Who is better on hard courts: Nadal or Murray?

[triforce defender]

I think this is a much better question than Federer vs. Djokovic on hard courts (of course it's Federer!) Nadal and Murray's resumes on hard courts both have their unique plusses and minuses:

In Nadal's favor
1. More slam titles (3-1)
2. More slam finals (6-5)
3. Leads H2H (6-5)

In Murray's favor
1. More overall titles (25-16)
2. More Masters titles (9-8 )
3. More indoor titles (11-1)

What say you?

 

[Bukmeikara]

Its Nadal and its not even close. You can compare Murray to Roddick, Hewitt and Safin but Rafa is on totally different level.

 

[triforce defender]

Its Nadal and its not even close. You can compare Murray to Roddick, Hewitt and Safin but Rafa is on totally different level.

But there are solid points in favor of Murray.

 

[Bukmeikara]

But there are solid points in favor of Murray.

Well in my opinion if you take away the clay and grass from Nadals resume he is still better on paper than Murrays overall resume.

 

[Bad_Knee]

They both lucked out with homogenisation of the surfaces, both would suck on real speedy hard courts.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Nadal, no question.

 

[triforce defender]

Well in my opinion if you take away the clay and grass from Nadals resume he is still better on paper than Murrays overall resume.

We are only comparing their hard court resumes. Unless you're saying Nadal's HC resume is better than Murray's all-surface resume?

 

[tennisaddict]

At this stage Rafa. But Murray has time on his hands.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

We are only comparing their hard court resumes. Unless you're saying Nadal's HC resume is better than Murray's all-surface resume?

3 HC slams > 1 HC slam and 1 grass slam.

 

[Chico]

A good thread comparing HC tier 2 players from top 4, after having similar thread comparing tier 1 HC players Novak and Fed.

Here have to go with Murray. No question about it, despite some inflated results from Nadal. Nadal is merely one surface wonder and is not comparable to any other member of top 4 on any surface outside clay.

 

[Bad_Knee]

3 HC slams > 1 HC slam and 1 grass slam.

Amazing to think that in 4 of the 5 slams you mentioned above, Djokovic was the losing finalist...He's just easy bait in slam finals for those 2 guys.

 

[Bukmeikara]

We are only comparing their hard court resumes. Unless you're saying Nadal's HC resume is better than Murray's all-surface resume?

Yep, Nadal is better than Murray at Australia, New York, Indian Wells, Canada and WTF. He fells short in Miami(still more finals, more wins and better win % for Nadal), Cincinnati and Shanghai/Madrid.

Murray has some good wins against Nadal including baggels but Rafa beated Federer in Dubai which is a formidable achievment considering how good are both Fed and Novak there.

 

[Deleted member 512391]

My vote goes to Nadal. He's had more success at the most important tournaments: more Majors (more titles and more finals), more success at WTF (Nadal's two finals against Murray's zero) and if you include the Olmpic gold on hard courts, it beats everything that Murray has achieved on that surface.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Nadal has 3 HC slams to Murray's 1. Why is the OP majoring in minors?

Unbelievable

 

[Bad_Knee]

Nadal has 3 HC slams to Murray's 1. Why is the OP majoring in minors?

Unbelievable

So Nadal is just as good on grass as Djokovic?

 

[Anti-Fedal]

Nadal by a country mile.

 

[Tennisknowledge99]

Nadal is better, even at indoor. Also Murray has mental block when he faced Rafa.

 

[Bender]

They both lucked out with homogenisation of the surfaces, both would suck on real speedy hard courts.

Say what you will about Rafa, but I don't think Murray really benefits from surface homogenisation.

The guy can't play well on clay because he has issues consistently generating his own power (at least that's what I remember Lendl saying back in the day). He's far better at redirecting pace, and plays way too flat on topspin-friendly surfaces.

I'd think Murray would do far better on faster surfaces.

 

[torpantennis]

So Nadal is just as good on grass as Djokovic?

