PMSL. You are taking Murray hate to new levels - brilliant. So if he wins, Murray's slam wouldn't be diminished - but he wouldn't be an 'elite' player who 'won' his slam. OK - there's nothing remotely incoherent about that statement. I often wondered what kind of bitter pish you'd come out with if Murray ever won a slam - now I guess we can all see. If Murray wins he'll have beaten two top ten players - unlike Roger in his first slam, who only faced one top ten player. I guess Roger wasn't an 'elite'player until he 'won' some subsequent slams - as the criteria you seem to want to apply to Murray this year would surely have also applied to Roger in 2003.