Murray too talented to end with only 2 majors

[staceyliving]

It would be such a shame if Andy Murray ended with only 2 slams. IMO he is far too talented a player to end with 2 slams. The only player with 2 slams (or less) close to or above him in talent level is Safin, but Safin was extremely lazy, and massively inconsistent. Murray is a very hard worker and more consistent than many past long term #1s, although no chance of #1 in an era with 3 dominant and 3 of the most consistent players ever. Hopefully the incredibly talented Murray will win atleast a 3rd, and maybe a 4th slam before he retires. It is not fitting for him to share the same place as the likes of Kafelnikov, Clerc, Bruguera, Hewitt, Rafter, very fine players, but not of Murray's immense talent level and potential.

 

[newpball]

It would be such a shame if Andy Murray ended with only 2 slams. IMO he is far too talented a player to end with 2 slams. The only player with 2 slams (or less) close to or above him in talent level is Safin, but Safin was extremely lazy, and massively inconsistent. Murray is a very hard worker and more consistent than many past long term #1s, although no chance of #1 in an era with 3 dominant and 3 of the most consistent players ever. Hopefully the incredibly talented Murray will win atleast a 3rd, and maybe a 4th slam before he retires. It is not fitting for him to share the same place as the likes of Kafelnikov, Clerc, Bruguera, Hewitt, Rafter, very fine players, but not of Murray's immense talent level and potential.

Frankly I think he should count his blessings with having two slams on his name.

And no, I think there won't be any more slams for Murray.

:grin:

 

[ollinger]

He's exactly where he belongs. I see nothing in him that I haven't also seen in Safin, Hewitt, Rafter and even some players with just one slam victory.

 

[staceyliving]

He's exactly where he belongs. I see nothing in him that I haven't also seen in Safin, Hewitt, Rafter and even some players with just one slam victory.

He is better in every facet of tennis other than volleys than Rafter. Even his serve is much better.

He plays a lot like Hewitt and they are evenly matched in many ways but just with much more variety, nicer touch and feel for the ball, and more power off the ground when he wants to unleash it. Also a much bigger and better serve.

Safin is probably more talented and definitely scarier at his best but he wasn't a consistent player who worked hard in addition to being extremely talented like Murray is. Once he showed up to play a slam final with 4 random women he probably only met that weekend with their boobs hanging out. I am surprised they were allowed in the arena with what they were wearing.

 

[newpball]

He's exactly where he belongs. I see nothing in him that I haven't also seen in Safin, Hewitt, Rafter and even some players with just one slam victory.

Yes, I agree.

Basically what I think is Murray's biggest problem is lack of focus, the kind of focus that that you see with the all time top players. Murray is clearly not one of them.

Frankly I would not be surprised if he soon sells his home in Surrey, England, close off the 'English tennis adventure', and return to Scotland to live in some sort of an old castle.

:grin:

 

[Mr.Snrub]

Yes, I agree.

Basically what I think is Murray's biggest problem is lack of focus, the kind of focus that that you see with the all time top players. Murray is clearly not one of them.

Frankly I would not be surprised if he soon sells his home in Surrey, England, close off the 'English tennis adventure', and return to Scotland to live in some sort of an old castle.

:grin:

He's playing 5 weeks in a row just so he can get himself into a groove/top 8 spot for next year. Not sure where this lack of motivation nonsense comes from.

 

[newpball]

Once he showed up to play a slam final with 4 random women he probably only met that weekend with their boobs hanging out. I am surprised they were allowed in the arena with what they were wearing.

Four?

:grin:

 

[Anti-Fedal]

OP: He's extremely lucky to have those 2 slams. He won't be winning any more.

 

[staceyliving]

Four?

:grin:

Sorry I guess I accidentally counted 2 of the large jugs on one of them as 2 different women.

Not that I am disparaging Safin any. Anyone would way rather win 2 majors and live that kind of life while doing it, than win 2 majors while living the regular boring tennis tour life.

 

[newpball]

He's playing 5 weeks in a row just so he can get himself into a groove/top 8 spot for next year. Not sure where this lack of motivation nonsense comes from.

No, you are missing the point, it is not lack of motivation, it is lack of focus, the focus to perform a professional execution under all conditions.

To get a bit more directly to the point, Connors got mad as well during games but it drove him to perform better with Murray it is completely the opposite.

:grin:

 

[Mr.Snrub]

No, you are missing the point, it is not lack of motivation, it is lack of focus, the focus to perform a professional execution under all conditions.

To get a bit more directly to the point, Connors got mad as well during games but it drove him to perform better with Murray it is completely the opposite.

:grin:

I'm talking about your other sentence, the one where you say you wouldn't be surprised if he gives up and fades into the sunset soon.

 

[newpball]

I'm talking about your other sentence, the one where you say you wouldn't be surprised if he gives up and fades into the sunset soon.

Oh that one, sorry I missed that.

Well, think about it this way, if you have been called one of the Big Four for awhile (which was overrated anyways but that is another discussion) but now you can hardly manage to stay in the top 10 and thus you are forced to scrape points from 500 tournaments to even make WTF then wouldn't you ask yourself some hard questions about your future?

A career closing with two slams is not bad, in fact it is a great achievement but I fear there is simply not much more to come, all I fear is that he will just get madder at himself, which only will make things worse.

2015 is right there to show, we will wait and see.

:grin:

 

[torpantennis]

The most important stroke of tennis? It's 2nd serve. Murray's 2nd serve? The weakest of top 30! He should have NO SLAMS!

 

[Chico]

It would be such a shame if Andy Murray ended with only 2 slams. IMO he is far too talented a player to end with 2 slams. The only player with 2 slams (or less) close to or above him in talent level is Safin, but Safin was extremely lazy, and massively inconsistent. Murray is a very hard worker and more consistent than many past long term #1s, although no chance of #1 in an era with 3 dominant and 3 of the most consistent players ever. Hopefully the incredibly talented Murray will win atleast a 3rd, and maybe a 4th slam before he retires. It is not fitting for him to share the same place as the likes of Kafelnikov, Clerc, Bruguera, Hewitt, Rafter, very fine players, but not of Murray's immense talent level and potential.

Yes he will win more slams. Just as Djokovic is way too talented to end with less than 10 slams.

 

[newpball]

Just as Djokovic is way too talented to end with less than 10 slams.

QFT!

Yes, certainly, Djokovic's slam count is bound to go up.

My prediction: RG 2015 is going to be for Djokovic!

:grin:

 

[Chico]

Four?

:grin:

I see six there. This is the real talent though. I am shocked anyone would object and complain about such audience.

 

[Mr.Snrub]

Oh that one, sorry I missed that.

Well, think about it this way, if you have been called one of the Big Four for awhile (which was overrated anyways but that is another discussion) but now you can hardly manage to stay in the top 10 and thus you are forced to scrape points from 500 tournaments to even make WTF then wouldn't you ask yourself some hard questions about your future?

A career closing with two slams is not bad, in fact it is a great achievement but I fear there is simply not much more to come, all I fear is that he will just get madder at himself, which only will make things worse.

2015 is right there to show, we will wait and see.

:grin:

Aye, I'm hoping this indoor season will lead to good things in 2015 but we'll have to wait and see.

I have a higher opinion of Murray than you (I thought he might be able to challenge for #1 around mid-2013), but your point about his focus is right on the mark. Cheers.

 

[D.Nalby12]

It would be such a shame if Andy Murray ended with only 2 slams. IMO he is far too talented a player to end with 2 slams. The only player with 2 slams (or less) close to or above him in talent level is Safin, but Safin was extremely lazy, and massively inconsistent. Murray is a very hard worker and more consistent than many past long term #1s, although no chance of #1 in an era with 3 dominant and 3 of the most consistent players ever. Hopefully the incredibly talented Murray will win atleast a 3rd, and maybe a 4th slam before he retires. It is not fitting for him to share the same place as the likes of Kafelnikov, Clerc, Bruguera, Hewitt, Rafter, very fine players, but not of Murray's immense talent level and potential.

