What is Andy Murray's style of play?

[laurie]

I was watching the Cincinnati final last night and was thinking about the matches he's played over the last 12 months. I'm a bit confused. Sometimes he looks agressive, comes to net, mixes up sopme serve and volley play. Then other times (in the same match), he's clearly reacting to every situation his opponent throws at him, counterpunching like there's no tomorrow. Hits a big first serve, misses it and throws in an 80mph serve in the middle of the box, will hit silly drop shots when out of position. Yesterday for instance in one rally, Djokovic hit a mishit shot which landed mid court on Murray's backhand, perfect to slice down the line and take the net, instead he sliced it down the line and ran back to the baseline, not suprisingly he went on to lose that point.

What is Murray's thing then? Is he agressive or a counterpuncher? Murray fans, would like to see him become a counterpuncher, or an agressive all court player? He has the height to be agressive rather than counterpuncher - having said that, look at Gael Monfils.

Is the modern way that guys over 6ft tall prefer to counterpunch? :?

 

[daddy]

Unlike Gugafan I think Murrays style varys on him not being a polished player and being undecided on how to play / unable to execute predetermined tactics.

Why ? Well, sometimes he'll serve and volley if he is in the mood and going okay, if not or if he gets passed a few times - he will just counterpunch. Sometimes like when he got tight serving for the match vs Djokovic, he'll just go all out and attack with 1st & 2nd serve, and immediately follow up with forehand attack. Actually I think defense is his last resort - whenever he is unable to attack with any result, he'll just stay back as few of his matches vs good defenders prooved ( like vs Nadal ). Not even counterpunch, just plain defend.

 

[Clydey2times]

Unlike Gugafan I think Murrays style varys on him not being a polished player and being undecided on how to play / unable to execute predetermined tactics.

Why ? Well, sometimes he'll serve and volley if he is in the mood and going okay, if not or if he gets passed a few times - he will just counterpunch. Sometimes like when he got tight serving for the match vs Djokovic, he'll just go all out and attack with 1st & 2nd serve, and immediately follow up with forehand attack. Actually I think defense is his last resort - whenever he is unable to attack with any result, he'll just stay back as few of his matches vs good defenders prooved ( like vs Nadal ). Not even counterpunch, just plain defend.

Murray has never played defensively against Nadal. That is the one player he attacks all out.

His game style changes depending on the opponent. For example, against Ivo he started serving and volleying in order to take the net away from him. Against Tursunov, he knew he would get errors from him, so he defended. Against Djokovic, he mixed up the two styles and defended with purpose and to a good length, rather than inviting him to try and hit winners off of junk balls. And against Nadal, he went for every single shot if the opportunity presented itself.

 

[montx]

I see him as an all courter.

 

[wyutani]

same as nadal, aggressive counter-puncher.

 

[eric draven]

I view him as an all-courter and agree with most of the other posters that he varies his game based on his opponent. I think his problem is that he just isn't disciplined enough to implement a game-plan for a particular oponent and then stick to it. Gilbert had him doing this for a time but he just tuned Brad out (although I don't blame him).

 

[matchmaker]

As other posters have mentioned he seems to have different styles against different opponents.
I remember Fed criticizing him after a loss and saying his game hadn't evolved in two years time. But that was in februari I think. Clearly he has changed now and is more aggressive. I'd say he is an aggressive baseliner, not really a counterpuncher because he often takes the initiative from the first ball on and tries to keep it. A counterpuncher let's the initiative to his opponent and then tries to take over.

 

[Feña14]

It totally depends on who he is playing. He is so talented that one day against a big hitter, he plays defensively with alot of crazy spin and junk... the next he plays against an all round player and beats them through being agressive.

It's clever really.

 

[diadorakuerten]

He's a clever baseliner.

