Is it remotely possible that Murray's God-Mode level exceeds that of the Big 3?

[Mike Sams]

TW members often remark that Murray has the tools but not the means to win Slams. He tends to do his best work in best of 3 sets. When seeing Murray at his best, it's quite a sight to behold as we've seen him demolish the big 3 numerous times on hardcourts. He's crunched Djokovic in straights in Miami, Toronto and Cincinnati. He's crushed Nadal in hardcourt Slams and even reduced Nadal to almost a high-school level player in the Japan final a few months ago. And he's had his way with Federer in numerous hardcourt matches including Doha, Indian Wells, Shanghai, Toronto, and Madrid indoors.

Why he's not able to get it all together to win Slams is anybody's guess although many on here say he just doesn't have the mental strength or patience to perform on the grandest stage.

But regardless of that, nobody denies his talent. He's smashed the big 3 in finals in best of 3. He can even blast the forehand when he's in the mood.

He has great touch and variety. In terms of tennis acumen and ingenuity and natural talent, do you regard Murray as a more talented player than the big 3 if he's in God-mode? Simply, is Murray's God-mode level almost untouchable against the big 3? And if he can bring that level of tennis to the business end of the Slams, can he get it done?

 

[Pwned]

Not even close.

 

[Mike Sams]

Not even close.

You cannot deny his victories against the big 3 in countless finals and semifinals, regardless of the prestige of the event.

 

[AhmedD]

You cannot deny his victories against the big 3 in countless finals and semifinals, regardless of the prestige of the event.

God mode Djokovic beat a God mode Murray in Rome this year :/

 

[Mike Sams]

God mode Djokovic beat a God mode Murray in Rome this year :/

That wasn't god mode Murray in the slightest. :lol:

 

[kragster]

Mike Sams I always thought you were murrayfan31 but this confirms it

To your OP I think peak Murray can certainly crush non peak top 3 and thtas a compliment since the rest of the field isnt capable of doing that. Is Murray's god mode better than the top 3 god mode? That I can't say until he goes through a dominant streak like the top 3. Either way at the top, consistency matters the most. On a playing scale of 0-100 It's way better to play 3 matches at a 95 than , 1 at99 and 2 at 85.

 

[tusharlovesrafa]

yes.........

 

[DeShaun]

He seems to play outside of himself so infrequently and so much more often within his comfort zone style of Santoro-meets-Giles Simon that his god mode is something that he aggressively suppresses or locks away with no chance of parole. Murray doesn't really have a god mode in my view. He goes on these spurts when nobody else seems to care about winning or the big players are injured or saving themselves for later in which Murray looks like a dominant player of form only to be obliterated as soon as one of the big boys decides it's time to restore order in the universe. Murray has been following this pattern of form for a few years now.

 

[Pwned]

You cannot deny his victories against the big 3 in countless finals and semifinals, regardless of the prestige of the event.

Who is denying his victories?

 

[Mike Sams]

He seems to play outside of himself so infrequently and so much more often within his comfort zone style of Santoro-meets-Giles Simon that his god mode is something that he aggressively suppresses or locks away with no chance of parole. Murray doesn't really have a god mode in my view. He goes on these spurts when nobody else seems to care about winning or the big players are injured or saving themselves for later in which Murray looks like a dominant player of form only to be obliterated as soon as one of the big boys decides it's time to restore order in the universe. Murray has been following this pattern of form for a few years now.

So basically you're saying Federer doesn't give a damn about losing in a Masters final even despite the god-like effort he put in for an entire week to reach that final? :-?

 

[nereis]

What you are saying is that over the course of a best of 3 match Murray at his best could beat Federer, Djokovic or Nadal.

That isn't revolutionary. But we all know what really matters. Slams. Lots of them. Until he manages to win a major he will always be second fiddle at best and a laughing stock at worst.

That means either holding his level consistently high for a best of 5 in a final or somehow finding another gear and blowing his opponent away. We have evidence that he can do neither the former or the latter in any of his three finals appearances in which he got white washed.

So until that changes, he has no 'God-Mode', he's just another top-10 player who can get hot.

