If Murray makes top 10 will he stil be overhyped?

RMac

New User
I personally don't think he's hyped enough....okay even I don't believe me. But seriously, this kid's got all of the tools. I mean he beat the 15th ranked player in the world today serving like 35% for the match. He still hasn't filled out all of the way, that will only add power and quickness to his game. He demonstrated today that his feel and hands are the best in the game and possibly since JMac.

The ceiling is pretty high on Murray. I don't see him getting to #1 in the world, but I definately see him winning a major if he sticks with BG and continues to improve between the ears. I'll be watching his match with Gasquet tommorrow with interest to say the least.
 

Watcher

Semi-Pro
He'll need to get the results to back the hype he has before he can stop being overhyped, which he is yet to do.
 

arosen

Hall of Fame
His match against Jarkko was one of the most aweful ones ever played at quarters of Masters stage. Neither guy could hold serve for shiit. Like that was not bad enough, they missed a bunch of second ones too. It was just painful to watch. I can't believe it, but everytime Andy tries to serve the set out these days, he gets broken, and often doublefaults in the process. WTF happened since Wimby? He served well there....If he serves like that against Gasquet and others, forget the top 5,he is not going to make it to top 20.
 

FEDEXP

Professional
Arosen I quite agree and of course ESPN skipped the Gasquet/Berdych match for this one. If Murray were to get into the top ten for an extended period of time, then, well, no, H'es not overhyped.
 

Feña14

Legend
Yeh todays match was awful, not pretty at all.

I see that as a good thing though, it shows that he can grind out wins against very good players when he isn't playing well. It's all well and good beating people when you are on like he did against Roddick at Wimbledon, but to win when you are playing poor is a good sign.

When things weren't right against Baghdatis he just gave up mentally but he didn't today, he managed to stay with his opponent and win the big points. His body language was also alot better than it hs been in the past.

Another plus point is that he had a long week last week in reaching the final and now the semi finals of a Masters Series where he seems to be ok physically, we all know about his problems with endurance in the past so thats another plus point for him.

He's improving from tournament to tournament. I admit I wasn't too much of a fan at the start and I thought that he would be a top 50 player who doesn't quite make it to the top. What I have seen since Queens has made me question my opinion on him, when he is on his game then wow he is fantastic to watch, the passes and little touch shots are amazing to watch.

Hopefully he will bring a Slam or two home to Britain one day.
 
Condoleezza said:
Where is he hyped anyway?

OK, in the U.K. maybe, but where else?

Condi

thats what i want to know. all these goofy people say he is over hyped when he has no hype yet. aside from kickin ass on the mens pro tour and now joining with gilbert, murray has over produced so far in his career, not underproduced, which means he is not over hyped. you silly people

what a joke
 

BiGGieStuFF

Hall of Fame
I definitely don't see him being overhyped or overrated. i've been watching tennis for a while and I'm just beginning to see more coverage on him this year but only because he's been playing well and going late into tournaments. Kid definitely has the tools to be very good. I've never heard anyone say he was going to be number 1 or top 5 or even top 10. Maybe I'm not watching the same broadcasts as some of you guys. Some of his shot selection is low percentage but it definitely gets his opponents guessing. I like the way he is looking to move forward in most of the points he plays.
 

Feña14

Legend
TennisProPaul said:
thats what i want to know. all these goofy people say he is over hyped when he has no hype yet. aside from kickin ass on the mens pro tour and now joining with gilbert, murray has over produced so far in his career, not underproduced, which means he is not over hyped. you silly people

what a joke
Totally agree with that.

In the UK people believe he has the potential to be a top 10 player who can possibly win a slam, possibly multiple slams. We see him as a new Henman who can operate in the top 10 and as a player who has the talent to win a slam or two, something that Tim couldn't manage. We don't see him as Rogers new enemy or expect him to equal Sampras' slam titles record. I think we are very realistic of what he can achieve.

So far I can see him doing it. He is making his way towards the top 10 after the last few weeks, his ranking will be around 25 or better if he loses today, possibly even better if he can go further this week. He's 19 and already pushing the top 20 with 4th round experience in a grand slam that is, according to him, on his least favourite surface.

He's doing just fine at the moment.
 

Cybele

Semi-Pro
No Ace said:
I think I'm the only person who thinks his style of play is ugly, his attitude annoying and his play VERY boring. :)

Oh well...
No, I think 'Watcher' is with you there

:)

oh, and my mother. she loathes him.

utterly.

she bangs on about the awfulness of Murray for hours - on very expensive telephone time between Spain and Turkey, which shows the level of vitriol she feels the need to express.

in fact, I 've been wondering if it is possible that 'Watcher' IS in fact my mother, as they sound so alike.

mum, do you have something to tell me?
 

Watcher

Semi-Pro
Cybele said:
No, I think 'Watcher' is with you there
I have nothing against his style of play at all. I don't have a grudge against Murray, either. What I don't like is that people automatically assume that just because he's a semi-successful Brit, that he's going to be the next huge thing. In that sense, yes, he is very overrated.

And keep in mind I'm talking about 2005, not 2006. As for his results in 2006, they're all good and well, but we've seen players cause upsets like he has before. We've seen players do greater things than he has and completely fizzle out shortly thereafter. Right now, there's absolutely no reason to eliminate the possibility that that will happen to Murray. He needs to become consistently successful before we can do that. And by consistently successful, I mean for about a year, not just the past two weeks.
 

pound cat

G.O.A.T.
FEDEXP said:
Arosen I quite agree and of course ESPN skipped the Gasquet/Berdych match for this one. If Murray were to get into the top ten for an extended period of time, then, well, no, H'es not overhyped.
You didn't miss much of a match. Berdych played lacklustre, sloppy tennis, completely unlike the way he played v. Nadal. Gasquet played smart, accurate tennis.

