Andy Murray vs Richard Gasquet - Can Andy win this?

Richard enjoyed a win over Andy recently, can Andy pull this match on clay? I think RG will win the RG encounter this time around.

It's n interesting match but I think Murray wins this easily. Reeshard usually wilts in these matches.

Depends on Andy's tactics, gameplan and mindset and on Gasquet's mental strength. Gasquet is being talked about as perhaps being in the form of his life and true he beat Andy two weeks ago in Rome but in their previous two slam encounters Murray has won in five sets and one of those was on clay so we shall see tomorrow. If Andy plays to his strengths and guards against feeding Gasquet's backhand then I'd fancy Murray to win.

Murray is favourite. BB is right on past form but not impossible that Gasquet will be mentally stronger this time, or just win anyway. Murray is still favourite though, heavily so if injury doesn't bother.

In a word yes.

Gasquet is not one for a BO5 against a grinder. Fancy Andy to take him out in 4.

Andy all the way, not so easy in 3 sets.

I personally wants Andy to win, but I fancy an upset tomorrow, RG might just pull it off, I guess he is playing mentally stronger games these days, the bad moments of life made him a stronger now I guess.

Yes he can win.

BUT...there is something different about Gasquet this event. It's like he's finally maturing and grinding out wins more. I fancy him to beat Andy tomorrow.

In reality, the better title for this thread would be can Gasquet win; he's the underdog and flakey player.

If he gets his teeth into it though the French crowd will give Murray some serious bird.

longer it goes the more you would have to back murray.
Gasquet's fitness is always questionable

Gasquet has had the talent but not the temperament or drive or stamina to win at the elite top level. If he has an "Indian summer" to his career I am sure that most wouldn't begrudge him of it.

This is Murrays viewpoint
The 25-year-old Briton said: "When he plays well, he's a very tough guy to beat. He plays some unbelievable shots.

"I'll need to stay solid and try and wear him down - that's worked when I've played him in the Slams before."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18316074

@ NS and Lyd

yes Andy knows a way or two to win it, this match would be a good launching pad for what he will face in the upcoming rounds, certainly the FO has got heated up.

@BB

Yea Gasq beating Murray would be deemed an upset and the title should have gone the way you suggeted, but with the french crowd behind him and stronger mentally now means Andy got a tough opponent than what it looks like, in my view its a 50-50 and yes it all rounds up to which Gasq and which Murray turns up.

Depressing comments from Murray.

Whatever happened to the idea of playing him off the park?

bogbrush wrote:Depressing comments from Murray.

Whatever happened to the idea of playing him off the park?

Well Murray needs a coach for press meet too

All i can say is go richard, don't have anything against murray but really love gazza's game. Well everything except his court positioning and second serve. That being said murray is certainly the favorite and should be. Both guys are good returners and look for a lot of breaks. I haven't been that impressed with murray during the FO so I don't think a Gasquet win on home soil would really be that big of an upset.

in few hours its gonna unfold.

Its a bit close to call this one... If the REAL Andy Murray would like to come out to play and attack from the word go.. maybe .. Gasket is playing well and if Andy Murray doesn´t get a grip from the word off he could go down a set before he could say haggis

bogbrush wrote:Depressing comments from Murray.

Whatever happened to the idea of playing him off the park?

Sorry? Depressing? How so? If Murray had said what you think he should have said then people would be on here panning him for being too arrogant and cocky. If Federer had said exactly what Andy said no one would have said a word about it.

If Federer had said he'd try to stay solid and wear him down everyone would believe he'd been impersonated. Federer sets out to beat the other man through his tennis, not by outlasting.

It's that approach, and the game he brings to implement it that makes me want him to win. Only another basis for support (patriotism, for example) could see anyone feel enthralled by the aim to drag the other guy down as opposed to lifting yourself higher.

Sorry but you do seem to have a false aura around Fed at times. I watched him indulge in a bit of moonballing with Goffin yesterday so don't try to pretend he is 100% Mr. Entertainment all of the time. As for how the game goes today - wait and see how it pans out before shooting Murray down in flames. But what the hell people will more than likely do that no matter what today. Kind of emphasises why I don't see it as a necessity to me that he wins a slam as the knives will always be out for him sadly. For himself and his own ambitions I hope he wins a slam but it won't change a thing in the realm of forums sadly.

Willful misunderstanding. It's about their tennis philosophy.