Better! Losses in finals do count they say. :lol:

 

[torpantennis]

Nadal is better, even at indoor. Also Murray has mental block when he faced Rafa.

Yeah right. Indoor titles 11-1 Murray.:roll:

 

[The_Order]

So Nadal is just as good on grass as Djokovic?

No, he's better.

2 WIM titles + 3 WIM finals > 2 WIM titles + 1 WIM final.

 

[Tennisknowledge99]

Yeah right. Indoor titles 11-1 Murray.:roll:

I'm talking about their match at indoor, not their achievement. Nadal led 2-1 at indoor. Did Murray ever make to the WTF Final??

You want to compare achievement?

AO: Nadal 1
Murray 0

USO: Nadal 2
Murray 1

Nadal also won Olympics Gold Medal on Hard court

Nadal and Murray, who had more best wins over Nole on hard court??

:lol::lol:

 

[Mainad]

Its Nadal and its not even close. You can compare Murray to Roddick, Hewitt and Safin but Rafa is on totally different level.

Well, if you look again at the OP's stats for their HC results, of course it's close! However, Nadal's better Slam record on HC clearly puts him ahead with 6 finals v 5 for Murray and a conversion rate of 3-6 to Murray's 1-4.

 

[chjtennis]

Of course, Nadal. The records speak for themselves. However, Murray can raise his level and compete on HC with Nadal.

 

[D.Nalby12]

If MM tournaments matters the most then Lendl and Connors would be Undisputed GOAT candidates. :lol:

In fact Murray's lone hard court slam win which is one of the biggest jokes in modern Tennis, I'm wondering how posters here can find the way to compare him to Nadal on hard court achievements who has 3 times HC GS titles including title on both Deco turf and Plexicusion.

There is no surface Murray is better than any member of Big 3 unfortunately. Sorry Rafa haters!

 

[cc0509]

If MM tournaments matters the most then Lendl and Connors would be Undisputed GOAT candidates. :lol:

In fact Murray's lone hard court slam win which is one of the biggest jokes in modern Tennis, I'm wondering how posters here can find the way to compare him to Nadal on hard court achievements who has 3 times HC GS titles including title on both Deco turf and Plexicusion.

There is no surface Murray is better than any member of Big 3 unfortunately. Sorry Rafa haters!

Seriously, you need to pipe down!

Believe it or not the hc achievements of Murray and Nadal are not THAT far apart. In Masters 1000 hc events, Murray has the slight title lead 9-8 over Nadal and in hc grand slams where they have played against each other the h2h is 2-2. What gives Nadal the decided edge on hc are his 2 more hc slam titles.

 

[Djokovic2011]

Seriously, you need to pipe down!

Believe it or not the hc achievements of Murray and Nadal are not THAT far apart. In Masters 1000 hc events, Murray has the slight title lead 9-8 over Nadal and in hc grand slams where they have played against each other the h2h is 2-2. What gives Nadal the decided edge on hc are his 2 more hc slam titles.

Wow, you just majored in minors by bringing up the Masters cc0 - I'm shocked! :grin:

 

[MichaelNadal]

Wow, you just majored in minors by bringing up the Masters cc0 - I'm shocked! :grin:

Well Nadal is the #KOM as well

 

[Djokovic2011]

Well Nadal is the #KOM as well

He won't be in a few years time babe. :wink:

 

[MichaelNadal]

He won't be in a few years time babe. :wink:

:lol: Yes he will. It might be closer than I'd like it to be, but Novak passing him isn't a concern for me. Good luck on Nadal only winning 1 master next year.

 

[Djokovic2011]

:lol: Yes he will. It might be closer than I'd like it to be, but Novak passing him isn't a concern for me. Good luck on Nadal only winning 1 master next year.

Lol, I was only kidding but ooh you can be an overconfident sob at times MN! :lol:

 

[Mainad]

Of course, Nadal. The records speak for themselves. However, Murray can raise his level and compete on HC with Nadal.

