N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Michael Chang was ranked as something like the #67 man all time and Murray is already better than him.
Will Murray ever be in the 100 Greatest of All Time
- Thread starter beast of mallorca
- Start date
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Chang is over-rated cause he is american. He is even in the hall of fame and Kafelnikov isn't being clearly a better player.
N
NadalAgassi
Guest
Chang may be overrated in some circles but he isnt overrated on that list. Can you name alot (or any) players who werent ranked above him by the TC list who should have been? Even Kafelnikov and Roddick (who I dont even agree with you are superior to Chang or Murray and who I think you drastically overrate, especialy Kafelnikov the worst 2 slam winner in history by far excluding Kriek) were ranked above him. It is pretty safe to say Chang is at worst a top 70 player all time, and Murray is definitely better than Chang. Sorry I think the idea Murray isnt a top 100 mens player of all time is laughable at this point, even for those who think he is weaker than people like Roddick and Kafelnikov, those people themselves are way inside the top 100 so it doesnt matter.
powerangle
Legend
Of course is in the top 100, even if you include the women. I'd say Murray is probably pretty close to being in the top 50 as well (just the men).
Hawkeye7
Professional
Hatred is blind. I wouldn't even try to argue with him, he is known for not liking Murray. Fate of using the same username on every website.
Even if Murray retired tomorrow he should still be included, he is in IMO the best one-slam-wonder there is. I guess you could make a case for Roddick, because he won more titles and was ranked #1, but then again, does that really make up for 3 Masters titles, a worse winning percentage and H2H records against all of his main rivals?
Last edited:
syc23
Professional
You could make a case for both Murray and Roddick that had they not been born earlier and coincided with Federer at his peak, Nadal and Djokovic, both Andy's would have collected more slams already.
These 2 could have been mulitple Wimbledon champions if it wasn't for the above guys.
The fact that Murray has had to win his slam the hard way in the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era is enough to include him in the top 100 already.
These 2 could have been mulitple Wimbledon champions if it wasn't for the above guys.
The fact that Murray has had to win his slam the hard way in the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic era is enough to include him in the top 100 already.
Steve0904
Talk Tennis Guru
I agree with most of your post, but I don't think comparing H2H's with one player (let alone Federer) adds much to the argument. Granted Murray is a better matchup for Federer than Roddick ever was, but Roddick faced prime Federer a lot more than Murray ever did. True, Federer's prime probably truly ended in 2010, but his best years in terms of playing ability were easily 2004-2007. Murray won the match in Cincinnati in 2006 yes, but the point still stands.
Besides, I could say that Roddick has a winning H2H with Djokovic and Murray doesn't. Both are in their primes I think you would agree, and it could be argued that Murray has blown some of the most recent matches he's had with Djokovic.
The Bawss
Banned
Who cares that he won in a tough era. History wants cold facts not opinions and hearsay. Truth is Murray lucked out in unplayably windy conditions. Murray is not even close to Noah or Gaudio yet because they won their slams in decent conditions at least.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Gaudio is probably the worst slam winner of the Open Era, Murray is far above him. He has probably surpassed Noah as well.
batz
G.O.A.T.
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
Oh Batz, you got me chuckling there
You gotta admit that The Bawss is gonna take that "windy conditions" to the death just to disparage Murray, lol
batz
G.O.A.T.
Oh Batz, you got me chuckling there
You gotta admit that The Bawss is gonna take that "windy conditions" to the death just to disparage Murray, lol
I hope Murray doesn't win BBC SPOTY - it mind send The Bawss over the edge.
I can hear him now as the key turns in the lock of his padded cell:
"But he isn't a slam champion, it was windy ah tells ya, WINDY!"
M
monfed
Guest
What the...Nevermind! :lol:
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
The Bawss
Banned
Fedex
Legend
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Murray would have won the US Open this year, windy or not.
The Bawss
Banned
Not that it's important in any way but I am from East Anglia originally but I move around a lot.
