"My Forehand Is Very Different And I'm Hitting It Really Really Well" Says Murray

This is what Andy Murray had to say about his forehand

"If you watch what it was like before and what it is like now, it is pretty major," the 24-year-old said. "It's not a major change but when you look at it, it's very different in terms of the way that I am moving my feet This week I have been hitting it really, really well and hopefully I can keep that up.... I never used to make that many mistakes on my forehand, it's just a bigger weapon now than it was before"

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=16799&zoneid=25

Is he correct?

Well yes he is correct. I won't argue. He knows his skills better than me. The significant difference has been the length and power he now get's behind it. He seems to back it more and realises it has strategical benefits in his game. The BH and drop shot seemed for a long time to be the only shots he had confidence executing, but now the FH has much more importance and involvement in his game now. The FH he plays is similar to Clijsters. There seems to be light impact on his hip roation when he executes it so when he plays through it, he is not fully moving his body into the shot which would jeprodise his court position.

hawkeye wrote:This is what Andy Murray had to say about his forehand

"If you watch what it was like before and what it is like now, it is pretty major," the 24-year-old said. "It's not a major change but when you look at it, it's very different in terms of the way that I am moving my feet This week I have been hitting it really, really well and hopefully I can keep that up.... I never used to make that many mistakes on my forehand, it's just a bigger weapon now than it was before"

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=16799&zoneid=25

Is he correct?

What do you think, given your always balanced view on all things Murray?

Why are all your articles about someone you don't like?

Are you on the wind-up or have you got some deep seated issues?

hawkeye wrote:This is what Andy Murray had to say about his forehand

"If you watch what it was like before and what it is like now, it is pretty major," the 24-year-old said. "It's not a major change but when you look at it, it's very different in terms of the way that I am moving my feet This week I have been hitting it really, really well and hopefully I can keep that up.... I never used to make that many mistakes on my forehand, it's just a bigger weapon now than it was before"

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=16799&zoneid=25

Is he correct?

Why shouldn't he be? he is the closest to his technique than any of us. More importantly, why have you asked the question if you don't have your own views. A quote, a link and a question, is this really an article?

Murray is going to break through, i still believe it is a matter of when as opposed to if. Barring any catastrophic injury or other unforseen situation he will get a slam or two. I have to agree with his own assessment, his forehand has been good. He could always hit big forehands when he was on, but more often than not under pressure it would start erroring too much. And he still does have some of that tendency. His mindset has been better and more aggressive on that shot recently. I really do see him as Novak's toughest challenge for the #1 ranking in the next couple of years.

Murray will succeed because he knows what it takes to succeed nowadays. He tells us after each Slam and he's getting there for sure.

hawkeye wrote: "... it is pretty major," the 24-year-old said. "It's not a major .... "

... it's very different in terms of the way that I am moving my feet ... it's just a bigger weapon ... "

I am incorporating this "moving my feet" technique into my forehand at my club. It's quite a major change in a non-major type of way. If you look you will see me moving my feet into the correct forehand position as I align my bigger weapon into play. The last time I played the club champion I tripped over my foot as I aligned my weapon, so unfortunately had to retire.

I'd have been more impressed if you'd tripped over your weapon as you aligned your foot.

Was tempted to start another thread with the latest Murray quote but I'll put it here. This is from The Times PPV (but worth it...). Murray may be the same age as Nadal and Djokovic but feels in some ways he is much younger.

“I’m 24 years old, everybody matures at different ages,” he said. “Somebody like Rafa was pretty mature when he was 19-20. Novak probably last year, everyone saying he was like a different person and his results would suggest that. Mentally he was much stronger than he was before and he maybe grew up a year earlier than me, six months earlier.

Is Murray young for his age? Why would that be? Are you only really grown up when you win a slam?

Huh! Where did your comment go YI Man?

I deleted it.
im off to bed, night.

Murray is the man to beat at every big tourney now.

I fear him, I fear him much like I fear the plague.

hawkeye wrote:“I’m 24 years old, everybody matures at different ages,” he said. “Somebody like Rafa was pretty mature when he was 19-20. Novak probably last year, everyone saying he was like a different person ... he maybe grew up a year earlier than me ...

