Murray: Djokovic is going to have to drop off if I'm going to win in Melbourne

[killerboi2]

The tour is weak now and that helped him big time. He's very consistent but he's doing horrible against the top players. He beat Djokovic on a HC? Come on, one match, in a MS when Djokovic was mediocre. What's his record against Djokovic this year? Btw I'm not laughing, I'm just saying that in 2012-2013 he was very tough - he reached 4 consecutive Slam finals (he withedrew from the FO). If he actually had more consistent results in the Masters which he obviously sacrificed to a degree to do better in the Slams, he could've been no 1. No chance of that happening now even if there was no Djokovic.

I agree. Real Murray fans such as myself can see that he has declined and are definitely not satisfied with his 2015 season. His performances against top players have been poor, bar one win against Djokovic and one against Nadal. He needs the edge and belief back in slams. If he can't beat the 34/35 year old in a slam this year then he is finished winning slams imo.

 

[Mainad]

The tour is weak now and that helped him big time. He's very consistent but he's doing horrible against the top players. He beat Djokovic on a HC? Come on, one match, in a MS when Djokovic was mediocre.

It was still a Masters final. How many other players have beaten Djokovic in those no matter what level he was playing at? Djokovic was arguably even more mediocre when he lost to Fed in Dubai and Cincy.

What's his record against Djokovic this year? Btw I'm not laughing, I'm just saying that in 2012-2013 he was very tough - he reached 4 consecutive Slam finals (he withedrew from the FO). If he actually had more consistent results in the Masters which he obviously sacrificed to a degree to do better in the Slams, he could've been no 1. No chance of that happening now even if there was no Djokovic.

The back surgery held him back and lost him a lot of time. He virtually lost a full year trying to recover from it (no big titles, loss of top 10 status for the first time in many years) and that always tells when you have players like Djokovic and even Federer who were able to proceed with their careers unhindered by any significant injuries. Murray has been trying to play catch-up and it's not easy. He may never succeed. He's just not been as lucky as them fitness-wise.

 

[Pagoo]

Excatly when some of the best players of the world talk like this there is no excitement left. Good news for Novak bad news for the sport. They cant even spice up the things to make it exciting. Their talk is like losing the match in the locker room before even it starts.

Honestly, I'm wondering at this point if any of these guys should bother showing up at the AO? What's the point, since the winner is a foregone conclusion? Maybe, they're just playing for points and cash without any real conviction. At least show some fight!

 

[TheFifthSet]

I'm a big an opponent to gender egalitarianism because I think that men are better leaders? What kind of a joke is this?

You said that any tennis player that is coached by a woman isn't a real man. Which is a lot different. What you're doing now is called "downplaying".

I agree that most men are better suited having other men as their coaches, mostly because there is more overlap in personality and that makes a big difference. Males are also usually sterner and that can lend itself better to coaching individual athletes. However if a woman can meet all the criterion necessary to be a good coach (and it's already been demonstrated that they can) then they are just as viable an option as coaches. The only potential obstacle at that point would the male players ego; some of them wouldn't be able to stomach the concept of being given orders by a woman.

And I mean ffs, I'd rather have Mauresmo as my head coach than, say, a 4.0 swindler like Bollettieri that would waste my time plagiarizing self-help quotes. He seemed to do alright coaching despite having a pretty ordinary tennis mind.

 

[tennis_pro]

It was still a Masters final. How many other players have beaten Djokovic in those no matter what level he was playing at? Djokovic was arguably even more mediocre when he lost to Fed in Dubai and Cincy.

Even if so Federer did it 3 times so it was no coincidence + he pushed him at Wimbledon and the US Open. Fed who is 34 years old.

The back surgery held him back and lost him a lot of time. He virtually lost a full year trying to recover from it (no big titles, loss of top 10 status for the first time in many years) and that always tells when you have players like Djokovic and even Federer who were able to proceed with their careers unhindered by any significant injuries. Murray has been trying to play catch-up and it's not easy. He may never succeed. He's just not been as lucky as them fitness-wise.

Of course this was a big factor but hiring Mauresmo didn't help him. He would've done just as well without her I feel because we all know that even if he's at 80% of his old level he's easily a top 5 player. The worrying part are his efforts againsts top players. While I can understand some of the losses against Djokovic - in some he looked completely hopeless (Shanghai, wasn't it? Or maybe Paris?). Federer owned him in 2 of his favorite tournaments, Wawrinka beat him, even Nadal who had no business beating Murray at the WTF did it in straight sets.

