Andy Murray - One Slam Wonder?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Hawkeye7, Feb 10, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    Those 'Murray will win a slam this year' statements Cup8489 is writing are the primary reason Murray gets bashed. Murray isn't guaranteed anything in any year. People do tend to overrate Murray's chances quite a bit.
     
  2. Mainad

    Mainad Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    22,936
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    The 2011 AO final was a bad beat-down but then Djokovic had started goating at that point. There wasn't another player on the planet who could handle Djokovic for the next 6 months!


    But here we go again. If Djokovic lost 2012 USO because he didn't play well, how come Murray isn't allowed the same excuse for losing 2013 AO? After all, Djokovic won 2 sets at the USO final but Murray could only manage one at the AO! His level definitely dropped after losing the 2nd set tie-breaker. You can't keep making excuses for one and not the other. That's just treating them both by a different set of rules!

    Well, I only joined the boards less than 2 years ago and in that time I have never ever seen this Murray-hype that is supposedly so rampant. If I had, I assure you I would have been one of the first to try and calm everybody down. I detest hype as much as I do unfair criticism. But all I've seen in the last 2 years are constant threads attacking, ridiculing and sneering at Murray with many posters absolutely refusing to give him credit for anything he's ever done. Over-hyped? Not on here, that's for sure!

    My impression is that many of these Murray-haters fall into one of 2 main categories:

    1. Disgruntled English football 'fans' who have never ever forgiven him for a jokey remark he once made in a good-humoured banter with Tim Henman about supporting anyone other than England after Henman had been taking the p1ss after Scotland got knocked out of the 2006 World Cup qualifiers (note no flack ever from Scottish fans against Henman)! This means they will take any opportunity to rubbish and disparage Murray on practically any forum they come across in which his name may appear!

    2. Fanatical Federer fans (*******s) who cannot ever forgive any player who has had a consistently winning H2H against their great hero. Murray is currently 11-9 in that regard. (Nadal is the only other top player to hold a positive H2H against Federer). This means that Murray's wins could only have been 'flukes' caused by Fed's tiredness or ill-health and, for good measure, most of his wins against other players came about probably for the same reasons. Their logic: someone like Murray, who has only recently managed to win one 'flukey' Slam, could not possibly have ever beaten the GOAT so many times fairly and squarely!

    Of course, there are doubtless a sprinking of other combinations like fanatical Djokovic supporters who weigh in with the same 'arguments' but it is my impression those are the 2 main categories by far.

    I'm not counting any chickens. I've been a fan for the last 4 and a half years but I know his strengths and weaknesses only too well. I just keep hoping and keeping my fingers crossed that he will focus on his strengths and cut back on the weaknesses because I know what his strengths are capable of as do all other fair-minded and impartial tennis fans. No hype from me!
     
  3. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    If Murray was as good as people said, he should have at least one a set against Djokovic. BTW at the time, Murray was rated far higher in the mindset of others from 2008-2010. Even though Djokovic had a slam to his name.



    Because Djokovic is clearly the better player and can exceed Murray's highest level of play. Hard to say that any Murray can live with Djokovic playing at his best (only Federer can nowadays). It's not an insult, or I'm not trying to insult anyone when I say Djokovic's level, not just in that match, the whole tournament wasn't that great. Murray (no matter how well he plays) can not live with Djokovic at his best. Period.



    I joined in 2009. Got banned for getting annoyed with Murray fans who didn't like the fact I said Djokovic would go on to better things although Murray was consistently favoured above him. Looks like I was right. I joined before you, I know what I'm talking about.



    His weaknesses are really his forehand, which is definitely improved and his serve. Most likely his serve won't get better, and dare I say it, his game has peaked. I think this year will be his best chance to win a slam just because It looks like their is no end to Djokovic's ability right now and the field isn't exactly stacked with champions, let's not forget Federer isn't what he was.
     
  4. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  5. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529

    Presenting what as fact? The fact that Djokovic's peak level of play trumps Murray's? I don't see why you are offended by that statement.







    So what is your problem?





