Thomas Muster comeback?

Blinkism

Legend
:shock:Has anyone heard of this?

http://blog.oregonlive.com/tennis/2010/06/thomas_muster_is_back_should_rafael_nadal_be_worried.html

Apparently, former world #1 and French Open Champion, Thomas Muster is back on tour!



He played his first match since 1999 last week at the Braunschweig Challenger in Germany, losing to Connor Niland in the first round.

He's playing in the Kitzbühel challenger in Austria now and, apparently, the organizers of the Vienna ATP 250 event are considering giving him a wildcard into the main draw in October (source: http://austrianindependent.com/news/Sports/2010-07-09/3520/Early_Meusburger_exit_at_Budapest_tournament)

Thoughts? This is relevant to our interests :lol:
 
Last edited:

Xemi666

Professional
Sounds like an ill-advised comeback to me if he's losing in challengers. But, I'd like to see a match between him and Nadal on clay just for kicks (I know Nadal destroys him at this point of their careers, but it would be fun nonetheless).
 

Dream_On

Rookie
Got 4 and 4 off of dustin brown, not bad at all only one break in each set.

If only he can manage to draw an american which isnt isner or querrey on clay somehow
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
I love how the article says he was the "best claycourt player" in the mid 90s. That's a pretty big claim especially since Sergi Bruguera won 2 French Opens and was runner-up another time. Muster beat a 33 year old Chang in his French win and faced pretty much bunnies for most of his matches (with Courier, Agassi, Bruguera etc all having poor matches earlier on).

Should Nadal be worried? Good one :lol:. He can do anything Muster ever could do, and more - but also hits the ball harder and is faster. Even if he played as good as he did back then, which is impossible, anyone the top 20 would slaughter Muster without much trouble I imagine.
 
Last edited:

Bud

Bionic Poster
:shock:Has anyone heard of this?

http://blog.oregonlive.com/tennis/2010/06/thomas_muster_is_back_should_rafael_nadal_be_worried.html

Apparently, former world #1 and French Open Champion, Thomas Muster is back on tour!



He played his first match since 1999 last week at the Braunschweig Challenger in Germany, losing to Connor Niland in the first round.

He's playing in the Kitzbühel challenger in Austria now and, apparently, the organizers of the Vienna ATP 250 event are considering giving him a wildcard into the main draw in October (source: http://austrianindependent.com/news/Sports/2010-07-09/3520/Early_Meusburger_exit_at_Budapest_tournament)

Thoughts? This is relevant to our interests :lol:
He looks closer to 52 in the pic :)
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
I love how the article says he was the "best claycourt player" in the mid 90s. That's a pretty big claim especially since Sergi Bruguera won 2 French Opens and was runner-up another time. Muster beat a 33 year old Chang in his French win and faced pretty much bunnies for most of his matches (with Courier, Agassi, Bruguera etc all having poor matches earlier on).

Should Nadal be worried? Good one :lol:. He can do anything Muster ever could do, and more - but also hits the ball harder and is faster. Even if he played as good as he did back then, which is impossible, anyone the top 20 would slaughter Muster without much trouble I imagine.
You do realise that Muster went 65-2 on clay in 1995 and 46-3 on clay in 1996? Bruguera had no such numbers, and Muster won 12 out of 15 matches against Bruguera in their head-to-head.
 

rodrigoamaral

Hall of Fame
good to see him back.. hope he put some wins together at the challenger level and play some big-name guy in a big tournament.. would be cool
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
You do realise that Muster went 65-2 on clay in 1995 and 46-3 on clay in 1996? Bruguera had no such numbers, and Muster won 12 out of 15 matches against Bruguera in their head-to-head.
Yep. But Bruguera achieved more of importance in the mid 90s. 2 FO wins and a runner-up means more than any number of the tiny claycourt tournaments Muster used to go to instead of facing his peers on hard or grass. In fact I understand Muster getting to number 1 ranking was one of the drivers in ranking system changes - so guys couldn't get to the top without achieving mushc in the slams as he did.

