Murray's turn for 3 slam year and Career Slam

[mattosgrant]

Now in this era the big 3 have all achieved a couple things Pete Sampras and Bjorn Borg amongst others could never do. All 3 achieved a 3 slam year within a 5 year period in fact- Fed 2004, 2006, 2007; Djokovic 2011, 2015; Nadal 2010 (the 5 year period being 2007-2011). All 3 achieved a Career Slam within a 8 year period- Fed in 2009, Nadal in 2010, Djokovic in 2016 (the 8 year period being between Fed 2008 US Open to Djokovic 2016 French Open).

So now it is Murray's turn to join his big 4 counterparts by completing his personal Career Slam with both a RG and AO title, and also attaining a 3 slam year in either 2017 or 2018.

 

[killerboi2]

Not sure if you are trolling or not, but I don't know why you are talking about this hours after he just got spanked in a slam final again. Even 1 slam from now to retirement should be a plus for him at this point, much less 3 in a year. Lmao.

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Not sure if you are trolling or not, but I don't know why you are talking about this hours after he just got spanked in a slam final again. Even 1 slam from now to retirement should be a plus for him at this point, much less 3 in a year. Lmao.

You laugh but Murray is capable of a 3 slam year. If he upped his game against Djoker just 5% he could rip off 3 slams. He already trashes everyone not named Djoker in the ATP. Theres a reason he keeps making slam finals.

 

[FudgeControl]

Now in this era the big 3 have all achieved a couple things Pete Sampras and Bjorn Borg amongst others could never do. All 3 achieved a 3 slam year within a 5 year period in fact- Fed 2004, 2006, 2007; Djokovic 2011, 2015; Nadal 2010 (the 5 year period being 2007-2011). All 3 achieved a Career Slam within a 8 year period- Fed in 2009, Nadal in 2010, Djokovic in 2016 (the 8 year period being between Fed 2008 US Open to Djokovic 2016 French Open).

So now it is Murray's turn to join his big 4 counterparts by completing his personal Career Slam with both a RG and AO title, and also attaining a 3 slam year in either 2017 or 2018.

My opinion: big 4 doesn't exist. There is a big 3 at best. Murray is incapable of winning neither slams not the WTF so long as Djokovic is in his way. At best, he can win multiple Masters 1000 titles in one season; at most 2-3. It's taken him from the beginning of this season until Rome for him to win a title.

 

[mike danny]

You laugh but Murray is capable of a 3 slam year. If he upped his game against Djoker just 5% he could rip off 3 slams. He already trashes everyone not named Djoker in the ATP. Theres a reason he keeps making slam finals.

Really? Oh boy, the trashings Stepanek and Bourge received at RG

 

[killerboi2]

You laugh but Murray is capable of a 3 slam year. If he upped his game against Djoker just 5% he could rip off 3 slams. He already trashes everyone not named Djoker in the ATP. Theres a reason he keeps making slam finals.

He hasn't won 1 slam in 2 and a half years, now people are talking up his chances of winning 3 slams in 1 year? That's ridiculous.

 

[Mainad]

Now in this era the big 3 have all achieved a couple things Pete Sampras and Bjorn Borg amongst others could never do. All 3 achieved a 3 slam year within a 5 year period in fact- Fed 2004, 2006, 2007; Djokovic 2011, 2015; Nadal 2010 (the 5 year period being 2007-2011). All 3 achieved a Career Slam within a 8 year period- Fed in 2009, Nadal in 2010, Djokovic in 2016 (the 8 year period being between Fed 2008 US Open to Djokovic 2016 French Open).

So now it is Murray's turn to join his big 4 counterparts by completing his personal Career Slam with both a RG and AO title, and also attaining a 3 slam year in either 2017 or 2018.

Will you tell him or shall I?

 

[VexlanderPrime]

Really? Oh boy, the trashings Stepanek and Bourge received at RG

... you're saying that Murray isn't significantly ahead of the rest of the ATP (when Fed is in 2016 form rather than 2015)?

 

[VexlanderPrime]

He hasn't won 1 slam in 2 and a half years, now people are talking up his chances of winning 3 slams in 1 year? That's ridiculous.

Nah ur missing the point. Hypothetically, if Murray edged ahead of Djoker - like in the way that Djoker has an Edge over Murray right now - he'd win a ton of slams. Because Murray is clearly better than everyone not named Djoker / Healthy Fed.

 

[Mainad]

Really? Oh boy, the trashings Stepanek and Bourge received at RG

They were 5 set trashes. Stepanek and Bourge were both devastated. They expected to win those matches you know. If they had, Djoko may still be searching for that elusive RG title!

 

[VamosBamos987]

Kalpab thread

 

[killerboi2]

Nah ur missing the point. Hypothetically, if Murray edged ahead of Djoker - like in the way that Djoker has an Edge over Murray right now - he'd win a ton of slams. Because Murray is clearly better than everyone not named Djoker / Healthy Fed.

Just a few problems with this,

1 - he is not going to edge ahead of Djokovic. The guy has lost every single slam meeting between the 2 in the last 2 and a half years. Also has a pretty poor record in recent times.
2 - Weak era trahs won't be weak era trash forever. Good chance it would become harder rather than easier if the mugs start stepping up
3 - He will be hitting 30 next year and likely be in decline
4 - Has anyone in his 30s ever had a 3 slam season in open era, much less a guy that doesn't even have 3 slams in his whole career? If no, then the stats aren't really for him either.

 

[mike danny]

... you're saying that Murray isn't significantly ahead of the rest of the ATP (when Fed is in 2016 form rather than 2015)?

He is ahead, there is no denying that. But Murray has never showed the constant ability to trash his opposition, especially before the later stages.

Murray is beating hie competition, but he isn't trashing it. He is just doing the minimum required to get through.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Nah after Djokovic declines, I doubt we will see another all-time great in our lifetime.

 

[duaneeo]

You laugh but Murray is capable of a 3 slam year. He already trashes everyone not named Djoker in the ATP.

...or named Federer, or Wawrinka, or Dimitrov, or Anderson. These are the players who've prevented Andy from winning another slam since Wimbledon 2013.

 

[metsman]

... you're saying that Murray isn't significantly ahead of the rest of the ATP (when Fed is in 2016 form rather than 2015)?

yeah but at this rate with his mental midgetry he's never beating Djokovic in a slam again so it doesn't matter.

 

[VPhuc tennis fan]

Now in this era the big 3 have all achieved a couple things Pete Sampras and Bjorn Borg amongst others could never do. All 3 achieved a 3 slam year within a 5 year period in fact- Fed 2004, 2006, 2007; Djokovic 2011, 2015; Nadal 2010 (the 5 year period being 2007-2011). All 3 achieved a Career Slam within a 8 year period- Fed in 2009, Nadal in 2010, Djokovic in 2016 (the 8 year period being between Fed 2008 US Open to Djokovic 2016 French Open).

So now it is Murray's turn to join his big 4 counterparts by completing his personal Career Slam with both a RG and AO title, and also attaining a 3 slam year in either 2017 or 2018.

How do you propose he achieves that with Djoker's in his way. Since they're only 1 week apart in age, Djoker's very unlikely will go away anytime soon. Djoker's appears to find way to play a tad better against Murray although their styles are so similar.

 

[Limpinhitter]

How do you propose he achieves that with Djoker's in his way. Since they're only 1 week apart in age, Djoker's very unlikely will go away anytime soon. Djoker's appears to find way to play a tad better against Murray although their styles are so similar.

My opinion: big 4 doesn't exist. There is a big 3 at best. Murray is incapable of winning neither slams not the WTF so long as Djokovic is in his way. At best, he can win multiple Masters 1000 titles in one season; at most 2-3. It's taken him from the beginning of this season until Rome for him to win a title.

Murray won both of his major titles at the USO and Wimbledon against Djokovic in the finals.

 

[FudgeControl]

Murray won both of his major titles at the USO and Wimbledon against Djokovic in the finals.

I know that. I meant that he won't be winning slams in the future. His 2 slams and Olympic gold do not justify him being in the top 4, which does not exist. He has a negative H2H against the other "top 4" players and gets wins against them once in a blue moon and when it matters the least.

 

[mattosgrant]

I did start this thread mainly in jest (some of you need a sense of humour, good gawd you are so serious all the time, chill out a bit), but in all seriousness it could happen. It doesn't seem likely at all now, but we have seen crazier things happen in tennis the last 8 years, and Murray is closing the gap considerably on Djokovic the last couple months, on his worst surface too. I do look forward to see him continuing his pursuit of Djokovic. For all the dumpage Murray gets here he is one determined bloke, and I don't think he is happy to end his career as the perennial bridesmaid. He will push hard to make one last big push upwards.

That plus I also believe and karma and signs. I just have this feeling something like this could happen to perfectly conclude the full circle of the big 4 era and all the things that have transpired within it.

 

[Limpinhitter]

I know that. I meant that he won't be winning slams in the future. His 2 slams and Olympic gold do not justify him being in the top 4, which does not exist. He has a negative H2H against the other "top 4" players and gets wins against them once in a blue moon and when it matters the least.

If Murray beat Djokovic, the best player in the world for most of the past 5 years, in the finals of the two biggest major events in tennis, how are you so certain that he will never win another major?

 

[Limpinhitter]

I did start this thread mainly in jest (some of you need a sense of humour, good gawd you are so serious all the time, chill out a bit), but in all seriousness it could happen. It doesn't seem likely at all now, but we have seen crazier things happen in tennis the last 8 years, and Murray is closing the gap considerably on Djokovic the last couple months, on his worst surface too. I do look forward to see him continuing his pursuit of Djokovic. For all the dumpage Murray gets here he is one determined bloke, and I don't think he is happy to end his career as the perennial bridesmaid. He will push hard to make one last big push upwards.

