Will Delpo or Murray become a Novak ?

[tennisaddict]

Novak before USO 2010, played true to the 'Always the bridesmaid never a Bride'. Coming close every time but still not getting over Fed, Nadal.

In fact after the AO 2008, he reached abysmal lows with unexplainable losses. His serve deserted him big time, no steady coaching. His strong defense was probably the only reason that kept him in the top. He could have faded away as a single major winner.

I see 2 matches that were pivotal in Novak starting a new chapter :

- the 2010 USO SF , saving 2 match points on serve and winning the match

- Davis cup victory gave him momentum, but it was the straight set victory over Fed in 2011 AO SF that gave him the belief that he can now beat Fedal consistenly at the big stage, not an one-off.

Coming to the topic about Delpo and Murray, they also have 1 major like how Novak had at the time of USO 2010 and waiting for the next big push.

Do they have the game and mental tenacity that Novak had to get a string of majors ? After all , they have age on their side.

If Delpo gets a big win against Novak in FO QF will it push him to another level ? With Murray, it is slightly different . He has been really at the top reaching several finals and SF's , probably much more than Novak had, yet still always falling short.

I see Novak having an incredible 2013-14 ala Fed 2005-06. He is clearly one level above players ranked 2-4 and 2 levels above players ranked 5-8. Every draw looks like a joke for Novak, that is the level he is at now.

 

[Deleted member 77403]

Novak before USO 2010, played true to the 'Always the bridesmaid never a Bride'. Coming close every time but still not getting over Fed, Nadal.

In fact after the AO 2008, he reached abysmal lows with unexplainable losses. His serve deserted him big time, no steady coaching. His strong defense was probably the only reason that kept him in the top. He could have faded away as a single major winner.

I see 2 matches that were pivotal in Novak starting a new chapter :

- the 2010 USO SF , saving 2 match points on serve and winning the match

- Davis cup victory gave him momentum, but it was the straight set victory over Fed in 2011 AO SF that gave him the belief that he can now beat Fedal consistenly at the big stage, not an one-off.

Coming to the topic about Delpo and Murray, they also have 1 major like how Novak had at the time of USO 2010 and waiting for the next big push.

Do they have the game and mental tenacity that Novak had to get a string of majors ? After all , they have age on their side.

If Delpo gets a big win against Novak in FO QF will it push him to another level ? With Murray, it is slightly different . He has been really at the top reaching several finals and SF's , probably much more than Novak had, yet still always falling short.

I see Novak having an incredible 2013-14 ala Fed 2005-06. He is clearly one level above players ranked 2-4 and 2 levels above players ranked 5-8. Every draw looks like a joke for Novak, that is the level he is at now.

I am hoping he has a great run at the top, but I don't know if every draw will look like a joke. He is not completely invincible, yes, he is the best in the world, and rightfully so, but with Federer, Nadal, Murray still around, and players like Del Potro lurking in the shadows, it will still require him to be in form all year round to really stand head and shoulders above the others like he did in 2011. Nadal, Federer and Murray all fought back very well in 2012, so lets see what happens now.

As for Murray and Del Potro running rampant, I wouldn't rule it out, both are great players, but they will need to contest with a prime Djoker who is also showing no signs of slowing down just yet.

 

[MonkeyBoy]

The pain of losing Wimbledon was the final push Murray needed to unlock his true potential.

Andy Murray predictions:

Will snag a Wimbledon in 13', and come to monopolize event in the coming years (bare minimum of three)

Will make Roland Garros final this year

Will win his first clay title in the coming months

Will take down a major player on clay

Will defend the USO

Will win the WTF


Thank you that is all

 

[OddJack]

No, they are both as hungry but neither is as agile and durable as Djoker.

Delpo will never win another major.

 

[tudwell]

I will be shocked if Murray doesn't win another major. He's arguably the favorite for Wimbledon or at worst co-favorite with Federer and Nadal. He's up there as the favorite with Djokovic at the two hard court slams. He should win at least one Wimbledon in his career and at least one more hard court major. I think he'll finish with somewhere between three and five majors - possibly more, but that'd be a tough ask.