Since when did Federer make wearing the other guy down his plan? I'm astonished at Murrays approach. As a highly skilled player he should aim to skill the guy off. He makes himself sound like a South American grinder. It certainly doesn't tally with your theory that Murray is 'in transition' to an attacking game. Sounds like more negativity to me.

If you're going to try to portray Federer as a moonballing grinder then good luck.

No I am saying Federer also wins matches ugly and his play has been far from enthralling. Yesterday was an example as I viewed many ugly shanks etc and few dreamy shots but there you go. What their philosophy is is to win at all costs. As for the moonballing comment just a demonstration that he does do that as well - it is not alien to him yet others are shot down in flames for doing it.

Well i have to add one thing here.. and I have always been irked by the fact that Nadal is "The Moonballer" (not denying he does you understand) But Ive seen Federer moonball quite often when he is of the mind... great shot for buying time isn´t it ?? and when Fed feels he is being rushed he plays it. As does Andy
Delpo was also doing it today. and others too.. so what is the big deal about using the Moonball. ???
I think Fed will do it more and more now that age is catchng up with him he isnt as fast as he once was

The view on 'moonballing' is more to do with using it when playing a shot in control.

In its place it's a perfectly legit shot, just not great if used too much.

End of the day each of us have our own favourite players and enjoy them for our own reasons for whatever reasons. Just bugs the hell out of me that Andy gets jumped upon for making ANY comment in the press. This particular one there was nothing whatsoever wrong with it. He credits his opponent and says what he feels will be a winning tactic against him. In short nothing of significance to report...move along. But no he gets criticised for it.

Dont worry Craig Rafa gets it in the neck for having too much to say.
Damned if you do and Damned if you dont

Balls.

Nothing to do with gobbling off - Federerdoes it and gets all sorts of moaning. It's the negativity of Murray that bugs me.

Err excuse me? Where has anyone brought up anything Federer has said in these championships just for starters? He has had pressers all through the tournament and nobody here has even referred to one word he has spoken.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Err excuse me? Where has anyone brought up anything Federer has said in these championships just for starters? He has had pressers all through the tournament and nobody here has even referred to one word he has spoken.

It's a response to the poor victims club emerging.

Anyway, let's watch the match.

Murray really just making a fool of Gasquet at the moment, 22 forehand winners alone already :o

Murray woke up, he is now punishing Gasq.

Haddie-nuff wrote:Well i have to add one thing here.. and I have always been irked by the fact that Nadal is "The Moonballer" (not denying he does you understand) But Ive seen Federer moonball quite often when he is of the mind... great shot for buying time isn´t it ?? and when Fed feels he is being rushed he plays it. As does Andy
Delpo was also doing it today. and others too.. so what is the big deal about using the Moonball. ???
I think Fed will do it more and more now that age is catchng up with him he isnt as fast as he once was

It is actually a very important ball for players of all levels depending on the situation. It is both an effective ball to the backhand in a rally to generate a shorter reply. It is also a good ball to give you time when under pressure and to get you back to even in a rally. Fed has won a lot of matches with his fitness and speed. A great many matches. In particular, fed counterpunches a lot with his slice backhand especially against big servers on their service game. He takes all the pace of the ball and keeps it low. It is a similarly defensive tactic to taking pace off and spinning the ball up and out of the ideal strike zone for your opponent while not trying to win the point outright for pace or placement.

How good was that Murray performance. I wish he would attack more often like this because he is clearly quite a powerful guy, has got a cracking flat backhand and his forehand has come along nicely. We all know what he can do when the other player comes to the net.

He needs to play quite close to that to beat Ferrer in the next round however, but, if he continues that kind of mentality and goes for his shots and mixes it up, he may be in with a shout of the finals who knows. Is he in Nadal's side of the draw?. Ah nuts just seen he is. Well, if he plays like he did baring in mind he's got to beat Ferrer, against Nadal, then he may be able to take it to 5 sets, who knows.

Against Nadal you have to have a high % of first serves in, if he can do this, then I give him some sort of a chance. Well done Andy, simply sublime.

martyr_94 wrote:How good was that Murray performance.

You're getting carried away too?

It was a "what I expected to see" performance. Have you ever played sport to any sort of level? if so, you would understand how easy it is to perform like that and look good when you get on top of someone you know is happy to bow to you and you're utterly confident knowing they won't fight back.

It was essentially a pretty meaningless performance in all honesty and nothing I saw was particularly noteworthy. He beat up on a shell.

