Were Sir Andy Murray and Mr Stanimal lucky to born in Djokovic's generation instead of 1980-81 with Peak Federer?

[Sunny014]

Murray & Stan are of the same league as Roddick-Hewitt types and Safin is 1 level above all these guys.

 

[BorgTheGOAT]

Exactly.
Federer after TMC 03 was scary consistent, it is as if his average level was GOAT level, you need to put up GOAT level performance to beat him, something which Safin did and was rewarded with 2005 Aus Open.
Nadal himself was scary on clay that his game in 2005 when he was a teenager was already GOAT level and Nadal was rising fast on Grass, by 07 his level was also ATG level....

Sir Andy would have no room to win slams and Stan would be toast

Murray was also not really an early bloomer in the sense that he could maybe snag some slams before Federer reaches peak level. Maybe he could win USO 2003 but that’s it. He does not win FO 2004 or AO 2005 and neither would he beat Federer or Nadal in any slam. AO 2008 he “might” have a chance if Novak gift it to him but I would still give him less than 50% of a chance. Starting 2011 peak Novak would take over and Murray would already be 30 by then so no way he wins anything here. This is of course all very hypothetical with everything remaining the same other than Murray being 6 years younger, but assuming such scenario I cannot see Murray winning more than 2 slams in a very best case for him (more likely only one or even zero).

 

[Sunny014]

Murray was also not really an early bloomer in the sense that he could maybe snag some slams before Federer reaches peak level. Maybe he could win USO 2003 but that’s it. He does not win FO 2004 or AO 2005 and neither would he beat Federer or Nadal in any slam. AO 2008 he “might” have a chance if Novak gift it to him but I would still give him less than 50% of a chance. Starting 2011 peak Novak would take over and Murray would already be 30 by then so no way he wins anything here. This is of course all very hypothetical with everything remaining the same other than Murray being 6 years younger, but assuming such scenario I cannot see Murray winning more than 2 slams in a very best case for him (more likely only one or even zero).

I agree with you, almost every word you said is true.
However in AO08 I will book Stan to do well because he actually was challenging Novak in 2013-2014 years so there is a slight chance, Murray's chance dimmer.

Like you said Murray's best bet would be to take USO2003 but then Roddick was zoning with his serve, not sure how good that would be because Cilic did take out Murray in the 4th round in 2009, so Murray's defenses were not that great back then and boy Roddick was serving really really hard vs Ferrero in the final. Murray would have to serve like Roddick to take him, infact anyone in the final would have had to serve like Roddick or at least close to that to take him out in 2003. Had Pete been in the final his strategy would also have been that, serve the biggest as returning Roddick serve in that tournament was very tough.

Plus the USO and W in early 00s were pretty fast compared to modern times, people often underestimate this. In this forum itself Philippoussis is underestimated, but then he literally served his way to the final in 03 and I remember that match vs Agassi where a supreme baseliner like Agassi was taken out by Scud who had 82% first serves won and hit 46 aces past Agassi, is it a joke to beat such a guy ? People think those guys were not good but back in those times for those conditions everyone who reached the final was quite well deserving and brutal.

 

[daphne]

I am serious bro, your IQ is quite low, lets appear for Mensa tests or some other tests on IQ level that give scores, I bet your score won't be even 20% of mine, your analytical thinking ability is non existent.

Hey Mr Chandala, Mensa and IQ tests have got nothing to do with determining how smart someone is. Probably you are too intelligent to realise that, Mr. Chandala.

 

[mike danny]

Murray has had great record vs Fed in bo3. I think he would take it to bo5 as well especially if he is already at his physical peak.

Nope.

 

[mike danny]

Well didn't Federer allow Hewitt and Roddick to win Slams by taking until he was 22 to get it together? Lol. You're ragging on Djokovic in allowing Murray and Wawrinka to win Slams, then what about Federer allowing Hewitt to win a Wimbledon with that pathetic draw and getting thrashed by 32 year old Agassi at 2001 USO after dethroning Sampras at Wimbledon? Put 20 and 21 year old Djokovic and Nadal in those years and they would wreak havoc. That sword cuts both ways buddy.

Ummm, Hewitt lost to Agassi at 2002 USO, not 2001.

Fed's draws in 2001 were really hard though. 20 year old Djokodal wouldn't do better in his place.

Fed didn't allow Roddick anything. Roddick won his first slam after Fed won his first.

 

[mike danny]

Well even other ATGs have said Murray would have won much more Slams in a different era so how is that insulting them? You're trying to diss Djokovic but Federer is not pristine either, as I've pointed out. Plus he got beaten by way past his prime Kuerten in one of his best seasons, then Safin and Del Potro.

Djokovic screwed up more than Fed, it's not particularly close.

 

[NoleFam]

Ummm, Hewitt lost to Agassi at 2002 USO, not 2001.

Fed's draws in 2001 were really hard though. 20 year old Djokodal wouldn't do better in his place.

Fed didn't allow Roddick anything. Roddick won his first slam after Fed won his first.

I'm talking about Federer losing to "old" Agassi.

