FrontHeadlock
Hall of Fame
Many people saying such things!
Murray needs to retire!
- Thread starter Terry Tibbs
- Start date
ichaseballs
Professional
i am looking forward to seeing andy as a full time commentator on TV
whenever that day may be
whenever that day may be
This is a good point. I wonder how many of all his recent 35 or so WCs are genuine invitations.
BeatlesFan
Bionic Poster
Yet you claim you're a "huge fan of Andy." If that were true you'd be happy he's playing. You're only a "huge fan" if he's winning...let him play, its his choice.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
I enjoy his defeats.
I am torn between agreeing he should retire - because he is damaging his body unnecessarily and it makes me whince picturing the pain he will go through again if he goes on much longer - and him continuing to lose while fist-pumping because that is so enjoyable.
Having the kind of surgeries he's had, yet plowing on isn't determination, bravery, or anything of the sort. It is pure, undistilled foolishness.
Terry Tibbs
Hall of Fame
Huge fan when he was in his prime as he was great to watch. He is just risking damaging his body by continuing especially when he has nothing to prove and has already achieved so much.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
To live is to suffer, to survive is to find some meaning in the suffering
Friedrich Nietzsche
travlerajm
Talk Tennis Guru
38 in the ATP Live Race, and climbing.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Friedl was a lunatic.
If he were alive today, and a fanatical tennis fan (fanatical because that's how he was), whom would he root for?
Nadal, the great sufferer?
Djokovic, the great "victim"?
Federer, the Ubermensch?
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
He lost sanity in his later years but we can't discredit his work because he went insane in his later years . he was a genius , i prefer Arthur over him though.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
Im with this. It also helps that im Scottish LOL But i genuinely would say the same for any aging pro, who has done a ton for the game, and gave so much of his self to achieve what he has.
This is a former world number 1, who toppled the unstoppable Djokovic to get there, A Davis cup champion, who almost single handidly won it for his country. A Several time grand slam finalist ( and winner ), along with Olympic and WTF titles.
I cant believe most of you people saying he doesnt deserve WC's into tournaments.
Wow...
Pheasant
Legend
If Murray wanted to play like a #200-ranked guy, then that would be fine. Thankfully, he's playing much better than that.
Eventually, Murray will climb enough in the rankings where he doesn't have to play a top-10 guy so early in the tournament. That will be nice.
Let's not bury this guy just yet. He's starting to get on a roll. But even if he slips; let the guy play in peace. It's amazing what he has overcome at his age just to play again. It's nice to see that he's back.
Eventually, Murray will climb enough in the rankings where he doesn't have to play a top-10 guy so early in the tournament. That will be nice.
Let's not bury this guy just yet. He's starting to get on a roll. But even if he slips; let the guy play in peace. It's amazing what he has overcome at his age just to play again. It's nice to see that he's back.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
I don't prefer any of them over anybody. Except maybe this one...
"Philosophers are all a bunch of overly theoretical hypocrites, demanding others practice what they preach, while themselves conveniently avoiding the responsibility to fit into their own systems and theories in their private lives. A bunch of lousy couch layabouts with nothing better to do than cause trouble!" - Confucius Cleese
Confucius Cleese was awesome, he correctly predicted everything... Perhaps he was a tad jealous, but that's OK.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
He is 35 in May.
And he's been nowhere not in a year or two but FIVE years.
So you're suggesting he can make the greatest comeback of all time? COAT?
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Absolutely no to wild cards. We need fresh blood. Murray can qualify, I don't doubt him. If he is not too proud to lose R2-R3, he should not be too proud to qualify.
Tennis Aloha
Rookie
I think there's two sides to this argument. One is yeah he's achieved so much in his career, why waste time and get beaten left and right by players with low ranking. Also true, his body is going to be wrecked by the time he truly retires.
On the other hand, he's playing tennis for a living and is still top 100 player in the world. Nothing mediocre about it. We all just get one life only, he might be trying to make the best of the time he's got left.
Both a bit sad and inspirational. Passion nonetheless. I respect that.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Have a feeling that he will call it quits this year (probably at Wimbledon) if he can't improve his results soon. That said, he could do with some kinder draws to help him play into some form. Drawing Medvedev in only the 2nd round is not the kind of draw that will help him at all.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
There's so much wrong with this. Firstly Philosophy is the pursuit of wisdom and how one sees the world, philosophers needn't be preacher. I see the suffering and meaningless in this world doesn't mean i am preaching anything and also how I live my life irrelevant to whatever is my observation and finding.
Forgive Me Father
Hall of Fame
mate he is a perennial R2 exit and is getting WC's every tournament.
Terenigma
G.O.A.T.
This.
