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

Tennis_Maestro

Tennis_Maestro

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

underground said:
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...
Click to expand...

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

Cup8489

G.O.A.T.
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.
 
D

Danny_G13

Rookie
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

Fedex

Legend
Tennis_Maestro said:
...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...
Click to expand...

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

MasturB

Legend
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.
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
Fedex said:
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.
Click to expand...

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

Fedex said:
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?
Click to expand...

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

90's Clay

Banned
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

batz

G.O.A.T.
MasturB said:
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.
Click to expand...


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?
 
R

rainingaces

Legend
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

kishnabe

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

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

Nathaniel_Near

Guest
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.
 
E

Emet74

Professional
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

Tennis_Maestro

Banned
rainingaces said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
Tennis_Maestro

Tennis_Maestro

Banned
90's Clay said:
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
Click to expand...

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

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

Mainad

Bionic Poster
90's Clay said:
And also a big luck thing for Murray, Djoker ended up getting cramps late in the match
Click to expand...

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

Russeljones

Talk Tennis Guru
Tennis_Maestro said:
...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...
Click to expand...

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,
 
R

rajah84

Semi-Pro
MasturB said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
T

Tammo

Banned
Tennis_Maestro said:
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...
Click to expand...

Rnd 3 Murray and Lopez didn't play real great TBH
Rnd 4 Murray played okay, but got lucky that Raonic didn't capitalize on his BP chances
Quarter cilic has gotten to 3 4th round in the past 2 years, less than .500
semis T berd only hit 7 aces and hit 8 more winners than Murray
Djoko obviously didnt like the wind, nad was slicing so many shots, got those 2 sets by murray choke.
 
Tennis_Maestro

Tennis_Maestro

Banned
Russeljones said:
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,
Click to expand...

I don't see this as an argument, more a debate.

Murray has beaten Nadal in Hardcourt slams, a US Open to note. With the way he was playing and the confidence he had been showing, I doubt there'd have been much problem for him on that one. Ofcourse, the girls who have a crush on him and the guys that idolise him and wish they could be him will protest that.

Federer @ a slam would have been difficult, I admit that, but if he beat the guy that knocked him out, Berdych, then surely he should be considered a worthy opponent? Remember Berdych is a slam finalist.

If we want to go on that ridiculously technical basis, then we would have to put into question Federer's consideration as the GOAT. He won the French Open beating none of the top 4 @ the time. (Unsure if Del Potro snuck 4 @ the time and even so I am not prepared to say Del Potro is truly credible on clay)
 
Last edited:
Tennis_Maestro

Tennis_Maestro

Banned
Tammo said:
Rnd 3 Murray and Lopez didn't play real great TBH
Rnd 4 Murray played okay, but got lucky that Raonic didn't capitalize on his BP chances
Quarter cilic has gotten to 3 4th round in the past 2 years, less than .500
semis T berd only hit 7 aces and hit 8 more winners than Murray
Djoko obviously didnt like the wind, nad was slicing so many shots, got those 2 sets by murray choke.
Click to expand...

Rnd 3 Murray and Lopez didn't play real great TBH

I'll take that, although by his standards, it wasn't bad.

Rnd 4 Murray played okay, but got lucky that Raonic didn't capitalize on his BP chances

^ Or from a more objective and impartial stand point, (Granted you actually did watch the match and not jus check the stats on bps after it was complete) Murray came up with big serves and clutch big forehands when under threat.

If you watched that match properly, you;d have seen that was actually one of his performances of the tournament.

semis T berd only hit 7 aces and hit 8 more winners than Murray

What does this have to do with the price of rice? The better player is only one that can mount aces and winners? Murray's a point constructor and manoeuvres his players over the court by keeping a good length and then capitalizing when the player hits a ball shallow in the court. Aces and winners doesn't mean he was the better player.

Djoko obviously didnt like the wind, nad was slicing so many shots, got those 2 sets by murray choke.

The wind was much apparent for large portions of the first set. Barely played a role in the second and by the 3rd it was non-existent. There was no choke from Murray in the 3rd set, or 4th, he merely played less aggressively and paid the price as a reuslt.
 