That's about if for that match.
 

Cybele

Semi-Pro
Watcher said:
We've seen players do greater things than he has and completely fizzle out shortly thereafter. Right now, there's absolutely no reason to eliminate the possibility that that will happen to Murray. .
I take your point. Professional tennis is a brutal arena. It's very easy to lose it all very quickly, and be down there among the qualifiers again.-

Look at Jelena Dokic - Wimbledon semi-finalist very early on in her career, everything before her, and now nowhere. She didn't even manage to qualify for Wimbledon this year.

Actually, being an unexpected Wimbledon semi-finalist seems to be the kiss of death in women's tennis - Kournikova and Alexandra Stevenson both went downhill from there. Plus there was anther blonde Slav whose name escapes me.

I'm trying to think of people in the men's game who have crashed and burned like that after early success, but my mind has gone a blank - can anyone give me some examples?
 

Watcher

Semi-Pro
Cybele said:
I'm trying to think of people in the men's game who have crashed and burned like that after early success, but my mind has gone a blank - can anyone give me some examples?
To me, the example that comes most readily to mind is Jan-Michael Gambill. Before Andy Roddick, they said he was the future of American tennis. Look at where he is now.

On a lesser note, people like Xavier Malisse and Paul-Henri Mathieu, who still enjoy success, but don't stack up to the high expectations that people had for them.
 

Cybele

Semi-Pro
Watcher said:
To me, the example that comes most readily to mind is Jan-Michael Gambill. Before Andy Roddick, they said he was the future of American tennis. Look at where he is now.

On a lesser note, people like Xavier Malisse and Paul-Henri Mathieu, who still enjoy success, but don't stack up to the high expectations that people had for them.
just looked at their records. I'd actually pretty much forgotten about Gambill, which I guess just goes to show. He's really gone a long way down.

Malisse is another good example. Excellent start, ATP finals early on, good Grand Slam progression, third and fourth rounds, but it took him seven years on the tour to win his only singles title, in 1995, and his Grand Slam career peaked with the semi-finals at Wimbledon in 2002. I remember how much buzz there was around him in the early years.

I think I might do a study on people whose tennis careers have gone into decline after reaching the semi-finals at Wimbledon....
 
Why do people care about hype? Hype is just a matter of public perception. People around here talk too much about hype and not about actual court play.

Hype.. who gives a ****?
 

alienhamster

Hall of Fame
stormholloway said:
Why do people care about hype? Hype is just a matter of public perception. People around here talk too much about hype and not about actual court play.

Hype.. who gives a ****?
THANK YOU! Hype is, well, over-hyped. If hype bothers you, stop paying attention to it and you'll help it go away.

I like Murray's game a lot actually: good mix of shots all around the court, usually patience and then sudden power out of nowhere. Great defense. He just really needs to do a better job in his service games. A lot of it is mental right now, and he needs to focus in on the break points against him much better (and not give away points with dumb shot selection or overhitting).
 

Dopke

Semi-Pro
stormholloway said:
Why do people care about hype? Hype is just a matter of public perception. People around here talk too much about hype and not about actual court play.

Hype.. who gives a ****?
My opinion exactly. Who cares if he's over-hyped, under-hyped, hype-hyped, his game will speak for itself.

And just to answer OP, if ppl right now think hes "overhyped" because hes not top 10, what happens when hes top 10 (if he does become top 10)? That means he no longer is hype. He's legit. Hype is when something is false or given worth when it actually has none or is worth less.
 

whealben

Semi-Pro
Some great posts here. I rather think if Andy makes No 2 in the world Watcher will still think he's overhyped. :p

Cyb, remember Vladimir Voltchkov, Wimbledon semi finalist 2000 and 25th in the world?

Now languishing around 625.

Andy will rise to 21 or 22 next week. Not bad for an overhyped youngster. :D He's too pumped to not capitalise on that, especially with Brad's unique coaching pushing him on.

I also love the fact that the 3 players pictured on the opening page of the atp site are Fed, Nadal and Murray.

http://www.atptennis.com/en/ :mrgreen:
 
I don't think Murray is particularly overhyped, even in the UK. I think that most people who know something about tennis here realise that he has the potential to be good, possibly extremely good, and the potential to win a Grand Slam. However, no one goes around, claiming that he will be the next person to usurp Federer, or will break Sampras' GS record. And also, for his age, he has done extremely well- it's only because of Nadal that his age is possibly not looked upon more favourably.
 

Watcher

Semi-Pro
whealben said:
Some great posts here. I rather think if Andy makes No 2 in the world Watcher will still think he's overhyped. :p
That's completely baseless. I'll stop thinking he's overhyped when he accomplishes enough to have pulled even with and/or exceeded his hype, which he is yet to do.
 
Watcher said:
That's completely baseless. I'll stop thinking he's overhyped when he accomplishes enough to have pulled even with and/or exceeded his hype, which he is yet to do.

please tell us what is the ranking he needs to pull for your almighty hype line to be crossed?

10 in the world
9
8
7
6
5??

give me a break
 

jaggy

Talk Tennis Guru
I think tennis needs hype and if American TV has to choose Murray through his association with Gilbert then so be it, the lack of interest from big networks is not healthy and ESPN are showing today's Toronto masters series on tape delay according to my daily paper. If the game goes beyond 2 hours I assume they will have to edit or not show the women's final live.
 

Watcher

Semi-Pro
TennisProPaul said:
please tell us what is the ranking he needs to pull for your almighty hype line to be crossed?
First of all, it isn't MY hype. It's everyone else's.

Second, rank is irrelevant. It's results that matter. His results are a far cry from his hype right now.
 
Top