What makes Djokovic more accomplished Grass player than Murray?

[Noelan]

W championship is jewel in the crown of tennis, so 2>1 , no way that even 5 Queens title can't raplace a single one from SW19, not to mention about the Olympics.
Novak is simply better all round player than Murray in every aspect of the game,better FH,sligtly better BH and ROS, much better second serve, better agility, mental strenght..with all this he can compensate his slightly worse movement on the grass.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Murray wasn't good enough to meet Djokovic at Wimby2011/2014.

Djokovic defeated Dimitrov who absolutely dismantled Murray on grass, so it's two fold ownership and same for 2011. :wink:

Seriously there is no meaning teaching maths to brick wall and debating with clueless Fanboys. They still to come with effective counterargument except H2H, which is proven failed criteria for comparison.

But what's your opinion on topic besides tremendous efforts of detailing thread?

 

[Gonzo_style]

5(5/6) titles vs 2(2/5) titles. Who is the more accomplished grass player?

hahaha Wimbledon=grass, Djokovic 2 titles, Murray 1, 2>1! Deal

 

[Egoista]

well he is nole thats why

 

[Gonzo_style]

2 meetings on grass. Both times Murray won in straight sets. Pointless thread.

Luke had a better H2H but Vader is still the GOAT.

LOL what a clown you are

 

[SpicyCurry1990]

I would be interested in knowing what Mainad's thoughts are on this. Is 1 Wimbledon title + 3 Queens + Olympic Gold better than 2 Wimbledons but no smaller titles? I really don't know.

In my view slam wins on a surface tops anything else on that surface in terms of greatness, but not necessarily average level. So Nole>Murray on grass in greatness, just like Nadal>Nole on fast hard courts in greatness, despite Murray and Nole having greater resumes on that surface outside of the slam.

Nole has been more clutch and peaked more often on grass at the biggest stage despite Murray's higher level of consistency (more titles, higher win %). But I would say Murray has a higher average grass level.

Just like Nadal has been more clutch and peaked more often on fast hard at the biggest stage despite Nole's higher level of consistency (more titles, higher win %). But I would say Nole has a average higher fast hards level.

I think Nole/Nadal on fast hards is closer because Nole still beats Nadal in USO Finals reached and USO win %, but Nole beats out Murray in all 3 categories at Wimby.

 

[Flint]

Queens is a 250 event. Most of the players are using it strictly for tune-up; I don't think it really counts for anything in any achievement debate.

Isn't queens like the most popular 250 event there is along with Halle due to..............grass?

 

[D.Nalby12]

W championship is jewel in the crown of tennis, so 2>1 , no way that even 5 Queens title can't raplace a single one from SW19, not to mention about the Olympics.
Novak is simply better all round player than Murray in every aspect of the game,better FH,sligtly better BH and ROS, much better second serve, better agility, mental strenght..with all this he can compensate his slightly worse movement on the grass.

Sensible post. Novak has slightly worse movement but he easily compensates with other aspects in which he's miles ahead than Murray. Basically I can't even imagine Djokovic getting dismantled on grass/hard in his prime by young Dimitrov.

 

[Mayonnaise]

Nadal leads AO H2H with Federer 3-0 with 1absolute beat down. So Nadal > Federer at AO?

Comprehension is not your friend

Read the post I was responding to, read my post, and you'll realize I was saying exactly that: titles matter, not who you beat and how many times.

 

[Mayonnaise]

5(5/6) titles vs 2(2/5) titles. Who is the more accomplished grass player?

Wimbledon > Olympics + 3 Queen's.

 

[drm025]

In my view slam wins on a surface tops anything else on that surface in terms of greatness, but not necessarily average level. So Nole>Murray on grass in greatness, just like Nadal>Nole on fast hard courts in greatness, despite Murray and Nole having greater resumes on that surface outside of the slam.

Nole has been more clutch and peaked more often on grass at the biggest stage despite Murray's higher level of consistency (more titles, higher win %). But I would say Murray has a higher average grass level.

