Well Done Andy

by CaledonianCraig Sun Oct 16, 2011 11:29 am

First topic message reminder :

Andy Murray, on sealing the Shanghai Masters and winning his third ATP title in as many weeks. That win means that, for the first time in his career, he moves above the legendary Roger Federer in the rankings moving to No.3 in the world and well-deserved it is too. Well deserved I hear some ask? Well rankings are judged on the here and now form not what has gone before from a year or two ago etc. Now on this season alone Andy has a better slam record than admittedly a Federer in decline and a better record in all other tournaments having won five titles to Federer's one so no contest there.

What difference will being No.3 make to Andy's game/mindset? Not a lot in the grand scheme of things but obviously it is a nice feather in his cap and can only boost his own confidence that he is heading in the right direction. I often hear people say that Murray should not be included in the big top four that is often mentioned perhaps solely because he has yet to win a slam which I can understand but equally it is unfair to try to paint him as being in the chasing pack as he has long been ahead of that chasing pack of players such as Ferrer, Soderling, Tsonga etc since breaking into the top four in 2008.

What does the future hold for Andy Murray in terms of grand slams? Well he may win one or he may not and that will depend a lot on what happens with those around him such as Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Now Federer is on the wain so he is much in Murray's boat where he may have to depend on others slipping up to benefit unless like Murray he can raise his slam game to another level that he isn't at at the moment. Nadal is going through something of a crisis of confidence himself of late so he isn't as bullet-proof as say a year or two ago. Djokovic has been imperious this season and the question will be:- Can he maintain that level and consistency? If not others will pounce.

Again well done Andy on winning your 21st title and 8th Masters title taking him up to joint 6th on the all-time list of most successful players Masters Series in history.

by Super D Boon Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:58 pm

legendkillar wrote:I wouldn't call it bickering. Someone stating 'facts' should provide them if asked. Don't see the harm.

It is frustrating to be honest to see the tennis thread treated as dumping ground for posters to crap on when they get peed off that their favourite team/player lost or something and try to antagonise posters here.

A good verbal kicking never hurt anyone.

What, to cyber bullies like you? Just because someone doesn't agree with your one-eyed views doesn't make them wrong. I see it that Murray wins lesser tournaments because the other better players ease off is an opinion I'm entitled to have and I don't need to back it up by "facts". We don't all have to love your curly haired hero. I rate him highly but think he's short of being great and some way below the top three.

If you want facts here's some:

Grand Slam wins:
Federer - 16
Nadal - 10
Djokovic - 4
Murray - 0

by Guest Thu Oct 27, 2011 4:53 pm

Super D Boon wrote:
legendkillar wrote:I wouldn't call it bickering. Someone stating 'facts' should provide them if asked. Don't see the harm.

It is frustrating to be honest to see the tennis thread treated as dumping ground for posters to crap on when they get peed off that their favourite team/player lost or something and try to antagonise posters here.

A good verbal kicking never hurt anyone.

What, to cyber bullies like you? Just because someone doesn't agree with your one-eyed views doesn't make them wrong. I see it that Murray wins lesser tournaments because the other better players ease off is an opinion I'm entitled to have and I don't need to back it up by "facts". We don't all have to love your curly haired hero. I rate him highly but think he's short of being great and some way below the top three.

If you want facts here's some:

Grand Slam wins:
Federer - 16
Nadal - 10
Djokovic - 4
Murray - 0

Gotta admit.. that's kinda funny. Short and sweet Laugh

Oh child Booooooooooooooon, You have the potential to be on the potential disciples list.

I will consult the Eastern Oracle. Ye are now free to thank me.

ghost

emancipator - recruiting for new potential discliples to be placed on the potential disciples list.

by legendkillar Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:41 pm

Super D Boon wrote:
legendkillar wrote:I wouldn't call it bickering. Someone stating 'facts' should provide them if asked. Don't see the harm.

It is frustrating to be honest to see the tennis thread treated as dumping ground for posters to crap on when they get peed off that their favourite team/player lost or something and try to antagonise posters here.

A good verbal kicking never hurt anyone.

What, to cyber bullies like you? Just because someone doesn't agree with your one-eyed views doesn't make them wrong. I see it that Murray wins lesser tournaments because the other better players ease off is an opinion I'm entitled to have and I don't need to back it up by "facts". We don't all have to love your curly haired hero. I rate him highly but think he's short of being great and some way below the top three.

