Andy Murray - I Have No More Faith

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 13:51

First topic message reminder :

Andy here we are again. The same old problem. Cannot take the incentive in a match when it matters. In my brutal and up most honest assessment of this match was that Djokovic was lucky. That type of performance against anyone more clinical would've won resulted in a 3/4 set defeat. For me Murray had so many chances in the match to win and gave it all back. Simply put he does not believe enough he can win a Slam. For me he wasted chance after chance. I hear all this give him credit, credit for what? Tossing the match in when it was there for the taking? Andy looked so effortsly on his FH and he was bossing Djokovic all around the baseline. I cannot from this match see Andy ever winning a Slam. I am a British tennis fan, but Andy's performance in the 4th set was pathetic. You only chuck in sets when you know for sure you can take the match in the next set. To try and do that against a proven champion was very misjudged and arrogant. Credit to Djokovic yes he won the match, but it wasn't a match he deserved to win. Some of his court play was Ferrer-esc.

When Andy Finally won the 3rd set, I expected him to click into 3rd gear and take the match in the 4th, but did he? Boll0cks did he!! He gifted points like they were going to come back round. Yes he got himself back in it in the 5th, but at the expence of fatigue on Djokovic's behalf.

Great players see out matches when in control. Great players do not dip and create problems for themselves in match winning positions.

Andy has the talent to be great, but wastes it with a poor mindset.

mad

by banbrotam Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 20:19

banbrotam wrote:
consigliare wrote:
barrystar wrote:
Tenez wrote:
barrystar wrote:
banbrotam wrote: Once he broke Nole back in the 5th set, I was no longer particular bothered who won, partly because Nadal had a massive physical advantage but partly because Andy finally showed that he can mix it with his peers, when they are playing well and expectation is high on him

That rings such a bell with me. I was pleased when he won his own serve to force Djoko to serve it out, and when he broke back I had exactly the same feeling although it was nothing to do with Nadal.

I had a similar feeling during the Wimbledon 2008 final - once Federer won that 4th set tie-break the score was respectable, the match would go down as a classic.

What????

That's the different between champions and others....it;s not about looking good and being respectable. It;s about winning. Djokovic typically doesn't get satisfied with such thoughts, He gives 100% until the last drop of sweat n blood. Federer, Nadal have learnt it the hard way.
Murray has moved on from being someone who folds after the first disappointment to a player who loses 7-5 in the fifth having broken back from 2-5 down.
Awesome achievement, and still only 25.

Keep this sort of stuff coming please fellas.

I know you love watching Murray lose - but can you please note, that given the paucity of good youngsters - indeed anyone below the age of Del Potro, 25, in today's game is still young. Here, Tenez's 'physicality' argument has some foundation. You have to be fit and strong - impossible if you're 19 and still developing unless you're a freak (meant in the nicest sense) like Nadal, that comes along once every 200 years

Indeed Nishikori, the fastest rising player soon to be in the Top 20, is the 3rd youngest in the Top 50 at 22.I mention him, because Murray's defeat against wasn't rated. Very worrying isn't it for the Murray knockers like you that one of the best youngsters around isn't seen as in the same league as Murray.

Amazingly Chela at 32 and a half, still occupies a Top 30 spot!! So the clay court grinder lives - so much for such players fading fast!! Even at 25, Andy has still far more players older than him than younger

I applaud you for making me find all these facts out as the age of the top players is higher than I first thought

25, is positively a spring chicken!!

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:14

CaledonianCraig wrote:Legendkiller - A five set defeat to the world No. 1 and defending champion surevas heck beats losing tamely in three sets a year ago. At the moment Djokovic is the best in the world and Murray came as near as you can to beating him. Now you may be peeved that Andy blew his chance but just remember that Djokovic did the same to the GOAT when match points down to him at the US Open. I just cannot fathom out how you kept the faith twelve months ago when Murray lost in straight sets and had no coach of note and was prone to on-court turmoil within himself. Now he looks much more assured and in control and better for it.

I can't understand how you view an opportunity blown as a better thing than being completely outplayed.

Like I said 12 months ago he ran Nadal and Djokovic close on clay which should've been the launchpad for much greater things. That greater thing was today, he had the chances and blew it.

If you remember Federer fans last year after that defeat weren't consoling themselves with 'There were positives' they were fuming for him being wasteful for the second year running and not to mention his defeat to Tsonga too.

Call it 'there were positives'

You can't polish a turd.

Today's performance more than any other in the past demonstrated to me that he hasn't got what it takes to win a Slam.

by **laverfan** Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:16

I am very surprised at the following...

"Speculating in the Channel 7 commentary box, both Lleyton Hewitt and Jim Courier said they did not think Andy Murray would win his first Grand Slam title this year due to the staggering competition he faces from Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. Both were quick to add, though, that they believe the Scot will taste Grand Slam glory at some stage in his career, with his best chances coming at the Australian Open or the US Open."

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/01/4/Australian-Open-Day-12-Diary-Ball-Kid-Catch.aspx

by noleisthebest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:18

LF, why are you surprised at that?

There's no need for the impatience.
Here's my little "take" on it all today. I know I'm no tennis great, but at least I says it as it is Wink

As for the match itself, since all the talk is on "poor" Andy, I don't think there's any reason for feeling sorry for him today.
He played a good match and has nothing to be ashamed of.
Lost to a better player. End of.

His game was better today than last year, still despite improvements, his forehand still lags behind the top 3, mainly in its variety. There's a lot more to it than a cross-court flat bullet.

Murray's returning today was excellent. Absolute top-notch.

His attitude was a lot better, as well. Notably love vibes flowing between him and the new coach, very nice to see.

If he continues to build on today's match, come clay season, he'll be a nightmare...

His game has been transmuting a lot in the last 3 years and is still work in progress.

In my opinion, Murray still hasn't found identity in his game, or maybe he lost it.

The real Murray was the 2009 weaving counter-puncher.

Nadal exploded, so Murray went Nadal way: piled on pounds of flesh, increased fitness to stupid levels, even started moonballing his forehand.

Thankfully, Lendl stopped the rot.

will be interesting to see where he takes him. Seems like Lendl likes Nole's game a lot Wink

.

by CaledonianCraig Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:21

Are you telling me then that you kept faith after he was thrashed twelve months ago but list it today. That is like proclaiming a first round knockout in boxing is a more encouraging way to lose than a split points decision against a world champion. And yes I am disappointed but nowhere near as disappointed as I was last year in Melbourne. Andy was seeded four unless you forget but took the star player of last year to the brink of defeat and you feel that is not cause for encouragement considering what happened a year ago?

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:26

CaledonianCraig wrote:Are you telling me then that you kept faith after he was thrashed twelve months ago but list it today. That is like proclaiming a first round knockout in boxing is a more encouraging way to lose than a split points decision against a world champion. And yes I am disappointed but nowhere near as disappointed as I was last year in Melbourne. Andy was seeded four unless you forget but took the star player of last year to the brink of defeat and you feel that is not cause for encouragement considering what happened a year ago?

For the last Flip time yes.

Are you overlooking the points I made about his performance on Clay or did that not cross your mind?

You can cling to the whole 'positive' crap all you want.

For me, this defeat stinks out the rest he has endured.

If you think Djokovic oplayed a better match today than last year then you are deillusional.

Murray had this match in his control and threw it.

It doesn't get any simplier than that.

by **laverfan** Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:33

LK... In 2010, after AO, he was morose for almost six months.

With Lendl, he has no choice but to learn to cope with loses which will give him mental strength.

I am happy to see he played a 5-setter compared to AO 2011 final.

I am looking forward to IW/Miami.

by **JuliusHMarx** Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:35

My faith is always magically renewed at the start of every slam. The same way it was with Timbo (and before that, Jimbo) every Wimbo.

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:38

LF,

Despite Lendl being on board, this defeat is the worst. Similar to Roddick in 2009 against Federer and Federer's to Nadal in 2009.