Just like Nadal has been more clutch and peaked more often on fast hard at the biggest stage despite Nole's higher level of consistency (more titles, higher win %). But I would say Nole has a average higher fast hards level.

I think Nole/Nadal on fast hards is closer because Nole still beats Nadal in USO Finals reached and USO win %, but Nole beats out Murray in all 3 categories at Wimby.

I agree with this.

Hey Spicy, you get my email?

 

[AssaultJoker]

Djokovic defeated Dimitrov who absolutely dismantled Murray on grass, so it's two fold ownership and same for 2011. :wink:

Seriously there is no meaning teaching maths to brick wall and debating with clueless Fanboys. They still to come with effective counterargument except H2H, which is proven failed criteria for comparison.

But what's your opinion on topic besides tremendous efforts of detailing thread?

Djokovic doesn't even play at Queens since entering his prime in 2011, we can use the same analogy that Borg fans are referring to that Borg would have easily won some more AO's if he had decided to play there. The same can be said about Djokovic, he could have won some Queens's if not refusal to play there.

At the end of the day 2Wimbys>1, that's all that matters considering that both are from the same era.

 

[Flint]

Djokovic defeated Dimitrov who absolutely dismantled Murray on grass, so it's two fold ownership and same for 2011. :wink:

Seriously there is no meaning teaching maths to brick wall and debating with clueless Fanboys. They still to come with effective counterargument except H2H, which is proven failed criteria for comparison.

But what's your opinion on topic besides tremendous efforts of detailing thread?

That's rather convenient. To say there is no mathematical argument in Murrays favor and then realising that there is indeed a mathematical argument in Murrays favor which is the H2H on grass. Just saying that is proven to have failed for a criteria.

That suggests a very biased opinion.

If H2H was proven to be a failed criteria we wouldn't get thread after thread about Nadal Vs Federer because every Nadal fan would know that Federer is superior.

Djokovic has never won a set against Murray on grass, that is extremely relevant for this topic, no matter how much people might try to bring Del Potro or hurricanes or whatever else into it.

 

[AssaultJoker]

That's rather convenient. To say there is no mathematical argument in Murrays favor and then realising that there is indeed a mathematical argument in Murrays favor which is the H2H on grass. Just saying that is proven to have failed for a criteria.

That suggests a very biased opinion.

If H2H was proven to be a failed criteria we wouldn't get thread after thread about Nadal Vs Federer because every Nadal fan would know that Federer is superior.

Djokovic has never won a set against Murray on grass, that is extremely relevant for this topic, no matter how much people might try to bring Del Potro or hurricanes or whatever else into it.

Both guys are from the same era, Murray is only 1 week older than Djokovic. 2Wimbledons>1Wimbledon. End.

 

[Mayonnaise]

That's rather convenient. To say there is no mathematical argument in Murrays favor and then realising that there is indeed a mathematical argument in Murrays favor which is the H2H on grass. Just saying that is proven to have failed for a criteria.

That suggests a very biased opinion.

If H2H was proven to be a failed criteria we wouldn't get thread after thread about Nadal Vs Federer because every Nadal fan would know that Federer is superior.

Djokovic has never won a set against Murray on grass, that is extremely relevant for this topic, no matter how much people might try to bring Del Potro or hurricanes or whatever else into it.

Why is the H2H relevant? Does the H2H make up for a freakin' Wimbledon title? :shock:

 

[Russeljones]

LOL what a clown you are

The clowns are those who denigrate the achievement of winning Masters-equivalent draws at Queens and the Olympics. The question here is about the better grass specialist. It has to be Murray.

 

[Gonzo_style]

The clowns are those who denigrate the achievement of winning Masters-equivalent draws at Queens and the Olympics. The question here is about the better grass specialist. It has to be Murray.

LOL that's why Djokovic plays year after year there :lol::lol:

 

[Djokovic2011]

The clowns are those who denigrate the achievement of winning Masters-equivalent draws at Queens and the Olympics. The question here is about the better grass specialist. It has to be Murray.

But if we're strictly talking about achievements would you say that Djokovic> Murray on grass?