P.S: Even I will admit that "bawheed" is a good one.
Edit: Looks like one of the murraytard admins has been deleting my posts left and right. The censorship of free speech at its best.
batz
G.O.A.T.
syc23
Professional
I think you've contradicted yourself by saying that the cold hard facts is the most important way of judging player's careers. Murray won USO fair and square so if other players couldn't adjust to the conditions then tough.
It doesn't matter how much you argue that it was a 'fluke' slam. He's got one in the bag and will most likely add more in the coming years.
The Bawss
Banned
You type well for a guy with 11 webbed fingers
Ooh, I like the casual reference to inbreeding. Classy and funny!
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Look out for him at Wimbledon next year for sure.
The Bawss
Banned
I don't think we've met before but I'll save you some time: there is no use reasoning with me, my hatred for Murray is blind and devoid of concrete reason which is not related to his attempt to belittle and disparage the Engand football team and his horrible slimy schoolboy behaviour on court.
batz
G.O.A.T.
A lad from Norwich comes home in tears on the night of his wedding.
"What's wrong with you son?" asks his Mother.
"She's still a virgin Mum" he says, through his tears.
His Mother hugs him and says "You're quite right to leave her, Son. If she's not good enough for her own family, she's not good enough for you".
The Bawss
Banned
A lad from Norwich comes home in tears on the night of his wedding.
"What's wrong with you son?" asks his Mother.
"She's still a virgin Mum" he says, through his tears.
His Mother hugs him and says "You're quite right to leave her, Son. If she's not good enough for her own family, she's not good enough for you".
Lol, that joke probably isn't even funny in Norwich (because it holds so much truth).
The Bawss
Banned
A lad from Norwich comes home in tears on the night of his wedding.
"What's wrong with you son?" asks his Mother.
"She's still a virgin Mum" he says, through his tears.
His Mother hugs him and says "You're quite right to leave her, Son. If she's not good enough for her own family, she's not good enough for you".
Why do Scots wear kilts?
So sheep don't hear the zipper.
Fedex
Legend
It's a well known Glaswegian term of endearment.
Do you remember Alan Partridge had a nervous break down and drove bare foot to Dundee?
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
Fedex
Legend
good one !
That sheep looks terrified. And rightly so!
Goosehead
Legend
aahh haaaaaaaa
dont forget he was eating loads of bars of toblerone "and i dont mean the small bars of toblerone..i mean the MEDIUM SIZED ones"
sonicare
Hall of Fame
Murray isn't even above Delpotro. Del potro demolished a peak Nadal and beat federer back to back to win his first USO.
Murray had a gassed out djokovic in terrible playing conditions.
Also Murray has a repelling personality. Del potro is much more likeable which is worth an extra slam or two.
Come at me Muzzatards!! I am ready and loaded.
Murray had a gassed out djokovic in terrible playing conditions.
Also Murray has a repelling personality. Del potro is much more likeable which is worth an extra slam or two.
Come at me Muzzatards!! I am ready and loaded.
90's Clay
Banned
Del Potro's USO win was certainly more impressive then Murray's. Murray still can't beat Fed at a slam. ROFL
forzamilan90
Legend
that's a tough feat for anybody.
90's Clay
Banned
Murray should have been able to do it by now if hes truly supposed to be the "next big thing".. Nadal, Djoker have done it on numerous occasions.
volleygirl
Rookie
Thats the way it seems to be in all sports. So many people just assume the best ever HAVE to be the ones playing today.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
And spending a little while at #1 doesn't mean he has to be the "next big thing". He's already the next big thing in Britian anyway, as he's a national icon over there. If he spends over 13 weeks at #1, he will be in the top 100 for certain.
