Why Has Murray Beaten Nadal The Last Three Time They Played?
- Thread starter TheRealTruth
- Start date
lambielspins
Banned
You already lose all credability when you refer to Djokovic as one of the top 2 hard court players right now. The guy has lost in the semis of the last 2 slams on hard courts whereas Nadal, Federer, and Murray have either won 1, been in a finals of 1, or in Federer's case both. He has won 1 hard court tournament in the last 11 months, has gone a combined 1-5 vs Federer/Djokovic/Nadal on hard courts during that time and is somehow a top 2 hard court player right now!?! Let me know what planet you are visiting, thanks.
tennis_hand
Hall of Fame
You'll be surprised how much Murray will improve in the clay season.
Let's just watch.
Let's just watch.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Yes, let's just watch. I can't wait.
NandoMania
Rookie
Yes Federer has won the US Open so he is no slouch on hard court. But why has he been owned by Murray the last 4 times they played on hard court whilst Federer is number 2? Was Federer fortunate to not play Murray at AO?
Same applies for Djokovic and last two times they played
So Murray is regularly beating all three players ranked above him.
very good points.
People were saying how great it is that Nadal did not retire against Murray sat Rotterdam so Mauuary could earn his win. Now people are using Nadal's injury as an excuse of why Nadal lost and how that loss should not count. I don't think you can have it both ways. What matters in the end is that you were injured and lost and not whether you retire or play on.
Cyan
Hall of Fame
Disagree.
On the Wimbledon grass of 1999, definetely Murray wins.
On the Wimbledon grass of 2009, Rafa wins, definetely.
Cyan
Hall of Fame
Agreed............
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Murray definitely pushes Rafa out of his comfort zone on hard. Even when Nadal beat Murray the matches were extraordinarily tense and tight. I'm still convinced that Nadal will beat him again in the future on hard court. I don't think it will ever be a one-sided head to head. We'll see if I'm right or wrong rather soon I guess as I expect them to meet often this year.
mawashi
Hall of Fame
I have not read most of the post here so I'm sorry if I'm repeating some of what's been said but I believe that Nadal tries to play clay on every surface so unlike clay which requires that you gradually create the point, hc let's you blast your way to success.
Nadal's game play is still somewhat routed in that style of play where he tries to pull you off the court then makes a kill while guys like Murry can end points faster by taking time away from Nadal.
As much as I love Nadal's game, it's rather predictable in the way he hits the balls n his strategy in winning a point.
He has certainly improved his hc game but until he starts to go for shorter rallies n win points faster, he'll always be at the mercy of guys like Murry.
mawashi
Nadal's game play is still somewhat routed in that style of play where he tries to pull you off the court then makes a kill while guys like Murry can end points faster by taking time away from Nadal.
As much as I love Nadal's game, it's rather predictable in the way he hits the balls n his strategy in winning a point.
He has certainly improved his hc game but until he starts to go for shorter rallies n win points faster, he'll always be at the mercy of guys like Murry.
mawashi
How about a bet? I'll take Nadal on clay to win in straights against Murray....I'll do any bet you want, your fav racquet, money, anything....
I'll make it even better, if Murray gets even one set, you win, deal?
Last edited:
tahiti
Professional
Well I wouldn't count Doha and Rotterdam because they're not big tournaments. When you have a lot of points to defend it doesn't make sense in winning them all, there's nothing left to compensate the next year if you lose some.
But Murray has a game that can outcast NAdal, FEderer and Djokovic. He's just a brilliant player. Very fast and he's built up the determination and strength that he needs the last year. He's going to win a grand slam for sure. He's got the game.
But Murray has a game that can outcast NAdal, FEderer and Djokovic. He's just a brilliant player. Very fast and he's built up the determination and strength that he needs the last year. He's going to win a grand slam for sure. He's got the game.
thalivest
Banned
It is stupid in a sense to count exos in head to head but I think the main point is that Murray seems to be building momentum vs Nadal on hard courts anyway. I somewhat agree with that but Murray also still has alot to prove in general.