Safin is probably most talented player ending with around 2 GS titles. In terms of talent Murray is not even close to Safin and I believe most of us will agree with this.

In my view is slightly overachiever, not much but slightly. I can't ignore the fact he was unbelievable lucky winning both GS titles. I wasn't actually get much impressed with his level when he won major titles but failure of 1990-94 generation, bad patch of Federer and Rafa and occasional luck like his Wimbledon draw played pivotal role making him grandslam champion rather than his own brilliance but he lost tons of GS finals playing much better to Federer and Djokovic so it evens out for me.

 

[staceyliving]

How was he lucky winning his slams?

Nadal didn't play the 2012 U.S Open, but Nadal is no more than 40% likely to survive a whole draw and win any particular non clay slam anyway (and 40% is the highest point, this particular one might have been lower than that of course). Nadal might have won the 2012 U.S Open had he played, but the odds are just as much, probably more, he wouldnt have just by the simple virtue he doesnt dominate any surface but clay, and wasnt ever dominating 2012 either. Nadal did play Wimbledon 2013, and was rubbish like he always is on grass today.

Federer isn't at the stage of his career you need to avoid him to win a slam. He has won only 1 slam since January 2010, and Murray is 1-1 vs him in slams since then (2-1 in big matches if you add Olympic final). He was never a big factor in the year 2013 anyway, and was taken out by Berdych who is a tough opponent for him these days at the U.S Open (whom Murray then proceded to beat despite that he is also a tough opponent for Murray).

That leaves Djokovic, who Murray beat straight up to win both his slams, is clearly better than on grass when in his top form anyway, and generally beats on faster surfaces (which both Wimbledon and U.S Open are).

So there we have it. Have I missed anything else?

 

[SpinToWin]

Murray has a terrible second serve for a top player and had only a very short time (under Lendl) in which he had the right mindset and where he hit every shot with the intent to win the point (especially the forehand). Ever since the back injury though, he has regressed to a more passive gamestyle and his forehand lacks penetration. Given his playing style, he doesn't have much more time in which he has a realistic chance at winning Slams, so chances are that he won't win more. Had he started playing the way he did under Lendl in 2012-2013 earlier (and thereafter), you'd have a point in saying that he clearly deserves more Slam titles. At the moment though, IMHO, that is not the case.

 

[Steve0904]

Safin was too, but he ended with 2 slams.

 

[SLD76]

How was he lucky winning his slams?

Nadal didn't play the 2012 U.S Open, but Nadal is no more than 40% likely to survive a whole draw and win any particular non clay slam anyway (and 40% is the highest point, this particular one might have been lower than that of course). Nadal might have won the 2012 U.S Open had he played, but the odds are just as much, probably more, he wouldnt have just by the simple virtue he doesnt dominate any surface but clay, and wasnt ever dominating 2012 either. Nadal did play Wimbledon 2013, and was rubbish like he always is on grass today.

Federer isn't at the stage of his career you need to avoid him to win a slam. He has won only 1 slam since January 2010, and Murray is 1-1 vs him in slams since then (2-1 in big matches if you add Olympic final). He was never a big factor in the year 2013 anyway, and was taken out by Berdych who is a tough opponent for him these days at the U.S Open (whom Murray then proceded to beat despite that he is also a tough opponent for Murray).

That leaves Djokovic, who Murray beat straight up to win both his slams, is clearly better than on grass when in his top form anyway, and generally beats on faster surfaces (which both Wimbledon and U.S Open are).

So there we have it. Have I missed anything else?

Not to mention the swirling winds of 2012 uso drove Djoker bonkers.

also, 2012 Djoker was not the same player as 2011 or 2014 djoker

 

[tennisaddict]

With the kind of fitness he showed today and also in general, I doubt he has more than a major or two left.

 

[Buffster]

He is better in every facet of tennis other than volleys than Rafter. Even his serve is much better.

Lol... :lol:

 

[SLD76]

Lol... :lol:

I know I lol ' d too.

