in 2005:

- AO: loses to Safin
- FO: nope
- Wimb: wins it. Hewitt and Roddick were unconvincing.
- USO: doesn't win it, IMO. Probably goes down to Hewitt.

2012 in 2006:

- AO: wins it
- FO: nope
- Wimb: 50/50. Yes, 2006 Nadal wasn't yet that good, but he still gave peak Fed a pretty good challenge and Murray isn't a tougher match-up for Nadal on grass than peak Fed is.
- USO: probably wins it, but if he plays against Blake like he did against Cilic, Blake may make him pay. So he's not a guaranteed winner.

2013 in 2007:
- AO: wins it.
- FO: nope
- Wimb: loses to Nadal
- USO: loses to Roddick

2014 in 2008: wins 0 slams. Murray was horrible that year.

2015 in 2009:
- AO: loses to Nadal
- FO: loses to Delpo, IMO.
- Wimb: loses to Roddick
- USO: loses to someone

2016 in 2010:
- AO: 50/50. Could go down to Davydenko
- FO: nope
- Wimb: loses to Nadal
- USO: loses to someone

So could win up to 5-6 slams, but that's about it.

Click to expand...

Third Serve said:

As for me, let's say Sir Andeh is born in a lowly manger within the rolling hills of Scotland in 1981, mirroring JesusFed's birthdate. His development as a player would roughly correlate to something like this:

Let's throw in his 2008 season btw because he had some pretty good results there. I guess we have to stretch the period to 2002-2010 to best reflect Murray's prime years.

2008 season --> 2002
2009 --> 2003
2010 --> 2004
2011 --> 2005
2012 --> 2006
2013 --> 2007
2014 --> 2008
2015 --> 2009
2016 --> 2010

That being said, we have to keep in mind some of the dynamics because taking someone like Federer out of the equation is gonna have some definite repercussions with regards to his generation... specifically Roddick. Do we think Roddick would turn in such mediocre performances like Wimbledon 2005 F or AO 2007 SF if he had to play anyone but Federer? There was a mental aspect there and that would probably be erased in this timeline. Also, the draws would be shuffled around a bit because I think Murray is gonna be fluctuating from #1 to #2 to #3 and back again more than Federer did, but for the sake of readability, let's assume Muzz gets Fed's draws... exactly the way they went. I also think Murray would keep his aggressive playstyle from the 2008-2009 years because it'd benefit him more in this era of relatively quicker courts. Who knows how players would deal with him then?

Spoiler

2002: Murray snags some Masters tournaments and has competent showings at Wimbledon, the US Open, and the Masters Cup, but I don't think he wins any of those. I think we're looking at a top 5-6 kind of season. The same guys win the Slams this year.

Johansson - Costa - Hewitt - Sampras - Hewitt

2003: Like 2002, he grabs some Masters, and he should have a good Wimbledon run though I think his run would end against Roddick in the semifinals. No Slam wins. Without Federer to occupy one of the top spots, I feel pretty confident that Murray would maintain his top 5-6 ranking. Slam and YEC distribution:

Agassi - Ferrero - Roddick - Roddick - Agassi

2004: Basically like 2003. He has some good runs at the AO and Wimbledon (and he even has an outside chance at winning the former should he navigate past Hewitt and Nalbandian in the earlier rounds) Probably maintains his ranking and also poses a definite threat at the YEC and possibly the Olympics as well. Roddick probably ends up being the top dog with Hewitt, Safin, and Agassi occupying the next three slots in some order.

Hewitt (or possibly Nalbandian or Murray but I don't trust Nalby at Slam-level and Murray isn't quite there yet) - Gaudio - Roddick - Agassi - Safin (or Murray or Hewitt)

2005: Murray brings up his Slam performance a good bit and remains pretty consistent across all of them. I don't think he wins any, but his best chance would be at Wimbledon where Roddick wasn't particularly good. However, as I mentioned before, Roddick might go into that final with a different mentality because, y'know, he would likely be the 2-time defending champion with no Federer in the way. I think Murray gets up to about #4 in the ranking and Roddick and Nadal split weeks at #1 throughout the year. If Hewitt wins Wimbledon 2005, though, things become interesting.