MasturB

MasturB

Legend
batz said:
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?
Click to expand...

I probably didn't thoroughly explain what I meant to say.

He didn't have to beat Djokovic 2.0/Federer/Nadal in 2/3 order to win a slam.

Yeah he beat Nole and Fed at Olympics. But he has not yet run the gauntlet yet in a slam where everyone gives a damn.

Just like Nole has to beat Rafa on his home court at Roland Garros, and Federer on his territory at Wimby to further solidify his greatness. Federer may never beat Nadal at Roland Garros either, but he still has his trophy during the peak of Nadal's clay dominance.

Would Murray even have made it to Wimby finals if he had to play Rafa instead of Tsonga in semis? We don't know that. But in the chances he's had, he couldn't get past Roddick either a few years ago, and struggled to take a set off Ralph the last two years.

Just as people kind of put an asterisk on Fed's 2009 Roland Garros for it not coming against Rafa, I don't see why we can't scrutinize Murray as well.

Again, props for him winning the trophy because at the end of the day it's still a slam. But let's not pretend he finally overcame the mental obstacle of outplaying the best to reach the top. The reason he hired Lendl was because he COULDN'T get over the hump of Rafa/Federer/Djokovic.
 
Last edited:
Tennis_Maestro

Tennis_Maestro

Banned
Fedex said:
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?
Click to expand...

Scheduling played no factor. Novak only play 3 sets in every single match up until the Ferrer one. Where he played 1 set in one day and then the next 3 on the following day. So that's quashed.

Murray was hobbling badly because he lost his nail when running up for a drop-shot in the game where he was serving out for it. He spoke of this in the SkySports (British Sports Broadcasting channel) half an hour or so after the match.
 
MasturB

MasturB

Legend
And yeah, Nole already had won 2 Aussie Slams before he finally ran the gauntlet, but that's what separated Nole 1.0 vs. Nole 2.0

The fact that he not only destroyed Nadal on clay, he owned him (except at Roland Garros where he has yet to beat him).

I'd say Nole checked off beating Roger at Roland Garros this year as one of his accomplishments with Fed being a former FO champion and 4 time finalist. We don't view Fed as a great clay courter because he's been in Nadal's shadow on clay for almost the last decade, but he's been the clear #2 clay courter.
 
brettsticker86

brettsticker86

Rookie
Tennis_Maestro said:
...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...
Click to expand...

this. his draw was definitely not "easy"
 
R

rajah84

Semi-Pro
MasturB said:
I probably didn't thoroughly explain what I meant to say.

He didn't have to beat Djokovic 2.0/Federer/Nadal in 2/3 order to win a slam.

Yeah he beat Nole and Fed at Olympics. But he has not yet run the gauntlet yet in a slam where everyone gives a damn.

Just like Nole has to beat Rafa on his home court at Roland Garros, and Federer on his territory at Wimby to further solidify his greatness. Federer may never beat Nadal at Roland Garros either, but he still has his trophy during the peak of Nadal's clay dominance.

Would Murray even have made it to Wimby finals if he had to play Rafa instead of Tsonga in semis? We don't know that. But in the chances he's had, he couldn't get past Roddick either a few years ago, and struggled to take a set off Ralph the last two years.

Just as people kind of put an asterisk on Fed's 2009 Roland Garros for it not coming against Rafa, I don't see why we can't scrutinize Murray as well.

Again, props for him winning the trophy because at the end of the day it's still a slam. But let's not pretend he finally overcame the mental obstacle of outplaying the best to reach the top. The reason he hired Lendl was because he COULDN'T get over the hump of Rafa/Federer/Djokovic.
Click to expand...

Ok, now I agree with you. Just checking.
 
MasturB

MasturB

Legend
rajah84 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Regardless of whether you think Roger's career is filled with cake-walk draws and weak competitors, he's won so many slams that he's pretty much erased that argument out of anyone's mind.

It's not like he got lucky every few years and pulled slams out of the hat and benefitted from people not showing up at slams. He was consistently winning not only slams but dominating Masters events as well. Least we forget, he's upset Nadal a few times on clay during Nadal's peak years on clay, before Djokovic came along last year and absolutely OWNED Nadal on clay minus RG.

