The formatter threw an exception while trying to deserialize the message: Error in deserializing body of request message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (30720) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 33169.
Great article and very enjoyable. I've always believed that if Andy were to ever win a Slam, that mentally he would unshackle himself. At times, especially in 'big' matches (Wimbledon SF as a prime example) I think he almost psyches himself out of it and that's when it all goes to hell. In a strange way, he almost has too much game but lacks the confidence to implement it all fully.
I still think he'll win a Slam eventually but you are absolutely right, the way he bounces back continually is something to be admired even if you can't admire him as a player. The pressure he's under, both from his own expectations and everyone elses can't be easy to handle, but occasional dips aside, he always comes back for more and I have to believe that when he keeps putting himself in positions to win, that he'll get there eventually, even if he has to do a Goran and finally win one when no one gives him a prayer, just to be contrary.
3 things: "rectangular-lipped roars," "It was like watching Dolgopolov, except that it all made sense," and "And those of who love the sport, for its subtle shot-making and emotional violence" made me think you understand Murray like no one else. Kindred spirits, perhaps.
Thanks for bringing to life a tournament I wasn't able to watch.
"You might not love Andy Murray’s attitude or his mouth. You might not love his forehand or his slump-shouldered walk. You might not love his sometimes-passive style of play or the way he gets crabby at 30-all in the first game. You might think he kvetches a little too much about all of the oversize checks he gets to take home. You might be skeptical that Murray, who, after his win in Shanghai today has eight Masters titles and zero majors, can get it done when the pressure is undeniably on."
...OR you might think NONE of those things. Seriously, does every Murray article you write have to start by having a dig at him.
Congratulations Andy. I'm proud of you,
I agree with a lot of what you wrote. There's an any given Sunday quality to the majors that the historic consistency of Federer, Nadal (and of late, Djokovic) has made fans forget. There's never been a period with so few "fluke" champions as the last few years and therein lies the issue for Murray. When will his window close?
He's 24, cetainly not old, but for the foreseeable future he SHOULD still have to contend with Djokovic, Nadal and whichever of the young guns ultimately breaks through. Federer has lost his preternatural consistency, but he's still a threat to win wherever he plays. If Murray doesn't win a major soon, well...can he win one at all?
Totally agree with the authors comments. If Murray blasts the forehand the way he did against Rafa is Tokyo, good things will come. If Andy has the confidence to consistently play more aggressive and can add a little somthing to his 2nd serve, he will win a major. Dont know if it will happen, but I wish him the best.
"how many players in the history of the game have reached the semis at all four majors in one season, as Murray did in 2011?"
Can anyone help with this? I'm very curious. Federer has, many times.
Nadal has, twice? Or once?
Murray now. Djokovic did it this year and at least one other?
Murray certainly has the ability to win a major...but not (as of yet) the mental/emotional fortitude. In the four big five-setters of the year, he rises to the occasion enough to take one set or so off "Djodalerer" but cannot sustain the requisite level long enough to grab three sets. Simply watch him in his service games at 30 all or deuce...or after dumping a couple of unforced errors into the net...as the pressure builds, he slumps (even more), grumps at himself and his box and loses belief. Murray can make it happen...he just needs to learn how to build steel in his soul.
@Mr. Truth
Djokovic was the youngest player to reach the semis at all 4 slams (which he did by age 20), and if I'm not mistaken, he's the first player in history to reach all 4 for the first time consecutively. 2007 FO, Wimbledon, USO, 2008 Aussie all in a row. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 though he missed the semis at at least one major every time. So this, like Murray was the first year Novak made all 4 in one calendar year. Nadal likewise has only made all 4 semis in 1 year, 2008.
Federer, as we know, has made all 4 semis 6 1/4 years in a row (2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009, 2010 AO). Quite the difference!
Murray in my mind should be beating Nadal at least half of the time in majors. Djokovic personally I think should be the worst matchup of the top 4 for him, as he does everything Murray does just a bit better. And he has the winning H2H vs. Federer. I call Murray to win his maiden slam in 2012. Or maybe he'll be the male Dementieva and win the London Olympics.
always enjoy reading your thoughts about Murray, Steve (also loved some of the funny-coz-it's-true lines - lips, Dolgo, etc.)