Murray can take positives, but for me there is too many negatives.

What can change??

by CaledonianCraig Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:38

Double post

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:40

He played better than Djokovic today and lost.

How do you console yourself? Knowing you controlled the match and then threw it away. Knowing that stroke for stroke you matched your opponent.

I remember Ivanisevic saying about Roddick's defeat that it would take him 5 years to get over it.

by noleisthebest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:47

legendkillar wrote:He played better than Djokovic today and lost.

How do you console yourself? Knowing you controlled the match and then threw it away. Knowing that stroke for stroke you matched your opponent.

I remember Ivanisevic saying about Roddick's defeat that it would take him 5 years to get over it.

LK,

Murray did NOT play better than Djokovic today. He had his stretches and that's it. He was even the fitter man during most of the match.

Stroke for stroke...don't kid yourself. Murray's forehand is miles behind Nole's. Especially in its variety.

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:49

noleisthebest wrote:
legendkillar wrote:He played better than Djokovic today and lost.

How do you console yourself? Knowing you controlled the match and then threw it away. Knowing that stroke for stroke you matched your opponent.

I remember Ivanisevic saying about Roddick's defeat that it would take him 5 years to get over it.

LK,

Murray did NOT play better than Djokovic today. He had his stretches and that's it. He was even the fitter man during most of the match.

Stroke for stroke...don't kid yourself. Murray's forehand is miles behind Nole's. Especially in its variety.

You are Poopie me?

Murray's FH today pi$$ed on Novak's. Murray was not exerting half the effort Novak was.

I wouldn't kid yourself that Novak played better.

If that Novak shows up Sunday, He will be done in 3 easily.

by noleisthebest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:52

You and I obviously watch tennis in a very different way, LK. I'll leave you to it.

by carrieg4 Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:52

legendkillar wrote:LF,

Despite Lendl being on board, this defeat is the worst. Similar to Roddick in 2009 against Federer and Federer's to Nadal in 2009.

Murray can take positives, but for me there is too many negatives.

What can change??

It is already changing LK. He took a very positive step in hiring Lendl and both said the effects would take time to appear but they are plain to see already. You may not agree but I believe he played well for four of the five sets. ND has been kicking everyones behind for the last 12 months so a 5 set loss to him is nothing to be ashamed of. It just proves that AM is finally ready to bring his A game to the finals and, the way things are going, he will be ready to seal the deal soon. I feel more positive than ever, there were two great players out there today and ND just played a little better.

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:55

NITB

Who hit the most FH winners today?

by Jubbahey Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:55

Andy Murray - I Have No More Faith..

Are you now a disbeliever ? A Murray atheist ?

I think you're being really hard on the guy, OK, he lost a passive 4th set, but so did Novak in the 2nd set.

For someone to come back from 5,2 down in a 5th set decider against the No1 player in the world was incredible and you should be beaming from ear to ear with pride that he put up such a fight in what is being called the match of the tournament.

Novak played some incredible tennis too, it was swings and roundabouts and in the end it was down to one game only and that wasnt an easy pushover for Djoko. To me, Murray has exorcised his evil spirits and is looking keener and more hungry. I swore like a trooper at times when he played passive, but he managed to pull it back in again.

This was no easy win for Novak and no hard loss for Murray. For me there are more positive things to take away than negative things and I think its a pity that someone like yourself should display the kind of brash, teenage sulking that Andy displayed on court all those years ago.

Far better to support him that turn on him after a match like that. no matter what you say about some individual points or games, it was 5 sets of hard slogging and see saw moments of splendid tennis. Murray did himself proud out there and should be applauded for his mental turnaround because that was a display of damn good mental strength under intense pressure.

by legendkillar Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 22:56

Jubbha,

I am not a Murray hater.

