Was peak Murray better than peak next gen (Thiem, Medvedev, Zverev etc.)?

Jokervich

Jokervich

Hall of Fame
I feel like next gen caused more problems for the big 3 than Murray did, even if next gen are mentally weak. We never got to see next gen against Murray because of the hip surgery.

What do you think? Was peak Murray better than peak next gen?
 
Another good Murray joke... or next gen joke... either way...

IllHollowKiskadee-small.gif
 
Pity the majority didn't appreciate him the way he deserved until he fell off a cliff.

At least he escaped the fate of Roddick. Right now, I'm having a blast reading some old posts from the pen of the grandmaster 90's clay himself:

90's Clay said:
Roddick had more holes in his game than a pin cushion that great players could just exploit all day long. Roddick's problem is for every strength (which was limited anyways) his weaknesses far outweighed them.

Great serve-CRAP transitional net game to follow it up and come in, and absolutely NO touch or feel or any type of good reaction at the net to put those balls away.
Great FH(Early on his career)- garbage BH
Rocket Serve-But Placement was not good enough/ nor the disguise on his toss)


From there, his athleticism was limited, so was his speed etc.

Why do you think he only has one slam? If he would have have something else to his game that was above average at least to what I mentioned, he would have a TON of slams and would have beaten Roger and others quite a few times in the process to get it. He had two weapons (serve-FH), but nothing to back those weapons up to enable him to win many slams

Not to mention, he had a pretty crappy attitude through the good majority of his career which probably didn't do him any favors as far as ultimate success is concerned, but his hole-ridden game was much more of a hinderance
Click to expand...

90's Clay said:
Roddick's problem was there wasn't much to back his serve up. And even that was just basically a hard readable serve. He couldn't place it great or disguise it. But where he really went downhill was just a below average game to back it up. When his FH was zipping pre 2005 he was a little tougher to beat but once that ended it was GAME OVER for Roddick.

- He had limited athleticism
- Limited net game
- BackHand was horrible
- Transition to net was awful
- Slow and club footed like Raonic. (Its like his feet were tied with Cement)


It was easy to poke holes in his game. Which is why he only managed 1 slams. He MAY Have managed another slam if he just went for broke on all serves and FHs and played a high risk game. Roddick playing the "safe game" was the worst tactic he could have ever employed because he just didn't have much all around talent
Click to expand...
 
MurrayGOAT is 5-1 against Kringios. Meanwhile, Joker is 0-2 against Kringios. Do what you will with that information.

He's also 2-0 vs Zedrot incluing "Cincy" of last year.
 
I don't think Murray ever peaked, still he won slams, old gen didn't.

Now, real next gen (Sinner, Korda) will be different, i can feel it.
 
Red Rick said:
Yeah maybe peak Mouray and peak Clayray might be too far apart, but he literally walks the AO, Wimb and USO
Click to expand...
With the Big 3 around, he probably takes Wimby (that's a maybe) and US Open (2012 final was fairly low-quality, but that was mostly because of the wind I think, and Murray would do better in 2019 conditions).
 
We have no idea yet what peak next gen is, they could get better in the years ahead. That they caused the big 3 more headaches than Murray is probably more due to their having a decade on him.
 
Third Serve said:
With the Big 3 around, he probably takes Wimby (that's a maybe) and US Open (2012 final was fairly low-quality, but that was mostly because of the wind I think, and Murray would do better in 2019 conditions).
Click to expand...
With the Big 3 around, Murray would still give 2019 Djokovic a tougher fight at the AO than Nadal did. Might actually beat Djokovic at Wimb if they're on the same side and I do think he'd beat Nadal at the USO.
 
When was it one of next gen beat Djokovic in a slam final?
 
ibbi said:
We have no idea yet what peak next gen is, they could get better in the years ahead. That they caused the big 3 more headaches than Murray is probably more due to their having a decade on him.
Click to expand...
When have they caused more headaches? There's been some good Bo3 wins, but Murray was always very competitive against them at the Masters events. And he still has more wins against them at the slams than the whole NextGen combined so far.
 
MeatTornado said:
When have they caused more headaches? There's been some good Bo3 wins, but Murray was always very competitive against them at the Masters events. And he still has more wins against them at the slams than the whole NextGen combined so far.
Click to expand...
I was just responding to what he said.
 
Jokervich said:
I feel like next gen caused more problems for the big 3 than Murray did, even if next gen are mentally weak. We never got to see next gen against Murray because of the hip surgery.

What do you think? Was peak Murray better than peak next gen?
Click to expand...
Apart from Thiem on clay, Murray's peak level was absolutely better than any of the top10 youngsters of today.
My countryman fared mucho mejor against peak/prime versions of Big3.
 
Thiem and Medvedev especially the latter might hit a level that is well beyond Murray for a tournament or two.

They haven't done that as of yet. So by default it's Murray as of now.

Zverev is of no importance.
 
Mainad said:
Even on clay, Murray beat the 2 top clay players of the current era in title matches unlike Thiem.
Click to expand...

Yep, and those were masters titles, not some mickey mouse tourneys. Especially Rome has always been a prestigious CC tourney, with a rich history.

Now if Thiem ever wins the FO it would be a different situation. I sincerely doubt that's gonna happen however.
 
zagor said:
Yes, by a considerable margin.



Eh, not sure Thiem is better than Murray even on clay.

On other surfaces, it's not even a contest.
Click to expand...

Murray is better player but his peak level wasn't that impressive. Thiem IMO showed higher level in AO 20F/WTF 2019 than Murray produced anywhere on hard court. It's only grass court Murray has edge.
 
What kind of question is this?

First, Thiem et al have not reached their peaks yet. So it's impossible to say!

Second, Murray's peak was quite lofty. He won 3 Slams and 2 Wimbledons. He beat both Djokovic and Nadal in straight sets, at Slams. He has a quite respectable 11-14 record against Federer. Let's just say his career far exceeds those of Roddick, Nalbandian and Hewitt.
 
D.Nalby12 said:
Murray is better player but his peak level wasn't that impressive. Thiem IMO showed higher level in AO 20F/WTF 2019 than Murray produced anywhere on hard court. It's only grass court Murray has edge.
Click to expand...
Disagree. What Murray displayed at 2012 AO and 2013 AO was more impressive than what Thiem displayed and he was up against a much better Djokovic than 2020 Djokovic.
 
ForehandCross said:
But unlike Thiem he never sniffed beating Djokovic in RG or beating RG winning Nadal in Masters every year.
Click to expand...

He still owns 2 clay Masters titles at the expense of the top 2 claycourt players of the current era. Thiem doesn't so why doesn't he?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Jokervich
  • Poll Poll
Is prime, non-injured lost gen better than next gen?
Replies
44
Views
2K
Rogerer
R
T
Peak big 3 against current next gen
Replies
15
Views
913
mike danny
mike danny
clout
  • Poll Poll
Are the next gen really better than the lost gen or the 2nd/3rd tier players from golden gen?
Replies
11
Views
770
Racquet_smash
R
TsitsiBH
Top 10 best players of each generation (New Balls, Golden Gen, Lost Gen, Next Gen, Baby Gen) ? And how would you rank these generations ?
2
Replies
86
Views
3K
Cabeza del Demonio
Cabeza del Demonio
jl809
The next gen are WORSE against Djokodal now than in 2019
Replies
42
Views
2K
AO13
AO13
Back
Top