Iona: as a Murray fan myself, I'll admit that "having a dig" at him - affectionately, of course - is hard to resist. It seems strangely appropriate that a guy who makes a habit of dry self-deprecation would have wryly critical fans. In a way, it reflects the respect we (and he) have for his talent - his potential. Murray is full of contradictions, and so is being a Murray fan (for some).
"In a strange way, he almost has too much game but lacks the confidence to implement it all fully."
I think I know of another player who once suffered from this problem, and he overcame it quite well :)
Northernboy - you are right about Novak. He is the youngest player in history to play all four semis at majors and he did consecutively! He was 20 then and to me that showed the true potential Novak had.
Even Nadal, who bursed into scene way earlier and by that time Nole reached his first ever semi 2007 RG, won 2005, 2006 and eventually 2007 RG and was at no.2 for two years could not do it. That fact gave me hope that Nole can dominate the game reminiscent in a way Federer did it. And it is such a pleasure to watch that come true :)
As for Murray, he never showed that kind of versatility early in his career. Clay was the problem results wise. He still has 0 clay titles if I am not wrong. But to his credit he is getting there and this year for him is positive also because he showed he can play on clay. I expect a lot from him next year when clay season arive, really a lot.
I seem to remember Marcelo Rios made the semis of all 4 GS one year as well, might have been 1998. But I'm too lazy to look it up :)
Quite a picturesque article. Tignor actually is the only writer on this site whose pieces I am able to finish. Even if it is about my less favorite player like Murray.
Interestingly, I never could finish Bodo’s writings.
Iona - ditto.
Faint praise and negativity made pallatable by compulsory acknowledgement that murray must do some things right, seem to be the defaul position of too many.
Tignor's feathery and imaginative writing style gets him away with a bit too much sometimes.
There are some of us out here who, despite his foibles, rarely have difficulty 'believing in' andy murray.
However, I also believe the best in tignor and am prepared to accept that he feels genuinely frustrated and perhaps even cheated by the fact that murray has not yet won a slam. As a fan, I can concur with tignor on that.
But will it happen? Today, I have less doubt than ever. As Simon Barnes wrote in 2008 ... "Murray - too good to hurry".
@ Mr Truth
Six other men have made made 4 semis in one season during the open era:
Laver, Roche, Lendl, Roger (4 times), Rafa, and Novak.
It's the names that are missing that makes it quite a feat.
"Djokovic was the youngest player to reach the semis at all 4 slams (which he did by age 20), and if I'm not mistaken, he's the first player in history to reach all 4 for the first time consecutively. 2007 FO, Wimbledon, USO, 2008 Aussie all in a row. In 2008, 2009 and 2010 though he missed the semis at at least one major every time. So this, like Murray was the first year Novak made all 4 in one calendar year. Nadal likewise has only made all 4 semis in 1 year, 2008.
Federer, as we know, has made all 4 semis 6 1/4 years in a row (2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009, 2010 AO). Quite the difference!"
When you put it in that context, Fed's consectutive semi streak is pretty mind blowing. I'm fairly indifferent to the guy, but I can't think of many more impressive achievements in tennis that.
On Muz, we all know he is capable of ripping through the Masters circuit before falling short at a Slam, but his consistency in Asia is new. He has never won a chain of events like that before. Will that help him break his mental block in the Slams? Probably not, but signs of agressivity against Nadal, resulting in a 3rd set bagel, are way more telling than this victory in Shanghai. Del Potro showed everyone how to win a Slam against these guys, try to hit them off the court just like they do to everyone else.
I'm torn to how this makes me feel about Murray's chances. On one hand you think that if he can keep this level up for three weeks then why not in a slam. But I've never doubted his ability to win a slam only if he was going to get to a final without a certain big threee across the net or whether he was going to have that big perfomance in him.
It nboggles the mind how some guy who has only ever lost 1 masters series final, all on hard courts of course, has neve won a set in a slam final, again all on hard courts.
I think that regardless of his great run his problem has always been two things. Firstly, its not necesarilly a case of Murray not being able to do it on the big occasion but that the other three raise their game much more for the slams.
Secondly, as well as murray was playing he gave ferrer chances to get back in the match and was broken back at the start of each set. Ok Ferrer didn't take advantage of it but Djoko and Nadal surely would have done in a slam.
I hope he ins one some day but all this run has done is shown me thathe has the ability to play at alevel that I always thought he could. Now he needs either an inspired performance at a slam or a lucky final opponent i.e. anyone but Djoko Nadl and Fed.