Safin - Nadal - Roddick (or Hewitt if Roddick remains exactly like he was in the real 2005 final) - Hewitt - Nalbandian

2006: This would be Murray's real breakout year as well as his absolute best season by my estimate. In his 2012 form, he probably wins the AO with its lackluster draw, has a solid chance at taking Wimbledon, and a decent chance at the US Open. I think he ends the year #1 unless Nadal wins Wimbledon, in which case it'd be pretty close between them. The US Open is interesting because the wind affected much of the 2012 final which made Murray look... not that great, but then again, Roddick only played like a couple of good sets in the 2006 final.

Murray - Nadal - Murray (or Nadal) - Murray (or Roddick) - idk lol... possibly even Nadal

2007: Murray has another solid year here. I'd back him to win the AO again, but this time Nadal in his 2007 form takes Wimbledon and either Roddick or Djokovic win the US Open. Because Nadal seems poised to take the Channel Slam here, I think Murray would slip to #2 in the rankings. YEC is interesting as usual.

Murray - Nadal - Nadal - Djokovic (or Roddick) - idk

2008: Murray declines here, assuming injuries strike him in this universe like they did in 2014 in ours. Nadal has an excellent season, Djokovic breaks through, and Murray gets shifted to the sidelines. He could still reach QFs and possibly SFs at the Slams but he shouldn't be winning anything more than small titles here in his condition. He likely drops to #8-10 in the rankings. The other interesting thing is that the absence of Federer basically clears the way for Djokovic to win the US Open and possibly challenge Nadal for the #1 spot. However, I think Nadal would still rack up enough points to secure the YE-#1.

Djokovic - Nadal - Nadal - Djokovic (or Nadal - not too likely but still) - Djokovic

2009: Murray improves, but I don't think it's enough to win any of the Slams although he could make deep runs at AO, RG, and Wimbledon. He should also be able to snag a Masters or two although that'll be difficult in this strong season. He picks himself back up to like #5 (Delpo and Roddick would greatly benefit from the absence of Federer and I think they - along with Djokovic and Nadal - would occupy the top four spots in the rankings)

Nadal - Del Potro (or Soderling) - Roddick - Del Potro - Davydenko

2010: Murray improves even more (at this point he's in his 2016 form) but Nadal would make it very difficult for him to compete for the #1 ranking. Murray probably takes the AO and the WTF as well as some HC Masters and has an outside shot at Wimbledon (2010 Murray gave Nadal a semi-tough fight) but overall, I see Nadal ending up as the YE-#1 and Murray the #2. But perhaps the YE-#1 will be so far out of reach for Murray that he might not go to such extreme lengths to reach what would be a lost cause. As such, maybe he'll stay clear of the injuries that affected him in 2017.

Murray - Nadal - Nadal (or Murray) - Nadal - Murray

In the end, here's what I think everyone gets here:

Nadal: 3-5 YE-#1s, probably looking at way more weeks, 9-12 Slams, several Masters, a shot at the 2006 YEC
Murray: 1 YE-#1, definitely gets plenty of weeks in 2006 and 2007, 3-6 Slams, 1-2 YECs, several Masters
Roddick: 2 YE-#1s, pretty much spends the last third of 2003, all of 2004, and the first half of 2005 as #1, 4-6 Slams, not too many Masters
Djokovic: Outside chance to get weeks at #1 in 2008, 2 Slams, 1 YEC, a couple of Masters
Hewitt: 1 YE-#1, same weeks as before but he could get some in 2005 depending on Wimbledon, 3-4 Slams, 1-2 YEC, a couple of Masters
Agassi: some weeks in 2002 and 2003, same as usual, 2 Slams, 1 YEC, a couple of Masters
Del Potro: 1-2 Slams which could even net him some weeks at #1 in 2009

Overall, it'd be an interesting time

Click to expand...

abmk said:

you do realise Djokovic was there prominently so in USO 07, AO 08, USO 08 and USO 09 (final, winner, semi, semi)?

Click to expand...

RF-18 said:

Mostly referring to period without them.

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

So you think Murray wins 8 slams to Fed's 9?

Bwahahaha

Click to expand...

RF-18 said:

?

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

You said the period without them.

Click to expand...

mike danny said:

2016 Murray wasn't convincing at the AO. He could realistically go down to Davydenko if he were in Federer's place assuming Davy doesn't have the same kind of collapse he actually did in reality. Davy probably shouldn't because he mostly had a mental block against Federer.

Click to expand...