I would love to see Del Potro win another major, but I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't happen. Neither would I be surprised if it did happen. If Nadal doesn't recover to his former level, Delpo's got a shot at the French. He can beat Federer there (he hasn't yet, but he can), I imagine he'd take Murray, and Djokovic would not be a lock to win against him, though he would be the favorite. He could possibly win another hard court major but he'd need Djokovic and Murray to slump a bit because they are poor match-ups for him and right now are dominating hard.

 

[Mainad]

Depends what you mean by 'become a Novak'?

If you mean, will they win multiple Slams, I think Murray is much more likelier than Del Potro to achieve that at some point. He consistently makes Slam finals including 3 out of the last 5 so he puts himself in much more of a position to win another. Since his 2009 USO win, Del Potro has never made it to any other Slam final!

If you mean will they have to wait another 3 years before they win their second Slam like Djokovic did, then Del Potro has already exceeded that time scale as it is now nearly 3 and a half years since his USO win. As I said above, Murray immediately made another Slam final straight after winning his first just 5 months ago!

In short: Murray more likely to emulate Djokovic as a multi-Slam winner while Del Potro has already been waiting longer than Djokovic to win another.

 

[timnz]

2008 masters cup

He did something else big in 2008 - don t forget the masters cup that year!

 

[OddJack]

I assumed what he meant by becoming Novak was to start a year and go 45-0 or whatever his streak was and hold three major titles at one time.

 

[xan]

I believe delpo might snatch 1 more slam at us open sometime in near future.

 

[forzamilan90]

Djokovic is truly a mercurial player. Potential top 10 player ever. That's asking too much of Murray and Del Potro.

 

[veroniquem]

Do you mean having a 2011 Novak type season? No, I don't think so. But both Murray and Delpo could win more than one slam, sure.

 

[mariecon]

Delpo not even in the same class as Nole, Nadal (if the knee holds up), Fed, Murray and I even think Ferrer is better than him.

Murray has the tools but today Nole that much better......answer to your question is NO.

If Ferrer is better than Delpo, why does Delpo have a major title while Ferrer doesn't? It's because Ferrer is a complete mental midget against the big 4. He's a great player but just not in their league. The reason he's even #4 is because he plays so many damn tournaments. Last year he played 24 tournaments while Delpo played 20. And Delpo's constantly getting injured, while Ferrer rarely if ever has an injury lay-off. Delpo can beat the big 4, just not consistently yet. That wrist injury really set him back a lot. But I wouldn't say Ferrer is better than him. Delpo's a lot younger too. He's just coming into his prime (age-wise). He'll win another major (at least).

 

[tennisaddict]

To clarify original post can Delpo or Murray find their 2.0 version ? Not just another major or two, but elevate their level.

Will they get a major breakthrough that will spur them on to become a genuine competition to Novak every single time and also win ?

 

[Mainad]

If Ferrer is better than Delpo, why does Delpo have a major title while Ferrer doesn't? It's because Ferrer is a complete mental midget against the big 4. He's a great player but just not in their league. The reason he's even #4 is because he plays so many damn tournaments. Last year he played 24 tournaments while Delpo played 20. And Delpo's constantly getting injured, while Ferrer rarely if ever has an injury lay-off. Delpo can beat the big 4, just not consistently yet. That wrist injury really set him back a lot. But I wouldn't say Ferrer is better than him. Delpo's a lot younger too. He's just coming into his prime (age-wise). He'll win another major (at least).

The trouble for Delpo is that he hasn't yet made a single Major final other than 2009 USO. In fact he's made only one other semi-final in a Slam and that was at 2009 FO, the same year he made his only ever Slam final. True, he was absent with injury for most of 2010 but we are now in 2013 and he seems to be no nearer cracking any more Slams. Case in point: he only made it as far as the 3rd round at this year's AO! So we are still waiting to see if he can make another deep run at a Slam. Murray, on the other hand, is consistently making Slam finals including the last 3 and so, although it's by no means a given, he is putting himself in a position with a much more realistic chance of bagging another at this moment in time than is Delpo.