Calu - Murray never played in a chain of events in which both Djoker and Roger didn't show up to.
its easier now to reach semis of four majors now with surfaces slowing on grass and hardcourt.
Englishpeter
Why is it easier to make semis on all four majors now with 3 surfaces than it was back in the day when there were only 2?
I guess anything to try and discredit Murray is fair game. It must annoy you greatly no Englishman has come anywhere close to achieving what Murray has done in modern times. I think he now has as many titles at the age of 24 as Henman and Rusedski did during their combined careers.
***batz, i am a fan of murray so shut up, also there is no need to be racist, do not slag off me or other english folk just to back up your assumption on what i do or do not feel... and if you dont know why its easier to reach semis of majors then this compounds the ignorance you so readily exhude.
Posted by Parryberci (Liberty for the Bears, pity for the Goats, let them live !)To be sure there are some things I don't like with Andy Murray, but I ever appreciated his sharp mindset in the game, and his asiatic tour was a perfect illustration of his cleverness in adjusting on his opponents'weaknesses : more aggressive with Nadal, more patient with Ferrer working him to elicit the error. Till today he had maybe a lack of boldness. That's behind him I think now and that makes the Top players' match up very interesting.
As Pete Bodo said in a previous thread, to be fourth instead of third is probably not a poignant issue for Federer, but if he wants to achieve his goals (one more GS or the Olympic Games'single gold medal as he said yet recently) he needs to maintain a good level and maybe win some tournaments (please Roger !!!) in order not to lose too much points.
As for Nadal, his situation is a bit unconfortable because he is now framed with two young guys. The first has already prevailed on him, catching the first place, and the second is now walking in his footsteps instead of Roger. Federer before or behind him was a very familiar landscape and he grew up and matured with it. Maybe that gave even sense and direction to his tennis live. Now he must go on in a disrupted landscape where the question is no more how to break down Roger's backhand but how to challenge Djoko's hellish coshing and Murray's weird cleverness. Big work in sight...
I think 2012 should see, draw gods willing, at least two djokovic-murray GS finals. Both clearly have the edge over Rafa on hard courts. Federer its probably 50-50.
Rafa can still win Paris, but i think now djoker and muzz´s games are reaching their full potential on hardcourts we can see just how well Rafa did to be able to take his game to GS winning levels on this surface. The ability to hit the ball flat and consistently, from both sides, gives djoker and muzz an advantage on hard courst imho. Delpot is the wildcard in the mix.
Steve, I know you are an afficionado of tennis names, so i would like to draw your attention to a qualifier into Luxembourg, the wonderfully named Bibiane Schoofs. Its only a matter of time before she bibianely schoofs a forehand down the line for a winner.
@EnglishPeter
PMSL. It's a pity we can't don't have a posting history on this site - then I could show up your ridiculous assertion about being a fan of Murray for the garbage it is. You hardly ever post other than to denigrate Murray in some way. Even today you haven't posted anything positive about him, quite the contrary - just some vacuous assertion that you seem to think is self-evidently true before then going on some rambling diatribe about 'racism'.
You're a funny guy Peter - and I'm laughing - but in a Nelson Munz kinda way. Haha. Haha.
**it be a great if murray could win wtf, is it only 1500pts for the winner ?..dont the runner up or semi final players get any rank points..i looked at atp points guide it had 1500 for winner and the rest was blank ?.
@Batz
Hey my friend, you can’t do my thing. You are probably a new guy in town, so you are not aware about me.
** bats, murray blows up in the majors its a fact, he keeps losing his temper and playing passive tennis, id like to see him win a major..but keep up with your deranged nonsense and feeble comments and we will all continue with reality.
***we are lucky to have an amazing top 3 plus murray and hopfully del potro..we should all stand in the streets and fart in way of celebration.
@Nelson
:) Please accept my apologies; no offeence meant.
@EnglishPeter
Stop having arguments with yourself - I haven't said anything about Murray's performances in slams.
thats what im on about murray is clearly a top player i mmean hes won 8 masters,but he frustrates the viewer in majors.
You mentioned how it was clear that Murray was feeling the pressure as Shanghai went on but won anyway. I should point out he played that way in the AO semi against Ferrer as well and, just like yesterday, Murray was let off the hook by a player having the same issue. His problem is that he can't get away with that against the Big Three in the majors. The way he handled the Tokyo final is really the attitude he needs in the big matches.