I am still a fan. Just don't believe he can capture that elusive Slam.

by CaledonianCraig Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:05

lk if it is positives and negatives you are after today then here goes:-

The Negatives:-

He lost
First serve percentage just not good enough
Too many unforced errors
Not enough break points converted

The Positives:-

Far better body language and mental aptitude than in previous such matches
Despite being a set and a break down and then 5-2 down in the final set he came back and never went away. Can't recall that in any such-like slam matches in the past.
Proved that he can trade with the world No.1 on the biggest stage and I'd say if he had won it would have been the best win of his career ad he got mighty close.

by Jubbahey Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:08

I didn't call you a hater, don't put words in to my mouth.

If after nearly 5 hrs and 5 sets of tennis, you can criticise someone for not playing 100% accurate tennis in that time is a bit harsh. There's going to be ups and downs, moments of intense pressure where confidence waivers or heightens and in those moments, games trun around.

Murray showed he can turn it around, which he hasnt been able to do before in slam semi's or finals. His game is in repair, so you can't expect the world from him right now, but considering its just the beginning and he has displayed such progress, then the future is brighter than you imagine.

Sure he's got a bad service motion and that was exposed today, his FH is weak compared to others and his shot choice and commitment were lacking in boldness at times. These are all things that can be improved, but it takes time and it has to come one step at a time. Mental fortitude was a serious problem for him, thats pretty much sorted, the rest is finesse, just bits of fine tuning.

by CaledonianCraig Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:13

That is the point here. Andy lost by the narrowest of margins against the world no.1 and the player of the year last year and yet there are still areas that Andy can improve his game. I mean if his first serve had of been a shade better he would most likely of won today.

by **laverfan** Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:13

Djokovic played well when it mattered, helped a bit by Murray's waywardness.

LK... I still see differences between AO 2010 and AO 2012. I do agree with you that it is not producing career-defining results yet.

by Jubbahey Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:23

Yes CC, somebody nicked his 1st and 2nd serve today, I hope he finds them again soon.

Lets not forget how well Djoko had to play to get hold of the match in the 5th set and how Murray played to claw his way back into it. That for me was the defining moment for Andy, his mental focusing he needed to put pressure on Novaks service games.

by Guest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:25

Jubba - look at the comments, most agree with your viewpoint. Imagine, if Murray is able to push Djokovic so close after 3 weeks of advice from Lendl, in which Murrays on-court attitude and mentality were changed - what then 6 months of Lendl advice and training schemes in improving the serve, the forehand, match awareness etc. Some are suggesting Murrays wasting of his three Hawkeye challenges early in the fifth set cost him dearly later on ...

Legend is entitled to his opinion. It is an opinion shared by a few but I don't think it is a majority view.

by Tenez Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:32

CaledonianCraig wrote:lk if it is positives and negatives you are after today then here goes:-

The Negatives:-

He lost
First serve percentage just not good enough
Too many unforced errors
Not enough break points converted

You missed the most important one. Not being able to pull his agressive game out before it was too late at 2/5 5th set.

Top players in their career find a way to surf a confidence wave where they play their A game week in week out. Murray hasn't.

I agree there is a case for concern cause I thought he woudl beat Djoko at this AO as he was playing very compact tennis...up to then. But even against a diminished Djoko, he coudl not pull it up.

Yes, he might/will get a slam but his fans can forget about getting much more (though I am sure they'd be happy with one).

by Guest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:38

As Federer mentioned before the AO 2010 final, Britain has been waiting about 150,000 years for a British male slam winner. If Murray wins just one then he is certain to be knighted - Sir Andrew Murray, Duke of Dunblane. He would probably win the BBC sports "personality" of the year award too. He might even end up as the President of Scotland, if and when they decide to go independent and Republic.

by Jubbahey Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:40

Nore Staat.....Those Hawkeyes prob did, but it doesnt take away his performance to come back like that though.

Like you I reckoned 6 months will show how Lendl is doing as a mentor to Murray, but after today, maybe 3 months is all that is required.