Mauresmo just simply won't help him in the mental part because despite winning 2 Slams she was considered somewhat of a choker. And that's exactly what Murray needs now - someone to fix his brains.

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

But that doesn't mean that Lendl wasn't his coach at the time just because he didn't travel with him for every single tournament. Why do I even have to explain this?

Lendl was not present throughout the entire Olympic Tennis event in 2012.

If you had bothered to look at why I said that, you would have seen that I was responding to a poster asserting that Murray won a big title in Mauresmo's absentia (implying that she had no direct influence on Murray winning Montreal).

I offered the Lendl-OG example as a counter argument i.e Murray is capable of winning titles without his primary coach being present and it's wrong to assume that he thrived in Montreal because Mauresmo wasn't there.

Booked a therapy session yet?

 

[tennis_pro]

You said that any tennis player that is coached by a woman isn't a real man. Which is a lot different. What you're doing now is called "downplaying".

Because this is true. Murray went the easy way becaue he didn't want to be chastised by a male coach cause that's exactly what he would've received if he had one. Again, I'm not saying Mauresmo is a bad coach but I feel that she could've helped a WTA player a lot more than she helped Murray. I think she would've done great with someone like Carla Suarez Navarro for example (who btw has 2 male coaches)

I agree that most men are better suited having other men as their coaches, mostly because there is more overlap in personality and that makes a big difference. Males are also usually sterner and that can lend itself better to coaching individual athletes. However if a woman can meet all the criterion necessary to be a good coach (and it's already been demonstrated that they can) then they are just as viable an option as coaches.

This is all true. Women don't have ego issues so they would easily transition into having a female coach if they had to.

And I mean ffs, I'd rather have Mauresmo as my head coach than, say, a 4.0 swindler like Bollettieri that would waste my time plagiarizing self-help quotes. He seemed to do alright coaching despite having a pretty ordinary tennis mind.

Bollettieri is a guy from the streets, he doesn't know anything about tennis.

 

[tennis_pro]

Lendl was not present throughout the entire Olympic Tennis event in 2012.

If you had bothered to look at why I said that, you would have seen that I was responding to a poster asserting that Murray won a big title in Mauresmo's absentia (implying that she had no direct influence on Murray winning Montreal).

I offered the Lendl-OG example as a counter argument i.e Murray is capable of winning titles without his primary coach being present and it's wrong to assume that he thrived in Montreal because Mauresmo wasn't there.

Mauresmo was absent for a far longer time than Lendl because she was pregnant and then was occupied with the baby. Lendl was accessible for Murray almost all the time. He really was the perfect coach for him.

Booked a therapy session yet?

Do you have any more lame questions in store?

 

[Mainad]

Even if so Federer did it 3 times so it was no coincidence + he pushed him at Wimbledon and the US Open. Fed who is 34 years old.

Murray also pushed Djokovic at the AO (splitting breakers and then going up a break before mentally imploding after Djokovic took an MTO) and took him to 5 at RG (which may have affected Djokovic's performance in the final). He also took him to a decider at Miami but then ran out of gas in the decider (fitness issues as I said). In the 1st half of last season, he actually played Djokovic much better than he did in the latter half (post Montreal). By then, as I said, he was struggling a bit physically (look how painfully he struggled through his matches in Cincy right after winning Montreal). IMO he was conserving all his remaining energy for the Davis Cup. This is where his true focus lay at that stage.

Of course this was a big factor but hiring Mauresmo didn't help him. He would've done just as well without her I feel because we all know that even if he's at 80% of his old level he's easily a top 5 player. The worrying part are his efforts againsts top players. While I can understand some of the losses against Djokovic - in some he looked completely hopeless (Shanghai, wasn't it? Or maybe Paris?). Federer owned him in 2 of his favorite tournaments, Wawrinka beat him, even Nadal who had no business beating Murray at the WTF did it in straight sets.

Mauresmo just simply won't help him in the mental part because despite winning 2 Slams she was considered somewhat of a choker. And that's exactly what Murray needs now - someone to fix his brains.

Bear in mind that, in the first half of 2015, most of the things Murray achieved (eg. winning his 1st clay title and the 2 Masters) were done without Mauresmo who was already taking a lot of time off prior to her extended maternity leave. Bkorkman was his main coach at that point. As I said, his poor form against the top guys towards the end of the year can at least be partially explained by his focus on DC (he even contemplated skipping the WTF so he could get more practice in on clay ahead of the final).