I do dislike Andy Murray for all of the reasons stated above. He won some titles in Asia when Fed and Novak were missing. (He did beat a not-himself Rafa, though). So now I'm supposed to jump on the bandwagon when just last March he was losing to the likes of Donald Young? Just because he didn't have his usual post-major swoon? No, I'm not convinced until he wins a major. If he never wins a major, fine, then can we stop talking about how great he is? I mean, what separates him and Soderling? Some masters titles and one GS final (oh and ranking points now that Soderling has mono). I loathe his attitude. He should feel lucky that he gets to do a job that so few can do, instead he's got the on-court demeanor of a spoiled 4 year-old. So until he actually wins something, where are the articles on Ferru or Sod or all of the others who HAVE NEVER WON A MAJOR.
I am impressed by Murray from time to time, but not regularly enough to care much, and certainly not more than I care for Sod or Ferrer or even Tomas Berdych. The semifinal in Rome this year was phenomenal, and I thought that might be a turning point for Murray and his confidence/attitude, but I don't think it was. Guess I'll
I'd love a couple of Djokovic/Murray slam finals next year, too. Because in terms of slams, I won't believe Murray can get one until I see it - and they'd surely be gimmes for Novak!
"genuinely frustrated"
this is what I was trying to say. I can only speak for one Murray fan (myself), but any tendency to be critical of him comes from the frustration of knowing how talented he is. Like I said, Murray is pretty critical of himself at times; maybe it comes from a similar frustration.
as long as his results seem to fall short of his potential, the "default position" of many people - even (or especially) fans - will probably involve some focus on the negatives.
@tennisDeb
"I mean, what separates him and Soderling? Some masters titles and one GS final"
11 more titles? 7 more masters series titles? World ranking high? Head to head v Federer? Age? Being a Slam finalist at multiple events? Being a Slam semifinalist at all events in one year?
welcome to the former world of Djokovic supporters, Isis. Indeed, all this year people seemed to be waiting for some crashing failure, and the talk has already shifted to the negatives of next year!
Even winning a slam in his second final was considered a fluke for three years. I'm not negative about Murray, but I do remain skeptical.
No one can predict the future of course, but I think, with just a little push from Lady Luck and help from the Draw gods, the chances are very good that Andy Murray will get that GS. And if he gets the one, chances are better that he will get more than one.
But not all the Luck or kindness from the DrawgGods will EVER allow full flap Murray to soar as high as Full Flight Federer....its like comparing a hawk to a road runner. Federer is all about updrafts and lightness, Andy is speed and grimaces. They do share a certain shot creativity, but even that, they express in radically different ways.
Murray got there because Fed slacked a bit. Djokovic got there because both Nadal and Fed slacked.
So, Djokovic and Murray are just two opportunists.
Yes!! Really, really nice, Steve. You found just the right words. It is exciting to see this "ornery" player battle his own demons. He has to triumph over his own personality, a vast challenge. But he's hanging in there, which is moving to watch. Well, you said it all, in your post, better than I can.
Nelson, are you Bored Poet in witness protection?
Murray got where, to #3 - by 45 points? Surely Fed can make up that difference in no time. Maybe as soon as Basel?
But Djokovic is at #1, roughly 3500 points ahead of Rafa and 6000+ points ahead of Fed because they both simultaneously "slacked"?
"But not all the Luck or kindness from the DrawgGods will EVER allow full flap Murray to soar as high as Full Flight Federer....its like comparing a hawk to a road runner. Federer is all about updrafts and lightness, Andy is speed and grimaces. They do share a certain shot creativity, but even that, they express in radically different ways."
CL, if you come back to this thread, this is so, so true.
"In a strange way, he almost has too much game but lacks the confidence to implement it all fully."
I think I know of another player who once suffered from this problem, and he overcame it quite well :)
----------
Isis, do you mean Fed? I do see the comparison, pace CL. Both Fed and Murray have an inventiveness, a capacity to surprise, which I don't feel in the surgical brilliance of Novak or the gutsy scrambling of Nadal. It's a combination of personality and technique. Maybe it's just an ability to take flight at certain surprising points, though admittedly, Murray's flight is more leaden than Fed's (whose isn't?).
