Dont ever compare Wawrinka to Murray... EVER

Another thing to say for Stan, and I know you can only beat what's put in front of you, but when you hold them up alongside each other it's something to see. In his 3 slam victories Wawrinka has amassed 5 victories over all 3 members of the holy trinity. Sir Andy has just the 2 such victories in his trio of major triumphs.
 
Sabratha said:
When I see stupid stuff like he's better than Edberg and Becker I sure can.

I think it's pretty dumb when people say that about Roddick too.

I just get real annoyed at the goldfish mentality some posters here possess.

One minute ago Nadal was the GOAT, then Federer, then Djokovic. That's also REALLY dumb. Better to evaluate players after they have retired.
Click to expand...
Djokovic is the GOAT. He's Serbian
 
NatF said:
This is just because I hurt your feelings.

So much hate man. I concur seek help.
Click to expand...
But you didn't "hurt my feelings". I'm just expressing my thoughts. You think you're the top dog but really you're just a pr1ck. Take it or leave it.

I honestly cannot fathom how anybody would get hurt over narcissistic statements like yours. It's grating more than anything.
 
Sabratha said:
But you didn't "hurt my feelings". I'm just expressing my thoughts. You think you're the top dog but really you're just a pr1ck. Take it or leave it.

I honestly cannot fathom how anybody would get hurt over narcissistic statements like yours. It's grating more than anything.
Click to expand...

I can hear the tears falling from here man.
 
Mainad said:
Look at the comparisons again, Murray was ranked world #1 for more than 3 times as long as Becker and was ranked Y/E #1 which Becker never achieved.
Click to expand...

So 29 weeks at #1 is worth 3 majors, LOL! Come on dude, I know you arent that stupid. Maybe 290 weeks at #1 you would have a good case.

And everyone who knows tennis knows Becker was the hands down #1 of 1989 regardless what the rankings said. ATP, ITF, Tennis Magazine, French Tennis Magazine, Bud Collins all picked Becker. The only thing that picked Lendl was the computer. He was a more clear #1 than Murray in 2016 practically speaking.

Then look at everything else, Becker actually has 2 more WTF titles than Murray (2 WTF titles are probably worth more than just 29 weeks at #1 btw). They are almost tied in Masters, Murray 1 ahead. Almost tied in slam finals, again Murray 1 ahead. Very close in tournament wins, Becker 4 ahead. Murray has his couple Olympic Golds, with the Olympic getting less points than a Masters title, so its value is up for debate. At best you could have an argument Murray is marginally ahead in non slam win stats, and that probably if you opt to give the Olympic big credit which is almost hypocritically ignoring the factual ATP point value awarded while arguing heavily for ATP rankings; while miles behind in slam wins stat with Becker not only having 3 more but double the number, which is huge when the numbers are lower to begin with.

Yeah like I said they are fairly close outside the slam wins, so there is nothing that comes anywhere close to negating 6 majors to 3, even for people who are judging the "totality" of the achievements. Even if you gave slam wins only 30% of the value Becker would still win with his huge gap there.

Serious question, if those exact Murray stats were for anyone but Murray, lets say they were for Yevgeny Kafelnikov instead, you wouldnt even be posting them with Becker and making anything of there being a possible argument, right?
 
Last edited:
Sabratha said:
Well doctor, what do I have? I don't agree Murray is an ATG so I need psychiatric evaluation!

Do you know what crazy is or do you just repeat **** like that when you're lost?
Click to expand...

Something must be wrong with you since you're so angry all the time here. You didn't use to be so bad before. I don't know your life and can't say what the cause is, but you sure need help as this is anything but healthy mentally.
 
Mainad said:
One minute ago Nadal was the GOAT, then Federer, then Djokovic. That's also REALLY dumb. Better to evaluate players after they have retired.
Click to expand...

Everyone who won the last slam is the GOAT these days. Osaka had "10, 15, or 20 slams, how many" threads after both her U.S Open and Australian Open wins. Now Osaka who? Still she will be back and win more slams in the future I am pretty sure, and there will be even more ridiculous threads after each one.
 
AnOctorokForDinner said:
Something must be wrong with you since you're so angry all the time here. You didn't use to be so bad before. I don't know your life and can't say what the cause is, but you sure need help as this is anything but healthy mentally.
Click to expand...
My life is better than it was years ago, I'm just bored with the circular arguments and how some posters behave on here.

Like I have said (or at least alluded to) in the past - the hatred for Murray is me trying to ease out the stupid from here. To be fair though, the Murray love-in is far from the worst stuff I could complain about on here.
 
