Without big 3 would Murray be the Goat?

Is Murray Murygoat without big 3?

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 34.2%
  • No

    Votes: 50 65.8%

  • Total voters
    76
  • This poll will close: .

RaulRamirez

Legend
The chances are that he probably surpasses Sampras slam record and makes many more records. Would he?
Yes, out of those 11 slam finals, he would've won a minimum of 15. I like and respect Murray - consistently terrific all-around player, but not really dominant to that degree.
 

PilotPete

Hall of Fame
Murray is good but not in the same league as the big3. However he would have many more slams without the Big3. This is how Djokovic also has many more slams than he should. Peak for peak he not in the same league as Federer, but when Fed aged he grabbed many more than he should because NextGen is absolutely useless. Over inflated in much the same way Murray would be without the Big3. Before you quip with Fed weak era, Safin and Roddick would have destroyed Djokovic as evidenced by their superior records over him.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
Even without big 3 i think Roddick would only reach half of Murray's record.
Eh he has 8 losses to Fed, 5 finals so at the very least 6-7 Slams (giving him USO ‘07 and WB ‘03)

but more importantly he’s not going to be ruined mentally and likely becomes a global superstar, who doesn’t have to change his game, if Fed doesn’t exist.

Murray prob wins more overall but a confident Roddick with a big game could be quite effective in what would be a horrendously weak 06-09 without Fedalovic.
Murray is good but not in the same league as the big3. However he would have many more slams without the Big3. This is how Djokovic also has many more slams than he should. Peak for peak he not in the same league as Federer, but when Fed aged he grabbed many more than he should because NextGen is absolutely useless. Over inflated in much the same way Murray would be without the Big3. Before you quip with Fed weak era, Safin and Roddick would have destroyed Djokovic as evidenced by their superior records over him.
How do you not get tired of repeating this same sh*t by now lol
 

Bubcay

Legend
Murray is good but not in the same league as the big3. However he would have many more slams without the Big3. This is how Djokovic also has many more slams than he should. Peak for peak he not in the same league as Federer, but when Fed aged he grabbed many more than he should because NextGen is absolutely useless. Over inflated in much the same way Murray would be without the Big3. Before you quip with Fed weak era, Safin and Roddick would have destroyed Djokovic as evidenced by their superior records over him.
In all fairness, neither Safin nor Roddick have played against peak Djokovic though, so this is not a fair argument.
 

No_Kwan_Do

Semi-Pro
No, but he may end up with something like 8-10 slams. Aside from one final against Botnic in 2016, every single one of his other 10 finals were against 2 of the big 3. Not to mention the numerous SF defeats by Nadal, Djokovic and Federer at slams as well.

He'd probably still lose slam finals to peaking opponents like Cilic, Wawrinka, Del Po, Nishikori or Roddick, but he'd win more finals than he'd lose.
 

ConnorH

New User
In the late stages of all slams, Murray lost 8 times to Djokervic, 7 times to Nadal, and 5 times to Federer. Without the Big 3, he would have won more than half of these lost slams, and will be the GOAT (better than Sampras, because of his almost certain Career Slam, possible Double Career Slam, and even a Calendar Year Slam).

Murray is 11-14 against Federer, and they are very close. It is just that Federer got most of his slams before Djokervic/Nadal dominates, but Murray had to compete against the peak Djokervic/Nadal.

Djokervic > Nadal >>>>> Federer > Mudday.

Federer is only the money GOAT.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
And Safin, despite winning only two slams, was 5 times the player of either Andy. At least when he felt like playing.
Roddick gave him some real problems though no? Perhaps Safin had the best peak level but not by much. Andy actually was his equal at AO ‘04 and scored that epic YEC win in ‘04 vs a Safin who very much felt like playing, didn’t he?

Murray is a different story… but if he could go toe to toe with prime Big 3 I doubt he’d get embarrassed by peak Safin or anything.
 

Adam Copeland

Hall of Fame
Talking of Murray is like writing a book on Tennis where every page represents a tier of players ....

You would have Big3, Pete, Borg, Laver, Mac type fellows on page 1, maybe a bit more of Mac, Agassi, Lendl and Jimmy on page 2, Becker, Wilander, Edberg, Newcombe and such fellows on page 3, Maybe Courier, Murray, Hewitt, Safin, Stan and a bit on Roddick on the last line, all on page 4

Maybe Murray would be on the first line of page 4, won't deny that but he is still page 4. You cannot put him on page 1 because he wasn't that good, the difference in pages is based on ability, that is why he only has 3 wins and not 6 or 8 .... Sorry Murray fans :X3:
 

Adam Copeland

Hall of Fame
Roddick gave him some real problems though no? Perhaps Safin had the best peak level but not by much. Andy actually was his equal at AO ‘04 and scored that epic YEC win in ‘04 vs a Safin who very much felt like playing, didn’t he?

Murray is a different story… but if he could go toe to toe with prime Big 3 I doubt he’d get embarrassed by peak Safin or anything.

Murray would definitely thrash Safin on Grass and Clay.

But HCs is a different ball game, Safin at his best would stomp Murray, no shame in accepting that
 
N

Nuclear

Guest
Murray is good but not in the same league as the big3. However he would have many more slams without the Big3. This is how Djokovic also has many more slams than he should. Peak for peak he not in the same league as Federer, but when Fed aged he grabbed many more than he should because NextGen is absolutely useless. Over inflated in much the same way Murray would be without the Big3. Before you quip with Fed weak era, Safin and Roddick would have destroyed Djokovic as evidenced by their superior records over him.
Wow so this is the new song you guys are singing?
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
Murray would definitely thrash Safin on Grass and Clay.

But HCs is a different ball game, Safin at his best would stomp Murray, no shame in accepting that
Think you’d be able to find a few people willing to go to bat for peak Safin being better on clay tbh. Due to beating Agassi as an 18 yr old at RG, strong matches vs Kuerten/Fed at Hamburg, etc. grass is obviously Murray’s. I think he compares favorably to someone like Soderling or Gulbis peaking just smashing missiles of groundstrokes. Murray could sometimes be susceptible to that. Rome ‘11 Muzz vs ‘02 Hamburg Safin could be fun.

Really these comparisons are difficult though. Murray’s like a completely opposite career type, incredibly dedicated teetotaler who sustained strong performance for 8-10 years, Safin a party boy womanizer who also had awful injury luck which culminated in him playing like.. a dozen actually good tournaments in his entire pro career. But what a dozen they were.
 

Adam Copeland

Hall of Fame
Think you’d be able to find a few people willing to go to bat for peak Safin being better on clay tbh. Due to beating Agassi as an 18 yr old at RG, strong matches vs Kuerten/Fed at Hamburg, etc. grass is obviously Murray’s. I think he compares favorably to someone like Soderling or Gulbis peaking just smashing missiles of groundstrokes. Murray could sometimes be susceptible to that. Rome ‘11 Muzz vs ‘02 Hamburg Safin could be fun.

Really these comparisons are difficult though. Murray’s like a completely opposite career type, incredibly dedicated teetotaler who sustained strong performance for 8-10 years, Safin a party boy womanizer who also had awful injury luck which culminated in him playing like.. a dozen actually good tournaments in his entire pro career. But what a dozen they were.

Safin could have been an ATG with Murray's discipline.
But thats like saying, Murray could have been an ATG with Safin's talents

In reality there are no IFs and BUTs, both of them are light years behind the Big 3, glorifying either of them in an attempt to bring down the Big 3 is wrong.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
Roddick gave him some real problems though no? Perhaps Safin had the best peak level but not by much. Andy actually was his equal at AO ‘04 and scored that epic YEC win in ‘04 vs a Safin who very much felt like playing, didn’t he?

Murray is a different story… but if he could go toe to toe with prime Big 3 I doubt he’d get embarrassed by peak Safin or anything.
AO 05 Safin was a probably close to a level up over AO 04 Safin (he was already pretty worn down and dealing with niggles by the time he got to Roddick, still managed to win not only that but also beat Agassi, pretty incredible), whereas AO 04 is clearly top level slow HC Roddick.

Safin clearly better on slow HC/clay, Rod on grass, fast hard neither has really that large of a top quality B05 sample, but you probably take Safin if it's a big stage (yeah I know he got edged twice in late 04, but if it's semis/finals of USO or TMC I'll still take Safin).
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
Statistically (rankings wise&finals reached) the 21st century GOAT race would be between Roddick and Murray without the Big 3, roflmao

THIS.

Like so many other topics, I feel like it's pertinent to my well being that I copy and paste my answers because it's tiresome rehashing the same thing. But anywho his 8 Slam Finals and beyond:

2008 USO: Probably loses to Roddick considering his career is greatly uplifted sans Big3
2010 AO: Obviously seedings change but he likely has to beat 2 of Tsonga/Cilic/Davydenko/Roddick so 50/50
2011 AO: CHAMP
2012 WMB: CHAMP
2013 AO: CHAMP
2015 AO: This is where things get dicey, as how does Wawrinka develop sans Big 3??? Can't automatically give this to Murray because of that
2016 AO: CHAMP
2016 FO: CHAMP


That's +5, now we move on to other scenarios I think in short see him winning the title

2017 FO: He doesn't burn himself out for 2016 and doesn't have the war with Wawrinka
2015 WMB: It's Gasquet or Wawrinka in the Final, really goes to show how well Federer was playing but without him or Novak, Andy is a clear frontrunner
2012 AO: Have to wonder how great Berdych was here but likely win
2011 USO: Considering he wins next year and only Tsonga is standing I give it to him


So that's +9 giving him 12. But you have to consider the development of guys like Tsonga and Berdych and of course how Roddick progresses himself, like with 2010 Wimbledon does he really lose to Lu without Fedman?? Wawrinka as mentioned earlier is also a big wildcard. The other aspect is if Murray does have 7 Slams prior to 2014 and his back issues or hell give him 8 by end of 2013, does he come back and get 5 additional Slams in the 2015-2017 period? I mean, with the above hypotheticals this means he gets 3 or 4 YE and well over 100 weeks at #1. He's bound to be less consistent and the absence of the other 3 will have a profound affect on other players.
 

Mediterranean Might

Professional
Safin could have been an ATG with Murray's discipline.
But thats like saying, Murray could have been an ATG with Safin's talents

In reality there are no IFs and BUTs, both of them are light years behind the Big 3, glorifying either of them in an attempt to bring down the Big 3 is wrong.
No one is glorifying them to bring down the big 3, they’re the greatest set of tennis players ever, period and most people agree

Murray just deserves his respects and frankly I see a lot of people (especially in other places that skew younger) totally disrespect his achievements and level
 

Milanez82

Hall of Fame
THIS.

Like so many other topics, I feel like it's pertinent to my well being that I copy and paste my answers because it's tiresome rehashing the same thing. But anywho his 8 Slam Finals and beyond:

2008 USO: Probably loses to Roddick considering his career is greatly uplifted sans Big3
2010 AO: Obviously seedings change but he likely has to beat 2 of Tsonga/Cilic/Davydenko/Roddick so 50/50
2011 AO: CHAMP
2012 WMB: CHAMP
2013 AO: CHAMP
2015 AO: This is where things get dicey, as how does Wawrinka develop sans Big 3??? Can't automatically give this to Murray because of that
2016 AO: CHAMP
2016 FO: CHAMP


That's +5, now we move on to other scenarios I think in short see him winning the title

2017 FO: He doesn't burn himself out for 2016 and doesn't have the war with Wawrinka
2015 WMB: It's Gasquet or Wawrinka in the Final, really goes to show how well Federer was playing but without him or Novak, Andy is a clear frontrunner
2012 AO: Have to wonder how great Berdych was here but likely win
2011 USO: Considering he wins next year and only Tsonga is standing I give it to him


So that's +9 giving him 12. But you have to consider the development of guys like Tsonga and Berdych and of course how Roddick progresses himself, like with 2010 Wimbledon does he really lose to Lu without Fedman?? Wawrinka as mentioned earlier is also a big wildcard. The other aspect is if Murray does have 7 Slams prior to 2014 and his back issues or hell give him 8 by end of 2013, does he come back and get 5 additional Slams in the 2015-2017 period? I mean, with the above hypotheticals this means he gets 3 or 4 YE and well over 100 weeks at #1. He's bound to be less consistent and the absence of the other 3 will have a profound affect on other players.
The 2013 AO Wawrinka that took Djokovic to an epic 5 setter stomps on any Murray there
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
AO 05 Safin was a probably close to a level up over AO 04 Safin (he was already pretty worn down and dealing with niggles by the time he got to Roddick, still managed to win not only that but also beat Agassi, pretty incredible), whereas AO 04 is clearly top level slow HC Roddick.