 

[purge]

You cannot deny his victories against the big 3 in countless finals and semifinals, regardless of the prestige of the event.

and you think the top 3 were in god mode themselves when murray crushed them?

you can never really prove anything in that department since you never have both players in god mode at the same time. being in god mode pretty much calls for the opponent to be far from your level at the same time. you only call it god mode if a player wins just about every point even the seemingly impossible ones with highly ridiculous shots.

if 2 players play on their highest level but are rather close in doing so neither of them would seem in god mode. not even the matches we consider to have been played on the arguably highest level overall, with the safin-fed AO SF in the top seat in my eyes. even there i dont consider federer to have been in god mode. safin probably was and fed wasnt far away but ive never seen a god mode vs god mode match and i dont suppose i ever will.

so there is no direct comparison between god modes and this topic is just as subjective as the GOAT discussion is. to me nothing has yet come close to god mode federer who seemed to be all over the court at once, hitting winners from anywhere at will with speed, precision and uncanny touch. and even still looking almost casual while doing it.

 

[Sentinel]

Is it remotely possible that Mike Shams' God-Mode level exceeds that of serendipitious, lolville, and tushylovesNoodle ?


The answer to both is no.

 

[Agassifan]

Peak level on hard courts:
1. Fed
2. Nole
3. Andy
4. Rafa

 

[Colin]

Peak level on hard courts:
1. Fed
2. Nole
3. Andy
4. Rafa

Agreed on that hardcourt ranking. For clay, it's Rafa, followed in order by Fed, Nole and Andy.

Grass is the tough one to call after Federer being the obvious No. 1 there. Before the latest Wimbledon I'd have ranked Djokovic last but he makes a case for being No. 2, leaving Rafa and Andy scrapping for third.

Overall, that leaves us with ...
1. Fed
2. Nole
3. Rafa
4. Andy

So Andy is a rather minor deity in this pantheon of Gods. But as far as Fed goes, I'd say he made a pact with the Devil for that kind of talent. Lucifer-mode Fed trumps all on all surfaces.

 

[tusharlovesrafa]

Is it remotely possible that sentinellovespuppies' God-Mode level exceeds that of gorecki, aphex, and vvlbj ?


The answer to both is yes.

corrected it for you..

 

[Povl Carstensen]

God mode generally exeeds others not in God mode.

 

[Homeboy Hotel]

THIS is Murray GOAT mode: AO 2010 vs Isner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jBMHslIuBc#t=11m33s

Watch those two consecutive points points that give him breakpoint and where he breaks. Who else can do that?


And this vs Nadal. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InxGvivzSSI

I mean, tactically when Murray is on and in control he hustles for the ball so well. He doesn't just hit one constant topspin forehand at his opponent or just constantly hit a two handed backhand, the guy has so many options in his calibre but gets let down by..
A) Mental strength
B) Inconsistent serving, or a poor 2nd serve

 

[aphex]

corrected it for you..

 

[tusharlovesrafa]

Is that you in that pic..u gotta nice face and a smile to die for.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Definitely no. His best on clay is by far the weakest of the top 4, and would always lose against the other 3 at their best. On grass he is probably also the weakest of the 4, if all at their best. Note Murray has exactly 0 victories over any of Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic on either of those surfaces. Only on hard courts would it be debateable, but 2004-2007 Federer would beat anyone on hard courts, and peak Djokovic is untouchable on rebound ace.

 

[NadalAgassi]

That wasn't god mode Murray in the slightest. :lol:

Actually that is about the best Murray can play on clay. In fact I doubt you can name a match on clay he played better than that, so on clay that would be his god mode (although no such thing exists for Murray on that surface really) . It is Djokovic wasnt even playing particularly well for his standards and still won.

 

[tusharlovesrafa]

Definitely no. His best on clay is by far the weakest of the top 4, and would always lose against the other 3 at their best. On grass he is probably also the weakest of the 4, if all at their best. Note Murray has exactly 0 victories over any of Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic on either of those surfaces. Only on hard courts would it be debateable, but 2004-2007 Federer would beat anyone on hard courts, and peak Djokovic is untouchable on rebound ace.

it is Plexicusion Prestige,not rebound ace??

