Does Murray have the ugliest game ever among ATGs?

UnforcedTerror

Hall of Fame
I've seen some posters recently describe Lendl and Wilander's games as ugly but their games can't be uglier than Murray's, can it?

I have nothing against Murray but I wouldn't pay a dime to watch him play tbh.

Please don't bring the Big 3 into this, none of then have the fugliest game. Even Bull with his one-dimensional moonball to BH spamming is more entertaining than Murray. At least Bull brings intensity to the court.

Discuss.
 

cortado

Professional
I used to think his game was ugly but I've changed my mind over time. I just think his forehand looks a bit weird because like Sampras he's playing with a ridiculously heavy racket and you can see how that makes the movement more of an effort compared to other players.
 

tex123

Professional
Sorry but i am going to bring the Big 3 into this because i think Nadal's game is uglier than Murray's. Nadal's prime forehand is excellent to watch but the rest of his shots look awkward and don't have a pleasing watchability to them.
Nadal has a textbook slice, overhead and he's the best volleyer of big 3. His movement is out of this world.

Note that he has two forehands. One where he finishes across his shoulder and another which he like to lasso i.e. reverse forehand. He uses open stance pretty much for his forehand.

So, what 'rest of his shots' are you referring to?
 

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
So, what 'rest of his shots' are you referring to?
His backhands look awkward and stunted and i also think his approach to the net and volleys don't look paticularly great I'm talking strictly from a viewer perspective, i think his whole game is very generic and his raw power and speed makes him a champion but i just don't find his tennis that watchable and it's very predictable. Murray mixes it up better, short balls and then a winner out of nowhere and keeps you guessing and i personally find it more impressive to watch. Outside of Nadal's fabulous FH his game is like watching pong.
 

skaj

Legend
Connors.

And most of the big 3, but the original poster doesn't want their names mentioned.
 

tex123

Professional
His backhands look awkward and stunted and i also think his approach to the net and volleys don't look paticularly great I'm talking strictly from a viewer perspective, i think his whole game is very generic and his raw power and speed makes him a champion but i just don't find his tennis that watchable and it's very predictable. Murray mixes it up better, short balls and then a winner out of nowhere and keeps you guessing and i personally find it more impressive to watch. Outside of Nadal's fabulous FH his game is like watching pong.
Well. Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. I switch on tennis just to watch Nadal's awesome game. No one can match his outrageous banana shots.

Note that he does not do textbook approach to the net like Edberg or Becker. It is more like set up, is it good enough?, get to the net. And the proof is in the pudding. He's the best volleyer of this generation.

Murray is a boring defensive player. His forehand is just ugly. Watching his tennis is like watching paint dry.
 

skaj

Legend
Nadal has a textbook slice, overhead and he's the best volleyer of big 3. His movement is out of this world.

Note that he has two forehands. One where he finishes across his shoulder and another which he like to lasso i.e. reverse forehand. He uses open stance pretty much for his forehand.

So, what 'rest of his shots' are you referring to?
Nadal is not a better volleyer than Federer... His movement is out of this world in terms of physicality, but beautiful it certainly is not. His groundstrokes are just plain ugly.
 
Last edited:

skaj

Legend
Well. Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. I switch on tennis just to watch Nadal's awesome game. No one can match his outrageous banana shots.

Note that he does not do textbook approach to the net like Edberg or Becker. It is more like set up, is it good enough?, get to the net. And the proof is in the pudding. He's the best volleyer of this generation.

Murray is a boring defensive player. His forehand is just ugly. Watching his tennis is like watching paint dry.
Murray is not a boring defensive player, he's a fun defensive player - incredible gets, anticipation, wonderful lobs, fun passing shots, yet he can also get to the net and be very effective there, throw in a drop shot, slice the ball nicely to break the rhythm, most of all he is a very smart player, lovely tactician. Boring defensive player would be Caroline Wozniacki, or David Ferrer.

And Nadal is not the best volleyer of his generation...
 