    No one is discrediting Murray's slam win, It's hard to really deny Djokovic was bad in the tournament as a whole. He sure as hell wasn't firing on all cylinders. That's what it takes for most players to beat Djokovic other than a guy with 17 slams to his name - play him on a bad day. That's what Murray did. I'm not knocking Murray in any way.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  6. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,005
    Location:
    Cologne
    That's your opinion. Others might struggle to agree, let alone that we have never seen peak Murray vs. peak Djokovic, therefore your statement is nothing but speculation. I don't think batz was offended, he just disagrees with you.
     
  7. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339

    Of course you are. You are asserting that Murray only loses when Novak plays badly. Actually, you're asserting that Novak only loses to anyone when he plays badly - and that's just silly as it is predicated on the notion that Novak is solely responsible for how he plays and that his opponent has no influence on him.

    I guess that for 40% of his matches with Murray he just couldn't be arsed.


    It's the Nole equivalent of 'Rafa only loses if he's injured' or 'Roger only loses if he's tired'.


    You've taken the reasonable premise that Novak is the best player in the world and made the quantum leap to the assertion that Nole has to play badly in order for someone to beat him.

    It's an epic logic fail - but logic, reason, facts and stuff were never your strong points, were they mate.
     
  8. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    Who would struggle to disagree with the notion Djokovic at his maximum surpasses Murray at his maximum? Peak Djokovic has won 5 slams out of 9. Murray has won 1. It's obvious who is in the wrong here.
     
  9. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529

    What would you like me to do? Pretend that Djokovic was on fire but Murray was just too good? Not going to happen.

    Or the fact from the end of 2008-2010 Djokovic was playing mediocre, couldn't serve due to changing his mechanics and his forehand was just as bad. Since finding his motivation, improving his movement and service motion he has had Murray's number.

    No, because at least there is truth to what I'm saying.

    Yes, unless you are Federer. Nowadays, in the slams, every other player except for Nadal at the FO will have to hope Djokovic plays good at best to beat him. Anything better from Djokovic and it's unlucky.







    Yes. Just like I was wrong when I said in 2009 that Djokovic would go on to dominate and Murray would struggle to win slams due to his defensive style of play. As for my posts, they are far more informative than yours; Your strong points start and end with Murray.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  10. Fiji

    Fiji Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,178
    Del Potro is more likely to end up as a one slam wonder than Murray.
     
  11. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,005
    Location:
    Cologne
    Uhm... So Murray plays his best in every single match? Did he play his best or even anywhere near his best in his first 3 GS finals? You guys keep making excuses for the rest of the top 3, how all of them were sub-par whenever they lose to Murray, but Murray doesn't get the benefit of the doubt, ever. That is suggesting the outcome of his matches has nothing to do with Murray's level of play at all, which is just ridiculous to say the least. I've never seen a bigger beat down of a Top 10 player than Murray vs Nadal in Tokyo 2011. Name one other match of the top of your head, where a top 10 player only won 4 points in an entire set, I dare you. If anything it's people like you who are underestimating Murray, not the other way around. But don't let facts get in the way of your delusions.

    No one suggested that Murray is a better player than Djokovic, but to say that Djokovic would just hit him off the court when both play their best is silly. I would agree that Djokovic's consistent level is higher than Murray's, at least at this moment in time, but I've seen Murray play some ridiculous Tennis and I dare say even Djokovic would struggle against him, when he's playing like that.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  12. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339


    As ever, you're meandering - so let's re-cap:

    1. Is Novak the best player on the planet? Yes.

    2. Does it follow that Novak must play badly to lose? No.

    3. Is it possible to be the best player in the world, play at the top of your game, and lose to someone else? Yes - see Federer v Nadal for evidence and lots if it.

    Still - it's nice to have you back.
     
  13. kalyan4fedever

    kalyan4fedever Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,827
    delp's is more legit he defeated nadal and federer to win it and did not play in super windy conditions with the absence of a key player (rafa) who has a trumping h2h against him(murray). unless murraa defeats rafa in a slam he is still a mug, no offense
     
  14. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339

    PMSL. :)


    And you're so modest, too.

    How unlike you to jump up and down like a spolied child screaming 'No! I'm right!' whenever your unjustifiable assertions are challenged.



    I'll ask you again - apart from 'Murray will never win a slam' - what other absolutist assertions have you been completely and utterly wrong about?
     
  15. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
    OK - if Delpo's wins are more legit than Murray's because of the standard of player he beat then many of Roger's are less legit than Delpo's also yes?