 

[Homeboy Hotel]

Actually that is about the best Murray can play on clay. In fact I doubt you can name a match on clay he played better than that, so on clay that would be his god mode (although no such thing exists for Murray on that surface really) . It is Djokovic wasnt even playing particularly well for his standards and still won.

Uhhh, Murray vs Nadal Monte Carlo 2011? 6-4 2-6 6-1 First two sets is Murray in clay-court god mode, injured.

How many players (let alone) take a set off Nadal on clay, in Monte Carlo, but also did that with a double break? Ferrer's not done it, Djokovic or Federer haven't done it of late in the last couple years.

Murray may not have the sparkling cabinet of clay-court tournaments, but I don't see why he can't get success on clay. It's not like it doesn't suit his game.

(And also, to say peak 2.0 Djokovic wasn't playing well in Rome is just absolutely stupid)

 

[AhmedD]

Uhhh, Murray vs Nadal Monte Carlo 2011? 6-4 2-6 6-1 First two sets is Murray in clay-court god mode, injured.

How many players (let alone) take a set off Nadal on clay, in Monte Carlo, but also did that with a double break? Ferrer's not done it, Djokovic or Federer haven't done it of late in the last couple years.

Murray may not have the sparkling cabinet of clay-court tournaments, but I don't see why he can't get success on clay. It's not like it doesn't suit his game.

(And also, to say peak 2.0 Djokovic wasn't playing well in Rome is just absolutely stupid)

Yes but Federer has bageled Nadal on clay, which neither Djokovic or Murray have done. Not to mention, even better than that, he bread sticked Rafa at a ROLAND GARROS FINAL. You've got to be Djoking if you're going to tell me Rafa prefers MC instead of RG.

 

[purge]

THIS is Murray GOAT mode: AO 2010 vs Isner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jBMHslIuBc#t=11m33s

Watch those two consecutive points points that give him breakpoint and where he breaks. Who else can do that?

fed for example has done stuff like that more times than i can count

 

[Homeboy Hotel]

Yes but Federer has bageled Nadal on clay, which neither Djokovic or Murray have done. Not to mention, even better than that, he bread sticked Rafa at a ROLAND GARROS FINAL. You've got to be Djoking if you're going to tell me Rafa prefers MC instead of RG.

Not at all, I'm not here boasting about 'whos done the most damage to Nadal on clay' but I'm saying that Murray's relatively few achievements on clay vs Nadal should definitely be respected. And not to be written off.

That's the thing, if Murray played more clay 250's and 500's he could easily inflate his clay-court results. But he doesn't. He's reached the SF of Roland Garros and pushed Nadal on clay, something that Ferrer can't say he's done.

 

[THUNDERVOLLEY]

remotely possible that Murray's God-Mode level exceeds that of the Big 3?

If his so-called "God mode" meant anything to his career, he would have the hardware (read: majors titles), but he does not. On the other side of the matter, its clear Djokovic, Federer and Nadal had the ability to win--even when they were not always in top form--so what does that say about a guy who in "God mode" still fails to win when it counts?

 

[Mainad]

Definitely no. His best on clay is by far the weakest of the top 4, and would always lose against the other 3 at their best. On grass he is probably also the weakest of the 4, if all at their best. Note Murray has exactly 0 victories over any of Federer, Nadal, or Djokovic on either of those surfaces. Only on hard courts would it be debateable, but 2004-2007 Federer would beat anyone on hard courts, and peak Djokovic is untouchable on rebound ace.

Injured Murray took a set off Nadal at 2011 Monte Carlo, where Nadal is virtually unbeatable, and almost and should have beaten Djokovic in last year's Rome semi-final (and please don't tell me Djokovic wasn't playing his best in that match because he went on to demolish Nadal in the final the next day). I agree that his best is the weakest of the top 4 on clay, but evidently not by as far as you suggest.

On grass, I think Murray has only ever come across Nadal and his opening set against him at 2011 Wimbledon showed his growing potential on that surface against him.

