abmk
Bionic Poster
Knew Stan was in 4 finals just had the ones he won on my mind that's all, so shoot me. Forgot about Hewitt playing Fed at USO but he certainly didn't fare better against him there than Murray did. Don't recall Murray getting bagelled TWICE in a single Slam final. So none of my slip-ups actually supported anything you said at all.
So nothing on the point about the AO finals and Becker/Courier/Murray. Simply trying to ignore that because you know you didn't have a proper point to rebutt? Atleast have the decency to acknowledge when someone else is right.
I already mentioned Hewitt's USO 04 final performance was below par. Other 3 were well above average though (including 2 vs worthy opponents - Sampras/Safin)
Shoulda woulda coulda. Fact remains that he didn't win whereas Murray won TWO Wimbledon finals, 1 against an ATG and he did both of them in straight sets. Cry me a river for poor Rodders.
you were the one who brought in shoulda woulda coulda first by saying Roddick missed a chance there, genius
Atleast one can feel sorry for Roddick who put in such an effort and talk about it. Murray's Wim 12 final was a worthwhile effort but quite less so than Roddick's.
Don't feel so when someone plays sh*t like USO 08/AO 11 final or not good efforts like AO 10 final/AO 16 final/RG 16 final
or for that matter Hewitt of USO 04 final/Roddick of Wim 05 final/Stan of RG 17 final
Also if you are so against shoulda, woulda, coulda, fact remains that Murray with 3 slams, 1YE#1, double digit masters, 1 YEC is simply not good enough to be at the level of Becker/Edberg/Wilander greatness wise. Stop saying he would do so much better in other eras then. He would do better in some, but not so much to rise to their level. And do worse if prime co-incided with fed's instead of Djokovic's.
Careful you don't choke on all those smilies. Fact remains that Murray beat an ATG in straight sets in a Slam final. Stan didn't a fact you would undoubtedly have pointed out if it was Stan whose record you like to diss instead of Murray's.
I didn't mention Hewitt straight-setting Sampras at USO specifically, did I?
All I need to say is that the performance was well above average.
Okay, I was a bit hasty again none of which is going to change our respective opinions on Murray's worth one little bit (unfortunately in your case).
of course you won't admit Murray being well above average in only 4/11 slam finals as opposed to 3/5 for Roddick, 3/4 for Hewitt and 3/4 for Stan.
of course you won't admit Murray being even slightly above average in only 6/11 slam finals as opposed to 4/5 for Roddick, 3/4 for Hewitt and 3/4 for Stan.
All you can cry about is competition/ATGs. It doesn't matter much if you don't put up worthwhile performances. You are probably going to lose to other good players in other eras as well with performances like that. A couple of performances like that are understandable/expected, but not as frequently as Murray has if you want to be anywhere near ATG level.
While Murray is overall a superior player to all 3 - Hewitt, Wawrinka, Roddick, its quite clear to anyone who know tennis/isn't so biased that those 3 put up clearly better performances in slam finals on an average than Murray did.
Last edited: