M
MurrayMyInspiration
Guest
Who's career would you rather have? Murray or Delpo?
Last edited by a moderator:
Definitely Murray, given the fact that he is almost guaranteed a slam in the near future, and will most likely end up with more than one slam. Murray also has more Masters titles, ATP 1000 tournaments, a gold medal (as opposed to a bronze) and a more impressive resume overall.
Even if he's probably going to win either the US Open or the Australian Open?Del Potro, sorry Andy 1 major is worth more than 0 majors
The money is what really counts, but he's also been way more consistent than Del Potro.Murray has a Ferrari and a lot more money and amongst the choices, you're splitting hairs. Del Po is a one trick pony so far, if he wins a another Major and Andy never wins one, that will be another question though.
Del Potro, sorry Andy 1 major is worth more than 0 majors
But Andy has chances to win more, DP was a one off
The sad thing is he may never be able to reach that level again.it wasn't necessarily a one off, his abilities went straight down hill a couple months after and hasn't been in good form until late. it's not like he was able to compete at the same high level in the 11 slams after the 09USO and failed to capture a single one, if that was the case, then yeah, call it a one off.
it wasn't necessarily a one off, his abilities went straight down hill a couple months after and hasn't been in good form until late. it's not like he was able to compete at the same high level in the 11 slams after the 09USO and failed to capture a single one, if that was the case, then yeah, call it a one off.
Also a lot more money.
How about comparatively for where they live?
To think 1 slam win and nothing else is worth more than 8 Masters, 4 slam finals, Olympic Gold, consistently higher ranking, many other titles, much better records vs all the top players is to take the meaning slams are everything to a whole new level, too extreme of one. Would you same people say Johansson has had a better career than Murray too. Probably not, the same people would probably laugh, yet Johansson technically might have a better career than Del Potro right now, a slam title plus a Masters title unlike Del Potro, and the same number of slam semis. Also a Davis Cup title. So if Del Potro's career is better than Murray's, that would mean Tomas Johansson's has to be considered too, LOL! While he is overall much less accomplishes than even Johansson or Del Potro at this point, would we even have say Gaston Gaudio has had a better career than Murray too. Mark Edmunston. Does everyone with a slam automaticaly have a better career.
To think 1 slam win and nothing else is worth more than 8 Masters, 4 slam finals, Olympic Gold, consistently higher ranking, many other titles, much better records vs all the top players is to take the meaning slams are everything to a whole new level, too extreme of one. Would you same people say Johansson has had a better career than Murray too. Probably not, the same people would probably laugh, yet Johansson technically might have a better career than Del Potro right now, a slam title plus a Masters title unlike Del Potro, and the same number of slam semis. Also a Davis Cup title. So if Del Potro's career is better than Murray's, that would mean Tomas Johansson's has to be considered too, LOL! While he is overall much less accomplishes than even Johansson or Del Potro at this point, would we even have say Gaston Gaudio has had a better career than Murray too. Mark Edmunston. Does everyone with a slam automaticaly have a better career.
Even if he's probably going to win either the US Open or the Australian Open?
Delpo also has a TMC final and 2 Davis Cup finals. It's not like the slam is the only thing he has that Murray does not.
And Del Potro lost 2 years of his career when he was in his prime and is only 23.[/QUOTE]
DC is an irrelevance as unlike any other tennis event (including OG) a player is wholly dependent on other people to do well in it.
Delpo did not 'lose 2 years' - he was out injured for 9 months. Murray's wrist injury wasn't as serious as Delpo's as it didn't require surgery but he was still unable to play for 5 months. Finally, Delpo will be 24 in a few weeks.
Thank you for clearing that up, Batz.Delpo also has a TMC final and 2 Davis Cup finals. It's not like the slam is the only thing he has that Murray does not.
And Del Potro lost 2 years of his career when he was in his prime and is only 23.[/QUOTE]
DC is an irrelevance as unlike any other tennis event (including OG) a player is wholly dependent on other people to do well in it.
Delpo did not 'lose 2 years' - he was out injured for 9 months. Murray's wrist injury wasn't as serious as Delpo's as it didn't require surgery but he was still unable to play for 5 months. Finally, Delpo will be 24 in a few weeks.
