Del Porto might have won the slam but Murray is still the better player

drwood

drwood

Professional
Spider said:
I want to respect Del Potro for his achievement but some of you are hyping him like crazy and that gets on my nerves. Let him prove himself on a consistent basis and then we can talk.
Click to expand...

He already has proven himself by winning the toughest slam and beating the 2 greatest players of this decade in order to do so.

Delpo isn't overhyped...he's just hyped more than Murray, which is well-deserved. Murray's performance in 5-set tournaments has proven that so far, he's not ready for the big time. Delpo has proven that he is.

It would be one thing if Murray was consistently making slams finals and losing them, like Lendl did. But he has yet to do that. I hope he can turn it around at the slams next year.
 
Talker

Talker

Hall of Fame
Potro is improving as I speak.
Potro is also proving he can hang with the big boys, part of that being the critically important skill of performing under pressure.

Potro has the right mindset, is cool no matter who he plays, Murray is more erratic in this area. Over 7 matches it catches up to Murray(majors).

At RG Potro came very close to beating Fed and therefore would of had an excellent chance of winning at RG.
In short, very close to winning 2 slams this year with beating Fed twice while doing it. And he can get better.

He is young, with a good work ethic he can become more physically skilled and come up with better shots as he gains experience.
 
E

Edstringer13

Guest
Edstringer13 said:
Are you crazy?Del potro already imposed his game against Murray a couple of times,and in Canada,only because Murray is fitter,he won that one.Del Potro has a much bigger potencial to be number than Murray,in fact i don't think Murray will ever be number one,and he'll be lucky if he wins a Slam.
Del Potro in 2,3 years will be serving average in the 140's and high in the low 150's,that's how much he can improve on his serve.
Ground strokes,he's already very solid,and he needs to come in more,which i'm sure he's working,and get more variety,and he'll be hitting at least in the 100's 120's for his forehand.
Movement he is not that good yet.
he is the calmest guy out there.

Murray has a defensive ugly game,his forehand is ugly and bad.His serve is good every once in while.His second serve is a joke.For him to be really good he'll have to be agressic=ve,and whenever he has to be agressive he loses,and that's waht Cilic did to him,left the balls hanging in the middle ,and he has no answer to that.On Clay he can't play.
Gulbis was supposed to bet him on first round,but because of mental issues and desbelief he didn't.Gulbis is the biggest underachiver in tennis these days.
Click to expand...

For those still speaking about it ,read this again.
Murray is boring.what an ugly game to watch,no shot making,nothing,plus now there are a lot of people hitting through him.His only advantage is,that he can run more,but everybody is catching up on physical training now,and soon it'll come down again to the ball striking.
 
JeMar

JeMar

Legend
Not that it matters a whole lot, but Murray dropped to number 13 of ESPN.com's power rankings.

Right below Flavia Pennetta and right above Venus Williams.

lol.
 
JeMar

JeMar

Legend
Edstringer13 said:
For those still speaking about it ,read this again.
Murray is boring.what an ugly game to watch,no shot making,nothing,plus now there are a lot of people hitting through him.His only advantage is,that he can run more,but everybody is catching up on physical training now,and soon it'll come down again to the ball striking.
Click to expand...

Commas are not your friend.
 
S

SerbWhoLovesDelPo

Guest
JeMar said:
Not that it matters a whole lot, but Murray dropped to number 13 of ESPN.com's power rankings.

Right below Flavia Pennetta and right above Venus Williams.

lol.
Click to expand...

What are ESPN' s power rankings?
 
Barfy

Barfy

New User
troll

you know this whole thread started with one guy being a troll. and all he wanted was for the troll to rampage on and you guys let that happen. tsk tsk tsk.

btw murray is a good player no doubt, but his style won't work on hard courts against the big hitters.
delpo on the other hand has an evolving game and will continue to improve.
 
nfor304

nfor304

Banned
JeMar said:
Okay... and how does that make you feel?
Click to expand...

Great! That guy was trying to tell me that Masters events were every bit as important as Slams and that Pros never skip Masters events for no good reason, and calling me a troll because I was arguing that that wasn't true.

And now he is banned.

So that makes me feel even better.
 
boredone3456

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
JeMar said:
Totally arbitrary list that doesn't have a whole lot to do with anything, but it's nevertheless fun to follow.

Clicky, clicky.
Click to expand...