If you want facts here's some:

Grand Slam wins:
Federer - 16
Nadal - 10
Djokovic - 4
Murray - 0

I am waiting for the quotes of these players who play with less effort and have come out publically and stated it.

Don't be such a ponce and state some facts about performance levels.

Don't be a cyber numpty.

by CaledonianCraig Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:35 pm

Some more tangible facts for you Super D Boon.

A triple slam finalist.

Five times slam semi-finalist.

One of only a handful of players in tennis history to reach all four slam semis (or better) in a calendar year.

One of only a handful of players to have reached all four slam semis.

Inside the top ten most successful Masters Cup players of all-time.

No.3 ranked in the world.

I'd say there is plenty to be mighty proud about already and guess what? He ain't finished yet.

by **laverfan** Thu Oct 27, 2011 8:59 pm

SDB... Is the glass half-full or half-empty?

CC feels it is half-full (Slam Finals, Masters, WTF) while you feel it to be half-empty (Slam wins).

Can we at least agree on the 'half-ness' of the glass, then we have a common language to discuss the 'empty' parts. What do you think?

Neither one is saying that glass is completely empty, which would be just my glass? Laugh

or perhaps Time Please's glass. Heck, her Chardonnay bottle should be completely empty now. Wink

by CaledonianCraig Thu Oct 27, 2011 9:05 pm

In my opinion, nothing at all to be negative/ashamed about with Andy's stats laverfan so glass definitely half-full.

SDB, I get the impression doesn't really rate Andy so going by that logic then from his point of view it has to be glass half-full as well since those achievements are out of this world for such a player.

by time please Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:16 pm

I heard that laver! And, yes it is........not a drop left! Wink

by **laverfan** Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:19 pm

This monkey, of a slam win, on Andy's back does create a bit of unfair criticism and when Pat Cash or Becker start criticising Andy, it is unfair, IMVHO.

With two (or three - sorry NiTB) great players are peers, even getting a look at silverware is an accomplishment.

I hope SDB will appreciate Andy when some slam silver comes his way.

by **laverfan** Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:21 pm

time please wrote: I heard that laver! And, yes it is........not a drop left!

Hope Monsieur Thierry at least got a whiff of the Chardonnay. Wink

by Calder106 Thu Oct 27, 2011 10:47 pm

Afraid I'm a glass half empty person naturally and with Andy at present it stays that way. Nothing I would like to see more than see him win a slam. However he has not performed in any of the three finals he has reached. Yes he has played against players ranked higher than him but has really been well beaten in all of them. However it really was his cave in agaist Nadal at Wimbledon after one bad shot that really worried me.

I saw an article after Shanghai (can't remember where) which seemed to indicate that he was look to bring someone into his team who had experience of competing or coaching at the sharp end of slams. I think that would be a good move as I feel there is not much missing in his game and this might just make the difference.

by Calder106 Thu Oct 27, 2011 11:18 pm

Found the article. I actually think it's a good honest summation of his performance in the slams and the fact that he needs to perform better in the 5 setters when he comes up against the top guys

http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2011/10/19/murray-looks-fine-tune-slams/

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 8:27 am

Half-full or half-empty does not all revolve around slam wins though as my earlier posted list of Andy's achievements so far. To have those achievements in an era containing Roger Federer (widely seen as the greatest player of all-time), Rafael Nadal (seen as perhaps one to become greatest of all-time but less so now) and Novak Djokovic who this year has been virtually unbeatable and looks like he could wrack up 10+ slams in his career then I cannot see how his glass can be half-empty. I'd also say if Andy does miss out he'll be one of the greatest player to never win a slam and challenge anyone to supply me with names of players who can match Andy's CV without having won a slam.

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 11:10 am

laverfan wrote:
time please wrote: I heard that laver! And, yes it is........not a drop left!

Hope Monsieur Thierry at least got a whiff of the Chardonnay.

Sadly...........no! Wink

Just going to add my piece a little late, and I am going to sit on the fence a little here. I think what Super D Boon wrote probably came out a little more baldly than he meant, because I do think that he has a point, not one I totally agree with, but my opinion is not dissimilar. I differ in the fact that I think all Andy's masters titles were won with the other top guys really trying - it is one thing to think a player might not try as hard as he might in a QF to give himself a breather, but ridiculous to suppose they would not play lights out in a final. Andy definitely has shown that he can beat the very best, and do it more than once.