 

[Mainad]

If his so-called "God mode" meant anything to his career, he would have the hardware (read: majors titles), but he does not. On the other side of the matter, its clear Djokovic, Federer and Nadal had the ability to win--even when they were not always in top form--so what does that say about a guy who in "God mode" still fails to win when it counts?

But Murray has never been in anything like 'God mode' when playing in a Slam final. The speculation here is what would happen if he were!

 

[NadalAgassi]

Injured Murray took a set off Nadal at 2011 Monte Carlo, where Nadal is virtually unbeatable, and almost and should have beaten Djokovic in last year's Rome semi-final (and please don't tell me Djokovic wasn't playing his best in that match because he went on to demolish Nadal in the final the next day). I agree that his best is the weakest of the top 4 on clay, but evidently not by as far as you suggest.

On grass, I think Murray has only ever come across Nadal and his opening set against him at 2011 Wimbledon showed his growing potential on that surface against him.

It is well known by all, except a few Nadal hating trolls, that Nadal's level on clay this past year was the worst he has produced since 2004. So references to so and so vs Nadal on clay in 2011 have to be taken into context. Even John Isner a clay court clown took him to 5 sets and nearly beat him at the French. He won the French only since he had a cakewalk draw and then his pigeon Federer in the final. Nadal of 2008 would be handing out breadsticks to Nadal of 2011 on clay. Murray still won only 1 of 5 sets played vs that version of Nadal on clay this year.

Murray's achievements on clay relative the top 3 say it all. He isnt even in their league on that surface. He has a grand total of 1 semifinal at Roland Garros, and even that only after surviving a chokefest vs Troicki. He has no Masters finals on the surface. In fact there are numerous guys in the game today besides the top 3 who have accomplished more than Murray on clay and probably have a higher A game than him on that one surface. Just look at his matches vs Gonalalez and Berdych at the 2009 and 2010 French Opens for instance. Murray didnt play badly in either of those but was still outplayed and overpowered which wouldnt happen on a good day on other surfaces (well maybe Berdych to some extent it could).

As for only playing Nadal on grass, that is true, but peak Federer is rated as much better than Nadal on grass, and Djokovic beat Nadal in this years Wimbledon final, so if you are repeatedly owned by Nadal on the surface...

 

[Romismak]

No way Murray´s peak level is higher than any of big 3 peak level, but he is close on HC and maybe even grass. But he is not only one who can go toe-to-toe at peaks with big 3. Guys like Delpo, Berdych, Tsonga, Soderling at their peaks and at their favourite surface can for sure go toe-to-toe with anyone. Possibly Delpo on HC, Tsonga on grass, or indoor, Berdych grass or HC and Soderling at indoor or clay at their peaks can beat peak Nadal, Federer or Nole.

About Murray, if all big 4 are at their peaks than i would say - HC-Federer,Nole, Murray, Rafa - so he can beat Rafa, probably close match with Nole, but peak Roger at HC is best player ever
Grass-I think Murray is pretty good on grass, he had also succes at Queens, just put Wimbledon in another country and he can win it.
Grass peak level- Roger, Andy-Nole-Rafa are all close i think
Clay- he is worst on clay for sure, his RG record say for everything, Rafa would beat anyone on clay, Roger at his peak probably would beat anyone besides Rafa on clay and Nole was always good on clay - pushed Rafa on clay xtimes more than Murray did... Murray pushed Rafa at MC and suddenly he is clay god.. Nole was playing close matches with Rafa on clay for years, in times when he had breathing-stamina issues and Rafa was better on clay than 2011.

So Andy can beat or play close match at their peaks with Rafa and Nole on both grass and HC.

 

[jackson vile]

Very possible, however we have not even seen that yet. But we have seen Murray cause players such as Federer and Nadal to completely self destruct at time for sure.