 

[Zildite]

The reason he's even #4 is because he plays so many damn tournaments. Last year he played 24 tournaments while Delpo played 20.

Doesn't matter, Ferrer gets consistently good results at all levels. No one did better at the slams except the guys above him.
The rankings are set up to nullify mickey mouse tournament spamming anyway, two of his titles last year don't even count towards his ranking.
He is not that much different to other higher ranked players besides the big 4 who play less because their dominance allows it.

Murray probably more likely to get on a roll but not to Novak 2.0 extent.
Wouldn't want to count Del Potro out but he always been a level below the very top except for that short time in 2009. Too many players that can beat him on tour.

 

[spperry]

I think Murray can win more but I don't will ever be as good as Novak.

Don't see Delpo winning anymore, he is a very good player but his level doesn't seem to be the same as before the injury break and he doesn't move and defend as well as Murray.

So don't think either will become a Novak but can see Murray winning some more Grand Slams, think his best chance is Wimbledon this year.

 

[Relinquis]

murray is the poor man's djokovic... it's a matter of time for people to figure out how to play them and then the game will evolve* again... I really think Murray needs another big loss before he makes the necessary adjustments in mentality and strategy to go up a level. A feather makes you lose concentration? Really? C'mon, you are better than that Andy!

If Delpo can figure out a way to beat David Ferrer, it may unlock what he needs to start tackling Djokovic and Murray. Until then, it will be tough for him to break through the top 4. I'm surprised why Delpo doesn't come in more often to pressure his opponents. He has the serve and the big ground strokes to do it. Might be a key tactic. The open 13 in marseille that just ended had a lot of successful all court tennis, not just from usual suspects like Tsonga and Llodra, but even from Gilles Simon. It was very effective in small doses and created a lot of tension for the opponents. What other options does Juan-Martin have? Borrow Nadal's left arm?


* imo, these two may adapt and change for the better, become more like all-courters at times.

 

[Relinquis]

wait a minute?

Ferrer isn't just more highly ranked than Delpo, he owns him on all surfaces. 6-2.
http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=F401&oId=D683

Check out their match on grass at Wimbledon last year or on hard-courts at the World Tour Finals. Watch the actual tennis being played against one another. You guys don't give Daveeeeed his due. He's a beast compared to the guys ranked below him.

 

[Cup8489]

I dont think Novak made a slam final between AO 2008 and USO 2010, did he? SO technically Murray's big boost should have been this past AO, so we'll see where he goes from there I guess.

 

[mariecon]

Doesn't matter, Ferrer gets consistently good results at all levels. No one did better at the slams except the guys above him.
The rankings are set up to nullify mickey mouse tournament spamming anyway, two of his titles last year don't even count towards his ranking.
He is not that much different to other higher ranked players besides the big 4 who play less because their dominance allows it.

Murray probably more likely to get on a roll but not to Novak 2.0 extent.
Wouldn't want to count Del Potro out but he always been a level below the very top except for that short time in 2009. Too many players that can beat him on tour.

Delpo's definitely inconsistent. I'm not denying that. But if I had to pick between him and Ferrer, I'd pick him simply because if his game is on he is capable of beating a top guy whereas Ferrer, sorry to say, isn't. And Ferrer is almost 31. So I can't see him suddenly acquiring the ability to beat one of the big 4.

For sure Murray's going to win more slams but I don't think he'll have a superman year like Djoko did in 2011. The next couple of years will be interesting.

 

[cc0509]

No Del Potro will NOT become a Novak, not even close. The guy has never even won a Masters 1000 tournament!

I don't think Murray will become as successful as Djokovic is either but Murray has a better shot to win a few more slams and Murray is a more talented player than Del Potro is. I don't think Del Potro will win another slam, never did.

 

[90's Clay]

Has Del Potro won a masters even yet? No neither Murray or Del Potro will become Nole. Del Potro's career was destroyed by injuries and his peak was cut short. He will never be the same again.

Murray is just a LESSER version of Djokovic and just isn't mentally wired correct to have the type of success that Nole has had at the slams.

