Murray is the most talented

F

futuretoptenner

Semi-Pro
"I’ve always thought he was one of the most talented ones of the whole group, even more talented than Djokovic to be honest. I thought he would do the most first before Djokovic, but Djokovic played really well the last year and started this year unbelievably."

Roger Federer

I'd have to agree in terms of talent and having that something special. He can be seen as an irritating character and considering he dropped out of davis cup thus annoying even his brother. I'd have to say I see him reaching the pinnacle of the game within the next year or so breaking the top 3.

What do you think?
 
Nole is a week younger and at one point they were both on the verge of breaking the top 10. Then Murray went and hurt his wrist and Nole kicked ass.
 
Murray's good, there's no question there.

However, he seems (at this point) to be only a hard court player. Despite liking the red dirt, he hasn't faired too well on clay. He does play decent tennis on grass and carpet, though, and I think he'll improve a lot on those 2 surfaces.
 
Magix said:
Murray's good, there's no question there.

However, he seems (at this point) to be only a hard court player. Despite liking the red dirt, he hasn't faired too well on clay. He does play decent tennis on grass and carpet, though, and I think he'll improve a lot on those 2 surfaces.
Click to expand...

He hasnt had much time on the dirt though. I saw his match in Hamburg last year when he injured his wrist. He was 5-1 up against Volandri who had beaten Federer in the previous tournament so was high on confidence. Those first six games he was playing like the world no1. It was ridiculous. In Monte Carlo I believe he either pulled out or was hampered by a back injury which stopped him having a great impact. The same injury kept him out of Rome I believe. Then in Hamburg he was playing awesome but suffered the injury.

On grass he has had decent results and missed last years season due to the injury. Indoors he is one of the best in the world with 4 of his 5 titles coming indoors. The fast conditions there make me think he can do well on grass too. On slower hard courts he proved last year he can do well by reachin semis of IW and Miami.

I think he is possibly the most talented young player there is. His problem is finding the right tactic. He is capable of playing defence, offence, all court and counterpuncher. He got the mix right against Federer but not against Davydenko.

If he works it out mentally and picks the right game plans for his different opponents then he can reach the top.

I have been a believer of his for a long time. So much so that I put a £5 bet on him last year to beat Nadal at AO. And I rarely bet, only at the slams and then its only £1 at a time.
 
SempreSami said:
Nole is a week younger and at one point they were both on the verge of breaking the top 10. Then Murray went and hurt his wrist and Nole kicked ass.
Click to expand...

I think that's the real key here.

It's all "what if's" but the way he and Djokovic were playing at the start of last year you really have to think Murray would of kept going along with Djokovic and they would be in similar positions now, but injuries robbed us from finding out.
 
Feña14 said:
I think that's the real key here.

It's all "what if's" but the way he and Djokovic were playing at the start of last year you really have to think Murray would of kept going along with Djokovic and they would be in similar positions now, but injuries robbed us from finding out.
Click to expand...

Wishful thinking at best. Murray does not have any of the weapons in his game that Djokovic has in his, except for great speed. He just plays a steady counterpunching game and his wins over top players are when they play very poorly (eg-his win over Federer in Dubai). Djokovic has a monster forehand and backhand, a devastating first serve. Sorry Murray is very good and solid but there is no comparision.

Also before Murray had his injuries he played Djokovic at both the Pacific Life and Nasdaq and was massacred, destroyed. Those matches showed while both were on the rise they were far from equals.
 
Before Murray's recent successes, a few teaching pros where I play indoors were remarking that they thought he was the most naturally gifted guy on the men's tour right now. He manages to make it look easy.
 
^ I've heard a lot of teaching pros say that too.

I actually like Andy's game a lot more than Novak's and I think he will definitely surpass him within a year or two.
 
Federer is right on the money.

Murray does have more variety in his game compared to Djokovic.
Having said that,for all of Murray's "talent" he has yet to have real success in a slam compared to the slam winners in Nadal and Djokovic and even Gasquet;considering Gasquet has made the 4th round in Australia,NY and the semis at Wimbledon.
Djokovic has a much reliable serve;less variety on the return but he has a better backhand;forehand and doesn't play as defensively as Murray does.He doesn't moonball as much either,Djokovic.
Djokovic has gotten in much better shape physically and is for sure mentally tough compared to Murray and plays the important points better.

