Tennis
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Berdy - lost at Wimbers. Two sets up against Tsonga, lost. Ditto Del Po at Us Open. And last Wimbers final could only beat Roddick 17-15 in the 5th.
Get real guys. Murray has a big big chance on Sunday
Get real guys. Murray has a big big chance on Sunday
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 36
|
By:
if wont bottle again ,yes
|
|
By:
If Murray wins a set it will be the first one he has ever won against Federer in a GS.
|
|
By:
Federer is the closest he's been to #1 for over 2 years so he's obviously playing quite well.
|
|
By:
He was never 2 sets up in that us open final against Del Potro, and it was 16-14 against Roddick in the 5th.
Get your facts right at least before you go kocking the greatest player ever to swing a racket. |
|
By:
It's more the case that Nadal's and Djokovic's level if play has dropped a lot this year
|
|
By:
It's more the case that Nadal's and Djokovic's level if play has dropped a lot this year
Funny then that noone except Federer has got any closer to them. |
|
By:
yep, Nadal's level has dropped, great excuse. that's why he destroyed everyone on clay apart from Novak.
|
|
By:
nadal was injured!!
ITMBI |
|
By:
Nadal is always injured when he loses
|
|
By:
might put a massive 10 sterling on the big man 3 sets to 2 .home advantage and all.
|
|
By:
That was worst i've seen Djoko play for a long time. He was awful today. Murray would have beaten him
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Djokovic's recent success in their matches has come from Fed's groundstrokes breaking down (over 50 unforced errors in the US Open semi).
Federer made 10 UEs today - the Master was in the house. |
|
By:
rubbish
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
"Berdy - lost at Wimbers. Two sets up against Tsonga, lost. Ditto Del Po at Us Open. And last Wimbers final could only beat Roddick 17-15 in the 5th.
Get real guys. Murray has a big big chance on Sunday" If you only take into account the bad things about Roger then I'm sure that for you Murray has a really big big chance. |
|
By:
bad things are recent I'm afraid. It's Bad Fed these days, Good Fed only comes out now and again
|
|
By:
Fed's played one great match, way beyond the level he has consistently played at in the last 2 years, and suddenly all the Fed fans have crawled out from under the rocks they've been hiding, proclaiming him to be the greatest again. See no reason why Murray can't beat him on Sunday. Murray much improved and mentally stronger. Fed chanced his arm today and got away with it. Never seen a player hit so many lines in a match.
|
|
By:
Murray has long had the game to beat Federer but continually bottles it on the big stage. Until the penny drops, he will continue to underachieve. I would love him to win on Sunday but can't see it. Maybe a set this time. Maybe.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
yes, one great match. Thanks for re-posting.
|
|
By:
one great match is all it takes to be on the verge of number one ranking?
Someone should tell Lukas Rosol, I have a feeling he's totally unaware he is so close to being world number one  |
|
By:
Think the biggest problem for Murray may well be that this is a different level totally for him - a Wimbledon final, if he's ever going to bottle it, it will be in this one - huge pressure on him.
Fed's been there done it bought the t-shirt, washed and ironed the t-shirt, lost it, and found it again in a charity shop. He has a great prize in store for winning it again. He should probably play close to his best in the final, not sure I'd say the same for Murray. All in all, I'd have to go for Fed at these prices given this. |
|
By:
(From a purely odds/betting perspective for the Murray-haters on here, lol)
|
|
By:
Fed's looked washed up these last few years. Stuffed at French Open by Djoko, comfortably beaten (as per usual) by Rafa in Oz Open, and a Slam-free zone since the Oz Open in 2010. Hardly the form of a world no1.
|
|
By:
Those victories in the masters events and his consistent ranking at no.4 demonstrate Murray's talent. As I said, he has the game to beat Federer, and the other 2. But slams are where the pressure is really on, and that's where Murray's talent is overcome by his nerves. Bottling, choking, call it what you will. It's a common trait in many athletes. Fed himself was a serial choker in his early days on the circuit, until the penny dropped. That's what Lendl is there for I'm guessing. Can he get into his head and get him to relax and play his shots without fear? I haven't seen much evidence of it so far, but Sunday would be the perfect time to do it.
|
|
By:
JR - Fed is a strange creature, but seems to have picked up his form at the right time. He hasn't won a slam recently, that's true, but if he'd only had to beat Murray to do so would that be the case? I'd guess not.
Comparatively, we could also say Murray has never won a slam, so being slam free for a period is hardly a negative in relative terms. I'm finding it hard to look past Fed winning and making tennis history, even though it would be great to see Murray win Wimbledon on an emotional perspective. |
|
By:
Hardly the form of a world no1.
He doesn't have to be #1 to be able to beat Murray - he just has to be better and everything suggests that he is. That's not to say Murray doesn't have a chance - he does - but Federer is rightly the favourite. |
|
By:
stu - it was a post in response to those who are eager to crown Fed world no1. He hasn't looked like a world no1 for a long time, and one great match vs Djoko doesn't change my mind. He did the same last year in Paris, beating Djoko in the semi, playing sublimely.
I'd counter by suggesting Murray is much improved since he met Fed in the Oz Open final in 2010. He also has more Slam final experience now. Don't go along with the theory Murray is a choker. But his game in the past in those big Slam finals has been too passive - which has long been a basic trait of his game, so not just something that happened in finals. At this tournament his game has looked a lot more aggressive. This has been worked on as much as his mindset and body language by Lendl and there are marked improvements to his game - the old Murray would have lost to Ferrer, and definitely capitulated against Tsonga. Yes, Fed is fav but Murray has a great chance of beating him. |
|
By:
I suppose the hope Murray backers could cling to is a match like Benneteau one - but then he's since played matches that washed that memory away. Djok didn't play at his peak, but neither was he so terrible - he just couldn't find a way through Fed.
|
|
By:
I'd add part of being a 'number 1' is resilience JR - if he's shown that in getting here then fair play. The others simply couldn't.
|
|
By:
Djokovic was way below form yesterday and I agree with Mcenroe who said he thought the roof was "a huge factor" in his performance. Never timed the ball, moved poorly and was brushed aside
Sure Federer played well but was never really pushed. Hopefully the weather stays dry, roof open and we get a competitive match - many Wimbledon finals have been too one sided - and a very high standard too 4/7 Fed seems fair at this stage but won't if Murray wins the first set which I see as crucial. If Fed gets a lead vs Murray he could be hard to stop Keys for Murray: choose the right game plan & execute perfectly (depth on groundies will be important for example, start dropping them short and Fed will be running round to hit in the in-out forehand for winners) and of course he must serve at his best |
|
By:
In the two Grand Slam finals between Fed and Murray, Fed has clearly had the upper hand. In Flushing Meadow, Murray was still feeling the effects of the rain-effected battle he had with Rafa in the semis. In Melbourne Murray played poorly. But he still should have won the 3rd set tie break (he blew it). The Melbourne match wasn;t as one sided as Flushing Meadows.
In Murray's other Grand Slam Final he met Djokovic on a roll. He smashed Murray. But subsequently for the next 18 months smashed Rafa and Federer as well |
|
By:
i was talking about wimbledon finals in general not the GS finals between Fed and Muzz
|