Murray will have a great career but he isn't going to have a peak year like Nole. Or have a career where he reaches double digit slam counts like Nole most likely will barring injury.

Murray will end somewheres in the 4-5 slam count territory at most.

 

[Relinquis]

[...]

Murray is just a LESSER version of Djokovic and just isn't mentally wired correct to have the type of success that Nole has had at the slams.

Murray will have a great career but he isn't going to have a peak year like Nole. Or have a career where he reaches double digit slam counts like Nole most likely will barring injury.

Murray will end somewheres in the 4-5 slam count territory at most.

Novak has six slams. Double digits mean nearly doubling his slam count. Murray has only won one. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here...

 

[Cup8489]

Novak has six slams. Double digits mean nearly doubling his slam count. Murray has only won one. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here...

90's clay excels at hyperbole. You're asking a lot of him.

 

[Start da Game]

players will be known for what they are.......d-pot will always be known for his attacking tennis, murray for his basic tennis and novak for his extreme defense skills and machine-like consistency......

if you mean achievements, well it depends how much they are willing to bend their back and put in the hard yards.......

provided both work equally hard, i would pick d-pot over murray just because he has a weapon(forehand).......a weapon that can take away the game from anybody on his day......his first serve is great when it's on as well.......

all top players have a weapon or two......i still don't know what murray's weapon is.......he just seems to be utterly consistent with all the basic shots but not one outstandingly brilliant shot in his arsenal.......

 

[Mainad]

players will be known for what they are.......d-pot will always be known for his attacking tennis, murray for his basic tennis and novak for his extreme defense skills and machine-like consistency......

Basic tennis? I think it takes a bit more than playing just 'basic tennis' to win as much as Murray has!

provided both work equally hard, i would pick d-pot over murray just because he has a weapon(forehand).......a weapon that can take away the game from anybody on his day......his first serve is great when it's on as well.......

Del Potro's weapon is no bar to either Djokovic or Murray. Both have commanding H2Hs over him (7-2 to Djokovic, 5-1 to Murray). Murray is a far more consistent player than Del Potro and has a whole range of shots at his disposal that Del Potro does not possess.

all top players have a weapon or two......i still don't know what murray's weapon is.......he just seems to be utterly consistent with all the basic shots but not one outstandingly brilliant shot in his arsenal.......

Evidently you have not watched many Murray matches as I have. His cross-court and DTL backhand are one of the best in the game and are most certainly weapons. His 1st serve too can be very potent (he serves many aces). At his best, he can pull out a whole range of shots that Del Potro can only dream of.

 

[zagor]

players will be known for what they are.......d-pot will always be known for his attacking tennis, murray for his basic tennis and novak for his extreme defense skills and machine-like consistency......

if you mean achievements, well it depends how much they are willing to bend their back and put in the hard yards.......

provided both work equally hard, i would pick d-pot over murray just because he has a weapon(forehand).......a weapon that can take away the game from anybody on his day......his first serve is great when it's on as well.......

all top players have a weapon or two......i still don't know what murray's weapon is.......he just seems to be utterly consistent with all the basic shots but not one outstandingly brilliant shot in his arsenal.......

Murray's weapons:

-BH (DTL, CC, ROS, anything)

-1st serve

-ROS

-Court Coverage

-Junk balling (varying pace/spin)


His FH can also be considered a weapon ever since he hooked up with Lendl, it's a much more dominating shot than before and less predictable (goes DTL more).

 

[NadalAgassi]

Has Del Potro won a masters even yet? No neither Murray or Del Potro will become Nole. Del Potro's career was destroyed by injuries and his peak was cut short. He will never be the same again.

Murray is just a LESSER version of Djokovic and just isn't mentally wired correct to have the type of success that Nole has had at the slams.

Murray will have a great career but he isn't going to have a peak year like Nole. Or have a career where he reaches double digit slam counts like Nole most likely will barring injury.

Murray will end somewheres in the 4-5 slam count territory at most.

Pretty much right on the mark as usual.