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Murray also pushed Djokovic at the AO (splitting breakers and then going up a break before mentally imploding after Djokovic took an MTO) and took him to 5 at RG (which may have affected Djokovic's performance in the final). He also took him to a decider at Miami but then ran out of gas in the decider (fitness issues as I said). In the 1st half of last season, he actually played Djokovic much better than he did in the latter half (post Montreal). By then, as I said, he was struggling a bit physically (look how painfully he struggled through his matches in Cincy right after winning Montreal). IMO he was conserving all his remaining energy for the Davis Cup. This is where his true focus lay at that stage.



Bear in mind that, in the first half of 2015, most of the things Murray achieved (eg. winning his 1st clay title and the 2 Masters) were done without Mauresmo who was already taking a lot of time off prior to her extended maternity leave. Bkorkman was his main coach at that point. As I said, his poor form against the top guys towards the end of the year can at least be partially explained by his focus on DC (he even contemplated skipping the WTF so he could get more practice in on clay ahead of the final).

Do you think Murray can topple Djokovic at AO if Djokovic maintains his current standard, in peaking for the biggest matches?

 

[tennis_pro]

You made the claim in the first place, so how 'bout you dish up the data instead, eh? That's the normal, logical way to proceed.

Top 10 female players:
1) Serena Williams - coaches - 2 - both male
2) Maria Sharapova - coaches - 5 - all male
3) Simona Halep - coaches - 6 - all male
4) Garbine Muguruza - coaches 1 - male
5) Agnieszka Radwanska - coaches - 3 - 2 male, Navratilova was dropped after 7 months
6) Venus Williams - coaches - 2 - both male
7) Angelique Kerber - coaches - 2 - both male
8) Lucie Safarova - coach - 1 - male
9) Flavia Pennetta - coach - 1 - male
10) Petra Kvitova - coach - 1 male

Quite a coincidence, isn't it? All the best female tennis players chose to have male coaches throughout their careers with one exception for Radwanska who hired Navratilova for a short time and that was by far her worst period. She started playing better and better once she parted ways with Martina.

 

[tennis_pro]

Murray also pushed Djokovic at the AO (splitting breakers and then going up a break before mentally imploding after Djokovic took an MTO) and took him to 5 at RG (which may have affected Djokovic's performance in the final). He also took him to a decider at Miami but then ran out of gas in the decider (fitness issues as I said). In the 1st half of last season, he actually played Djokovic much better than he did in the latter half (post Montreal). By then, as I said, he was struggling a bit physically (look how painfully he struggled through his matches in Cincy right after winning Montreal). IMO he was conserving all his remaining energy for the Davis Cup. This is where his true focus lay at that stage.

While this is true it is strange that Murray's energy bar is close to 0 after 2 sets a lot of the times when he faces Djokovic. For someone who is considered one of the fittest guys on tour?

Bear in mind that, in the first half of 2015, most of the things Murray achieved (eg. winning his 1st clay title and the 2 Masters) were done without Mauresmo who was already taking a lot of time off prior to her extended maternity leave. Bkorkman was his main coach at that point. As I said, his poor form against the top guys towards the end of the year can at least be partially explained by his focus on DC (he even contemplated skipping the WTF so he could get more practice in on clay ahead of the final).

Exactly, thanks for all the details as I know you're following Murray's career more closely. It just strengthens my point.

 

[Mainad]

Do you think Murray can topple Djokovic at AO if Djokovic maintains his current standard, in peaking for the biggest matches?

I don't think it's impossible but he will have to be at the very top of his game and serving and returning at least as best as he's ever done, otherwise...forget it.

 

[Sysyphus]

Top 10 female players:
1) Serena Williams - coaches - 2 - both male
2) Maria Sharapova - coaches - 5 - all male
3) Simona Halep - coaches - 6 - all male
4) Garbine Muguruza - coaches 1 - male
5) Agnieszka Radwanska - coaches - 3 - 2 male, Navratilova was dropped after a year
6) Venus Williams - coaches - 2 - both male
7) Angelique Kerber - coaches - 2 - both male
8) Lucie Safarova - coach - 1 - male
9) Flavia Pennetta - coach - 1 - male
10) Petra Kvitova - coach - 1 male

Quite a coincidence, isn't it? All the best female tennis players chose to have male coaches throughout their careers with one exception for Radwanska who hired Navratilova for a short time.

I have never claimed that the majority of female players do not have male coaches, and that is not at all the point under contention.