However, and this is where my opinion is a bit closer to SDB - I think Roger, Rafa and Novak are able to find a 5th gear on the biggest stage. It is not that they wouldn't try consciously not to find this in a Masters but I think it is just something that when the stakes are highest and their opponent is playing brilliantly too, they are able to play outside themselves - I am not sure that Andy has that 5th gear.

by Calder106 Fri Oct 28, 2011 11:54 am

time please wrote:
laverfan wrote:
time please wrote: I heard that laver! And, yes it is........not a drop left!

Hope Monsieur Thierry at least got a whiff of the Chardonnay.

Sadly...........no!

Just going to add my piece a little late, and I am going to sit on the fence a little here. I think what Super D Boon wrote probably came out a little more baldly than he meant, I do think that he has a point, not one I totally agree with, but my opinion is not dissimilar. I differ in the fact that I think all Andy's masters titles were won with the other top guys really trying - it is one thing to think a player might not try as hard as he might in a QF to give himself a breather, but ridiculous to suppose they would not play lights out in a final. Andy definitely has shown that he can beat the very best, and do it more than once.

However, and this is where my opinion is a bit closer to SDB - I think Roger, Rafa and Novak are able to find a 5th gear on the biggest stage. It is not that they wouldn't try consciously not to find this in a Masters but I think it is just something that when the stakes are highest and their opponent is playing brilliantly too, they are able to play outside themselves - I am not sure that Andy has that 5th gear.

He should have kept his hair on then. Very Happy

More or less agree with you. They seem to be able to time their campaign in order that they are peaking at the semi-final/final stages of the slams and the belief they have in their ability and the fact they have done it before carries them through.

CC yes Andy has achieved a lot in his career so far at a high level (and I hope he achieves much more). He will be one of the greatest players never to have won a slam if that comes to pass, no question. Unfortunately though that's he tag he will carry around with him (Colin Montgomerie in golf springs to mind). Therefore given the effort he has put in to get where he is I think he would see it as glass half empty. Anyway that's hypothetical for now lets just hope he finds that missing ingredient and goes on to win one or more slams.

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:09 pm

I would agree with you about glass being half empty IF he had reached three slam finals and lost against players perceived as lesser than him ie David Ferrer, Gael Monfils and Robin Soderling etc etc etc but that hasn't been the case. If that happens in the future then I would agree it was glass half empty but to have lost against Roger Federer twice (seen as GOAT by many) and Novak Djokovic who as we now know was embarking on an incredible unbeaten run then that is nothing to be ashamed of.

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:22 pm

It is the comphrehensive way that Murray was beaten, not taking a set in 3 finals that makes me wonder about a) his heart b) whether he can find a 5th gear.

But I hope very much that Novak's success this year, and the way Andy bagelled Rafa in Tokyo will give him the heart and the belief to draw on if he finds himself in a major final this coming year.

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:35 pm

True he has not performed at his best in these slam finals but he has come very close to winning sets such as v Federer (a tie-break which you can't get any closer to winning a set without doing it) and 5-7 V Federer and a 4-6 V Djokovic so he has got very close. He just needs to keep hammering on the door and I am sure one day it will open. Even the winning of one set may just clear that final obstacle and take off his handcuffs.

by **laverfan** Fri Oct 28, 2011 12:38 pm

CC.. since you mention Soderling, he has been to two finals. The stigma attached to Andy is also attached to Robin. Beaten by Nadal and Federer in two consecutive finals. Sad

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:15 pm

Yes Soderling has been one of the more prominent players outside the top four but has lacked the consistency of Andy Murray but still has had an impressive career considering the competitiveness of the era.

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 2:34 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:True he has not performed at his best in these slam finals but he has come very close to winning sets such as v Federer (a tie-break which you can't get any closer to winning a set without doing it) and 5-7 V Federer and a 4-6 V Djokovic so he has got very close. He just needs to keep hammering on the door and I am sure one day it will open. Even the winning of one set may just clear that final obstacle and take off his handcuffs.

I really hope so CC - and for you too as a very loyal fan Very Happy

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:21 pm

To be honest time please I try not to look at it as winning a slam being the be all and end all to things. Andy hasn't won a slam sure but he has achieved more than what many slam winners have in the sport. I mean look back through records and there are countless one slam winners who won a slam and never even reached another slam semi and won far fewer titles than Andy already has. Does that make them better players than him? I think not.

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:01 pm

It may not make certain players better on a day to day basis than Andy Craig, but it possibly makes them braver ones.