 

[NadalAgassi]

Novak has six slams. Double digits mean nearly doubling his slam count. Murray has only won one. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here...

What, so you think Djokovic is going to win only 3 slams or less and Murray will win only 1 or 2 from. Maybe you need to be reminded 4 slams will be played every year. Where will all those other slams go, to the planet Mars, to muggish up and comers like Tomic and Raonic, to 30 something Federer, or to Rafael *******. It is you who needs a reality check in this case.

 

[batz]

Murray's weapons:

-BH (DTL, CC, ROS, anything)

-1st serve

-ROS

-Court Coverage

-Junk balling (varying pace/spin)


His FH can also be considered a weapon ever since he hooked up with Lendl, it's a much more dominating shot than before and less predictable (goes DTL more).

Well played Sir.


I'd also point out that the guy with no weapons has a 5-1 record against the big guy with a forehand.

 

[xan]

What, so you think Djokovic is going to win only 3 slams or less and Murray will win only 1 or 2 from. Maybe you need to be reminded 4 slams will be played every year. Where will all those other slams go, to the planet Mars, to muggish up and comers like Tomic and Raonic, to 30 something Federer, or to Rafael *******. It is you who needs a reality check in this case.

was about to post this.

 

[always_crosscourt]

What, so you think Djokovic is going to win only 3 slams or less and Murray will win only 1 or 2 from. Maybe you need to be reminded 4 slams will be played every year. Where will all those other slams go, to the planet Mars, to muggish up and comers like Tomic and Raonic, to 30 something Federer, or to Rafael *******. It is you who needs a reality check in this case.

Djokovic will win more, I don't think Murray will. Everything (scheduling, conditions, draw...etc...) had to line up just perfectly in order for him to win his solitary slam, whereas I think Djokovic could face Davydenko, Tomic, Raonic, Tsonga, Murray, Federer, Nadal all in a row whilst playing at 80% with a stomach bug and 7 5-setters in a row and still come away with the slam comfortably.

In fact, with no-one to challenge him, Djokovic may well win a truly insane number of slams that one of us had though possible even after watching 2011 Djokovic.

 

[smoledman]

Nole can't beat Nadal on red clay when it counts.

 

[Steve0904]

Djokovic will win more, I don't think Murray will. Everything (scheduling, conditions, draw...etc...) had to line up just perfectly in order for him to win his solitary slam, whereas I think Djokovic could face Davydenko, Tomic, Raonic, Tsonga, Murray, Federer, Nadal all in a row whilst playing at 80% with a stomach bug and 7 5-setters in a row and still come away with the slam comfortably.

In fact, with no-one to challenge him, Djokovic may well win a truly insane number of slams that one of us had though possible even after watching 2011 Djokovic.

Not sure about this one. This one needs a reality check.

 

[Relinquis]

Djokovic is beatable...

his opponents have served for the match against him at slams... he has faced tie breaks against top 20 players at slams... he has good odds, but is not invincible against other top 20 folks. Stan Wawrinka (and murray pre-feather/blister) showed us this at the Aussie Open this year.

Federer won a slams less than 12 months ago. Wouldn't discount him.

Yeah, there are 4 slams up for grabs per year, but there are usually 2-3 players on either side of the draw that have the ability to knock the top two seeds out occasionally... This is before looking at other factors like injuries and such, or the odd non-top 20 player who plays out of his mind on the day.

Tennis tournaments are usually knock out style (apart from WTF round robin). You only have to lose once to lose your chance at the title. You guys are extrapolating a lot when you say Novak will nearly double his slam count, or Murray will add 2 or 3 slams.

I will agree that this might be the best year for either player to enhance their slam count given Nadal's troubles, but it is far from certain and we don't know what will happen next year.

 

[xan]

Well then why discuss anything at all? Considering no one here can predict future. We are talking about world number one winning at least 4 more slams in years to come. 1 per year. If that is really inconcievable to you guys then I don't know what are you doing on tennis forum.

