SaintClaires
Banned
Djokovic has a very awkward slice....he hits it extremely tentatively.
Djokovic is much more exciting to watch than Murray
- Thread starter Cesc Fabregas
- Start date
SempreSami
Hall of Fame
Last time I checked, Smith leads his team to Test series victories away from home and doesn't bottle captaincy and whine to the press about missing his wife. And he uses Gunn & Moore like me.
Josherer
Professional
I disagree.... Djokovic is fun to watch when he's playing well but he too often has metal lapses and plays like crap.
On the other hand there's Murray who always plays at a high level and although his game doesn't include lots of winners... i alway love watching him scramble from the baseline and win the point. Although he doesn't hit winners he is more fun to watch as he works hard for each point and mentally weak players (such as Joker) get fustrated and loose the match.
Overall much prefer watching Murray as Djoko is boring (ie. the same old thing... rally...rallyy..rally.. winner... rally..
Love the fact that murray never misses... Admire him alot..
On the other hand there's Murray who always plays at a high level and although his game doesn't include lots of winners... i alway love watching him scramble from the baseline and win the point. Although he doesn't hit winners he is more fun to watch as he works hard for each point and mentally weak players (such as Joker) get fustrated and loose the match.
Overall much prefer watching Murray as Djoko is boring (ie. the same old thing... rally...rallyy..rally.. winner... rally..
Love the fact that murray never misses... Admire him alot..
Sampras was extremely boring to watch...not a bit of emotion or interpay with the crowd. Yet poeple loved to watch him play, and loved to watch Federer. Boring, boring IMO. Give me some fire , excitement, and unpredictablity any time.
That is, unless you're a person who likes boring and predictable tennis.
That is, unless you're a person who likes boring and predictable tennis.
rooski
Professional
+1 on agreeing with the OP.
I was happy Murray came on the scene to add to the small group of players that could potentially challenge Fed...but after watching the match today, I see why people have called him a pusher. Not the 4.5 version of a pusher of course but the pro version. Boring. One of the announcers called him this generation's version of Brad Gilbert. I'm not quite sure about that but he does seem to "win ugly". He also has a suprisingly weak serve for such a big guy. Strange player to watch.
Too bad Djoker was in "heat mode" again today but that's a whole different story.
I was happy Murray came on the scene to add to the small group of players that could potentially challenge Fed...but after watching the match today, I see why people have called him a pusher. Not the 4.5 version of a pusher of course but the pro version. Boring. One of the announcers called him this generation's version of Brad Gilbert. I'm not quite sure about that but he does seem to "win ugly". He also has a suprisingly weak serve for such a big guy. Strange player to watch.
Too bad Djoker was in "heat mode" again today but that's a whole different story.
Ripster
Hall of Fame
I think Murray can be exciting depending on who he's playing. Let's face it, the guy has all the shots in the book however, when he thinks that all he needs to do is get the ball back and cover the court to win - well, that's just what he'll do.
On the other hand when he plays a guy like Nadal he is forced to be more aggressive and that's when I enjoy watching him the most. That US Open semi-final was very entertaining tennis from Murray.
On the other hand when he plays a guy like Nadal he is forced to be more aggressive and that's when I enjoy watching him the most. That US Open semi-final was very entertaining tennis from Murray.
Last edited:
Excellent. This is what I have been hamering on about for ages. The only point I could mention was that I watched Sampras on the biography channel here in the uk and it was said that he was upset that people found his tennis so boring because he worked so hard. This is one of the sad aspects of tennis. I'm afraid when Federer was playing he was so predicatable that I often didn't finish watching the match.
Clydey2times
Hall of Fame
His flat serve regularly breaks 130mph and he has served over 140mph. I don't see how that is a weak serve.
orangettecoleman
Professional
being exciting isn't murray's job, winning tennis matches is murray's job. he plays smart- he takes exactly as many risks as he needs to take to get the win and no more.
mawashi
Hall of Fame
More or less that's correct. I'm no fan of Murry cus of the way he plays, the negative vibes, etc. Basically as much as I hate watching him play his boring game, he deserves credit for getting so much better then some his peers.
Djoker is a real joy to watch provided he plays well but with his talent he SHOULD try harder to actually get better not just try to get more attention.
mawashi
It's such a shame because Djokovic played a brilliant AO when he beat both Tsonga and Federer 2 years back - I would hate to see him go back to being just another top 10
I agree that Djokovic is more exciting to watch & Murray pushes a lot more. However, Murray can hit with a better variety than Djokovic (drop-shot, volleys, lobs etc).
paulorenzo
Hall of Fame
no my friend, you pulled this out too early, while the general consensus is pretty much split down the middle. therefore, the thread has not failed. you fail.
plus i would definitely rather watch an on form djokovic than an on form murray. murray's game is effective, but the pattern is basically like so:
safe deep ball, flat deep ball, flat deep ball, loopy junk ball, flat deep ball, and repeat.
paulorenzo
Hall of Fame
i agree with you on the complaining retirement part, that's probably what turn most people off about djokovic.
but when novak is on, the product of aimless bashing seem to magically find itself frequently near the lines, which is potentially far more appealing than murray's "variety" - which consists of hitting rally balls and bashing a couple once in a while, from the baseline.
cknobman
Legend
I agree with OP.
