stringertom
Bionic Poster
Only if he fires Lendl, hires JMac as coach/partner and allows JMac to teach him how to channel Fleming or Stich.
Andy Murray.....To be or not to be?
- Thread starter miyagi
- Start date
Only if he fires Lendl, hires JMac as coach/partner and allows JMac to teach him how to channel Fleming or Stich.
D
Deleted member 307496
Guest
All Murray lacks right now is consistency, he has enough talent to win a slam he just is not at his mental peak yet. Once/if that happens, I believe he could be a multi-slam winner.
Evan77
Banned
OK,, call me ignorant but I have no freaking clue what you talking about ... now we are bringing astrology into tennis, lol ... great
I agree, It is painfully obvious watching the big three that (style aside), Djokovic, Nadal, and Fed are always in command, and it isn't whether they will make the shot, but what shot they will make. (obviously not totally true, but that's how it looks...)
That said, Murray hit some serves in the mid-upper 130's...Why is he not more aggressive on that? It's not like his first serve percentage is that good to begin with...
I was poking fun at Rafa's way of play, but I guess you had an unforced error in picking up on that. lol
And for the record, Rafa is a Grinder/Pusher, Murry is a Pusher/Counterpuncher, Ferrer looks like a Counterpuncher/Grinder, Federer is a Shotmaker/Defender, Novak is a Defender/Attacker. Anything else you want to know?
That sums up the top guys perfectly imo.
I dont know what to think about Murray anymore. He just seems to leave to many matches for his opponents to dictate. I think if he get win one GS the fload gates will open. Just not sure he can do it.
Last edited:
stringertom
Bionic Poster
First, if paraphrasing Shakespeare when commenting on a Scot and not a Dane, the OP should have used a phrase from "Macbeth" and not from "Hamlet". I recommend the "sound and fury signifying nothing" line in this case.
Secondly, if we devolve into dissecting the Murray dilemma, let's be brief and to the point...suspect 2nd serve (IMO the most underrated stroke in tennis), overly predictable FH and not enough weapons to bail out those two weaknesses. This places him in situations where he doesn't have many options to turn to when either of those really go in a funk. Against top-tier talent in pressure situations (3 Slam finals, 0-9 setcounts), this is a ticket to doom.
Can he get over it..."Out damn spot...out I say!"??? Only time will tell.
Secondly, if we devolve into dissecting the Murray dilemma, let's be brief and to the point...suspect 2nd serve (IMO the most underrated stroke in tennis), overly predictable FH and not enough weapons to bail out those two weaknesses. This places him in situations where he doesn't have many options to turn to when either of those really go in a funk. Against top-tier talent in pressure situations (3 Slam finals, 0-9 setcounts), this is a ticket to doom.
Can he get over it..."Out damn spot...out I say!"??? Only time will tell.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
That AO match vs Djokovic convinced me he has a Slam tournament in him. Is he taking the right steps to bring him closer to his goal? I don't know. Lendl remains unproven.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Fair comemnt this.
I think the way he lost to Ferrer is quite revealing and might be a positive.
Two years ago, he went out to Berdych in R4 on a cold evening after rain interruptions. He spent almost the entire match 5 metres behind the baseline getting pulled left and right.
I saw something different on Wednesday - sure, the forehand broke down like it usually does but he was still going for it until the end of the match, especially inside out/ down the line.
If he keeps working then there will come a day when it won't break down. He's just got to keep working - and he will.
If he doesn't win one it will be becuase he wasn't good enough, not lack of work.
gold soundz
Professional
People talk about the mentality of Murray; yes I agree that's a huge factor in him winning a slam, but I think his game is still quite far from the top 3. His game is too passive imo, he doesn't attack enough. If you don't have an attacking, going-for-the-lines style, then you've at least got to slug every ball with everything you've got (with an effective technique) like Djokovic and Nadal. I don't see any sign of him taking either of those options and therefore I don't see him winning a slam anytime soon, unless Djokovic/Federer/Nadal play a sloppy slam (highly unlikely all 3 will).
Last edited:
Agreed, Murray sometimes works too hard & actually has to be stopped or braked. He just needs to stay in & rip, it will work on the other 3 Surfaces &
probably has the best chance at US Open.Despite Courier wanting him to slice & loop this is exactly the game style that Andy liked playing BUT it won't get it done, especially on grass, US Open. I think they are working towards this rather than taking a backward step.
He has made some small changes to his FH & this going for it mentality will help him over the next 3 months.
He just has to stick around...
batz
G.O.A.T.
Again, fair comment form an historical perspective but did you watch the Ferrer match? I really don't think Murray lost because of a lack of aggression, quite the opposite.
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
His spurts of uber aggressive game were amazing to watch even though he lost in the end. I like that Andy Murray better.
Murray is 25 now and the chances he'll win a GS in the future will lessen with each year. I thought he would have won one by now, but he hasn't done it yet. Nadal, Djokovic and Federer are all tougher mentally and physically. I didn't fancy Murray to beat Ferrer on clay in Paris either, David is tough on clay. Then there's Tsonga and Del Potro.
The top three are always favourites to beat Andy in a GS, but if he is to win, he has the best chance at the US or Australia, I believe.