Murray has won all of his titles on hard court.Doesn't play that well on clay for someone who trained in Spain;has shown he is capable of playing good grass court and good indoor.Djokovic has won on hc,clay(weak tournament but still..)
Nadal has won his titles on clay and hc
Gasquet has 5 titles on 5 surfaces.


In fact Murray is 0-9 against Nadal,Djojovic and Gasquet!
 
Last edited:
Was he only considering Murray and Djokovic?

Because if he was talking about all the younger players, on pure talent, I still go will the perpetual underachiever, Gasquet.

But between those two, I don't know if Murray is a more talented player than Djokovic, but he is certainly a smarter player.
 
stormholloway said:
Djokovic's game is simplistic. Murray's game is far more clever.
Click to expand...

Santoros game is far more clever then Davydenkos for example. Which is producing the far better results. The Williams sisters and Sharapova have a far more simplistic game then Patty Schnyder. Again which produces the better results. An extremely solid all around, yet powerful and efficient game is usually more simplistic. The biggest keys to winning tennis today are:

1. Powerful and reliable serving. Edge to Djokovic over Murray
2. Powerful and skillful returning. Closer here between them.
3. Powerful weapons off both wings. Big edge to Djokovic.
4. A rock solid mental game. Big edge again to Djokovic.
5. Consistency, lack of unforced errors. Closer between them.

Djokovic has far more of the superior tools that work in todays game then Murray. It isnt even closer.
 
Aabye said:
Was he only considering Murray and Djokovic?

Because if he was talking about all the younger players, on pure talent, I still go will the perpetual underachiever, Gasquet.

But between those two, I don't know if Murray is a more talented player than Djokovic, but he is certainly a smarter player.
Click to expand...

OK so how would you rank Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Gasquet, Berdych, Baghdatis, Tsonga, on pure talent alone (I guess you could include Monfils if you wish but I think he is a joke personally).
 
in terms of pure talent
1-Gasquet

Murray
Tsonga
Djokovic
Monfils(when he is healthy and playing well)

Baghatis
Nadal


Berdych
 
tintin said:
in terms of pure talent
1-Gasquet

Murray
Tsonga
Djokovic
Monfils(when he is healthy and playing well)

Baghatis
Nadal


Berdych
Click to expand...

Interesting. Personally I find the talent level of Gasquet, Monfils and even Baghdatis exagerrated by alot of people and the talent level of Nadal and Djokovic undervalued by alot. I think part of it is people like the mystique of players that dont always use all their talent, and enjoy to create extreme and unrealistic delusions of what they really would be capable of applying themselves, while ones who do fully capatilize on their talents like Nadal and Djokovic dont have this same sense of wonder which makes people less enthused about them.

Anyway I rank them in just natural talent order something like this:

Djokovic

Tsonga Nadal

Gasquet Murray

Baghdatis Berdych




Monfils (pure athletic talent does not neccessarily equate to tennis talent)
 
lambielspins said:
OK so how would you rank Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, Gasquet, Berdych, Baghdatis, Tsonga, on pure talent alone (I guess you could include Monfils if you wish but I think he is a joke personally).
Click to expand...

Now that is a hard question, and one which I bet is the topic of many other threads. You asked it here, so I'll answer it here and let someone else decide if it pertains to the OP.

While I admit to holding certain biases (I don't think I'm alone when saying I have a habit of looking past the faults of players I like), I will try to remain objective. Also, just to be clear, when I say pure talent, I am taking out things like mental stability, because I think a player can be talented without it (i.e. Safin). I don't take in to account aesthetics either, believing that old cliche 'beauty is the eye of the beholder'. I include, however, consistency, power, variety, and athletic and ball-striking ability. For me, talent doesn't by itself relate to results.

As this post is running long, I'll list only their order here, and if anyone still cares I'll post my reasons in another post.

1. Gasquet
2. Djokovic=Murray
3. Nadal
4. Tsonga=Baghdatis
5. Berdych


I wrote this up quickly, and will say that my placement of the last three may be unfair and based on the fact that I have seen less of them. I've seen several matches of all the players here listed, but not as many as the top four.
 