    Murray has beaten Rafa in slams as many times as Roger has. If you knew the first thing about tennis you'd know this. No offence.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  16. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529

    Murray usually plays great against Nadal. This is normally because Nadal's ball allows Murray to take cracks on the FH side, which is slightly a longer motion than his BH side. If Murray can start attacking the opponent on the FH side he's pretty much got it sorted out, and against Nadal he is able to do this. That Tokyo beatdown was impressive.


    What? I've seen Djokovic at times kill Federer and Nadal (on clay no less). Players who are far superior to Murray. Please, Djokovic at his best is pretty unplayable for anyone other than Federer and maybe Nadal at the FO.






    I've rarely seen Djokovic play a great match and lose, it's mostly down to Djokovic.


    I've never seen either at their maximum and lose to each other. FO 2008 and the WTF match where neither match was close displayed each others best respectively. AO 2009 was ok until the moment Federer packed up and gave in.
     
  17. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    I actually never said Murray wouldn't win a slam. I said he wouldn't win a slam if he continued his ultra defensive junk-balling style. Which again, I was right. Problem?
     
  18. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,005
    Location:
    Cologne
    It's not. Rafa was below par and came from a long injury lay off and Federer played a horrible match in the final and couldn't find his serve to save his life in the last couple of sets. There see, I can be a ***** as well.
     
  19. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
    :)

    You said plenty of times (unqualified) that Murray wouldn't win a slam. You were wrong.

    No problem whatsoever.
     
  20. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
    Rarely or never? You're already trying to wriggle out of the absolutist rubbish you posted - it's what you do.

    You haven't seen every one of Novak's losses therefore you are unqualified to judge.

    He only needs to have lost once whilst playing at the top of his game for your assertion to be refuted.
     
  21. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    Uh, no. I said Murray wouldn't win a slam if he continued his defensive style of play. Since Lendl, he has gotten a lot more 'pro-active' and aggressive on court. Hence his slam win. He would have got blown away by Djokovic if he played like he did before Lendl (the results speak for itself). I also went on to say if he plays aggressive, he could win some slams but Djokovic winning the most. Turns out I was right on all counts. Thanks for playing!
     
  22. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,005
    Location:
    Cologne
    He is 5-13 against him. 'Usually' sounds a bit far-fetched.

    And you know for a fact that Federer and Nadal were playing their best at the time? 2008 Nadal would have never lost those matches to Djokovic on clay. Everyone can make sweeping statements without backing them up.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  23. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    You see Batz, I haven't rubbished any of your posts, why do you resort to quips and digs as soon as you see an opinion, or fact you don't like?
     
  24. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
    I agree about the differences in Murray's game since Lendl.

    If you are incapable of admitting you were wrong then that's fine mate. Knock yourself out.

    Why don't you post some more informative stuff like how good your posts are.
     
  25. Anaconda

    Anaconda Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,529
    Doesn't mean Murray didn't play well and let's not forget the first few meetings played where Nadal was far ahead than Murray.


    Except Djokovic in the time was on a run tennis has never seen before to the point Federer, a player with 17 slams, was the only guy to harm Djokovic from the start of 2011 until the end of Wimbledon when Djokovic lost to Federer at the FO.
     
  26. Hawkeye7

    Hawkeye7 Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,005
    Location:
    Cologne
    You keep throwing around numbers. What do those have to do with it? Yes, Djokovic was playing very well in 2011 and no one is denying that, but he wasn't unbeatable. He would've lost to Murray on Clay if Murray had had his act together. Besides, I have seen Rafa play a lot better on clay than in 2011.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
  27. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
    Of course you haven't - you've just said that your posts are more informative than mine. How could anyone read that as a dig? Now you're getting all coy because, as happens so often, you can't back up your absolutist assertion when challenged.


    Here's my opinion - peak Murray versus peak Novak at Centre Court Wimbledon is at worst a toss up. You are absolutely at liberty to disagree with me - I won't jump and and down and state that I'm right because I say so.

    You seem genuinely incapable of accepting that you might be wrong. About anything.

    Man, you used to be a bit conceited - but now? Now you're just perfect.
     
