Did Murray over achieve in his career?

[Jokervich]

Yes another Murray thread, I know some people here don't like that (I'm not a Murray fan btw). But anyway, do you think Murray over achieved in his career as a whole?

Especially at slam level. He won 2 slam finals when Djokovic was well below his best, as well as 1 slam facing none of the big 3 and his toughest opponent was Raonic lol. Didn't really come close any other times. At slam level, he was the big 3's pigeon more or less.

His year end number 1 was when Fedal were injured and Djokovic had a big slump of form at the end of the year. Even so, he had to play every mickey mouse tournament at the end of the year to squeak it out narrowly by something like 200 points.

Just looking back at his career, I personally think he over achieved. You could say "well in any other era he would have 20 slams" but no, Murray is just not that caliber of player.

What do you think?

 

[Mediterranean Might]

Cmon man how many times does this need to be said, he was the only one to consistently challenge the big 3 in their best years

Murray is so much better than his slam count indicates and should receive proper respect. He did not overachieve and his achievements cost him dearly in terms of hard work and health

 

[Mainad]

I think you are clearly not a Murray fan but that still doesn't give you the right to disrespect his achievements. He beat the Big 3 in their heyday a total of 29 times including in 14 title matches of which 12 were big ones (2 Slams, 1 WTF, 8 Masters 1000s, 1 OSGM). In 2016, his final great season, he had to overcome a deficit of more than 9,000 ranking points in order to overtake Djokovic and beat him for the #1 position in the final match of the year. 6 out out of his 9 titles that year came in big events (1 Slam, 1 WTF, 1 OSGM, 3 M1000s) so he didn't just seal the #1 position by winning "mickey mouse" events as you like to claim.

In short, the answer to your question is a resounding NO!!!

Now leave Murray alone and go and pick on somebody else for a change!!!

 

[Nole_King]

I think you are clearly not a Murray fan but that still doesn't give you the right to disrespect his achievements. He beat the Big 3 in their heyday a total of 29 times including in 14 title matches of which 12 were big ones (2 Slams, 1 WTF, 8 Masters 1000s, 1 OSGM). In 2016, his final great season, he had to overcome a deficit of more than 9,000 ranking points in order to overtake Djokovic and beat him for the #1 position in the final match of the year. 6 out out of his 9 titles that year came in big events (1 Slam, 1 WTF, 1 OSGM, 3 M1000s) so he didn't just seal the #1 position by winning "mickey mouse" events as you like to claim.

In short, the answer to your question is a resounding NO!!!

Now leave Murray alone and go and pick on somebody else for a change!!!

Same goes for you ... Who has asked you to defend him on every thread created to discuss him. Leave Murray defending alone and go pick something else for a change

 

[Sir Weed]

Connors in cinque.

 

[Kralingen]

He has over achieved in being discussed by TTW users that is for damn sure.

Real answer: he underachieved his true potential because of injuries. But that’s a different sort of underachieving, in that it’s largely out of his control.

But in terms of maximizing his potential while healthy, he probably got closer than almost anyone did. Sure he could have adopted a more offensive style and worked harder on the 2nd serve & FH, but he squeezed every last bit out of his body that he possibly could, and won quite a lot. He didn’t overachieve or underachieve imo. He did his best.

when I think “overachiever” or “underachiever” Andy Murray is at the bottom of the list, and rightly so.

 

[zagor]

Well the guy reached 11 slam finals and converted "only" 3, he's more of an underachiever on the spectrum IMO.

Of course it also depends what you think of his game and if he could have done a better job improving some of his flaws.

 

[Olli Jokinen]

I think you are clearly not a Murray fan but that still doesn't give you the right to disrespect his achievements. He beat the Big 3 in their heyday a total of 29 times including in 14 title matches of which 12 were big ones (2 Slams, 1 WTF, 8 Masters 1000s, 1 OSGM). In 2016, his final great season, he had to overcome a deficit of more than 9,000 ranking points in order to overtake Djokovic and beat him for the #1 position in the final match of the year. 6 out out of his 9 titles that year came in big events (1 Slam, 1 WTF, 1 OSGM, 3 M1000s) so he didn't just seal the #1 position by winning "mickey mouse" events as you like to claim.

In short, the answer to your question is a resounding NO!!!

Now leave Murray alone and go and pick on somebody else for a change!!!

This.

 

[Dominic & Andrey]

I remember vividly rooting for Raonic during that final at Wimbledon, I also remember myself ranting at and insulting this Canadian mug with embarrassing passion

 

[The Big Foe fan]

Yes another Murray thread, I know some people here don't like that (I'm not a Murray fan btw). But anyway, do you think Murray over achieved in his career as a whole?