 

[Cenc]

murrays style? how about... unknown? i dont see anything in his game

seriously his style could be "counter" although i dont know his game is just far worse than most other counters in the history of top 10 tennis so its tough to say

 

[Andres]

He's an all-courter, but if I have to find a new term for him, it'd be a 'neutralizer'

 

[daddy]

Murray has never played defensively against Nadal. That is the one player he attacks all out.

His game style changes depending on the opponent. For example, against Ivo he started serving and volleying in order to take the net away from him. Against Tursunov, he knew he would get errors from him, so he defended. Against Djokovic, he mixed up the two styles and defended with purpose and to a good length, rather than inviting him to try and hit winners off of junk balls. And against Nadal, he went for every single shot if the opportunity presented itself.

You give him too much credit. In my mind he is a great player but not yet defined on the style of play. What you call mixing it up - I call it now knowing your style. Watching Nadal or Djokovic or Federer, you kind of know the style no matter what. Rafa seeks his forehand spin, Novak seeks short balls by pushing from baseline. Roger dictates play and looks for an opening to either prepare the big fh or come to the net. Murray ? One minute he is pushing balls back, then he is trashing everything that comes at him, then he's at the net. That is not varying style, that is having no explicit style of play as none of the above is done with real intention but as a product of him not being able to implement one tactics from during the match except in cases where one of the big guns makes him defend through the match.

 

[Meanstreak]

I was watching the Cincinnati final last night and was thinking about the matches he's played over the last 12 months. I'm a bit confused. Sometimes he looks agressive, comes to net, mixes up sopme serve and volley play. Then other times (in the same match), he's clearly reacting to every situation his opponent throws at him, counterpunching like there's no tomorrow. Hits a big first serve, misses it and throws in an 80mph serve in the middle of the box, will hit silly drop shots when out of position. Yesterday for instance in one rally, Djokovic hit a mishit shot which landed mid court on Murray's backhand, perfect to slice down the line and take the net, instead he sliced it down the line and ran back to the baseline, not suprisingly he went on to lose that point.

What is Murray's thing then? Is he agressive or a counterpuncher? Murray fans, would like to see him become a counterpuncher, or an agressive all court player? He has the height to be agressive rather than counterpuncher - having said that, look at Gael Monfils.

Is the modern way that guys over 6ft tall prefer to counterpunch? :?

Versatile is the word you are looking for.

 

[TheTruth]

Agree with most posters. A versatile counterpuncher who plays according to the style presented across the net. I enjoy his game because you never know what you're going to get. He's one of the most entertaining on the tour for me.

 

[tennis-hero]

baseliner, average at the net- good mental game

mixes things up well... those tactics will work wonders against the big 3

he's improved A LOT this year, last year i would have called him someone who keeps the ball in play and prays the other guy makes a mistake, this year he can actually win a point.

he could be deadly against Nadal, because nadal's one dimensional hit to the backhand and hope they make a mistake will be countered by a solid murray backhand. i see murray being a serious challenge and a potential dark horse from now on. especially for this years US OPEN

dont get me wrong, a peak fed would beat him in straights and joker has a better game (Nadal isn't top 5 on hard- murray is much better). but fed's wheels have fallen off all of a sudden ( its in his mind, thats the damn shame) and joker basically beats himself by playing patchy tennis (sometimes amazing other times distinctly average)

 

[SempreSami]

baseliner, average at the net- good mental game

mixes things up well... those tactics will work wonders against the big 3

he's improved A LOT this year, last year i would have called him someone who keeps the ball in play and prays the other guy makes a mistake, this year he can actually win a point.

he could be deadly against Nadal, because nadal's one dimensional hit to the backhand and hope they make a mistake will be countered by a solid murray backhand. i see murray being a serious challenge and a potential dark horse from now on. especially for this years US OPEN

dont get me wrong, a peak fed would beat him in straights and joker has a better game (Nadal isn't top 5 on hard- murray is much better). but fed's wheels have fallen off all of a sudden ( its in his mind, thats the damn shame) and joker basically beats himself by playing patchy tennis (sometimes amazing other times distinctly average)

Then why hasn't he beaten him? :roll:

 

[tennis-hero]

Then why hasn't he beaten him? :roll:

08 MURRAY> 07 MURRAY

the difference is night and day

in 07 murray wasn't HALF the player he is now.

from their meetings they've met

twice on clay
once on grass
twice on hard

07 Australian open, Murray wasn't half the player he is now, YET,,,, YET, he still took Nadal to 5 sets

nadal beat him on clay, not murrays best surface (he's improving)

at wimbeldon (again, Murray looks much better on grass, maybe in 2 years he'll win there) and dont forget, this wimby is SLOW grass

and at the toronto masters- the ONLY hard court tournament nadal has won, the ONLY one.

if they met at cincinnati, i'd say 80-20 in favor of murray (murray did beat the guy who whupped nadal 6-1 in the first set, remember)
if they meet at the US open, i'd say 70-30 in favor of murray
in 2 years time, i'd give murray the edge at wimbeldon, at the australian and US open, at any hard court tournament (even toronto- nadals ONLY HARD WIN) and i'd give nadal the edge on any clay court, where he usually has a much better record against anyone in the top ten

then again, clay courts suit his style of play. even one dimensional play can get you far on clay

 

[Hot Sauce]

Then why hasn't he beaten him? :roll:

I can see it happening soon on HC, but Murray needs more time.

 

[veroniquem]

08 MURRAY> 07 MURRAY

the difference is night and day

in 07 murray wasn't HALF the player he is now.

from their meetings they've met

twice on clay
once on grass
twice on hard

07 Australian open, Murray wasn't half the player he is now, YET,,,, YET, he still took Nadal to 5 sets

nadal beat him on clay, not murrays best surface (he's improving)

at wimbeldon (again, Murray looks much better on grass, maybe in 2 years he'll win there) and dont forget, this wimby is SLOW grass

and at the toronto masters- the ONLY hard court tournament nadal has won, the ONLY one.

if they met at cincinnati, i'd say 80-20 in favor of murray (murray did beat the guy who whupped nadal 6-1 in the first set, remember)
if they meet at the US open, i'd say 70-30 in favor of murray
in 2 years time, i'd give murray the edge at wimbeldon, at the australian and US open, at any hard court tournament (even toronto- nadals ONLY HARD WIN) and i'd give nadal the edge on any clay court, where he usually has a much better record against anyone in the top ten

then again, clay courts suit his style of play. even one dimensional play can get you far on clay

You're completely wrong. Actually Murray has been more of a threat to Fed whom he has beaten on hard courts a couple of times and now Djoko. Nadal is the only player that Murray hasn't managed to figure out and they've played a lot on hard courts (including AO and indoor). Nadal is a bad matchup for Murray the same way Djoko is a bad matchup for Nadal (on hard). PS: the one dimensional nonsense is getting stale, even Fed wouldn't dare use it at this point about Nadal.

 

[Ripster]

He's definitely an all-court player, he can do it all (and does execute) depending on his opponent of the day.

 

[Feña14]

You're completely wrong. Actually Murray has been more of a threat to Fed whom he has beaten on hard courts a couple of times and now Djoko. Nadal is the only player that Murray hasn't managed to figure out and they've played a lot on hard courts (including AO and indoor). Nadal is a bad matchup for Murray the same way Djoko is a bad matchup for Nadal (on hard). PS: the one dimensional nonsense is getting stale, even Fed wouldn't dare use it at this point about Nadal.

You're right there. Tennis is all about match ups and if you don't match up well with a player, they will cause you problems. Look at Santoro and Safin, Safin on paper is a much better player but whenever they meet on tour, Marat can't get the job done.

This isn't to say Murray is a better player than Nadal, but when you think of Murrays record against the likes of Djokovic, Federer, Davydenko, Roddick etc.. he does well against pretty much all the top players with the exception of Nadal.