@ Batz I was being a little facetious for effect. Beating Roger and Rafa in Masters series are great. Being a finalist in the USO and the AO instead of "just" the FO is great. But... he got slaughtered in all of those finals and at the end of the day, he has as many Grand Slam trophies as Robin. Plus Soderling plays to his potential and Murray is capable of more. Maybe Murray will turn the mental corner like Djokovic did and start winning when it counts, but until then, he's just a big tease for his fans.
***federer won basle last year didnt he ?. so he cant overhaul murray again he must win title or fall further behind and djokovic is playing basle as well..unless he withdraws.
Nelson M, what's wrong with seizing opportunity when it presents itself? Wouldn't you do the same?
Mr. Tignor, thanks for trying to help the Murray-doubters understand why he deserves to be in the conversation. No, he deserves no special consideration, but I think a lot of people are blind to his skills. No, skills do not equal success (think Gasquet), but Murray has shown himself to be more than just a skillful shotmaker or fast retriever. The guy's got game.
I'm a big Murray fan--he's one of the players I most like to watch--but evan as a fan I agree that there's reason for doubt. I truly believe Murray has the goods to win majors, but he has yet to put it together and keep it together long enough and well enough to win one. My feeling is that if he doesn't do it in the next 5 or 6 slams it's not likely to happen. Here's hoping.
Yes, Fed did win Basel last year, and Murray lost early in Valencia. I actually meant to say Paris.
I think Djokovic will play in Basel and not withdraw; he will have had plenty of rest, and is probably itching to get back on tour already.
i had a look at novaks website but there isnt any updates on his injury but basle is still 2wks away.
Great articl Steve. Bit I still think that if mUrray wants to win at a GS, he will have to control his temperamant. Its alright to show off your crankiness in the first game against Ferrer at 30-30 but agaianst players like Nadal and Djoker, You dont give them a hint that you are feeling out. And if you do that, we all know aht has happened in the past. Wimbledon Sf was a perfect example. Temperamant is what he needs to control- look at djoker- even at match points, he remains calm and smiling at times! This is an article i found while surfing on net about Murray and his anger: http://bit.ly/qhjpaO (Anger- Difference between Nadal/Federer and Murray!)
Murray doesn't have the guts for the fight, first sign of losing, he's all over the place.
I don't know if you can "teach" heart, but that's what AM needs more than anything in that final weekend of a slam.
Imagine Nole or Nadal in AM's body: admit it, they would've won a slam by now.
I see no reason Novak won't play Basel after such a long rest period; plus, he'll want to get some tour matches in before Paris and the WTF. In x-fan's guessing game - where is x-fan? - I did not predict the Davis Cup loss, but I did think he might get another loss in Basel.
Since it was once thought that Nole also didn't have the guts - or even the physical capability - for the fight, I'm still waiting to see if Murray will surprise me after all. This jury of one is still out.
It does seem clear that Murray's "problem" has nothing to do with forehands or backhands or serves, though. And this must be just as obvious to him, as well. Doesn't he have a sports shrink? Even a hypnotist might help him become a positive thinker instead of a negative one. I don't mind players who are ornery, but his negative emotions are so internalized.
Congratulations to Muzz! I think that he has made some progress this year. The loss to a supreme Nole at AO destroyed him mentally (I guess the critics fom the media don't help) for 3 months. Removing that period, it's been a fantastic year for him. He had by far his best clay season, and people seem to forget that he was one inch away of beating Nole in the Rome SF, when Djokovic was rolling on all cylinders. After that, he just was terribly unlucky meeting the best Nadal at the semis of the remaining GS. To me, Nadal's SF at both USO and Wimby finals were his best matches of the year. He's won Queens, Cincy, and swept the Asian swing.
Come on, he's had a great season! And I believe to have seen progresses in the mental side of his game. He doesn't quit as fast as he would do in the past, he bounces back much faster, and maybe, he's finally learning that he has to go for it and take his chances in the big matches. He has the tools to face any of the big fishes in the sea, and it could be that his mental approach is getting there too. Again, that should only make for more entertainment in 2012!!
**thats the thing about major winners like nadal they play there best at the buisiness end of majors..thats why nadal beat murray in 3 major semi-finals this year.
it is murrays best season so far, he is 24 so hes got a bit of time to win yet.
Steve said that:
Murray said he felt, paradoxically, more pressure as the wins built up, and he showed it in the quarters, the semis, and the final with his hair-trigger temper.