The same h2h logic can be used re: Nadal and Federer but no-one can claim Nadal has achieved what Federer has until he actually has. In that respect I think Bruguera trumps Muster as a mid-90s clay court player.
 
Last edited:

thalivest

Banned
I love how the article says he was the "best claycourt player" in the mid 90s. That's a pretty big claim especially since Sergi Bruguera won 2 French Opens and was runner-up another time. Muster beat a 33 year old Chang in his French win and faced pretty much bunnies for most of his matches (with Courier, Agassi, Bruguera etc all having poor matches earlier on).

Should Nadal be worried? Good one :lol:. He can do anything Muster ever could do, and more - but also hits the ball harder and is faster. Even if he played as good as he did back then, which is impossible, anyone the top 20 would slaughter Muster without much trouble I imagine.
Bruguera probably belongs at the same level as Courier and Muster but still no way should he lead the list as best clay courter of the 90s over either of them. Courier has the same French Open record (2 wins and 1 other runner up) as Bruguera, but was more imposing and untouchable on clay in 1992 than Bruguera ever was. Even in 93 when Bruguera beat Courier to win the French it was a major upset and a huge win for Bruguera, and Courier had spanked Bruguera in their other meeting on clay that year. As for Muster he has less success at the French but still won it, and all his other success on clay gives him the edge over Bruguera, plus as Mustard said he owns Bruguera in head to head majorly (clay and otherwise).

Muster was unbeatable on clay in 1995. It wouldnt have matter who he played at the French that year. Agassi would get destroyed by a peak Muster on clay. Bruguera wouldnt have had a hope that year. Only Courier was a possible threat only due to the matchup issues, but Courier was past his prime by then anyway so probably wouldnt beat Muster on clay at that point (on other surfaces he still would at that point though). And a 33 year old Chang!?! What the heck are you smoking.
 
Last edited:

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Bruguera probably belongs at the same level as Courier and Muster but still no way should he lead the list as best clay courter of the 90s over either of them.
I agree for sure. I was just ignoring courier - specifically saying mid-90s (which I guessed was 93-96).

On the h2h with Muster thing, I can see that side of the reasoning too but, as I mentioned the Nadal-Federer h2h - a h2h is not as important as overall achievement at the highest level. Even the most die-hard Nadal fan can't claim he has achieved what Federer has (yet) even if his h2h was 20-0. In the same respect neither can Muster's h2h over Bruguera supercede the slam wins/finals. At least to me.

How they play - pusher, punisher, lucky/unlucky or whatever - is also irrelevant. You win how you win and performance in grand slams is the most common criteria on which to judge on a person's career. That's how history judges Federer, Sampras, Agassi etc - why not Bruguera?
 
Last edited:

BevelDevil

Hall of Fame
I thought his "comeback" would be on the seniors tour.


What's his setup? Did polyester strings give him some kind of renewed hope?
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Yep. But Bruguera achieved more of importance in the mid 90s. 2 FO wins and a runner-up means more than any number of the tiny claycourt tournaments Muster used to go to instead of facing his peers on hard or grass.
2 French Open wins to 1 is probably the only thing Bruguera has over Muster. Bruguera has 2 masters, his 1991 and 1993 Monte Carlo wins. Muster has 8 masters, 3 in Monte Carlo, 3 in Rome, 1 in Essen on indoor carpet and 1 in Miami on hardcourt. Muster won 21 titles during his 25 month career peak (February 1995 - March 1997) and 44 titles in his career overall. Bruguera, by contrast, won 14 titles in his whole career, the last of which came in Prague in August 1994.

And as for playing on hardcourt and grass, Muster had more success in his career on hardcourts than Bruguera. Muster won 1997 Miami and was a runner-up in 1989. He was a runner-up at 1997 Cincinnati. Twice an Australian Open semi finalist in 1989 and 1997, three times a US Open quarter finalist in 1993, 1994 and 1996. He also reached two semi finals at Indian Wells in 1997 and 1998.

Oh, and Muster did reach a grass-court semi final at Queen's Club in 1996.

