Is this Murray's time to dominate?

The path for the Brit appears to be opening up:
-Djokovic can’t even win a set against a ‘cake-walk’.
-Federer will probably retire in the next decade or so.
-Nadal has a knee injury and can’t perform in the major tournaments these days.

OK, I might have exaggerated slightly there
But, jokes aside I do see this time as a chance for Murray. Djokovic’s form has not been the same as last year; Federer (although playing well) at this age will not perform as consistently in every big tournament while Nadal is recovering from a knee injury.

For the last 2 years or so the tour has been dominated by the ‘Big 3.’ Before that the tour was dominated by the ‘Big 2.’ Even though it is possible, I think Murray going on a Djokovic 2011-like tear is unlikely. However I do think this could be his chance to dominate alongside a few others at the top of the men’s game.
Remember, Murray is one of the youngest players in the top 20, his time his hardly running out. If he can avoid injuries I believe he can play at the top level for another 5-6 years or so. Furthermore, there aren’t that many youngsters who are bursting through- certainly none of them are near Murray’s level.

But, I feel I may be getting a bit ahead of myself here. As a word of warning, although Murray’s victory over Federer was his first against the Swiss in BO5, it was not in a Grand Slam. Will this Olympics victory really give Murray the belief in the majors? We shall have to wait and see. Nevertheless it does look possible, very much so. He can beat Djokovic- he nearly beat him in AO 2012 but since then he has improved (unlike Djokovic). He can beat Federer- his record against him is 9-8 altogether- but he needs more belief in the majors. Nadal, well. Let’s see how he comes back from his knee injury.

So, what do you think? Is this Murray’s chance? Will the Gold Medallist grasp glory?

Will be good to hear your views,
IMBL

I've said something similar before and I'll say it again, before there's any talk of Murray "d*********" he needs one major. Once he wins said major, he can then think about more titles and pushing on. Until he wins, use of the "d" word is premature at the very least. It is my belief that Murray will win one major, anything more than that is a bonus to me as a fan.

TSJ, I recognise at the moment Murray isn’t dominating.
However I believe that it is possible Murray picks it up and starts winning majors and joins a ‘dominations pack’ in the near future.

Murray played some of his best-ever tennis during the Olympics. But without belittling his efforts one iota, this was very clearly a completely different type of tourney to a GS.
Murray said so himself, saying he would never have played the doubles (which might have relaxed him for the singles in some kind of way) if this had been one of the GS.
Also, Andy was so much further out of the spotlight during a Wimbledon tournament than he would have been during a "real" Wimbledon, thanks to the tennis just being one part of the huge Olympic event.
The key to immediate success for Andy could be Rafa, so often Murray's nemesis at Slams. No one really knows what sort of a shape Nadal will be in. Personally, I reckon he'll be in pretty good shape and Andy might need the sort of fantastic performance he produced at the 08 USO s-f to get past him.

Murray I dont believe has the mental toughness to dominate a whole season, he just doesnt speak "leader" quality to me.

Yes its a great chance for him to win a slam right now...but thats pretty obvious given the top 3 have current issues in different ways (vulnerability and venerability).

But dominate? Actually dominate the others? Er, no.

lydian wrote:Murray I dont believe has the mental toughness to dominate a whole season, he just doesnt speak "leader" quality to me.

Yes its a great chance for him to win a slam right now...but thats pretty obvious given the top 3 have current issues in different ways (vulnerability and venerability).

But dominate? Actually dominate the others? Er, no.

Lydian, I did say in the article that I don't think he will go on a Djoko2011 like run.
I suggested that he will dominate with some others, and 'join the pack' if you were.

I'd say this is now his best chance. Not to dominate though as I don't see it but to win a Slam. You just never know if the next Federer is going to appear in the next 2-3 years.

Murray will take confidence from the Olympics so I'm thinking he now has the ingredients to get over the line in a Slam. Federer's age may start to help him, Nadal's injuries also. He could conceivably be left with one barrier not the three. If that becomes the case then he's got to take his chance.

It was his time back in 2008 to be honest IMBL.

The improvement from the beginning of 2007 to 2008 was stunning and I think at the time he lacked the weight in groundstrokes which led to year in 2009 when he was blown off the court by big hitters. His serving was quite inconsistent and he stagnated under Maclaghan and even in 2009 he still looked far from the finished article and that cost him a couple of years I feel. Under Lendl he has become more focused on court and the FH and 2nd serve have improved significantly.