Come again.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

I don't think it's impossible but he will have to be at the very top of his game and serving and returning at least as best as he's ever done, otherwise...forget it.

He was with Djokovic last year, but fatigued.

He could have taken better advantage of his parity and come out on top of more big points to maybe take a 2-0 lead at which point perhaps Djokovic's extra endurance wouldn't have come into play. He doesn't believe he can outlast Djokovic (at least on plexi) and it impacts his play - he lost patience toward the end of the match and got more and more desperate. Murray should junk-ball Djokovic more, in my view. He gets drawn into Djokovic's game too much. Murray has forgotten that he has a game that can drive Djokovic up the wall and that it can still actually work. Just my opinion.

For the record, I rewatched the entire match last night just for a fresh view.

 

[killerboi2]

Do you think Murray can topple Djokovic at AO if Djokovic maintains his current standard, in peaking for the biggest matches?

For some reason things seem to go spectacularly wrong for Murray in these big matches more often than not. There are 3 times where I clearly remember that it hasn't. The two slams he won obiously and 2012 AO semi. That was a match I feel he could have won if he had just a little bit of luck, that rub of the green you need to carry you through these matches.

Under Lendl he was definitely capable of beating Djokovic and did so numerous times. Ran him pretty close in a few of the losses as well. He definitely has to improve a lot if he wants to get the job done again though.

 

[Mainad]

While this is true it is strange that Murray's energy bar is close to 0 after 2 sets a lot of the times when he faces Djokovic. For someone who is considered one of the fittest guys on tour?

I don't think Murray's stamina is quite as good as it was pre-surgery and that is no use against a guy like Djokovic who just seems to get fitter and fitter every year. Like I said, he tailed off physically in the 2nd half of last year especially after the US Open. He focussed his remaining energies on DC. That was the one event he was most determined not to screw up.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Murray at his best can definitely take out Djokovic at AO if he makes sure to play his best points on the big points. There's no doubt in my mind. I see Murray as a guy who can realistically beat Djokovic to win the AO despite his horrible record, and yet strangely I don't see Federer with any realistic shot despite his way way better recent record against Djokovic.

My intuition tells me strange things often.

 

[tennis_pro]

I have never claimed that the majority of female players do not have male coaches, and that is not at all the point under contention.
Come again.

The fact that almost every tennis professional (both male and female) chose a male coach instead tells me all I need to know. Everyone prefers a male coach and there's a reason for that.

If you want more data go through the list yourself, I'm bored now proving you something so obvious.

 

[Adv. Edberg]

There are like 3 or 4 examples given in the entire thread. 3 or 4 out of thousands of professionals who ever played the game. You know why they were so easy to find? Because each time it has happened in history it was a big story. Women as coaches (for men obviously, for women in a lesser degree) stand out. That means that 99,9% of coaches who worked for ATP players have been male.

This is like explaining to a 15-year old how much is 2+2. It's hilarious that I have to prove something so obvious. WTA could be more interesting though because I've heard of some female coaches.

But where do you prove that men are better not led by women?

 

[tennis_pro]

I don't think Murray's stamina is quite as good as it was pre-surgery and that is no use against a guy like Djokovic who just seems to get fitter and fitter every year. Like I said, he tailed off physically in the 2nd half of last year especially after the US Open. He focussed his remaining energies on DC. That was the one event he was most determined not to screw up.

I think there's a factor that makes Murray get tired faster against Djokovic. He can still play long matches and look fresh at the end but never against Djokovic. I truly believe that there's a big mental part to it. Playing Djokovic now was like playing peak Federer back in the day, the sole fact that you're playing someone who you know you're going to need an incredible amount of hard work against in order to get a win wears you down a lot faster than playing Berdych for example.

 

[Mainad]

He was with Djokovic last year, but fatigued.

He could have taken better advantage of his parity and come out on top of more big points to maybe take a 2-0 lead at which point perhaps Djokovic's extra endurance wouldn't have come into play. He doesn't believe he can outlast Djokovic (at least on plexi) and it impacts his play - he lost patience toward the end of the match and got more and more desperate. Murray should junk-ball Djokovic more, in my view. He gets drawn into Djokovic's game too much. Murray has forgotten that he has a game that can drive Djokovic up the wall and that it can still actually work. Just my opinion.

For the record, I rewatched the entire match last night just for a fresh view.