Roll on Wimbledon.

by **laverfan** Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:41

NS... a tall order. I would much rather Andy fix the state of LTA first (after he wins a couple of slams). Wink

by CaledonianCraig Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:48

Tell me Tenez, what led you to believe Andy would beat Djokovic today? Against the world No.1, the player of the year last year and currently reigning champion. I find that an odd statement really. I am a Murray fan and even I felt Djokovic would win going on Andy's past disappointing slam performances in crunch matches against Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. Today he came desperately close to winning the match, sure he'll kick himself for the missed chances but hell I'd sooner see him get within a hairs breath of winning than a tame three set thrashing. That, to me, tells me there is progress there. Remember Djoko did a somewhat similar job on GOAT Roger Federer at last year's US Open so it is clear how good Djokovic is.

True a slam may never come Andy's way but if people want to claim this match was proof as to how he won't win a slam then I am stunned. It was a flip of the coin who won today so how is that a bad thing compared to a straight sets thrashing.

Also take this on board - in his last five slams Andy has lost to Nadal in four sets (twice) and in three sets once. In last years Aussie Open Final Andy lost in three sets and so today is the closest he has got to a big result against the world No.1. Sorry but I take that as progress, small I know but progress all the same.

by Guest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:48

I thought Murray might lose 7-5 7-6 6-4 to begin with, but was hoping he might be able to win a set. He certainly surpassed my expectations in the way he came back in the second and in the third (when facing three set points). Then he came back again at 2-5 in the fifth, very gutsy. And all this despite the evident weaknesses in his serve, which will take longer to perfect. Once Murray has perfected that serve, it will be an excellent weapon. He can secure his service game and attack the service games of others. I wasn't expected any big changes in his serve at this stage - and his serving stats against Nishikori were the same old same old.

by Guest Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:52

laverfan wrote:NS... a tall order. I would much rather Andy fix the state of LTA first (after he wins a couple of slams).

I would just send all the British prospects off to the Lendl Academy in the "States". Probably would be cheaper than what they are doing at the moment. ... but let's not start debating the LTA ... Smile

by Josiah Maiestas Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:54

Novak broke Murrays serve 11 times today, 4 more than he was broken by the Scot, and according to Legend Murray was the better player... Laugh

A "better player" doesn't get his serve broken that many times in 1 match, I think you are really overlooking the bread and butter of tennis today, fine sir. thumbsup

by CaledonianCraig Fri 27 Jan 2012 - 23:59

And your point JM? Murray almost won a match against the world No.1 even though his first and second serve percentages were poor. Damn imagine what would have happened if Murray's serve had been firing.

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:01

CaledonianCraig wrote:Tell me Tenez, what led you to believe Andy would beat Djokovic today? Against the world No.1, the player of the year last year and currently reigning champion. I find that an odd statement really.

Why? That's a strange question for a fan of Murray. As I said, one because I felt Djoko was struggling. I don;t think he was only faking, he looked in real difficulty at times...and secondly cause Murray can produce an agressive game and had played very consistently and "compact" for 10days.

Murray showed mental strength in his previous rounds but simply folded versus Djoko. Djoko did not play like the number 1 today or certainly not like he played in 2011. And from what I saw this is why Murray managed to grab 2 sets...otherwise it woudl have been 3x set 1 when Djoko was still fresh.

by CaledonianCraig Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:15

Sorry but he is Novak Djokovic not Superman. Against David Ferrer he looked at deaths door early on and yet Ferrer still couldn't wear him down with his baseline game as Djokovic kept chasing balls down and retrieve balls other players can't get and it was the same today. His fatigue/injury struck after about an hour but four hours later he was still sprinting around as fit as you like and will be lining up for the final. Also if injured then why no MTO which he is famed for? Novak was fit of that I am 100% certain. Do you not think it strange that all the winces and going down on his haunches always occur when the game is going against him. It happened against Ferrer and today against Murray. Now no way am I saying it is gamesmanship more like a mental/pyschological thing within himself wherein he loses a point at a key time and so the slightest soreness from exertions and he reacts. Certainly no fitness problem though or else the match would not have lasted four hours fifty minutes.

