Is Alcaraz already greater than Andy Murray?

Is Alcaraz already greater than Andy Murray?

  • Total voters
    248
Can’t believe I’m defending Murray here but he was clearly better on hard court (both HC Slams) and there’s no way he would’ve lost to geriatric Novak at Wimbledon 23/24 considering he’s never lost a set to prime Novak. Murray was never all that inspiring but it’s hard to imagine him losing to Ruud, 36/37 yr old Novak, or Zverev in a Slam final.
 
Kralingen said:
Can’t believe I’m defending Murray here but he was clearly better on hard court (both HC Slams) and there’s no way he would’ve lost to geriatric Novak at Wimbledon 23/24 considering he’s never lost a set to prime Novak. Murray was never all that inspiring but it’s hard to imagine him losing to Ruud, 36/37 yr old Novak, or Zverev in a Slam final.
Click to expand...
Randy Murray rather chose to leave a unique impression and thus lost to a 29/30 old serve and volley player, transported from 1985, at a HC slam. The one and only Muri goat.
 
xFedal said:
Razer whats your thoughts about Carlos achieveing 25 slams and being the GOAT? Hes won 5/10 slams played, winning consistently now. Might win another this year to make it 6 or 7 before he even turns 23, Nole had 1 at this point, Carlos is clearly ahead of track here.
Click to expand...

If Alcaraz wins 25 slams then he will be declared the GOAT because to win 25 slams you have to be that good and you shall not be a mug in other eras, it is understood by everyone, plus Alcaraz's mental toughness IMO is only second to Djokovic and a bit above Nadal's and far above Federer's. However nobody is reaching 25 slams by winning them all before their 30th birthday, so Alcaraz will have to win a few in his 30s too. HIs next generation might not allow him to do that but then we never know, maybe he will develop/is developing that aura right now to scare his true next gens who are all 10-12 years old and watching him on TV or watching him in the Arena with their parents etc.

Pheasant said:
Good point there on Courier. As for Kuerten, Murray outside of the slams buries Kuerten badly. I’d have to take Murray at this point. His overall body of work is too much for Kuerten. Courier might be a different story with his extra slam.

However, you brought up a great point about longevity(modern meds, technology, supplements, surgeons, etc). All 3-slam careers are not equal for that reason. That does give me some food for thought.

Kuerten was a beast on clay. We learned that when his injured self slaughtered peak Fed in 2004 in straight sets. Fed in 2004 was 16-2 on clay with a stellar 1.33 dominance ratio(includes loss to Kuerten). This competes well with his 2009 season when he was 18-2 on clay with a 1.34 DR.

I need to look at a timeline adjustment for # of slams. So many players in the past were well past their prime by age 30; especially guys like Wilander, McEnroe, Becker and Edberg). Even Lendl had declined a bit by 30; although not as badly as the aforementioned guys

I might change my mind on this one.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Kuerten in ideal circumstances should have won the French open 5 times in a good career where he is not injured and in his prime till 30. He is of a different league to Murray. People like Kuerten, Safin and to an extent even Boris Becker are guys who were unlucky to not win more because they were that good at their best to win a few more, but Murray we cannot say that unfortunately. Had Murray beaten Federer/Nadal at their best to win a slam or 2 then we would have been talking about him very differently today.
 
Razer said:
If Alcaraz wins 25 slams then he will be declared the GOAT because to win 25 slams you have to be that good and you shall not be a mug in other eras, it is understood by everyone, plus Alcaraz's mental toughness IMO is only second to Djokovic and a bit above Nadal's and far above Federer's. However nobody is reaching 25 slams by winning them all before their 30th birthday, so Alcaraz will have to win a few in his 30s too. HIs next generation might not allow him to do that but then we never know, maybe he will develop/is developing that aura right now to scare his true next gens who are all 10-12 years old and watching him on TV or watching him in the Arena with their parents etc.