  28. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,623
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Batz, I don't think it would be a toss up. I think Murray is a much better grass courter than Djokovic. I think Murray will end his career with more Wimbledons than Djokovic
     
  29. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    You are wrong about so many things, especially the quoted portion. First of all, Murray has a much better H2H against Djokovic than he does against Nadal, so I 'm not sure what you were talking about there. Secondly, Djokovic is nowhere close to a big favorite at either RG or Wimbledon, in fact at Wimbledon I would put him below ALL 3 of the other top players.
     
  30. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    Only a "maybe" for Nadal at he FO, LOL! Nadal has played Djokovic 4 times at Roland Garros and lost only 1 set, and Djokovic's record vs Nadal on clay is just as poor as Federer's. Peak years Nadal playing his best would spank any version of Djokovic on a clay court, and even today if at his best would usually win over Djokovic at his, especialy in a best of 5. Nadal of Wimbledon 2007 and 2008 (and the later rounds of 2010) would also always beat any version of Djokovic on grass. Even on hard courts only 2011 Djokovic playing his best does Nadal have virtually no chance against.

    As for Murray and Djokovic, they have a long history of very competitive matches. On slower courts Djokovic has the edge if both are playing their best, as Djokovic is the Australian Open GOAT and Murray is still not a truly top tier clay courter (who knows if he will develop into one ever or not). That said Murray still did very nearly beat Djokovic in excellent matches on those surfaces- Rome in 2011 and Australian Open 2012. On any medium to faster courts though- grass, medium paced or faster courts, indoors, Murray and Djokovic both at their best is a very close matchup, almost a toss up, and on grass Murray should win in that scenario in fact.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 13, 2013
  31. kalyan4fedever

    kalyan4fedever Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    3,827
    Ok enough of this already , cant wait to bump this thread after RG :D
     
  32. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    I wouldn't even say Nadal has no chance against 2011 Djokovic on hard courts, the only HC major they played in was US Open 2011 and that was a very tough, tightly contested 4 setter.
     
  33. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    15,339
    Well mate, Nole is a course and distance winner and that goes a long way - but I do think that Murray is a better mover on grass than Novak - and given how important movement is to both of them, I think that swings things back towards Murray - hence my 50:50 opinion.
     
  34. NadalAgassi

    NadalAgassi Guest

    That is true. Anaconda makes Djokovic sound like peak Federer with a greater clay game, or god mode Safin everday he is playing well.
     
  35. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,145
    Location:
    The Shire
    I'm not sure about that. I mean, it's kind of hard to say Nadal has no chance anywhere, but Djokovic actually had a winning H2H against Nadal on HC before 2011. It's the closest thing Nadal has to "no shot" anywhere.
     
  36. Feather

    Feather Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2012
    Messages:
    4,623
    Location:
    Bangalore, India
    Can you please stop lying or twisting facts?

    In Wimbledon final, when the roof was closed, they were tied at one set each and in third set it was 1-1 40-0 on Roger's serve when roof was closed. Don't make it what it wasn't
     
  37. WhiskeyEE

    WhiskeyEE Legend

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,990
    Actually you sound butthurt that your boy will go down as a failure that never really won anything. The wind affected both of them, but what they played that day can't be called tennis.

    Murray lost to Rafa at 3 slams in 2011 and then never even had to play him at a slam in 2013. He past his prime, but his competition got even worse.

    I don't hate Murray my friend. I just call it as I see it. And in Murray I see a lucky, past his prime choker. Not a multi-slam winner.
     
  38. Laurie

    Laurie Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    1,941
    Location:
    London
    Good grief! Tennis Warehouse forum is going through one of those strange moments which occurs every few weeks.

    One chap is trying his hardest to diss Murray, and then another chap chimes in that Nadal and Federer are on their way out and therefore he will manage two or three because there is no depth at all.

    Clearly the madness on Tennis Warehouse forum will never stop.
     
  39. President

    President Legend

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    7,859
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    Put it this way, I think Nadal has a much better chance of beating Djokovic on hard court than Djokovic does of beating Nadal on clay, no matter if its 2011 or any other year. Those 2 wins Djokovic had over Nadal that year were extraordinary but I think Nadal's clay level was noticeably low that year.
     
  40. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    16,145
    Location:
    The Shire
    Yep. I would have to agree.
     