Halba
Hall of Fame
thats not true a wins a win in sport. it all adds up ranking points. Murray is killing it with these Masters series and MM tourneys. Imagine if he did well at FO,Wimbledon and USO this year.
Rhino
Legend
D
Deleted member 21996
Guest
so according to this genious of Geography and Physics Murray never actually beat Nadal!!!
vince evert
New User
I wonder how Murray would fare against Rafa on the European clay season?
I think he's got the potential to win against Rafa even on clay. Except that is in a best of five match like at the French Open, where Rafa's groundies and superior conditioning will wear Murray out.
I think he's got the potential to win against Rafa even on clay. Except that is in a best of five match like at the French Open, where Rafa's groundies and superior conditioning will wear Murray out.
Rhino
Legend
Yeah talk about tunnel vision!
Nadal Freak actually has a selective memory when it comes to Rafa...
his loses are not actually true loses, no? They are merely matches Nadal would have won apart from outside elements that have nothing to do with his genius and should not really be counted.
D
Deleted member 21996
Guest
yeah.. right... andy thinks so too! what is that bs you guys keep on talking about conditioning? muscles? you do understand conditioning is also not having your body falling appart every two tournaments?
cknobman
Legend
Nadal will be owned by Murray all year long. Unlike Federer, Nadal cant exploit Murrays backhand and Murray can be even more of a grinder than Nadal. Then add the fact that Nadal usually is not in 100% perfect condition and that just makes it even easier for Murray to outlast him.
Unless things change I say at end of 09 it could be:
1. Murray
2. Nadal
3. Federer
4. Djoker
Unless things change I say at end of 09 it could be:
1. Murray
2. Nadal
3. Federer
4. Djoker
Cyan
Hall of Fame
Disagree. On clay, grass and slow HC's Rafa will beat him. Murray wont even win a slam this year.
At the end of the year
1. Rafa
2. Federer
3. Murray
4. Nole
Last edited:
Cyan
Hall of Fame
How about a bet? I'll take Nadal on clay to win in straights against Murray....I'll do any bet you want, your fav racquet, money, anything....
I'll make it even better, if Murray gets even one set, you win, deal?
Agreed. And btw, Murrays best chance to win a slam this year was at the AO and he blew it. Fed is winning the USO so this will be a slamless year for Murray.
Rhino
Legend
i doubt Nadal, Federer, or Djokovic would drop a set against Sergiy Stakhovsky.
edberg505
Legend
If Nadal dropped a set to the 407 ranked player in the world then anything is quite possible and well, I don't even want to mention Djokovic right now because he is totally off track at the moment.
edmondsm
Legend
Nadal was beating Murray on hardcourts back then too. Less then a year later, Murray is a much better player. I would give Murray a very good chance on grass these days, not clay though.
Cyan
Hall of Fame
On fast grass, yes. Like for example Queens. At Wimbledon right now with the slowed down grass, no.
Good post.
stician
Semi-Pro
Murray returns well and I mean he returns deep. His backhand can handle the spin from Nadal's forehand because he's tall, strong and uses both hands. He's good and young so I expect him to continue giving Nadal problems. In terms of competing at the big venues, well that comes down to determination and mental strength. At this point Nadal is hands down number one.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Great post! I agree!
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
What's missing from this equation is the way Nadal is a. constantly improving, and b. finding a way to win.
Thus far, we have seen Nadal take a more aggressive stance on grass and hardcourt. He has added new elements to his game at an alarming pace.
As time wears on Nadal will improve, so will Murray, but at the present time Nadal leads Murray 5-2. There is no ownage there.
Thus far, we have seen Nadal take a more aggressive stance on grass and hardcourt. He has added new elements to his game at an alarming pace.
As time wears on Nadal will improve, so will Murray, but at the present time Nadal leads Murray 5-2. There is no ownage there.
Another great post and i agree. Nadal is adapting/improving his game all the time. I didn't expect much from him last week - he played an excellent game against Tsonga and that was good enough for me
edmondsm
Legend
Well then you could say Nadal isn't improving as fast as Murray, because Murray has turned the tide and won the last two meetings. Before Nadal was killing murray, now it's totally different.