 

[MG1]

Already over achiever for his talent ..should not win anymore slams or masters!

 

[staceyliving]

Not to mention the swirling winds of 2012 uso drove Djoker bonkers.

also, 2012 Djoker was not the same player as 2011 or 2014 djoker

Not sure what you are smoking but 2014 Djokovic is much worse than 2012, although neither is as good as 2011. 2014 is the poorest Djokovic since 2010 easily. Even in a dead year for mens tennis with Nadal playing like garbage, Murray not a factor, Del Potro not even playing, and no good up and comers, he still won only 1 slam and didn't reach the final of either hard court slam; and is in danger of losing the #1 ranking.

As for the wind both had to deal with it. No difference. Murray usually beats Djokovic on fast courts like I said. Maybe he would have won in 4 sets or less if it wasn't windy. Djokovic is 1-4 in U.S Open finals, thus obviously the likely loser.

 

[syc23]

The most important stroke of tennis? It's 2nd serve. Murray's 2nd serve? The weakest of top 30! He should have NO SLAMS!

Yes he shouldn't win so much due to his 2nd serve but he has so go and choke on a haggis pudding

 

[Goosehead]

murray is more than capable of winning more majors. don't think he will end with two.

 

[SLD76]

Not sure what you are smoking but 2014 Djokovic is much worse than 2012, although neither is as good as 2011. 2014 is the poorest Djokovic since 2010 easily. Even in a dead year for mens tennis with Nadal playing like garbage, Murray not a factor, Del Potro not even playing, and no good up and comers, he still won only 1 slam and didn't reach the final of either hard court slam; and is in danger of losing the #1 ranking.

As for the wind both had to deal with it. No difference. Murray usually beats Djokovic on fast courts like I said. Maybe he would have won in 4 sets or less if it wasn't windy. Djokovic is 1-4 in U.S Open finals, thus obviously the likely loser.

2012 lost FO to nadal, lost Wimby semi to old man fed and lost uso final to murray. Won AO

2014 Djoker lost FO to Nadal, beat old man fed to win Wimby , lost uso semi nishikori. Lost AO to wawa.

I'm failing to see how 2012 Djoker is far and away better than 2014 djoker.

although I agree that Murray does well against Djoker on faster surfaces. The best example being 2012 dubai....where he got blown off the court by murray.

Also, murray handles windy conditions much better than djokwr. Of the Big 4, Djoker is far and away the worst in dealing with wind. Nadal and fed probably the best.

 

[Gary D]

Also, murray handles windy conditions much better than djokwr. Of the Big 4, Djoker is far and away the worst in dealing with wind. Nadal and fed probably the best.

Federer doesn't cope with windy conditions well. I've heard commentators say on several occasions that it throws off his timing.

 

[The_Mental_Giant]

Dont worry , murray is likely to win more slams, I see him ending with 4-5 slams.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

It would be such a shame if Andy Murray ended with only 2 slams. IMO he is far too talented a player to end with 2 slams. The only player with 2 slams (or less) close to or above him in talent level is Safin, but Safin was extremely lazy, and massively inconsistent. Murray is a very hard worker and more consistent than many past long term #1s, although no chance of #1 in an era with 3 dominant and 3 of the most consistent players ever. Hopefully the incredibly talented Murray will win atleast a 3rd, and maybe a 4th slam before he retires. It is not fitting for him to share the same place as the likes of Kafelnikov, Clerc, Bruguera, Hewitt, Rafter, very fine players, but not of Murray's immense talent level and potential.

Please be banned again soon.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Not sure what you are smoking but 2014 Djokovic is much worse than 2012, although neither is as good as 2011. 2014 is the poorest Djokovic since 2010 easily. Even in a dead year for mens tennis with Nadal playing like garbage, Murray not a factor, Del Potro not even playing, and no good up and comers, he still won only 1 slam and didn't reach the final of either hard court slam; and is in danger of losing the #1 ranking.

