Murray should have more than one HC major by now

I mean just look at the guy's stats. 32 HC titles including a USO, WTF, 12 Masters, an Olympic gold and 8 500s. He features in the top 10 for players with the best W-L% in the Open Era and only Federer, Djokovic, Sampras, Lendl and Agassi have reached more HC slam finals. :oops: I know some of you will say "he didn't play well enough in the finals he lost to deserve more titles" but at the end of the day he'd still likely be sitting on at least a couple of AO trophies without the two greatest ever HC players standing in his way so yes, to a certain degree he has been unlucky whichever way you look at it.

It goes without saying that as a huge Nole fan I'll be absolutely ecstatic if he wins a 7th title this year(and even that's putting it mildly) but if Andy does go on to finally win there's no way I could begrudge him given his incredible consistency over the last 6-7 years. As I said in the match thread the other day, he's a champion in every sense of the word and a first Aussie Open title to go alongside his US Open trophy and all the other big HC tournaments he's won over the years would be no less than he deserves. Good luck to him and all the other players for that matter, it should be a fantastic tournament.

C'est tout pour le moment. :)
Two words:

Back
Serve

He's always has yips on the 2nd serve, which is a huge problem for an otherwise top player. Then right at the moment he was hitting his peak, he had to have surgery.

That's just SO tough and was terribly bad luck...

Credit to modern surgery for giving him a second chance to make it to the top...
 
Erm...no :confused:

Feel free to ignore me though, I won't lose sleep.

Your contention is that Djokovic fans have an ulterior motive in praising Murray. Djokovic had to go through Murray to win a bunch of his slams. If they praise Murray it elevates Djokovic's achievements. If you diminish Murray's capability then you take some shine off Djokovic's achievements.

Your comment is projection, you're the one with the ulterior motive. You're ascribing a motive to people, and adjusting your responses to counter this motive, with this behaviour facts are secondary. It's pretty common for sport fans to see commentary as a zero sum game. Diminishing this guys opponents, elevates that guys achievements.

Murray is a fantastic player, why wouldn't someone praise a guy who has been a top 5 player his whole career, has won multiple majors and has an excellent record against the field.
 
Your contention is that Djokovic fans have an ulterior motive in praising Murray. Djokovic had to go through Murray to win a bunch of his slams. If they praise Murray it elevates Djokovic's achievements. If you diminish Murray's capability then you take some shine off Djokovic's achievements.

Your comment is projection, you're the one with the ulterior motive. You're ascribing a motive to people, and adjusting your responses to counter this motive, with this behaviour facts are secondary. It's pretty common for sport fans to see commentary as a zero sum game. Diminishing this guys opponents, elevates that guys achievements.

Murray is a fantastic player, why wouldn't someone praise a guy who has been a top 5 player his whole career, has won multiple majors and has an excellent record against the field.

I can only assume you're not familiar with Djokovic2011's posting history.

Murray is of course an amazing player. I value Djokovic's 12 slams as highly as Federer's first 12 and Nadal's and Sampras's.
 
Your contention is that Djokovic fans have an ulterior motive in praising Murray. Djokovic had to go through Murray to win a bunch of his slams. If they praise Murray it elevates Djokovic's achievements. If you diminish Murray's capability then you take some shine off Djokovic's achievements.

Your comment is projection, you're the one with the ulterior motive. You're ascribing a motive to people, and adjusting your responses to counter this motive, with this behaviour facts are secondary. It's pretty common for sport fans to see commentary as a zero sum game. Diminishing this guys opponents, elevates that guys achievements.

Murray is a fantastic player, why wouldn't someone praise a guy who has been a top 5 player his whole career, has won multiple majors and has an excellent record against the field.
Who actually listens to you? Aren't you that idiot that argued Murray is as good as Becker today?
 
Your contention is that Djokovic fans have an ulterior motive in praising Murray. Djokovic had to go through Murray to win a bunch of his slams. If they praise Murray it elevates Djokovic's achievements. If you diminish Murray's capability then you take some shine off Djokovic's achievements.

Your comment is projection, you're the one with the ulterior motive. You're ascribing a motive to people, and adjusting your responses to counter this motive, with this behaviour facts are secondary. It's pretty common for sport fans to see commentary as a zero sum game. Diminishing this guys opponents, elevates that guys achievements.

Murray is a fantastic player, why wouldn't someone praise a guy who has been a top 5 player his whole career, has won multiple majors and has an excellent record against the field.

You are a true sports fan, unlike Sabatha who is the worst kind of W*******R
 
You are a true sports fan, unlike Sabatha who is the worst kind of W*******R
I find it ironic you call anybody else a sad individual when you cannot even type out a proper sentence. Drunk, are we?

I own you.
 
Everyone gets what they deserve in this game. There's no should, or could, or would. Murray won what he was capable of, and that's that.
 
Back
Top