Whatever his fans wish, I think we all know that if he finishes his career without a slam that there are moments which will haunt him, when he knows with a bit more courage his name could be inscribed on one of the major trophies with the greats. His terrible defeatism after AO 2010 and '11 shows how it affected him. For some players, 3 finals might well be the pinnacle of what they could hope to achieve, but Andy has clearly considered himself the equal of the other three in the past - in fact I would go so far as to say that until the 2010 final he actually saw himself as better than Federer 'I didn't have to do anything special to beat him'.

Yes I know he will be rich beyond measure, lovely girlfriend, etc etc......but he is a top class sportsman and they think rather differently to you and I. I hope that he does realise his dream of winning a major because he has carried his own and our expectations for a long time.

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:06 pm

I wouldn't say it was anything like lack of courage that holds him back as he has displayed time and again he has that. He needs to be more consistently aggressive in his matches and of course beef up second serve. He has proven time and again even after past disappointments in slam finals he still has the self-belief to get there again and it is up to him to implement a far better game plan ie more aggressive when he gets there. If he does that or even wins a set it will cut off the shackles he seems to play in in his slam finals.

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:16 pm

Lack of aggression at the key moments is either a lack of ability to read the game and the importance of the moment (unlikely - he's too experienced now) or a lack of courage.

You talk about his shackles, and I wouldn't disagree with you - but I think what shackles him is a lack of derring-do, or desperate courage.

He was so brave against Rafa USO 2008 - go and look for highlights on you tube and look how intense he was and how he played like he had everything to win and nothing to lose........then go and look at this year's semi! All sportsmen lose, maybe not their nerve, but some of that reckless courage of youth as they get older......Federer very much has but the knowledge that he has and can, will sometimes still see him through against the top on the biggest stage.

Murray needs to re-discover a bit of the reckless courage that saw him triumph over Rafa at US 2008 imo, if he can.

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:23 pm

I think Boris Becker at the US Open this year hit thew nail on the head best of all. He said that basically Andy's game of manoeuvring players all over the court and forcing errors is so good he sticks to it and gets in a groove and often gets him to the later stages. However, that game won't beat the likes of Federer, Djokovic and Nadal and so he needs to implement a more aggressive gameplan but since he has played such a different game up to that point by the time he finds his range with his aggressive game the match is invariably as good as lost. BB feels Andy should implement his aggressive game from Round One in slams and so it is well run-in and working smoothly for the start of matches against the big guns putting him in a far better position to win these matches.

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 4:44 pm

Aaah yes I remember Boris saying that now Craig - I agree, and I think it ties in with my point as well - he doesn't have the courage of his convictions in the clutch moments because the 'muscle memory' for playing aggressively isn't there.
He should be saving himself earlier in the slams if he has superior fire power - why play the waiting game? That to me is lack of aggression/courage and it has caught him out more than once - an example floating around the threads today Roddick W 2009 - the brave player won out. He should never have made the same mistake again, yet he did just a few months later to Cilic.

I also have to say I think he has been a bit confused with all the fitness team and no real strong coach to guide him. But again, I feel his reliance on his entourage is a sympton that he lacks the courage to make it a bit uncomfortable for himself in order to progress.

It is a shame we can't put Tim's heart with Andy's ability!

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 5:45 pm

No I'd say that he plays the way he does because to a degree it is so successful now as his slam record proves. Perhaps he feels that system works so well why change it? He just needs to take himself out of the comfort zone more often but at times he is in a Catch 22 situation. His game of manoeuvring players around works very well and he is comfortable with it and more at ease with himself. However, when he goes aggressive and invariably misses a tad more shots as is natural he tends to beat himself up mentally as he is a perfectionist and so it psychologically makes the aggressive game less appealing to him. Does that make sense?

by time please Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:47 pm

Yes you do make sense Craig - the thing is Andy is obviously an intelligent guy and he must know that over bo5 it would be better to conserve his energy for later matches by playing the aggressor more frequently. I think his game used to be more aggressive, certainly when he played Rafa it was, and I was thrilled to see that he had obviously taken more of the initiative again in Tokyo.

Your latter point about perfectionism I understand, and we saw Djokovic doing the same in 2010 - beating himself up over every little point. MV obviously put it on the line for Djokovic this year and he has been a much braver player this year and reaped the rewards accordingly.