It's not fast enough to bother Nadal though. Speed it up to what it once was (which was in that 90s speed) and Murray actually becomes a huge favorite.
edmondsm
Legend
It all depends on their form at the meeting, but the way Murray has played I would give him a good shot at Nadal on anything but the red stuff.
tahiti
Professional
If you've been watching someone's game for long enough, who doesn't have a "predictable game?"
Murray's still complaining about his ankle in Dubai. I bet 75% of the reasons are about the tournament, the draw, the length of matches, the difficulty of the matches and overall fitness when they reach other.
Murray's still complaining about his ankle in Dubai. I bet 75% of the reasons are about the tournament, the draw, the length of matches, the difficulty of the matches and overall fitness when they reach other.
maximo
Banned
5-3 actually.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
You're wrong: it's 5-2. (USO 2008 and Rotterdam 2009 are the only matches Murray has won against Nadal in competition).
Once again Murray doesn't own Nadal, maybe he will in the future but that's all conjectures at the moment. Murray owns Federer in best of 3 set matches as he's leading Fed 5-1 in those (he also leads Fed 5-2 overall). You guys have to go over the meaning of "owning", you don't really get it , you don't "own" somebody unless you're leading the head to head by a landslide. 13-6 (Nadal-Federer) would be a good example of what owning means: winning twice as many encounters as your opponent, you also need enough encounters for the "ownage" observation to be true, the more the better. "Ownage" cannot be very significant on the short term, it's mostly relevant on the long term after a lot of encounters. The best example for that is 16-2 (Federer-Roddick) over a period of time of 7 years or more.
Now if you understood my explanations, you'll see that Murray would have to beat Nadal in their next 4 encounters to just lead their head to head but he would have to win their next 8 encounters to officially "own" him, good luck to him with that!
Last edited:
edmondsm
Legend
I don't know if it's that cut and dry with the h2h. If Murray wins their next 4 matches then that will mean he has won 6 straight and it will be obvious that Murray has Nadal's number. Just like with Federer/Hewitt, they were basically even on h2h by 2005, but Federer had won 6 straight. It was obvious that Federer owned Hewitt by that point.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
That's a good point but "own" is a strong word, you could project that it would happen real soon but IMO as long as a head to head is 6-5 or something like that, you still have to wait for the "own" statement. You can predict that the "ownage" is on the verge of happening and you can predict that the losing player won't be able to reverse the trend with more and more accuracy with each loss but I would still consider head to head as an important indicator. If Nadal were to lose his next 4 matches to Murray, that would be a serious block for sure. I don't see that prediction as particularly likely but we'll see.
DarthFed
Hall of Fame
For once i agree with Veroniquem...regardless of whether Murray was to make the head to head 7-5 it wouldn't be an owning..
It's what i call a "domination trade" examples being Hewwit-Fed,Nalby-Fed, Agassi Fed....the domination switches and the score changes
Owning is what Federer does to most of the rest of the tour
A rivalry is like Federer Nadal 13-6, or Nadal Djokor 10-4
Imo opinion even a 20-0 is a rivalry, rivalry to me isn't about both wining, its about the sheer number of encounters...and playing Federer 19 times in the span of a few years is A LOT
It's what i call a "domination trade" examples being Hewwit-Fed,Nalby-Fed, Agassi Fed....the domination switches and the score changes
Owning is what Federer does to most of the rest of the tour
A rivalry is like Federer Nadal 13-6, or Nadal Djokor 10-4
Imo opinion even a 20-0 is a rivalry, rivalry to me isn't about both wining, its about the sheer number of encounters...and playing Federer 19 times in the span of a few years is A LOT
Sure,on hardcourts. And results wise it may not matter, unless Murray finds a way to avoid getting taken out in the Slams.
On clay, forget it. Nadal is probably the best clay courter ever. And Murray on clay is a nobody.
On grass, nadal 3 Wimby finals - 1 win, 1 Queens club title. I give it to him too
Says the guy who believed Donald Young would one day reach #1. I don't really disagree with your points, but I take issue when you make such an outrageous claim and then proceed to bash others for their lack of "credability."
Similar threads
- Poll