 

[Dan007]

70% of the time counterpuncher 20% of the time all courter 15% of time time agressive baseliner, and 5% of the time a pusher

 

[Cup8489]

he's a Brad Gilbert-er.

uses his strengths against his opponents weaknesses. if you watch the various matches against different opponents, he always tries to play against their weaknesses with his strengths, as gilbert used to back in the day..

against tursonov, he just kept it in play, knowing that tursonov's style would eventually cause him to miss. against djokovic, he mixed up with pace, angles and spin, to keep djokovic out of a rythm. so basically, his style is "Winning Ugly"

 

[35ft6]

^ There's a lot of truth to that, but he makes it look pretty IMO. He has great stroke production, unlike Gilbert, and can generate world class power when he wants to, also very un-Gilbert like. He's maybe a combination of Gilbert and Federer in that way, and a little bit of Safin throw in (in terms of his flat stroke production). He's versatile like Federer and he doesn't just play different styles to keep people guessing... what I mean is that some people will serve and volley a point simply as a surprise tactic, but they couldn't really sustain that style of play for a whole match or set and hope to win... but Murray is one of the very few players who can play a few different styles the WHOLE MATCH and win against top 10 players. He is a very rare breed. He's got a great tactical mind, perhaps even better than Nadal and Fed, who I think are, actually, less cerebral and more instinctual. Murray doesn't have the same hitting ability or movement of Nadal and Fed, but he DOES have their natural feel for the court. He looks like a natural in all areas of the court, has great hands, and seems to often be a shot or two ahead of his opponents. Not sure why it took me so long to see what a unique player he is. I really wish I could have seen his match against Gasquet at Wimbledon. He's a great addition to the top 10.

 

[laurie]

Thanks for everyone's replies. I think every poster kind of sums up what type of player Murray is becomming. I'm not a fan of his attitude but I have to say I am impressed with his improvement this year and will agree that he has an outside chance (maybe more even?) at this years US open.

Personally I would like to see Murray be more agressive and take the initiative more often - that will probably happen as he gets stronger and more confident - the Cincinnati win will help establish that.

 

[PROTENNIS63]

murray is a counter-puncher.

 

[Andres]

and at the toronto masters- the ONLY hard court tournament nadal has won, the ONLY one.

Ehmmmmm.... No.

 

[Andres]

Ehmmmmm.... No.

And in case you didn't get my last message, I'll quote it...

..... No.

Nadal has 6 hardcourt titles, including 4 Master Series. Andy Murray has 6 titles TOTAL.

You see? Four... One... Four... One... You see? Not the same. Even the words ain't the same.

 

[cknobman]

Murray style of play?

Many on the ATP would clasiffy it as: "Difficult to deal with".

He will counter punch until an opportunity arises and then pump up and be agressive. He will kick in first serves at 98 mph one second and then blast 135 mph down the T the next. He will hit a low slice to force a weak topspin shot and then hit crosscourt hard to throw you off balance. He will hit a dropper or a weak slice to draw you in and then go for a pass down the line.

If Andy can keep his head clear, positive, and focused it wouldnt be hard for him to make a firm shot at #4 in the world.

 

[HyperHorse]

He just plays tennis. He uses his head..
He mixes it up. I love watching him play.
He's my next favourite player after Gonzo, Tipsarevic and Federer. I guess... So many great players in this day and age..

 

[Gugafan_Redux]

It's a great question, and clearly generating a lot of different responses.

Sometimes it's very annoying to watch Murry rolling balls back with seemingly no purpose, then get in a trouble and play some ridiculous low percentage pass for a winner and get all pumped about it.

He's like that guy who limps in with pocket nines, flops his set, and just smooth calls you as you try to shove him off with your big slick. Then next thing you know, you are screwed.

 

[35ft6]

^ The commentators during the recent Masters final talked about how Murray plays possum. Exhibits really negative body language only to come alive and start ripping winners. He IS a very emotional player, like a Mac, Hewitt, and Becker, and that's nice to see as well. I really hope he makes it to a Wimbledon finals because if he does, that crowd is going to be going absolutely bat sh$% crazy.