Aabye said:
Now that is a hard question, and one which I bet is the topic of many other threads. You asked it here, so I'll answer it here and let someone else decide if it pertains to the OP.

While I admit to holding certain biases (I don't think I'm alone when saying I have a habit of looking past the faults of players I like), I will try to remain objective. Also, just to be clear, when I say pure talent, I am taking out things like mental stability, because I think a player can be talented without it (i.e. Safin). I don't take in to account aesthetics either, believing that old cliche 'beauty is the eye of the beholder'. I include, however, consistency, power, variety, and athletic and ball-striking ability. For me, talent doesn't by itself relate to results.

As this post is running long, I'll list only their order here, and if anyone still cares I'll post my reasons in another post.

1. Gasquet
2. Djokovic=Murray
3. Nadal
4. Tsonga=Baghdatis
5. Berdych


I wrote this up quickly, and will say that my placement of the last three may be unfair and based on the fact that I have seen less of them. I've seen several matches of all the players here listed, but not as many as the top four.
Click to expand...

OK thanks. I was just curious. You are right our own biases subconsciously probably come into play at some point. We atleast seem in agreement Baghdatis and Berdych are the least talented of this particular group though.
 
I do like Andy`s game alot but in order of talent i`d put it like this:

1-Nadal
2-Djokovic
3-Gasquet
4-Murray
5-Berdych
6-Baghdatis
7-Tsonga

I have put them in this order because i think your talent will determine how good a career you will have and how much titles you can achieve. This is my opinion only and i know things like a rock solid mentality will help big time but even that is nothing without the talent to back it up.
 
Well while I dont like putting too much stock in just one result Tsonga has already done something Berdych will never do, reach a grand slam final. Personally I believe he will have a better career then Berdych or Baghdatis anyway but only time will tell.
 
I think too often people confuse inconsistency for talent. If somebody is playing poorly but occasionally hits a phenomenal shot, they're often said to be very talented. But when a person can hit spectacular shots all the time, they're deemed "robotic."
 
35ft6 said:
I think too often people confuse inconsistency for talent. If somebody is playing poorly but occasionally hits a phenomenal shot, they're often said to be very talented. But when a person can hit spectacular shots all the time, they're deemed "robotic."
Click to expand...

Totally agree. That is why a guy like Gasquet has people IMO vastly overrate his talent, and guys like Nadal and Djokovic have theirs substantialy downplayed.
 
doctor dennis said:
I do like Andy`s game alot but in order of talent i`d put it like this:

1-Nadal
2-Djokovic
3-Gasquet
4-Murray
5-Berdych
6-Baghdatis
7-Tsonga

I have put them in this order because i think your talent will determine how good a career you will have and how much titles you can achieve. This is my opinion only and i know things like a rock solid mentality will help big time but even that is nothing without the talent to back it up.
Click to expand...

And this is my opinion:
doctor dennis said:
I do like Andy`s game alot but in order of talent i`d put it like this:

1-Djokovic
2-Gasquet
3-Nadal
4-Murray
5-Tsonga
6-Baghdatis
7-Berdych
Click to expand...
 
Nadal is #2 in the world and was all of last year. There's a reason for that kid's. I am by no mean's a big Rafa fan...but so many people claiming he is untalented is amazing to me. You know if that whiny crybaby Roddick had half of rafa's heart, he'd own tennis. Not only can Rafa play...but he is the most dedicated player i've seen in a long time. He plays each and every point like it's opposing match point.

Last time I saw heart like that was between Agassi and Chang...they were the ones that really brought the heart in the US.
 
lambielspins said:
Wishful thinking at best. Murray does not have any of the weapons in his game that Djokovic has in his, except for great speed. He just plays a steady counterpunching game and his wins over top players are when they play very poorly (eg-his win over Federer in Dubai). Djokovic has a monster forehand and backhand, a devastating first serve. Sorry Murray is very good and solid but there is no comparision.

Also before Murray had his injuries he played Djokovic at both the Pacific Life and Nasdaq and was massacred, destroyed. Those matches showed while both were on the rise they were far from equals.
Click to expand...

So Djokovic beating Murray when they play means it's highly likely Murray would still only be a top 15 player if he didn't get injured? I have to disagree.