 

[Steve0904]

Djokovic is beatable...

his opponents have served for the match against him at slams... he has faced tie breaks against top 20 players at slams... he has good odds, but is not invincible against other top 20 folks. Stan Wawrinka (and murray pre-feather/blister) showed us this at the Aussie Open this year.

Federer won a slams less than 12 months ago. Wouldn't discount him.

Yeah, there are 4 slams up for grabs per year, but there are usually 2-3 players on either side of the draw that have the ability to knock the top two seeds out occasionally... This is before looking at other factors like injuries and such, or the odd non-top 20 player who plays out of his mind on the day.

Tennis tournaments are usually knock out style (apart from WTF round robin). You only have to lose once to lose your chance at the title. You guys are extrapolating a lot when you say Novak will nearly double his slam count, or Murray will add 2 or 3 slams.

I will agree that this might be the best year for either player to enhance their slam count given Nadal's troubles, but it is far from certain and we don't know what will happen next year.

Well personally I think Novak hits 10 GS and no more, but overall I definitely agree with you. Too much extrapolating based on current form on this forum, particularly by one poster, but others as well. Unfortunately this seems to be the case in a lot of places, and is often wrong (but sometimes correct).

 

[Clarky21]

Djokovic is beatable...

his opponents have served for the match against him at slams... he has faced tie breaks against top 20 players at slams... he has good odds, but is not invincible against other top 20 folks. Stan Wawrinka (and murray pre-feather/blister) showed us this at the Aussie Open this year.

Federer won a slams less than 12 months ago. Wouldn't discount him.

Yeah, there are 4 slams up for grabs per year, but there are usually 2-3 players on either side of the draw that have the ability to knock the top two seeds out occasionally... This is before looking at other factors like injuries and such, or the odd non-top 20 player who plays out of his mind on the day.

Tennis tournaments are usually knock out style (apart from WTF round robin). You only have to lose once to lose your chance at the title. You guys are extrapolating a lot when you say Novak will nearly double his slam count, or Murray will add 2 or 3 slams.

I will agree that this might be the best year for either player to enhance their slam count given Nadal's troubles, but it is far from certain and we don't know what will happen next year.

Where? From what I see he's about as unbeatable as one can get. He won't lose a match until Wimby at the earliest, and even that is debatable.

 

[always_crosscourt]

Djokovic is beatable...

his opponents have served for the match against him at slams... he has faced tie breaks against top 20 players at slams... he has good odds, but is not invincible against other top 20 folks. Stan Wawrinka (and murray pre-feather/blister) showed us this at the Aussie Open this year.

Federer won a slams less than 12 months ago. Wouldn't discount him.

Yeah, there are 4 slams up for grabs per year, but there are usually 2-3 players on either side of the draw that have the ability to knock the top two seeds out occasionally... This is before looking at other factors like injuries and such, or the odd non-top 20 player who plays out of his mind on the day.

Tennis tournaments are usually knock out style (apart from WTF round robin). You only have to lose once to lose your chance at the title. You guys are extrapolating a lot when you say Novak will nearly double his slam count, or Murray will add 2 or 3 slams.

I will agree that this might be the best year for either player to enhance their slam count given Nadal's troubles, but it is far from certain and we don't know what will happen next year.

Yes, in theory Djokovic is beatable, but in practice, just who is going to beat him?

Tennis has been one of the most predictable sports in recent years - barring Murray's perpetual drama, upsets rarely happen.

Sure, Tsonga may have had several match points, Wawrinka and Seppi may have taken him to five, but, really - was the result of any of the matches ever in doubt? We all knew Tsonga would not convert, and Seppi and Wawrinka would cave.

Matches such as these give the illusion that Djokovic can be beaten by guys not named Nadal or Federer, but just because the lower ranked guys were one point away from doing it, doesn't actually mean they were that close in practice. Djokovic was in the driver's seat all the way.

 

[rdis10093]

lot of what ifs

 

[Relinquis]

Well then why discuss anything at all? Considering no one here can predict future. We are talking about world number one winning at least 4 more slams in years to come. 1 per year. If that is really inconcievable to you guys then I don't know what are you doing on tennis forum.

there are wold number 1s who have never won a slam (Rios) and others who have only managed to get one slam (Roddick). I think people extrapolate too much from recent history of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Getting slams is tough and will get tougher for Djokovic as the years go by. He is in his prime now at 25, but it will get tougher for him.