 

[Tony48]

Djokovic is supremely talented tennis player....and a player of his caliber can play ANYWHERE. Like Federer and Ferrer. Ferrer is probably more of a claycouter, whereas Federer is just an all-around amazing tennis player.....where the surface isn't THAT much of factor.

Players like that don't have trouble adapting to different surfaces.

 

[D.Nalby12]

In my view slam wins on a surface tops anything else on that surface in terms of greatness, but not necessarily average level. So Nole>Murray on grass in greatness, just like Nadal>Nole on fast hard courts in greatness, despite Murray and Nole having greater resumes on that surface outside of the slam.

Nole has been more clutch and peaked more often on grass at the biggest stage despite Murray's higher level of consistency (more titles, higher win %). But I would say Murray has a higher average grass level.

Just like Nadal has been more clutch and peaked more often on fast hard at the biggest stage despite Nole's higher level of consistency (more titles, higher win %). But I would say Nole has a average higher fast hards level.

I think Nole/Nadal on fast hards is closer because Nole still beats Nadal in USO Finals reached and USO win %, but Nole beats out Murray in all 3 categories at Wimby.

Good point raised here, in terms of grass greatness Novak > Andy currently. Additionally both are from same generation, if Murray has top grass court skills then why he couldn't stop Djokovic winning Wimbledon twice in his prime? because he was busy getting humiliated by someone who's currently busy getting humiliated by 100+ rankers. and Novak is very consistent performer here since 2010 getting SF+ for 5 straight years..Djokovic has some great victories on grass in last 5 years over Nadal, Federer, Del Potro, Tsonga, Berdych, Haas (Very high quality encounter last year), Dimitrov (On top form with 10 match winning streak on grass, absolutely dismantled Murray in front of home crowd)

 

[Mayonnaise]

Good point raised here, in terms of grass greatness Novak > Andy currently. Additionally both are from same generation, if Murray has top grass court skills then why he couldn't stop Djokovic winning Wimbledon twice in his prime? because he was busy getting humiliated by someone who's currently busy getting humiliated by 100+ rankers. and Novak is very consistent performer here since 2010 getting SF+ for 5 straight years..Djokovic has some great victories on grass in last 5 years over Nadal, Federer, Del Potro, Tsonga, Berdych, Haas (Very high quality encounter last year), Dimitrov (On top form with 10 match winning streak on grass, absolutely dismantled Murray in front of home crowd)

Murray wasn't getting humiliated. He was just losing. Was Djokovic being humiliated by Murray in their two matches? Djokovic is the greater Grasscourter, but that could very well still change.

 

[D.Nalby12]

The clowns are those who denigrate the achievement of winning Masters-equivalent draws at Queens and the Olympics. The question here is about the better grass specialist. It has to be Murray.

Enough trolling now, Hewitt has 7 additional masters (grass) crowns then. :lol:

Fact is queens is deserving 250 (500 next year) warmup tournament. Since it's not even even masters (Draw, Depth of field), it's not special achievement. Even Novak doesn't care to participate it since 2011. Additionally it shows how versatile Novak is, since he has won Wimbledon twice without participating warmups.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Comprehension is not your friend

Read the post I was responding to, read my post, and you'll realize I was saying exactly that: titles matter, not who you beat and how many times.

Fair enough, I thought you were launching H2H missiles which historically famous for dropping in oceans before hitting target.

Murray wasn't getting humiliated. He was just losing. Was Djokovic being humiliated by Murray in their two matches? Djokovic is the greater Grasscourter, but that could very well still change.

6-1 7-6 6-2 against inexperienced young Dimitrov being defending Champion in front of home crowd in prime. Humiliation is rather very soft word to describe that beat down while Djokovic lost 2 close matches to experienced peak Murray.

Murray may be proven better player according to H2H but Djokovic is proven better against field. Show me the match Djokovic got humiliated by newbie especially on his favorite hard courts.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Djokovic is supremely talented tennis player....and a player of his caliber can play ANYWHERE. Like Federer and Ferrer. Ferrer is probably more of a claycouter, whereas Federer is just an all-around amazing tennis player.....where the surface isn't THAT much of factor.