It's my impression that the 2015 AO final was perhaps Murray's best chance to break his AO duck and he came frustratingly close as he kept pace with Djokovic in the first 2 sets, holding set points in the 1st breaker and winning the 2nd. Then he went up a break in the 3rd. Isn't that when Djokovic took his MTO or am I recalling this wrong? Afterwards he lost all focus and never won another game. It was an extraordinary and frustrating collapse but I'm not sure how much it was physical and how much mental. What do you think?

 

[tennis_pro]

But where do you prove that men are better not led by women?

If this was a 50/50 call there would be more than one odd example out of a thousand when a male player picks a female coach.

Even if it's just driven by ego (which is not), if it puts their mind to rest that means that male coaches are better for them, period.

 

[Sysyphus]

The fact that almost every tennis professional (both male and female) chose a male coach instead tells me all I need to know. Everyone prefers a male coach and there's a reason for that.

If you want more data go through the list yourself, I'm bored now proving you something so obvious.

Are you really this dense?

No one here has taken issue with a proposition of the like of "the majority of good coaches on tour are men" or "there are by far more good male coaches than female".

Showing that the vast majority on both tours choose male coaches does quite plainly and obviously not prove: (1) "No man should ever be coached by a woman. EVER."
nor (2) that "No real man wants to be led by a woman, period."

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

Even if so Federer did it 3 times so it was no coincidence + he pushed him at Wimbledon and the US Open. Fed who is 34 years old.



Of course this was a big factor but hiring Mauresmo didn't help him. He would've done just as well without her I feel because we all know that even if he's at 80% of his old level he's easily a top 5 player. The worrying part are his efforts againsts top players. While I can understand some of the losses against Djokovic - in some he looked completely hopeless (Shanghai, wasn't it? Or maybe Paris?). Federer owned him in 2 of his favorite tournaments, Wawrinka beat him, even Nadal who had no business beating Murray at the WTF did it in straight sets.

Two of Federer's fave tournaments, you mean,

Murray lost Fed in Cincinatti and Wimbledon.

Murray has a combined total of 3 titles from those two tournys, Fed has 15.

Wimbledon and Cincinatti are probably the two toughest places to face Fed (even at 34 years old).

Let's see Murray vs Fed on a slow HC (I'd wGer things would be a lot closer if they faved off at the AO, for instance).

As for Nadal/Wawrinka, Murray prepared for the WTF by playing on a clay court. It was clearly not his priority.

People are convienently overlooking these caveats.

 

[Krish872007]

RAFA.

That is all.

 

[metsman]

I don't think Murray's stamina is quite as good as it was pre-surgery and that is no use against a guy like Djokovic who just seems to get fitter and fitter every year. Like I said, he tailed off physically in the 2nd half of last year especially after the US Open. He focussed his remaining energies on DC. That was the one event he was most determined not to screw up.

and the serve....it's all about the serve really. Like I said in like 5 of the 9 meetings between Djokovic and 2012-2013 Murray, Muzz won 70% or more of first serve points. That's huge for him...a key barometer of success as is of course serving a healthy percentage. Since 2014? Never.

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

He was with Djokovic last year, but fatigued.

He could have taken better advantage of his parity and come out on top of more big points to maybe take a 2-0 lead at which point perhaps Djokovic's extra endurance wouldn't have come into play. He doesn't believe he can outlast Djokovic (at least on plexi) and it impacts his play - he lost patience toward the end of the match and got more and more desperate. Murray should junk-ball Djokovic more, in my view. He gets drawn into Djokovic's game too much. Murray has forgotten that he has a game that can drive Djokovic up the wall and that it can still actually work. Just my opinion.

For the record, I rewatched the entire match last night just for a fresh view.

Interesting theory.

If you look at the way Dolgopolov played Djoko at Miami 15, there may be some truth to that.

Awkward slices and mixing the play took Djokovic out of his comfort zone, Dolgopolov was very unlucky not to come through that (if he converts the point for a double break, he gets it done, IMO).

 

[metsman]

Two of Federer's fave tournaments, you mean,

Murray lost Fed in Cincinatti and Wimbledon.

Murray has a combined total of 3 titles from those two tournys, Fed has 15.

Wimbledon and Cincinatti are probably the two toughest places to face Fed (even at 34 years old).

Let's see Murray vs Fed on a slow HC (I'd wGer things would be a lot closer if they faved off at the AO, for instance).

As for Nadal/Wawrinka, Murray prepared for the WTF by playing on a clay court. It was clearly not his priority.

People are convienently overlooking these caveats.