Murray needs to have the courage and the heart to look beyond the lost point .......less of 'oh woe is me' and start looking forward all the time - that is courage I think.

by CaledonianCraig Fri Oct 28, 2011 6:57 pm

In the end it is all just about fine tuning his mindset and gameplan come slam finals/semi-finals. If he can find that magic recipe I see no reason why he can't win a slam as he has almost been there without the recipe.

by time please Sat Oct 29, 2011 2:42 pm

Requesting a wild card for Basel looks like a statement of intent Craig Wink

by CaledonianCraig Sat Oct 29, 2011 3:38 pm

Obviously, his confidence will now be high and will be looking to test himself against the world No.1 Djokovic and Roger Federer.

by time please Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:15 pm

It's a tricky draw with Haase and Wawrinka, both of whom have caused him problems in the past - hopefully he will come out firing straight away.

by Super D Boon Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:14 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:Some more tangible facts for you Super D Boon.

A triple slam finalist.

Five times slam semi-finalist.

One of only a handful of players in tennis history to reach all four slam semis (or better) in a calendar year.

One of only a handful of players to have reached all four slam semis.

Inside the top ten most successful Masters Cup players of all-time.

No.3 ranked in the world.

I'd say there is plenty to be mighty proud about already and guess what? He ain't finished yet.

Here's another fact, Djokovic was all out to sea with a shoulder problem in the final of Cincinnati, no doubt pulling out of the Cinci final ensured he didn't aggravate his injury further meaning he could concentrate on being better again for the main event the US Open - which he would later go on to win.

Also, Murray won Cincinnati in 2008 beating Djokovic there but it was the latter who went on to record the bronze medal win in the Olympics and Nadal who failed at Cincinnati went on to win the gold. Murray bombed in round one.

Murray won Doha in 2009 prompting many experts to believe him as favourite for the Aust Open - he would fail to win that slam.

This year he's recorded a winning streak spanning 15 matches but this is when the slams are over. In two of these tournaments, Nadal was very much a part of. Djokovic wasn't but no doubt nursing his shoulder injury, after all he's got 3 of 4 slams this year so can afford to recuperate.

In 2008 Murray had a similarly impressive winning streak of 14 but again this came after the US Open.

These FACTS support my argument that Murray comes on better when the bigger names are not as focussed or are out of action, (ie. during non slam time). I mean, do you seriously think Nadal concentrates on winning Shanghai as much as he does winning a grand slam?

Plenty to be proud of but still no slam. It looks like he needs the level of the top three to drop a little before that happens because Murray's A game doesn't seem to be on a par with the A game of the big three on the big occassions.

I know you like to protect your fellow scot but you obviously have a very thin skin when someone offers an argument that may not be 100% sugary sweet in favour of your hero. Still, good luck to him I say! I'm not one of these people who wants him to lose because of what he said about a football match many years ago. Besides I'm not even English. I'd like to see him do it one day but hold the view that his sucesses seem to come outside of the big events when the bigger players seem not to be fully focussed. A view I'm entitled to have.

by Super D Boon Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:17 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:Some more tangible facts for you Super D Boon.

A triple slam finalist.

Five times slam semi-finalist.

One of only a handful of players in tennis history to reach all four slam semis (or better) in a calendar year.

One of only a handful of players to have reached all four slam semis.

Inside the top ten most successful Masters Cup players of all-time.

No.3 ranked in the world.

I'd say there is plenty to be mighty proud about already and guess what? He ain't finished yet.

Here's another fact, Djokovic was all out to sea with a shoulder problem in the final of Cincinnati, no doubt pulling out of the Cinci final ensured he didn't aggravate his injury further meaning he could concentrate on being better again for the main event the US Open - which he would later go on to win.

Also, Murray won Cincinnati in 2008 beating Djokovic there but it was the latter who went on to record the bronze medal win in the Olympics and Nadal who failed at Cincinnati went on to win the gold. Murray bombed in round one.

Murray won Doha in 2009 prompting many experts to believe him as favourite for the Aust Open - he would fail to win that slam.

This year he's recorded a winning streak spanning 15 matches but this is when the slams are over. In two of these tournaments, Nadal was very much a part of. Djokovic wasn't but no doubt nursing his shoulder injury, after all he's got 3 of 4 slams this year so can afford to recuperate.

In 2008 Murray had a similarly impressive winning streak of 14 but again this came after the US Open.

These FACTS support my argument that Murray comes on better when the bigger names are not as focussed or are out of action, (ie. during non slam time). I mean, do you seriously think Nadal concentrates on winning Shanghai as much as he does winning a grand slam?

