Murray- will everyone finally shut up about him?

#51
I hate Andy Murry. But he lost to a decent player unlike Andy Roddick. So what if he loses 1 match on clay does it really matter? He will probably make it far at Wimb and the USO
 
#53
I think Murray is overrated and has been since 08. He will never win a major.
Really? I always wonder w/ the 'Murray is overrated' crowd, how is he overrated? Is he not deserving of the top 5 status which he's earned with his results over the past 2 years? The rankings are what they are, they are not subjective.

People say he's always favored to win slams and never lives up to it; the only slams where you could say Murray was mentioned as a legit favorite over Nadal/Fed would be AO 09 and Wimbledon 09. AO 09 he went out 4R to Verdasco, but was sick, yet still put up a decent losing effort. Wimby 09 he lost a tight 4 setter to Roddick who was playing some of the best tennis of his career and damn near won the title.

There's a difference between being a favorite and being a contender - Murray's been a slam contender for the past 2 years now, and rightfully so. But it's not as if (normal non Murtard) people are running around rating him higher than Fed or Nadal or anything. So again, in what way is he overrated? Does he not warrant mention as a contender? Maybe not at RG, but certainly at the other 4 slams he's got as good a shot as anyone not named Fed/Nadal of winning it.

Yet people still say Murray's overrated/all hype? He's made 4R or better of the past 8 slams now, and made 2 slam finals losing to the guy who's only one of the best of all time. People who say he's a nothing player - umm, sorry, do you really think a nothing player could be top 5 for 2+ years?

Some of these questions are rhetorical, but for some I do wonder - in what legitimate way is Murray so vastly overrated?
 
#55
Really? I always wonder w/ the 'Murray is overrated' crowd, how is he overrated? Is he not deserving of the top 5 status which he's earned with his results over the past 2 years? The rankings are what they are, they are not subjective.

People say he's always favored to win slams and never lives up to it; the only slams where you could say Murray was mentioned as a legit favorite over Nadal/Fed would be AO 09 and Wimbledon 09. AO 09 he went out 4R to Verdasco, but was sick, yet still put up a decent losing effort. Wimby 09 he lost a tight 4 setter to Roddick who was playing some of the best tennis of his career and damn near won the title.

There's a difference between being a favorite and being a contender - Murray's been a slam contender for the past 2 years now, and rightfully so. But it's not as if (normal non Murtard) people are running around rating him higher than Fed or Nadal or anything. So again, in what way is he overrated? Does he not warrant mention as a contender? Maybe not at RG, but certainly at the other 4 slams he's got as good a shot as anyone not named Fed/Nadal of winning it.

Yet people still say Murray's overrated/all hype? He's made 4R or better of the past 8 slams now, and made 2 slam finals losing to the guy who's only one of the best of all time. People who say he's a nothing player - umm, sorry, do you really think a nothing player could be top 5 for 2+ years?

Some of these questions are rhetorical, but for some I do wonder - in what legitimate way is Murray so vastly overrated?
He isn't consistent that's why. Plus he isn't aggressive enough. Del Potro is the one that will be winning slams with/after Fed and Nadal, not Murray. He has already backed it up without ANY hype or fuss. Murray gets all the hype and fuss and usually goes out like a wimp. To me he is nothing more than the new Tim Henman.
 
Last edited:
#56
He isn't consistent that's why. Plus he isn't aggressive enough. Del Potro is the one that will be winning slams with/after Fed and Nadal, not Murray. He has already backed it up without ANY hype or fuss. Murray gets all the hype and fuss and usually goes out like a wimp. To me he is nothing more than the new Tim Henman.
Please

Tim Henman and Andy Murray have nothing in common except that they are both British
 
#57
He isn't consistent that's why. Plus he isn't aggressive enough. Del Potro is the one that will be winning slams with/after Fed and Nadal, not Murray. He has already backed it up without ANY hype or fuss. Murray gets all the hype and fuss and usually goes out like a wimp. To me he is nothing more than the new Tim Henman.
4R or better of the past 8 slams isn't consistent? lol it's not like he's going out 1st or 2nd Round.

And again, what's the hype? Are people saying that's he's better than Fed/Nadal? Besides a decided few fanatics, no they are not. New Tim Henman? He's a hell of a lot more accomplished than Henman ever was.