TW members often remark that Murray has the tools but not the means to win Slams. He tends to do his best work in best of 3 sets. When seeing Murray at his best, it's quite a sight to behold as we've seen him demolish the big 3 numerous times on hardcourts. He's crunched Djokovic in straights in Miami, Toronto and Cincinnati. He's crushed Nadal in hardcourt Slams and even reduced Nadal to almost a high-school level player in the Japan final a few months ago. And he's had his way with Federer in numerous hardcourt matches including Doha, Indian Wells, Shanghai, Toronto, and Madrid indoors.

Why he's not able to get it all together to win Slams is anybody's guess although many on here say he just doesn't have the mental strength or patience to perform on the grandest stage.

But regardless of that, nobody denies his talent. He's smashed the big 3 in finals in best of 3. He can even blast the forehand when he's in the mood.

He has great touch and variety. In terms of tennis acumen and ingenuity and natural talent, do you regard Murray as a more talented player than the big 3 if he's in God-mode? Simply, is Murray's God-mode level almost untouchable against the big 3? And if he can bring that level of tennis to the business end of the Slams, can he get it done?

 

[Mainad]

It is well known by all, except a few Nadal hating trolls, that Nadal's level on clay this past year was the worst he has produced since 2004. So references to so and so vs Nadal on clay in 2011 have to be taken into context. Even John Isner a clay court clown took him to 5 sets and nearly beat him at the French. He won the French only since he had a cakewalk draw and then his pigeon Federer in the final. Nadal of 2008 would be handing out breadsticks to Nadal of 2011 on clay. Murray still won only 1 of 5 sets played vs that version of Nadal on clay this year.

Well, if Nadal's clay performances this past year have been so bad then that kind of makes Djokovic's record against him on clay this year much less impressive than it would seem doesn't it?

Murray's achievements on clay relative the top 3 say it all. He isnt even in their league on that surface. He has a grand total of 1 semifinal at Roland Garros, and even that only after surviving a chokefest vs Troicki. He has no Masters finals on the surface. In fact there are numerous guys in the game today besides the top 3 who have accomplished more than Murray on clay and probably have a higher A game than him on that one surface. Just look at his matches vs Gonalalez and Berdych at the 2009 and 2010 French Opens for instance. Murray didnt play badly in either of those but was still outplayed and overpowered which wouldnt happen on a good day on other surfaces (well maybe Berdych to some extent it could).

Murray hasn't any clay court achievements to speak of compared to the top 3 but I was referring to his improved level on clay this year which makes me think he is not that far off from them nowadays level-wise. It will of course take him a long time to match their overall achievements. All told he has reached a total of 4 clay semis altogether (2009 MC, 2011 MC, 2011 Rome and 2011 FO). At 2009 FO I grant you he was still learning to play on clay and was thoroughly outclassed by Gonzalez, a much more experienced clay courter. At 2010 FO I disagree with you. Murray was out of sorts, grumbling because of the bad weather conditions and just played awful and it didn't take much for Berdych to overpower him. Berdych's coach was overheard saying to him during one of the frequent rain-breaks that 'he didn't think Murray wanted to win this one'!

As for only playing Nadal on grass, that is true, but peak Federer is rated as much better than Nadal on grass, and Djokovic beat Nadal in this years Wimbledon final, so if you are repeatedly owned by Nadal on the surface...

Djokovic has been handily beating Nadal on ALL surfaces recently. He is in Nadal's head. Murray, on the other hand, has had some much closer matches with him post AO including one win so maybe Djokovic isn't as much of a problem for Murray as he currently is for Nadal. After all, Djokovic wasn't playing all that well at 2011 Wimbledon (survived scares from Tomic and Baghdatis) and a Nadal with his head screwed on could probably have won that final. Maybe Murray with his head finally screwed on right for Slams could have done the same given his better track record against him in 2011. Until they finally play a grass match, we can't say for sure.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Well, if Nadal's clay performances this past year have been so bad then that kind of makes Djokovic's record against him on clay this year much less impressive than it would seem doesn't it?

Well yes I would agree with that. Only an idiot Nadal hater would say things like the current Djokovic is better than the Nadal of his best years on clay. It is a combination of Djokovics improved level, Nadals badly dropped level on clay (I actually dont think Nadal has dropped much or any on outdoor hard courts, current Djokovic is just too good for him there now), and the extreme matchup issue, that leads to Djokovic wins over Nadal on clay today. That said beating any version of Nadal on clay in back to back Masters finals is impressive.