That plus I also believe and karma and signs. I just have this feeling something like this could happen to perfectly conclude the full circle of the big 4 era and all the things that have transpired within it.

You may be conflating hyperbole and sarcasm with seriousness. Barring unforeseen injury, I think these two can be the two best players for the next 3-4 years.

 

[FudgeControl]

If Murray beat Djokovic, the best player in the world for most of the past 5 years, in the finals of the two biggest major events in tennis, how are you so certain that he will never win another major?

Simple: Murray is nowhere near good enough as Djokovic. Credit to Murray when he does get wins against Djokovic, but 23-10? That really cracks me up.

Murray has a loser's mentality, and Djokovic has a winning mindset. Murray seriously might as well retire from tennis if he can't convince himself that he is a decent player. Tennis has no room for sore losers.

Remember: Murray won because Lendl gave him a mental edge, which Murray desperately needed. Now Murray throws hissy fits like it means something. He won a few titles with Mauresmo and split because he can't accept that he isn't good enough.

 

[Limpinhitter]

Simple: Murray is nowhere near good enough as Djokovic. Credit to Murray when he does get wins against Djokovic, but 23-10? That really cracks me up.

Murray has a loser's mentality, and Djokovic has a winning mindset. Murray seriously might as well retire from tennis if he can't convince himself that he is a decent player. Tennis has no room for sore losers.

Remember: Murray won because Lendl gave him a mental edge, which Murray desperately needed. Now Murray throws hissy fits like it means something. He won a few titles with Mauresmo and split because he can't accept that he isn't good enough.

Yet, Murray managed to beat Djokovic, in his prime, in the finals of the two biggest events in tennis. Lendl didn't beat Djokovic, Murray did. In my view, it is unreasonable to conclusively assert that Murray simply can never do it again, whether he meats Djokovic in the draw or not.

 

[duaneeo]

Barring unforeseen injury, I think these two can be the two best players for the next 3-4 years.

When you say that Djokovic and Murray will be the two best players until 2019-2020 (when they will be 32-33 years old, and would mean Djokovic's 'prime' has been an amazing 10-year stretch), aren't you proving the point of those who call this the weakest era ever?

 

[FudgeControl]

Yet, Murray managed to beat Djokovic, in his prime, in the finals of the two biggest events in tennis. Lendl didn't beat Djokovic, Murray did. In my view, it is unreasonable to conclusively assert that Murray simply can never do it again, whether he meats Djokovic in the draw or not.

I never said Lendl beat Djokovic. I am not discrediting Murray either. Lendl helped Murray's mental game to beat Djokovic, I get that. Keep telling yourself that Murray will win another slam. So long as Djokovic is in the game, Murray has a very slim chance at another slam. Murray is too predictable and is above decent at best.

 

[Limpinhitter]

When you say that Djokovic and Murray will be the two best players until 2019-2020 (when they will be 32-33 years old, and would mean Djokovic's 'prime' has been an amazing 10-year stretch), aren't you proving the point of those who call this the weakest era ever?

No. Are you saying that the Federer/Nadal era was the weakest era to date?

 

[Limpinhitter]

I never said Lendl beat Djokovic. I am not discrediting Murray either. Lendl helped Murray's mental game to beat Djokovic, I get that. Keep telling yourself that Murray will win another slam. So long as Djokovic is in the game, Murray has a very slim chance at another slam. Murray is too predictable and is above decent at best.

Murray has never won a "Slam" and I don't expect he ever will. But, in my view, Murray has as good a chance of winning another major as he had of winning the major titles he already has.

 

[D.Nalby12]

It is not always necessary to have touch with reality, ain't it? No sane person would say Murray belongs to group of players with 12+ Slam wins including CGS and 140+ weeks at #1 position. He is nowhere near...

 

[dr325i]

I think the next big achievements are going to be: CYGS, Golden Slam, at least 2x slams on every surface, #18, 303 weeks at #1 before we see Murray doing 3x slams per year

 

[D.Nalby12]

You laugh but Murray is capable of a 3 slam year. If he upped his game against Djoker just 5% he could rip off 3 slams. He already trashes everyone not named Djoker in the ATP. Theres a reason he keeps making slam finals.

Really? After 10 years as professional player, Murray has total 2 Slam titles and you think he is capable of winning 3 in a season - something he couldn't do in a decade long period of time?

 

[FudgeControl]

Murray has never won a "Slam" and I don't expect he ever will. But, in my view, Murray has as good a chance of winning another major as he had of winning the major titles he already has.

Apologies for the confusion. When I say slams, I meant majors (Melbourne, Paris, London, NYC). I don't see Murray going past 2 majors, but that's just my two cents.