Sabratha said:
My life is better than it was years ago, I'm just bored with the circular arguments and how some posters behave on here.

Like I have said (or at least alluded to) in the past - the hatred for Murray is me trying to ease out the stupid from here. To be fair though, the Murray love-in is far from the worst stuff I could complain about on here.
Click to expand...

Your comments are too angry. Happy people don't feel like saying such things. I'm not an example of a happy person either, for the record. But you sound way too rude. Also your focus on combating muryluv makes no sense, most people know full well he's not near Big 3. Claiming he's better than Becker/Edberg/Wilander does make me annoyed, but that's still a niche opinion thankfully.
 
ReeceSachs said:
Murray was fantastic in AO 2010 QF and AO 2012 and the AO 2013 SF as was Stan at AO 13/14. I think it's a close call.
Click to expand...

Close call but the one who actually has a title there probably get the nods. It is close just because Murray has so many finals, but it must be noted Djokovic played Wawrinka before the finals and got his toughest match from him (not Murray in the finals) twice, so that is enough to go with Wawrinka due to his lone title for me.
 
If they were cars, Murray would be a consistent, reliable Corolla and Stan would be a Ferrari.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
JoelSandwich said:
I think they’re really even there so I could see an argument for Wawrinka
They both have some solid runs
I just think the 08 semi is the best match played by either
Click to expand...

The 08 semi was an incredible performance. Totally outhitting Nadal at the height of his confidence. Nadal was a bit worn that event from a long incredible summer, but it was still spectacular. He had over twice the winners of Nadal in that match.
 
JoelSandwich said:
I think they’re really even there so I could see an argument for Wawrinka
They both have some solid runs
I just think the 08 semi is the best match played by either
Click to expand...

The USO goes to Murray imo. He beat a better version of Djokovic, who statistically should have won that tournament, and beat Nadal. Wawrinka won in one of the most physically hampered fields ever. Murray also has two finals.
 
vaillancourt said:
So 29 weeks at #1 is worth 3 majors, LOL! Come on dude, I know you arent that stupid. Maybe 290 weeks at #1 you would have a good case.

And everyone who knows tennis knows Becker was the hands down #1 of 1989 regardless what the rankings said. ATP, ITF, Tennis Magazine, French Tennis Magazine, Bud Collins all picked Becker. The only thing that picked Lendl was the computer. He was a more clear #1 than Murray in 2016 practically speaking.

Then look at everything else, Becker actually has 2 more WTF titles than Murray (2 WTF titles are probably worth more than just 29 weeks at #1 btw). They are almost tied in Masters, Murray 1 ahead. Almost tied in slam finals, again Murray 1 ahead. Very close in tournament wins, Becker 4 ahead. Murray has his couple Olympic Golds, with the Olympic getting less points than a Masters title, so its value is up for debate. At best you could have an argument Murray is marginally ahead in non slam win stats, and that probably if you opt to give the Olympic big credit which is almost hypocritically ignoring the factual ATP point value awarded while arguing heavily for ATP rankings; while miles behind in slam wins stat with Becker not only having 3 more but double the number, which is huge when the numbers are lower to begin with.

Yeah like I said they are fairly close outside the slam wins, so there is nothing that comes anywhere close to negating 6 majors to 3, even for people who are judging the "totality" of the achievements. Even if you gave slam wins only 30% of the value Becker would still win with his huge gap there.

Serious question, if those exact Murray stats were for anyone but Murray, lets say they were for Yevgeny Kafelnikov instead, you wouldnt even be posting them with Becker and making anything of there being a possible argument, right?
Click to expand...

You said that nothing in any of Murray stats came close to being far ahead of any of Becker's and I just gave you an example which predictably you just dismissed out of hand. I've tried to show you that the gap between Becker and Murray is not as vast as you and many others would like to believe and I've just shown you why. Pick as many holes in whichever facts you don't like but there it is.

As for Kafelnikov, what's he got to do with anything? Unlike Murray's none of his stats come anywhere near Becker's.
 
Mainad said:
You said that nothing in any of Murray stats came close to being far ahead of any of Becker's and I just gave you an example which predictably you just dismissed out of hand. I've tried to show you that the gap between Becker and Murray is not as vast as you and many others would like to believe and I've just shown you why. Pick as many holes in whichever facts you don't like but there it is.

As for Kafelnikov, what's he got to do with anything? Unlike Murray's none of his stats come anywhere near Becker's.
Click to expand...

