Djokovic vs Murray: Reasons for big disparity in level of success

[BringBackSV]

This is completely wrong.
1. Djokovic and Murray DO NOT have similar styles at all. Murray is a counterpuncher while Djokovic is aggressive offensive baseliner and shotmaker. No similarity at all for any knowledgeable tennis fan who actually follows and watches their matches.
2. There is really no reason to ask this question. The answer is obvious. Djokovic is simply better, more skilled and more accomplished tennis player. Why trying to question this fact and start threads like this which undermines and undervalues Djokovic's achievements and career?

ALso saying that Murray and Djokovic have "even" FH and return? Even implying Murray's FH is better? Are you for real?
So much disrespect and so little recognition for Djokovic's skillst, game and career.

I would not say that Novak is more skilled or that he's an "aggressive baseliner and shotmaker". They possess a similar skillset and while Novak is more accomplished, I think that the difference in their success largely comes down to Novak being stronger mentally.

This is not even remotely insulting to Novak. Murray's return game is every bit as good as Novak's and quite frankly I didn't know anybody would dispute that.

 

[bjsnider]

Murray is superior defensively, but Djokovic is near the top of the ATP Match Facts offensive statistics as well, something Murray is not. Djokovic is willing to attack and put pressure on his opponent more than Murray. Djokovic is incorrectly described in some quarters as a counterpuncher. He's an attacking player. This is the main difference.

The reasons behind this are up for debate, perhaps Murray lacks a mental quality Djokovic has, or perhaps Murray's tragic upbringing has something to do with it.

Personally, I think the quality of the team surrounding the player has a lot to do with their on-court success. Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic have had, and I think continue to have, much better teams than Murray.

 

[JRAJ1988]

Case in point, Djokovic is a better match player than Murray.

I think Murray though on form possesses a more penetrative first serve.

 

[Mainad]

@Mainad. Nole actually leads Murray at the Slams 3-2 mate. :wink:

Yeah, I was talking about Slam finals. I should have made that clearer!

 

[D.Nalby12]

Both Djokovic and Murray play a similar type of game - solid baseline tennis. Murray has always been pegged as the one with more variety and better in the front court, and in fact when both were coming up, Fed thought Murray would be the more successful of the two.

While Djoko is slightly better in a number of areas, the disparity in success shouldn't be that big? Is it skill level, mental or coaching/support staff?

Here's my quick breakdown:

FH: Even (when Murray is not being too defensive)
BH: Djoko
Return: About even?
Passing shots: Murray
Defense: Even
Athleticism/Movement: Djoko
Serve: Djoko
Variety: Murray
Net: Murray

Major aspects in the game Djokovic leads by big margin are Forehand, Serve, athleticism, mentality, consistency.

Other main difference is their shot making skills and execution of shots that defines their playing style which are entirely different as someone said earlier. There is no wonder aggressive baseliner with lesser variety but better mentality is more accomplished than defensive base liner with more variety in baseline era.

Finally answer to your question, more shotmaking skills, different playing styles, fitness and athleticism, mentality, consistency makes Novak more accomplished player on every surface, there is no reason to consider them equally skillful based on talk when they were youngsters like Thiem, Kyrgios.

 

[BringBackSV]

Major aspects in the game Djokovic leads by big margin are Forehand, Serve, athleticism, mentality, consistency.

Other main difference is their shot making skills and execution of shots that defines their playing style which are entirely different as someone said earlier. There is no wonder aggressive baseliner with lesser variety but better mentality is more accomplished than defensive base liner with more variety in baseline era.

Finally answer to your question, more shotmaking skills, different playing styles, fitness and athleticism, mentality, consistency makes Novak more accomplished player on every surface, there is no reason to consider them equally skillful based on talk when they were youngsters like Thiem, Kyrgios.

Certainly Novak isn't better than Murray by a big margin in virtually anything, which is obvious.

 

[Chanwan]

You probably haven't watched much of Djokovic in 2011...

And you were probably not yet 10 years old, when Fed's forehand ruled the game between 2004-2007 - a shot referred to as 'a great liquid whip' and 'maybe the greatest shot our sport has ever seen'

 

[Chanwan]

Pretty much agree with you and conway on most points. I have the same feelings about the serve, Murray has the edge there when his 1st serve is on and Djokovic has a bigger edge when thats not the case due to a much better 2nd serve.