I think it's very possible Murray would be a top 5 player by now.
 
lambielspins said:
Totally agree. That is why a guy like Gasquet has people IMO vastly overrate his talent, and guys like Nadal and Djokovic have theirs substantialy downplayed.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Nadal is what made me think of that. Also, it seems like guys with beautiful one-handed backhands automatically are considered talented based almost solely off that shot. Like Gasquet, ugly forehand and average serve, but beautiful one-hander = incredibly talented.

Nadal hits incredible shots with insane frequency. That's talent. And he really understands the court well, especially when it's a clay court. His point construction on clay is almost Hingis-like. If he had a one-handed backhand people would think he was the most talented player in tennis.
 
Murray may have talent, but does he really use it instead of falling back on a counter-punching game style. Wasn't that what his break-up with Gilbert about? Seems like Gilbert wanted Murray to move in and attack but Murray just wanted to hang back and counter.
 
yep, among the "younguns" I'd say Murray has the 2nd most talent.
Gasquet still has my #1 vote.
If anyone has seen Gasquet vs. Federer Monte Carlo then they will know how dangerous gasuqet can be.

Likewise Murray hit some of the most amazing winners in Madrid 07 against Chela
 
lambielspins said:
Interesting. Personally I find the talent level of Gasquet, Monfils and even Baghdatis exagerrated by alot of people and the talent level of Nadal and Djokovic undervalued by alot. I think part of it is people like the mystique of players that dont always use all their talent, and enjoy to create extreme and unrealistic delusions of what they really would be capable of applying themselves, while ones who do fully capatilize on their talents like Nadal and Djokovic dont have this same sense of wonder which makes people less enthused about them.

Anyway I rank them in just natural talent order something like this:

Djokovic

Tsonga Nadal

Gasquet Murray

Baghdatis Berdych




Monfils (pure athletic talent does not neccessarily equate to tennis talent)
Click to expand...

Wow, I agree about the "mystique aspect" of those players. I'd put Nadal right up there with Djokovic on your list and move Tsonga down with Gasquet and Murray but other than that, totally agree with this post and Monfil's complete dependence on athletic talent.
 
I see a lot of people seem to think Nadal's talent is often taken for granted because of his achievements. That might be true in a lot of cases, but as a Nadal fan I want to make clear that that was not my intention.

The only reason I rank him third is because I feel he is perhaps slightly lacking in his ball-striking ability. Rafa is incredibly consistent, along with having immense raw athletic ability. I have always felt it would have been interesting to see what he would have played like if he had gone to an academy, like a lot of his peers. The only thing with that is not having his family there to help build up his confidence might have diminished his amazing mental abilities, and resulted in him becoming a mental midget like Gasquet.
 
As far as I know some of them grew up together in juniors, Murray was usually owned by Djokovic, which passed on latter in their pro careers.

For me its cool that they are all friends and coming on to the big scene big time and imo most talented but worst playing stylewise is Murray who will never do more unles he screws his scottish head off and finds a german one to put on. He really does have a boaring game, developed from 2005 unlike federer said but still, needs more to be in top 5.

So Murray with * because he wastes his talent because of the way he plays. Right below are Djokovic, Nadal, Gasquet, each in some departments but all huge talents. Others are no contest, clowns group is Baghdat and Monfils, more showboating from them then from NWA thru their career. Berdych, Ill comment only his stupidity and him not being able to produce once when its needed.
 
You can have the best talent in the world, but if your head doesn't match your talent, you go nowhere. Safin is extrememly talented, but his head is sitting on top of the mountain that his body could not make it to. Murray, Gasquet, Monfils, and Nalbandian have the same issues. They all have incredible talent, but their head is only there 25% of the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_Mental_Giant
  • Poll Poll
Is murray the most talented of the Big4?
2 3 4
Replies
173
Views
15K
JonathanRF
J
D
Who do you think is the most talented player on the tour?
Replies
31
Views
4K
samurai13
samurai13
Z
Andy Murray is one of the most talented players I have ever seen
2 3
Replies
120
Views
9K
Mainad
Mainad
123456789
Marko Djokovic is the most talented player I have ever seen
Replies
6
Views
2K
Jamesm182
J
J
"Mark is the second most talented player on tour"
Replies
18
Views
2K
PusherMan
P
Back
Top