I did not say NONE of Murray's stats came close to Becker. You obviously have reading comprehension issues, show me one place in bold where I came even close to saying this. I specifically acknowledged Murray's stats minus the slams wins are atleast comparable to Becker's, and each are ahead in some, while most are about equal. What I said none of his non slam stats are SO superior to make up for 3 majors or 6 majors to 3 even by a "totality" logic. They arent even enough to make up for 1 major, let alone 3, as the two are extremely close outside of slam wins. You basically have to go to the point of arguing slam wins as being worth only 10% or less of a players career to make a case for Murray against Becker.

And I used Kafelnikov as a random example under the specific hypothetical he had Murray's exact career and stats would you even be arguing him against Becker with Murray's exact career/stats (not Kafelnikov's own). Basically I chose a player I am pretty sure you dont care about vs the player who is probably your favorite. And can you honestly say if it were Kafelnikov with those stats you would be arguing him vs Becker? I think we both know the answer to that. In fact I will flat out guarantee right now this is the only time you will try and make a case for a 3 slam winner against a 6 time winner, men or women. If you prove me wrong in the future, feel free to quote me on it.
 
Last edited:
tonylg said:
If they were cars, Murray would be a consistent, reliable Corolla and Stan would be a Ferrari.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No, because in this case, the Ferrari would win every time when not in the shop. Murray would be closer to a Corvette (reliable and good), but not as high end as a Ferrari. But I don't know much about cars, so maybe a Corvette is in the shop a lot too. :-D
 
vaillancourt said:
I did not say any of Murray's stats came close to Becker.You obviously have reading comprehension issues, show me one place in bold where I came even close to saying this.
Click to expand...

I know you didn't. What you said was this, "Murray does not even come close to being so far ahead in other areas to compensate." Then when I pointed out that his weeks at #1 (41 by the way, not 29) were more than 3 times longer than Becker's (12) you immediately and predictably dismissed it as irrelevent.

vaillancourt said:
What I said none of his non slam stats are SO superior to make up for 3 majors or 6 majors to 3 even by a "totality" logic.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were. I wanted to look at the totality of their careers and, outside the Slams, their stats are pretty close. Even 6 > 3 is not a ginormous gap in my view. Yet so many people on here think that Murray is nowhere near being in the same league as guys like Becker and Edberg who are acknowledged ATPs (even if there own Slam tallies are miniscule compared to any of Fedalovic or Sampras).
 
Wawrinka's claim to fame is that he was Nole's slam nemesis. Why he was Nole's nemesis, or why Nole would collapse when he faced Stan in a slam final is anyone's guess.
 
Saying don't compare them is going a bit too far... Wawrinka has earned the right to be compared with 3 slams. Apart from the consistency though, Murray's head to head against big 3 is generally better. Murray is outshining the guy even regarding his strongest argument (that he can challenge top players)

KINGROGER said:
Murray is a more consistent version of Roddick or Hewitt.
Click to expand...

Saying Murray is a more consistent version than Hewitt is like saying Djokovic is a more consistent version of Murray. Technically true in that he does everything better and he's gone on for longer but still sounds like a big injustice to Djokovic. As for Roddick, his style is not similar to Murray's at all, neither are his results in general.
 
killerboss said:
Saying don't compare them is going a bit too far... Wawrinka has earned the right to be compared with 3 slams. Apart from the consistency though, Murray's head to head against big 3 is generally better. Murray is outshining the guy even regarding his strongest argument (that he can challenge top players)



Saying Murray is a more consistent version than Hewitt is like saying Djokovic is a more consistent version of Murray. Technically true in that he does everything better and he's gone on for longer but still sounds like a big injustice to Djokovic. As for Roddick, his style is not similar to Murray's at all, neither are his results in general.
Click to expand...
Murray is greater than all of them. But he amounts to the same thing when we are discussing level of competition at slams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

TimHenmanATG
To people denying the concept of a ''big 4'', and comparing Murray to Wawrinka - here are some stats
3 4 5
Replies
203
Views
15K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
J
  • Poll Poll
Sinner vs Murray - who is greater?
2
Replies
70
Views
1K
Razer
Razer
D
  • Poll Poll
Stan with the hypothetical Career Grand Slam vs Andy Murray
2
Replies
88
Views
5K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
clout
  • Poll Poll
Who was greater: 2005-07 Nadal (age 19-21) vs 2017-19 Nadal (age 31-33)?
2 3
Replies
141
Views
8K
FedeRadi
F
T
  • Poll Poll
What if the big three finish on the same number of slams? What weight do we give their other achievements?
2
Replies
70
Views
3K
FRV4
F
Back
Top