Yeah, Kuerten in ideal circumstances should have won the French open 5 times in a good career where he is not injured and in his prime till 30. He is of a different league to Murray. People like Kuerten, Safin and to an extent even Boris Becker are guys who were unlucky to not win more because they were that good at their best to win a few more, but Murray we cannot say that unfortunately. Had Murray beaten Federer/Nadal at their best to win a slam or 2 then we would have been talking about him very differently today.
Click to expand...

Lol...."ideal circumstances" for every other player but none allowed for Murray. :p:p:p
 
Mainad said:
Lol...."ideal circumstances" for every other player but none allowed for Murray. :p:p:p
Click to expand...

Murray already enjoyed his ideal circumstances :)

I mean poor Roddick was blocked by Grass GOAT Federer at 4 Wimbledons (03,04,05,09) from winning the title while Murray got to dodge peak Federer (& peak Nadal whose grass prime was from 2006 to 2011), if this is not ideal circumstance then what is ?

Sir Andy is a 2 time wimbledon champ while Roddick is 0, lets swap their birth years and see the fun.
 
Razer said:
Murray already enjoyed his ideal circumstances :)

I mean poor Roddick was blocked by Grass GOAT Federer at 4 Wimbledons (03,04,05,09) from winning the title while Murray got to dodge peak Federer (& peak Nadal whose grass prime was from 2006 to 2011), if this is not ideal circumstances then what is ?

Sir Andy is a 2 time wimbledon champ while Roddick is 0, lets swap their birthdates and see the fun.
Click to expand...

Lol...so what? He faced peak Djokovic twice and won twice. He would probably have beaten him a 3rd time if Djokovic hadn't been so careless as to lose to the likes of Querrey and maybe a 4th or 5th time if injury hadn't stopped him.

BTW should we also see the fun if Djokovic swapped his birthdate with Roddick's?
 
Mainad said:
Lol...so what? He faced peak Djokovic twice and won twice. He would probably have beaten him a 3rd time if Djokovic hadn't been so careless as to lose to the likes of Querrey and maybe a 4th or 5th time if injury hadn't stopped him.

BTW should we also see the fun if Djokovic swapped his birthdate with Roddick's?
Click to expand...
Grok is actually best response to shut down provocative behavior..

The name calling and fake bravado, all that goes to gutter when AI is able to sense a bias. It's pretty easy. I am with you anyways. Murray is pretty close to atgs like Becker.
 
Mainad said:
Lol...so what? He faced peak Djokovic twice and won twice. He would probably have beaten him a 3rd time if Djokovic hadn't been so careless as to lose to the likes of Querrey and maybe a 4th or 5th time if injury hadn't stopped him.

BTW should we also see the fun if Djokovic swapped his birthdate with Roddick's?
Click to expand...

Djokovic will lose many slams if swapped with Roddick but he could still win double digits... he will still 7-8 Aus opens in that era in the presence of Federer because on that surface he is super dominant and suits his game, like Federer was on Grass. He will also win some wimbledons maybe 1-2 and the US open he will still win a couple, he might not win the french or win only once.... probably in 2016-2017... not bad, he is winning double digits anyway, he is that good.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Grok is actually best response to shut down provocative behavior..

The name calling and fake bravado, all that goes to gutter when AI is able to sense a bias. It's pretty easy. I am with you anyways. Murray is pretty close to atgs like Becker.
Click to expand...

Reject Grok and check my link.... Human beings are above Grok for a reason...
Use your own mind to judge things, not Grok.

Razer

Thread 'Open Era Win % vs Rival ATGs ........ What does this tell you ?'

Head to Head against ATGs faced in their career [Vs Rivals who played at least 6 GS Finals in the Open Era]

01. Borg vs - [Connors (15-8), Mcenroe (7-7), Lendl (6-2), Wilander (1-0), Vilas (17-5), Laver (6-2), Newcombe (2-3), Rosewall (1-0)] .... Total 55-27 ..... Win% = 67.07 % (8 players)

02. Sampras vs - [ Agassi (20-14), Becker (12-7), Courier (16-4), Edberg (8-6), Lendl (5-3), Mcenroe (3-0), Wilander (2-1), Connors (2-0), Federer (0-1)] .... Total 68 - 36 .... Win% = 65.4% (9 players)

03...
  • Like
 
You are single most irresponsible member I have seen so checking the links will not be helpful

What we are trying is now less tribalism and more genuine discussion. This will not be possible with you and this is lost cause.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
You are single most irresponsible member I have seen so checking the links will not be helpful

What we are trying is now less tribalism and more genuine discussion. This will not be possible with you and this is lost cause.
Click to expand...