Safin clearly better on slow HC/clay, Rod on grass, fast hard neither has really that large of a top quality B05 sample, but you probably take Safin if it's a big stage (yeah I know he got edged twice in late 04, but if it's semis/finals of USO or TMC I'll still take Safin).
AO ‘04 QF between those two would probably be the single non-Fed match I choose when people say ‘04-07 was weak era tennis’ lol. You definitely can’t watch that and think these are two weak mugs going at it.

I think Safin’s return of Roddick’s serve is the key tbh. Even in that match there were stretches of lazyish coasting on return and iirc the YEC match Roddick had close to 45% unreturned serve as well. But peak, truly zoned in Safin, probably had his biggest strength on return. I’m not sure if we ever got an example of how that would actually look vs Roddick. Just guessing but it feels like mostly TBs and sets decided by a couple 30-30s and BPs here and there would be a fair result on a faster HC.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
Deification of Fed's opponents.
I mean Safin was pretty dang good at his best, let’s not kid ourselves here. But how rarely he was actually at his best is what knocks him down a peg in this comparison. Muzz had a lower peak (except on grass) but that consistency is the biggie here. Marat barely broke a 60% winning percentage and while a lot of that was due to injuries, a good portion of it was just inconsistency.
 
In all fairness, neither Safin nor Roddick have played against peak Djokovic though, so this is not a fair argument.

Maybe not peak Djoko, but they both played him and thrashed him after Djoko had won a slam, made two slam finals, and would’ve been #1 in the world if not for Fedal.
 

metsman

G.O.A.T.
AO ‘04 QF between those two would probably be the single non-Fed match I choose when people say ‘04-07 was weak era tennis’ lol. You definitely can’t watch that and think these are two weak mugs going at it.

I think Safin’s return of Roddick’s serve is the key tbh. Even in that match there were stretches of lazyish coasting on return and iirc the YEC match Roddick had close to 45% unreturned serve as well. But peak, truly zoned in Safin, probably had his biggest strength on return. I’m not sure if we ever got an example of how that would actually look vs Roddick. Just guessing but it feels like mostly TBs and sets decided by a couple 30-30s and BPs here and there would be a fair result on a faster HC.
Roddick's serve is bad news for pretty much anyone besides Fed and Hewitt who are just savants at returning big serves, but that being said in the direct matchup you still trust Safin to come up with a big return on a big point more, and he should have a decided edge once the ball is in play.
 

Kralingen

Bionic Poster
Maybe not peak Djoko, but they both played him and thrashed him after Djoko had won a slam, made two slam finals, and would’ve been #1 in the world if not for Fedal.
I guess nuance always goes out the window on these but I did this write up a while back in ‘17-18 and finally found the chat it was in.

I don’t think Roddick ever beat a good to great playing Djokovic (I haven’t seen ‘10 Cincy but have seen at least most of the others via sketchy links). It’s not really a defense of Djoko (I think for example Roddick easily should have taken USO ‘08 to 5) just my personal take…

‘08 Dubai was a few weeks after a Novak wins his first Grand Slam. Djoko makes a small error in the first set TB and visibly lets down in the 2nd set, you can tell his focus is pretty far away. He did go onto win IW the week after though so this is probably the best Roddick win. His serve was killer but Djokovic still had more winners and was just unlucky with two UEs in the first set TB. Djoko’s head visibly drops and he’s out of it after two dumb UEs give roddick the break. It’s their best non slam match though, worth watching.

So then 2009. the thing about 2009 is that Djokovic was adjusting to a new racket from January on. He lost to a lot of players before clay season, Nieminen, Simon, Gulbis, Tsonga etc. I think this is acknowledged as a pretty large mistake at the time. Also his fitness sucked in this period (leading him to hire a new fitness coach pre clay season) and all 3 ‘09 matches were quite hot. So… yeah.

‘09 AO… well, the first two sets were pretty competitive and the first set was actually well played from both. But (no excuse just reality) Djoko looks worn down and can’t go two points without looking like keeling over from the 3rd set on. Roddick wins easily but 3rd/4th set would have lost to just about anyone. Roddick’s movement and defense is insane in this match btw. Quite literally the best movement I had seen from him in years.