Put 20 year old Djokovic from 2007 against Agassi and he would give him a real match.

I know but I'm going by his logic.

 

[mike danny]

This is a bulls**t survey. Marray is 11-14 H2H against Federer, but 11-25 H2H against Djokorvic.

If Murray peaked along with Federer. he would have won about 10 slams, and Federer only about 13 slams.

Federer got those cheap slams when both Nadal and Djokervic were teenagers, and he should not be considered as great as either Nadal or Djokervic.

Moron.

 

[NoleFam]

Djokovic screwed up more than Fed, it's not particularly close.

At their peaks, yes, but not overall.

 

[mike danny]

I'm talking about Federer losing to "old" Agassi.

Put 20 year old Djokovic from 2007 against Agassi and he would give him a real match.

I know but I'm going by his logic.

For the record I do think Murray and Stan would be slamless in 2004-2007. Fed was just too good in those years for players of this caliber.

 

[mike danny]

At their peaks, yes, but not overall.

Talking about their primes.

Overall, Djoker made up for it, but Suck Gen helped a lot.

 

[NoleFam]

For the record I do think Murray and Stan would be slamless in 2004-2007. Fed was just too good in those years for players of this caliber.

I don't know about that but ok. I like 2015 Wawrinka's chances at 2004 RG. 2014 AO Wawrinka would be a handful for Safin as well, as long as he avoids Federer. Lol. Murray would present problems as well.

 

[NoleFam]

Talking about their primes.

Overall, Djoker made up for it, but Suck Gen helped a lot.

Ok fair enough.

 

[mike danny]

I don't know about that but ok. I like 2015 Wawrinka's chances at 2004 RG. 2014 AO Wawrinka would be a handful for Safin as well, as long as he avoids Federer. Lol. Murray would present problems as well.

Murray would present problems, but I don't see him scoring a slam win.

Stan could maybe win a slam if he avoids Federer, that's fair.

 

[ChristianWilson1989]

Let's do a simulation for Sir Andy Murray born In 1981 instead of 1987, i.e. 6 years earlier.

Murray's 2008 Wimbledon Qf would face peak Hewitt in 2002 who was ranked 1 for almost 2 years, a defeat is certain against the Champion!
Murray's 2008 USO Finals would not exist because Pete/Agassi would be too good, he loses in Semis.
Murray's 2009 Wimbledon Semi final run vanishes because Fed/Roddick/Scud were all better in 2003 and Fed would obv win.
Murray 2010 AO final does not exist because Fed/Safin would be too good in 2004 and they would meet each other in finals for sure.
Murray's 2011 AO final would maybe happen if he beats Hewitt to reach final but Safin would CRUSH him.
Murray's 2012 W final also vanishes since Fedal are there in 2006.
Murray's 2012 USO win vanishes because in 2006 USO Federer would crush him in the final i.e if he reached the final because Roddick himself had been broken very less until the final, I remember it was some amazing figure, so Murray might never go past Roddick to reach the final in the first place.
Murray's 2013 AO final will happen as he might replace Baggy in the final but Fed would obviously crush him again!
Murray's 2013 Wimbledon vanishes because both Federer and Nadal were amazing in 2007
Murray's 2015 AO final won't happen because Federer and Nadal were too powerful in 2009.
Murray's 2016 Aus open final vanishes because again Federer of 2010 would be there to beat him
Murray's 2016 FO final won't happen as Soderling and Federer would again reach the finals, I dont him peak either of them to reach the final.
Murray's 2016 Wimbledon vanishes because Nadal was at his best in 2010 yet again, no chance.

0 SLAMS ..... 3-4 finals at best and all of them ending in defeat

In Stanimal's case the simulation is even worse, we are assuming he being born in 1980 instead of 1985 which is Safin's birth year.

Stan's 2013 USO Semi final performance would be in 2008 against Federer (someone whom he hasn't beat even once in 20 HC encounters) - So no chance
Stan's 2014 AO win would be in the year 2009 against Federer and Nadal fighting GOAT level battles - Again no chance
Stan's 2015 AO performance vs Novak would again be up against Federer's 2010 masterclass - No change
Stan's 2015 FO win would be in the year 2010 when Rafa is red hot - No chance
Stan's 2015 USO was anyway straight setted against Federer, this time he would face Federer again or Djokovic in his draw - Even if he beats Novak and avoids Federer then Nadal will finish him in the final, 2010 was Nadal's year
San's 2016 FO defence of his title form would be up against Nadal, Federer, Djokovic all at their peak, even if Stan reaches the final, Nadal is always there !
Stan's 2016 USO win would be in 2011 in an year when Djokovic was red hot and not to mention even Federer could not stop Novak, what chance does Stan have?
Stan's 2017 AO campaign was ended by Federer, so in 2012 he would up against Novak and Rafa at their peak, what chance does he have? He shall have to beat Novak here, herculean task.
Stan's 2017 FO finalist campaign would end same if he faced Nadal in 2012, can't get any tougher.