Becker was a revolutionary player of his era, raised the bar of athleticism ... he was like what Alcaraz is today

Murray is not in that league.... not worthy of comparison with an alpha like Becker.
 
Razer said:
Becker was a revolutionary player of his era, raised the bar of athleticism ... he was like what Alcaraz is today

Murray is not in that league.... not worthy of comparison with an alpha like Becker.
Click to expand...

According to you Murray is not in anybody's league which merely shows your laughable bias against one of the greatest players of the past 2 decades. Nothing you say about Murray can possibly be taken seriously as you clearly have an agenda to dismiss everything about him. Why that is only you can answer but it's not one anybody else is interested in finding out.
 
Mainad said:
According to you Murray is not in anybody's league which merely shows your laughable bias against one of the greatest players of the past 2 decades. Nothing you say about Murray can possibly be taken seriously as you clearly have an agenda to dismiss everything about him. Why that is only you can answer but it's not one anybody else is interested in finding out.
Click to expand...
Murray is slowly becoming 6th best player of 2000s as now raz and sinner will bypass him.
 
Mainad said:
According to you Murray is not in anybody's league which merely shows your laughable bias against one of the greatest players of the past 2 decades. Nothing you say about Murray can possibly be taken seriously as you clearly have an agenda to dismiss everything about him. Why that is only you can answer but it's not one anybody else is interested in finding out.
Click to expand...

You tell me, did Murray revolutionize Tennis ?

- Connors - First ATG of the open era, brash and aggressive baseliner
- Borg-Mcenroe - Superstars .. the predecessors of Federer and Nadal in popularity
- Lendl - Guy who is considered the godfather of modern day baseliners, brought fitness as a priority in tennis away from the hippie culture
- Boris Becker - Raised the level of athleticism, boom boom serve... first guy to weaponize Serve... at 6'3 he moved like nobody like that before and a powerhouse..
- Edberg - Best volleyer of all time
- Pete Sampras - Really Weaponized the Serve even more
- Federer - Greatest Superstar ever... raised the level of tennis from the Sampras era to the modern one
- Nadal - Scintillating athleticism, used topspin like nobody before or after
- Djokovic - Took fitness to another level, flexibility par excellence ...

Now ... Alcaraz and Sinner....according to Pundits they are raising the bar even more athletically.. probably yes...

So I am dying to hear what Murray has done ??? He was as great as Stan, Roddick, Hewitt, Marat etc were... Mind you Hewitt and Marat are also known as the guys who were pioneers of baseline tennis in this era but I am diluting them down to this level saying they did not add anything, so whats you argument for Murray ????? @Mainad
 
Last edited:
RS said:
Not at this stage? He has to be closer to Murray than Nadal by a good margin rn.
Click to expand...
If we compare how much he’s won at such a young age he’s already ahead of the big 3 at 22. If he keeps this up he can definitely surpass a lot of big 3 records. It in his hands but it still a long way and not easy to remain that good and consistent.
 
Razer said:
You tell me, did Murray revolutionize Tennis ?

- Connors - First ATG of the open era, brash and aggressive baseliner
- Borg-Mcenroe - Superstars .. the predecessors of Federer and Nadal in popularity
- Lendl - Guy who is considered the godfather of modern day baseliners, brought fitness as a priority in tennis away from the hippie culture
- Boris Becker - Raised the level of athleticism, boom boom serve... first guy to weaponize Serve... at 6'3 he moved like nobody like that before and a powerhouse..
- Edberg - Best volleyer of all time
- Pete Sampras - Really Weaponized the Serve even more
- Federer - Greatest Superstar ever... raised the level of tennis from the Sampras era to the modern one
- Nadal - Scintillating athleticism, used topspin like nobody before or after
- Djokovic - Took fitness to another level, flexibility par excellence ...

