Murray - Djokovic RG 2016 Final: Murray's greatest chance at the clay slam, why is it overlooked?

[Start da Game]

just ask fed how difficult it is to win ONE roland garros........often we hear tones about that final as if murray was there just to lose that match and complete djokovic's career slam........does anyone remember that he took the all important first set? and then went onto lose the next 3........did he not trust himself enough? or was it that he was already in a shock seeing himself in the final........i felt he should have fought a lot more in the final........why is this match, such an important one in murray's life not really discussed by his fans? all the time we hear them talking about his non-existent ATG status........i think it would have been the laugh of the century if djokovic was denied the career slam and murray won the french beating all expectations........

 

[BeatlesFan]

did he not trust himself enough? or was it that he was already in a shock seeing himself in the final........i felt he should have fought a lot more in the final.......

All good questions. Remember that in the Monte Carlo semis in 2016, Andy took the first set from Rafa 6-2, but then was routinely steamrolled. The same thing happened in the 2016 FO final. Andy won the first set 6-3, but then only won 7 games in the next three sets. Murray had a fairly routine 4 set semi against Stan, so he wasn't gassed going into the final.

We can over-analyze the FO all we want, but the bottom line is that Djokovic is the better player and stronger mentally than Andy. He knew this was his one chance at winning RG after failing in many prior attempts and there was just no way he was going to lose to Andy Murray on that day. Djokovic was too good and too strong and Muzz wilted. No shame in that, at least he over-achieved on clay by reaching the final.

 

[Red Rick]

Djokovic better clay player. Murray also ran out of gas.

Big surprise when playing 5 set matches in rounds 1 and 2 for no reason cause fatigue.

 

[TheAssassin]

All good questions. Remember that in the Monte Carlo semis in 2016, Andy took the first set from Rafa 6-2, but then was routinely steamrolled. The same thing happened in the 2016 FO final. Andy won the first set 6-3, but then only won 7 games in the next three sets. Murray had a fairly routine 4 set semi against Stan, so he wasn't gassed going into the final.

We can over-analyze the FO all we want, but the bottom line is that Djokovic is the better player and stronger mentally than Andy. He knew this was his one chance at winning RG after failing in many prior attempts and there was just no way he was going to lose to Andy Murray on that day. Djokovic was too good and too strong and Muzz wilted. No shame in that, at least he over-achieved on clay by reaching the final.

He played a lot of tennis before the final, winning easier than expected over Stan doesn't change that. Two five setters in early rounds and four sets against Gasquet just to make it to Stan. He paid the price but Djokovic was at his best, it probably wouldn't have made a difference.

 

[BeatlesFan]

He played a lot of tennis before the final, winning easier than expected over Stan doesn't change that. Two five setters in early rounds and four sets against Gasquet just to make it to Stan.

Good point, I'd forgotten about his earlier rounds.

 

[Gazelle]

Djokovic better clay player. Murray also ran out of gas.

Big surprise when playing 5 set matches in rounds 1 and 2 for no reason cause fatigue.

How the hell he went 5 sets against dinosaur Stepanek I'll never understand. And this was during the Clayray period.

And the other guy he went 5 against I don't even remember.

 

[Im(moral) Winner]

How the hell he went 5 sets against dinosaur Stepanek I'll never understand. And this was during the Clayray period.

And the other guy he went 5 against I don't even remember.

He was two points away from losing

 

[Zetty]

Nobody can keep up with all these goddam slams bro, we gotta forget some of'em jeez

 

[Red Rick]

How the hell he went 5 sets against dinosaur Stepanek I'll never understand. And this was during the Clayray period.

And the other guy he went 5 against I don't even remember.

Because lesser players like Edberg or Becker would have lost.

 

[r2473]

If Murray had won this match, he would have been an ATG

@Mainad

 

[Knovax]

If only it had been Nadal instead. No offense to Murray.

 

[Knovax]

.i think it would have been the laugh of the century if djokovic was denied the career slam and murray won the french beating all expectations........

I don't find this very funny.

 

[Mainad]

If Murray had won this match, he would have been an ATG

@Mainad

Still 2 Slams short.

 

[Steve0904]

It's overlooked because he was never the favourite to begin with. As long as he was playing Djokovic in the final he was the underdog. In Fed's lone RG he was the immediate favourite as soon as Soderling beat Nadal.

 

[Mainad]

Interestingly, in their recent Instagram chat, Murray said that the outcome of their 2016 RG final was the one he would most like to change:

Andy Murray reveals French Open regret during Novak Djokovic chat

Djokovic picked the Olympic semi-final at Wimbledon as the pair’s best battle.

www.expressandstar.com

 

[Poisoned Slice]

He played a lot of tennis before the final, winning easier than expected over Stan doesn't change that. Two five setters in early rounds and four sets against Gasquet just to make it to Stan. He paid the price but Djokovic was at his best, it probably wouldn't have made a difference.

The match with Stan a year later was more of a war.

 

[King No1e]

just ask fed how difficult it is to win ONE roland garros........often we hear tones about that final as if murray was there just to lose that match and complete djokovic's career slam........does anyone remember that he took the all important first set? and then went onto lose the next 3........did he not trust himself enough? or was it that he was already in a shock seeing himself in the final........i felt he should have fought a lot more in the final........why is this match, such an important one in murray's life not really discussed by his fans? all the time we hear them talking about his non-existent ATG status........i think it would have been the laugh of the century if djokovic was denied the career slam and murray won the french beating all expectations........