In fact I understand Muster getting to number 1 ranking was one of the drivers in ranking system changes - so guys couldn't get to the top without achieving mushc in the slams as he did.
Kafelnikov getting to world number 1 right at the end of an awful spell of 7 straight losses in singles competition, is what brought about the Champions Race.

The same h2h logic can be used re: Nadal and Federer but no-one can claim Nadal has achieved what Federer has until he actually has. In that respect I think Bruguera trumps Muster as a mid-90s clay court player.
Unless you're using the total number of French Open titles as your criteria, I fail to see how you can come to this conclusion.
 
Last edited:

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
2 French Open wins to 1 is probably the only thing Bruguera has over Muster.
A pretty significant one imo. Most player would swap all of their masters series wins for a single slam - since that is the criteria by which top player's careers are measured.

Did Bruguera come up with the goods when it mattered in the majors more often than Muster? Yes is the only answer. 2 wins/3 finals vs 1 win/1 final.

The grass/hard/carpet results aren't what I was talking about - if you read back over my posts - I was specifically talking in terms of mid-90s clay court players, not overall. I'm not saying Muster wasn't a good player, rather that the claim made in the article isn't backed up by the results which matter historically.

Unless you're using the total number of French Open titles as your criteria, I fail to see how you can come to this conclusion.
Yep. That is the primary criteria used when comparing players. Sure, it's not always the full picture but, in the end: slam wins are more important than other tournament wins.

Oh, and yes.. re: Chang. Doh! ha ha typo.
 
Last edited:

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
A pretty significant one imo. I can't think of any situation where a player wouldn't swap 10 masters series wins for a single slam - since that is the criteria by which top player's careers are measured.
I'd rather Muster's career than Bruguera's. Much more fulfilling and satisfying.

On balance, do you agree Bruguera could come up with the goods when it mattered in the majors more often than Muster?
Unless you mean that Bruguera won 2 French Opens to Muster's 1, then no. Only 4 times in his career did Bruguera get to the quarter finals or better in a major, and all of those were at the French Open. Muster did better at the Australian and US Opens than Bruguera, reaching 9 quarter finals or better in the majors overall.

The grass/hard/carpet results aren't what I was talking about - if you re-read my posts - I was specifically talking in terms of mid-90s clay court players, not overall.
Like I said, the number of French Open titles aside, Muster was a far more dominant clay-courter than Bruguera.

Yep. That is the primary criteria used when comparing players. Sure, it's not always the full picture but, in the end: slam wins are more important than other tournament wins.
But masters wins are also important, as the second most important level of tournaments after the 4 majors. Muster has 8 (6 on clay) to Bruguera's 2.

Oh, and yes.. re: Chang. Doh! ha ha typo.
If you knew Chang was 23, then why mention it at all? It's just a typical tennis age, not really young, not really old. It's actually more on the younger side.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
I'd rather Muster's career than Bruguera's. Much more fulfilling and satisfying.... including etc etc etc
OK, I didn't realise you were one of those people who goes through posts nit-picking them apart.

Grand Slam wins is the defining metric by which tennis players are primarily judged. No one will tell you otherwise unless they are either habitual arguers, haters of a particular player or conveniently choosing an argument line which suits their pre-made conclusions.

Not agreeing with someone doesn't have to be a red-rag-to-a-bull invitation to go to town with detailed dissections of posts.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
OK, I didn't realise you were one of those people who goes through posts nit-picking them apart.
Well, this is a discussion forum. I like to be thorough :)

Grand Slam wins is the defining metric by which tennis players are primarily judged. No one will tell you otherwise unless they are either habitual arguers, haters of a particular player or conveniently choosing an argument line which suits their pre-made conclusions.
The majors are the most important tournaments, but they do not always tell the whole story. And I am certainly not a Bruguera hater. His French Open wins were extremely impressive.