Now ... Alcaraz and Sinner....according to Pundits they are raising the bar even more athletically.. probably yes...

So I am dying to hear what Murray has done ??? He was as great as Stan, Roddick, Hewitt, Marat etc were... Mind you Hewitt and Marat are also known as the guys who were pioneers of baseline tennis in this era but I am diluting them down to this level saying they did not add anything, so whats you argument for Murray ????? @Mainad
Click to expand...

Lol...well silly Murray for having to undergo surgeries that prevented him from raising the bar for fitness like Elastovic for example. Maybe he should be remembered for raising the bar for counterpunching ability but no doubt you would refuse to acknowledge that too! Discussing anything to do with Murray with you is utterly pointless as you start from the position that he is no good and hasn't achieved anything of note other than by sheer luck. Every other Slam winner (and maybe others too) is somehow better and can be excused for not being any better. Nothing of the same is allowed for Murray which means, as I say, that you are ridiculously biased against him and your opinions about him cannot be taken seriously. But we've been here before and I don't really see the point in pursuing any further discussions with you as it's clearly one of your main objectives to do him down as often as possible. Good luck with that!
 
Without reading three pages of comments I will say that Carlos according to my eye test is today a better player than peak Murray. I would say the same about Sinner. Not in any way trying to belittle Murray or undermine his achievements.
 
Mainad said:
Lol...well silly Murray for having to undergo surgeries that prevented him from raising the bar for fitness like Elastovic for example. Maybe he should be remembered for raising the bar for counterpunching ability but no doubt you would refuse to acknowledge that too! Discussing anything to do with Murray with you is utterly pointless as you start from the position that he is no good and hasn't achieved anything of note other than by sheer luck. Every other Slam winner (and maybe others too) is somehow better and can be excused for not being any better. Nothing of the same is allowed for Murray which means, as I say, that you are ridiculously biased against him and your opinions about him cannot be taken seriously. But we've been here before and I don't really see the point in pursuing any further discussions with you as it's clearly one of your main objectives to do him down as often as possible. Good luck with that!
Click to expand...

Elastovic was already a double digit slam winner with 12 slams by age 29, Murray had won just 3, how was Murray gonna raise the bar if not for injury? He had his injury after his 29th birthday, most truly greats revolutionize the game in their 20s or teens, not in 30s.

You have not answered my question on how Murray is comparable to Becker/others in terms of changing the game/impact but you called me biased. Did I ever compare Murray to bad players? I always gave Murray the respect he deserves, that is he is not a worse player than Hewitt/Safin/Stan/Roddick but I also said he is not better than them either in ability. How is this being biased? Did I ever say Murray is only as good as Ferrer ? I have always been against underrating and overrating players, so I asked you to explain how Murray revolutionized tennis and unfortunately you could not answer and that is because Sir Andy did not.
 
Sign of how miserable the Andy Murray ATG discourse is that it’s actually making me nostalgic for the “Will Andy Murray ever win a Grand Slam?” threads.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
You are single most irresponsible member I have seen so checking the links will not be helpful

What we are trying is now less tribalism and more genuine discussion. This will not be possible with you and this is lost cause.
Click to expand...
genuine discussion while you are not even thinking for yourself but just copy-pasting AI made ********. Well maybe that’s the lesser evil.
 
Razer said:
You tell me, did Murray revolutionize Tennis ?

- Connors - First ATG of the open era, brash and aggressive baseliner
- Borg-Mcenroe - Superstars .. the predecessors of Federer and Nadal in popularity
- Lendl - Guy who is considered the godfather of modern day baseliners, brought fitness as a priority in tennis away from the hippie culture
- Boris Becker - Raised the level of athleticism, boom boom serve... first guy to weaponize Serve... at 6'3 he moved like nobody like that before and a powerhouse..
- Edberg - Best volleyer of all time
- Pete Sampras - Really Weaponized the Serve even more
- Federer - Greatest Superstar ever... raised the level of tennis from the Sampras era to the modern one
- Nadal - Scintillating athleticism, used topspin like nobody before or after
- Djokovic - Took fitness to another level, flexibility par excellence ...