Murray's meltdown after AO2010 and AO2011 (losing in the first round of tournaments to players outside of the top 50), Murrays weak performances in finals and semi-finals against Djokovic, Federer and Nadal (in 2011), Murray hitting his fists on his racket and drawing blood, Murray on court chuntering and moany outbursts, with looks of despair and anger, his unconvincing displays, his inconsistency, his refusal to get himself a proper coach after he fired the last one, his refusal to listen to advice and to do it his way, surrounded by his mates ... was not necessarily displaying "grown up" behaviour. I would even suggest he lost quite a few "armchair" supporters during this period.

I think at Dubai Murray looked physically absolutely brilliant - he has taken a little longer to grow into his frame than Nadal and Novak. He lost well too, taking a lot of positives from his performance over the week and knowing that he was heading towards a surface that he feels suits him better.

Hoping for all good things for him this year

Oh boy!!.. Murray suffered another tame loss to Garcia-Lopez currently ranked #92 in st. sets 6-4 6-2. Murray played very poor, Garcia-lopez played decent enough, nothing great but was good enough.

Wondering what happened to the new and improved weapon the Murray's forehand? It was no where to be seen today. In fact his trusty backhand was off color as well. Only those backhand slices were working fine, whatever fine it was for him.

Very disappointing. I cannot judge as I never saw it but his first serve percentages were down similarly to what they were in the final in Dubai against Federer. You will always struggle to win matches with that sort of percentage. Well at least no ranking points were dropped since he faired similarly at Indian Wells last year.

I saw the match CC, and serving was not that great for Murray but he has won many matches against tougher opponents in more testing situations with worse stats. Actually no part of his game was working today, even his ever "trusty" backhand was just too "rusty".

Last year and in 2010 I could understand Murray coming into his first tournament and still with the blues of the AO finals loss. But this year he looked confident and he didn't attempt to hide anything in his interviews. He defeated #1 ranked Djo and reached the finals of Dubai. So can you suggest why this loss against a rank #92 player this time?

There could be a number of reasons. An off-form Murray playing a player playing very solidly (as various sites report that Garcia Lopez did put in an impressive display) or Murray experimenting with different elements of his game for the bigger tournaments that lie ahead or a number of other reasons. Not that I, or he will be too perturbed by it. After all Andy has had far bigger setbacks in his career and bounced back from them.

CaledonianCraig wrote:There could be a number of reasons. An off-form Murray playing a player playing very solidly (as various sites report that Garcia Lopez did put in an impressive display) or Murray experimenting with different elements of his game for the bigger tournaments that lie ahead or a number of other reasons. Not that I, or he will be too perturbed by it. After all Andy has had far bigger setbacks in his career and bounced back from them.

Reports on various sites is no testimony how Gracia-lopeaz played. They write the similar story for all matches, changing the names. I saw the whole match and I didn't see Garcia-lopez being very impressive. He faced a lot of break points and Murray only unable to take any of those. The match was full of unforced errors. Winners-Errors ratio Muray - 16:34 , GL - 14:16. It was solid play, but I don't call it impressive. If this was "impressive" , I'm sure they get impressed very easily.

Murray experimenting in a masters series 1000 tournament?? Oh Ya, If Federer can why not Murray. . He definitely is getting closer to Federer in this department . And has Murray ever won any bigger tournament than a Masters 1000? Why will he chose to experiment in a tournament where he has all to gain. He had no points to defend coming into IW, Fed has a semis to defend, Nadal a final and Djo a win. Why will he try on something like that and lose an opportunity to close on the gap to the top 3. Perhaps a sudden attack of insanity?

Quit twisting my words. I offered reasons but did not say that was the reason. Like I say Andy has suffered far worse setbacks in his career and bounced back from them so I see no need for any panic whatsoever. You'll need yo do better than that if your intending to make me feel concerned or bad.

I suggest you try another rod.

No CC. I didn't twist anything. You just suggested that a possible reason could be "Murray experimenting with different elements of his game for the bigger tournaments that lie ahead" . I just think this isn't true.


I'm not trying to make you feel bad. I'm just thinking how hard it must be to be a big Murray fan.


Imagine how tough its for me to be Gulbis fan.

Pride comes before a fall and all that...

I am always surprised by the stuff that Murray comes out with at inteviews. He sort of gives a pep to himself or maybe to us. No other players do it. Its like he's taking advice from a really bad sports psychologist... or not taking advice at all?