Hawkeye7
Professional
They only played 3 slam matches and all were finals. Djokovic has never beaten Federer in a slam final either. In fact in 2 of those 3 slams, Djokovic lost to Federer as well and in the 3rd one (AO 2010) he lost to Tsonga who Federer then went on to beat with ease. It's not like Murray had that many opportunities. In fact only 2 men ever beat Federer in a slam final: Nadal and Del Potro.
Last edited:
rocketassist
Rookie
Who has the bigger career accomplishments? :-?
Most impressive slam win doesn't mean better career. Safin's AO 05 win was at a far higher level than a lot of players, doesn't put him above them.
Regarding the topic, easily, he's already top 30 Open Era (just below Roddick and just above Chang IMO). Before you WTA ****s get pissy, I don't count WTA players.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
Agreed. Entirely.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
LOL!
How many Slam finals has Del Potro been in? Answer = 1.
How many Slam finals has Murray been in? Answer = 5.
How many Masters titles has Murray won? Answer = 8.
How many Masters titles has Del Potro won. Answer = 0.
Case closed.
ROTFWL! I don't recall the final being interrupted because of the "terrible playing conditions" like the AO, FO and Wimby finals all were!
I bet you've just got the hots for big, hairy, Argies haven't you? ;-)
And I'm afraid you don't win Slams just by being a nice guy. Fact.
Hardly worth it. Firing blanks as usual!
beast of mallorca
G.O.A.T.
Haha. Nadal did it 8/10x.
Humbalito is so freaking arrogant !!.............:twisted:
Hawkeye7
Professional
DelPo isn't even that nice. I have seen him use gamesmanship in order to win matches many times. He's not better than the rest of them, a myth.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Chang's ranked fine there. But he is not Hall of Fame material imo.
And of course Murray is TOP 100, what I said is he doesn't come close to the TOP 20. I never said he shouldn't be included, he is probably around 50 or so. But people saying he is TOP 10 is laughable.
Kafelnikov maybe the worst 2 slam winner but neither Chang, Roddick and Murray have 2 slams. Besides that he was #1 and an olympic gold winner. He is ahead of the other 3 in terms of achievements. If Murray wins another slam and has at least a week at number 1 his career will be far superior to the other 3. He is already ahead of Chang and would be ahead of Roddick if it wasn't for Roddick being 1 in 2003.
At the moment is probably something like this imo:
1-Kafelnikov
2-Roddick/Murray (Is till give Roddick the edge because of being #1)
4-Chang
At the end of his career Murray will be the better player of those 4.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
I see Murray ending his career with (maybe) three slams (probably two) and some time at #1.
Ranked at #1 - Probably around 20 weeks.
Slams - 2012 US Open, 2013 Australian Open/2013 Wimbledon.
YEC - (Maybe) 2013.
Masters - Probably around 12-14.
With that, he will trump Roddick in every single way.
Ranked at #1 - Probably around 20 weeks.
Slams - 2012 US Open, 2013 Australian Open/2013 Wimbledon.
YEC - (Maybe) 2013.
Masters - Probably around 12-14.
With that, he will trump Roddick in every single way.
90's Clay
Banned
Chang or Roddick probably isn't HOF material if they were strict on who they induct but since they aren't. Chang deserves to be in there. Youngest Slam champion ever, spent quite a long time at the top, and won quite a few titles winning 34 in all. . He had fantastic results all around the world tour during his career.
BauerAlmeida
Hall of Fame
Yeah, he had a great career for sure, and he accomplished what seems to be needed to be in the HOF as it is now, but they should be stricter in my opinion.
forzamilan90
Legend
no doubt Nadal is great
Towser83
G.O.A.T.
Well Nadal is a great player. He does things that few other players can do.
I agree that Murray hasn't played enough slam matches vs Federer to really compare with Djokovic, but I don't think the difference between final and semis makes any difference really. Plus saying that Murray has not had that many opportunities is right, but Djokovic with one slam final vs Federer which happened to be his first has has even less opportunity to beat Fed in a slam final than Muray has had to beat him in a slam.
Similar threads
