Murray vs Safin vs Wawrinka vs Roddick vs Del Potro vs Hewitt?

[H_Richardson]

In what way?

It may seem a bit unfair but you can't just disregard 2 grand slam titles just because Murray wasn't able to play on that surface. And a RG final alongside a couple of masters titles as an argument...really? The fact stands that Edberg and Becker have double the slams that Murray has with periods of being the top ranked player in the world, they just aren't comparable yet.

 

[NatF]

And that's your right. But you have to accept that it is subjective given that there can never be an overall rule to measure a performance from the late 80s or early 90s against one from the 2000s.

Of course it is subjective, I don't deny that - I would be happy to debate the finer points in terms of their draws and opponents. I fully understand that two people can have different but at the same time educated opinions. For me I tend to try and think in relative terms, in absolute terms Murray would win more often than not. What matters to me is level relative to peers and whether those peers played up to the best of their ability - very murky indeed

As I pointed out, Murray is never going to have the opportunity to win a Slam title on grass anywhere except Wimbledon so I prefer to compare them at things they have both had an opportunity to play at.

That's fair enough, agree to disagree on Edberg. With regards to Becker he's clearly greater on grass though, those extra 4 finals are too big to be covered by a Queens title.

I never throw 'hissy fits (who do you think I am, Sabratha?) and I've no objection to anyone comaring Del Potro or anybody else to Murray so long as they can justify their comparisons with objective and indisputable facts.

Oooh burn

I'll sticky this final point from you for future reference

 

[Jokervich]

Lol...just listen to yourself! The fact remains he beat the world number 1 player twice in Slam finals. I howled with laughter at your attempt to make windy conditions supposedly favour Murray rather than Djokovic. Did the wind only blow on Djokovic's side of the court or something? If Djokovic had won that match, and he had every chance of doing so given that it went to a deciding set, would you be saying HE only won it because of the wind? Of course not, because you're a biased hypocrite! The conditions were sunny and warm at Wimbledon. Are you going to say those conditions unfairly favoured Murray as well??

Trying to overhype Del Potro and Roddick to make them appear better at Slams than Murray is one of the funniest and most ridiculous things I have ever come across. It just says more about you than it does about any of them mate!

ffs, how many times do I have to repeat myself before it gets through to your head...

Murray wins over big 3 in slams:

- 2 wins against Outofformovic, 1 of which came in extremely windy conditions which strongly favours the non-aggressive player (which Murray is)

- 1 win over Tireddal and 1 win over Injureddal (Nadal didn't even finish the match at AO10, so you can't really count that as a win lol)

- 1 win over 32 year old Federer (in by far his worst season for over a decade) on slow plexicushion (and even that went to 5 sets)

So as you can see, the big 3 need to be playing their C or D game for Murray to even have a chance. Djokovic has crushed Murray in slams since W13 (please don't bring up RG15 - that looked close on paper, but Djokovic was never losing that one in a million years). Federer has crushed him in slams full stop (including a straight sets win against prime Murray when he was 34 years old, lmfao!), apart from that one blip at AO13 which I outlined above. Nadal has equally crushed him at slams when he's been fully fit. Not to mention losses such as Wawrinka USO13, Anderson USO15, Dimitrov W14, Nishikori USO16 etc. when these guys played aggressive tennis against Murray, which he couldn't handle in the big match situations.

Face it, Murray is not a great player when it matters most. Never has and never will.

 

[Mainad]

ffs, how many times do I have to repeat myself before it gets through to your head...

Murray wins over big 3 in slams:

- 2 wins against Outofformovic, 1 of which came in extremely windy conditions which strongly favours the non-aggressive player (which Murray is)

- 1 win over Tireddal and 1 win over Injureddal (Nadal didn't even finish the match at AO10, so you can't really count that as a win lol)

- 1 win over 32 year old Federer (in by far his worst season for over a decade) on slow plexicushion (and even that went to 5 sets)

So as you can see, the big 3 need to be playing their C or D game for Murray to even have a chance. Djokovic has crushed Murray in slams since W13 (please don't bring up RG15 - that looked close on paper, but Djokovic was never losing that one in a million years). Federer has crushed him in slams full stop (including a straight sets win against prime Murray when he was 34 years old, lmfao!), apart from that one blip at AO13 which I outlined above. Nadal has equally crushed him at slams when he's been fully fit. Not to mention losses such as Wawrinka USO13, Anderson USO15, Dimitrov W14, Nishikori USO16 etc. when these guys played aggressive tennis against Murray, which he couldn't handle in the big match situations.

Face it, Murray is not a great player when it matters most. Never has and never will.

You can repeat yourself until the cows come home mate. It still won't make your arguments a jot more valid. If it suits you to believe that Murray ONLY ever wins big when his opponents are tired or sick while all the players you DO like only ever win big because of their sheer genius, then you go on believing it mate. The rest of us will continue to view his achievements with a more realistic and more unbiased sense of balance. That's what TRUE tennis fans do, something I hope you will learn to emulate one day but I have to confess I'm not holding out much hope and, to be honest, don't much care anyway. Cheerio!

 

[Gmidkiff]

Stanimal , Murray, Hewitt, Safin, Roddick , and Del Porto

Stan over Murray due to big match play and he beat #1 in each of his GS wins ; Hewitt over Safin b/c year end #1 and he won Wimbledon ; Roddick over Del Porto because of multiple Wimbledon finals and YE #1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 307496]

I never throw 'hissy fits (who do you think I am, Sabratha?) and I've no objection to anyone comaring Del Potro or anybody else to Murray so long as they can justify their comparisons with objective and indisputable facts.

Yeah, you do throw "hissy fits". You do it every single time someone brings up a point that isn't in favor of your boy. You're as bad as the Djokovic fanboys, and it's absolutely laughable you believe Murray can and will double his major count before he's retired.

You'll also find I don't throw "hissy fits" -- I am just extremely irritated/annoyed at your cringeworthy posts and feel the need to interject my opinion, which you then try to drown out with some overblown metric favoring Murray.

Grow up. Better yet, why don't you actually play tennis?

 

[Deleted member 307496]

You can repeat yourself until the cows come home mate. It still won't make your arguments a jot more valid. If it suits you to believe that Murray ONLY ever wins big when his opponents are tired or sick while all the players you DO like only ever win big because of their sheer genius, then you go on believing it mate. The rest of us will continue to view his achievements with a more realistic and more unbiased sense of balance. That's what TRUE tennis fans do, something I hope you will learn to emulate one day but I have to confess I'm not holding out much hope and, to be honest, don't much care anyway. Cheerio!

"Unbiased" to you is comparing Murray to freaking Becker and Edberg.

 

[Mainad]

Yeah, you do throw "hissy fits". You do it every single time someone brings up a point that isn't in favor of your boy. You're as bad as the Djokovic fanboys, and it's absolutely laughable you believe Murray can and will double his major count before he's retired.

You'll also find I don't throw "hissy fits" -- I am just extremely irritated/annoyed at your cringeworthy posts and feel the need to interject my opinion, which you then try to drown out with some overblown metric favoring Murray.

Grow up. Better yet, why don't you actually play tennis?

Better yet, let's end this farce now. You dislike Murray and resent anyone giving him any credit let alone DARE to compare him with anyone from the past. You're just an incorrigible Murrayphobe and laughably so. I, on the other hand, am a TRUE tennis fan and will always defend Murray (and any other player) against persistently irrational and biased attacks from unbalanced haters like you. I had thought and hoped that you had improved in this respect lately but you've just regressed big style. You have a great deal of growing up and maturing to do but I haven't got the time or patience to hang around on the off chance that day might ever arrive. So you carry on with your sneery little hate fests while I switch my attention to more worthwhile and rational posters. Cheerio!!!

 

[Hyde]

He is a lesser player than Becker, Edberg and Wilander. Those guys are all-time greats while Murray is not.

What's to compare?

You shouldn't forget that Murrays career is still ongoing. He is in a good position to win at least 2 more slams until the end of 2018.

Then he would be at 5 grand slam titles, 2 olympics, likely 15+ Masters and similar amount of tournament wins as players like Becker.

You can't compare Murray and his career achievements to Del Potro, that's ridiculous. At the end of his career, Murray will likely be in the same bracket as Becker etc

 

[kiellmann]

I dont think Murray is as good a player for his own time as Becker and Edberg in theirs personally but I do think it is possible he ends up with similar achievements, like ending up with 6 slams, and if that is the case many years from now people will think of them as roughly the same caliber of player. Of course it is entirely possible he stays at only 3 slams. I would say that is best case and worst case scenarios.

I do think Murray's longevity and consistency are superior to both Becker and Edberg actually, and he also could be more versatile since he is clearly better on clay, but their peak playing level and overall playing level in their absolute prime years is better.

 

[SoBad]

Comparing Safin with Delpotro lol...

 

[tarutani]

Murray>> other