Not agressive enough at times is a fair assesment. But to expand that into "Murray's overrated blah blah blah" still is missing the mark, as no grand group is claiming him to be the next all time great, besides a decided few Murtards, as I noted. So I ask again, how is he so vastly overrated? He's not a top 5 player? Sorry, the results and rankings disagree with you. He doesn't perform at slams? 4R or better 8 in a row and 2 finals over that time, a lot of guys would kill for that kind of resume in their career, let alone over 2 years.

You still haven't provided evidence to support this myth that Murray is vastly overrated. And yes, I know calling someone overrated is an opinion. But to me it's a dumb one to have about Murray.
 
#58
Please

Tim Henman and Andy Murray have nothing in common except that they are both British
And sickeningly overhyped to win Wimbledon just because of that fact.

4R or better of the past 8 slams isn't consistent? lol it's not like he's going out 1st or 2nd Round.

And again, what's the hype? Are people saying that's he's better than Fed/Nadal? Besides a decided few fanatics, no they are not. New Tim Henman? He's a hell of a lot more accomplished than Henman ever was.

Not agressive enough at times is a fair assesment. But to expand that into "Murray's overrated blah blah blah" still is missing the mark, as no grand group is claiming him to be the next all time great, besides a decided few Murtards, as I noted. So I ask again, how is he so vastly overrated? He's not a top 5 player? Sorry, the results and rankings disagree with you. He doesn't perform at slams? 4R or better 8 in a row and 2 finals over that time, a lot of guys would kill for that kind of resume in their career, let alone over 2 years.

You still haven't provided evidence to support this myth that Murray is vastly overrated. And yes, I know calling someone overrated is an opinion. But to me it's a dumb one to have about Murray.
I give him full credit for the finals, i'm not saying he isn't a great tennis player, he obviously is. As much as I hate the Soderling hype, I feel he is more of a slam contender than Murray is. 4th round or better at 8 in a row? Congratulations! He is top 5, he SHOULD be making it to the 4th round. I see him as a slam contender sure, but no more than a Davydenko, Verdasco, Cilic. If he makes it to another final then I will concede. Until then I'm not buying it. And actually if we want to rant about his final appearances we can also start hyping Jankovic and Safina. They have done the same AND been number one..... see the bias?
 
Last edited:
#61
Haven't read your 2300 posts. I have a life but didn't get that impression.
I'm rooting for Nadal now but you don't help his cause.
 
#62
Haven't read your 2300 posts. I have a life but didn't get that impression.
I'm rooting for Nadal now but you don't help his cause.
I don't help Nadal's cause by stating I don't think Murray will win a slam? I don't see why it's illegal to state a simple opinion. If he does, he does. But personally, I don't see him winning a slam. Can he.... does he have the tools, absolutely. However he hasn't lived up to his hype yet and that's what i'm pointing out. Andy was billed as THE man to beat at the AO 2009. For what? That's all i'm saying and I see no harm in having a differing opinion than someone else. The problem with these boards is anyone who doesn't share the opinion of the person who is typing is "wrong". I beg to differ. Murray being OVER or UNDER-rated is an opinion on both sides.
 
#63
I give him full credit for the finals, i'm not saying he isn't a great tennis player, he obviously is. As much as I hate the Soderling hype, I feel he is more of a slam contender than Murray is. 4th round or better at 8 in a row? Congratulations! He is top 5, he SHOULD be making it to the 4th round. I see him as a slam contender sure, but no more than a Davydenko, Verdasco, Cilic. If he makes it to another final then I will concede. Until then I'm not buying it. And actually if we want to rant about his final appearances we can also start hyping Jankovic and Safina. They have done the same AND been number one..... see the bias?
Except the 3 guys you named have exactly 0 slam finals between them, while Murray has 2 and STILL has that winning h2h vs Fed (not that I'm saying he's better than Fed, but you don't get a winning h2h w/ Fed over the course of that many matches if you're chopped liver). Murray's shown he has the stuff to win slams when on. Look at his matches v Nadal USO 08/AO 10. But to write him off as 'overrated' and use a result on clay his least successful surface to do so...speaks for itself quite frankly. It's just about finding that balance between defense and offense, that is the one thing I agree w/ you on.

And please do NOT compare Murray to Jankovic or Safina, especially considering the poor state of the WTA the past few years. ATP/WTA comparisons have no place in the discussion as to whether Murray is overrated or not.

You've still yet to substantiate your claim that Murray is so vastly overrated. Though it is an opinion, one that many share, I still find it to be an illogical one and one not really supported by facts.
 