Players like that don't have trouble adapting to different surfaces.

Well said. Finally Djokovic gets appreciation what he deserves. I agree with Federer and Djokovic are two most complete and versatile players ever. Federer with his all court skills and Djokovic with complete baseline game almost unbeatable in BO5 and their SF/QF streaks very good representative of their versatile abilities.

 

[Mayonnaise]

Fair enough, I thought you were launching H2H missiles which historically famous for dropping in oceans before hitting target.

H2H is for bitter Sampras/Nadal fans

6-1 7-6 6-2 against inexperienced young Dimitrov being defending Champion in front of home crowd in prime. Humiliation is rather very soft word to describe that beat down while Djokovic lost 2 close matches to experienced peak Murray.

Dimitrov is 23 years old. That's about the age most players are in their prime. Considering Dimitrov is being considered the most promising player of his generation, maybe, in time, it will not be seen as an upset at all

Murray may be proven better player according to H2H but Djokovic is proven better against field.

I think Murray is the better Grasscourter, but not because of his H2H. For now, Djokovic is greater, but I think Murray will finish with the better Grasscourt resume, which is why I consider him better. Time will tell.

Show me the match Djokovic got humiliated by newbie especially on his favorite hard courts.

Dimitrov is not a newbie. At 23, you could probably say he's just hit his prime, considering his recent results. I think this is a far more embarrassing loss, against a relic of the past :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkacPVyY8zM

 

[Bobby Jr]

..and his serve can be more of a weapon. Djokovic is now more accomplished at Wimbledon but overall I would have to give it to Murray.

Seriously? Djokovic's serve is better than Murray's by virtue of having an on-average way better second serve. It's not even a close contest there. Djokovic can hit second serves which can't be so easily attacked much more consistently than Murray can.

 

[D.Nalby12]

Dimitrov is 23 years old. That's about the age most players are in their prime. Considering Dimitrov is being considered the most promising player of his generation, maybe, in time, it will not be seen as an upset at all

I agree with Dimitrov is very talented but straight setted by new relatively inexperienced young talent is just too much if you call Murray is great grass courter. Djokovic handled Dimitrov well (Close match but Djokovic was rock solid on set points in 4th set) This shows Djokovic is more versatile in handling field even on grass.

I think Murray is the better Grasscourter, but not because of his H2H. For now, Djokovic is greater, but I think Murray will finish with the better Grasscourt resume, which is why I consider him better. Time will tell.

No problem, you're allowed to express your views as everyone on message board.

Dimitrov is not a newbie. At 23, you could probably say he's just hit his prime, considering his recent results. I think this is a far more embarrassing loss, against a relic of the past :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkacPVyY8zM

Dimitrov is still losing 1st round of RG against Karlovic. I think it's just 8-9 months he joined Rasheed. He is still developing. It was embarrassing loss since supposed grass courter Murray has no answers to Dimitrov's variety and all court game. He got flat outplayed in every department and that was not even close while supposed worse grass courter Djokovic managed to beat Dimitrov in next round. At least Dolgopolov took it to 5 sets. :lol:

In my view that match was indication of what is ahead, Dimitrov (Raonic also) will continue to own Murray in GS and Masters since they are getting better and better. This competition is just too tough for Murray since there are no Tsonga, Berdych, Ferrer in QF since new guys are stepping up. I think that match was turning point in Murray's career since he lost to young upcoming player who can trouble Murray on every surface till his retirement.

 

[Mayonnaise]

I agree with Dimitrov is very talented but straight setted by new relatively inexperienced young talent is just too much if you call Murray is great grass courter. Djokovic handled Dimitrov well (Close match but Djokovic was rock solid on set points in 4th set) This shows Djokovic is more versatile in handling field even on grass.

It just shows that Murray wasn't good enough on the day and Djokovic was.

No problem, you're allowed to express your views as everyone on message board.