I'd favor the Djoko backhand slightly, but I'd agree Murray has the 2nd best 2-hander in the game right now next to him and its very close.

Quick note on the ROS stats you pulled up.

1)You have to consider that Djokovic is usually making deeper tournament runs and as such is playing a higher percentage of his matches against better players who are harder to break.

2)You also have to consider that a larger part of the season is played on hard courts vs clay and Murray's edge at returning vs big servers is more pronounced on the hard and hence his minor edge in return games won % on hard courts entirely compensates for a larger deficiency in return games won % on clay courts. Grass court return games won % are pretty even because its so tough to break on grass anyways.

3)Murray more often then Nole (when his serve is not on) has to fight for more breaks to win sets vs mid level players. They can both win a set 6-3, but Nole could not drop serve once in the set and just get the 1 break he needs and coast to save energy, while Murray might drop serve once and fight for that 2nd break to win the set. This is substantiated by Nole's higher service game won %. Against lesser opponents Nole breaks more often as shown by his higher # of breadsticks and bagels.

Good additions - I agree on the first points, but not completely on the 1, 2 and 3.
1) true, but I'm not sure to what extent this has an influence on the percentage (or it least - it would be minor). He goes deeper, but it's not as if Murray goes out in the first round

2) Murray is 33 vs 31 % for Djoko on HC. Djoko is 36 vs 34 % for Murray on clay. Given how much better Djoko is on clay compared to Murray, I would say these numbers actually point to a slight advantage to Murray on the ROS. Also, if we agree that Djokovic is the slightly better player once the rally is going, then Murray's ROS has to be a bit better to conjure equal stats - at least if 1) above is not skewing the percentages too much. Either way, not much difference on ROS.

3) this could be a reason. Though as you yourself imply with the bagel and the breadsticks in favor of Nole, Nole is rarely just coasting through a set. He almost always try to break as much as he can, so I don't think it's such a significant factor if at all.

 

[Chico]

I think you are taking that a little far accusing him of intentionally undermining Novak's career

That is what OP is clearly doing here indeed. Undermining and underrating Novak and his career.

 

[AssaultJoker]

And you were probably not yet 10 years old, when Fed's forehand ruled the game between 2004-2007 - a shot referred to as 'a great liquid whip' and 'maybe the greatest shot our sport has ever seen'

A shot that is helpless against Nadal:lol: Go back and watch Djokovic's Rome-2011 final and US Open 2011 final, it will give you some impression of what a forehand Djokovic had at the top of his game.

 

[Chico]

Well, I have watched many of their matches and their styles are VERY similar, certainly when they play each other. Some people on here think they are TOO similar to the point of boredom when they watch them play! The main differences are that Djokovic hits the ball harder and he has a more reliable forehand.



Why isn't there any reason to probe this question? They are extremely close in age (only a week apart), grew up on the tour together as juniors, know each other very well, have played each other often, are both extremely skilled players when they are on top form and are generally a very even match-up for each other (their 12-8 H2H and 2-2 H2H in Slam finals indicates as much). Djokovic is mentally stronger, physically healthier and is more consistent. That, in the end, is what counts for the wide gap in their achievements.



Djokovic's FH is definitely more consistent and reliable. When Murray is on top of his game, his defence is equal.



In treating a comparison between them as disrespectful to Djokovic you are just treating Murray with the same disrespect and lack of recognition you accuse others of showing towards Djokovic. No-one is disputing that Djokovic is the better player because his results prove that but Murray has beaten him in 2 Slam finals and 3 other tour finals and that deserves some recognition too!

Sorry but Novak and Murray don't have similar styles at all. Novak's game is based on offense and excellent shotmaking and helped with good defense he is capable of playing when needed, while Murray is crafty counterpuncher whose game is base on defense, not on shotmaking.

The way OP posted the question, it is clear what is his intention - to undermine and devalue Novak's game comparing to other three brom the current "big 4". claiming that Murray's FH and return are equal or even better than Novak's just confirm that. And that is treating Novak with the disrespect indeed. So no there is no need nor any reason to "probe" the question as formulated by the OP.

Maybe people are not disputing Novak achieved more and is more accomplished player here, but they are disputing (especially sneaky OP post) that Novak is more skilled and better player than Murray, which I really find disrespectful and not acceptable indeed.

 

[Chico]

I would not say that Novak is more skilled or that he's an "aggressive baseliner and shotmaker". They possess a similar skillset and while Novak is more accomplished, I think that the difference in their success largely comes down to Novak being stronger mentally.

This is not even remotely insulting to Novak. Murray's return game is every bit as good as Novak's and quite frankly I didn't know anybody would dispute that.

Typical example of underrating, undermining and disrespecting Novak and his game, I was talking about in my previous post.

LOL at Murray's return game being equal to Novak's and Novak not being offensive and aggressive shotmaker - only haters and Fedal fanboys are still trying to get away with this nonsense.

 

[conway]

In treating a comparison between them as disrespectful to Djokovic you are just treating Murray with the same disrespect and lack of recognition you accuse others of showing towards Djokovic. No-one is disputing that Djokovic is the better player because his results prove that but Murray has beaten him in 2 Slam finals and 3 other tour finals and that deserves some recognition too!

I don't think this particular poster has anything against Murray, but more is an over the top Djokovic fanatic. Look at some of his/her previous posts. Nadal and Graf are the players this poster really hates, Murray pretty much wouldn't care about one way or the other probably.

That said he/she is right the OP comparision between them is way off the mark, and implying Murray even might have a better or equal forehand to Djokovic for instance is a complete joke.

As for your point on defense, while Murray has excellent defense, like I said Djokovic is the ONLY player who can sometimes beat Nadal by outdefending him (does outhit him on most of those same days too mind you). Murray could never and has never beaten Nadal by outdefending him, but only on days he played more agressively than usual and was able to outhit and overpower him. So based on that I would have to say Djokovic's defense > Murray's defense.

Djokovic obviously has a better game and more ability overall. You have to admit Murray could never have a year like Djokovic had in 2011, or beat peak Nadal 7 times in a row. He could never dominate one particular event like Djokovic has both the Australian Open and WTF. Furthermore Murray on a subpar day could never beat Nadal playing his absolute best in a big slam match like subpar Djokovic did to Nadal playing his absolute best in the 2012 Australian Open final (and Djokovic choked too and still won). And yes I know Murray has beaten Nadal in slams, but it would never be a day with the combination he was subpar and Nadal was playing his best. I like Murray more than Djokovic, and prefer watching him play as I like games with more variety and feel generally, but still the truth is obvious.

 

[Chanwan]

A shot that is helpless against Nadal:lol: Go back and watch Djokovic's Rome-2011 final and US Open 2011 final, it will give you some impression of what a forehand Djokovic had at the top of his game.

It's the backhand that was (and still is) helpless vs Rafa in case you haven't noticed. I watched Djoko 2011 all year long. And while his forehand was great indeed, what truly made him great was his no weaknesses - his balance off both wings (the net was a bit of a weakness compared to other greats, but he didn't really need it much).
It confused Nadal that he couldn't just aim all his shots at the backhand. Djoko 2011 properly had the best return game of all time (at least up until post US-OPen). Coupled with a very decent hold game, that made him incredibly tough to beat.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

I think you are taking that a little far accusing him of intentionally undermining Novak's career

That is what OP is clearly doing here indeed. Undermining and underrating Novak and his career

tennisbuck, it's been proven that Talk Tennis threads have been known to undermine careers.

The OP's undermining Novak's career, and 5555 is underlining Novak's career! Can't you see what's happening here tennisbuck?!!! This is serious!!!!!

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Because murray is british and its not maketeable and sustainable to have a british guy in top of the ATP considering the british people (ethnic brits) average looks...

 

[sportsfan1]

I got one more: Slice BH - Murray > Djoko ;-).
But I still believe Djoko and Murray have overall similar skills and style of play, but Djoko has been able to use and refine his skills for greater success. This will be obvious to those who recognize Murray for the actual great player that he is, rather than through the prejudiced "pusher" view that he's (incorrectly) tagged with on here.

 

[Chico]

I got one more: Slice BH - Murray > Djoko ;-).
But I still believe Djoko and Murray have overall similar skills and style of play, but Djoko has been able to use and refine his skills for greater success. This will be obvious to those who recognize Murray for the actual great player that he is, rather than through the prejudiced "pusher" view that he's (incorrectly) tagged with on here.

How about you recognize Novak for great player that he actually is and admit his skills (FH and return especially) far far exceed Murray's, and simply that is why he is much better and more accomplished player.
You also need to recognize that their styles are not similar at all since Novak's game is based on offense and shotmaking.

 

[Noelan]

They haven't similar skills and style of play at all, they both well defend and because of that that you see them as similar players ,that's all .And is quite narow thinking about this sport.

 

[FedTheMan]

tennisbuck, it's been proven that Talk Tennis threads have been known to undermine careers.

The OP's undermining Novak's career, and 5555 is underlining Novak's career! Can't you see what's happening here tennisbuck?!!! This is serious!!!!!

LOL! You are intelligent and very witty.

 

[SpicyCurry1990]

Good additions - I agree on the first points, but not completely on the 1, 2 and 3.
1) true, but I'm not sure to what extent this has an influence on the percentage (or it least - it would be minor). He goes deeper, but it's not as if Murray goes out in the first round

He has played 35 matches vs Fed and 41 vs Nadal for example vs far less for Murray against both. Its not a pronounced edge in that it would skew the numbers greatly, but it exists.

2) Murray is 33 vs 31 % for Djoko on HC. Djoko is 36 vs 34 % for Murray on clay. Given how much better Djoko is on clay compared to Murray, I would say these numbers actually point to a slight advantage to Murray on the ROS. Also, if we agree that Djokovic is the slightly better player once the rally is going, then Murray's ROS has to be a bit better to conjure equal stats - at least if 1) above is not skewing the percentages too much. Either way, not much difference on ROS.

I must have missed something, I thought I saw 32% for Murray on clay, if it is indeed 34 then you would have a point, but only if we discount 1 and 3.

3) this could be a reason. Though as you yourself imply with the bagel and the breadsticks in favor of Nole, Nole is rarely just coasting through a set. He almost always try to break as much as he can, so I don't think it's such a significant factor if at all.

I was saying against low tier players, he can coast and still break with ease more so than Murray can. Against mid-tier players where you need to go all out to break, Nole will be more apt (because of his higher service games won %) to coast once he gets a break to save energy (and maybe a reason why he goes deeper than Murray a lot), while Murray needs to expend more energy to earn a 2nd break more often, or also possibly not break until later in the set.

 

[Mainad]

How about you recognize Novak for great player that he actually is and admit his skills (FH and return especially) far far exceed Murray's, and simply that is why he is much better and more accomplished player.

His skills do NOT far exceed Murray's! They are well-matched as players. Their overall H2H is 12-8 to Djojovic, 5-4 to Murray in tour finals and 2-2 in Slam finals. Why will you not accept that they are well-matched as players? I can only think it is because you cannot accept that Djokovic can sometimes lose to a better player and, on a number of occasions, Murray has proved to be the better player. Of course, overall, Djokovic is the better player because he is more consistent and mentally stronger and his results prove that and nobody is trying to deny that. But when Murray is at the top of his game, which happens far less often than it does with Djokovic, he is definitely a match for him. Why is this so hard for you to understand and accept?

You also need to recognize that their styles are not similar at all since Novak's game is based on offense and shotmaking.

Novak's game is not always based on those tactics. Sometimes he just grinds and he nearly always does that against Murray. Reason? When they play against each other, their tactics are very similar because Murray's strong defensive game often neutralises Djokovic's offensive game and Djokovic is forced to grind it out against him. This is perfectly clear when you watch their matches against each other and I do not understand why you refuse to recognise this! You are not taking anything away from Djokovic's great legacy by doing so and just accepting that Murray is very often a very tricky and awkward match-up for him. 5 tour final losses including 2 Slam final losses is obviously clear proof of that!

 

[conway]

Djokovic is a more offensive player than Murray or Nadal. He is overpowering from the baseline or atleast can be, in a way those other two cannot be. In the Wimbledon final he was even overpowering Federer, especialy off the ground, and Federer is the most offensive of the big 4.

 

[SpicyCurry1990]

@Mainad. Nole actually leads Murray at the Slams 3-2 mate.

Mainad likes to be "objective" and discount the AO 2012 match when discussing big match h2h since it wasn't a slam final:lol: However, he uses tour level masters finals while disregarding the slam SF match to argue that Murray can beat Nole in "big matches"

He also literally claimed in another topic that the AO 2013 final (where Murray had a 5 setter before in the SF) was not equal conditions, but Wimbledon 2013 (where Nole had a 5 setter before in the SF) was equal conditions, saying to me that both have "1 final win over the other in equal conditions." :lol:

Literally lumped in AO 2013 (a 5 setter under his own control with time to rest after) with USO 2012 where Nole had to play a SF/F back-to-back days (not under his own control despite beating Ferrer quicker than Murray beat Berdych) and refuses to acknowledge the heavy winds hurt an offensive player more than a defensive one.

He then goes on to lump the AO 2011 straight set beat down in perfectly neutral conditions with the Wimb 2013 where Nole had a 5 setter SF (under his own control all be it with time to rest after) and led by a break in the 2nd/3rd sets instead of AO 2013, the obviously more apt comparison. :lol:

Anything to make Murray look good. :roll:

 

[Mainad]

Mainad likes to be "objective" and discount the AO 2012 match when discussing big match h2h since it wasn't a slam final:lol: However, he uses tour level masters finals while disregarding the slam SF match to argue that Murray can beat Nole in "big matches"

He also literally claimed in another topic that the AO 2013 final (where Murray had a 5 setter before in the SF) was not equal conditions, but Wimbledon 2013 (where Nole had a 5 setter before in the SF) was equal conditions, saying to me that both have "1 final win over the other in equal conditions." :lol:

Literally lumped in AO 2013 (a 5 setter under his own control with time to rest after) with USO 2012 where Nole had to play a SF/F back-to-back for Nole (not under his own control despite beating Ferrer quicker than Murray beat Berdych) and refuses to acknowledge the heavy winds favor an offensive player over a defensive one.

He then goes on to lump to AO 2011 straight set beat down in perfectly neutral conditions with the Wimb 2013 where Nole had a 5 setter (under his own control all be it with time to rest after) instead of AO 2013. :lol:

Anything to make Murray look good. :roll:

I understand that you are a Djokovic fan and that you obviously find it difficult to accept that your guy can sometimes lose to a better player on the day even if that player happens to be Murray! You seem to find it difficult to swallow that Murray has quite often beaten Djokovic in tour finals including Slams and therefore you seem to find it necessary to look for all manner of excuses to try to justify such losses. This only seems to happen whenever the player he loses to is Murray. I don't seem to find any such difficulties on your part whenever he loses to Federer or Nadal. The only possible conclusion to draw is that it is because you respect Federer and Nadal's game and do not respect Murray's which means, as I have suspected all along, you are biased against Murray especially when it concerns his wins against your favourite player.

Something you should learn and understand:

Definition of a true fan: Someone who accepts and recognises that his favourite player can sometimes lose to a better player on the day.

Definition of a fanboy: Someone who cannot accept that his favourite player can lose fairly and squarely especially when he does so against a player who he cannot respect or whose game he cannot respect.

IMO the jury is still very much out which definition you fall under!

 

[Noelan]

I understand that you are a Djokovic fan and that you obviously find it difficult to accept that your guy can sometimes lose to a better player on the day even if that player happens to be Murray! You seem to find it difficult to swallow that Murray has quite often beaten Djokovic in tour finals including Slams and therefore you seem to find it necessary to look for all manner of excuses to try to justify such losses. This only seems to happen whenever the player he loses to is Murray. I don't seem to find any such difficulties on your part whenever he loses to Federer or Nadal. The only possible conclusion to draw is that it is because you respect Federer and Nadal's game and do not respect Murray's which means, as I have suspected all along, you are biased against Murray especially when it concerns his wins against your favourite player.

Something you should learn and understand:

Definition of a true fan: Someone who accepts and recognises that his favourite player can sometimes lose to a better player on the day.

Definition of a fanboy: Someone who cannot accept that his favourite player can lose fairly and squarely especially when he does so against a player who he cannot respect or whose game he cannot respect.

IMO the jury is still very much out which definition you fall under!