Especially at slam level. He won 2 slam finals when Djokovic was well below his best, as well as 1 slam facing none of the big 3 and his toughest opponent was Raonic lol. Didn't really come close any other times. At slam level, he was the big 3's pigeon more or less.

His year end number 1 was when Fedal were injured and Djokovic had a big slump of form at the end of the year. Even so, he had to play every mickey mouse tournament at the end of the year to squeak it out narrowly by something like 200 points.

Just looking back at his career, I personally think he over achieved. You could say "well in any other era he would have 20 slams" but no, Murray is just not that caliber of player.

What do you think?

Hell no

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Not when you compare him to somebody like Nicki Minaj.

''I hear you're judging on America's got talent. Wouldn't you need some talent first?''

''I guess not.''

 

[OhYes]

Murray isn't calibre to be reason of existing term - Big 4
Having that in mind, he had to face Big 3 and couldn't win Slams bcs of it. He is just bit better player than the rest of non Big 3 tour. Nothing more.

 

[aldeayeah]

Well the guy reached 11 slam finals and converted "only" 3, he's more of an underachiever on the spectrum IMO.

Of course it also depends what you think of his game and if he could have done a better job improving some of his flaws.

I mean, most of the lost finals weren't particularly close.

I'd say he was "unlucky" to run into very high quality opposition, but not "underachieving"

 

[fishpiefriday]

No, absolutely not. He's one of the best to play the game. The fact that he has three slams and a lot of people feel he could have or should have won more, indicates to me that he didn't overachieve.

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

https://imgur.com/a/5zXozPV

Haters will say it’s fake.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

https://imgur.com/a/5zXozPV

Haters will say it’s fake.

 

[zagor]

I mean, most of the lost finals weren't particularly close.

I'd say he was "unlucky" to run into very high quality opposition, but not "underachieving"

Right but it ain't overachieving either.

No matter the opposition I wouldn't call someone who goes 3/11 an overachiever.

 

[NatF]

I think reaching 11 slam finals is perhaps a bit of an overachievement relative to former players who I consider outside of his weight class. Likewise his number of masters tournaments and his positioning on the all time list is as much a reflection of his skill as it is the tour structure of his era. However I don't think reaching #1 or winning three slams was overachieving. IMO he's a 3-4 slam caliber player who was born into a tour where consistency was a bit easier.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Yes. He is hardest working guy out there. Someone other with his skill set/flaws in his game would never achieve so much.

 

[Deleted member 748597]

He overachieved a bit when Djokovic tanked that YE #1.

 

[No_Kwan_Do]

Not at all. He underachieved on the slam count given his conversion rate, and a lot of his other tour stats are in line with players with far more slams.

Had he not had the hip issues, he may have won another 2-3 slams in 2017-2019, and it wouldn't have surprised me had he ended up a 5-6 slam winner.

 

[NatF]

He overachieved a bit when Djokovic tanked that YE #1.

Wimbledon 2013 a tank job too?

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Wimbledon 2013 a tank job too?

Yes, your people needed a Wimbledon champ after so many years.

 

[Wurm]

He over achieved at taking up rent free residence in TTW posters' heads, that's for sure.

 

[Blahovic]

He underachieved in his 30s due to injury, that cost him maybe 1-3 more slams. Before that, his achievements match his talent.

- 3 slams
- 2 gold medals
- Year end #1
- Finalist at all 4 slams
- Loads of masters titles
- Davis Cup
- Big titles on every surface
- Loads of big wins against the best 3 players in history, including at the slams and Olympics

He was that good. It's a shame he didn't manage his body better to make it to 5+ slams. He should be in that Becker/Edberg type of space.

 

[nolefam_2024]

After USO2012 Murray was asked how many slams you think you will end up with. He said Three because he knows winning a slam is very difficult.

Just because Djokovic is so good at winning slams doesn't mean Murray is too. He was consistent but rarely dominant. I think he won just right amount of slams. I remember Rafa thrashing him in Wimbledon. So let's not over exaggerate his misfortune of playing peak big 3.

 

[Mainad]

After USO2012 Murray was asked how many slams you think you will end up with. He said Three because he knows winning a slam is very difficult.

Just because Djokovic is so good at winning slams doesn't mean Murray is too. He was consistent but rarely dominant. I think he won just right amount of slams. I remember Rafa thrashing him in Wimbledon. So let's not over exaggerate his misfortune of playing peak big 3.