  41. Gonzo_style

    Gonzo_style Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,923
    Only a third set
     
  42. dafinch

    dafinch Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,817

    He's lost 3 times in straight sets-the first player in tennis history to lose 9 straight sets in his first 3 Slam finals-and lost twice in 1 over the minimum. You wanna pretend think that's not stinking up the joint, Sport, you go RIGHT ahead. 5 sets(not to mention ONE match) won out of 22 played, yeah, BANG up job of being competitive. And, if it's a waste of time, why are you still flapping your gums?
     
  43. dafinch

    dafinch Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,817
    I didn't contradict a single thing, I put what I said, and it's all there for everybody to see. They can also see that you're a non responsive liar.
     
  44. dafinch

    dafinch Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2011
    Messages:
    1,817
    I overlooked another howler of yours: "the 3rd went to tie-break and was decided at 13-11!" I'm sorry, did the rules of tennis change to one getting credit for playing long tiebreakers? No? You still have to win 3 sets in Slams? And you wanna give a guy credit for winning ONE set twice, and getting blanked three times, is that your position? ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!! Btw, I see another poster busted you on your "At 2013 AO, he against almost went a set and a break up. What's 'horrible' about that." First of all, it wasn't true, and secondly, it's irrelevant-this ain't horseshoes, and "almost" getting a break doesn't mean jack.
     
  45. Mainad

    Mainad Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    22,936
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Oh sure,he's a real failure isn't he? One Slam, 5 other finals, 1 Olympic gold medal, 8 Masters 1000 titles and 10 other titles! If that makes him a failure, I absolutely dread to think what you're going to call every single player ranked below him which is, in case you've forgotten, 99.9999% of the entire friggin' ATP tour!

    I'd like to say it was a nice try but it doesn't even come close! :)

    So what? Rafa lost to Murray at 2 Slams in 2008 and 2010. And how is the fact that he never got to play him in 2013 relevant? None of the top players have yet to play Rafa in 2013!!!

    Oh don't deceive yourself. You hate him alright! Only a die-hard Murrayphobe like you would attempt to dismiss everything he's achieved as 'luck' or a 'fluke'. But hey, you're not doing yourself any favours by trying to peddle this trash. You're only making yourself look stupider and stupider and just exposing yourself for the biased, Murray-hating troll that you are. Do yourself a favour and peddle it somewhere else to someone who actually cares!
     
  46. always_crosscourt

    always_crosscourt Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2013
    Messages:
    496
    But you do care. Deeply. Which is why we do it.
     
  47. Mainad

    Mainad Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    22,936
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Are you living in some strange little fantasy world all of your own? Do you actually watch tennis or does your mum try to stop you watching it in case you get up late for school the next morning? So you actually think losing a tie-break that stretches to 13-11 is somehow the equivalent of someone losing a set 6-0 or 6-1? Have you no sense of shame or proportion at all? Truly your hatred of Murray has deranged your wits beyond all logical reason. Try and get over the fact that he beat Djokovic to win a Slam and stop boring us all by trying to pretend that it was like something unprecedented in the entire history of tennis! Your boy lost. It's painful I know. But you'll get over it ..one day when you've grown up and can look back on what you've posted here with justifiable shame and embarrassment!

    Firstly, no other poster has 'busted' me on anything! Secondly, at 2013 AO he won the first set and went 40-0 against Djokovic's serve in the first game of the second. So listen carefully. He almost went a set and a break up! What part of that don't you understand? Or did you even bother to watch the match at all because it sure seems like you didn't!

    So now I'm putting you on Ignore because I can't think of a single thing more we can possibly say to each other until that distant day comes when you finally mature and can discuss tennis and tennis players with the kind of grown-up, mature reasoning the rest of us strive for!

    Cheerio!!
     
  48. monfed

    monfed Guest

    Well, technically he should still be on 0 slams but wind slam wonder is about right. :lol:
     
  49. Mainad

    Mainad Talk Tennis Guru

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    22,936
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    Erm...no, technically he won one Slam! This thread is asking whether he'll be a one Slam wonder or not! if you don't understand the thread, then don't join in!
     
  50. Antonio Puente

    Antonio Puente Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Messages:
    2,341
    Location:
    Buenavista
    The Murray love is heart-warming.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page