Not agreeing with someone doesn't have to be a red-rag-to-a-bull invitation to go to town with detailed dissections of posts.
Are you saying I'm wrong to argue my point? :confused:
 

darthpwner

Banned
Mustard, do you think that without the accident with the drunk driver, Muster would have done much better overall?
 

vortex1

Banned
Thomas Mugster should thank the lucky stars that he played in a clown era where he could win his lucky slam. It's sad that he was actually dominant clay courter of his era.
 

Blinkism

Legend
Apparently, Muster says he didn't even retire, but that he's been on "break" since 1999.

He's actually serious about this :lol:

Why not? I guess...
 

thalivest

Banned
Seriously though Muster's comeback is beyond strange. What are his goals exactly. I could see coming back to play the Seniors Tour, or playing doubles or mixed the way Matina does (though probably not Muster who never played much doubles really).

Is he motivated with say the lofty goal to get back into the top 200 when he is a former #1. Date's comeback has had some mild enough success that it may well have been rewarding for her. She won a tournament and has beaten and pushed some big names. However Date is a former top 10 player only and the WTA has nowhere near the competition of the ATP in general (especialy now, the WTA is a pile of slop at the moment) so I cant imagine his comeback having anywhere near the success even hers has had.
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
Muster said he needs 10 more months to get back in shape. At the rate he's going with a solid 4-6 4-6 loss I can definitely see him getting back to competitive form. This will be interesting. Hope he has some clashes with Nadal at Roland Garros.
 

thalivest

Banned
He lost 6-4, 6-4 to a clown I have never heard of. That isnt the promise of some amazing things to come. Seriously you are the same one who is crowing about Hingis's potential comeback being a success when her comeback 4 years ago was somewhat of a flop. Except Muster's case is 10 times more obvious than even Hingis as he is well over 40 years old now and this is the ATP, not the WTA.
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
You can't really judge Muster until he's had a year back in the game. The fact he's not getting injured while playing is the only priority at this stage, and the fact he can run around the court properly etc. The stamina will take a year to reacquire. So far so good :D
 

thalivest

Banned
Yes in another year he will be going on 44 rather than going on 43. It would be one thing if he were a golfer, an equestrian rider, or a Nine Ball Champion.
 

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
OK, I didn't realise you were one of those people who goes through posts nit-picking them apart.

Grand Slam wins is the defining metric by which tennis players are primarily judged. No one will tell you otherwise unless they are either habitual arguers, haters of a particular player or conveniently choosing an argument line which suits their pre-made conclusions.

Not agreeing with someone doesn't have to be a red-rag-to-a-bull invitation to go to town with detailed dissections of posts.
No they aren't. ATP ranking is the metric by which tennis players are primarily judged, and seeded. Majors are the most important tournaments. But, they are not more important than all the others combined.
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
Stamina and skill-level doesn't decline in some players. Often they retire due to injury alone. And sometimes they find a way to clense themselves of injury and therefore return to their former self.

If Muster can avoid injury then he could definitely reclaim a high level, maybe even the highest level on clay or close to it.
 

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
Anyway, I think this is great. I wouldn't expect anyone who's been out of top flight tennis for over a decade to come back and start winning matches. It'll take at least 6 months of match play for him to get close to his competitive potential. If his body holds up, I think he can make an impact. Gonzalez was USLTA top 10 until he was at least 45. Muster has had a decade off from the wear and tear. I hope he stays with it.
 

Andres

G.O.A.T.
Anyone expecting him to be a FO QF????

Come on, the guy is playing for the kicks. He enjoys the game, he misses the game, and he wants to challenge himself. He's having fun

Kudos to you, Thomas, and the best of luck!
 

thalivest

Banned
Stamina and skill-level doesn't decline in some players. Often they retire due to injury alone. And sometimes they find a way to clense themselves of injury and therefore return to their former self.

If Muster can avoid injury then he could definitely reclaim a high level, maybe even the highest level on clay or close to it.
That is why even Navratilova the latest blooming great player male or female ever couldnt even beat people like 15 year old Capriati, Linda Harvey Wild, Conchita Martinez, or Monica Seles anymore on her beloved grass once she reached age 34 or older. Age was irrelevant though I guess, even in her 20s she would be losing to Conchita, baby Capriati, and Linda Harvey on grass, the game simply had so far surpassed her even on grass with age being no factor at all.