Now ... Alcaraz and Sinner....according to Pundits they are raising the bar even more athletically.. probably yes...

So I am dying to hear what Murray has done ??? He was as great as Stan, Roddick, Hewitt, Marat etc were... Mind you Hewitt and Marat are also known as the guys who were pioneers of baseline tennis in this era but I am diluting them down to this level saying they did not add anything, so whats you argument for Murray ????? @Mainad
Click to expand...
Murray revolutionised tennis lol? How so? By playing fourth fiddle? You can then also say guys like Safin or Rafter revolutionised tennis.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Grok is actually best response to shut down provocative behavior..

The name calling and fake bravado, all that goes to gutter when AI is able to sense a bias. It's pretty easy. I am with you anyways. Murray is pretty close to atgs like Becker.
Click to expand...
Murray is closer to Stan and Kuerten than he is to Becker. He is also below Courier.
 
Razer said:
Becker was a revolutionary player of his era, raised the bar of athleticism ... he was like what Alcaraz is today

Murray is not in that league.... not worthy of comparison with an alpha like Becker.
Click to expand...
Becker is indeed alpha. He took good care of the big shots, won Wimbledon at 17, 8-2 against Mac, 6-0 against Connors 7-3 against Wilander, 25-10 against Edberg, 6-1 against Courier and so on. Only against Lendl he is 10-11, but 5-1 in slams. Also trails Agassi who was his nightmare matchup but even here he was able to beat peak Agassi with a great performance at Wimbledon 95, and even against 90s GOAT Pete he gave him all-out fights like in YEC 96. Becker was never ****ting his pants against ATGs, in fact it gave him extra motivation.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Courier is dominant number 1 even if for short period. Respect.

Murray is closer to Becker than he is to someone like stan.
Click to expand...
How so? Becker has three more slams than Murray while Stan has same number. Before you start with masters, OG etc, Becker is one of the carpet GOATs with 3 YECs, 1 WCT and one Grand slam cup. All during a time when it was incredibly relevant. Also is the Davis Cup GOAT which during his time was on par with slams. Way above Murray.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
How so? Becker has three more slams than Murray while Stan has same number. Before you start with masters, OG etc, Becker is one of the carpet GOATs with 3 YECs, 1 WCT and one Grand slam cup. All during a time when it was incredibly relevant. Also is the Davis Cup GOAT which during his time was on par with slams. Way above Murray.
Click to expand...

GROK did not tell him this, he should watch 1992-1996 epic fights of Becker even in 1990s on carpet instead of asking Grok, lol

Becker had an epic 6 hours 22 match with Mcenroe at the Davis Cup too I think, has Murray even played 5 hours? lol, these guys are insulting Becker by talking of Murray in the same breathe... you are right.... Safin-Rafter all are legendary if Murray is... at this point it is a joke that Sir Andy is rated so high by the fanatics.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Becker is indeed alpha. He took good care of the big shots, won Wimbledon at 17, 8-2 against Mac, 6-0 against Connors 7-3 against Wilander, 25-10 against Edberg, 6-1 against Courier and so on. Only against Lendl he is 10-11, but 5-1 in slams. Also trails Agassi who was his nightmare matchup but even here he was able to beat peak Agassi with a great performance at Wimbledon 95, and even against 90s GOAT Pete he gave him all-out fights like in YEC 96. Becker was never ****ting his pants against ATGs, in fact it gave him extra motivation.
Click to expand...