You fit in a definition of a fanboy,perfectly

 

[SpicyCurry1990]

I understand that you are a Djokovic fan and that you obviously find it difficult to accept that your guy can sometimes lose to a better player on the day even if that player happens to be Murray! You seem to find it difficult to swallow that Murray has quite often beaten Djokovic in tour finals including Slams and therefore you seem to find it necessary to look for all manner of excuses to try to justify such losses. This only seems to happen whenever the player he loses to is Murray. I don't seem to find any such difficulties on your part whenever he loses to Federer or Nadal. The only possible conclusion to draw is that it is because you respect Federer and Nadal's game and do not respect Murray's which means, as I have suspected all along, you are biased against Murray especially when it concerns his wins against your favourite player.

Something you should learn and understand:

Definition of a true fan: Someone who accepts and recognises that his favourite player can sometimes lose to a better player on the day.

Definition of a fanboy: Someone who cannot accept that his favourite player can lose fairly and squarely especially when he does so against a player who he cannot respect or whose game he cannot respect.

IMO the jury is still very much out which definition you fall under!

Was anything I said in my post inaccurate? You actually literally just did what I accused you of 2 posts above! You said its an even match-up due to slam final h2h being 2-2 (disregarding the AO SF) and then cited the 5-4 tour finals h2h! Thats a true fan? Presenting half arguments? A slam SF is a far bigger match than a Masters Final.

And how about the slam finals piece? Did you not say both have 1 "neutral final win over the other" lumping Wimb 13 with AO 11 and AO 13 with USO 12? Tell me what reasonable poster would consider having to play 8 sets in 24 hours vs 5 sets in 24 hours the same as having a 5 setter 2 days before a match and having a day off and THEN also considering that same scenario (5 setter 2 days before the final) as a NEUTRAL condition in the other direction?

I've already said I take nothing away from Murray's OG or Masters or Wimb 13 win. I only have something to say about the USO 12 win precisely because it WASN'T fair and square. You can keep going on about your woe is Murray facade but the fact is you aren't as objective as you claim to be when you spew the abundance of BS above I just called you out on and you just glossed over.

If Murray beats Nole at the USO in a neutral conditions match, the way Federer and Nadal both have, I would be happy to give him credit. Fact is that has not happened yet.

 

[conway]

I understand that you are a Djokovic fan and that you obviously find it difficult to accept that your guy can sometimes lose to a better player on the day

He wont even accept that Nadal was CLEARLY the #1 and best player of 2013 despite winning 2 slams to 1 for Djokovic, 5 masters to 3 for Djokovic, 10 tournaments to 7 for Djokovic, and leading the ATP race almost the entire year. So yeah definitely a heavily biased Djokovic fanboy.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Mainad likes to be "objective"

Anything to make Murray look good. :roll:

Post of the Month.

So true. If you don't agree with him, you're biased. But he sees himself as the Voice of Reason, all knowing and all seeing.

Murray is much more passive than Djokovic. Lendl improved that somewhat; but when things start going bad, passive Andy re-emerges. He has the talent to be as aggressive as Djokovic. Just not the conviction.

 

[killerboi2]

If Murray beats Nole at the USO in a neutral conditions match, the way Federer and Nadal both have, I would be happy to give him credit. Fact is that has not happened yet.

Ahh so you're one of those wind apologists. Could your fragile man not handle the mean nasty wind?

 

[Mainad]

Was anything I said in my post inaccurate? You actually literally just did what I accused you of 2 posts above! You said its an even match-up due to slam final h2h being 2-2 (disregarding the AO SF) and then cited the 5-4 tour finals h2h! Thats a true fan? Presenting half arguments?A slam SF is a far bigger match than a Masters Final.

Slam finals >>>>>Slam semi-finals. Whole different beasts! Plus Masters final wins can give a good grounding and basis for future Slam wins. Why is this so hard for you to grasp and accept or is it only hard for you to accept whenever it applies to Murray v Djokovic?

And how about the slam finals piece? Did you not say both have 1 "neutral final win over the other" lumping Wimb 13 with AO 11 and AO 13 with USO 12? Tell me what reasonable poster would consider having to play 8 sets in 24 hours vs 5 sets in 24 hours the same as having a 5 setter 2 days before a match and having a day off and THEN also considering that same scenario (5 setter 2 days before the final) as a NEUTRAL condition in the other direction?

Players like Djokovic obviously don't have a problem with it (otherwise they would refuse to play) and if he doesn't, why do you?

I've already said I take nothing away from Murray's OG or Masters or Wimb 13 win.

What a hypocrite! You've just been busy trying to persuade me that NEITHER of Murray's Slam wins over Djokovic were in 'neutral conditions' and now you're telling me that you're willing to give him credit for Wimbledon, but not USO! Make up your mind, please. Either you believe that Murray can beat Djokovic in neutral conditions or you don't. You're perfectly free to believe either but don't expect the rest of us to automatically swallow the 'evidence' you believe gives substance to your belief!

I only have something to say about the USO 12 win precisely because it WASN'T fair and square. You can keep going on about your woe is Murray facade but the fact is you aren't as objective as you claim to be when you spew the abundance of BS above I just called you out on and you just glossed over.

Lol... that's rich and then some! MY Murray is woe facade? The whole thrust of these pointless arguments of your's is your constant 'Oh woe is Djokovic' facade because you just cannot accept that he can lose to Murray fairly and squarely because you basically don't respect his game as you do Federer's and Nadal's. But that's just YOUR problem, I'm afraid. True Djokovic fans (eg. Djokovic2011) recognise and understand this. Djokovic fanboys like you never can and never will until you learn to respect Murray's game and understand that, when he is on top of his game, he is perfectly capable of beating him in whatever conditions you deem to be fair or otherwise!

If Murray beats Nole at the USO in a neutral conditions match, the way Federer and Nadal both have, I would be happy to give him credit. Fact is that has not happened yet.

Lol...yeah right! Fact is until you learn to respect what Murray is capable of you will never be able to give him credit for beating your idol at USO or anywhere else. If you had already managed to learn this, I guarantee that we would not continue to be subjected to your endless and futile attempts to 'prove' otherwise!

 

[bullfan]

Both Djokovic and Murray play a similar type of game - solid baseline tennis. Murray has always been pegged as the one with more variety and better in the front court, and in fact when both were coming up, Fed thought Murray would be the more successful of the two.

While Djoko is slightly better in a number of areas, the disparity in success shouldn't be that big? Is it skill level, mental or coaching/support staff?

Here's my quick breakdown:

FH: Even (when Murray is not being too defensive)
BH: Djoko
Return: About even?
Passing shots: Murray
Defense: Even
Athleticism/Movement: Djoko
Serve: Djoko
Variety: Murray
Net: Murray

Mental and tactics.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Certainly Novak isn't better than Murray by a big margin in virtually anything, which is obvious.

Neither Federer/Nadal isn't better than Murray by a big margin in virtually anything, only difference between them is Luck, isn't it?

 

[BringBackSV]

Neither Federer/Nadal isn't better than Murray by a big margin in virtually anything, only difference between them is Luck, isn't it?

Did I say anything about luck? I'm not sure what Federer and Rafa have to do with this either.

 

[Jam]

well Djoko is the better player. I suspect Murray is physically stronger in terms of the pace he can hit the ball and is better with the slice and variety though. Djoko has a better forehand and a more consistent serve (although Murray's serve when on is better). Djoko's backhand is prob a little better both are excellent returners so not much there (maybe just the nod to Djoko). Djoko finds murray's variety a bit annoying those slices and lobs (he doesn't like lobs even when he can take it out the air for some reason quite comfortably). And he doesn't like Murray moving him around at the net with the slice.

Stats 2-2 in slam finals
3-2 to Djoko in all slams (that Oz semi final being the other one).
5-4 murray in all finals.

But 12-8 to Djoko. So comfortably ahead but not by loads.

So Djoko ahead. Also Djoko and this is for me the big difference......he can deal with Nadal better. We haven't seen Murray 2.0 play Nadal off clay so we'll see but at the moment we are not really seeing Murray 2.0.

Djoko is definitely better. The main problem for Murray is probably 3 things:

1) a low first serve percentage (when it's going it's a weapon)
2) A cr ap 2nd serve (a real weakness against the top guys as often his 1st serve drops due to pressure
3) a forehand that is reasonable but not that great.

If he solved 1 or 2 I think he'd win or would already have won a couple more slams. Djoko doesn't have such obvious weaknesses.

 

[Dedans Penthouse]

LOL! You are intelligent and very witty.

Thank you.

However, many would argue, and with good reason good Sir.

; )