Plenty to be proud of but still no slam. It looks like he needs the level of the top three to drop a little before that happens because Murray's A game doesn't seem to be on a par with the A game of the big three on the big occassions.

I know you like to protect your fellow scot but you obviously have a very thin skin when someone offers an argument that may not be 100% sugary sweet in favour of your hero. Still, good luck to him I say! I'm not one of these people who wants him to lose because of what he said about a football match many years ago. Besides I'm not even English. I'd like to see him do it one day but hold the view that his sucesses seem to come outside of the big events when the bigger players seem not to be fully focussed. A view I'm entitled to have.

by legendkillar Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:19 pm

Super D Boon wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:Some more tangible facts for you Super D Boon.

A triple slam finalist.

Five times slam semi-finalist.

One of only a handful of players in tennis history to reach all four slam semis (or better) in a calendar year.

One of only a handful of players to have reached all four slam semis.

Inside the top ten most successful Masters Cup players of all-time.

No.3 ranked in the world.

I'd say there is plenty to be mighty proud about already and guess what? He ain't finished yet.

Here's another fact, Djokovic was all out to sea with a shoulder problem in the final of Cincinnati, no doubt pulling out of the Cinci final ensured he didn't aggravate his injury further meaning he could concentrate on being better again for the main event the US Open - which he would later go on to win.

Also, Murray won Cincinnati in 2008 beating Djokovic there but it was the latter who went on to record the bronze medal win in the Olympics and Nadal who failed at Cincinnati went on to win the gold. Murray bombed in round one.

Murray won Doha in 2009 prompting many experts to believe him as favourite for the Aust Open - he would fail to win that slam.

This year he's recorded a winning streak spanning 15 matches but this is when the slams are over. In two of these tournaments, Nadal was very much a part of. Djokovic wasn't but no doubt nursing his shoulder injury, after all he's got 3 of 4 slams this year so can afford to recuperate.

In 2008 Murray had a similarly impressive winning streak of 14 but again this came after the US Open.

These FACTS support my argument that Murray comes on better when the bigger names are not as focussed or are out of action, (ie. during non slam time). I mean, do you seriously think Nadal concentrates on winning Shanghai as much as he does winning a grand slam?

Plenty to be proud of but still no slam. It looks like he needs the level of the top three to drop a little before that happens because Murray's A game doesn't seem to be on a par with the A game of the big three on the big occassions.

I know you like to protect your fellow scot but you obviously have a very thin skin when someone offers an argument that may not be 100% sugary sweet in favour of your hero. Still, good luck to him I say! I'm not one of these people who wants him to lose because of what he said about a football match many years ago. Besides I'm not even English. I'd like to see him do it one day but hold the view that his sucesses seem to come outside of the big events when the bigger players seem not to be fully focussed. A view I'm entitled to have.

What total five knuckle shuffle

I take it it took you 2 days of Wikipedia and You Tube

I want to see the FACT that is top players admitting under performance down to lack of mental application

Present that fact and I might engage in debate.

by Super D Boon Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:28 pm

What are you talking about you weirdo? Perhaps I should go and do an interview with the players and ask them if they went at full pelt in Cincinnait or Tokyo? Like they would admit that they didn't! Maybe raid the files of Novak's personal doctor to establish exactly why he pulled out of a Masters final yet two weeks later win a slam and then somehow feel injured again afterwards.

Facts are facts and we base our opinions on the evidence we have at our disposal. What you ask for is ridiculous and besides the point, and what's worse you know it. Still, there's always clowns like you on every board so we need to make allowances.

Also, it didn't take me two days to respond I've been doing other things with my life over the weekend.. obviously you haven't been!

by Guest Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:31 pm

Stop the bickering please. Debate by all means, but dont start having a go at eachother.
Thanks.

by legendkillar Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:38 pm

Super D Boon wrote:What are you talking about you weirdo? Perhaps I should go and do an interview with the players and ask them if they went at full pelt in Cincinnait or Tokyo? Like they would admit that they didn't! Maybe raid the files of Novak's personal doctor to establish exactly why he pulled out of a Masters final yet two weeks later win a slam and then somehow feel injured again afterwards.

Facts are facts and we base our opinions on the evidence we have at our disposal. What you ask for is ridiculous and besides the point, and what's worse you know it. Still, there's always clowns like you on every board so we need to make allowances.

