Clydey2times
Hall of Fame
He'll go into Wimbledon as 3rd or 4th favourite, along with Roddick. He definitely has a shot there.
Andy Murray: This time I'm ready to Slam it at the Australian Open
- Thread starter TennisFan3
- Start date
He'll go into Wimbledon as 3rd or 4th favourite, along with Roddick. He definitely has a shot there.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Because serving is the be-all and end-all of tennis. That's why Ivo Karlovic has 17 slams and spent so long a the top of the game. Oh, wait a minute...
If you are so confident Nam - I'll pose you a wager. If Murray meets Isner and Isner wins, I'll donate $500 to Haiti disaster funds - if Murray wins; you do the same.
So do you walk the walk as well as you talk the talk Nam? Over to you.
Last edited:
batz
G.O.A.T.
Yep - no way can a guy who has gone R3,R4,QF,SF in his previous visits to Wimbledon and won tournaments on grass possibly improve on that.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Murray only won 1 slam match vs Nadal and he needed 2 days to do it on a faster surface than AO. Nadal beat him at AO before and he's leading the head to head 7-2 (the only other loss coming in an indoor event when Nadal was injured and he still won a set :shock.
I don't find all that too scary for Rafa TBH.
If you want to console yourself with Rafa's wins over Murray from before Murray entered the top six then feel free to do so, but the fact is that Murray leads 2-1 on hardcourts since Murray became a top player - including winning the only time they've met in a slam.
Now that doesn't mean Murray will win, or even start as favourite. But it does mean that you underestimate his threat at your peril.
It's funny that you get your panties all up in a bunch when I say a dangerous player who is at his career high, just won a title, and has arguably one of the best serves in the game could possibly upset Andy Murray.
BTW, no thanks. Unlike you, I don't need to flaunt my e-manliness everywhere.
batz
G.O.A.T.
But that's not what you said though, is it. I agree Isner would have a outside chance against Murray. You made Isner out have much more of a chnce than that - he simply doesn't. Hence your reticence to engage my 'e-manliness' (love that word BTW
)But that's not what you said though, is it. I agree Isner would have a outside chance against Murray. You made Isner out have much more of a chnce than that - he simply doesn't. Hence your reticence to engage my 'e-manliness' (love that word BTW
Considering Andy Murray is very likely to implode on himself once again in a slam, I think there's a very good chance that a power tennis player like Isner, who is at his very best thus far in his career, has a good shot at beating Andy Murray.
Whatever rocks your boat...
batz
G.O.A.T.
Yeah - we heard you the first time. Thing is, you seem more than willling to do bit of e-soothsaying but don't seem to have the e-minerals to back it up with some e-manliness in the form of an e-wager for a good cause.
I'm sorry that my opinion on a match result offends you, especially considering you are so obsessed with your great Scottish Hero that you can't possibly fathom that one of the most dangerous floaters in the draw (who is playing as well as he ever has) could possibly upset a guy who last year didn't even have a QF finish at both of the HC slams.
I don't need to prove anything, and I don't need to take your wager. I will donate money for the right reasons, not because some Andy Murray obsessed freak is trying to call me out. Goes to show your level of maturity, trying to call someone out over the internet because his opinion obviously offends you.
Last edited:
batz
G.O.A.T.
Ooooooh - hark at her.
There's only one person getting wound up here sunshine and it ain't chilled old me.
Knock yourself out with your predictions Nam - I've already agreed with you that Isner would have a chance against Murray - we just disagree over the degree of that chance. Now, wipe the bits of spittle away that have gathered at the side of your mouth, take a deep breath, and chill the hell out - tennis starts in less than 3 hours.
Jeez. No wonder The List starts at 'N'.
Last edited:
N
nikdom
Guest
If Murray plays Isner, Murray wins. I find it hard to give Isner an entire best of 5 match just because he has a big serve. Trouble, sure, upset, I don't think so.
batz
G.O.A.T.
batz
G.O.A.T.
There's a British airbase on Cyprus.
Chill out? I'm pretty sure you're the one who tried to call me out for whatever reason just because I said Isner has a significant shot at beating Andy Murray. Sorry that your little Scottish hero can't manage to get past the 4th round of a slam, but that's not my problem. Until he does that this year, I'm going to keep picking him to lose before the Quarters.
And it's funny that you think I'm the one wound up when you tried to get me into a bet just because I disagreed with you. Try looking at yourself in the mirror friend.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Nam - I called you out for a bet to see how deeply your actions match your words - the anwer is that they don't. All mouth - no trousers; as they say in London. Like I say - knock yourself out with your predictions - you're already making yourself look less than blessed in the brain dept by asserting that Murray hasn't made if past the fourth round of slam.
Now go enjoy the tennis. Toodle pip.
I didn't do anything at first, all I said was Isner had a very good shot at beating Murray since :
1. Murray has failed to reach the Quarters of a HC slam
2. He plays very poor tennis in the early rounds
3. Isner has developed into a very good tennis player, and has arguably one of the best serves in the game
4. Isner is at a career high ranking, just won an ATP title, and is playing with as much confidence as he ever has
Then bat goes off and attempts to drag me into a bet and then mudslings at me just because I called him out on his immaturity.
batz
G.O.A.T.
All mouth and no trousers? Why would I take the bet of an immature person? What did I do to offend you so greatly before at that point? Absolutely nothing.
Oh, and remind me what were Murray's HC slam results last year? Oh yeah, 4th round and 4th round.
I would gladly take the bet if it was zagor, or anyone else. However, I don't accept bets from immature people who try to call me out just because they disagree with my opinion (one that I think is a pretty good one too).