Well Steve, maybe he just needs to get over that hump where you get used to the pressure of having 'the game' to beat anybody and you use that to win your first major after you have used it to dominate the tour for three weeks. The pressure should never disappear, but you get used to it and deal with it in the moment. As you described it in the Shanghai final, Murray was putting more into his shots than usual and that is what I always felt was lacking in the slam finals he made it to. He just never let go and went with the flow of playing well-balanced aggresive tennis and uncanny defense like Federer has and Djokovic is doing now.
Posted by Roddick fan from Virginia (Young at Career High #41)Tina- Roger can get back to #3 this yr, but Andy has a slight advantage because Roger loses 250 pts from Stockholm Monday. Roger defends 2360 pts after that and Andy 625 (Basel/Valencia, Paris, London).
Posted by Roddick fan from Virginia (Young at Career High #41)Rafa can pick up some pts as he only played London (1000 pts) last year. Novak defends 790 pts from Basel, Paris, London. So Rafa can widen the gap over #3 and Nole can widen the gap over #2.
Posted by Roddick fan from Virginia (Young at Career High #41)There is even the longshot possibility that Ferrer could get the #4 spot as he only defends 590 pts, but oger would need to flub his finish and David better than usual.
Posted by Roddick fan from Virginia (Young at Career High #41)oger = Roger. Sorry Roger fans.
**oger is rogers secret name for when he wants to go out but be left alone...but on a hat, some shades, a josef stalin moustache, and call himself oger.
e-dude "Come on, he's had a great season!"
But not nearly as good a year as Nadal's!... who everyone is saying has had a bad year because he has fallen short of his own very high standards.
I think Murray has at last come of age in Asia this fall and now he and Djokovic will be competing with one another to share the top two slots with Nadal, who ain't going away anytime soon. Can't see Djokovic defending all these points in 2012, though, so Murray has the better chance of staying with Nadal.
I still get really frustrated seeing murray have those 'slumps' after final defeats. Ok he had it in 2010, and that was understandable but this year he just had the exact same thing, he should have lernt from it.
Ok it may not necesarilly hinder his chances of slam succcess unless he gets to the final of the FO and has a slump after that but he needs to remind his opponents of his resiliance that Steve points out.
and now for something completely different ..
**spam n chips, egg spam n chips, spam egg n chips, spam spam spam spam spam n chips.
Most telling quote: “I didn’t necessarily feel like I played amazing tennis, I just did the right things, made it very difficult for my opponents...".
Has Murray been talking with Brad Gilbert? This could have been pulled straight out of "Winning Ugly."
And that, folks, is how you keep your winning ways going. Do the right things, instead of the amazing things, and make it as difficult on your opponent as you can, the byproduct of which is that it becomes much easier on yourself.
**the lesser spotted del potro has been seen in stockholm..he could make the wtf which would be amazing if he did..he was 485 rank at start of feb...shame he skipped shanghai he could have ot to final or even won n hoovered up rank points..ho hum.
Tina: Nelson, are you Bored Poet in witness protection?
What make you think so? There was nothing sexually inappropriate in my comments.
low4.0player: Nelson M, what's wrong with seizing opportunity when it presents itself? Wouldn't you do the same?
I would. Everybody would. I am an opportunist too.
My problem with Murray is I really like the guy because it is more fun when the top players all have very different personalities. But for some reason when I am watching him I begin to try to psychoanalyze him instead of really watching the tennis. I get caught up in his moods, or his snarl at the box or how he can bring off a shot of total brilliance and then double fault the point away. Some players just go that to you. Rios was maddening and Agassi in his younger days had the same effect on me. But unlike a lot of fans I am very fond of this prickly young man who has taken a lot of defeats on the chin and come back stronger. And frankly I think his sardonic sense of humor is very entertaining. Not as chilly as Lendl's but pretty close.
wiseowl, you're right about Murray's sense of humor. I enjoy his interviews, when he lets it all hang out.
his hamster is a sideways squirrel.
I am beginning to miss Nole and at the same time get used to his absence. Weird.
I think it´s finaly time for one of the Grand Slams to be played indoor on a fast to semi-fast surface and with a LOW BOUNCE! There are sooooooo many players that are in a gigantious and unfair disadvantage because they have played most of their upbringing indoors because of the climate!