#64
I don't help Nadal's cause by stating I don't think Murray will win a slam? I don't see why it's illegal to state a simple opinion. If he does, he does. But personally, I don't see him winning a slam. Can he.... does he have the tools, absolutely. However he hasn't lived up to his hype yet and that's what i'm pointing out. Andy was billed as THE man to beat at the AO 2009. For what? That's all i'm saying and I see no harm in having a differing opinion than someone else. The problem with these boards is anyone who doesn't share the opinion of the person who is typing is "wrong". I beg to differ. Murray being OVER or UNDER-rated is an opinion on both sides.
That's one tournament though. People have used AO 09 for long enough now. Wimbledon 09 - like I said, he lost a tight 4 setter to Roddick who was playing some of the best tennis of his career. I guess that means Murray can never win Wimbledon, at least according to you.

He's only been favored to win one slam, most people consistently place him behind Fed/Nadal, most even put him behind Djokovic, 90% of people on here call him a pusher - yep, Murray's SO overrated. :roll:

Like I said, take out the rabid Murtards, and who's overrating him? That's like saying Nadal's overrated because of the select few who try to claim he's a greater all time player than Federer.
 
#65
I don't help Nadal's cause by stating I don't think Murray will win a slam? I don't see why it's illegal to state a simple opinion. If he does, he does. But personally, I don't see him winning a slam. Can he.... does he have the tools, absolutely. However he hasn't lived up to his hype yet and that's what i'm pointing out. Andy was billed as THE man to beat at the AO 2009. For what? That's all i'm saying and I see no harm in having a differing opinion than someone else. The problem with these boards is anyone who doesn't share the opinion of the person who is typing is "wrong". I beg to differ. Murray being OVER or UNDER-rated is an opinion on both sides.
I don't think he is under or overrated. He is where he is on merit.
You say he has the tools. Definitely agree. Great talent.
Didn't perform yesterday though. He looked spent.
I think his body can't take the strains required to win a slam.
His body frame just can't seem to take it.
I think that is his problem.
 
#66
I see where you are coming from JBF. I do want to say i'm not using this result at the French to write him off, it's no surprise. My only point is it should never be a surprise if someone beats Murray at a slam, he is hot and cold. Whether it be Wimby, USO, wherever, no one's heart should skip a beat. In Murray's defense I will say whenever he is beaten he is usually having an off day. The reason why I say he is overrated is because he is too unacceptable to losing to anyone on any given day. He isn't on Federer/Nadal level yet in slams, yet was touted as such in the past couple years. Meanwhile Novak HAS a slam and hasn't been.
 
#67

He's only been favored to win one slam, most people consistently place him behind Fed/Nadal, most even put him behind Djokovic, 90% of people on here call him a pusher - yep, Murray's SO overrated. :roll:
Strongly disagree with this part of your post. There isn't a select few people, it's just as widespread as Soderling's hype.

I don't think he is under or overrated. He is where he is on merit.
You say he has the tools. Definitely agree. Great talent.
Didn't perform yesterday though. He looked spent.
I think his body can't take the strains required to win a slam.
His body frame just can't seem to take it.
I think that is his problem.
I mostly agree with this post, no argument here.
 
#68
With all due respect - Novak's played like crap this season. If not for joke draws, who knows where he would be at right now. I know the French isn't Murray's best slam anyways, but if he trades draws w/ Novak and Nole had to play Gasquet 1R, Bagman 3R, and on fire Berd 4R, I have a feeling he'd be out too given his form. Yet Djoke gets quite frankly a joke of a draw and could sleepwalk to the semis to get demolished by Nadal. But that's another topic I guess.

Comparing Murray to Djokovic (prior to French)
Since Wimbledon 2008:

Murray - 110-22 (.833) 9 titles, 4 MS titles
Slam Results: 2 F, 1 SF, 2 QF

Djokovic - 119-33 (.782), 7 titles, 1 MS title, 1 YEC title
Slam Results: 0 finals, 2 SF, 3 QF

Take that as you may.
 
#69
Strongly disagree with this part of your post. There isn't a select few people, it's just as widespread as Soderling's hype.
For every person hyping up Murray, there's another 2-3 calling him a pusher or calling him overrated, like you are right now. Trust me, I'm not saying you're the first to call him overrated, nor are you the only one. I just don't get it, I guess.
 