In actual fact, Murray is 1-1 v Nadal at the AO and 1-1 v Nadal at the USO so overall he is 2-2 v Nadal in HC Slams which means they are very well balanced in the biggest hardcourt events in their personal H2H. Even their 2010 semi-final at the WTF, their sole meeting at that event, went down to the wire with Murray holding match points in the final set tie breaker which he failed to convert.

All of which means that Murray has already proved he can compete with Nadal on HC. He just needs to raise his level only a little more to start beating him more. As you say, the records speak for themselves.

 

[Djokovic2011]

In actual fact, Murray is 1-1 v Nadal at the AO and 1-1 v Nadal at the USO so overall he is 2-2 v Nadal in HC Slams which means they are very well balanced in the biggest hardcourt events in their personal H2H. Even their 2010 semi-final at the WTF, their sole meeting at that event, went down to the wire with Murray holding match points in the final set tie breaker which he failed to convert.

All of which means that Murray has already proved he can compete with Nadal on HC. He just needs to raise his level only a little more to start beating him more. As you say, the records speak for themselves.

Did Murray have match points in that WTF match Mainad?

 

[D.Nalby12]

Seriously, you need to pipe down!

Believe it or not the hc achievements of Murray and Nadal are not THAT far apart. In Masters 1000 hc events, Murray has the slight title lead 9-8 over Nadal

I know that. At masters level they are almost equal and at GS Rafa leads by big margin. A margin equals to Murray's complete successful career at GS level on three surfaces over 8-9 years!

Rest of MM titles = Popcorn discussion.

and in hc grand slams where they have played against each other the h2h is 2-2. What gives Nadal the decided edge on hc are his 2 more hc slam titles.

H2H ain't the argument objective Tennis fan would use to compare two players, unless one is losing argument. It has flaws as we all know.

 

[Mainad]

Did Murray have match points in that WTF match Mainad?

Yep, he had at least 1 and maybe 2 (can't quite recall for sure) in the final set tie break!

 

[cc0509]

H2H ain't the argument objective Tennis fan would use to compare two players, unless one is losing argument. It has flaws as we all know.

It absolutely is a part of the objective argument to compare the h2h in slams between two players, wtf are you talking about? The reality is at the hc slams the h2h between Murray and Nadal is 2-2 so Nadal has not been clobbering Murray on hc at the most important hc tournaments in tennis.

The only area where Nadal comes out on top of this whole hc argument over Murray is with their hc slam title difference and of course slams are the most important titles. 3-1 in favor of Nadal. Everywhere else Murray is just as good if not better than Nadal (indoors) on hc.

 

[MichaelNadal]

Yep, he had at least 1 and maybe 2 (can't quite recall for sure) in the final set tie break!

That was an awesome match. I love Nadal/Murray matches.

 

[clayqueen]

I think this is a much better question than Federer vs. Djokovic on hard courts (of course it's Federer!) Nadal and Murray's resumes on hard courts both have their unique plusses and minuses:

In Nadal's favor
1. More slam titles (3-1)
2. More slam finals (6-5)
3. Leads H2H (6-5)

In Murray's favor
1. More overall titles (25-16)
2. More Masters titles (9-8 )
3. More indoor titles (11-1)

What say you?

Only slam titles matter. Is that not the common consensus?

 

[clayqueen]

Amazing to think that in 4 of the 5 slams you mentioned above, Djokovic was the losing finalist...He's just easy bait in slam finals for those 2 guys.

Oops!

 

[Gary Duane]

Only slam titles matter. Is that not the common consensus?

That's not my opinion, but I would agree that it is the most important factor.

I can see one player having one more slam than the other but way more Masters being the better player, especially if the player with one more slam has a far weaker H2H.

For instance, Fed has three more slams. Superior. I'm not sure what the Masters count is right now. I think Fed leads.

But unlike most Fed fans (I am a fan of both) I think the 23/10 H2H has to be considered.

So I'd say right now the edge goes to Nadal, but time could change that.

