If Ferrer beats Murray then he is the real number 4

First topic message reminder :

Beat him easily at the French, could beat him in the quarters here and he would in most peoples eyes be the world number 4.

The victor in 2 out 3 surfaces in grandslams proves you are better, no discussion.

Ferrer or Tsonga for the finals?

Super D Boon wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

Super D Boon wrote:

dummy_half wrote:
Murray does though have a 5:1 h2h record over Tsonga

Yes that should mean he'll get safely through to the final, afterall, Henman had a 4:0 record against Ivanisevic before their semi-final in 2001 and look what happened there...................wait a minute!

Again not relevent.

We are talking Murray/Tsonga, not Henman/Ivanisevic.

It's wholly relevent. Henman never proved he could handle the big occassion and win when he was expected to. Murray is YET to prove it. He's usually lost when he was expected to, now for Murray, nothing but the final will do.

Ermmmmm Murray has reached 3 Grand Slam finals and Henman didn't

Where's the relevence?

I do agree with those that say nothing but the final will do and I will go one step further he has to get to the final and actually make it competive. If he gets bombed out in 3 easy sets then it will make his final run feel anticlimactic and as if he really didn't make any progress to get closer to his ultimate goal. Finals and a competive final or actually winning the thing is the only way Murray can have a successful tournament. That is the kind of pressure that Rafa, Roger, and Novak have had to deal with in every slam. Now Murray gets it even more intensly at this his home tournament.

The relevance is by quoting a 5:1 record does not mean the Murray will get through against Tsonga, just had to remember Henman's 4:0 record as proof of this. Just warning the poster who mentioned that. Tis hardly a guarantee!

Also, that Murray is correctly identified as not Henman, correct. However, what exactly has Murray proven to be better than over Henman?
Like Henman he hasn't proven he can deliver the goods on the biggest ocassions. Like Henman he's lost matches he should have won. He's just proven he can get further more often and win smaller stuff. Just like "Tiger" Tim I see a player who is not unlucky to be playing at a really competitive time but a player who is very good but not quite good enough to win the really big stuff. I don;t mind being proved wrong come Sunday but if Djoko or Fed get to the final and are firing as they should I don't see him winning.

Murray has a bag of Masters tites which Henman doesn't.

Trying to draw a comparison based on a Brit at Wimbledon is daft given the difference in competition and also changes in the game since Henman's peak to Murray's.

He has crap bottle on the biggest of stages like Henman....

Murray may have the numbers that is obvious but I think Murray is very good but just short of the world's elite. I think Henman was very good but also just short of the world's elite.

Murray has the better record no doubt but I can't help thinking he has to work awfully hard to keep his number 4 spot. I think he's someone who struggles to keep up rather than a player who's so close to the top 3 it hurts!

Still good luck to Murray if he makes it on Sunday.

He doesn't have to work as hard as hard as you think. Thing is each year he wins titles and Masters event. Ferrer has never won a Masters event and nor has Tsonga. This makes it increasingly difficult for them to make up the short fall in points in trying to catch the top 4.

The last 14 Masters event titles have been won by the top 4. You have to go back to Paris 2010 for the last player outside the top 4 to win one. That shows you how far away from the rest of the field they really are.

Murray is going to need to be at his best no doubt.

I think Murray is going to make the final this year, I'm not saying it will be easy, but I think he'll find a way to get there. Funnily enough I think Kohlschreiber has the potential to be his most difficult opponent because the guy is good on grass and Murray is far more familiar with Ferrer and Tsonga, who he knows how to beat (away from clay at least). Bottom line is that I think he'll get through because he knows he just has to and his last two matches have shown such a mentality when he had his opponent and the clock to beat.

I think his past record in the latter stages of slams holds him in good stead as someone who tends not to go out to a disappointing opponent - the sole 'exception' being an inspired Roddick in 2009. His bad losses tend to be in earlier rounds.

He has been to a slam QF 12 times thus far:

3 QF losses, Nadal W 2008, Gonzales RG 2010, Ferrer RG 2012
6 SF losses, Roddick W 2009, Nadal W 2010 & 2011, RG 2011, US 2011, Djoko Aus 2012
3 F losses Fed US 2008, Aus 2010, Djoko Aus 2012

I think anything other than a place in the final now would be a huge let-down and a massive blow to his hopes of getting a slam. Even he seems to agree with the general view on this board that with the top 3 still ahead of him in terms of ability he needs a bit of luck with the draw - he's said as much and now it's time to make that good.

I think the question was answered today

US Open will give us a better view.

It never really was about what happened today.

I had you all fooled.

Take this.......

Tsonga will grab his opportunity on friday.

I shall hereby call it: French Fries Friday.

[insert troll smiley here]

Hopefully Federer and his less than attractive wife( imo) (previously edited for those of a hypersensitive nature) will be returning home on Friday.

The Federer that arrived and entertained on court today will not be going home if he shows the same attitude on Friday.

Federers wife is made to look ugly by the Murray loving BBC footage editors, I have seen her in real life and my jaw dropped. Federers wife also cooks a mean apple crumble.

barrystar wrote:I think anything other than a place in the final now would be a huge let-down and a massive blow to his hopes of getting a slam. Even he seems to agree with the general view on this board that with the top 3 still ahead of him in terms of ability he needs a bit of luck with the draw - he's said as much and now it's time to make that good.

I agree with first part - but don't see what it would be "a massive blow to his hopes of getting a slam" other than Nole, all the players who are now regularly contesting the last 8 of the Slams, i.e. the Top 7 are all older than him and with a paucity of good youngsters I still think he has 4 reasonable years and hence at least 12 opportunities (forgetting the French)

It's the 27 year old nearly man Tsonga, with one Masters title to show for all that talent - who has to take his opportunity. I think we constantly forget just how old all the players around him and more importantly how the new peak seems to be 28/29 as Davydenko showed

Of course, that mean Nole's going to be an issue for as long as Andy is around -but I said a couple of years ago I expect these two to dominate 2015 for a year or so

In 2009 when Murray lost limply to Cilic (mainly because unbeknown to most he had a dodgy left wrist injury) and Del Potro won that US Open, we were all told how they were going to dominate - it hasn't happened simply because the likes of the older players play consistently better

It's a testament to Andy, that he's been so consistent for so long and that will get him his due rewards one day