Simply folded? Eh? A set and a break down and he folded? How come he went ahead to lead 2-1 in sets then if he folded? Also in the fifth set I wouldn't call fighting back from 2-5 down as folding. Perhaps Djoko never played like he did last year because he wasn't allowed to by Andy? And I like how you claim Murray grabbed two sets because Djoko's level dropped yet no mention of Murray's level dropping in set one and four. It was a flip of the coin who won that match today and that in a match that Andy could have been better in a few areas. I would say that is a positive as shows there can be improvement.

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:18

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry but he is Novak Djokovic not Superman..

Sorry but that's what you are implying by saying it's normal Murray lost today.

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:22

I don't know whether he was injured or not but he certainly was not playing as consistently as he was in 2011 AO final. He had serious dip of form in that final.

Yes, I was very surprised he managed to play through it, but just so you know I had put money on him losing as he was obviously struggling. Nadal or Federer I feel woudl have exploited that dip much better...yes including Nadal.

by legendkillar Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:23

CC,

Read that last paragraph you wrote. We are in agreement that Andy played some great tennis. My frustration is with the fact he had control of the match and lost it much rather than Djokovic winning it. Djokovic did not play at his best and that is why it was a scrappy affair. Andy broke down Djokovics game and still could not deliver the fatal blow when he had the chances.

by amritia3ee Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:23

Tenez, without any personal bias, who do you think will win the final?

by CaledonianCraig Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 0:39

I am certain Tenez he is not/was not injured as we will see on Sunday.

lk Yes we agree Andy played some great stuff and yes he played some poor shots as well and Djokovic may not have been as imperious as last year but don't you think that may have had something to do with the way Andy played against him not allowing him to impose himself. Like I said earlier I mentioned break point conversions are an area for him to work on, as is serve. Jeez give Ivan Lendl time I mean, like Djokovic, he is not Superman. My point is Andy has not got this close to beating the world No.1 in a slam before and I see that as a step forward.

Step back a year in time and see where Andy was. Without a coach and tamely beaten in straight sets against the same player as today. He then went AWOL for a couple of months in the season and then we saw the upward trend. His best clay court season to date, a semi at RG, won Queens, a semi at Wimbledon where he took a set off Nadal before imploding, wins in the Masters Cups, a semi at the US Open where he lost in four sets to Nadal and a strong finish to the season with a hat-trick of titles and then starting this year as he has and now with Lendl on-board and I'd say he has already been of great help in just three weeks. I am sure more improvements will come and today though Andy lost he went down fighting to the last and instilling belief in himself that he CAN compete against the very best player in the world in the latter stages of slams.

by Josiah Maiestas Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 1:02

Andy broke down Djokovics game and still could not deliver the fatal blow when he had the chances.

Murray is not built to deliver fatal blows he is merely q counter punching percentage guy, maybe 1 in 5 times you will see him stinging the ball at the end of a long match against a big player, hence he has won twice and lost 10 times against the top 3 in slams? Rolling Eyes

by socal1976 Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 5:05

legendkillar wrote:NITB

Who hit the most FH winners today?

Legend who hit more errors off the forehand side. Murray hit more winners and way more errors off that wing as well. In no way does that make Murray's forehand quote "pi$$" on Djokovic. A lot of guys hit more winners off the forehand side than Nadal or djokovic but hitting winners alone is not the sole analysis of strokes effectiveness. If someone hits 10 winners and 20 errors, is his forehand better than a guy that hits 8 winners with 5 errors? James Blake hit a lot of winners with his forehand as well I wouldn't take his forehand over Djoko or Nadal's. But I do agree until the 4th or 5th set Novak was not hitting his forehand well at all. But when they went cross court to cross court with the forehands I think Novak's forehand was clearly better and for most of the points that was the shot that dictated the play.

by raiders_of_the_lost_ark Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 7:31

As I've always said Andy Murray's game is limited and he lacks weapons of tennis. I give him high credit for making the most of what tennis talent he has, he has a very tactical brain and ability to analyze the opponent's play and force them into errors. He has great stamina and strength. But this is as far as it can go for him. Some Masters, some wins against top guys, some good runs to Grand Slams but no more. For wining a slam he needs circumstantial advantages ( top contenders losing early, injuries to them, etc..) along with his own game clicking on top gears ( as it was in the famous US open 2008 semis) . As of now those haven't aligned for him. Will it happen, who knows??