To think 1 slam win and nothing else is worth more than 8 Masters, 4 slam finals, Olympic Gold, consistently higher ranking, many other titles, much better records vs all the top players is to take the meaning slams are everything to a whole new level, too extreme of one. Would you same people say Johansson has had a better career than Murray too. Probably not, the same people would probably laugh, yet Johansson technically might have a better career than Del Potro right now, a slam title plus a Masters title unlike Del Potro, and the same number of slam semis. Also a Davis Cup title. So if Del Potro's career is better than Murray's, that would mean Tomas Johansson's has to be considered too, LOL! While he is overall much less accomplishes than even Johansson or Del Potro at this point, would we even have say Gaston Gaudio has had a better career than Murray too. Mark Edmunston. Does everyone with a slam automaticaly have a better career.
True, but in that same light, some of Murrays accomplishments are merely right place at right time, time of year etc...
Delpo also has a TMC final and 2 Davis Cup finals. It's not like the slam is the only thing he has that Murray does not.
And Del Potro lost 2 years of his career when he was in his prime and is only 23.[/QUOTE]
DC is an irrelevance as unlike any other tennis event (including OG) a player is wholly dependent on other people to do well in it.
Delpo did not 'lose 2 years' - he was out injured for 9 months. Murray's wrist injury wasn't as serious as Delpo's as it didn't require surgery but he was still unable to play for 5 months. Finally, Delpo will be 24 in a few weeks.
Yes. He lost 2 years. The year he was injured (2009) and the year he was coming back (2010). You don't think you perform the same way after a whole year without touching a racket, right? Not to mention his ranking dropped and he was facing top players in the first rounds.
And DC matters. If you're the number 4 player and you don't play a single match I agree that it's not relevant, but that wasn't Del Potro's case. For example in 2008 he won his both semi-finals matches against Russia to put Argentina in the final.
Haha, so Nadal was playing his best Tennis when DelPo beat him in 2009, right? Please.
Delpo's H2H against the top 4 is 8-29 btw. That's astonishingly bad and makes 2009 sound a bit like a fluke.
Everytime Nadal or Federer loses they're injured apparently. Del Potro trashed him 2-2-2. If he wasn't playing well it's not Del Potro's fault.
And of course his record is going to be bad if the first times they played each other Del Potro was a teenager and outisde the TOP 50. How is the H2H without those matches?? Not to mention some of them were in 2010 when he was coming back from the injury.
It's funny people picking Murray for the money. Delpo isn't struggling to make ends meet exactly you know...
If you pick Murray pick him for the M1000, slam finals or whatever, both guys have money to live without worries for a hundred years and are 25 or less.
Yes. He lost 2 years. The year he was injured in (2009) and the year he was coming back (2010). You don't think you perform the same way after a whole year without touching a racket, right? Not to mention his ranking dropped and he was facing top players in the first rounds.
And DC matters. If you're the number 4 player and you don't play a single match I agree that it's not relevant, but that wasn't Del Potro's case. For example in 2008 he won his both semi-finals matches against Russia to put Argentina in the final.
.
Delpo has made only $9.25 mil in prize money, and probably some more from endorsements. Sounds like more than it is... once you take out expenses, taxes, etc, let's say he has $5 mil saved. If he stops playing today, he has to make that money last many years. He will have enough to live on if he keeps a modest lifestyle, but to live like a star takes a lot more than that.
Murray has made $21.5 mil plus a lot more in endorsements. He probably has $15+ mil in the bank. There is a big difference in the lifestyle you can afford to keep for the rest of your life with $15 mil versus with $5 mil.
(Obviously my numbers are made up I have no idea what they have in the bank, but the point is that the marginal difference is significant.)
The Spade und der Stebe!none of the above. Spadea is "du bomb"
Andy's estimated wealth is £24m. That's like $38m.
He was injured in 2009? The year he won the USO and made the final of the WTF? Wow - just imagine how good he would have been if he wasn't injured that year.
He played the AO in 2010 and Japan 2010 - if that's 'not touching a racket for a whole year' then I'm a Dutchman.
I'm not saying that DC doesn't matter per se; it's a very prestigious event - I'm saying it can't be used to reflect one individual's superiority over another as in order to win a DC or even make a final, a player is 100% dependent on someone else.
Delpo has made only $9.25 mil in prize money, and probably some more from endorsements. Sounds like more than it is... once you take out expenses, taxes, etc, let's say he has $5 mil saved. If he stops playing today, he has to make that money last many years. He will have enough to live on if he keeps a modest lifestyle, but to live like a star takes a lot more than that.
Murray has made $21.5 mil plus a lot more in endorsements. He probably has $15+ mil in the bank. There is a big difference in the lifestyle you can afford to keep for the rest of your life with $15 mil versus with $5 mil.
(Obviously my numbers are made up I have no idea what they have in the bank, but the point is that the marginal difference is significant.)