Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by batz, Dec 16, 2011.
Good. Now carry on spending Christmas day in the gym, get the mental strength into gear and pick up the title come January.
Was the original "sciatica" a misdiagnosis or a totally separate issue that is also resolved? The reason I ask...a relative has sciatic issues and they flare up almost randomly.
Best of holiday wishes to you, Batz!
Thanks Tom. All the best for Christmas and the New Year to you as well.
Sciatica problem was separate to the groin issue - your relative is not alone; it happens to a lot of people out of the blue. I had real bother with it over a 3 year period in my early 20s whilst serving in the Royal Navy, then all of a sudden - it stopped. I get an occasional twinge every couple of years but it only lasts a few seconds.
I hope it doesn't bother Murray too much these coming months. I don't think there's much can be done other than strong anti-inflams; and they are not that effective.
Good, but he probably needs to get over his forehand injury too.
I wonder what would happen if Sampras came out of retirement to play Murray in the Australian Open final....
7-6 7-6 7-6
Probably. Sampras is the most clutch tennis player I've ever seen. If he can merely 'stay in' each set he can win each set.
First of all, good to see Andy in good health and thinking positively.
That's good, but is that correct. Only 6 times ??
Who are the others ?
I wish Sampras would return. But he seems kind of lazy and content in retirement, so it's highly unlikely.
Again, Lendl also managed to reach at least the semis of all four Majors in a year. Vamos!
Good info, batz!
Only 6 men apart from him in the open era.
His Rogerness (who has done it 3 or 4 times)
Noel (also did it this year)
Obviously, Laver '69 and Fed at least 4x (20 consecutive SF's).
He won't win anything playing pusher tennis with a wimpy loopy forehand. Gonna have to fix that area of his game.
Exactly, he looks scared senseless to hit a proper forehand down the line. Actually he comes up looking impotent against top ranked players on many occasions even when he gets the victory. He's working way too hard on the court, he better watch out otherwise he'll have a short career.
Federer (2008 )
Nadal (2008 )
Murray and Djokovic both did it in 2011.
Yep, coz he's never managed to win anything at all yet!
If your manner of thinking too concrete?
Even in victory he often looks under-powered and as if everything is this huge effort. You seem to be quite defensive and querying about Murray, I seem to have noticed, real cute.
Look, obviously Murray is a super good player, but he's struggling to show enough game at the very later stages of the Slams, and can't consistently bring attacking weapons to the table and ends up playing catch-up and anticipatory defense in way too many rallies. It's a fair point and he needs to be more willing to not be man handled when it comes to later stages of Slams and this involves not being swamped on the FH side by Nadal and not being dominated by the likes of Federer and Djokovic, whom in Slams he has been reactive rather than proactive against.
Good point. Djokovic, Nadal and Federer all beat each other so easily don't they??
Funny you should say that. You seem to be quite patronising and dismissive of him, I seem to have noticed. Real curious.
Bold - Lol, I'm on about against players he should be winning against routinely without spending too much time on the court, everything seems to be more of an effort for Murray than it is for the other 3.
Non bold - Hey I'm just telling it how it is. I'm hoping he comes good in the Slams though.
Point is, Murray's not showing enough game in the very endgame, unlike Botvinnik or Capablanca. Some of it's mental but I believe some of it is ... he just has less game, truth be told, than the rest of the top 4. I don't think this opinion is unreasonable, but if he can stop looking to blame everything under the sun when he's losing then he should win at least 1 Major at some point, would be VERY WEIRD if he didn't considering he's bagged a slew of 1000 titles and has been ranked top 4 for the last 4 years.
Nathaniel_Near, don't give Murray any credit.
The reason he has made it far in slams is weak draws.
The reason he can't beat a top 3 in a slam is physical (weak) and technical (flawed) and natural talent-related (a lack of). When he has beaten Nadal in a slam Nadal has been injured or tired.
The importance of 'mental strength' is vastly over-rated and besides, Murray must have much more of it than the rest of the top 3 considering his over-achievments relative to his talent thus far.
Djokovic, Federer and Nadal have under-achieved at the moment, Murray has over-achieved BIG time.
I expect him to decline sharply in 2012 and never make it past the 3rd round in a slam or masters again.
I think he has plenty of game. It's those pusher tennis schools in Spain that screwed him over. They have infected him with their pusher/grinder virus.
Mongo like candy?
Crikey ! Who is this Federer guy who keeps popping up in all kinds of records :shock::shock:
Botvinnik and Capablanca??
I think Murray is far too often under-rated on here. He has a good record against Federer and Djokovic (H2H 8-6 and 4-6 respectively) not so good against Nadal (5-13) although ironically Nadal is the only one of them he has beaten at a Slam (twice). When he is on his game he is a good match for any of the top 3 as his results show. It's just that he hasn't been able to translate it into success aginst them in Slam finals yet and IMO the reason is almost certainly mental and not because he hasn't got the game.
You make a fair point about Murray grinding it out a little too much in the early rounds. He is a bit of a slow starter but sometimes the opponents can be unexpectedly tough even in the early rounds. Even the other top players know this. For instance, Isner was a handful for Murray at the USO this year and probably tired him out to last the course against Nadal in the semi (Nadal had had a nice stroll in the park with Roddick) but Isner is a handful for a lot of players including Nadal at this year's FO.
I feel Murray just needs a bit of confidence and luck to make it to his first Slam. The top 3 were all a bit lucky in not having to face a previous Slam winner in their first Slam finals. Murray has only ever been up against Slam winners. I feel he needs to work just that little bit harder than they had to in order to get that first Slam title under his belt. I don't know whether he will ever do so or not but if he doesn't it won't, in my opinion, be because he lacks the game to do so.
Just ignore it and don't feed it! :wink:
No-one is "over an injury" until they've had their next three of four hard actual matches behind them with no issue.
ask murray ... he knows him quite well
At least he didn't pick up any OCD's over there.
It's more Brad Gilbert
That's an interesting point Mainad and I hadn't heard or read of it before. I think you're right. All the top players say that the tough matches come down to one or two points and having scaled the mountain already, so to say, those that have already won slams do have a definite advantage. Andy has gotten so close and the other guys all think enough of his game to say that he is more than capable of winning a slam. I just hope he doesn't do it against Rafa.
I am really glad to hear that he will be ready for the AO. I am still not losing hope that he will one day win a slam.
Separate names with a comma.