Well at the 2014 AO Fed beat him handily, but Murray was better in 2015 so who knows. WTF is a pretty slow court although it is indoors but still we all know what happened there. But still Federer was far more competitive against a better version of Federer in 2012 than he has been the past two years on any surface. Beat him at Olympics, Shanghai on Fed's preferred surfaces....competitive at Wimbledon, in control of the match before Fed turned on god mode at the end of the second. WTF he was doing well but then Fed really raised his level and Murray's dipped, still way better than the 2014 horror show. Dubai was two competitive sets...more competitive than Cincy this year despite the scoreline I'd say.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

It's my impression that the 2015 AO final was perhaps Murray's best chance to break his AO duck and he came frustratingly close as he kept pace with Djokovic in the first 2 sets, holding set points in the 1st breaker and winning the 2nd. Then he went up a break in the 3rd. Isn't that when Djokovic took his MTO or am I recalling this wrong? Afterwards he lost all focus and never won another game. It was an extraordinary and frustrating collapse but I'm not sure how much it was physical and how much mental. What do you think?

Obviously, Murray is prone to mental lapses, but I saw clear signs that he was struggling physically to create the same levels of rotation and torque through his strokes that he personally requires to get the purchase on the ball that he needs. Because of the flat nature of his strokes, this problem becomes amplified, especially with his margin for error being, I'd suggest, narrower generally than Djokovic's. Obviously, everything feeds into everything else in tennis, so if Murray had kept positive perhaps he'd have appeared less fatigued, but he puts extra stress on all parts of his game compared to Djokovic because he too often asks too much of himself on his own service games (as we've discussed many times). I also got the impression that Djokovic was more fatigued than he let on later in the match. He's great at blagging in either direction, and Murray buckles first. It's mind games stuff. You'd think Djokovic had a full house toward the end of the match regarding physical reserves but he just had a high pair. Murray needs to remember that Djokovic is just human.

 

[Rebel-I.N.S]

Well at the 2014 AO Fed beat him handily, but Murray was better in 2015 so who knows. WTF is a pretty slow court although it is indoors but still we all know what happened there. But still Federer was far more competitive against a better version of Federer in 2012 than he has been the past two years on any surface. Beat him at Olympics, Shanghai on Fed's preferred surfaces....competitive at Wimbledon, in control of the match before Fed turned on god mode at the end of the second. WTF he was doing well but then Fed really raised his level and Murray's dipped, still way better than the 2014 horror show. Dubai was two competitive sets...more competitive than Cincy this year despite the scoreline I'd say.

Yeah, in 2014 Murray was soundly beaten...he simply could not compete with any of the top guys.

I think he didn't get his first top 10 win until very late in the year too (Ferrer in Vienna, I think).

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

Interesting theory.

If you look at the way Dolgopolov played Djoko at Miami 15, there may be some truth to that.

Awkward slices and mixing the play took Djokovic out of his comfort zone, Dolgopolov was very unlucky not to come through that (if he converts the point for a double break, he gets it done, IMO).

Murray gets too drawn into the machismo of Djokovic's baseline game.

 

[tennis_pro]

Showing that the vast majority on both tours choose male coaches does quite plainly and obviously not prove:

(1) "No man should ever be coached by a woman. EVER."
(2) that "No real man wants to be led by a woman, period."

Of course, because men are better coaches (obviously as evidenced by almost every player picking a male coach so either they're all dumb and don't know what they're missing out or they all believe that this is a better choice than having a female coach) + it goes against their ego/mentality. No man should ever be coached by a woman because they have better options in male coaches, just because there are sparse exceptions it doesn't mean that it's false. It's like you had 2 paths to choose with one of them being better than the other and despite you knowing which one is which you're going with the worse option. Is this enough explanation for your 12-year old yoyo mentality to swallow? Or do you want me to put it in short sentences so that you don't have to take a month to analyze my post?

Men are better coaches than women (as evidenced earlier) -> no man should even be coached by a woman because he'd have worse results. And if this wasn't the case then I see no reason why anyone would prefer a male coach over a female coach yet this is the case. I WONDER WHY.

 

[metsman]

Yeah, in 2014 Murray was soundly beaten...he simply could not compete with any of the top guys.

I think he didn't get his first top 10 win until very late in the year too (Ferrer in Vienna, I think).

In 2015 he was much better consistency wise than 2014 but his results against the top top guys still stunk. The back half of the top 10 is very weak right now so Murray should be able to beat those guys (which he wasn't even doing in 2014, so at least that improved). But against Fed, Stan, Djoker he has no answers right now and I really hope for the sake of the game that it changes.