 

[samprasbackhand]

I'd say all-court, and I'd also say he's the best all-courter on tour right now

 

[Melissa]

Hi Laurie

I would say 'adaptable'. I think Andy has learned not just to adapt to the player he is facing but also 'the moment'.

 

[marc45]

You're completely wrong. Actually Murray has been more of a threat to Fed whom he has beaten on hard courts a couple of times and now Djoko. Nadal is the only player that Murray hasn't managed to figure out and they've played a lot on hard courts (including AO and indoor). Nadal is a bad matchup for Murray the same way Djoko is a bad matchup for Nadal (on hard). PS: the one dimensional nonsense is getting stale, even Fed wouldn't dare use it at this point about Nadal.

thanks for that last point, to call nadal one-dimensional now is beyond ridiculous.....he's improved his serve, both speed-wise and direction, his ability to step inside the baseline and take control of the points has dramatically improved, his volleying skills are startling at times, his return has become much more consistent as well....and i'm surprised nobody has mentioned to tennis-hero that his match stats are wrong...three of nadal's five wins against murray are on hard, one clay, one grass...murray has made it clear that a win against nadal is extremely important to him, no doubt signifying that he's truly ready to win a slam...having said that i do believe he's capable

 

[marc45]

i'd also add that a win against nadal in a best-of-five match would be much more impressive, and challenging, for murray than a three-setter, even at a masters...it is great for the game to see him doing well...whatever you want to call his game, or whatever it becomes, he does provide a contrast, certainly to fed and nadal, and even, to a lesser extent, novak

 

[thor's hammer]

What is Andy Murray's style of play?

McEnroe.

When I first saw Murray play that's who I thought of. Here was a guy loping around the court but with surprising quickness, sometimes floating softballs around, tempting his opponent, sometime cracking em by em. Creative, with deft touch to spare.

Not to mention petulance. ;-)

McEnroe.

 

[marc45]

McEnroe.

When I first saw Murray play that's who I thought of. Here was a guy loping around the court but with surprising quickness, sometimes floating softballs around, tempting his opponent, sometime cracking em by em. Creative, with deft touch to spare.

Not to mention petulance. ;-)

McEnroe.

nice comparison...serve needs to get alot more consistent and creative to be compared to john though

 

[Feña14]

Yeah, i'm liking the McEnroe comparison too.

 

[veroniquem]

I've always thought that Murray was top 5 material, very versatile and intelligent, I love watching him play and I'm really happy he seems to be coming into his own right now.

 

[tenis]

murrays style? how about... unknown? i dont see anything in his game

seriously his style could be "counter" although i dont know his game is just far worse than most other counters in the history of top 10 tennis so its tough to say

Yes... No style, sportmanship; agly, no pleasure to watch him. Sometimes irritating attitude, is tennis so painful for him???
But I love British Airways.

 

[tenis]

70% of the time counterpuncher 20% of the time all courter 15% of time time agressive baseliner, and 5% of the time a pusher

Yep.......... total 110% player?

 

[Dan007]

Yep.......... total 110% player?

haha my bad. make that a 60% counterpuncher.

 

[coloskier]

He is 50% arrogant, 50% ***, 50% inconsistent. He has gotten hot for a few tournaments, but eventually he will come back down to normal.

 

[Clydey2times]

^ The commentators during the recent Masters final talked about how Murray plays possum. Exhibits really negative body language only to come alive and start ripping winners. He IS a very emotional player, like a Mac, Hewitt, and Becker, and that's nice to see as well. I really hope he makes it to a Wimbledon finals because if he does, that crowd is going to be going absolutely bat sh$% crazy.

Speaking of the commentators, what did Brad Gilbert have to say during the Cinci final? I've sort of been wondering what his reaction is to Murray's recent success.I read an article that described his on court interview with Murray after the match as "one of the most awkward in recent memory".

Did anyone see the post match interview? If so, what was it like?