This is the best way I feel about it. If he can earn his way back up the rankings with a few decent runs here and there then that is completely fine but I do NOT like him taking WC literally every tournament he plays and especially at slams where a WC for a young player or player who is low ranked but in a bit of form. Getting a WC for them is a huge huge deal and could be the springboard they need and could potentially be way more entertaining too. Also as a fan and for his own status, it's starting to get a bit embarrassing watching him lose to nobody players who in his prime he would sweep aside.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Marx was a philosopher, was he not?
He didn't behave at all in accordance with his own beliefs. And he tried to devise a "perfect" world, while playing a large role in destroying it...
Leibniz actually dared argue that we exist "in the best of all possible worlds" which is dumber than anything Kanye had ever said and as stupid as Marx's optimism, and he did it just to appease his overlords. So yeah, some of these guys were dishonest opportunists too.
Not saying some of them didn't have some great things to say, but overall...
Besides, I am not going to sit here and defend Confucius Cleese. He is quite capable of doing it himself.
Last edited:
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Literally any thinker can be termed as philosopher but lumping socio economic thinker like Marx with philosophers like Nieeztche , Schopenhauer and other existentialist like Camus , JPS is ridiculous ,laters were more not moral preachers or didn't device a system for mankind . They described the world the way the saw it , who told you that philosophers have to be preachers or they want people to live life according to them ? Schopenhauer gave no solution , Nietzsche's Superman was his personal struggle after denouncing old system. I am sorry to break it to you but you are not well versed in philosophy. Also how I see the world have nothing to do with how I live my life . How I see the world is result of my brain reaching a conclusion based upon the reason and arguments and how i live the world is based on many factors including biological , social, economical.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Believe me, I would never take this as an insult...
And excessive nit-picking, which you're doing now, that was also popular among them. They taught you well, young Padowan...
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Believe me you are the last person here i would like to insult , tbh i admire you for your smart take on many things but even you can be wrong at times.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Ah yes, perfection, it is indeed elusive...
I'd rather be "wrong" about philosophers than about tennis. On a tennis forum, at least...
I know you didn't wanna insult, I was just kidding.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Hahah , tbh i got your pm but then i was like I'll ask your opinion about other matters rather than tennis since i find you very intelligent.
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
"Some truths cannot be assaulted, questioned, or revised." - Me
As you can see, I am so quotable, as good as any of those damn bloody overrated philosophers...
"That bolded statement is an utterance of near-perfection which all TTW users would agree to... if blackmailed or asked to do so at gun-point." - Confucius, being sarcastic at my expense
bluetrain4
G.O.A.T.
He doesn't "need" to until he himself isn't satisfied with the distance from his prime to his current self, or he has career-ending injuries of course. If he wants to see if he can go deep in a Slam again, so be it. If he simply wants "just see what I can do" every tournament, that's fine. Maybe he'll manage a post-prime 1991 US Open Connors run and make one more lasitng impression. Probably not, but if HE wants to try, why not?
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
Agree with being assaulted and revised but i don't think truth would mind being questioned rather truth would encourage people to question it and check the veracity of the claim.
As far as philosophers are concerned they observed the world and reached their conclusion , you needn't necessarily agree with them but philosophers developed logic and arguments and they have contributed a lot to rationality. i would rather take your critique of their works rather than calling them rubbish . Even Einstein was in awe of Schopenhauer's astute observation and rationality. we all got taste , may be philosophy is not your forte like quantum physics is not mine.
theSHAMOO
Rookie
can anyone explain to me if this is a satire account or a real human bean?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
Don't even get me started about Einstein...
Funny thing you mentioned quantum physics (which I am infinitely more interested in than what a few 18th-century wig-wearers thought about the cosmos or our tiny human brains), which Einstein detested and tried desperately to negate. He was like an autistic genius, brilliant yet unwilling to bend his views to adjust them to new discoveries. He desperately believed in a static, "logical" universe and then quantum physics shook him to the core.
Yet it's Niels who won the war. Bohr - Einstein 1-0 final score.
Tennis Aloha
Rookie
Comparing Murray to Kyrgios. It was inevitable that this thread would get to this point.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
yeah, Einstein got owned By Bohr on QM but QM was not his thing and that doesn't take away anything away from theories he gave. I personally prefer Nikola Tesla but there can be more than one genius scientists , no?
UnderratedSlam
G.O.A.T.
I never even implied this. A lot of his early work is unassailable, and utterly brilliant. I emphasize, early work.
The point is however that Einstein became arrogant (as a result of his success and the incessant ass-kissing, happens to the best of them), i.e. he allowed a pathetic human trait to cloud his scientific judgment, which for someone who is used as a measuring stick for intellectual excellence is a bit... disappointing. He insisted that his views were right that Bohr was wrong - without having any scientific evidence to back it up, which for a scientist is kind of a no-no. Just because he WANTED the universe to be as he pictured it, like a child told that Santa is imaginary then getting angry. Which is ironic because he is famous for saying "God does not throw dice". Well, Einstein may have started believing that he was God because how the hell would he know what God would do (if He existed)? Yet more arrogance, in other words...