 

[tennis_pro]

Two of Federer's fave tournaments, you mean,

And Murray's not? The only 2 big tournaments (so the Slams/WTF/MS) where Murray made the QF at least 7 out of 8 times since 2008 are Wimbledon and Cincinnati.

Cincinnati is one of the 4 Masters events that Murray won at least twice while Wimbledon is his best Slam (unless he wins the Australian Open in his career) and the only big tournament where he's made the QF or better every year since 2008.

Murray lost Fed in Cincinatti and Wimbledon. Murray has a combined total of 3 titles from those two tournys, Fed has 15.

No offence but Murray doesn't even have 15 big titles in his career combined, let alone in any 1-2 tournaments. Wimbledon and Cincinnati are one of his best tournaments (if you don't like the word "favorite" because it's questionable. IMO the more you win in a particular tournament the more you like it)

Wimbledon and Cincinatti are probably the two toughest places to face Fed (even at 34 years old).

Based on what I've seen Federer would've been the favorite against Murray in every tournament unless it's on a slow surface and best-of-5-sets in which case I'd give it a 50-50.

Let's see Murray vs Fed on a slow HC (I'd wGer things would be a lot closer if they faved off at the AO, for instance).

You do know that Federer has some decent results on slow surfaces as well? He reached the final of WTF, Indian Wells, Rome. At the AO Federer has won 2 of 3 matches and was a set away from winning all 3, that's with 2 matches being played in 2013 and 2014. The only reason Murray has a chance now is because Federer has issues with matches that take longer than 3 hours.

As for Nadal/Wawrinka, Murray prepared for the WTF by playing on a clay court. It was clearly not his priority.

That explains his horrible record vs the top 5 throughout the entire year?

 

[Sysyphus]

Of course, because men are better coaches (obviously as evidenced by almost every player picking a male coach so either they're all dumb and don't know what they're missing out or they all believe that this is a better choice than having a female coach) + it goes against their ego/mentality. No man should ever be coached by a woman because they have better options in male coaches, just because there are sparse exceptions it doesn't mean that it's false. It's like you had 2 paths to choose with one of them being better than the other and despite you knowing which one is which you're going with the worse option. Is this enough explanation for your 12-year old yoyo mentality to swallow? Or do you want me to put it in short sentences so that you don't have to take a month to analyze my post?

Men are better coaches than women (as evidenced earlier) -> no man should even be coached by a woman because he'd have worse results. And if this wasn't the case then I see no reason why anyone would prefer a male coach over a female coach yet this is the case. I WONDER WHY.

Oh my, this really is unbelievable.

No one has disputed that the majority of top quality pro coaches are men.

The proposition "the vast majority of legitly top quality Xs are Ys" does not --> "no Z is a legitly top quality X".

Just like the vast majority of NBA MVPs being black does not negate Larry Bird having been a legit MVP.

But it has become copiously clear quite a while ago that you are incapable of understanding such simple distinctions, so there is no reason to bother.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

 

[Novak And The Net.]

Wow, Big Mouth has such a losers mentality right now. Hope he gets his arse handed to him in the 1st round, preferably to someone like Dudi Sela, and then goes back to Scotland and stays there.

 

[VexlanderPrime]

I 100% agree with this. No man should ever be coached by a woman. EVER. It's not in our mentality to be led by a female.

Lol I'll take "backwards ass attitudes that have held you back in life" for $1000 Alex!

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Nobody but Murray got the message. Pusher is a pusher. Federer knows that it's all in his own racquet.

Lol k

 

[VexlanderPrime]

You should go back to your cave, it's getting dark.

1 shot him

 

[TheFifthSet]

Because this is true. Murray went the easy way becaue he didn't want to be chastised by a male coach cause that's exactly what he would've received if he had one. Again, I'm not saying Mauresmo is a bad coach but I feel that she could've helped a WTA player a lot more than she helped Murray. I think she would've done great with someone like Carla Suarez Navarro for example (who btw has 2 male coaches)

This is all true. Women don't have ego issues so they would easily transition into having a female coach if they had to.



Bollettieri is a guy from the streets, he doesn't know anything about tennis.

1. Guess work and extrapolations. Neither of us actually has much of a clue as to how often or in what way Lendl would 'kick Murray in the pants' or what Andy's motivations were for hiring Mauresmo. Your reasoning can be boiled down to "well, she's a woman, so structure and discipline are obviously not important to Andy". You have no knowledge of the inner workings of their relationship. For what it's worth, I think Andy has declined since '13 because he's not the athlete he used to be, he isn't as fleet of foot and is easier to hit off the court.