At least more 4 more slams? This is a very tough target for someone who has 6 slams to his name at the moment (4 at Australia, where he was tested this year). You guys talk about it as if it was something routine for him, as it if it is inconceivable that he wouldn't be able. As if I am crazy to suggest that it will be tough.

if he does get more slams this year or next that will be awesome for him. a great achievement. you have other guys on this thread suggesting that he won't lose a match*, or won't lose until wimbledon. that's ridiculous. even greats like nadal, sampras and federer have lost matches in their primes.

* i.e. delusional...

 

[Cup8489]

Where? From what I see he's about as unbeatable as one can get. He won't lose a match until Wimby at the earliest, and even that is debatable.

You can be extremely nauseating at times..

 

[tudwell]

What, so you think Djokovic is going to win only 3 slams or less and Murray will win only 1 or 2 from. Maybe you need to be reminded 4 slams will be played every year. Where will all those other slams go, to the planet Mars, to muggish up and comers like Tomic and Raonic, to 30 something Federer, or to Rafael *******. It is you who needs a reality check in this case.

I'm sure you said the same of Nadal back in 2010, and now he's barely playing.

 

[xan]

there are wold number 1s who have never won a slam (Rios) and others who have only managed to get one slam (Roddick). I think people extrapolate too much from recent history of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Getting slams is tough and will get tougher for Djokovic as the years go by. He is in his prime now at 25, but it will get tougher for him.

At least more 4 more slams? This is a very tough target for someone who has 6 slams to his name at the moment (4 at Australia, where he was tested this year). You guys talk about it as if it was something routine for him, as it if it is inconceivable that he wouldn't be able. As if I am crazy to suggest that it will be tough.

if he does get more slams this year or next that will be awesome for him. a great achievement. you have other guys on this thread suggesting that he won't lose a match*, or won't lose until wimbledon. that's ridiculous. even greats like nadal, sampras and federer have lost matches in their primes.

* i.e. delusional...

4 more years. thats 16 more slams up for grabs. who has the best chance to rack them up if not for the world number 1?
ofc its tough, no one denied it, but if we talk possibility and probability then djokovic is your best bet. hands down.

as for what clarky is saying i doubt anyone is taking her serious. so it would be wise to just ignore it all together.

edit: also, come on, you didnt try to disagree with my by using rodick and rios as examples. it wasnt a trivia quiz to guess if there were such cases, but blatantly obvious novak is in whole different league compared to those guys.

 

[NadalAgassi]

I'm sure you said the same of Nadal back in 2010, and now he's barely playing.

and you said early last year Serena would win only 14 slams, and she has already passed that in less than a year so there you go. Like I said 4 slams will be played every year, and they have to go somewhere. Only on some imaginary planet is the rest of the field going to cobble together enough slams to hold Djokovic and Murray down to a combined 4. Where are all the other slams going to go, to Mars.

 

[Anaconda]

I will be shocked if Murray doesn't win another major. He's arguably the favorite for Wimbledon or at worst co-favorite with Federer and Nadal.

No. Just no. You can't put him ahead of Wimbledon champions like Federer, Djokovic or Nadal.

Delpo will never win another major.

Where did you buy your crystal ball from? I want one too!!!

Delpo not even in the same class as Nole, Nadal (if the knee holds up), Fed, Murray and I even think Ferrer is better than him.

Is this a p!sstake? Ferrer? Seriously?? Ferrer has done absolutely nothing to achieve a top 5 ranking. 0 slams, 0 runners up, I think he's only got 1 MS title under his belt. JMDP on the other hand has a slam win which includes the big 2 scalps and respectable slam results. Ferrer usually gets blasted off the court by the top 4.

Murray's weapons:

-BH (DTL, CC, ROS, anything)

-1st serve

-ROS

-Court Coverage

-Junk balling (varying pace/spin)


His FH can also be considered a weapon ever since he hooked up with Lendl, it's a much more dominating shot than before and less predictable (goes DTL more).