 

[John6239]

Surprisingly Murray has more hardcourt masters titles than nadal and has a lot more titles. Still when it comes down to it nadal has 3 hardcourt slams vs 1. Murray is a better hardcourt player than nadal but nadal has a considerably higher peak level on hardcourt than murray which is why nadal has 3 slams.

 

[merwy]

Surprisingly Murray has more hardcourt masters titles than nadal and has a lot more titles. Still when it comes down to it nadal has 3 hardcourt slams vs 1. Murray is a better hardcourt player than nadal but nadal has a considerably higher peak level on hardcourt than murray which is why nadal has 3 slams.

I think Murray has also played a lot more HC M1000s, as Nadal skips them a lot because of injury or just to rest up. Nadal plays about every week during the clay season and after that takes a lot of weeks off here and there. And of course Nadal isn't that good indoors so you have that as well.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Surprisingly Murray has more hardcourt masters titles than nadal and has a lot more titles. Still when it comes down to it nadal has 3 hardcourt slams vs 1. Murray is a better hardcourt player than nadal but nadal has a considerably higher peak level on hardcourt than murray which is why nadal has 3 slams.

How is Murray better hardcourt player than Nadal? Is he more offensive, have better serve or forehand or something?

Master 1000 Nadal/Murray

Titles 8/9
Finals 15/12
SF 29/20

Andy has inferiour record to Nadal at the Slams, Master and the WTF. How is that making him the better player? Murray has more titles probably because he played more tournaments(not checked) while Nadal preffers the clay ones. And yet Nadal had still won Beijing, Tokyo, Dubai, Doha and played final at Rotterdam and Tokyo.

 

[Deleted member 307496]

Surprisingly Murray has more hardcourt masters titles than nadal and has a lot more titles. Still when it comes down to it nadal has 3 hardcourt slams vs 1. Murray is a better hardcourt player than nadal but nadal has a considerably higher peak level on hardcourt than murray which is why nadal has 3 slams.

Murray is the better player, but Nadal has the higher peak? Please clarify exactly what you mean by this statement.

 

[Bender]

Murray is the better player, but Nadal has the higher peak? Please clarify exactly what you mean by this statement.

Probably something to do with consistency in performance on HC as opposed to highest playing level on HC.

Murray's performance is pretty consistent on HC. Nadal's is rather bipolar, for lack of better words. He's either amazing or mediocre, although thankfully for him, his best performances have been at the slams.

 

[jg153040]

It's about slams, so 3vs1 and more finals seals the deal for me.

Quality over quantity. Even indoor, Rafa at least has two WTF finals.

Murray is maybe more consistent overall, but Nadal brings better tennis in big matches, when it matters.

 

[jg153040]

Probably something to do with consistency in performance on HC as opposed to highest playing level on HC.

Murray's performance is pretty consistent on HC. Nadal's is rather bipolar, for lack of better words. He's either amazing or mediocre, although thankfully for him, his best performances have been at the slams.

But luckily for Nadal, it's big matches that matter. Quality over quantity. Mental aspect and physical aspect play a big part there and Nadal is better.

A lot of players are amazing in practice or lower matches. But, the trick is to bring your A game in big matches. That is difficult, because other aspects besides skills play a huge role. So, skills alone isn't enough. That's what's great about tennis.

 

[jga111]

I suspect Nadal was not motivated enough for the majority of his indoor matches with Murray. He wins when it matters...

 

[TheFifthSet]

A good thread comparing HC tier 2 players from top 4, after having similar thread comparing tier 1 HC players Novak and Fed.

Here have to go with Murray. No question about it, despite some inflated results from Nadal. Nadal is merely one surface wonder and is not comparable to any other member of top 4 on any surface outside clay.

........





Nadal is better than Murray on grass by leaps and bounds. 9-1 in sets in their 3 Wimbledon matches, 2 titles to 1, 5 finals to 2. Asinine to argue that Nadal "isn't comparable" to Murray on grass.


And on hardcourts he is more accomplished. But on grass, I mean............................

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Nadal is the third best on HC in this era, with only Federer and Djokovic having superior records than him. Murray though, solidly stands at fourth imo.