#70
With all due respect - Novak's played like crap this season. If not for joke draws, who knows where he would be at right now. I know the French isn't Murray's best slam anyways, but if he trades draws w/ Novak and Nole had to play Gasquet 1R, Bagman 3R, and on fire Berd 4R, I have a feeling he'd be out too given his form. Yet Djoke gets quite frankly a joke of a draw and could sleepwalk to the semis to get demolished by Nadal. But that's another topic I guess.

Comparing Murray to Djokovic (prior to French)
Since Wimbledon 2008:

Murray - 110-22 (.833) 9 titles, 4 MS titles
Slam Results: 2 F, 1 SF, 2 QF

Djokovic - 119-33 (.782), 7 titles, 1 MS title, 1 YEC title
Slam Results: 0 finals, 2 SF, 3 QF

Take that as you may.
Ok, he has a semi and a quarter on Murray and won the WTF. He also played 9 more matches than Murray but lost 11 more. Not a huge difference. I never said Murray wasn't a great player. IMO there is Federer and Nadal, then there's the rest of the field, its been that way, unflinched for 5 years, save Del Potro and Djokovic. Murray doesn't win the important matches, and like Federer says, that's all that matters.
 
#71
Ok, he has a semi and a quarter on Murray and won the WTF. He also played 9 more matches than Murray but lost 11 more. Not a huge difference. I never said Murray wasn't a great player. IMO there is Federer and Nadal, then there's the rest of the field, its been that way, unflinched for 5 years, save Del Potro and Djokovic. Murray doesn't win the important matches, and like Federer says, that's all that matters.
Erm, no - you cannot look at those numbers and conclude that Novak 'has a slam semi and quarter on Murray'. That would suggest that Novak has made 1 more slam QF and 1 more SF than Murray during the period in question - he hasn't; he's made less than Murray on both counts. JBF didn't count the semis and QFs that Murray made on his final runs. To be clear, Murray made 3 semis and 4 QFs during the period in question.


Murray has made R4 or better at the last 8 slams - that's 2 years worth. I'll happily stand corrected if I'm worng, but I don't think anyone other than Roger can say the same.
 
Last edited:
#72
Erm, no - you cannot look at those numbers and conclude that Novak 'has a slam semi and quarter on Murray'. That would imply that Novak has made 1 more slam QF and 1 more SF than Murray during the period in question - he hasn't; he's made less than Murray on both counts. JBF didn't count the semis and QFs that Murray made on his final runs. To be clear, Murray made 3 semis and 4 QFs during the period in question.
U rite u rite. I was sleepy :)
 
#74
Except the 3 guys you named have exactly 0 slam finals between them, while Murray has 2 and STILL has that winning h2h vs Fed (not that I'm saying he's better than Fed, but you don't get a winning h2h w/ Fed over the course of that many matches if you're chopped liver). Murray's shown he has the stuff to win slams when on. Look at his matches v Nadal USO 08/AO 10. But to write him off as 'overrated' and use a result on clay his least successful surface to do so...speaks for itself quite frankly. It's just about finding that balance between defense and offense, that is the one thing I agree w/ you on.

And please do NOT compare Murray to Jankovic or Safina, especially considering the poor state of the WTA the past few years. ATP/WTA comparisons have no place in the discussion as to whether Murray is overrated or not.

You've still yet to substantiate your claim that Murray is so vastly overrated. Though it is an opinion, one that many share, I still find it to be an illogical one and one not really supported by facts.
Well said.

MichaelNadal's ripping of Murray comes across as bitterness from a Nadal fan because of Murray's 2 major wins against Rafa.
 
#75
Well said.

MichaelNadal's ripping of Murray comes across as bitterness from a Nadal fan because of Murray's 2 major wins against Rafa.
Or it could simply be an opinion independent of his thoughts on Rafa. It is possible you know.

:rolleyes:


As for Murray, I've got no opinion on him either way, except to say his on-court body language could do with a whole lot of improvement. Will he ever win a slam? Maybe. Or maybe he'll end up being one of those guys with all the talent and skill in the world who just can't seem to pull it together when it counts the most. We'll see.
 
Last edited:
#76
For every person hyping up Murray, there's another 2-3 calling him a pusher or calling him overrated, like you are right now. Trust me, I'm not saying you're the first to call him overrated, nor are you the only one. I just don't get it, I guess.
Yes. We get that you don't get it. Just like you don't get Safin's hype. Your insistent puffing of your chest and persistent daring of people to change your mind is annoying and juvenile. Grow up.

Murray was either favored or co-favored to win three tournaments in the last two years (AO 09, AO 10, Wimbledon 09). He emerged as the strong second choice at USO 09. You could easily say that he underperformed his pre-tournament odds in all of those tournaments. Hence, overrated. Done. In at least 4 of the last 6 major tournaments, he's underperformed what the betting public (as good an indicator of public opinion as there is) tabbed him to perform.

Any other silly comments you want to present? Any more dogged determination you wish to throw out there? Any more repetition ad nauseum you wish to come up with? Are you seriously using a forum's comments to try to argue over/underratedness? Revise your factors, curb your methods, and then we can talk.

Otherwise, this "I don't get it, so prove me wrong" attitude you're carrying is a little annoying.
 
#77
Well said.

MichaelNadal's ripping of Murray comes across as bitterness from a Nadal fan because of Murray's 2 major wins against Rafa.
Lol uh NO! Delpo knocked him out of the USopen last year and i'm not upset a bit. Just bc he has beat Nadal doesn't mean I hate him. What a narrow minded line of thought.
 
#78
Yes. We get that you don't get it. Just like you don't get Safin's hype. Your insistent puffing of your chest and persistent daring of people to change your mind is annoying and juvenile. Grow up.

Murray was either favored or co-favored to win three tournaments in the last two years (AO 09, AO 10, Wimbledon 09). He emerged as the strong second choice at USO 09. You could easily say that he underperformed his pre-tournament odds in all of those tournaments. Hence, overrated. Done. In at least 4 of the last 6 major tournaments, he's underperformed what the betting public (as good an indicator of public opinion as there is) tabbed him to perform.

Any other silly comments you want to present? Any more dogged determination you wish to throw out there? Any more repetition ad nauseum you wish to come up with? Are you seriously using a forum's comments to try to argue over/underratedness? Revise your factors, curb your methods, and then we can talk.

Otherwise, this "I don't get it, so prove me wrong" attitude you're carrying is a little annoying.
Exactly! Damn.
 
#79
Murray was either favored or co-favored to win three tournaments in the last two years (AO 09, AO 10, Wimbledon 09). He emerged as the strong second choice at USO 09.
.
And where exactly did you hear this or how did you come up with him being favorite for those tournaments? You are clutching at straws here.
 
#81
What rock were you living under?
So, i guess we can just accept these assertions without actually being proven? The fact is ChanceEncounter made an assertion without having anything to back it up. It's his opinion but in reality i don't believe murray was the favorite to win any of those tournaments he listed.
 
#82
So, i guess we can just accept these without actually being proven? The fact is ChanceEncounter made an assertion without having anything to back it up. It's his opinion but in reality i don't believe murray was the favorite to win any of those tournaments he listed.
Lordy jesus. Everytime someone says something on here, doesn't mean we feel like typing paragraphs and pulling factual information just bc you don't accept our opinion on something. I definitely don't feel like sitting here listing sources. No one is asking you to prove that he WASN'T hyped so don't ask us to prove the opposite. It's silly. Unless you were watching feeds with commentary in hindu or something it was all you heard for those 3 tournaments.
 
#83
No one is asking you to prove that he WASN'T hyped so don't ask us to prove the opposite..
That's the point. You can't prove he was hyped. ChanceEncounter can pull out anything he wants but that's simply his opinion and i'm sure most rational people would agree that Murray was never the favorite for those tournaments.
 
#84
That's the point. You can't prove he was hyped. ChanceEncounter can pull out anything he wants but that's simply his opinion and i'm sure most rational people would know that Murray was never the favorite for those tournaments.
How can we? I didn't sit there and record commentary or save articles bc there would be a debate about this a year later. If you were watching the slams i'm honestly surprised you didn't see the pedestal he was on.
 
#86
How can we? I didn't sit there and record commentary or save articles bc there would be a debate about this a year later. If you were watching the slams i'm honestly surprised you didn't see the pedestal he was on.
How can anyone be made favorite ahead of Federer in a hard court and grass slam? that just makes no sense whatsoever. I'd love to hear the people who put Murray favorite ahead of Federer at the USO 2009, because they simply arn't in tangible form.
 
#87
How can anyone be made favorite ahead of Federer in a hard court and grass slam? that just makes no sense whatsoever. I'd love to hear the people who put Murray favorite ahead of Federer at the USO 2009, because they simply arn't in tangible form.
Lol I never said ahead of Fed, that would be extreme, but he was considered second.
 
#90
That's the point. You can't prove he was hyped. ChanceEncounter can pull out anything he wants but that's simply his opinion and i'm sure most rational people would agree that Murray was never the favorite for those tournaments.
I'm talking about the pretournament betting favorites. You're welcome to search for the figures. Vegas had Murray even with Federer in AO 10, and the slight favorite in AO 09 (presumably because of his US 08 finals appearance and early season form). Then he was also considered co-top pick with Roger Federer in Wimbledon 09, probably because Nadal was out.

He underperformed his betting line every time. That's textbook overrated. No real 'opinion' necessary.
 
#91
I'm talking about the pretournament betting favorites. You're welcome to search for the figures. Vegas had Murray even with Federer in AO 10, and the slight favorite in AO 09 (presumably because of his US 08 finals appearance and early season form). Then he was also considered co-top pick with Roger Federer in Wimbledon 09, probably because Nadal was out.

He underperformed his betting line every time. That's textbook overrated. No real 'opinion' necessary.
murray was only the number one betting favorite at the 09 australian open. no where else was he the number 1 favorite
 
#93
I'm talking about the pretournament betting favorites. You're welcome to search for the figures. Vegas had Murray even with Federer in AO 10, and the slight favorite in AO 09 (presumably because of his US 08 finals appearance and early season form). Then he was also considered co-top pick with Roger Federer in Wimbledon 09, probably because Nadal was out.

He underperformed his betting line every time. That's textbook overrated. No real 'opinion' necessary.
This is bollox. Murray was narrow favourite at 1 slam only - AO 09.
 
#94
Okay.

09 Australia, Murray was favored:

http://www.betus.com/sports-betting/tennis/props/2009-mens-australian-open-odds/

Lost in the 4R to Verdasco.

09 French, Murray was the fourth top pick:

http://www.phoenixsports.com/events/may08/tennis-french-open-payouts.shtml

Lost in the QFs to Gonzalez.

09 Wimbledon, Murray was the second pick, tied with defending champion Nadal:

http://www.bsnsportsblog.com/other-sports/2009-wimbledon-betting-odds

Lost in the semifinals to Roddick, who was quite the bargain.

09 US Open, Murray was the second pick:

http://www.sportsbettingreview.co.uk/News/03092009/us-open-odds-tennis-betting-2009.html

Lost in the 4R to Cilic.

'10 Australian Open, Murray was the third pick behind Federer and Del Potro:

http://www.live-tennis.com/category...-for-Roger-Federer-Rafael-Nadal-200911300001/

Lost in the finals to Federer.*

'10 French Open, Murray was tied for the sixth pick:

http://www.1800-sports.com/french-open-betting-odds.shtml

Lost in the 4th round to Berdych.

* So according to where he was seeded, Murray only played up to his betting line once, in the 2010 Australian Open when he lost to Federer in the finals. Del Potro reinjured his wrist and hasn't played since.

I think that's pretty strong evidence for the "Murray is overrated" camp. Every slam, someone pegs him as the guy who could win, or the "true #1," and pretty much every time, he disappoints. That's pretty good evidence.

So the next time you stick your chest out and claim that "I don't see how he's overrated," think a little first.
 

Benhur

Hall of Fame
#95
The main culprit in Murray's loss to Berdych was Berdych, not Murray. Give the guy a break. Everyone was waiting for Berdych to cool down, slow down, break down, do something down. Only it never happened. I wonder how many players could have retreived many of the balls Murray managed to retreive. I wonder how many players could have beat Berdych the way he played yesterday. Maybe 2 or 3. Maybe none.
 
#96
I realize the title of this thread is a bit rude, but it had to be said. It has now been shown that Murray has no potential to win a major. Some people thought he would win the French Open :). Losing to people like Berdych, Cilic? Come on, and they thought he could beat Federer at a major to win it.
I always thought murray was a little over rated as well. Not saying he isn't a good player but saying there was just a little too much credit given for an extended period of time for a couple big wins which feels like ages ago now. Plays great defense but needs to develop more of an explosive offense game as the players and game is evolving.
 
Last edited:
#97
It's just plain and simple... Murray will never be in the same league as champs like Federer and Nadal—both who are GREAT. The truth is—Murray's GOOD, but NOT great, and never will be great. It's sad, but true.

Sorry Murray fans. The English will have to wait longer for a great one. But the Americans? Ha! Good luck waiting forever.
 
Top