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 7:58

CaledonianCraig wrote: My point is Andy has not got this close to beating the world No.1 in a slam before and I see that as a step forward.

Well he has! Hasn't he beatten Nadal a couple of times? But more importantly, you are making too much of a poor tight match. The first set is really what sets them apart for now. After that it's simply Djoko fighting like a lion without being 100%.

by CaledonianCraig Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 8:35

Well if we listen to the sceptics here Tenez wasn't Nadal injured both times Murray faced him and was Nadal world No.1 at those times like Djokovic is now.

Step back and look at how men's tennis is. Nadal has the Indian sign over Federer, Djokovic has the Indian sign over Nadal and was the player of the year by some way last year. We are talking world No.1 here and regardless of how both men played, both played great stuff intermingled with poor stuff but the bottom line here is that it was a damned close match. Yes Murray will look at this as a chance missed as he should and will but after three weeks of working with Ivan Lendl we have already seen improvements in Andy's game and I'd say that is very encouraging for the future. Andy has always had the talent and his greatest achilles heel has been with self-belief in these matches. Yesterday he lost but he lost so narrowly it will have been a big injection to his self-belief that he was so close to perhaps the biggest win of his career and that with a game where he has room for improvement.

by consigliare Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 8:45

banbrotam wrote:
legendkillar wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:Sorry but I have to totally disagree with you legendkiller about listing faith in Andy after today. If you were going to lose faith in him then the time for that should have been twelve months ago. Last year he went down to a meek straight sets defeat in the final to the same opponent. Today was like chalk and cheese to that performance. I'd sooner he lost and we are sat here thinking perhaps he could have or should have won than last year when we couldn't even say he could have or should have won a set. Also on top of that the signs for this partnership with Ivan Lendl are very encouraging. Three weeks into the job and already we see improvement in many areas. Obviously, still a heck of a lot to work on such as his serving and also this tension that creeps into his game at inopportune moments. Also take on board who was on the other side of the net - Djokovic is as brave advanced lion with an iron will and the star player of last year. Not an easy task at all for Andy and not many people gave him a chance but he nearly pulled it off.

If people think a 5 set defeat is a good thing, then there are fans who are in total denial.

Today's peformance summed up why Murray even in form will struggle to win that elusive Slam if the Top 3 are left standing.

There is clear evidence that Murray is now better than today's Federer for instance.

Good lord, What utter tripe.

by CaledonianCraig Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 9:05

How so?

Roger Federer (world no.3) lost in four sets to Rafael Nadal (world No.2) in the first semi. Andy Murray (world No.4) lost in five sets to Novak Djokovic (world No.1). I know which was the scoreline to be more impressed by.

Also Andy has reached the last five slam semis (unlike Federer) and is pressurising Federer for the No.3 slot in the rankings so not such tripe as you paint it to be.

Of course Federer is still seen and regarded as the GOAT which nobody can take away from him (for now) but in the here and now he is not, in tennis terms playing consistent GOAT-type tennis hence his slam wins have dried up.

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 9:06

consigliare wrote:
banbrotam wrote:There is clear evidence that Murray is now better than today's Federer for instance.
Good lord, What utter tripe.

I can't believe he wrote that... Andy Murray - I Have No More Faith - Page 3 810156456

. Well actually knowing Banbro, I do!

That's how it works for them:

Fed v nber 2 = 4 set loss

Murray v nber 1 = 5 set loss

=> Murray > Federer

Look no further they have undeniable proof and evidence.

by Tenez Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 9:07

And amazingly enough...while I wrote my previous post, CC confirms it.

Laughable really.

by bogbrush Sat 28 Jan 2012 - 9:16

I thought things like the rankings, and actually winning something big like the WTF, would settle matters.

But no, the details of the scorelines of two semi matches against different opponents outweighs that? Really? Erm

by Sponsored content