LOL that thing is to funny. Serena below Woz, Dementieva ahead of Verdasco (by the way, who were the tons of people who picked her to win the US Open?)Klijsters ahead of Rafa....Stepanek even on the list at all, I mean yes a marathon against Karlovic is impressive but still.
 
S

Spider

Hall of Fame
Barfy said:
you know this whole thread started with one guy being a troll. and all he wanted was for the troll to rampage on and you guys let that happen. tsk tsk tsk.
Click to expand...

If cheering for your player and telling he will end up with better results is trolling for you, then okay....

JeMar said:
Sure, let's talk about Murray being worse than Del Potro when Murray goes out in the round of 16 at the next grand slam. I look forward to it.
Click to expand...

That is a possibility and I accept that and if Del Potro wins the AO then I will keep my mouth shut for sometime, however if Murray performs better than him there, then I won't.

JeMar said:
And yet you argue for a guy that's consistently shown he can't hack it in best of five matches. Double standards much?
Click to expand...

I accept at times I appear a bit biased towards Murray but all of us are towards some players. Well, if we all just talk facts then this place would be a bit boring because then we'll be discussing Federer and Nadal (because they have the results and facts) and very less about anything else. The challenge is to go a little out of the box and talk things over, that's more interesting debating (facts as well as predictions).

This will be a very interesting thread in a few years time. I accept I could be making a fool out of myself if Del Potro continues to win slams every year and Murray happens to suck at them. I would gladly accept defeat and come to terms with it. However, just in case, the opposite happens and Murray does better consistently over a period of time, I hope those of you who have called me a troll now, show up then. :)
 
ksbh

ksbh

Banned
Dr ... what hurts Federer's legacy is not the losing 7 -13 H2H with Nadal because in the long run, most people will forget those numbers.

What taints his legacy is the losing 2-5 record in slam finals. People are not going to forget that, especially considering that it was over 3 different surfaces!

drwood said:
No, by that analogy, 15 > 6.
Click to expand...
 
U

UsualSuspect

Banned
ksbh said:
Dr ... what hurts Federer's legacy is not the losing 7 -13 H2H with Nadal because in the long run, most people will forget those numbers.

What taints his legacy is the losing 2-5 record in slam finals. People are not going to forget that, especially considering that it was over 3 different surfaces!
Click to expand...
Considering 3 of those were at RG against Nadal, it doesnt hurt him a bit IMO when comparing to Sampras who never even achieved a single FO final much less play a claycouter even near Nadal's league.
 
Last edited:
hankash

hankash

Rookie
Delpot defeated Federer in he US Open Finals...something Murray was unable to do. If Delpot was a Brit, few would be talking about Murray.
 
ksbh

ksbh

Banned
Come on, Thug! What has been the most discussed topic in Nadal-Federer's rivalry? It's Nadal's domination over Federer at the most important events- the slams! You can ignore it if you want to but the rest of the tennis following world won't!

UsualSuspect said:
Considering 3 of those were at RG against Nadal, it doesnt hurt him a bit IMO when comparing to Sampras who never even achieved a single FO final much less play a claycouter even near Nadal's league.
Click to expand...
 
ksbh

ksbh

Banned
At this point, I have to concede that Del Potro is clearly the more promising player, having won his first grand slam titile beating Federer in the final while Murray is content to beat Federer at the events that don't really matter.

hankash said:
Delpot defeated Federer in he US Open Finals...something Murray was unable to do. If Delpot was a Brit, few would be talking about Murray.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Q

quest01

Hall of Fame
Sorry to say but Del Potro as of right now is the better player. Murray has won more tournaments, beat Federer and Nadal more times but the fact is Del Potro won a grand slam title while Murray has not. The only true measurement of success is the number of grand slam titles one accumulates.
 
U

UsualSuspect

Banned
ksbh said:
Come on, Thug! What has been the most discussed topic in Nadal-Federer's rivalry? It's Nadal's domination over Federer at the most important events- the slams! You can ignore it if you want to but the rest of the tennis following world won't!
Click to expand...
I am not ignoring it, K. You bring up a great point. Nadal has worked hard for that amazing H2h. I am just saying that if you are in a GOAT discussion between Sampras and Fed. I dont find that stat to be of any value because Federer lost three FO finals to the great Rafael Nadal. Sampras never even accomplished a final. Sure you can say that Federer didnt dominate his rival but ask yourself this. How would have Sampras faired against Nadal if they played majority of their slam matches on clay courts? Not well I can assure you that, K
 
Last edited:
boredone3456

boredone3456

G.O.A.T.
quest01 said:
Sorry to say but Del Potro as of right now is the better player. Murray has won more tournaments, beat Federer and Nadal more times but the fact is Del Potro won a grand slam title while Murray has not. The only true measurement of success is the number of grand slam titles one accumulates.
Click to expand...