The even bigger point is that... nobody is beyond criticism, I don't care how admired, brilliant or revered in all the textbooks they may be. Nobody is peRFect, not even Roger (who is losing the slam race to both rivals).
But no more of this. It's a tennis forum.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
So what use are wildcards if they cant be given to grand slam champions who lost their way in the game through injuries etc ?
If this ' fresh blood' is upto much, then they should be able to qualify by playing regular tennis.
You cant expect guys of 35 years old to be out playing tons of events to qualify.
You sound like the bosses in my workplace, who think guys with 40 years service should be running around doing physical work , at the same rate as new starts in their early 20s.
Third Serve
Talk Tennis Guru
There's no "deserves" about the wildcards. Murray is still a pretty big draw because of his past successes as a player so of course they're gonna want to keep letting him into the main tournament.
It's like when everyone was complaining about Fed getting centre court at Wimbledon basically all the time last year.
I personally think Murray's resume as a player speaks for itself and it should guarantee him whatever wildcard he wants for the rest of his career, but I think the crowd draw is the primary methodology these tournaments are looking to.
It's like when everyone was complaining about Fed getting centre court at Wimbledon basically all the time last year.
I personally think Murray's resume as a player speaks for itself and it should guarantee him whatever wildcard he wants for the rest of his career, but I think the crowd draw is the primary methodology these tournaments are looking to.
wangs78
Legend
I think wildcards should be given to players whose rankings underestimate their actual ability, such as a great player coming back from injury or coming out of retirement. Or I suppose to young prospects of the country in which the tournament is held to support that country's tennis prospects. Other motivations beyond these two (of course maybe I'm missing some other fair reasons) do not seem consistent with the principle of fair competition. At this point, Murray's ranking is a fair representation of his ability as he's been back on tour for a while now. Continuing to give Murray a WC because he might be a good draw makes no sense to me. Based on that logic, the USO might as well give a WC to Jimmy Connors every two years, as he's a bigger attraction at any age than half the men's draw.
Murray should just play doubles at this point. Given his hip and the fact that the rest of his skills are in excellent form, doubles would be great and with the right partner (maybe even his brother), he could be a regular contender and even Slam champion on the doubles tour. Success on the doubles tour would do more to burnish his legacy than scrapping around in first and second round singles matches. It should be a no brainer. He also would be less likely to wreck his hip again.
Murray should just play doubles at this point. Given his hip and the fact that the rest of his skills are in excellent form, doubles would be great and with the right partner (maybe even his brother), he could be a regular contender and even Slam champion on the doubles tour. Success on the doubles tour would do more to burnish his legacy than scrapping around in first and second round singles matches. It should be a no brainer. He also would be less likely to wreck his hip again.
NeutralFan
G.O.A.T.
He has earned it based on his past success , he's a former no1 and 3 times slam winner plus he's an equality activist , champion of women tennis players right, a big draw.
Jokervich
Hall of Fame
If Murray gets unlimited wildcards for his past successes, imagine what the big 3 will get when they eventually drop down the rankings (in fact Federer is already there). Unlimited wildcards until they're 80 years old?
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
You're literally talking about discrimination.
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
So You think a former world number 1, and grand slam champ, should be made to scrap his way through qualifying tournaments , so younger kids can play?
Isnt that discriminating?
Young players will either be good enough, or theyll never break through anyway. Im pretty sure Nadal wasnt desperate for WC entries as an 18 year old. He fought and earned his way to the main draws.
And Murray has certainly earned his stripes in the tennis world, to not be tossed aside, because hes had a major injury, and is struggling to get back to anywhere near his best.
People like you, are whats wrong with the modern world.
Asking someone to earn their right to enter a tournament is not discriminating.
Asking a former world number 1 to do so may be regarded as disrespectful however. But Andy hasn’t really done himself justice, the tournaments justice, or the fans. So who is the winner here exactly? Meanwhile, potential talents are losing out on money and experience
kevaninho
Hall of Fame
But youre not getting this.
These 'future talents' are either going to be good enough, or theyre not. The guys/ girls making money from tennis, didnt rely on wildcards to get to where they are.
Does that mean any random kid should get entry to tournaments just because the money should be shared among everyone who plays tennis?
Any kid who thinks they deserve wildcards , obviously isnt willing to work hard enough to get to where they need to be.
This smells of entitlement of youngsters.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Professionally, I am a lot closer to Murray than I am to the younger generation. I don't see any sense in keeping someone out if I don't merit it.
You're simply a sycophant kowtowing to celebrities.