I am not so sure mentally that he is on the same wavelength of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic to dominate. When those 3 play each other over 2-3 matches they are able to sustain a level of performance which is so high that we are talking finite moments in these matches that decide the outcome. With Murray you feel he follows up 1 good performance with about 2 bad performances. This year really he has only managed to dominate Djokovic twice in a BO3 format. We saw at the AO that in BO5 Djokovic had more time to get his rythym going and turn the match despite how well Andy played. Take 2011. He could never get the job done against Nadal in a BO5 format despite Nadal having a crisis in confidence.

If Murray is to dominate he needs the consistency both mentally and physically.

Fair enough IMBL but what you're asking is whether Murray is effectively now on a par with the top 3 to dominate. The answer is still no.

Those guys are simply better than Murray across seasons and surfaces. They are mentally stronger and less prone to aberrations/dips/etc.

In particular as SFP has said, Nadal is a real nemesis to Murray. Murray has never really got his head around him (besides USO08 but thats a whole different story) because Nadal gets to him in a way the others dont.

Otherwise, he's already dominating with the 3 in that he's been #4 for ages now but for me its Top3+1 rather than Top4. I dont see that changing until we see Federer losing more regularly early on or something happens to Djokovic or Nadal's game similarly. The "lad done good" at London2012 but lets not forget what factor the absence Nadal has had on his ascendancy too.

lydian wrote:In particular as SFP has said, Nadal is a real nemesis to Murray. Murray has never really got his head around him (besides USO08 but thats a whole different story) because Nadal gets to him in a way the others don't.

Not certain we can cite Nadal as a 'fear factor' for Murray - particularly as their last meeting was 6-0 bagel when the Scot won (Japan was it!!)

I actually think that rather than Murray not getting his head around him, he was so disappointed with his US Open defeat, he went away and has altered his game since. That bagel has significance, simply because he was very aggressive and he's taken that on to a further level. It's no coincidence that he's had 5 matches against Nole and Fed all of which he's performed well in them, winning 3

Given that Andy has actually beaten Nadal twice at a hardcourt slam - I don't think there is a mental issue, anymore (I actually don't think there ever was - it was all about choice of shot making)

Andy's play now is light years away from a year ago. For me it's the biggest improvement since the Wimbledon 2008 one, when he suddenly moved up another notch and won his first Masters

I don't think he's ready to dominate - but he is ready to be classed in the same league as the others

Sorry dont agree banbrotam...the H2H is massively in favour of Nadal, 13-4 inc. a Nadal retirement. So this is very one-sided. I didnt count a walkover at Miami this year when Nadal withdrew before the match due to injury.

Japan is a poor example to choose given Nadal and Djokovic were spent after their brutal 2011 efforts. As for the 2 slam wins on HC well we know Nadal was injured during that AO10 match and subsequently retired, and USO08 Nadal was exhausted from the huge run he'd had across the summer. Not that Murray wasnt playing well, I agree, but Nadal wasnt anywhere near 70-80% in either match, never mind 100%.

Out of all the top3 I think Murray looks up to Nadal the most, indeed he's based alot of his training around Nadal's approach. You say he doesnt have a mental issue against Nadal but he hasnt beaten Nadal at a slam since that AO10 match...in 2011 Nadal beat him on grass, hardcourt and clay slams.

I agree he's playing better but its not light years away...I still think his FH and 2nd serve are issues but I dont think the competition has been playing that well to exploit that (Federer aside at Wimbledon). So I dont agree he can be "classed in the same league" as them at all. Not until he starts winning slam finals against them.

Murray and Nadal are very good friends from what I've read. Maybe he has a problem playing a good friend of his on tour in the big matches?

The Special Juan wrote:Murray and Nadal are very good friends from what I've read. Maybe he has a problem playing a good friend of his on tour in the big matches?

I don't think thats the problem

Although I have heard they are good friends, they play FIFA together apparently

legendkillarV2 wrote:It was his time back in 2008 to be honest IMBL.

If Murray is to dominate he needs the consistency both mentally and physically.