Djoker much more interesting to watch because of all the drama. I watch his matches just to see if anything juicy will happen.
Will he **** the crowd off? Will he retire? Will he **** his opponent off? Will he say something stupid in post match comments? Will his family do something stupid during the match?
So many questions, so many opportunities.
Djoker much more interesting to watch because of all the drama. I watch his matches just to see if anything juicy will happen.
Will he **** the crowd off? Will he retire? Will he **** his opponent off? Will he say something stupid in post match comments? Will his family do something stupid during the match?
So many questions, so many opportunities.
rooski
Professional
Maybe you are right. However, in the 3-4 times I've seen him play his serve was not impressive for one of the top players in the world. AM's fastest serve yesterday against Djoker was 127 I think and most first serves were in the 117-119 range. I'm sure he is physically capable of hitting a serve 140+ but he doesn't seem to do it. He hit one ace yesterday at 76 mph out wide in the deuce court and another sub 90 mph ace later.
Maybe his strategy yesterday was to get a high percentage of serves in by taking something off the speed. He only hit 59% first serves in yesterday so I don't know.
Leublu tennis
Legend
Thats really not saying much. Personally I like to watch paint dry. Grass grow. And then Murray play.
ronalditop
Hall of Fame
actually every player is more fun to watch than murray. Really, this guy plays extremely boring. I think his strategy is to bore his opponents till they just dont give a .... about the match.
M
Morrissey
Guest
That´s not saying much. But then again I haven´t seen much of Joker since he retires so much. Arguing with Breakpoint is more exciting then watching Murray I guess.
Tennis_Bum
Professional
I'll watch a lot of others before I watch Murray. I don't like to watch pushers even though they have excellent results. Pushers are not someone I like to watch. When Murray wins, people say he's so talented, so smart, etc. but when he loses, man the guy is just a jerk as anyone. He's way overrated, until he wins a slam, I don't think he's that great. I don't think he'll win a slam though, you can't push your way to a slam. At least I haven't seen a pusher win a slam yet anyway. Is there a pusher that won a slam? Anyone knows?
ODYSSEY Mk.4
Professional
agree with the OP
Tennis_Bum
Professional
Have you ever seen a pusher miss a ball on any level? That's why they are called pushers. The object is to push the ball back and let the other guy make mistakes by trying to change the game, great results no doubt but sure do make boring tennis. Murray will never draw the crowd as Fed, Djoko, Roddick or Nadal does. But to some degree Nadal also pushes the ball, but not as blatantly as Murray does.
tennis_hand
Hall of Fame
true. but he isn't winning at the moment.
Fed is also more exciting to watch, but also not playing well.
The dull players like Murray and Nadal are dominating now.
batz
G.O.A.T.
Sigh.
So many tropes and cliches.
OK, if all Murray is doing is pushing the ball back, crossing his fingers and wishing real hard (which seems to be what you're implying), how come you, me or Uncle Tom Cobbleigh aren't in the top 4 in the world with 3 MS shields, 11 titles and a slam final before turning 22?
Rafa and his Uncle call Murray 'a complete player', but you'll know best.
Winners or Errors
Legend
Very sad for tennis, though I don't think Nadal is boring, not like Murray. If Murray were number 1, I think tennis would lose more fans than it already has... that's a good reason to root for guys with more interesting games.
Tennis_Bum
Professional
Again, you can't believe everything you hear from the pros or their coaches. Just because they said things about Murray in public doesn't mean that he ain't a pusher. Murray can produce excellent results but his tennis is more or less a battle of errors from the opponents. I still say he can't win slam by pushing the ball, but let's see if he can prove me wrong. I don't think Murray will ever draw a crowd the way other pros do. Simply because he's too dull to watch.
tacou
G.O.A.T.
good for you man. even though Djokovic lost I'm sure he takes solace in you preferring to watch him.
SempreSami
Hall of Fame
Federer must really suck if he loses to Murray all because of errors. :roll:
mawashi
Hall of Fame
Regardless of how well he plays n he can play great!
Murry will never have as many fans as Rafa, Fed or even Djoker because he is really really weird. Negative body language, zero charisma on his interviews, freaky n rather embarrassing celebrations like him flexing his biceps or his latest spasm like head shakes.
I though Monfils' dance was bad but Murry can really get under my skin.
mawashi
Murry will never have as many fans as Rafa, Fed or even Djoker because he is really really weird. Negative body language, zero charisma on his interviews, freaky n rather embarrassing celebrations like him flexing his biceps or his latest spasm like head shakes.
I though Monfils' dance was bad but Murry can really get under my skin.
mawashi
35ft6
Legend
Would much rather watch Murray over Novak anyday. Not even close. Murray is doing some incredible tactical stuff out there. Really, the level of point construction among the top 3 guys right now (Murray, Nadal, and Fed) is incredible. You want variety? I love the contrast between their games but they're all similar in that they're not just some of the best ball strikers around, but they are all arguably all court players with incredible racket skills. Yes, Nadal included.
Similar threads
