Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by Jupiter
If that's correct then Murray has won about 14 grand slams.
Get Sampras in to make him serve and volley.
It's blatantly obviously the way u beat Fed/Jockitch and Nadal.
Hall Of Fame
Murray has made 19 gs semis
10 finals
2 wins
In his 10 finals he's only ever played Federer and Djokovic
Federer #1 all time in gs wins (17)
Djokovic #4 all time in gs wins (12)
Only 10 men have reached all 4 gs finals
By any measure he's spectacularly successful.
He's just come up against 2 of the best to ever do it in every one of his finals.
Hall Of Fame
If that's correct then Murray has won about 14 grand slams.
Get Sampras in to make him serve and volley.
It's blatantly obviously the way u beat Fed/Jockitch and Nadal.
Hall Of Fame
The stat about his first serves when facing break points is very interesting. Djokovic is the best and he just gets under Murray's skin mentally. He must do. There's no other reason for that first serve stat. There have been times in the past where Fed or Nadal would lose against and that would open up the draw for others. Djokovic hardly seems to lose early in GS.
I love how Murray keeps bouncing back. Ten finals is really impressive.
Hall Of Fame
I'm not sure that's true. Fed reached the Quarters of 36 Grand Slams in a row. Nadal reached at least the 4th round 24 times in a row. Djokovic is on a run of at least the 4th round 28 times running and Murray has reached at least the same stage 21 times in a row.
Hall Of Fame
Win ratio of Grand Slam Titles to Finals
Murray 20%
Federer 63%
Nadal 70%
Djokovic 60%
Murray, in most experts opinions, has as good if not a better all round game than the other 3. His final losses are littered with 0-6, 1-6 & 2-6 sets. But he's also had clear opportunities in finals too, to "stamp on the opponents throat" and failed do so, first game second set yesterday being the latest example. After that he fell to pieces.
To me its clearly a mental issue. One that Lendl seemed to fix. Mauresmo was a ridiculous appointment and Delgado is not the answer either.
Hall Of Fame
Shame about the final...but let's be honest predictable outcome
There isn't that much between them..he just needs that little extra
Hall Of Fame
I agree Mauresmo was a ridiculous appointment. He's at a cross-roads and needs to make the right choice. I thought McEnroe was perfect for him but he's gone off to work with Roanic. I think it needs to be a former champion. Someone like Sampras perhaps
Hall Of Fame
Im nae massive on tennis but if hes good enough to reach finals hes good enough to win them but his 20% suggests hes not.
Is it a mental thing (which it looks like)or is it even with all the hype he gets, hes just not good enough
Hall Of Fame
Most likely a mental issue. Against other opposition Murray digs in and finds a way to win more often than not but against the machine as soon as it starts to go away from him he capitulates. Djokovic is undoubtedly the best there is at the moment but no way is he that much better than Murray to win three sets in a row so easily. Resolve and confidence is key when they are so closely matched.
Hall Of Fame
Ok, compared to three of the absolute best players ever, and the players Murray has had to beat to win the titles he has won, Murray doesn't look so good.
How about comparing his win percentage to other historically top class players, Cash, or Lendl or Becker? I'm gonna guess 20-40% will be a much more common success rate.
I'm not sure there is a consensus that Murray has a better all round game than certainly Djokovich or Federer. It's debatable for sure but personally, I think most would rate Murray at least 3rd, if not 4th, out of the 4 based on the overall game of each player at their peak.
For me, Murray dips below the all time legend status of players like Borg, Sampras, Laver or Federer but is in with the truly great players like Becker, Edberg, Cash or McEnroe.
Posting Permissions