Can Murray do what Federer could not do?

[FedererDropShot]

And achieve the golden career grand slam?

I mean he did deny Roger's ''realistically'' final chance at it.

- AO - Hardcourt is his best surface, very do-able.
- FO - This tournament might be like Lendl & Wimbledon for him.
- Wimbledon - He is a major threat on Grass. Very do-able.

I think FO might cause him not to get it.

I'm starting to think Djokovic won't be able to do it either. He still needs a FO (overcoming Nadal at the FO is something that Federer never managed to do, and Federer is arguably the second best clay court player in the past decade nearly) and an Olympics gold.

If it were to be achieved, who COULD achieve this feat quicker? Murray or Djokovic?
Cause the next Olympics is in 4 years so Djokovic has to wait for his chance at a Gold Medal... and within those 4 years.... we could see Murray winning one of each of the other 3 slams.... And yeah, Murray already has a Gold medal.

Golden Career Grand Slam - Andy Murray is more likely to get it quicker IF both of them were to get it.
Career Grand Slam - Novak Djokovic is more likely to get it quicker IF both of them were to get it. Just needs a FO left.

Discuss.

 

[kishnabe]

The French Open will elude him.
Aussie.....always did well here....thought this would be his first slam.

Wimbledon....there are few grass court specialist. He is one of them....the other better specialist or favs are getting older/weaker(Fedal). Eventually it will tip to him winning there. 4 consc SF and a final must mean good news in the future.

 

[forzamilan90]

He can definitely do it, he's legit on all surfaces and already has the OG

 

[Paul Murphy]

I think the French will always be problematic for him.

 

[merwy]

The French will be hard for him. But in a few years if Federer, Nadal and Ferrer all retire, I don't see anyone else but Djokovic standing him in the way. So unless Djokovic is planning on winning 3-4 RG in a row, Murray should be able to get at least 1.

 

[Sid_Vicious]

Murray is already in the GOAT conversation IMO...

 

[Tony48]

If Djokovic can win Wimbledon then Murray can win the French. It's not going to be easy, he's going to need a little luck with the draw and whatnot, but it's conceivable.

 

[TheF1Bob]

HELL NO! Without tornadoes, he's nothing.

 

[jokinla]

The French Open will elude him.
Aussie.....always did well here....thought this would be his first slam.

Wimbledon....there are few grass court specialist. He is one of them....the other better specialist or favs are getting older/weaker(Fedal). Eventually it will tip to him winning there. 4 consc SF and a final must mean good news in the future.

Tell that to Andy Roddick.

 

[jokinla]

Where is the NO option, there is a "calendar year grand slam" option, hilarious.

 

[jokinla]

Murray is already in the GOAT conversation IMO...

Well played sir.

 

[Sentinel]

How do these 2 options differ ?

( ) No - He won't win the other 3 slams at all
( ) He'll be one-slam wonder 4eva.

 

[NadalAgassi]

The French will be hard for him. But in a few years if Federer, Nadal and Ferrer all retire, I don't see anyone else but Djokovic standing him in the way. So unless Djokovic is planning on winning 3-4 RG in a row, Murray should be able to get at least 1.

Murray and Djokovic will both be about 29 by then. Neither would be winning a FO by that point of their careers, especialy not Murray who always struggled there. As for who can beat Murray at RG alot of people can, the only French he avoided a loss to a second tier or lower type player was 2011 when Troicki had to choke for Murray to survive. Any decent up and coming clay courter will have a good shot vs a 29 year old Murray at the French Open. Lets not be silly here. Unless he massively improves on clay (which who knows, he is young enough to still potentially do) he is never winning a French.

 

[FedererDropShot]

How do these 2 options differ ?

( ) No - He won't win the other 3 slams at all
( ) He'll be one-slam wonder 4eva.

He can win multiple US Opens and no other slams?

 

[Raiden]

Ridiculously premature thread.

Wait until someone wins at least two consecutive slams before starting such discussions.

Otherwise we might as well start discussing the calendar year grand slam prospects of prepubescent juniors playing ITF Futures/Challengers.
.

 

[tennisMVP]

Nadal and Murray are roughly the same age, and Nadal probably has a longer career ahead of him. I don't think Murray will ever get a look-in at Roland Garros.

3 years ago, Team Nadal took risks and it made it possible for Nadal to be less than fit at Roland Garros. Now though, Team Nadal has said there will be no more band-aid solutions, and that they'd rest Nadal in between slams to make sure he's fit for the slams.

So I don't think we'll see a repeat of 2009 (or 2012 for that matter). Will be very hard for Murray/Djokovic/Federer to get a look at Roland Garros.

 

[batz]

Until 2 weeks ago, Murray hadn't even made 2 slam finals in the same year, but now we're talking about him winning the golden career slam?

gotta love this place.