How on earth does that negate the argument? If anything a typical example of how the Big 3 so often stood in the way of him achieving more (which is, after all, why they are the Big 3)!

 

[Mainad]

Yes, your people needed a Wimbledon champ after so many years.

Funny how Novak 'tanked' so much to Andy isn't it? Maybe he just liked him too much but why then couldn't he tank the odd AO final (he could afford to after all)?

 

[BGod]

Injury held him back. It's a really good what if question if he's healthy in 2014.

Anywho, he pretty well did as good as he should have safe for a couple of Slams he was 50/50 on and lost. 2013 AO really.

 

[Mainad]

He overachieved a bit when Djokovic tanked that YE #1.

Is Djokovic in the habit of tanking Y/E #1s? Thought he was keen to get the record??

 

[Mainad]

I remember vividly rooting for Raonic during that final at Wimbledon, I also remember myself ranting at and insulting this Canadian mug with embarrassing passion

So why were you rooting for him then??

 

[Deleted member 748597]

Funny how Novak 'tanked' so much to Andy isn't it? Maybe he just liked him too much but why then couldn't he tank the odd AO final (he could afford to after all)?

Is Djokovic in the habit of tanking Y/E #1s? Thought he was keen to get the record??

Djokovic only tanked the matches played in London that were huge for Murray's legacy. Pressured by the British mafia or something.

 

[Dominic & Andrey]

So why were you rooting for him then??

I am exaggerating, but I do remember that in 2016 I was often rooting for Nishikori and Raonic when they faced Djokovic and Murray, and if I remember correctly they lost every time lol

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

I am exaggerating, but I do remember that in 2016 I was often rooting for Nishikori and Raonic when they faced Djokovic and Murray, and if I remember correctly they lost every time lol

Gong!

 

[Adam Copeland]

Yes. He is hardest working guy out there. Someone other with his skill set/flaws in his game would never achieve so much.

Sir Andy Murray is shockingly overrated by the British media and also by TTW, he should consider himself very lucky that he was not born in 1987, Federer would have reduced Murray to David Ferrer level in stats.

IMO the 4th best player after the Big 3 in the last 30 years of debut in terms of an actual game that could beat the best ATGs was Marat Safin.

Andy Murray = The Greatest Overachiever among the slam winners in this century
Marat Safin = The Greatest Underachiever among the slam winners in this century

 

[Sudacafan]

Now leave Murray alone

I second this proposal.
Murray bullying has fed me up.

 

[mike danny]

Not at all. He underachieved on the slam count given his conversion rate, and a lot of his other tour stats are in line with players with far more slams.

Had he not had the hip issues, he may have won another 2-3 slams in 2017-2019, and it wouldn't have surprised me had he ended up a 5-6 slam winner.

Where exactly was he winning those slams?

 

[mike danny]

It depends how you look at things.

Did he underachieve based on how often the threw a dud in slam finals?

 

[ichaseballs]

he worked his ass off...
he didn't seem as naturally gifted as much as some of his peers...
with the pressure of a Brit/Scot to win Wimbledon, he endured and then did it. but no one was really surprised he did...
then fought back from major surgery and rehab to play pro again, knowing he won't be able to compete at the same level...

and you know Sir Andy Murray wishes you a happy holidays!

 

[TennisLurker]

Novak didn't tank to Murray
Murray benefited from Novak having a super hard 5 sets semifinal against Del Potro, and a super hard 5 sets semifinal against Federer, but everybody gets some luck sometimes, you just have to take your chances.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Same goes for you ... Who has asked you to defend him on every thread created to discuss him.

I'm curious if you use the same criterion for the two vociferous Rafa fans here who wade into every Nadal thread, furiously and hysterically defending him? What about the Djokovic fan club who does the same? If someone attacks a POS like Srjdan we have to listen to the same old tired mantra, "Anti-Serbian hatred, so racist!! Like so unfair, like lay off our GOAT Nole!"

Please leave Mainad alone. Defending Muzz might be a full time occupation, but Mainad is up to the job.

 

[toby55555]

He put the effort in and got his just rewards.

 

[spottishwood]

Where exactly was he winning those slams?

Lol I was about to ask the same question. It seems like he'd have 2-3 chances at max. USO'17. He can win that one if he's playing well cuz Rafa didn't play that great. 50/50. His other chances may be AO'18 (10% probability as he has got a great record vs fed in slams like 1-5 or something). And maybe WC'18 cuz Nole was coming of a long match vs rafa and records say that Mury is 2-1 on grass. Apart from these 3, I don't see him having a shot at others.