Murray just didn't have Djokovic's experience and confidence in BO5. Probably a mental block there too. He just wasn't winning 3 sets against Djokovic on clay.
If Murray had won that match I don't think I'd ever get over it.

 

[MeatTornado]

So sorry we're not talking about this enough

 

[Breakpointerer]

I don't find this very funny.

Do you find it very troubling?

 

[Mainad]

just ask fed how difficult it is to win ONE roland garros........often we hear tones about that final as if murray was there just to lose that match and complete djokovic's career slam........does anyone remember that he took the all important first set? and then went onto lose the next 3........did he not trust himself enough? or was it that he was already in a shock seeing himself in the final........i felt he should have fought a lot more in the final........why is this match, such an important one in murray's life not really discussed by his fans? all the time we hear them talking about his non-existent ATG status........i think it would have been the laugh of the century if djokovic was denied the career slam and murray won the french beating all expectations........

And for one glorious 1st set it seemed like it might actually happen (although I would not have wanted to take any pleasure in Djokovic's discomfiture).

 

[btsjungkook]

Djokovic was winning no matter what, he just had a lot of nerves in the first set.

 

[flutzingitaway]

Still 2 Slams short.

If he had won it maybe it gives him the confidence to win an Australian though. And if he wins both of those to complete the Career Slam he easily makes the bar, even without reaching 6 slams. Considering his overall career, consistency, achievements, etc...

 

[Subway Tennis]

Still 2 Slams short.

According to TTW, Murray is not an elite player. Here I was thinking he was rather good, but apparently not

 

[flutzingitaway]

And for one glorious 1st set it seemed like it might actually happen (although I would not have wanted to take any pleasure in Djokovic's discomfiture).

Ironically it might have worked out better for Djokovic to lose that match, even if it would have been emotionally devastating. Winning the elusive RG title was so huge for him it defused any fire for a good 2 years. It is not like he had a major injury problem like Murray and Wawrinka. He might have been burnt out, there was talk of marital problems which probably played a part too. Still I think he stays a lot hungrier and plays better the following 2 years losing there, and quite possibly gets a RG title sometime the next 3 years anyway now.

 

[Mainad]

According to TTW, Murray is not an elite player. Here I was thinking he was rather good, but apparently not

Silly us.

 

[Start da Game]

coria was the clear favourite going into the final in 2004, but guess who won that final.......it was a once in a lifetime chance for both players in 2016.......i felt watching that final where is that fire or playing in his only slam final of RG.......surely this match will be seen as a missed opportunity more and more in the coming years, evidenced by that statement of murray.......

 

[Start da Game]

All good questions. Remember that in the Monte Carlo semis in 2016, Andy took the first set from Rafa 6-2, but then was routinely steamrolled. The same thing happened in the 2016 FO final. Andy won the first set 6-3, but then only won 7 games in the next three sets. Murray had a fairly routine 4 set semi against Stan, so he wasn't gassed going into the final.

We can over-analyze the FO all we want, but the bottom line is that Djokovic is the better player and stronger mentally than Andy. He knew this was his one chance at winning RG after failing in many prior attempts and there was just no way he was going to lose to Andy Murray on that day. Djokovic was too good and too strong and Muzz wilted. No shame in that, at least he over-achieved on clay by reaching the final.

yes but that was rafa......i felt murray was probably overwhelmed by the occasion, forgetting that djoko was under more pressure.......

 

[HetTheGreaterer]

Ironically it might have worked out better for Djokovic to lose that match, even if it would have been emotionally devastating. Winning the elusive RG title was so huge for him it defused any fire for a good 2 years. It is not like he had a major injury problem like Murray and Wawrinka. He might have been burnt out, there was talk of marital problems which probably played a part too. Still I think he stays a lot hungrier and plays better the following 2 years losing there, and quite possibly gets a RG title sometime the next 3 years anyway now.

If not 2016, then never. It was his best mounted chance for a RG title.
He wasn't beating nadal in 2017, 2018 or 2019.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Because lesser players like Edberg or Becker would have lost.

To ancient Stepanek, challenger guy Bourgue, bot Karlovic and bot Isner, in their best clay year, yeahlol.

 

[Red Rick]

So sorry we're not talking about this enough

Honestly think the lack of "is Murray ATG" debate is more concerning

 

[zagor]

Because he got smoked in the final after winning the 1st set? He wasn't really in shape to make it a contest against Novak after getting into 5 setters early on and with his style of play.

 

[Gazelle]

Ironically it might have worked out better for Djokovic to lose that match, even if it would have been emotionally devastating. Winning the elusive RG title was so huge for him it defused any fire for a good 2 years. It is not like he had a major injury problem like Murray and Wawrinka. He might have been burnt out, there was talk of marital problems which probably played a part too. Still I think he stays a lot hungrier and plays better the following 2 years losing there, and quite possibly gets a RG title sometime the next 3 years anyway now.

Problem is that if Djokovic doesn't take his chance in 2016, he will have to get past Nadal in every following year.

And I feel Djok's game has declined the most on clay as he gets older. Nadal meanwhile still holding on reasonably strong.