 

[merwy]

Murray and Djokovic will both be about 29 by then. Neither would be winning a FO by that point of their careers, especialy not Murray who always struggled there. As for who can beat Murray at RG alot of people can, the only French he avoided a loss to a second tier or lower type player was 2011 when Troicki had to choke for Murray to survive. Any decent up and coming clay courter will have a good shot vs a 29 year old Murray at the French Open. Lets not be silly here. Unless he massively improves on clay (which who knows, he is young enough to still potentially do) he is never winning a French.

There is no up and coming clay courter. 29 years old is still a pretty decent age to be winning slams for people that don't play like Nadal. But really, there is no one young at all that can play on clay. If someone will come, he has to do it very soon and it would have to be some sort of Nadal who wins RG before he's 20.

 

[Prisoner of Birth]

Until 2 weeks ago, Murray hadn't even made 2 slam finals in the same year, but now we're talking about him winning the golden career slam?

gotta love this place.

Exactly. It's amazing how it's suddenly gone from, "Murray the choker will never win a Slam," to, "Murray will win 3 Slams a year and is the next world #1."

 

[Wuppy]

James Blake will come out of obscurity to stop him.

 

[tennisMVP]

There is no up and coming clay courter. 29 years old is still a pretty decent age to be winning slams for people that don't play like Nadal. But really, there is no one young at all that can play on clay. If someone will come, he has to do it very soon and it would have to be some sort of Nadal who wins RG before he's 20.

29 years old is also the age Nadal will still be a huge factor. I laugh at people who think the 2012 Roland Garros champion (and he only lost 1 set) won't be contending in 3 years.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

29 years old is also the age Nadal will still be a huge factor. I laugh at people who think the 2012 Roland Garros champion (and he only lost 1 set) won't be contending in 3 years.

Forms can change a great deal over a year. Nadal might not even make it to the semifinals of RG '13, depending on whether or not he can recover from his injury in time for it.

 

[syc23]

Murray will win at least 2 AOs as this is the surface that suits him best.

After Fed, Murray is the best grasscourter - some may argue that Nadal is better but until we see how Rafa gets on after 6 months out of the tour but I think Andy will get at least 1 Wimby before he hangs up his racquet for good.

The French is not impossible, he played a decent match against a peak Nadal at RG '11 with a bad ankle and had he taken the key BP chances, he could have got to the final.

Lendl and Murray will focus on AO & Wim in 2013 and then should they achieve these then FO and WTF will be next on the to win list.

 

[Rozroz]

Exactly. It's amazing how it's suddenly gone from, "Murray the choker will never win a Slam," to, "Murray will win 3 Slams a year and is the next world #1."

let them have some fun, they deserve it :twisted:

 

[Fedex]

let them have some fun, they deserve it :twisted:

Mainad posted this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3cKAhL0c-g

Before Andy Murray, a lot of people forget "it's a well-known fact that Scotland is the worst country in the world at playing tennis".

 

[Rhino]

He's had a good summer, let's not get carried away.

 

[fuzzyball]

There is no up and coming clay courter. 29 years old is still a pretty decent age to be winning slams for people that don't play like Nadal.

Only 2 players won the FO at 29 or more years old since the last 35 years, 29 years old is usually not a pretty decent age when talking about the French Open.

 

[pvaudio]

Until 2 weeks ago, Murray hadn't even made 2 slam finals in the same year, but now we're talking about him winning the golden career slam?

gotta love this place.

And that is why we come to be entertained.

 

[tennisMVP]

Forms can change a great deal over a year. Nadal might not even make it to the semifinals of RG '13, depending on whether or not he can recover from his injury in time for it.

Ferrer going to take him out? :lol:

See, Nadal's team has already said that everything from now on will be cautious. And that there will be no more 'band-aid' solutions, and that Nadal will only play when he's 100%. 2013 will not be 2009/2012. That was the errors of his team, when they were happy with band-aid solutions. That is over.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Ferrer going to take him out? :lol:

See, Nadal's team has already said that everything from now on will be cautious. And that there will be no more 'band-aid' solutions, and that Nadal will only play when he's 100%. 2013 will not be 2009/2012. That was the errors of his team, when they were happy with band-aid solutions. That is over.

No, Ferrer won't take him out. But perhaps Djokovic could.

 

[veroniquem]

Can't see Murray win RG, sorry. He could win the other 3 for sure.

 

[Prisoner of Birth]

Only 2 players won the FO at 29 or more years old since the last 35 years, 29 years old is usually not a pretty decent age when talking about the French Open.

I guess if 2 people could do it, Nadal can. Remains to be seen if he will.

 

[tennisMVP]

And those 2 people who won Roland Garros at 29+years were nowhere near as good as Nadal on clay.

 

[Bjorn99]

Murray is bigger and stronger than the other three. If he can stay healthy...............

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

No, Ferrer won't take him out. But perhaps Djokovic could.