I don't see anyone agreeing with this very, very bold statement...
batz
G.O.A.T.
Because you actually believed what you were posting and therefore thought you would win some money? Someone offers me what I consider to be easy money and I'll take it.
look - forget it. You didn't offend me - apologies again if I did you. I've already agreed with you twice that ISner would have a shot if they met. Only two hours to go now and I really can't be @rsed any more with this.
enjoy the tennis - hope whoever you want to win does well.
Cheers.
malakas
Banned
2 hours for what?:shock: hubby playing??:shock:
Let's remind everyone about a few facts :
1. Isner is in fact, a dangerous player. He is in fact much more than a serve. He is a high octane player, and when he is on, he is essentially unplayable.
2. Isner is at a career high singles rank of 28, even higher than his other fellow giant Ivo Karlovic.
3. Isner just won his first ATP title ever, and is riding high on confidence.
4. Andy Murray last year finished in the 4th round of the Australian Open, and the 4th Round at the USO. He lost to Verdasco, and Marian Cilic. Guess what? They both serve big and hit big. Sounds like some big giant fellow I know.
5. Andy Murray has a tendency to play passive, especially in the early rounds of a slam. In fact, he sometimes just plays outright terrible in the early rounds. Isner if he plays to his seeding is meeting Murray in the 3rd round I believe (if I looked at the draw right).
Are you going to tell me these facts are wrong? Is it so bold to think that the 28 seed could actually beat the 4 seed? *Gasp*.
Last edited:
batz
G.O.A.T.
1. Apart from the USO?
2. Yep - like his 60 60 61 defeat of Alberto Martin, followed by straight sets defeat of Chela back in AO 07? How many sets did Murrya lose in the early rounds of last years AO? That would be none.
This is the annoying thing Nam. You pull stuff out of the ether that isn't factually correct - then extrapolate some bizarre conclusion from this non fact.
batz
G.O.A.T.
1. Is not a fact - it's an opinion.
2. So what?
3. So what?
4. If you think Verdasco and Isner are comparable then don't get angry when people point at you
5. Can you give some examples of Murray playing terrible in the early rounds of a slam? Examples from the last 18 months - since Murray became a top 6 player would be good because they would be relevent.
1. I was referring to last year. What were his HC slams last year again? 4th and 4th. *Gasp*
2. Referring to last year again. Was getting steam rolled by both Kendrick and Wawrinka early on at Wimbledon, nearly lost to Starace at the FO, layed an egg against Marian Cilic and Verdasco, somehow managed to lose a set to Capdeville, nearly lost to Melzer and Llorda at the USO in 2008, etc.
But hey, just ignore them facts.
USO 2008
1. Llorda, tight match that could have easily swung either way
2. Melzer, a match Melzer should have won.
AO 2009
Laid an egg against Verdasco, supposedly sick. You can excuse this if you want, however Murray still had chances to win if he didn't play like a pusher the whole 5th set.
FO 2009
1. Starace totally dominated Murray for the majority of this match and just fell apart.
Wimbledon 2009
1. Kendrick was rolling all over Murray till he finally woke up.
2. Wawrinka, same thing here.
USO 2009
1. Do I really need to remind you about Cilic?
2. Somehow managed to lose a set to Paul Capdeville, who is purely a claycourt specialist.
1. So John Isner isn't a dangerous player? Ok, fine. I guess sh1t doesn't smell bad either.
2. He's ranked 28 for a reason, because he's a good player. I think stranger things have happened than a lower seeded player beating a high seeded player.
3. Winning a title going into the AO usually means you're playing well.
4. Both Isner and Verdasco play high octane offensive tennis; one just so happens to have a monster forehand, while the other has a monster serve. The two guys who knocked out Murray in the HC slams last year hit hard and serve big. Sounds like Isner to me!
batz
G.O.A.T.
You said:
1. Murray has failed to reach the Quarters of a HC slam
You didn't qaulify it. You were simply wrong. Plain wrong.
Murray hasn't gone out of a slam in the first week since RG in 2008. That makes your pet theory that he is susceptible in the early rounds look a little weak. Never mind the ifs and buts - whjat is it you keep telling us - it's all about the slam results. And the results suggest Murray doesn't lose early.
I'm sorry that your logical deduction skills cannot connect the fact that I was referring to last year, but I was. So, yes, he in fact lost in the 4th round of both HC slams last year, losing to Verdasco and Cilic (both in fairly embarrassing manner).
Wait, losing in the 4th round isn't losing early? Then what is losing early?
thejoe
Hall of Fame
The thing is, Murray won most of these, so does that really matter?
batz
G.O.A.T.
1. You said it was a fact. It's not. It's an opinion. There is no way to verify whether it is true or false. You do this a lot - make an assertion, then argue on a different point when the assertion is debunked. Isner may or may not be a 'dangerous player' - but that would always be a matter of opinion rather than fact.
2. K.
3. Murray won Doha in 2008. Did it again in 2009 - beat Roger on the way. You keep telling us the other tournaments don't mean Jack - you can't have it both ways.
4. Verdsaco can move - Isner can't. The comaprison is invalid IMO.
batz
G.O.A.T.
You said Murray hadn't made a hardcourt QF. If your English skills are lacking, how the heck am I supposed to know what you meant? Some sort of process of osmosis? Only you could write something that you didn't mean and then blame the reader for not having the deduction skills to understand what you were actually trying to say. That's some serious chutzpah dude.
'early' is 1st week in most folks' books - after that there's only 16 guys of the original 128 left.
Last edited:
