Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by Cyan, Apr 23, 2009.
Murray is the best HC player on tour.
This was said about last years US Open and this years Aussie Open...he is 0 for 2.
Well, I think we can make an exception for last year's US Open because he was very nervous during the final and couldn't find any rhythm against Fed (and it didn't help that he was robbed of a break of serve in the fifth game of the second set at 2-2).
Murray has a very good chance of winning the US Open.......that is, if Nadal is exhausted after playing so many matches.
I think he would have no problem against Nadal there, regardless of if he is tired or not. He is the likely candidate to win it, he was on fire at the us open and got nervous in the final. Then at the aussie he lost to the player that was on fire while not playing near 100%, so he is definitely the most likely candidate to take it this year.
Nope, Nadal is.
I'm sorry?...How many slams has Murray won so far?
That was not said before last year's US Open. Nothing of the sort was said. In fact, he had just lost to Lu in the Olympics.
And anyone who bothered to follow his progress this years knows exactly why he lost to Verdasco at the Australian Open.
Federer is still the best hard court player.
Even in 2008, Federer wasn't the best hard court player anymore. Murray won 5 tournaments on hard including 2 masters, Djokovic won 3 including a slam, a master and the master cup. (Fed had only 2: 1 slam and 1 small tournament). In 2009 Nadal joined the party with his best start of the season so far including a slam and a master and Murray has already won 3 hard court tournaments. To me, this is the second year already that Federer has relinquished his spot as best hard court player.
lol great post
murray may win it we wont know til it happens..
If we're being objective and basing it on recent results, regardless of circumstances and what ifs, Nadal is the best hard court player in the world, closely followed by Murray. I'd say that Federer has dropped from 2nd possibly to 4th on hard this year.
I never said anything about Federer...you are just assuming things out of thin air.......AGAIN! :roll:
PS: Nadal & Djokovic have also won hard court slams
I agree that's the way things stand right now. I think in 2008 the best hard court players were Murray and Djokovic and so far in 2009 they've been Nadal and Murray. We'll see what the future brings.
And Nadal is currently the best hard court player in the world.
Actually, I should be more specific. I think Nadal is the best slow hard court player and Murray is the best fast hard court player.
I mean, do you think Djokovic is a better hard court player than Murray because he won the AO over a year ago?
I could see Murray finally doing it this year. I think it will depend on what the rankings look like at the end of the season though.
Murray has first final slam gitters out of the way so he should be ready to go.
i would pick him right now, a lot can happen between now and the USO though, so no one knows really
The Nadal-Murray final should be pretty interesting.
World no1 and no2.
Nadal shooting for a calendar slam, having just disposed of Federer in the semis, in record time, 6-0, 6-4, 6-0.
Murray going for his first slam after barely getting by world no7 Gulbis 6-4, 1-6, 7-6(10), 0-6, 7-6(22).
You think Federer will make it to the semis? :shock:
(just joking )
LOL i assume your being sarcastic or maybe just another mindless fanboi.
actually it is not a ridiculous assumption. Nadal has won AO and IW so he is the best HC player this season by far.
yeah true, but lets be real, the USO isnt any old hardcourt to be compared to.
I wouldn't say by far. I think that's way over the top. In terms of win ratio and win/loss, Murray had a better opening hard court season. They both won a huge MS event and Nadal's AO win obviously tips it for him. I think it's unfair to judge Murray's AO performance, given the circumstances.
what an idiotic thing to say, really
not even worth explaining the reasoning...it's just too stupid.
I think Murray has all the tools necessary to win this year USO. However, he has to prove himself and his critics that he can beat the likes of Federer, Djokovic, Nadal (he proved it last year) on numerous occassions to earn it.
IMO he should definately win it this year but it remains to be seen.
I think Federer, in a best of 5 set match situation is still a force to be reckoned with on a hard court. In a best of 3 set match..... not so much anymore. Remember, Fed would have been kicked out of the AO in the 4th round by Berdych had it been a best of 3. Best of 5's are different beasts all together.
If murray isn't winning US open then i see Federer or novak taking it before nadal does
But how?? Fed is passed his priime.
i see nadal going deep into the draw.. but this could turn out to be his achilles heel at the end of his career, its definitely not one of his best courts.
Well regardless of whether or not he is past his prime, he is still the 5 time defending champion and hasn't lost there in a loonng time.
absolutely not. federer's 6th straight for sure
Yeah, this is what I meant. And USO is fast HCs.
He was past his prime in US open 2008 after suffering a loss to nadal at wimbledon and losing his no.1 ranking and still won it so don't count him out yet
I agree. But still, Murray's won 0 HC slams in 2008 while Federer won 1. Simple math. This is why I think even if Fed and Murray meet in the US Open final of 2009, I'd still favor Fed. Not against Nadal though. Fed will probably ask Nadal to choke him before the match so he wouldn't do it himself in it.
I know Im just mocking people who want to say Fed is past his prime yet how he seems to reach every slam final.
Your judging Federer on his results instead of his performance which seems silly that means players like safin roddick nalbandian are still heavy in their prime which is non sense if you watch their tennis nowadays
Good post. It won't put any sense into GameSampras. It's hopeless.
No. Wrong. False. What ever you want to say, I don't see it happening for a couple years.
One Nadal is too good at slams at the moment and two this is the only place left that Federer has any confidence (besides Basel!!!!!)
Not in slams he isn't. So far he won nothing.
Plus, Fed gave him quite a beating in Cincy. It'll be interesting if they meet in the final.
Murray was not serving and returning nearly as well as he usually does against Federer.
Same goes for Federer in their past 4 meetings. It goes both ways.
If they meet at the USO final (like they should), I would put my money on Fed. It won't be a beating like last year, but I doubt Murray can outlast Fed in a best of five.
Murray's played one, arguably two hard court majors since he started to find his game. He lost to Federer in a final after a long match over Nadal in 2 days, and he lost to a red hot Verdasco when he had the flu in Australia.
These are reasons for him to not win a major? lol, ok people.
I thought Federer played his usual self in Madrid and the YEC last year. Was smashing backhands DTL and forehands crosscourt like crazy. Equally, Murray defeated Federer in what most people believed was during his prime (06).
Personally, if Murray plays offensive rather than passive (similar to last year) i would go with Andy.
What happened in Cincinnati then?
He wasn't robbed, he should have challenged. That's the whole point of the challenge system, we can now blame the players for everything
murray is the best form player on tour on HC.
Federer has the credentials and the reputation...he had a nice tournament in cincy but lets not get carried away. He was sub-par earlier in the season.
It wasn't a beating. The first set was decisive. The second set could have gone either way. Murray had 2 setpoints in the breaker.
And that's bearing in mind that Murray returned the worst he has in years. That's why I'm encouraged for the USO. Murray played a very poor match against a very good Federer and still, in my opinion, was inches from winning the match. The reason I say that is because Murray has always beaten Federer when it's come down to the final set.
Until Murray wins a slam calling him the favorite at any slam is retarded.
Murray post Cincinnati with his coach:
"I just cant dooo it captain. I dont... have.. the power!!!!"
Harsh. It was breakpoint. He would've had to stop the point to challenge. That would have been a massive risk and is a decision that has to be made in a split second. The fact is that he broke serve and didn't get awarded it, whether you want to blame him or the linesperson.
yeah, well.. in that case.. linescalls still are part of tennis.. it's no robbery, he had faith in his own hands. He could have challenged. It was that close that today we are still very uncertain about whether that ball was in or out. It looked like it might not have made the line, but I wouldn't dare to go against someone watching on the line, ONLY based on that replay we got to see there. They didn't show official review of it. So, although it was bad for Murray, saying he was robbed of a break is both premature and ridiculous imo. Murray had a good reason not to be awesome that day, but on that day Federer just was a LOT better.
Separate names with a comma.