While I disagree that the only measure of success is grand slam titles, big but just winning slams doesn't mean much if you don't do anything otherwise. I agree that Del Potro winning one before Murray is big. Murray doesn't seem ready for the the biggest stages, he is stuck in traction winning small events and doing well at masters but unable to take the next step. Delpotro doesn't do as well at non slam events as Murray does consistantly, but with the slam win he likely will. Hopefully Del Potro doesn't fade back or slip off like Novak seems to have done this year after breaking through at the Aussie last year.
 
jimbo333

jimbo333

Hall of Fame
I was lucky enough to be there and see Del Potro win the US Open, but I still think at the moment Murray is the better player, but it is very close!
 
ksbh

ksbh

Banned
Thug ... great post. I agree. Sampras will likely not have taken a set off Nadal on clay.

The argument isn't about who's greater. I think it's obvious that Federer's accomplishments outweigh those of Sampras. IMO, Sampras is top 5 at best and all I'm saying is that with a losing record against his chief rival on the biggest stages (the slams), Federer can't stake claim to GOAT either.

UsualSuspect said:
I am not ignoring it, K. You bring up a great point. Nadal has worked hard for that amazing H2h. I am just saying that if you are in a GOAT discussion between Sampras and Fed. I dont find that stat to be of any value because Federer lost three FO finals to the great Rafael Nadal. Sampras never even accomplished a final. Sure you can say that Federer didnt dominate his rival but ask yourself this. How would have Sampras faired against Nadal if they played majority of their slam matches on clay courts? Not well I can assure you that, K
Click to expand...
 
Talker

Talker

Hall of Fame
ksbh said:
Thug ... great post. I agree. Sampras will likely not have taken a set off Nadal on clay.

The argument isn't about who's greater. I think it's obvious that Federer's accomplishments outweigh those of Sampras. IMO, Sampras is top 5 at best and all I'm saying is that with a losing record against his chief rival on the biggest stages (the slams), Federer can't stake claim to GOAT either.
Click to expand...


This comes back to the counterpoint, if Fed lost to a less worthy player than Nadal would be to his advantage?
No, it would show that his level drops.

If Fed didn't make the finals would it be better?
No, again it shows a drop in level of play.

That's where this argument has a problem.

Fed losing to Nadal over anyone else is the best thing for pointing out Fed's level of play.

Losing to Nadal isn't that bad a mark on anyones resume, he is an awesome and powerful player. At times he plays as well as anyone.

Nadal doesn't get enough credit, not even Fed can handle him all the time.

Then for GOAT, who did the other contenders lose to in finals?
How many finals did they make?

Just my .02.
 
mandy01

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
ksbh said:
Thug ... great post. I agree. Sampras will likely not have taken a set off Nadal on clay.

The argument isn't about who's greater. I think it's obvious that Federer's accomplishments outweigh those of Sampras. IMO, Sampras is top 5 at best and all I'm saying is that with a losing record against his chief rival on the biggest stages (the slams), Federer can't stake claim to GOAT either.
Click to expand...
ksbh I dont know if anyone can claim to be the GOAT.
 
federerfanatic

federerfanatic

Banned
This thread actually makes sense. Do people consider Iva Majoli and Anastasia Myskina better players than Helena Sukova and Pam Shriver? Do people think Tomas Johansson is better than Todd Martin, Mark Philipoussis, Tommy Haas, or Tim Henman. Do people even think Albert Costa is better than Alex Corretja.

I like Del Potro but he doesnt even yet have a Masters title. That will probably change soon but at this point I understand this thread.
 
A

Alejandro D

Semi-Pro
federerfanatic said:
This thread actually makes sense. Do people consider Iva Majoli and Anastasia Myskina better players than Helena Sukova and Pam Shriver? Do people think Tomas Johansson is better than Todd Martin, Mark Philipoussis, Tommy Haas, or Tim Henman. Do people even think Albert Costa is better than Alex Corretja.

I like Del Potro but he doesnt even yet have a Masters title.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that Delpo victory at the USO can be seriously compared with Johansson's and Costa's GS titles. Del Potro's power tennis shows consistency and promise and he got his GS title by winning over word's #1 and #2.
 