I know that

Dimitrov is still losing 1st round of RG against Karlovic. I think it's just 8-9 months he joined Rasheed. He is still developing. It was embarrassing loss since supposed grass courter Murray has no answers to Dimitrov's variety and all court game. He got flat outplayed in every department and that was not even close while supposed worse grass courter Djokovic managed to beat Dimitrov in next round. At least Dolgopolov took it to 5 sets. :lol:

What does RG have to do with Wimbledon?

In my view that match was indication of what is ahead, Dimitrov (Raonic also) will continue to own Murray in GS and Masters since they are getting better and better. This competition is just too tough for Murray since there are no Tsonga, Berdych, Ferrer in QF since new guys are stepping up. I think that match was turning point in Murray's career since he lost to young upcoming player who can trouble Murray on every surface till his retirement.

Is the Kyrgios-Nadal match an indication of what's ahead? You're reading too much into it.

 

[Chico]

Djokovic isn't more accomplished on grass IMO, Murray has won more titles on the surface and has a better W/L%. And Chico's gonna hate me for saying it but I do think Murray is the more natural grass court player, his movement is certainly more fluid and his serve can be more of a weapon. Djokovic is now more accomplished at Wimbledon but overall I would have to give it to Murray.

Yes indeed. How can you say this?
Murray's serve more of a weapon than Djokovic's? Really? With that joke of a second serve? Also Novak's first serve is superior to Murray's - at least recently.
Also Djokovic is much better mover overall. His only problem on grass are the slippery shoes he was forced to wear by AELTC.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Yes indeed. How can you say this?
Murray's serve more of a weapon than Djokovic's? Really? With that joke of a second serve? Also Novak's first serve is superior to Murray's - at least recently.
Also Djokovic is much better mover overall. His only problem on grass are the slippery shoes he was forced to wear by AELTC.

I agree that Djokovic is underrated on grass but just because he has won more Wimbledons than Murray doesn't mean I should automatically think that he is better on the surface than him. Nadal has won more USO than Novak but would you say that he is a better HC player than him?

 

[Chico]

I agree that Djokovic is underrated on grass but just because he has won more Wimbledons than Murray doesn't mean I should automatically think that he is better on the surface than him. Nadal has won more USO than Novak but would you say that he is a better HC player than him?

5 > 3.

Novak has won more HC slams than Nadal. Why are you acting like Nadal fan and twist the facts?

 

[Djokovic2011]

5 > 3.

Novak has won more HC slams than Nadal. Why are you acting like Nadal fan and twist the facts?

Yes, I think Novak is(by far) the better player on HC than Nadal but I still believe that Murray is better on grass and the fact that he has yet to even drop a set to Novak in their two matches only reinforces my opinion.

 

[Chico]

Yes, I think Novak is(by far) the better player on HC than Nadal but I still believe that Murray is better on grass and the fact that he has yet to even drop a set to Novak in their two matches only reinforces my opinion.

2 > 1. End of story.

Man, Novak gets no love here, even from his fans.

 

[Djokovic2011]

2 > 1. End of story.

Man, Novak gets no love here, even from his fans.

Djokovic is greater on grass, but Murray is better. There's a difference Chico.

I take it you believe Nadal is a greater USO champion than Novak seeing as 2>1.

 

[NatF]

Djokovic despite playing below his best level actually kept Murray tight in both their grass court matches. I think the 2012 score was 7-5 7-5 and at Wimbledon last year Djokovic led in at least 2 of the sets IIRC.

If he played at his Wimbledon 2014 final level or his Wimbledon 2013 semi final level I think he could definitely match Murray.

Murray is more natural on the surface but Djokovic when he's playing well is generally superior IMO.

 

[Mayonnaise]

2 > 1. End of story.

Man, Novak gets no love here, even from his fans.

What do you think about, 17 > 14 > 7?

 

[Djokovic2011]

What do you think about, 17 > 14 > 7?

What do you think about 10>23 and 2>9? :twisted:

 

[D.Nalby12]

Djokovic despite playing below his best level actually kept Murray tight in both their grass court matches. I think the 2012 score was 7-5 7-5 and at Wimbledon last year Djokovic led in at least 2 of the sets IIRC.

If he played at his Wimbledon 2014 final level or his Wimbledon 2013 semi final level I think he could definitely match Murray.

Murray is more natural on the surface but Djokovic when he's playing well is generally superior IMO.

Yeah Wimbledon to USO last year was worst run of his life since he wasn't there mentally. That RG loss hurt him lot and I think he's no longer same player mentally.

I disagree with Murray more natural grass court player Djokovic is better than Murray in every aspect of the game except movement and which is not major factor when he have unbreakable baseline game and excellent shot making skills. I think post Becker he improved his serve a lot, I never seen Djokovic winning so many free points on serve. His improved serve remained undiscussed in my view.

 

[Mayonnaise]

What do you think about 10>23 and 2>9? :twisted:

Is Roddick > Djokovic?

 

[Djokovic2011]

Is Roddick > Djokovic?

6-4 is hardly the same as 23-10. :wink:

 

[Mayonnaise]

6-4 is hardly the same as 23-10. :wink:

Why not? It's the same metric! :twisted:

I ask again: how do you determine the greatness of a player? By their titles or their H2Hs?

 

[D.Nalby12]

It just shows that Murray wasn't good enough on the day and Djokovic was.

You just conceded supposed superior grass court player in your view wasn't good enough to take set against inexperienced Dimitrov. While Dolgopolov took two. :lol:

What does RG have to do with Wimbledon?

That shows Dimitrov is still improving, losing to Karlovic on clay, how can fall further down calling him prime?

Is the Kyrgios-Nadal match an indication of what's ahead? You're reading too much into it.

Thrashing is ahead, wait for it.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Why not? It's the same metric! :twisted:

I ask again: how do you determine the greatness of a player? By their titles or their H2Hs?

By their titles of course. I'm just trolling you- you've become one of my favourite posters on this forum already. Long live Mayo!

 

[tipsa...don'tlikehim!]

Djokovic isn't more accomplished on grass IMO, Murray has won more titles on the surface and has a better W/L%. And Chico's gonna hate me for saying it but I do think Murray is the more natural grass court player, his movement is certainly more fluid and his serve can be more of a weapon. Djokovic is now more accomplished at Wimbledon but overall I would have to give it to Murray.

and why should you worry if Chico hates you ?

 

[Mayonnaise]

You just conceded supposed superior grass court player in your view wasn't good enough to take set against inexperienced Dimitrov. While Dolgopolov took two. :lol:

Really? Is Wawrinka > Djokovic on Clay because Djokovic lost to Federer at Monte Carlo and Wawrinka beat him?

That shows Dimitrov is still improving, losing to Karlovic on clay, how can fall further down calling him prime?

Because Dimitrov is not an all-time great? Maybe that is his prime, with all its inconsistencies.

Thrashing is ahead, wait for it.

Yes, there is a strong era coming up. Djokovic won't be able to keep up with that strong era!

 

[Mayonnaise]

By their titles of course. I'm just trolling you- you've become one of my favourite posters on this forum already. Long live Mayo!

Exactly. And 17 > 14 > 7.

Also, while you're nowhere near my favorite poster (sorry) you are my favorite Djokovic fan

 

[Djokovic2011]

and why should you worry if Chico hates you ?

Because we're part of the same Brethren and he might feel like I'm betraying Nole.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Exactly. And 17 > 14 > 7.

Also, while you're nowhere near my favorite poster (sorry) you are my favorite Djokovic fan

I'll get there in time. :wink:

 

[FreeBird]

5(5/6) titles vs 2(2/5) titles. Who is the more accomplished grass player?

Dumb post is dumb.

 

[D.Nalby12]

By their titles of course. I'm just trolling you

There is no shame telling other members your 24*7 job, stay classy! :lol:

- you've become one of my favourite posters on this forum already. Long live Mayo!

Even Stepanek doesn't change girlfriends the rate you're changing your troll idols. Yesterday there was other one!.