0 SLAMS and even reaching finals seems impossible.


Looks like Sir Andy Murray and Stanimal Wawrinka were lucky to have been born in an era where their games blended well with Novak Djokovic's game and thus gave them 3 slams each, few years earlier and they would have struggled horribly vs Federer, Safin, Hewitt, Roddick, Agassi, Teenage Nadal etc etc ...... A very powerful field !

They were definitely not going to have a sniff at any slam in Roger's reign.

 

[Sunny014]

Djokovic fans need to get out of this inferioriy complex of losing to murray and stan and accept that he struggled/underperformed, glorifying Murray won't help.

They should accept Facts :

Djokovic and perhaps Safin too would win Slams if their decades are reversed.

Murray-Stanimal-Hewitt-Roddick all might be 1 slam wonders or 0 slams if their decades reversed, this is also a fact, trying to pass off Murray as a multiple slams heavyweight is actual insult to real champions who won 5-6 slams in previous decades, it is not a joke to win 5 slams or 6 slams, or even 4 slams for that matter.

Thats why I put Murray and Stan in Fed's peak to just show how ordinary they are, they are not heavyweights by any means, Novak made them look greater than they are.

 

[Nole_King]

Djokovic fans need to get out of this inferioriy complex of losing to murray and stan and accept that he struggled/underperformed, glorifying Murray won't help.

They should accept Facts :

Djokovic and perhaps Safin too would win Slams if their decades are reversed.

Murray-Stanimal-Hewitt-Roddick all might be 1 slam wonders or 0 slams if their decades reversed, this is also a fact, trying to pass off Murray as a multiple slams heavyweight is actual insult to real champions who won 5-6 slams in previous decades, it is not a joke to win 5 slams or 6 slams, or even 4 slams for that matter.

Thats why I put Murray and Stan in Fed's peak to just show how ordinary they are, they are not heavyweights by any means, Novak made them look greater than they are.

Mainad would have by now put a bounty on your head.

 

[6august]

Even Fred fans feel too ashamed to contribute to this thread, I can only see a few of them )))

But some of you still spend time to argue with a guy who say a sportsman is GOAT because he is the richest and the biggest commercial brand )))

His signature reminds of the guy who said Federer has Nike while Djokovic has Uniqlo, yet another guy use that as his signature. I guess those 2 guys both committed suicide the day Federer decide to wear Uniqlo ))))

Hey Sharma/Sri/Ram/Amit........ whatever your name is, just get a life! You're unhappy now and it means you're wasting a part of your life.

 

[Sunny014]

Even Fred fans feel too ashamed to contribute to this thread, I can only see a few of them )))

But some of you still spend time to argue with a guy who say a sportsman is GOAT because he is the richest and the biggest commercial brand )))

His signature reminds of the guy who said Federer has Nike while Djokovic has Uniqlo, yet another guy use that as his signature. I guess those 2 guys both committed suicide the day Federer decide to wear Uniqlo ))))

Hey Sharma/Sri/Ram/Amit........ whatever your name is, just get a life! You're unhappy now and it means you're wasting a part of your life.

This post is not to appease any fed fans or nadal fans or djokovic fans.
It is just to address facts on how Murray is in the league of Hewitt-Roddick-Stan-Safin and nothing more.

There is a big myth going on that Murray made as many semi finals as Sampras and so Sampras in the presence of Big 3 would be Murray or maybe slightly better ... Those posters who think so also think Murray is ahead of Agassi .... such myths have to be busted, so I connected Murray's failure to tame an old Federer to prove that he would be an even bigger failure vs young Federer and thus he would fail vs other ATGs in other eras too .... this whole notion of 3 goats in 2010s is flawed, Fed was a guy past his peak, so the fact that Murray failed to convert his early BO3 success into BO5 vs a much older and past his prime Fed and also having a losing H2Hs in slams to stanimal of all people shows that Murray is not as great as billed..... thats my only motive.

 

[CCPass]

Cope

 

[killerboss]

Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Philippoussis being too good for Murray is nonsensical. Murray beat Hewitt and Roddick back to back to win his first ever title. This was in 2006. And you think players of this ilk are gonna keep him at zero slams? Lmao. Murray also had 10 years of getting to semis and beyond. This is around the stage he'd be playing your Federer standard player So yeah, Federer losing a match in 10 years isn't completely out of the realms you know.

Stan Wawrinka would find ways to win slams as well despite his garbage record against Federer.

 

[Sunny014]

Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Philippoussis being too good for Murray is nonsensical. Murray beat Hewitt and Roddick back to back to win his first ever title. This was in 2006. And you think players of this ilk are gonna keep him at zero slams? Lmao. Murray also had 10 years of getting to semis and beyond. This is around the stage he'd be playing your Federer standard player So yeah, Federer losing a match in 10 years isn't completely out of the realms you know.

Stan Wawrinka would find ways to win slams as well despite his garbage record against Federer.

Federer and Nadal will keep him at 0 slams.

Hewitt and Roddick have no say in all this because they themselves have been at 0 in Fed's peak.

Fed and Nadal will decide whom to keep at 0 and whom not to. ....and they keep everyone at 0 .