What he needs is a really good coach. Someone to help with the technical aspects of his game but also someone that could set him realistic goals. He is not a Federer, Nadal or Djokovic being told or believing that he is will not help him achieve more it will in the end be harmful.

IMO linking up with Lendl is a continuation of him being unrealistic. As if a retired player who appears to have more interest in golf could give him a magical secret of how to win a 1st slam at 25 just because he did it himself. Pfft! The emperor has no clothes.

I know this will all be taken the wrong way by many of Murray's fans but I genuinely believe Murray could have been a better player without all the unrealistic expectation and "belief". He should concentrate on the game he has, recognise the flaws and areas that require improvement and accept advice. It sounds simple but maybe its already too late?

I'm really shocked by this. Every time you think he's taking a step forward he takes one back.

How long is it since Federer, Nadal or Djokovic lost in the first round of a 1000 series event two years on the run?

Theres no excuse; this is just surely a symptom of an inconsistent player, probably arising from faults in technique that will rise up at unexpected moments to undermine his game. The serve and forehand are known to be badly flawed, maybe the same goes for other parts too.

No excuse for this. I posted at Dubai that there seems to be an issue with the way he prepares for the start of tournaments. Too often he gets knocked out or struggles in his first match. This year he has had problems in Brisbane. AO and Dubai but managed to get through before going on to have a good tournament. He and Lendl need to analyse why this is or it will happen at a slam soon.
Btw well done Garcia-Lopez you had your chance and took it.

At 6-4 6-2 I wouldnt call it a "chance" taken for Garcia-Lopez, just a collapse from Murray. Its head scratching stuff really...

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:No CC. I didn't twist anything. You just suggested that a possible reason could be "Murray experimenting with different elements of his game for the bigger tournaments that lie ahead" . I just think this isn't true.


I'm not trying to make you feel bad. I'm just thinking how hard it must be to be a big Murray fan.


Imagine how tough its for me to be Gulbis fan.

A possible reason is not my personal thoughts though like you try to paint it in your response but like I say I am not biting. A possible solution is that Andy is now playing a more aggressive style of game, going for more shots, hitting them nearer the lines and being more attacking with his forehand and with that style until he can adjust will come more unforced errors as we saw here and in previous matches in Dubai. As I say I am not going to be too bothered by this result as he has had far worse defeats that he has bounced back from.

bogbrush wrote:How long is it since Federer, Nadal or Djokovic lost in the first round of a 1000 series event two years on the run?
.

Nadal Shanghai 11...so just a few months ago...against the player he is going to play today.

Is it a one off due to possible jet lagging or is Murray turning onto a clear cyclical player? We will see what happens at Miami.

LOL A bit of an overreaction here.
Andy lost in a Masters 1000. So what? Sh*t happens. Nadal himself got trounced by this GL in an unimportant tournament. Murray will be fine for the Grand Slams, in fact better to lose to GL now than Djokovic in the semi. But I can guarantee that Murray would easily beat Garcia Lopez in a grand slam, no need to panic at all.

Hawkeye, I'm sorry I type of disagree with you on Murray. Nadal is really good friends with him firstly and says he's a really nice guy, secondly he is under a lot of pressure so says words which can be twisted to the media.

Tenez wrote:

bogbrush wrote:How long is it since Federer, Nadal or Djokovic lost in the first round of a 1000 series event two years on the run?
.

Nadal Shanghai 11...so just a few months ago...against the player he is going to play today.

Is it a one off due to possible jet lagging or is Murray turning onto a clear cyclical player? We will see what happens at Miami.

Thanks!

Maybe Murray's repositioning of his foot to improve his forehand went awry ... maybe he positioned his foot into his mouth?

I go along with those that talk about poor preparation for tournaments. I think Murray took his "eye off the ball".

Dubai Tournament
Having taken Djokovic close at the Australian Open, having beaten Djokovic at Dubai, he was strangely passive about his loss to Federer in the final saying he had had a satisfactory tournament and he just lost in the Final to a player “who plays better than him on that type of court surface / conditions” (... "Federer is better on a faster court" ...). Where was the self-analysis, identifying the technical reasons why he lost and what he should work on to address them?