Seriously I cant believe some of the things you post. Stamina, reflexes, strength, SPEED, all decline with age.
 

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
Stamina and skill-level doesn't decline in some players. Often they retire due to injury alone. And sometimes they find a way to clense themselves of injury and therefore return to their former self.

If Muster can avoid injury then he could definitely reclaim a high level, maybe even the highest level on clay or close to it.
Physical AND mental wear and tear takes it's toll on everyone. And, who would argue that tennis isn't the toughest mental game out there. I'm not just talking about tactics, I'm talking about the unrelenting focus it takes to compete at or near the top, in a sport that's very personal, no team mates, no coaching and no clock to build a lead and run out. You have to finish, every time. It's brutal. IMO, very few last as long mentally as they do physically.
 

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
That is why even Navratilova the latest blooming great player male or female ever couldnt even beat people like 15 year old Capriati, Linda Harvey Wild, Conchita Martinez, or Monica Seles anymore on grass once she reached age 34 or older. Age was irrelevant though, even in her 20s she would be losing to Conchita, baby Capriati, and Linda Harvey on grass, the game simply had so far surpassed her even on grass with age being no factor at all.

Seriously I cant believe some of the things you post. Stamina, reflexes, strength, SPEED, all decline with age.
Are you speaking from personal experience, or are you just parrroting the common knowledge that we all know is commonly wrong?
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
That is why even Navratilova the latest blooming great player male or female ever couldnt even beat people like 15 year old Capriati, Linda Harvey Wild, Conchita Martinez, or Monica Seles anymore on her beloved grass once she reached age 34 or older. Age was irrelevant though I guess, even in her 20s she would be losing to Conchita, baby Capriati, and Linda Harvey on grass, the game simply had so far surpassed her even on grass with age being no factor at all.

Seriously I cant believe some of the things you post. Stamina, reflexes, strength, SPEED, all decline with age.
You can't even read. I said "Stamina and skill-level doesn't decline in some players." SOME PLAYERS.

Don't reply to me if you aren't prepared to read my posts properly.
 

thalivest

Banned
You can't even read. I said "Stamina and skill-level doesn't decline in some players." SOME PLAYERS.

Don't reply to me if you aren't prepared to read my posts properly.
Stamina and skill level by that age will have declined in ALL players. You are the most delusional person on the planet if you think otherwise. In fact your trainwreck of a Hingis thread already made it clear you are either incredibly stupid or just trolling on purpose.
 

Limpinhitter

G.O.A.T.
Stamina and skill level by that age will have declined in ALL players. You are the most delusional person on the planet if you think otherwise. In fact your trainwreck of a Hingis thread already made it clear you are either incredibly stupid or just trolling on purpose.
You have no idea what you're talking about! And, you're being a jerk, too!
 

NADALbULLS

Banned
Plenty of players retire due to injury alone. Hewitt is an example as we speak. Plenty of grinders in particular got injuries before we could ever see their stamina or skill decline. And others saw a drop in their execution level simply because they couldn't train enough due to injury. Injury triggers a lot of downhill slides. Even Scud lost his career to injuries, and he wasn't even a grinder. Happens to a lot of players.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Mustard, do you think that without the accident with the drunk driver, Muster would have done much better overall?
It's hard to say. I do think Muster would have had more success on hardcourts without that accident, but at the same time, the whole thing gave him the motivation and focus he needed.
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Apparently, Muster says he didn't even retire, but that he's been on "break" since 1999.

He's actually serious about this :lol:

Why not? I guess...
Muster didn't leave tennis until after the 1999 French Open, and he didn't annouce it publicly. Around March 1999, as his results declined, he quietly decided to play up until the French Open and then walk away, and that he wouldn't tell anybody his plans because he didn't want any farewell tour or people asking him questions at press conferences all the time, like they did with Stefan Edberg in 1996. Muster just stopped after the 1999 French Open and quietly walked away.
 
Last edited:
Top