E

Emelia21

Rookie
Ambivalent said:
I'm pretty sure his 22 match streak last year or whatever is enough proof. Del Potro has had consistent results on every surface but grass.
Click to expand...

I mean his consistent in the Slams, he has won one, like Novak did and lets hope he does better and goes on to win many more slams :) lets hope he's not happy to win a Slam and thats it :cry:
 
Weathered33

Weathered33

Rookie
I was wondering how this this thread was still going, then I came in and saw people talking about Fed-Nadal H2Hs and Fed and Sampras' GOAT claims and I was like "A-ha".
 
S

svijk

Semi-Pro
federerfanatic said:
This thread actually makes sense. Do people consider Iva Majoli and Anastasia Myskina better players than Helena Sukova and Pam Shriver? Do people think Tomas Johansson is better than Todd Martin, Mark Philipoussis, Tommy Haas, or Tim Henman. Do people even think Albert Costa is better than Alex Corretja.

I like Del Potro but he doesnt even yet have a Masters title. That will probably change soon but at this point I understand this thread.
Click to expand...

Reading this thread now since its been around for a while....

The example above is not logical since all these players have reired and we look at their whole career now. DP and Murray are in their early 20s so its actually hard to say anything at this point.

Very amused by OP' comment that DP was lucky to win.....after beating Nadal and Fed back 2 back. Some folks don't think beforing posting such BS
:confused:
 
Ventolin

Ventolin

Banned
Spider said:
Federer also was slameless for quite some time, however things have turned out quite well now. :oops:
Click to expand...

Federer was 21 when he won his first slam though... Murray is now 22 and by Wimbledon next year will be 23.

Federer had 3 slams before he turned 23, as oppossed to Murray's 0, or possibly 1 if he manages to win the Australian. If Murray is going to have a Federer like career he's got a hell of a lot of catching up to do.

Also the Hewitt, Federer comparison isnt really fair because they were both born in the same year while Del Potro is younger than Murray.

I wont even start on the fact that Murray's game is closer to Hewitt's than Del Potro's is....
 
S

SerbWhoLovesDelPo

Guest
federerfanatic said:
This thread actually makes sense. Do people consider Iva Majoli and Anastasia Myskina better players than Helena Sukova and Pam Shriver? Do people think Tomas Johansson is better than Todd Martin, Mark Philipoussis, Tommy Haas, or Tim Henman. Do people even think Albert Costa is better than Alex Corretja.

I like Del Potro but he doesnt even yet have a Masters title. That will probably change soon but at this point I understand this thread.
Click to expand...

Good points. Murray's achievements so far are worth a little more than DelPo's slam. That is, if DP does not do anything with his career from now on.

But, Del Potro looks to have more potential than those people in your list, so that will likely change. IMO if he can get a Masters or MC by the end of 2009, he can already consider himself a more accomplished player.
 
mikro112

mikro112

Semi-Pro
Del Porto might have won the slam but Murray is still the better player
Click to expand...
WTF is wrong with the Murray-****s? He hasn't accomplished anything on the big stages, but he showed all tennis fans that he chokes big time in Grand Slam events on a consitant basis. JMDP just beat the #1 player in the world and possible one of the greatest players of all time in a Grand Slam final. Before that Federer only lost in Grand Slam finals to his big nemesis Nadal.

So please shut up saying your beloved Murray pwns the rest of the players. He has yet to show that on the big (important) stages. :rolleyes:
 
djokovicgonzalez2010

djokovicgonzalez2010

G.O.A.T.
They are both overrated

1. Pre-Injury Nadal
2. Federer
3. Djokovic
4. Post-Injury Nadal
5. del Potro
6. Murray
7. Davydenko
8. Soderling
9. Verdasco
10.Hewitt (most under-ranked payer at time)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GasquetGOAT
If Juan Martin Del Potro wins the Masters Cup....
Replies
7
Views
879
robin7
robin7
Sport
Did Del Potro save the US Open 2017?
Replies
37
Views
3K
Prabhanjan
Prabhanjan
TTMR
Del Potro to win more Slams than Murray
Replies
43
Views
3K
rainingaces
R
GustafsonFanatic
Nadal: "Murray and Djokovic still better than Del Potro"
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
GOATPARERA
GOATPARERA
KenC
2010: the year the old guard changes
Replies
21
Views
1K
Tsonga#1fan
Tsonga#1fan
Top