Agassi to some extent and of course the Great Sampras harmed Becker's repo, that and his drinking, partying etc ... with Murray's discipline and focus to the game maybe Becker wins even more titles... True that he was always eager to take the fight to the big players.... no surprise that he was unhappy watching Roger in the 2000s and always wondering IFs and BUTs wanting to get into the action, so he coached Djokovic and made it a point to create a player who will fight and bring down Roger... what a champion Becker is... he wants to be a part of the fight always, never backing down....
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
How so? Becker has three more slams than Murray while Stan has same number. Before you start with masters, OG etc, Becker is one of the carpet GOATs with 3 YECs, 1 WCT and one Grand slam cup. All during a time when it was incredibly relevant. Also is the Davis Cup GOAT which during his time was on par with slams. Way above Murray.
Click to expand...
Ok I will scrap Davis cup directly as it is team sports.

Yes. Becker has 3 yec , 1 wct and grand slam cup

Murray has 13 masters 2 og and 1 yec.

I see it that you are giving Becker the props but not Murray? 13 masters is a lot. In over all big titles , Becker is 23 and Murray is 20. Now slams is not everything and big titles is also not everything but I say Murray is far closer with 20 vs 23.

Now stan is at 4.
Guga is at 9
Courier is at 9

Guga and courier has world number 1 ranking. Wawrinka doesn't.

So Murray is likely closer to Becker than he is to a wawrinka or even guga.
 
nolefam_2024 said:
Ok I will scrap Davis cup directly as it is team sports.

Yes. Becker has 3 yec , 1 wct and grand slam cup

Murray has 13 masters 2 og and 1 yec.

I see it that you are giving Becker the props but not Murray? 13 masters is a lot. In over all big titles , Becker is 23 and Murray is 20. Now slams is not everything and big titles is also not everything but I say Murray is far closer with 20 vs 23.

Now stan is at 4.
Guga is at 9
Courier is at 9

Guga and courier has world number 1 ranking. Wawrinka doesn't.

So Murray is likely closer to Becker than he is to a wawrinka or even guga.
Click to expand...
Davis Cup was more important than the AO for a long time. Becker is 38-3 in SINGLES with multiple wins over the likes of Edberg, Agassi, McEnroe often in 5 set epics. To denigrate this because of “team event” again shows your ignorance. Murray has 14 Masters btw.

The stats you cite look good on paper but are based on a completely wrong assumption which let it all collapse down. Not all big titles are the same. Masters are way less important than slams and especially during Becker’s time. Olympics were almost not even present. So instead of Masters and Olympics we have to look at DC for Becker and here he was more dominant than Murray ever was at Masters.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
Davis Cup was more important than the AO for a long time. Becker is 38-3 in SINGLES with multiple wins over the likes of Edberg, Agassi, McEnroe often in 5 set epics. To denigrate this because of “team event” again shows your ignorance. Murray has 14 Masters btw.

The stats you cite look good on paper but are based on a completely wrong assumption which let it all collapse down. Not all big titles are the same. Masters are way less important than slams and especially during Becker’s time. Olympics were almost not even present. So instead of Masters and Olympics we have to look at DC for Becker and here he was more dominant than Murray ever was at Masters.
Click to expand...

Davis cup is way less important today.

The host country would get to pick the surface. For Boris Becker it's mostly carpet. P

Andy Murray is 33-3 in Davis cup singles himself yet he barely faced 1 top 10 in this.

Masters are less important than slams but I don't believe and ATP don't believe they are way less important. That's why masters get half the pts of a slam.
 
All of your heroes are on 20+ and not one of you can even concede and give Murray the credit for the little bit of success that he earned

Alcaraz and Sinner will clear Murray, I think we can all agree on that, so it shouldn’t be too much for any of you to talk sensibly re. Murray. Nobody’s saying deify him or call him top 10 all time, just give props where appropriate.
 
BorgTheGOAT said:
How so? Becker has three more slams than Murray while Stan has same number. Before you start with masters, OG etc, Becker is one of the carpet GOATs with 3 YECs, 1 WCT and one Grand slam cup. All during a time when it was incredibly relevant. Also is the Davis Cup GOAT which during his time was on par with slams. Way above Murray.
Click to expand...

