Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 72 comments are related to the topic:
Would Andy Murray have dominated in any other era on hard courts?
Would Andy Murray have dominated in any other era on hard courts?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 72
|
By:
AT
Since 2008 Murray is 5-4 up against Nadal on Hard Courts. So he had more than proved himself against even a fit Nadal. |
|
By:
With McEnroe it all depends on how much physical training he would be willing to do. His touch would not be enough alone. He would have to really hammer it in the gym.
Would he be able to move with the top guys now. |
|
By:
Nadal has always had a lot of physical problems with hard courts - lots of heavy defeats at slams to lesser players like Tsonga, Ferrer, Gonzalez when his body has given way. Nadal's crushed Murray all 3 times they've met at Wimbledon.
|
|
By:
The top of the thread clearly says Hard Courts
 By the way AT Sprinter Sacre has already hit the same rating as Moscow flyer after only 6 chases. It took Moscow Flyer at most of his career to get even close. I would rather listen to the handicapper, Barry G, NH and the other pundits when assessing how good SS is. |
|
By:
To address the thread title directly the answer is "most certainly not".
|
|
By:
I actually agree with you AT.
 |
|
By:
Personally I think Andy and Murray should both have a damn good thrashing and be sent back to school. Whoever they are
it never did me any harm |
|
By:
Regardless of surface, Nadal had become Murray's problem.
I don't think in any other era 'peak' Murray could have been stopped. He's seriously that good. Sampras would certainly have been pleased to have taken a set or two off him at best, and even then only on grass. But Nadal just got into his head regardless of surface and on clay, grass AND hard court he repeatedly took Murray out of the slams in 2011. When the final tally of Murray's titles is done, we will look back to Nadal's silent knee ban as the key moment of opportunity. |
|
By:
Glad we agree AG
For the record on Sunday I'm expecting a heavy defeat for Murray. |
|
By:
Can't fault Murray for coming unstuck against Nadal. Nadal is a monster competitor and the most intimidating player the game has ever seen (ask Fed). Always interesting to debate players of different eras. Mac will always be the greatest talent for me, but the game has changed beyond recognition since his heyday.
|
|
By:
Typos Angel...HEELS not heals.
|
|
By:
Murray would have learned to beat Nadal, just as he learned to beat Federer and Djokovic.
|
|
By:
Thanks Alias. Heels is indeed correct.
Nadal had really started to read Murray`s game, and with Murray`s two handed backhand, Nadal was consistently bending the ball away as a left hander meaning all Murray could do was slice the ball back, allowing Nadal to gain the momentum in the rally. This happened time and time again. I have to agree that Nadal had the measure of Murray big time. |
|
By:
erm they all had murray's number in the slams until after wimbledon ffs
he's a different play now and rafa hasn't even hit a ball |
|
By:
He is still the same player hth
|
|
By:
yeah the big difference for Murray has been Nadal being injured and Federer's powers diminishing. Murray could still win a fair few slams though because there is noone in the 18-22 age bracket who looks remotely capable of getting to a slam final nevermind winning one. It was a real shame Del Potro got injured when he did he was up there with the top 4 and hasn't been able to recapture that form.
|
|
By:
I put del potro, ferrer, tsonga and co in the same bracket as the likes of kuerten, kafelnikov, courier etc. capable of winning a few majors between them but shut out (bar one for potro) because of the top two(then three and now four).
|
|
By:
Murray is more controlled on court and his serve has improved since Nadal has been injured but i still feel Nadal would beat him more than not.
Fed was on top after the 4th set in the Aus semi the other day, but seemed to wilt all of a sudden from the beginning of the 5th. Not sure Murray is a `different player` since Nadal got injured. Sure he is more finally tuned but Nadal had him running from side to side and dominating him. |
|
By:
Murray won the olympics and the US Open. He won the last two big events and is in the final of this one. Hard to say if that is because he has "stepped up" or not, but he HAS won whereas before healways failed at the final hurdle. Now he knows he can, and has, won and you cant buy or fake that kind of mental confidence.
|
|
By:
I didn't think Fed was ever on top to be honest. He had to play **** or bust tennis to get out of Dodge in the 4th and you can't keep that up. More importantly, I think Murray thought that also. In the fifth set he looked like someone swatting a fly he thought he'd already killed.
|
|
By:
I still fear Fed, he is the greatest and may yet have one more slam in him, best chance Wimbers this year, but clearly third best now(at best), even now he can, seemingly from nowhere, play tennis that belongs with the gods that the other three can only dream of, (see last year's wimbledon final for proof). If he can keep it up, as he clearly couldnt in yesterday's semi, then he could yet win another slam.
|
|
By:
these days Fed can't recover from tough matches like he used to - the struggle with Tsonga really took it's toll and he was spent by the 5th vs Murray. Djokovc and Murray are like duracell bunnies - even after 4 hours they still seem to be as fresh as ever reaching balls from all corners.
|
|
By:
That`s true Rob. However in the Olympics Djork had been showing signs of burn out and Fed never produced his A game the. The US Open was similar.
I remember backing Murray against Nadal in the US Open in 2011 and at no point did i think Murray had a chance. That was the difference, against Fed and Djork(Unless Djork is at his best) i always feel he has a chance. |
|
By:
Yeah. The best ever, without a question.
|
|
By:
That`s true AT.
This is why i feel Samprass, McEnroe and a few other old time top players would have to be seriously committed to the intense training these guys go through. Just look at the difference in leg muscles from say Murray to McEnroe. |
|
By:
speaking as someone who has watched nearly every slam match of murray's career, i can assure you all he's stepped up!
was fairly obvious changes were happening when he took djok to 5 12 months ago and performed decent in the wimbledon final on the mental side, it's like he has a new brain |
|
By:
Angel Gabrial 26 Jan 13 13:05
Murray is more controlled on court and his serve has improved since Nadal has been injured but i still feel Nadal would beat him more than not. Fed was on top after the 4th set in the Aus semi the other day, but seemed to wilt all of a sudden from the beginning of the 5th. Not sure Murray is a `different player` since Nadal got injured. Sure he is more finally tuned but Nadal had him running from side to side and dominating him. yes fed had 2 purple patches in the match, the 2nd set tb and 6-5 in the 4th and the tb as someone who attended said, one of those rare 5 set thrashings and when you see the stats it's even more surprising it wasn't done in 3 |
|
By:
Agree, was a rare 5 set thrashing. Is that canaryboy?
|
|
By:
yeah congrats today
we deserved all we got! another woeful cup display at home after we should have made the fa quarters last season and league cup semi this |
|
By:
its the same in all sports, once one person at the top raises the bar, the rest have to go with them and everybody improves.
if the 90's tennis players played the current players they'd get hammered, however if they were around now then they'd be just as fast and strong as them. george best in his prime would get slaughtered in today's premier league, however imagine how good he could've been had he trained as hard as they do now, also had he played against defenders who werent out to break his legs or footballs made of cement. you can only really measure a player in any sport in the context of his era, as compared to previous generations they are typically miles better, murray as he is today would win every slam he played in against players pre-fed. |
|
By:
also if this current crop of tennis players is to be remembered as having a 'top 4' then for me Murray has to win at least 3 more over the next two years.
what's the longest a multiple slam winner went before picking up their first? |
|
By:
lendl was a year younger at 24 winning his first and won 8
|
|
By:
must be Lendl in the open era. He was 25 & had lost his first 4 finals, so very very similar to Murray, before winning 8 titles.
he also lost 11 slam finals so had a pretty impressive record in the majors. |