IW Masters
I think he lost here because he expected to win, hadn’t adequately prepared and was not expecting to have to “fight for a win”. Although Guillermo Garcia-Lopez played well, he is a clay court specialist and ranked 92 in the world. It is being said that Murray doesn’t know why he lost and he needs to go away to think about it. His apparently lack of self and match analysis concerns me. When Nadal and Djokovic lose, they are able to articulate why they lost and what they need to do to prevent it happening again. I think this is a significant difference in why Nadal and Djokovic are consistent and slam winners and why Murray is more inconsistent than them and slamless.

Quote From Murray: "He was playing with a lot of spin. It almost felt like playing the match on a clay court."

Reply: Yes of-course that's how Lopez plays. The conditions are slower than in Dubai so will play slower and more like "clay".


Quote From Murray: "In comparison to how I felt coming in here last year, it was night and day, I was feeling way more focused and confident, so I'm not sure exactly why that happened tonight.”

Reply: Lack of acclimatisation to the court conditions. Having an expectation that this would be a straight-forward win without having to work hard. Too many unforced errors, not enough first serves in, inability to take break point opportunities, lack of match awareness.

Hopefully Lendl can explain to him what happened and what he needs to do to prevent this type of first round / first match loss.

No Tenez you are confused.
Nadal lost to F. Mayer in Shangai, but he's up against L.Mayer today.

Nore Staat wrote:Quotes From Murray: "He was playing with a lot of spin. It almost felt like playing the match on a clay court." My Reply: Yes of-course that's how Lopez plays. The conditions are slower than in Dubai so will play slower and more like "clay".

"In comparison to how I felt coming in here last year, it was night and day, I was feeling way more focused and confident, so I'm not sure exactly why that happened tonight.”
Reply: Lack of acclimatisation to the court conditions. Having an expectation that this would be a straight-forward win without having to work hard. Too many unforced errors, not enough first serves in, inability to take break point opportunities, lack of match awareness.

Sometimes when these surprising losses happen to Murray you do feel that he has been a little complacent when facing the match.

The comments about IW playing like a clay court when facing a clay specialist like Garcia-Lopez aren't surprising to most of us after comments here and in the press after the faster court in Dubai.

Despite Murray's assertion after the final in D that he feels more comfortable on the courts of IW, are the slow courts the ones that really bring out the best in him? He obviously likes to get into a rhythm of defending and counterpunching, but do fast courts which force him to get onto the front foot more actually bring out the instinctive play which he excels at?

Hi time please, the following after match quote from Murray would suggest he fell into passive mode, was expecting Lopez to give him the match and had misjudged the "slowness" of the court: "He hardly missed the ball the whole match."

A 6-4 6-2 loss seems like a pretty comprehensible loss to me.

To be fair also, GL isnt a bad hardcourt player...I wouldnt put him as an out and out typical spanish clay-courter. IW probably suited him well. Still, this is a disappointing loss by Murray whatever the circumstances given he should do well on this surface really.

Good analysis Nore Straat
I wonder if he also got mentally complacement after the win over Djokovic? Felt he didnt need to prepare much for IW?

Murray is not at his best on a clay court, and IW is basically that slow.

lol, well its not clay but it is one of the slower HCs. IW uses ITF2 speed (medium-slow) plexipave, AO uses ITF4 speed variant (medium-fast) so its slower than there. Still think Murray should have the game to do ok here given it is HC and his run on clay at MC/Rome and FO was strong last year (SF's).

Murray played a really bad match. 4 BPs wasted in earlier games. Casual errors to get broken in the first set. Absolutely horrible match.

bogbrush wrote:Murray is not at his best on a clay court, and IW is basically that slow.

He served for the match on Rome clay against Djokovic. He knows how to handle clay. I wish Lendl was in the stands.

Too fast, too slow, under the lights, heat of the day. These are not out of the ordinary conditions. Murray had been practising in these conditions prior to the match.

laverfan

What do you think Lendl would have done or said if he had been in IW?

What did you do the celebrate this result hawkeye?

Was this the best thing that's happened to you this year so far?

djlovesyou wrote:What did you do the celebrate this result hawkeye?

Was this the best thing that's happened to you this year so far?

he needed Murray to stay in to take out Djokovic thus giving Nadal an easy chance to earn a title. Poor guy will be distraught!

laverfan wrote:
He served for the match on Rome clay against Djokovic. He knows how to handle clay. I wish Lendl was in the stands.

I'm not sure about that LF. Murray has been on circuit for so many years now, but he is yet to play a clay final of any tournament.