‘09 IW: Djokovic flew in late after two davis cup matches with Ferrer and Nadal (he got spanked in both btw) so imo was not focused… he was crapola from the opening set, he sprayed a dozen UEs in a 6-3 set and I think most of them were on his own serve.. but credit to Roddick whose FH and serve were really on point here. A couple dumb UEs at the business end of the breaks Roddick got. This was new Racketovic and it showed.

‘09 Canada: pissed off Roddick coming to his first tournament since Wimbledon was serving beastly that day no doubt about it. Djokovic on the other hand was working his first tournament with no other than Todd Martin and this paid off because Djoko DF’d like 7-8 times including to give Roddick a BP. Lol. Poor serving % vs great serving % made the difference. Well played from Roddick though.

haven’t seen cincy 10 but probably more of the same.

Generally the dynamics were Roddick’s FH and serve was able to overpower a weak legged Djokovic who also choked a lot on his own serve. He also had a much clearer game plan and understanding of himself than Djoko who was adjusting to a new coach or new racket in 4 of these losses. Stefanki Roddick played great defense and Djoko is actually the aggressor more often than not, and his UEs made the difference in all these matches.

this level of detail will surely not be applied to every matchup but my takeaway was prime Djokovic was a lot better than this… he was visibly subpar everywhere except ‘08 Dubai/USO. Roddick of course was also better in his prime… and I think his big serve would trouble any Novak (see Isner win in Miami, Karlovic 2-1, etc) but these are bad, weak, adjusting to new circumstances Djokovic performances.

Anyway what does it matter, but I do think H2H especially post or pre prime in tennis is generally not all it’s cracked up to be.
 

BGod

G.O.A.T.
The 2013 AO Wawrinka that took Djokovic to an epic 5 setter stomps on any Murray there

I covered the Wawrinka factor though in my post more than once. Without Novak, it's a crapshoot how Stanimal matures. Obviously he was at least somewhat mentally hampered by Federer but you can't automatically assume he springs up as he did without the Novak trials. Murray beats Wawrinka on hard at 2011 Shanghai and 2012 Tokyo while losing to him at 2010 and 2013 USOs. But this doesn't give us much to work with. What we do know is Murray had the progress and likely a few Slams prior to 2013 AO, including quite possible 2011-2012 AO titles. So it's a bit much to assume Wawrinka storms out in the same form. Obviously I think it's a wash with both Tsonga and Berdych developing stronger so that's why I don't give Andy too much. But Wawrinka is a wildcard until 2014-2016 period and even then who the hell knows.
 

pj80

Legend
In all fairness, neither Safin nor Roddick have played against peak Djokovic though, so this is not a fair argument.
Roddick did and Djokovic "beat him like a drum" and that's where Roddick said “That was one of the first times where I was thinking that this game was a little bit different to what I am used to. These guys are kind of from another planet."
 

Bubcay

Legend
Roddick did and Djokovic "beat him like a drum" and that's where Roddick said “That was one of the first times where I was thinking that this game was a little bit different to what I am used to. These guys are kind of from another planet."
Yes, that is true. But on the other hand, Roddick was far from his peak at the London Olympics.
 

Jonesy

Legend
images
 

Aabye5

G.O.A.T.
Murray would definitely thrash Safin on Grass and Clay.

But HCs is a different ball game, Safin at his best would stomp Murray, no shame in accepting that

I think on clay he'd have his chances. Espeicially young Marat. People seem to forget his win over Agassi on clay and Andre is better than Muzzah on clay.
 

Adam Copeland

Hall of Fame
I think on clay he'd have his chances. Espeicially young Marat. People seem to forget his win over Agassi on clay and Andre is better than Muzzah on clay.

True, he also beat Juan Carlos Ferrero at the French Open an year before Ferrero actually won the French Open, so Marat was a beast even on clay.
 

abmk

Bionic Poster
I think on clay he'd have his chances. Espeicially young Marat. People seem to forget his win over Agassi on clay and Andre is better than Muzzah on clay.

True, he also beat Juan Carlos Ferrero at the French Open an year before Ferrero actually won the French Open, so Marat was a beast even on clay.

Wasn't just Agassi that Safin beat in RG 98, he also beat defending champ Kuerten.
Also took prime Kuerten to the brink in the 5th set in Hamburg 00 final.

Safin is definitely better than pre-15 Murray on clay.
15-17 Murray might just edge him out.
 
Top