Sorry, after Roland Garros 2012, Nadal has reminded Djokovic of his dominance at Roland Garros (still only won a single set, under questionable playing conditions), shutting out Djokovic completely from ever winning the one slam title that eludes him.

 

[dominikk1985]

Can't see Murray win RG, sorry. He could win the other 3 for sure.

I second this.

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

I second this.

Agreed, with Nadal playing Roland Garros for many more years to come (at least until the end of Murray's career), Murray winning Roland Garros is impossible.

 

[underground]

Again, snap back to reality. Murray has ONE slam, stop talking about the GOAT debate, he hasn't even got a #1 ranking, let alone the CYGS.

Glad to see F1Bob stopping the sulking and to join forces against the Murraytards.

 

[FedererDropShot]

Agreed, with Nadal playing Roland Garros for many more years to come (at least until the end of Murray's career), Murray winning Roland Garros is impossible.

Strong assumption that Nadal will play until the end of Murray's career.

 

[6-1 6-3 6-0]

Strong assumption that Nadal will play until the end of Murray's career.

Nadal is the best clay-court player on tour (and of all time) by a wide margin, so when he gets to a certain age he can start to focus more and more on the clay-court season, so he can continue to rack up Roland Garros titles well into his 30s (he may even become MORE dominant in the clay-court season since he'll be focusing all of his energy on that period when he gets older). Murray, on the other hand, doesn't dominate one particular period/surface as much as Nadal, so Nadal will play until the end of Djokovic/Murray's career (and possibly a few others such as Del Potro).

 

[mmk]

Mainad posted this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3cKAhL0c-g

Before Andy Murray, a lot of people forget "it's a well-known fact that Scotland is the worst country in the world at playing tennis".

Podgorny had better facial hair than Murray

 

[tudwell]

Murray is probably co-favorite at the Australian with Djokovic, or barely behind him as second favorite, and he's probably around third favorite for Wimbledon after Federer and Nadal, so he has a good shot at either one of those. But he is further down on the list of favorites for the French, and I don't see him even making a final there, let alone winning.

 

[fuzzyball]

Nadal is the best clay-court player on tour (and of all time) by a wide margin, so when he gets to a certain age he can start to focus more and more on the clay-court season, so he can continue to rack up Roland Garros titles well into his 30s (he may even become MORE dominant in the clay-court season since he'll be focusing all of his energy on that period when he gets older).

I disagree, simply because Nadal's Stamina + court coverage on clay-court are the 2 main reasons of his success on clay, of course he has more weapons thans just stamina + court coverage (mental toughness, insane spin on his forehand), but stamina + court coverage stay his 2 best weapons and unfortunately for Nadal it happens that stamina and court coverage are the 2 parameters that suffer the most and the earliest from aging, so as soon as age will start to take its toll on Nadal's body, he won't be able to dominate anymore on clay, even if he tries to rest his body by focusing only on the clay-court season.

 

[Clarky21]

I disagree, simply because Nadal's Stamina + court coverage on clay-court are the 2 main reasons of his success on clay, of course he has more weapons thans just stamina + court coverage (mental toughness, insane spin on his forehand), but stamina + court coverage stay his 2 best weapons and unfortunately for Nadal it happens that stamina and court coverage are the 2 parameters that suffer the most and the earliest from aging, so as soon as age will start to take its toll on Nadal's body, he won't be able to dominate anymore on clay, even if he tries to rest his body by focusing only on the clay-court season.

Then why doesn't Cvac dominate on clay? Or Ferrer? Or Murray? All of those guys have great court coverage and stamina so they should be winning 7 RG titles,too.

 

[single_handed_champion]

So Federer and Nadal will be useless old fools at the age of 29 and beyond, but Murray and Djokovic will be chugging along like in the salad days?

OK....

 

[AnotherTennisProdigy]

I think people are hopeful because now he's shown he's capable of winning in the final. Think about it, he's made it to the final of the US, Aussie, and wimby final already. Still, the french is going to be the hardest for him.

 

[timnz]

Golden Career Slam - value?

Murray might very well do it. I think that Roland Garros will be very hard for him to win but it is not past his level of skill to win....everything would have to be going for him, weather, the field etc etc.

In terms of rating against Roger...remember that the 'Golden Career Slam' isn't what it is cracked out to be. The Olympics is only the 15th most important tournament of the year (not my opinion - but the ITF/ATP point ranking place it at number 15). It would be far more important in a career to win all the Slams plus the WTF (Which is the 5th most important tournament of any year) - (WTF Roger has won 6 times).

 

[gmatheis]

Murray is already in the GOAT conversation IMO...

After an olympic gold and a single major ?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

now we know what your opinion is worth

 

[Prisoner of Birth]

After an olympic gold and a single major ?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH

now we know what your opinion is worth

He was being ironic.