Like your optimism and there is cause for optimism with Murray hitting an amazing 59 winners today. However, Murray will do well to overcome Ferrer and then comes the greatest clay courter of all-time - Rafael Nadal. I cannot see Andy beating him but thoroughly enjoyed his performance today.

Andy has a tough road ahead from here on, beating two in form players to reach final is no easy task.

He got a scary QF against Ferrer and a nightmare in Semi.

Good Luck Andy , anyways it was a noteworthy performance today in my view.

consigliare wrote:

martyr_94 wrote:How good was that Murray performance.

You're getting carried away too?

It was a "what I expected to see" performance. Have you ever played sport to any sort of level? if so, you would understand how easy it is to perform like that and look good when you get on top of someone you know is happy to bow to you and you're utterly confident knowing they won't fight back.

It was essentially a pretty meaningless performance in all honesty and nothing I saw was particularly noteworthy. He beat up on a shell.

Well actually I thought I'd complement him on a very good performance. My God is that such a crime. I have played sport to a high level but what's that got to do with it. I though Gasquet would beat Murray, I really did. I thought he played well, nothing wrong with that. I'm not one of these nutters you see at Wimbledon who scream when he hits a smash or something, I think he just played well.

I think Ferrer will be a very tough test indeed, not many beat Ferrer on clay other than the top 3, but, I think if he plays with that sort of mentality and positiveness, why can't he beat Ferrer. I think Nadal is too much of an ask IF he can beat Ferrer, but I'm just happy to see Murray going for his shots. I know its cool to go against the mainstream views, I've done it before, especially if your proven right say in the next round, but I thought he played superbly today against a very decent player in Gasquet who has a good record against him.

Andy played well and returned the breadstick.

bogbrush wrote:If Federer had said he'd try to stay solid and wear him down everyone would believe he'd been impersonated. Federer sets out to beat the other man through his tennis, not by outlasting.

When will you realise that as Andy is not the GOAT and never will be (indeed, we'll be an awful long time waiting for another Roger to come around) so comparing his game / approach to Fed's is a bit like comparing the current Real Madrid squad to vintage Barcelona

It woudl be a good idea if people viewed Murray on his own merits and actually this was not 'solid wearing down' - but Andy's best three sets of Tennis on a Clay Court. Gasquet's didn't really drop, even towards the end he was doing amazing things with the Tennis ball. Andy is simply better at all facets of the game

In fairness, if Roger had Murray 'bloody minded' attitude, then he'd have 20 slams by now as one can only marvel at the fact that we got a wry grin from the Scot, the moment the crowd starting booing and then a classy 90 minutes of play

But not a GOAT[b]

bogbrush wrote:Depressing comments from Murray.

Whatever happened to the idea of playing him off the park?

Think Murray reverted to that plan. 59 winners. Don't think that can be considered negative.

bogbrush wrote:.I'm astonished at Murrays approach. As a highly skilled player he should aim to skill the guy off. He makes himself sound like a South American grinder.

Were you watching as if so, I want some of whatever you were smoking. The only error Andy makes is at being a notoriously poor starter (injury niggles or not) as he needs to get his 'eye' in to get the range of his shots going. Then he get's his sweet return game working and the rest is history. Agassi and Connors, worked in a similar manner - if that's 'grinding', simply because you need a while to adjust to what you're opponent is doing, then bring it on

If Murray didn't "skill the guy off" in those last two sets, then what did he do?

In addtion, you need to realise that Fed has flaws. His superb instintive attacking game often suffers from an absence of a 'Plan B'. In fairness this is a harsh assessment, given the 16 Slams and the fact that we (as I've said before) should applaud the way that he's happy to have 50 winners even though it often means 50 errors

The problem with you and Tenez (where is he, by the way??) is that you compare everyting to Fed in a misguided assumption that there is nothing else in Tennis to admire

We're in the best era because of Roger - but that doesn't mean we have to have half a dozen clones of him as well

bogbrush wrote:.It certainly doesn't tally with your theory that Murray is 'in transition' to an attacking game. Sounds like more negativity to me.

Today Murray used is forehand so much, you wondered whether he had a bet on himslelf to use his backhand for less than 20% of his shots. One can only admire his inistence on doing this shot, even though it's giving him a bad 30 minutes per match, whilst he refines it

Let's be honest, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for Andy to do a Tsonga/Gasquet and just repeat what he did in 2008/9 - it would certainly bring another half a dozen Masters and maybe a Slam if lucky. But what he's doing now is trying to do everything to win a Slam as though the next Slam match is his last. If that's not something that earns respect from you, then keep moaning about him

The daft Scot, actualy believes he can win this event this year

@ Banbro, if only Murray can play different game like this according to the merits of the opponents it would be so much fun to watch and rankings and slams will follow.

banbrotam wrote:

bogbrush wrote:.I'm astonished at Murrays approach. As a highly skilled player he should aim to skill the guy off. He makes himself sound like a South American grinder.