The top three are always favourites to beat Andy in a GS, but if he is to win, he has the best chance at the US or Australia, I believe.
I don't agree simply because Murray is improving, it takes time for some players to break through...He is actually going into his best 5 years now.
He has got some form in the US & Oz, that is clear. He will even recover & challenge at Wimbledon & the Olympics.
It is a long year & the other guys will have to be strong for a long time.
He just has to avoid overtraining & stay sharp.
wangs78
Legend
I think Murray's attitude seems to have improved under Lendl's coaching but the biggest problem with Murray is that he does not have the ability to raise his game when it counts the most. We've all seen him play at a level where he is matching the likes of Fed, Nadal and Djokovic. But at the moment of truth, his opponents, especially the Big 3, usually amp up their game and take him out. This occurs against lesser opponents too - just look at his loss to Ferrer - he clearly has the game to beat Ferrer, and would've likely put up a bigger challenge to Nadal in the SF than Ferrer is capable of, but he couldn't even raise his game enough to beat a lesser foe. In other words, his level play, in the important matches, often sinks and rises to the level of his opponent, but he tends to fall just short. Sure he's won a bunch of Master's so he yes he does have his moments sometimes, but we're talking Slams here and what I said holds true, I think.
It is taking Andy a long time to break through alright!!
I can see him maybe win one Slam, two at most, but he hasn't progressed as much as I would have thought. Del Potro has won a major, Murray hasn't. Best 5 years to come for Andy? We'll see.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Nice of you to say so Mandy. Yes, the forehand broke down - but he was still going for it until the end, especially inside out and down the line. That is very much a new thing for Murray.
OverratedIvanovic
Semi-Pro
Does anyone think his fitness is not at par with Djokovic and Nadal? The way he tanked 4th set at AO semis in order to conserve energy for the 5th set was rather astonishing.
Bud
Bionic Poster
If we remove Laver, Rosewall and Newcombe that list gets very small. Even smaller for those who won more than a single major (only one guy won multiple majors after the age of 26).
Of the single major winners, after the age of 25, who was their opponent in the final?
- - -
Murray's winning window is closing quickly.
I think Almagro is better on clay than Ferrer (whom I would place 5th in the RG 2012 draw). However, he ran into Nadal earlier in the draw and was eliminated.
Decent article but this statement is ridiculous: "To be, in terms of pure ability, one of the 30 or so best tennis players ever to pick up a racket"
I'd put every major winner above Murray and there are currently 47.
Last edited:
Mustard
Bionic Poster
1972 French Open F: Andres Gimeno def. Patrick Proisy (4-6, 6-3, 6-1, 6-1)
1975 US Open F: Manuel Orantes def. Jimmy Connors (6-4, 6-3, 6-3)
1976 French Open F: Adriano Panatta def. Harold Solomon (6-1, 6-4, 4-6, 7-6)
1977 Australian Open (January) F: Roscoe Tanner def. Guillermo Vilas (6-3, 6-3, 6-3)
1980 Australian Open F: Brian Teacher def. Kim Warwick (7-5, 7-6, 6-2)
1990 French Open F: Andres Gomez def. Andre Agassi (6-3, 2-6, 6-4, 6-4)
1995 French Open F: Thomas Muster def. Michael Chang (7-5, 6-2, 6-4)
1998 Australian Open F: Petr Korda def. Marcelo Rios (6-2, 6-2, 6-2)
2001 Wimbledon F: Goran Ivanisevic def. Patrick Rafter (6-3, 3-6, 6-3, 2-6, 9-7)
2002 Australian Open F: Thomas Johansson def. Marat Safin (3-6, 6-4, 6-4, 7-6)
2002 French Open F: Albert Costa def. Juan Carlos Ferrero (6-1, 6-0, 4-6, 6-3)
2004 French Open F: Gaston Gaudio def. Guillermo Coria (0-6, 3-6, 6-4, 6-1, 8-6)
Bud
Bionic Poster
Thanks Mustard. How many of the above would you classify as a dream draw final for the winner?
Mustard
Bionic Poster
They all must have been good to get to the final. However, the ones that stick out the most are Gimeno beating Proisy and Teacher beating Warwick. Gimeno was the third best player in the world for years in the 1960s, behind Laver and Rosewall, and was regularly thwarted by them in the pro majors, so it was nice for him to get a French Open title, even past his prime.
Last edited:
Evan77
Banned
he is very fit. I think it's a combination of so many different things. Too many players btw, tank sets when they feel they can't win ... very common thing ... Djokovic was notorious for doing that when he was younger, but not any more.
Murray has a problem with his first serve, his second serve is bad ... he needs to improve that FH too ... I actually think that he is a much better player today then a year ago but it's not good enough to compete with Nadal and especially Djokovic who is still on fire. There is a mental aspect of the game too, but I won't go there.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
He's definitely having fitness problems compared to last year though. He himself says that he needs to get fitter ahead of Wimbledon.
Agree about the erratic nature of his 1st serve (roughly 80% v Gasquet, roughly 50% v Ferrer). He started the year being very competitive against Djokovic with the 5 set semi at AO, and beating him in Dubai but has been on a steady decline since Dubai probably due mainly to fitness problems.
World Beater
Hall of Fame
not bad...
Similar threads
- Poll