Murray hasn't any clay court achievements to speak of compared to the top 3 but I was referring to his improved level on clay this year which makes me think he is not that far off from them nowadays level-wise. It will of course take him a long time to match their overall achievements. All told he has reached a total of 4 clay semis altogether (2009 MC, 2011 MC, 2011 Rome and 2011 FO). At 2009 FO I grant you he was still learning to play on clay and was thoroughly outclassed by Gonzalez, a much more experienced clay courter. At 2010 FO I disagree with you. Murray was out of sorts, grumbling because of the bad weather conditions and just played awful and it didn't take much for Berdych to overpower him. Berdych's coach was overheard saying to him during one of the frequent rain-breaks that 'he didn't think Murray wanted to win this one'!

I still dont consider his level on clay overall close to the top 3 yet. You have to do more than take the occasional set off those players to be close to them on the surface IMO.

Djokovic has been handily beating Nadal on ALL surfaces recently. He is in Nadal's head. Murray, on the other hand, has had some much closer matches with him post AO including one win so maybe Djokovic isn't as much of a problem for Murray as he currently is for Nadal. After all, Djokovic wasn't playing all that well at 2011 Wimbledon (survived scares from Tomic and Baghdatis) and a Nadal with his head screwed on could probably have won that final. Maybe Murray with his head finally screwed on right for Slams could have done the same given his better track record against him in 2011. Until they finally play a grass match, we can't say for sure.

Yes I agree. Murray would still be 4th on grass of that quartet, but closer than he is on clay. As of date there is no argument for even his best level (best thus far displayed) being better than any of the top 3 on grass yet. Even if Murray and Djokovic havent played on grass Djokovic is now a Wimbledon Champion so has to be rated as better than someone who hasnt even reached a Wimbledon final.

The only of the 3 major surfaces there is an argument would be hard courts, but as I said 2004-2007 Federer is by far the best overall hard courts of anyone, while Djokovic at his best is nearly unbeatable on rebound ace.

Overall this is a stupid thread.

 

[kaku]

If Murray can reach his Tokyo Final form and build on it (not to mention keep it in the later rounds of slams) than his god mode would probably be able to compete with the other 3 guys playing rather well.

As for his clay court ability, it's definitely not as good as the other 3 guys consistently, although he showed that he can play a good clay court match as seen in MC and Rome. If he consistently posts good clay court results at the masters and FO (semi/final/W) he can start to reach the clay court level of the other three guys.

 

[NadalAgassi]

No way Murray´s peak level is higher than any of big 3 peak level, but he is close on HC and maybe even grass. But he is not only one who can go toe-to-toe at peaks with big 3. Guys like Delpo, Berdych, Tsonga, Soderling at their peaks and at their favourite surface can for sure go toe-to-toe with anyone. Possibly Delpo on HC, Tsonga on grass, or indoor, Berdych grass or HC and Soderling at indoor or clay at their peaks can beat peak Nadal, Federer or Nole.

About Murray, if all big 4 are at their peaks than i would say - HC-Federer,Nole, Murray, Rafa - so he can beat Rafa, probably close match with Nole, but peak Roger at HC is best player ever
Grass-I think Murray is pretty good on grass, he had also succes at Queens, just put Wimbledon in another country and he can win it.
Grass peak level- Roger, Andy-Nole-Rafa are all close i think
Clay- he is worst on clay for sure, his RG record say for everything, Rafa would beat anyone on clay, Roger at his peak probably would beat anyone besides Rafa on clay and Nole was always good on clay - pushed Rafa on clay xtimes more than Murray did... Murray pushed Rafa at MC and suddenly he is clay god.. Nole was playing close matches with Rafa on clay for years, in times when he had breathing-stamina issues and Rafa was better on clay than 2011.

So Andy can beat or play close match at their peaks with Rafa and Nole on both grass and HC.

Excellent summary.