2. So now the male having an overinflated ego IS the main obstacle preventing a woman from coaching a man, and not tennis knowledge, demeanour or anything else (although you haven't been very consistent in this thread). If that's the case, isn't that more of an indictment on the player than the coach? If a player is receptive and open-minded and can get over the mental block of receiving tutelage from a woman, it can be a beneficial partnership. Am I misreading you or do you not understand your own words?

3. You're right, he's a hack yet he made a living coaching tennis. I was mostly being facetious, hoping you would read between the lines.

4. I think I'll end it on this note. Ciao mang. I hope I didn't ruffle too many feathers (not being sarcastic).

 

[Mainad]

Yeah, in 2014 Murray was soundly beaten...he simply could not compete with any of the top guys.

I think he didn't get his first top 10 win until very late in the year too (Ferrer in Vienna, I think).

He had 4 top 10 wins in 2014: 2 against Ferrer, 1 against Raonic and 1 against Cilic, all towards the end of the season.

 

[tennis_pro]

1. Guess work and extrapolations. Neither of us actually has much of a clue as to how often or in what way Lendl would 'kick Murray in the pants' or what Andy's motivations were for hiring Mauresmo. Your reasoning can be boiled down to "well, she's a woman, so structure and discipline are obviously not important to Andy". You have no knowledge of the inner workings of their relationship. For what it's worth, I think Andy has declined since '13 because he's not the athlete he used to be, he isn't as fleet of foot and is easier to hit off the court.

This is one of the 2 big reasons. The other one is the fact that he regressed to his pre-2012 mentallity which Lendl fixed for the time of their partnership and one that Mauresmo simply won't fix as evidenced by the fact that it's been 2 years since he hired her with no progress in this matter. He's consistently reaching the SF and F rounds and constitently gets beaten by the top players which has to be at least partly mental.

2. So now the male having an overinflated ego IS the main obstacle preventing a woman from coaching a man, and not tennis knowledge, demeanour or anything else (although you haven't been very consistent in this thread). If that's the case, isn't that more of an indictment on the player than the coach? If a player is receptive and open-minded and can get over the mental block of receiving tutelage from a woman, it can be a beneficial partnership. Am I misreading you or do you not understand your own words?

It's a combination of both things.

3. You're right, he's a hack yet he made a living coaching tennis. I was mostly being facetious, hoping you would read between the lines.

I thought you'd do the same.

 

[tennis_pro]

delete post

 

[tennis_pro]

As for the OP (because as always a group of butthurt people jumped on me because they have different opinions and can't accept that mine differs) - I don't think Murray said that literally, a big story was made out of nothing again. However, even if he did - I don't blame him. It's not gonna affect his play if he already thinks that way and pretending he doesn't feel this way won't change a thing.

 

[6august]

N

Nadal AIN'T a pusher! (all things relative to level of course) Nadal hits the ball with so much energy, that combo of pace, depth and spin was so hard for anybody to handle. Now he's just on decline and drops too many forehands short. Murray hits the ball with much less energy on average, spin is like only half that of Nadal! But even more importantly, Murray's pusher self goes for way too much safety in ball placement and shot selection. Going always crosscourt with safe margings and too little energy on ball just ain't enough. Nadal knows it and hence he needs his DTL forehand and I/O point winning forehand.

If Nadal isn't a pusher, nobody is a pusher.

Nadal's winners per match is an all-time-great joke.

His distance to the baseline is another ATG joke.

He's a legend, even a GOAT candidate but anybody saying he's aggressive must be abnormal.

 

[Nathaniel_Near]

N


If Nadal isn't a pusher, nobody is a pusher.

Nadal's winners per match is an all-time-great joke.

His distance to the baseline is another ATG joke.

He's a legend, even a GOAT candidate but anybody saying he's aggressive must be abnormal.

Does Nadal have a shout for greatest comedian of all-time?

 

[6august]

For Murray, it's so unfair to bash him:

1. He's telling the truth. Saying out or not, everybody knows and accepts it.

2. He's trying to lift the pressure on himself.

3. He's Scottish. Scottish are famous for being honest.

 

[Doflamingo]

How much does Djokovic have to drop his level in order for Murray (Andy) to have a chance of beating him on the way to claiming an AO title?

bout tree fiddy ​