stringertom
Bionic Poster
Still feel cheated from the return of MUGray vs Zed the Elder that erased a classic matchup.
Who would have won???
Discuss.
Who would have won???
Discuss.
Would fedr Have Beaten mury In Melbourne???
- Thread starter stringertom
- Start date
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
When the tournament started I thought for sure that Federer would have lost to this Murray. But the way Federer has played during this tournament makes me think that he may have blitzed Murray as he usually does in slams. He may have had too much variety and aggression for Murray to handle.
Meles
Bionic Poster
Muzziah of the Fall would have won, but Murray2017 definitely this.
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
Muzziah of the Fall would have won, but Murray2017 definitely this.
I never in a million years thought Federer would play this well this fast after being out for so long. What a joy he has been to watch in this tournament no matter how it ends.
stringertom
Bionic Poster
I agree with your outcome but don't think it would have been a BerdPoo/Zed the Elder style of blitz. Probably in four.
If he takes the title vs Nadal and it had been the expected QF, what an accomplishment beyond what it will be...five wins in a row vs top 10 seeds! Probably another record for fedr!
Meles
Bionic Poster
The stats on Rafa and Grigs off the chart to boot. Best slam everer?
The match in 6 hours.
icedevil0289
G.O.A.T.
what did you think about his match against stan and how he fares going into the final?
cc0509
Talk Tennis Guru
I thought Federer looked great in the first two sets and then the dip in form in sets three and four was worrisome.
Who knows if he really has an injury or not and if he does how serious it is. I think he will give his all in the final no matter which player he faces. I'm not sure it will be enough if it's Nadal but I guess we'll never know until the last point.
D
Deleted member 735320
Guest
Doesn't matter. Watch the matches we have. Live the life that is going on. Murray, Nole and Stan pooped out and now rafa will win another major unfortunately. Hopefully Grigor can't stop that but I am prepared for Rafa to win. I won't protest but will immediately look to the next major
Djokovic2011
Bionic Poster
Murray of the last six months would've won but the version we saw at this tournament would've probably lost in 4. Having said that, I suspect he would've increased his level and played more aggressively had he made it to Federer so who knows.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Given Andy's current form, Roger would have won.
It's quite simple, no need to complicate it.
If Andy could not get past Zverev Sr., no way he could have handled Rogi. Neither was Joker in great form. So these ifs and buts are useless. They came, they played, they lost.
Let's give credit to the guys who are still standing instead of those who got flushed out.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
This should have been Murray's, Djocks, or Stan's tournament to win. Maybe with last year's court speed Djokovic beats Istomin. But Fed wouldn't have beaten Murray. Murray's loss was a freak occurrence. Lendl's fault.
How was it a freak occurrence ?
They knew MZ's playing style, they knew what to expect. It wasn't like MZ changed his style suddenly for this match. He just has one plan, as he admitted. No surprises. Totally Andy's fault if he could not find a way to win.
Mr.Lob
G.O.A.T.
He would beat Murray once if they played 100 times. ..in a slam. Freak occurence.
skynyrd1611
Rookie
Depends on which version of Murray showed up. At the very least, he would have made it far more difficult for Federer and may have cost him the next match if not winning himself.
Sentinel
Bionic Poster
Must be some version of Murray I have yet to see.
Most likely Federer. But he had to spend a lot of energy to overcome Mandy on this court for sure. He might not have made final then. So avoiding him has definitely helped Federer IMO.
Anyway does it even matter now? This mug (Mandy) lost to some unknown, that says all about his abilities and it's not like he has always troubled Federer at biggest stages (like Nadal/Djokovic). It takes something special to beat in form Federer in Slams, that he doesn't have. At his best he can beat Federer in some masters, that's all.
Anyway does it even matter now? This mug (Mandy) lost to some unknown, that says all about his abilities and it's not like he has always troubled Federer at biggest stages (like Nadal/Djokovic). It takes something special to beat in form Federer in Slams, that he doesn't have. At his best he can beat Federer in some masters, that's all.
Last edited:
Subway Tennis
Legend
I feel like Murray may have figured out a way to win in 5, with the match having a similar level of tension, aggression and high quality drama to their 2013 AO match.
falstaff78
Hall of Fame
After a suggestion by @Sysyphus I've been fooling around with stats for round 3 and later. Basically to exclude fedrs first two rounds. (Will post something on this when we know tomorrow's finalist.)
The short answer is, if you compare fedr, Nadal, dimitrov and fedr 16 through 3R, 4R and QF, you find fedr 16 and fedr 17 are basically identical in their respective levels and head and shoulders above Nadz and grigz.
I'll say fedr could have taken Mury based on (1) the fact that fedr seems to have reacquired his pre-injury level, (2) the fact that fedr has some mongrel to him this year - as evidenced by beating slammin Stan while playing about equally well - and (3) the ex-post fact that Murray played a **** QF
The short answer is, if you compare fedr, Nadal, dimitrov and fedr 16 through 3R, 4R and QF, you find fedr 16 and fedr 17 are basically identical in their respective levels and head and shoulders above Nadz and grigz.
I'll say fedr could have taken Mury based on (1) the fact that fedr seems to have reacquired his pre-injury level, (2) the fact that fedr has some mongrel to him this year - as evidenced by beating slammin Stan while playing about equally well - and (3) the ex-post fact that Murray played a **** QF
skynyrd1611
Rookie
Must be some version of Murray I have yet to see.
I guess I left that opening for you.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Federer would have lost to Istomin, if that's an answer.
Feather
Legend
Didn't you say Roger will lose against Berdych, Nishikori and Stan too?
joekapa
Legend
They were not on the same side of the draw.
So you think Istomin would of made the final ?
Don't know about the final, but he certainly would of made the quarters. For me he deserved so much more. He played fantastic tennis.
joekapa
Legend
Federer did lose to Stan. Didn't you watch yesterdays match ? Even the Fed fan commentators couldn't celebrate that "victory".
Feather
Legend
Stan has not yet beaten Roger on a hard court. Roger is the most difficult match up for Stan.
joekapa
Legend
Stan gifted it to him, and I'm sure you will admit that. Fed hardly impressed yesterday. Even Fed admitted it himself.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Feather
Legend
QF. I never thought he wil beat Kei and Andy Murray back to back! however once Andy got eliminated and he got Stan, I thought at least he will reach final
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Well, we have to be honest. My assessment is that he lost to players who were in better shape than he is. More match fit. He beat them because they could not take advantage of that. Especially against Stan, he was there for the taking.
When I say he wouldn't have won against Istomin, this is what I mean. Istomin doesn't have a long history with Roger. He would have played his heart out, just as he did against Andy, and his conditioning would have told.
Feather
Legend
I honestly didn't think Stan will beat Roger. Roger has never lost to Stan on a hard court
Similar threads