 

[Mike Sams]

It is well known by all, except a few Nadal hating trolls, that Nadal's level on clay this past year was the worst he has produced since 2004. So references to so and so vs Nadal on clay in 2011 have to be taken into context. Even John Isner a clay court clown took him to 5 sets and nearly beat him at the French. He won the French only since he had a cakewalk draw and then his pigeon Federer in the final. Nadal of 2008 would be handing out breadsticks to Nadal of 2011 on clay. Murray still won only 1 of 5 sets played vs that version of Nadal on clay this year.

Murray's achievements on clay relative the top 3 say it all. He isnt even in their league on that surface. He has a grand total of 1 semifinal at Roland Garros, and even that only after surviving a chokefest vs Troicki. He has no Masters finals on the surface. In fact there are numerous guys in the game today besides the top 3 who have accomplished more than Murray on clay and probably have a higher A game than him on that one surface. Just look at his matches vs Gonalalez and Berdych at the 2009 and 2010 French Opens for instance. Murray didnt play badly in either of those but was still outplayed and overpowered which wouldnt happen on a good day on other surfaces (well maybe Berdych to some extent it could).

As for only playing Nadal on grass, that is true, but peak Federer is rated as much better than Nadal on grass, and Djokovic beat Nadal in this years Wimbledon final, so if you are repeatedly owned by Nadal on the surface...

Nadal of 2008 couldn't even make hardcourt Slam finals. Nadal of today is a better player all-round on all surfaces.

 

[helloworld]

No, it has always been the Big 4; Pwc, KPMG, E&Y, Deloitte.
A joke thread deserves a joke respond.

 

[DeShaun]

So basically you're saying Federer doesn't give a damn about losing in a Masters final even despite the god-like effort he put in for an entire week to reach that final? :-?

That's not what I'm saying. Federer could have so endeavored hoping to finally play the guy from the other side of the bracket who:
A. Federer figured had the best chance of getting to the final, and
B. had been giving Federer plenty of trouble as of late.

Now, if Roger smarting goes off and customizes a new wrinkle on an existing game plan meant for giving himself even a slightly better shot at beating that guy--and suppose Roger very curious to try out the new plan, it's not inconceivable for him to work hard through a Masters draw, itching to play that guy sometime later in the draw, even if this means that Roger must dig really deep and make his way all the way to the finals. Ha Ha

 

[Noltae]

Murray will take a slam when he gets into Devil Mode!

 

[DeShaun]

THIS is Murray GOAT mode: AO 2010 vs Isner
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jBMHslIuBc#t=11m33s

Watch those two consecutive points points that give him breakpoint and where he breaks. Who else can do that?


And this vs Nadal. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InxGvivzSSI

I mean, tactically when Murray is on and in control he hustles for the ball so well. He doesn't just hit one constant topspin forehand at his opponent or just constantly hit a two handed backhand, the guy has so many options in his calibre but gets let down by..
A) Mental strength
B) Inconsistent serving, or a poor 2nd serve

In the first clip Isner's movement does not compare with Murray's.
Pattern: Isner hits great forcing shot, stands there admiring it, quickly realizes that his opponent is tracking it down, struggles to remember where he should be court-position wise. Is caught out by Murray's reply. Point Murray. Rinse and repeat.
Rafa, Nole, and Roger wouldn't have stood there admiring their shot. Instead, they would have prepared themselves for Murray's reply as soon as the ball had left their racquets.
When everyone is playing his top gear, that 55mph dipper which Murray ripped from well behind his baseline towards Isner at the net, would have been anticipated by Rafa, Roger, or Nole either of whom would simply have moved his feet, lowered himself and served up a stop volley on a platter. Andy's good not merely at making his opponent hit one more ball, but at luring his opponent into thinking that they've got Andy running, when Andy on a stretch is about to reply with some real interest and you had better prepare not just to hit one more ball but deal with a well angled, deep or otherwise tricky ball that's his response to the seemingly solid forcing shot that you hit very well the stroke just before.

 

[jackson vile]

Murray will take a slam when he gets into Devil Mode!

What is that going to look like?