I think Jet lag probably did play a role. I for one have gone through that same jet lag from the middle east to the west coast of CA. It is absolutely the worst jet lag because it is 12 hours time difference. At 3 pm it feels like 3am. And it really stays with you for a week.

Still Roger and Novak seemed to adjust ok and win their matches in the first round after Dubai.

I think Andy's second is weak so when he hits for a low percentage of 1st serves he becomes very attackable. That is why I think he has a tendency to have more shocking losses than the other big 4 earlier in the tournaments. Murray's second serve is not as good as the the other 3 players in the big 4. The other 3 guys can more easily win matches when their first serve isn't clicking by playing behind their second and gutting out a win. Murray doesn't have that luxury, he has to serve at a high 1st serve percentage or he goes from being a world beater to being very beatable. But to be fair this is the case for a lot of players and not just Andy.

All in All, I don't see it as being that big of a deal. Probably a little jet lag, a little complacency after beating the world #1, a bad serving day all in one and you are out of the tournament. This doesn't change my estimation of Murray as being able to compete and win in grandslams. Happens to the best of them. But definetly a sign that Andy needs to do some hard yards on the second serve and forehand to solidify those parts of his game.

For me that is always the tell tale of whether Andy is going to struggle or not.

I don't think fed's played yet.

I agree with your assessment of his serve and the problems that arise when the percentage is low.

The dissapointing aspect for Andy will be that he lost so tamely. That will knock his confidence; a couple more early losses before RG and he may start to question whether there is ANYTHING more he can do to close the gap at the top. The Lendl appointment and all the media frenzy around it puts additional pressure on his shoulders.



emancipator

Well emanicpator, agree with your post but I don't think the lendl appointment puts more pressure on murray I think it is the opposite that having lendl gives murray relief from pressure. Think about it, if he had this loss and still had Dani Valverdue or whatever as his coach people would be even more harshly criticizing him. At least they can't attack him now for not having a big name coach.

I think if we go back and look at most of Andy's bad losses I think we would find a big, big correlation between low first serve percentage and most of Andy's bad losses.

But don't you think the expectations have increased even more with the Lendl appointment?

Everyone will be scrutinizing his game even more than usual to detect the 'Lendl influence'. I think overall it creates more pressure for him.

social1976

Well he's linked to a big name but how close is the link and is he a coach?

Garcia Lopez is a decent player so its a surprise but not that big a surprise that Murray lost. I wouldn't go as far as celebrating in fact I always feel a little sorry for his fans when it happens... and also I'm no "guy".

These things happen, not just in tennis but in the wider world of sport generally, and I feel some folk are too quick to come down hard on Murray when he fails to win a match he is 'automatically' expected to win, based on respective rankings. History over many decades shows that these sort of odd defeats are quite often suffered just before, or hot on the heels of, a top-notch victory (eg.vs Djoker in Dubai)

The vast majority of the guys on the tour have played a helluva lot of tennis, and they have all mastered the fundamentals. They strike the ball cleanly, move around the court well and can cause problems for any opponent, whether an elite name or not. It's all too easy to forget that even those well outside the top 10 are tough, hardened pros and on their day can take out a big name who simply performs well below par (and for no immediately discernible reason) whilst the lower guy hits a purple patch, and in any Bo3 it can all be over very quickly. Garcia-Lopez may be down at 92 right now but don't forget he was at 23 only around 12 months ago.

When the big guys do win against lower opponents, as they almost always do, it's very often just one break of serve per set that does the job rather than some sort of whitewash. The margins are very fine at this level, always have been, so should be no surprise really that now & then it goes the other way.

All that said, there's no doubt Mr. Lendl will want to focus on how best to iron out these inconsistencies. I haven't checked the records but I just get the impression that of the top four it's Andy who seems most prone to occasional early exits over the last couple of years or so. But overall he had a fine 2011 and there were NO early exits at the Slams of course

Djoker, Rafa and Fed do seem more consistent and reliable, but in very basic terms is that not the crucial point of difference, and in part at least the reason why they are where they are, and with multiple Slams to their names....?

Someone mentioned that "at least Andy had no points to defend in IW" (or indeed Miami) but in a way that's precisely why he will see this as a missed opportunity to make some headway in closing the gap.

I personally reckon this is a blip, albeit an unwelcome one for him, but that he will bounce back pretty swiftly. The season has a long, long way to go with so much big stuff still to play for.