Also, it didn't take me two days to respond I've been doing other things with my life over the weekend.. obviously you haven't been!

Well yes, provide the link to which players playing Andy Murray admitted they didn't put the effort in or admit your wrong jackass!!

Let me provide a fact for you

Nikolay Davydenko has been warned by umpires in the past 'for not trying' during matches

Show me a tournament that Andy won where someone he played was warned?

Maybe had you researched and not been a prat you might get some respect.

by yummymummy Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:42 pm

Having read through CCs' post it is obvious that *Super D Boon*

hates Murrays guts - don't know why - but live with it folks Well Done Andy - Page 2 291114

Quelle plonker springs to mind

Well Done Andy - Page 2 2211252749

by Guest Sun Oct 30, 2011 6:44 pm

Y I Man wrote:Stop the bickering please. Debate by all means, but dont start having a go at eachother.
Thanks.

by CaledonianCraig Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:01 pm

Lets see now,

Three players that Super D Boon feels don't try hard at the Masters Events and yet they have 'bothered' themselves enough to win far too many to mention between them in their career. So we shall presume according to you they decide to try hard when they win them but when playing Murray they don't try so hard??

I think I need a swift whisky. Erm

by yummymummy Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:18 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:Lets see now,

Three players that Super D Boon feels don't try hard at the Masters Events and yet they have 'bothered' themselves enough to win far too many to mention between them in their career. So we shall presume according to you they decide to try hard when they win them but when playing Murray they don't try so hard??

I think I need a swift whisky.

Swift ????

Three or Four loooong sloooow ones would be better Cool

by carrieg4 Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:29 pm

Hmm........players not trying outside slams?? Unless the player is Novak Djokovic they are not exactly overburdened with current slam titles are they? They ALL are chasing every title - especially Masters - and to suggest otherwise is extremely naive. Even ND, who has had a fantastic year, clearly enjoys his win rate so is not exactly likely to not bother, the more he wins the more unbeatable he seems.

by legendkillar Sun Oct 30, 2011 7:53 pm

It is another poster attempting to antagonise and just ends up looking the fool.

And he/she claims to have a life!! Laugh

by yummymummy Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:06 pm

legendkillar wrote:It is another poster attempting to antagonise and just ends up looking the fool.

And he/she claims to have a life!!

Yet ANOTHER ABM merchant joins 6o6v2 under another pseudonym LK !

by **laverfan** Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:15 pm

Super D Boon wrote:Like they would admit that they didn't!

From the Toronto 2010...

Do you think the Top 4 were not playing 'full pelt'? Erm

SF Murray vs. Nadal - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG2bV6ElTZA

QF Federer vs. Berdych - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZiCRGbc9lY

SF Federer vs. Djokovic - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd2JhMC7dVk

F - Federer vs. Murray - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ALfgGuV-bo

This is before the USO 2010.

I can post videos of Shanghai 2010 (after the USO) and you can probably compare.

It is a bit surprising that you claim that the Masters are less important in any way.

The numbers from the Top 4, Nadal (19), Federer (17), Djokovic (10) and Murray (8), seem to contradict your theory that Masters are any easier and less coveted as compared to winning the Slams.

by carrieg4 Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:22 pm

Yes LF, Nadals leap in the air and fist pumps show how casually he is taking the match when he breaks back for 3-3 in the second set in Toronto Laugh

by break_in_the_fifth Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:39 pm

I don't know why everyones having a go at Super D just for having an opinion. At this point its fair enough to think Andy doesn't measure up to the best players. He says he doesn't hate Murray so you conclude he does Rolling Eyes

I'd say it takes Murray's A++ game to match or beat the other guys' A games, how many guys can bring that out at will? So it's not that far out to suggest that the others have to not be at their best or haven't been some of the times Murray's won.

by sportslover Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:41 pm

Warning to all sensible tennis posters:

This is possibly one of the poorest forms of wumming recently seen.

Starve them of oxygen by not responding to any further comments and they will go back to the Boxing forum.

Hope Federer doesn't get beat this week in Switzerland by Murray and his fans find out he wasn't trying Laugh

by legendkillar Sun Oct 30, 2011 8:43 pm

BITF perhaps because he is centering his dislike at one player and I am still waiting for 'facts' on players under performances. Not only is he discrediting Murray, but also the integrity of such players as Nadal, Djokovic and Federer.

If that is what posters want on this forum, count me out.

by Sponsored content