Why should all the Grand Slams be played outdoors with its slow surface and very high bounce??!! It benefits some players (read: all the claycourters etc.)in a really UNFAIR way! Indoor-tennis, with its perfect conditions (no wind, no sun, fair temprature provides the best tennis (because of its perfect conditions.
I remember last years semifinal-match (Paris Masters) between Robin Soderling vs Michael Llodra; one of the best matches of the year (if not the best) becuase of the different styles that clashed. Soderling´s baseline (which 99,9999999% of all the players play) and Llodra with his fantastic net-rushing-attacking-tennis!
So PLEASE, make one of the Grand Slam-tournaments an indoor-event with a fast surface with LOW bounce!!!!!!!!!!
"No one else leans into a backhand quite like [Murray] does"... Really??? You don't think Djokovic leans into his laser backhands - the best backhands on the tour right now?
"I loathe his attitude. He should feel lucky that he gets to do a job that so few can do, instead he's got the on-court demeanor of a spoiled 4 year-old. So until he actually wins something, where are the articles on Ferru or Sod or all of the others who HAVE NEVER WON A MAJOR."
+1.
Posted by Nelson Muntz 10/17/2011 at 12:49 PM
Murray got there because Fed slacked a bit. Djokovic got there because both Nadal and Fed slacked.
So, Djokovic and Murray are just two opportunists.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Talking about opportunists, there's nothing wrong with taking the opportunities that present themselves. I wasn't going to do this before the season is over, but I do believe that numbers keep us honest. So far this season Novak has won 10 titles, in 2006 Federer won 12 titles. If you considered the rankings of the opponents they had to beat in the semis and the finals, you get the following numbers:
Djokovic: 2,5,7,2,2,1,15,1,36,37,36,1,4,1,19,1,16,8,3,2. Average:9.95
Federer: 45,30,25,54,61,14,11,6,26,15,59,2,16,51,6,10,72,55,4,10,54,7,2,8. Average: 26.79
The last 2 numbers for Federer were for the Masters Cup (WTF), hence 2 Top 10 players in a row, a first for Roger that year. (Winning a GS facing the #54 player in the final? No such luck for Novak).
So maybe Nadal and Roger dipped this year, maybe, and Novak took the chance. ALL the top 20 players took a dip in 2006, they were not making the semis of the big events. Federer took the chance. Why not? Nothing wrong with taking the opportunities.
Imagine how much Novak would have achieved if he had had to fight players ranked around 30 in the semis and finals, instead of Top 10 players. Well...there's not much more he COULD have achieved, but he would have achieved that. XD
3 times did Roger face 2 Top 10 players in the semis and the final in 2006, not once. My bad. :)
I agree with Nelson Muntz at 12:49 pm, word!
By the way, is Djoker really injured?
If Murray keeps his winning ways, Nadal is able to snap out of his fear of Djokovic, and Federer arrests his slump, then it will be a very interesting year ahead. Djokovic has mountains of points to defend, and it is difficult to imagine 2012 will be another 2011 for him. In which case, the top four players will be clawing at each other. The question is: can Djokovic maintain his hold on the top-ranking and defend all his points?
@ Joe - Nole went down in Davis Cup (extremely important to him) against one of his great friends (del Potro) and was crying because he had to withdraw. He was injured.
@ Tony - Djokovic doesn't have to defend ALL of his points, he just has to get more points than anyone else. He's really only in trouble if one person does what he did. Even if the others win some tournaments, unless one player wins all of them, he'll be fine. Either way he'll be fine, since he'll get the Golden Slam next year. (Oh, wouldn't that just stick in Fed's craw).
@Yolita
Great post. Those numbers do help to put things into perspective. I suggest using median rather than mean.
Median ranking of players Nole had to beat in SF and F in 2011: 3.5
Median ranking of players RF had to beat in SF and F in 2011: 14.5
(RF's median is 15.5, but considering that he was #1, we took 1 off.)
@Yolita
Great post. Those numbers do help to put things into perspective. I suggest using median rather than mean.
Median ranking of players Nole had to beat in SF and F in 2011: 3.5
Median ranking of players RF had to beat in SF and F in 2006: 14.5
(RF's median is 15.5, but considering that he was #1, we took 1 off.)