As for the wind both had to deal with it. No difference. Murray usually beats Djokovic on fast courts like I said. Maybe he would have won in 4 sets or less if it wasn't windy. Djokovic is 1-4 in U.S Open finals, thus obviously the likely loser.

I'm not sure what you are smoking, claiming that Murray is better than his 2 majors present. You forget that players like Hewitt and Safin also won 500 titles, quite a few of them, and that it ended up amounting to nothing for them.

Murray only now just passed Hewitt for his total amount of titles despite Hewitt being pretty much done after 25 and living life on tour as a journeyman ever since. I have yet to place Murray above Hewitt, in terms of playing level and achievements although they are close in both regards.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

He is better in every facet of tennis other than volleys than Rafter. Even his serve is much better.

He plays a lot like Hewitt and they are evenly matched in many ways but just with much more variety, nicer touch and feel for the ball, and more power off the ground when he wants to unleash it. Also a much bigger and better serve.

Safin is probably more talented and definitely scarier at his best but he wasn't a consistent player who worked hard in addition to being extremely talented like Murray is. Once he showed up to play a slam final with 4 random women he probably only met that weekend with their boobs hanging out. I am surprised they were allowed in the arena with what they were wearing.

:lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-T5RkrASBVQ

I haven't seen Murray hit much harder than that..

 

[moonballs]

He does have the talent and speed on the court. Problem is he often plays too passively (borederline pushing). That can get you a couple of slams but it takes a more aggressive mentality to win.

Contrast with Nadal, who often is willing to play defensive. But you know he is always ready whenever his moonball draws a somewhat weaker return, then he turns the tide with one shot to the line or corner.

 

[SLD76]

Federer doesn't cope with windy conditions well. I've heard commentators say on several occasions that it throws off his timing.

Right.

That's why old fed beat Nadal at IW in 2012 in straight sets in 2012 in swirling conditions

 

[ark_28]

How was he lucky winning his slams?

Nadal didn't play the 2012 U.S Open, but Nadal is no more than 40% likely to survive a whole draw and win any particular non clay slam anyway (and 40% is the highest point, this particular one might have been lower than that of course). Nadal might have won the 2012 U.S Open had he played, but the odds are just as much, probably more, he wouldnt have just by the simple virtue he doesnt dominate any surface but clay, and wasnt ever dominating 2012 either. Nadal did play Wimbledon 2013, and was rubbish like he always is on grass today.

Federer isn't at the stage of his career you need to avoid him to win a slam. He has won only 1 slam since January 2010, and Murray is 1-1 vs him in slams since then (2-1 in big matches if you add Olympic final). He was never a big factor in the year 2013 anyway, and was taken out by Berdych who is a tough opponent for him these days at the U.S Open (whom Murray then proceded to beat despite that he is also a tough opponent for Murray).

That leaves Djokovic, who Murray beat straight up to win both his slams, is clearly better than on grass when in his top form anyway, and generally beats on faster surfaces (which both Wimbledon and U.S Open are).

So there we have it. Have I missed anything else?

Wrong Murray trails Federer 2-1 in Slams since January 2010.

Federer beat Murray in the Wimbledon final 2012 in 4 sets

Murray beat Federer in the 2013 Australian Open Semi Finals in 5 sets.

Federer beat Murray in the Australian Open 2014 quarter finals in 4 sets.

 

[staceyliving]

2012 lost FO to nadal, lost Wimby semi to old man fed and lost uso final to murray. Won AO

2014 Djoker lost FO to Nadal, beat old man fed to win Wimby , lost uso semi nishikori. Lost AO to wawa.

I'm failing to see how 2012 Djoker is far and away better than 2014 djoker.

although I agree that Murray does well against Djoker on faster surfaces. The best example being 2012 dubai....where he got blown off the court by murray.

Also, murray handles windy conditions much better than djokwr. Of the Big 4, Djoker is far and away the worst in dealing with wind. Nadal and fed probably the best.

So if you concede Murray always has a good chance of beating Djokovic on any faster surface under any circumstances (which is proven in their H2H stats too) I fail to see how Murray was in anyway lucky.

Lucky he avoided Nadal at Wimbledon when Nadal cant hold a racquet straight on grass anymore? Lucky Nadal didn't play the U.S Open as Nadal with 3 hard court slams out of 14 held since 2008 (roughly the start of his prime) was such a mortal lock for the title had he played? Lucky that he avoided Federer who was in garbage form in 2013 anyway, and lucky that Federer didn't make the U.S Open final which he hasn't since 2008 anyway.

Sorry I am just not seeing it.

 

[Djokovic2011]

The most important stroke of tennis? It's 2nd serve. Murray's 2nd serve? The weakest of top 30! He should have NO SLAMS!

I've been sensing more than a little hostility from you towards Murray just recently torpan. Couldn't have anything to do with Andy being 11-11 in his H2H with Roger and for much of the last few years actually leading it could it??

 

[Gary D]

Right.

That's why old fed beat Nadal at IW in 2012 in straight sets in 2012 in swirling conditions

One example doesn't contradict a general trend.

In 2012 when Fed beat Murray at Wimbledon his fortunes turned when the roof was closed. Murray remarked that Fed hadn't lost indoors in 2 years.

 

[SLD76]

One example doesn't contradict a general trend.

In 2012 when Fed beat Murray at Wimbledon his fortunes turned when the roof was closed. Murray remarked that Fed hadn't lost indoors in 2 years.

Murray lost the second set and was down a break in the third before the roof closed
Try again

 

[Djokovic2011]

I'm not sure what you are smoking, claiming that Murray is better than his 2 majors present. You forget that players like Hewitt and Safin also won 500 titles, quite a few of them, and that it ended up amounting to nothing for them.

Murray only now just passed Hewitt for his total amount of titles despite Hewitt being pretty much done after 25 and living life on tour as a journeyman ever since. I have yet to place Murray above Hewitt, in terms of playing level and achievements although they are close in both regards.

Not sure what you mean by that Saby. Surely it looks better for Murray that he's already won more titles than Hewitt given that Lleyton is six years older and still active and even won a title this year, beating Federer in the final no less.

 

[Gary D]

Ok, you must be right then. Most of the commentators must be wrong.

 

[SLD76]

Ok, you must be right then. Most of the commentators must be wrong.

Don't be mad because you don't know what you are talking about.

How about all those USO semis and finals Fed won in windy conditions. I recall the 05 final with Agassi was brutal

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Not sure what you mean by that Saby. Surely it looks better for Murray that he's already won more titles than Hewitt given that Lleyton is six years older and still active and even won a title this year, beating Federer in the final no less.

I mean he just passed Hewitt's total title count? Hewitt has racked up, what? 4 titles in the space of 9 years? All 250 titles? Remove those titles and Hewitt and Murray will still be very close.

 

[bluetrain4]

He's a great player, no doubt. But, players aren't owed Slams. If he ends with 2, that's the right amount. He's not "too" talented to end with two majors.

 

[Steve0904]

Right.

That's why old fed beat Nadal at IW in 2012 in straight sets in 2012 in swirling conditions

USO 2004 QF vs Agassi too. Fed is a fine player in windy conditions, and he won 5 USO's in a row. You don't do that if you can't play in the wind because it swirls there a lot.

 

[Djokovic2011]

I mean he just passed Hewitt's total title count? Hewitt has racked up, what? 4 titles in the space of 9 years? All 250 titles? Remove those titles and Hewitt and Murray will still be very close.

I may be wrong Saby but you seem a bit miffed that Murray's now overtaken Hewitt in overall titles won. It was always going to happen eventually and FWIW I still personally rank Lleyton above Andy anyway due to his 2 WTFs and 80 weeks at #1. :wink:

 

[SLD76]

USO 2004 QF vs Agassi too. Fed is a fine player in windy conditions, and he won 5 USO's in a row. You don't do that if you can't play in the wind because it swirls there a lot.

Precisely

But I think Gary is new to the game.

But correct me if in wrong but I stand by my previous aasertion..the 05 uso final with Agassi was fairly windy iirc