Would it have been better for his CV if he had lost in the 1st round of some of those? Does getting to a final not count unless you win it?
Probably.. I don't know appearing in 5 finals and never sealing the deal doesn't completely destroy you mentally.
Yep. Must be embarassing as hell. Today he just took it to new levels in blowing it in big games. I heard that he yelled "this is the worst tennis i've ever played in my life" during the 1st set. Damn right it is. I don't know what he has to do to get back in the slams, but I do know that Mauresmo is not the answer.
Yes, he got five on it.
Someone recently said that Murray has actually done very well with his opportunities to win slams. The reality is he is a notch below the rest of the big 4 and the wins he has were well played. With Fed and Rafa degrading a bit soon Andy will have more and more opportunities; just hopefully some don't involve Djokovic.Probably.. I don't know how appearing in 5 finals and never sealing the deal even once doesn't completely destroy you mentally.
Most players don't even reach five GS finals throughout their entire career, let alone at the same tournament. What Murray has achieved(and yes, his impressive consistency IS an achievement) is something that should really be given a lot of credit and not laughed at because he hasn't won one - reaching a final is always better than going out in an earlier round. I think it would perhaps look worse for him if he'd lost to a different player in each final but for God's sake, he's had to face peak Djokovic in four of them and prime Federer in the other. Give the guy a break!
Fed was a great clay court player and perhaps his new style of game is not as suited to the clay, so only the French Open is on his schedule.You know who the all-time winningest player at Roland Garros is, behind Rafa?
Roger Federer, the guy who had lost, what, 4 finals to 1 win? I'm sure he will take that 'subpar' record over the accomplishments of someone like Sampras.
Yes it has been like that for the Nadal fans for a few years. That how "the H2h in slams " goat standard works.Would it have been better for his CV if he had lost in the 1st round of some of those? Does getting to a final not count unless you win it?
Yeah some really poor, apologists excuses for Murray going round in this thread. Some people pointing out failures of Nadal, Djokovic and Federer. Those guys are all into double figures in slams and have all pretty much fulfilled their potential now. Murray is stuck on 2 slams and has the worst slam ratio in open era history. Mugged it up one too many times this time.
Still better than you, hiding behind a computer and judging him.
You WISH you could be in his position
Yeah some really poor, apologists excuses for Murray going round in this thread. Some people pointing out failures of Nadal, Djokovic and Federer. Those guys are all into double figures in slams and have all pretty much fulfilled their potential now. Murray is stuck on 2 slams and has the worst slam ratio in open era history. Mugged it up one too many times this time.
Because Nole is that much better.Boy I'll say.. How can Nole have 11 slams and Murray only has 2? We all know Murray isn't as good but a 9 slam differential? Thats horrible
You know who the all-time winningest player at Roland Garros is, behind Rafa?
Roger Federer, the guy who had lost, what, 4 finals to 1 win? I'm sure he will take that 'subpar' record over the accomplishments of someone like Sampras.
How does the worst tennis he's ever played in his life allow him to only lose 7-5 7-6 in the last two sets against the world number 1? Does that mean his best tennis would give him 11 majors to Djokovic's 2?
Well you gotta reach the finals first to win it and it's been unfortunate for him to keep reaching Novak all the time, Novak's just a better player than Murray.
As the one true King (@StannisTheMannis) said above, each of these players have had multiple slam final losses at a specific event. Still better than crashing out in the early rounds.
Murray's mental fitness was the worst I've ever seen from him. Very poor shot selection throughout the match at key moments. And yes, despite it, he made the 2nd and 3rd set close.
When Murray zones with his flat strokes and court penetration, he's tough to handle. there's a reason he's been to 9 slam finals.
He had no business losing the 2nd set, and had plenty of opportunity to take the 3rd. Straight set loss is tough, but I still have belief he can gain control of his mental faculties and bring it.
Because Nole is that much better.
Lol, too busy whining about a player to think this one through for 5 seconds I guess. Roddick's was actually worse and I don't see anyone hating on his slam conversion rate all the time.Yeah some really poor, apologists excuses for Murray going round in this thread. Some people pointing out failures of Nadal, Djokovic and Federer. Those guys are all into double figures in slams and have all pretty much fulfilled their potential now. Murray is stuck on 2 slams and has the worst slam ratio in open era history. Mugged it up one too many times this time.
Another accomplishment for the best student of the game. I knew RAFA wouldn't walk away from the tournament empty handed.Might have a point actually. Better to lose in Round 1 like RAFA and focus on winning the Slam Wooden Spoon, no?
That much better than this mug version of Murray yeah, not that much better than Lendl version of Murray who used to beat Djokovic and Federer multiple times back then. There were actually times where it was actually hard to call who was going to win.
He's running out of time. He should sack Mauresmo, FAST.
The game's #2 player and 4-time AO finalist was up 40-love while serving at 5-5 in the 2nd set, only to lose the game and eventually the set. Yes, good Lord.
I suppose it would be more respectable if he collected several first week losses and had a SF as his best resultWould it have been better for his CV if he had lost in the 1st round of some of those? Does getting to a final not count unless you win it?
I suppose it would be more respectable if he collected several first week losses and had a SF as his best result
This looks like a pretty enviable record to me:
Murray got robbed! On two separate break points in the 2nd set, Djokovic's serves were well long but were not overruled by the umpire. Had Murray broken in either or both of those times, he could have won the 2nd set and then it would have been a completely different match from then on.
I'm just following the thought process of a Sampras fan like the OPWhose stats are we talking about?
Pistol Pete obviously. Look at those numbers at Wimbledon for god's sake and it becomes pretty obvious.Whose stats are we talking about?
Pistol Pete obviously. Look at those numbers at Wimbledon for god's sake and it becomes pretty obvious.
He should call Dimitrov to get some advicei'm afraid Mauresmo got her claws deep into him by now
he dug himself into a hole. he'll be too embarrassed to let her go.