I liked how Andy Murray hit his forehand during this asian swing. that's the main difference in his game. he decided to be agressive on the FH side. If he continues to do this succesfully, he will be a major thread to all the top guys in slams. Go Andy!
Predictions for next year: Nole will continue to dominate Rafa, maybe not like 2011 but definitely will win the head to head in 2012. If Murray continues playing his agressive forehand, he will also dominate Rafa on the head to head. As for Federer, i don't know. I'm thinking he will come back stronger and more focused and win a slam or two, but he could also just not have enough physically and mentally to deal with the younger generation anymore. This remains to be seen. What is for sure is that all these guys will be tearing each other up on the court. We are in for some great tennis in 2012 again :)
I totally agree with Dime that we will have a great year in 2012. but I still dont think that Andy can handle the GS pressure yet! I am a fedal fan and i would like to believe that both federer and nadal will come back stronger in 2012. Just read this story link on another article: a good one on federer: Federer, no.4- his days over http://bit.ly/nUKaLC? . A good one for fedal fans like me!
"After his Asian hat trick, it's time to recognize Andy Murray for something different: his resilience."
thank you for a very real and well-deserved comment about Murray.
he's a proven talent despite missing the slams in that he has proven time and time again, he CAN beat the top 2 and now NO.4. - and he does hang in there even if he takes time to reassess himself which is a good thing.
his greatness has yet to be fully recognized even if he never wins a slam which he will. 2012 promises to be remarkable in many ways and i feel it is waiting in the wings for Murray.
congratulations Andy. we luv you.
I think what Andy Murray has achieved is lovely for him but it's pretty difficult to evaluate it fully when the guys who usually play well in this part of the season are missing. I seriously wonder what his chances at Masters level tourney would have been when they were 5 setters. The less chance Murray has to psyche himself out, clearly he performs better. Hey, at least he's helping to keep pundits' hopes alive as they branded him the next big thing.
Andy has been on the shadow of Roger and rafa for many years, just like Djoko.
Maybe he'll finally step up and starts winning consistently.... like Djoko....
I believe Murray still has it in him to win a few majors. You got to remember a few things here.
One, federer's career is dwindling a bit(just a little) and doesn't seem to have all the weapons needed to win a major. Granted, he still might win one or two more but that's it. If Murray can rise to #2 and get Federer in a semifinal, i think he can beat Fed. I honestly think if its in a final he will collapse and lose(nerves will get to him like the last two finals).
Two, Nadal and Djokovic are still in their prime but i don't think it will last as long for either as some may think. Nadal has had a host of injuries throughout his career and Djokovic has as well. They might wear soon enough which leads into my next point.
Third, if Murray can continue his unparalled physical fitness level for five to seven more years(a la agassi in his 30s) he may have few year window after the big three break down or retire. I think he will, its just a matter of when will the other two drop.
Fourth, i don't like to say he will win just because the big three get old or hurt but there's a reason why. NERVES! He always let's that get to him in a semi against Nadal or a final against Djoker or Fed. I know he has to play more aggresively as well. But, if he's a hothead out there, is it really smart to spray the ball near the lines all the time? Maybe, that's why he plays conservatively. For this i don't know maybe he needs to see one of those sports counselors or something. He needs to figure that out. I think someday he will curtail the hotheadedness at least a bit. He has to if he ever wants to finally cash in and win a big one.
With all that in mind, i say he wins three or four majors. If he don't, he will go down as the greatest never to win a major, but many will forget he will also be one of the greatest ever, if he isn't already.
Expounding on the last point of my last comment, Murray in my eyes is already one of the greatest ever. If you take out even one of the big three ahead of him, he would probably have five or six majors by now. Plus, he's excelled(other than the absolute biggest stages) on almost every stage of tennis in the greatest era of tennis, ever. To think he has the stats he has in the era with possibly the two greatest ever(Nadal and Fed) and with another who is about to become one of the greatest ever if not already(Djoker), is astounding and should be appreciated. Here are some stats for you.
-3 Grand Slam Finals, 8 Grand Slam Semifinals
-Only seventh player to reach all four Grand Slam Semis in one year
-8 Masters 1000 Titles in 9 Finals appearances
-21 Titles in 30 Finals Appearances
-In the top 5 ATP Rankings for over three years running
-$18,495,016 in career prize money
Now again, they don't compare to the big three's numbers but they still should be appreciated. He's one of the best and should only get better.
No comments:
Post a Comment