He's had 3 of the greatest seasons in tennis history (2004, 2006, 2007). And while he wasn't winning slams, he was still making semis and slam finals as a mark of consistency that his slam wins in "cake-walk" draws weren't flukes.

Roger dominated his generation/his era, you play against the cards you're dealt with. He's also done it with remarkable consistency (Being one of the best hardcourt players, one of the best grasscourt players, probably the best indoor player, and clearly the #2 clay courter of his generation).
 
Mainad

Mainad

Bionic Poster
MasturB said:
Again, props for him winning the trophy because at the end of the day it's still a slam. But let's not pretend he finally overcame the mental obstacle of outplaying the best to reach the top. The reason he hired Lendl was because he COULDN'T get over the hump of Rafa/Federer/Djokovic.
Click to expand...

As a result of which he finally overcame the hump of playing Djokovic, the best player at this year's USO (ranked #2 but by far the best player).
 
フェデラー

フェデラー

Hall of Fame
Well considering Murray could have lost to Lopez and Cilic (still not sure how cilic managed to lose), I think his draw was tough. Murray was lucky he didn't have to face Fed, but conversely Djokovic did not have to face Nadal, so it evens out. People can complain about the wind all they want, but it takes a smart player to adapt to it. The wind exposed Berdych's and Djokovic's weaknesses, as they are in many ways, one dimensional. Don't hate the player, hate the game.
 
N

NadalDramaQueen

Guest
TheF1Bob said:
Lets be real guys, it was destiny. The chokes, the tornadoes... wtf?

Never happen again thankfully. :)
Click to expand...

Luckily he only had to play Chumpovic (Djokovic 2012) in the final. :cool:

We'll have to wait until he beats a real champ. :)
 
N

NadalDramaQueen

Guest
TheF1Bob said:
Novak was whack compared to the form he showed getting to the final.

YES... when Nole 2.5 beta is released. ;)
Click to expand...

What will you do with Novak 2012 though? Will you use this year to refer to good or bad times?
 
TheF1Bob

TheF1Bob

Banned
NadalDramaQueen said:
What will you do with Novak 2012 though? Will you use this year to refer to good or bad times?
Click to expand...

Hopefully, he takes this time to chillax, go back to the drawing board with Marián Vajda and come up with some new ideas.

You can always improve you game my friend, even through the best years. ;)

Just look at Fed. :)
 
mellowyellow

mellowyellow

Legend
RTeally, no one wants to talk about the fixed schedulign and the 3 days in a row that Djoko had to play and it clearly affected his 5th set performance. I really don't think Murray would have seen 5th set had Djoko not played the 3 setter the day before while Murray recovered. That in and of itself was clearly grooming Murray for the title and it seemed to play out. Yes he played more hrs, but not the last days going into the final when it matters. This was a duplicate of Haas/Safin/Johanson debacle matches in AusO semis. That match sequences earned none other than Thomas Johanson a AusO title. I was not his tennis that won that tourney by any stretch of the imagination.
 
Hawkeye7

Hawkeye7

Professional
Tammo said:
Rnd 3 Murray and Lopez didn't play real great TBH
Rnd 4 Murray played okay, but got lucky that Raonic didn't capitalize on his BP chances
Quarter cilic has gotten to 3 4th round in the past 2 years, less than .500
semis T berd only hit 7 aces and hit 8 more winners than Murray
Djoko obviously didnt like the wind, nad was slicing so many shots, got those 2 sets by murray choke.
Click to expand...

Raonic didn't even have BPs. ;) So no chances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tennis_Maestro
Posters have already started with the old "easy draw"..
Replies
24
Views
3K
Al Czervik
A
J
Easy draw vs Hard draw
Replies
0
Views
1K
jeremy6044
J
George Turner
Nadals draw couldn't have been easier.
2 3 4
Replies
154
Views
7K
sarmpas
S
BladeDaywalker
What is the difference between an easy draw and a tough draw?
Replies
18
Views
1K
Lleytonstation
Lleytonstation
sseemiller
Dubai Draw -- Pretty Tough for Federer and Safin
Replies
22
Views
4K
Mainad
Mainad
Top