So you think Stan, with 4 big titles and a highest ranking of #3, is closer to Murray who has 20 big titles and been ranked #1???
 
Maddamhussein said:
All of your heroes are on 20+ and not one of you can even concede and give Murray the credit for the little bit of success that he earned

Alcaraz and Sinner will clear Murray, I think we can all agree on that, so it shouldn’t be too much for any of you to talk sensibly re. Murray. Nobody’s saying deify him or call him top 10 all time, just give props where appropriate.
Click to expand...

Giving Murray credit for anything is clearly far too much for some on here. He must be the only multiple Slam champion who is regularly ridiculed and put down by so-called tennis critics on here who should know better. :rolleyes:
 
Maddamhussein said:
All of your heroes are on 20+ and not one of you can even concede and give Murray the credit for the little bit of success that he earned

Alcaraz and Sinner will clear Murray, I think we can all agree on that, so it shouldn’t be too much for any of you to talk sensibly re. Murray. Nobody’s saying deify him or call him top 10 all time, just give props where appropriate.
Click to expand...
What is ridiculous is to argue Murray didn't have it tough and on top of it say he would be slamless if born 5 years ago. Literal boneheaded move..
 
Mainad said:
So you think Stan, with 4 big titles and a highest ranking of #3, is closer to Murray who has 20 big titles and been ranked #1???
Click to expand...

Stan beat Prime Djokovic and P;rime Nadal in the same slam to win AO, he even beat past prime Fed and prime Djoko to win French.
Del Potro beat Prime Federer and Prime Nadal in the same slam to win USO.

Murray could never come close to doing that for a reason, he is no better than Stan/Del Potro/Hewitt/Safin/Roddick/Guga/Rafter/Kafelnikov/Bruguera.
 
Maddamhussein said:
All of your heroes are on 20+ and not one of you can even concede and give Murray the credit for the little bit of success that he earned

Alcaraz and Sinner will clear Murray, I think we can all agree on that, so it shouldn’t be too much for any of you to talk sensibly re. Murray. Nobody’s saying deify him or call him top 10 all time, just give props where appropriate.
Click to expand...
I give him the appropriate credit that is due. This means he is a three slammer, above the likes of Hewitt, Stan and Safin as well as slightly above Kuerten but slightly below Courier. Where it stops for me is when certain folks try to lump him together with Becker who is clearly in another league.
 
Razer said:
Stan beat Djokovic and Nadal in the same slam to win it.
Del Potro beat Federer and Nadal in the same slam to win it.

Murray could never come close to doing that for a reason, he is no better than Stan/Del Potro/Hewitt/Safin/Roddick/Guga/Rafter/Kafelnikov/Bruguera.
Click to expand...

Lol...so now he is not even close to Stan or Delpo! Keep going, it's becoming just too comical to even bother arguing!
 
Mainad said:
So you think Stan, with 4 big titles and a highest ranking of #3, is closer to Murray who has 20 big titles and been ranked #1???
Click to expand...
Closer than Murray is to Becker yes. The term big titles is just a recent invention and pointless metric. Slams are way above everything else and here Stan and Murray are equal, while Boris is three ahead. If you argue with OG which is indeed important in Murray’s time, I counter it with DC and YEC which was importantly during Becker’s time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
  • Poll Poll
Is Murray really greater than Hewitt?
8 9 10
Replies
476
Views
25K
Rebel-I.N.S
Rebel-I.N.S
D
  • Poll Poll
Stan with the hypothetical Career Grand Slam vs Andy Murray
2
Replies
88
Views
5K
tennis_pro
tennis_pro
Entername
  • Poll Poll
Best WTA Player in the post-Serena Era (2017-present)
Replies
7
Views
656
coolcamden
coolcamden
clout
Is Sinner already a top 25 player in history?
2
Replies
53
Views
2K
thrust
T
Holmes
  • Poll Poll
Is Alcaraz greater than Roddick?
6 7 8
Replies
377
Views
18K
Third Serve
Third Serve
Back
Top