Were you watching as if so, I want some of whatever you were smoking. The only error Andy makes is at being a notoriously poor starter (injury niggles or not) as he needs to get his 'eye' in to get the range of his shots going. Then he get's his sweet return game working and the rest is history. Agassi and Connors, worked in a similar manner - if that's 'grinding', simply because you need a while to adjust to what you're opponent is doing, then bring it on

If Murray didn't "skill the guy off" in those last two sets, then what did he do?

In addtion, you need to realise that Fed has flaws. His superb instintive attacking game often suffers from an absence of a 'Plan B'. In fairness this is a harsh assessment, given the 16 Slams and the fact that we (as I've said before) should applaud the way that he's happy to have 50 winners even though it often means 50 errors

The problem with you and Tenez (where is he, by the way??) is that you compare everyting to Fed in a misguided assumption that there is nothing else in Tennis to admire



We're in the best era because of Roger - but that doesn't mean we have to have half a dozen clones of him as well

bogbrush wrote:.It certainly doesn't tally with your theory that Murray is 'in transition' to an attacking game. Sounds like more negativity to me.

Today Murray used is forehand so much, you wondered whether he had a bet on himslelf to use his backhand for less than 20% of his shots. One can only admire his inistence on doing this shot, even though it's giving him a bad 30 minutes per match, whilst he refines it

Let's be honest, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for Andy to do a Tsonga/Gasquet and just repeat what he did in 2008/9 - it would certainly bring another half a dozen Masters and maybe a Slam if lucky. But what he's doing now is trying to do everything to win a Slam as though the next Slam match is his last. If that's not something that earns respect from you, then keep moaning about him

The daft Scot, actualy believes he can win this event this year

To be fair to bogbrush those comments were made before the match got under way but I did ask him to judge after the match had finished. True Gasquet's match fell apart but Murray still has to take credit for hitting some superb winners that even the embittered French crowd had to applaud and gasp it. Hardly, grinding in the slightest. Hope you enjoyed Andy's 59 winners bogbrush and more than half of them I do believe came off that 'flaky' forehand.

@ CC I did enjoy some of his forehand winners, some were sublime.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Hope you enjoyed Andy's 59 winners bogbrush and more than half of them I do believe came off that 'flaky' forehand.

It must have been way over 50% and impressive to see. Not for this event, Ferrer or Nadal for me are far more dangerous than Nole on Fed given the weather forecast (i.e. very slow conditions) - but more for the upcoming hardcourt season

But will Andy do this against the Top 3? I suppose he did against Nole and it nearly worked and he certainly did against Nadal in Japan (??) last year

So we see, contrary to the teasing of bogbrush, that his game is evolving for the better, when he gets it right

Murray used to avoid aggression on the forehand more than I avoid the washing up. It is a clear sign to me of how he's trying to change his game that he now tries to be as aggressive as possible on the forehand, maybe even more than the backhand.

I think it was Willander who said the other day that one thing Lendl gets Murray to do again and again in training is generate his own power on bunts to the forehand. The issue I've always thought Murray had on that side was generating his own pace on that wing. Rafa in particular plays a lot of short slices to the Murray forehand.

I think beating Ferrer on clay may be a step too far, but his game is evolving nicely. 59 forehand winners can't be argued with. It's a massive improvement and should benefit him in the remaining 2 slams after this, both of which he has a great chance in.

If Murray can beat this Ferrer there is a very good chance he would do the miracle on semi's against the Bull.

I'm not sure he can take down Nadal on this surface, and I'm not sure he'll get past Ferrer in any case... But he's doing the right things to give himself a great chance at SW19 and Flushing Meadows.

If only his serving was improving as rapidly as his forehand...

I think Murray will beat Ferrer.

Ferrer is great at grinding down everyone apart from the top four. Murray, however, can stay with him in the rallies and has more firepower. Most importantly, I'm not sure if Ferrer can hold it together in the tight moments. People usual laude him for being a tough cookie, which he is in a way, but he visibly tightens and makes 'uncharacteristic' errors in the key moments of matches; when it's close and the stakes are high.

Murray in four or five gruelling sets.



emancipator