Murray's 1st serve is actually quite redictable and low in %. His ROS and movement are more 'tools' than weapons seeing as a weapon is something you impose on your opponent; Murray's ROS isn't like Agassi's - although it's a great defensive shot.

 

[Hawkeye7]

Murray's 1st serve is actually quite redictable and low in %. His ROS and movement are more 'tools' than weapons seeing as a weapon is something you impose on your opponent; Murray's ROS isn't like Agassi's - although it's a great defensive shot.

That's not even a word. I can only assume you meant predictable... He hits a lot of aces and gets quite a bit on it. His 1st serve percentage has also been pretty good so far this year.

Murray can hit winners on return, so it's a bit ignorant to simply label it as a defensive shot. Your views seem kind of outdated.

 

[Mainad]

N
Is this a p!sstake? Ferrer? Seriously?? Ferrer has done absolutely nothing to achieve a top 5 ranking. 0 slams, 0 runners up

He has achieved the ranking by getting better results and being more consistent than all players ranked below him.

I think he's only got 1 MS title under his belt.

Still 1 more than JMDP.

JMDP on the other hand has a slam win which includes the big 2 scalps and respectable slam results.

No-one can argue against JMDP's Slam win. On the other hand, he has not made any Slam semi-finals since 2009 FO and USO. Ferrer has made 5 Slam semis altogether, at least 1 in every year since 2011 including the recent AO. However, as you say, the top 4 are a bit of a wall for him as they are for JMDP.

Murray's 1st serve is actually quite redictable and low in %. His ROS and movement are more 'tools' than weapons seeing as a weapon is something you impose on your opponent; Murray's ROS isn't like Agassi's - although it's a great defensive shot.

Murray's first serve is extremely effective when on and he serves many aces with it. It has certainly improved in consistency in the last year or so. As for his ROS and movement, they are among the best in the current game and enable him to beat nearly every other player in the field. So how he does not impose them on his opponents?

 

[NadalAgassi]

Back on topic a definite no. In a best case scenario for Murray would be equalling Djokovic's current career by the time he is done (I do not think Murray will reach that point, but that is the absolute 15% at most chance max for him at this point). Even then he would definitely not reach Djokovic's career though, as Djokovic is a 100% certainty to add to his current slam total and overall career achievements. Even if Murray was a slightly better player than Djokovic every year for the remainder of their careers (hugely unlikely of course), and had one dominant year on par with Djokovic's 2011 (not impossible but also slightly unlikely), he still probably wouldnt catch Djokovic's career, as Djokovic is so far ahead at this point. It would require a long slam drought for Djokovic, or Murray winning slams into his 30s.

As for Del Potro a best case scenario for him is to make an amazing improvement and end his career with 3 slams and to have 40% the career Djokovic has already had. Probably never winning another slam is more likely than that, who knows if he will ever even win his frst Masters.

 

[zagor]

Murray's 1st serve is actually quite redictable and low in %. His ROS and movement are more 'tools' than weapons seeing as a weapon is something you impose on your opponent; Murray's ROS isn't like Agassi's - although it's a great defensive shot.

It has always been somewhat predictable, Murray's idea of a 1st serve has always been usually a flat bomb down the T but it gets him enough free/cheap points that it's a weapon regardless, his 1st serve % can drop (especially against top players) but he has improved a lot in that regard lately from what I've seen.

Murray's ROS doesn't have to be like Agassi's, how many players follow up the big serve to the net these days? And even when they do with conditions today players have too much time to hit a passing shot. Regardless, you could say it's a tool but if it takes away the opponent's weapon the effect is still the same (if you pressure the opponent's serve all the time, especially a big servers who's used to coasting through their service games it's bound to affect the rest of his game as well at some point).

Don't know if I'd call great movement a tool, how many all time greats in the history of tennis didn't/don't have great movement? There's Agassi maybe but I'd say his footwork was excellent and his ballstriking ability was out of this world, unmatched by anyone.