Terenigma

G.O.A.T.
Well. Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder. I switch on tennis just to watch Nadal's awesome game. No one can match his outrageous banana shots.

Note that he does not do textbook approach to the net like Edberg or Becker. It is more like set up, is it good enough?, get to the net. And the proof is in the pudding. He's the best volleyer of this generation.

Murray is a boring defensive player. His forehand is just ugly. Watching his tennis is like watching paint dry.
You've gotta look deeper. Like good examples of why i love watching Murray play are shown in thie following video. Note the last 3 shots Murray hits at 3:20 and also at 6:47. Deep loop ball followed by short wide angle hit with pace followed by dropshot. Executed perfectly against Djokovic/Nadal. It's stuff like that which is why i love watching Murray. There is so much more to his game than people realise and i love it more than your typical ballbasher.
 

Quaichang

Rookie
I've seen some posters recently describe Lendl and Wilander's games as ugly but their games can't be uglier than Murray's, can it?

I have nothing against Murray but I wouldn't pay a dime to watch him play tbh.

Please don't bring the Big 3 into this, none of then have the fugliest game. Even Bull with his one-dimensional moonball to BH spamming is more entertaining than Murray. At least Bull brings intensity to the court.

Discuss.
My problem with Murray is the negativity.
I've seen some posters recently describe Lendl and Wilander's games as ugly but their games can't be uglier than Murray's, can it?

I have nothing against Murray but I wouldn't pay a dime to watch him play tbh.

Please don't bring the Big 3 into this, none of then have the fugliest game. Even Bull with his one-dimensional moonball to BH spamming is more entertaining than Murray. At least Bull brings intensity to the court.

Discuss.
My problem with Murray is the negativity. The guy never looks like he is enjoying himself on the court.
 

Olli Jokinen

Semi-Pro
I've seen some posters recently describe Lendl and Wilander's games as ugly but their games can't be uglier than Murray's, can it?

I have nothing against Murray but I wouldn't pay a dime to watch him play tbh.

Please don't bring the Big 3 into this, none of then have the fugliest game. Even Bull with his one-dimensional moonball to BH spamming is more entertaining than Murray. At least Bull brings intensity to the court.

Discuss.
Lendl's game was pretty. Perfect technique. Wilander's was smooth. Good looking serve.
 

Mainad

Bionic Poster
That's true, but he does use numerous expletives during matches, constantly shouts at his box and always looks and sounds miserable even when he's won.
Not excusing the expletives but they are only directed at himself or the situation he finds himself in, not at anybody else.
 

nachiket nolefam

Hall of Fame
Murray is whatever lies between ATG and one hit wonder. He is not too special. He probably would be 2nd to 4th wheel in any era. It's not just because of big 3. So negative and potty mouth
 

tex123

Professional
I didn't mind Murray before. But I went off him when he started bullying Tsitsipas over toilet break on twitter as if he's some saint. And then he serves underhand in desperation against Alcaraz. Two faced potty mouth twat.
 

R. Schweikart

Professional
I've seen some posters recently describe Lendl and Wilander's games as ugly but their games can't be uglier than Murray's, can it?

I have nothing against Murray but I wouldn't pay a dime to watch him play tbh.

Please don't bring the Big 3 into this, none of then have the fugliest game. Even Bull with his one-dimensional moonball to BH spamming is more entertaining than Murray. At least Bull brings intensity to the court.

Discuss.
Murray (!) is most certainly not an ATG.
 

mike danny

Bionic Poster
Nadal has a textbook slice, overhead and he's the best volleyer of big 3. His movement is out of this world.

Note that he has two forehands. One where he finishes across his shoulder and another which he like to lasso i.e. reverse forehand. He uses open stance pretty much for his forehand.

So, what 'rest of his shots' are you referring to?
Extremely debatable.
 

Booger

Hall of Fame
When his match started last week, I literally left indian wells to go back to my hotel and eat a sandwich. Walked right by his practice as well. Zero desire to watch him play tennis. Or hear from him in any capacity at all.
 
Top