He is more mature than in 2008 LK

As for the 'dominating' thing, he just needs to peak for the slams IMO, that's what he will be measured on.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:It was his time back in 2008 to be honest IMBL.

If Murray is to dominate he needs the consistency both mentally and physically.

He is more mature than in 2008 LK

As for the 'dominating' thing, he just needs to peak for the slams IMO, that's what he will be measured on.

He may have matured as a person IMBL, but his game hasn't matured into a more all-round complete game. For example the FH/serve still need some work on it. This was the thing he had a load of momentum after the 2008 US Open Final and then 2009 was a very stagnated year for him performance wise.

It is very difficult for the modern player to 'peak' at Slams. There is so much emphasis on gaining points for season and being around the top 8. Take Sampras towards the end of his career focused on Slams and wasn't worried about his seeding or who he faced.

Managing yourself in the Slams is the key to success. That's what made Federer so great at this was the slight increase in performance level through the rounds. It was a slow incline, whereas Murray's form tends to be slow, then rapid incline, then slight decline. If he manages himself better, he will win a Slam.

This year Murray is playing well enough in the big matches to give himself a chance to win. He's never consistently done that before. The final step is to have the mental strength to go for it on the big points.

He did that quite well against Novak at AO, but at 5-5 in the fifth set he had 3 break points and lost them all without going for a single winner, so it wasn't quite there.

At Wimbkedon against Federer he had break points to go a break up in the second set. He didn't take them, but he went for it on those points. He tried to win them rather than not lose them. Massive step forward.

At the Olympics he beat Djokovic and Federer by winning the big points. He saved 4 BPs against Novak with some really aggressive play, and won 2 of the 4 he had.

Against Roger he was even better, saving 9 break points (again with some really aggressive play) and winning 5 of his 10 BPs by going for it. He's never done that before, completely backed himself in the big moments.

I actually think he's there now. I think the serve is better, the forehand has improved dramatically and he's playing on the baseline rather than 2 metres behind it. His game is ready, and he now knows that he has to WIN those big points, rather than not losing them.

Will he dominate? No I don't think so. He'll never win the French, and I don't think he'll ever have a Novak like streak. But I think he'll win slams and I think he'll win at least one over the next 12 months.

I think Lendl is making him more aggressive, or helping him believe he can be more aggressive at the crunch moments. This THE biggest difference for me. Otherwise I dont believe his FH or 2nd serve (or serve in general) are any better.

Conversely, can anyone tell me how the FH and serve are technically better?

I would say lydian that FH when he swings from hips is a heavy shot that can win him points. However, the whipped FH technically looks a mess and keeps low and is too short for my liking

His serve technique is very much the same. He is trying to add power to his second serve.

Hmmm...I'm not sure how a swing from the hips differs from a whipped shot in that they should both be the same really.

Murray has always had a problem with his grips on Forehand. He used to be Western (I think from all his clay days in Barcelona) but then has moved to SW in more recent times. But at crunch moments he can tend to revert to the Western again meaning he tops the ball and it goes into the net. He was still doing this in the London2012 final...although he pulled off a few as well. His serve is still good on 1st when it goes in but then it always was good. The 2nd is still slow (approx. 140kmh) and he still throws it too far back and to the left (a source of back issues). I havent seen that change much.

For me, Federer didnt exploit these issues as he (and Nadal) would normally do last Sunday. He just wasnt seeing the ball well and his ralleying power was poor. Murray was more aggressive though at key points and moved Roger around alot which is always the key to beating Federer. His 1st serve also clicked well at key moments, e.g. that 2-2 game in 2nd set and in the game where he served for the match.

Hmmm...I'm not sure how a swing from the hips differs from a whipped shot in that they should both be the same really

Not essentially.

The whipped FH tends to be when his arm is at much higher point. The momentum of the swing is coming from the wrist. When he takes the ball higher, the whipped FH has more depth as the momentum from swing when taking it high adds more power.

I can see where It Must Be Love is coming from in purely as speaking from a here and now situation.

Recent history dictates who the contenders will be - Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray. Let us look at current form and fitness.

Well Roger Federer will be feeling great about things again after winning his first slam for a while and regaining his No.1 slot so he'll be licking his lips at the prospect of another slam win.

Novak Djokovic recent form has dipped and that is not open for debate really. By his high standards he has went down to tame defeats in the last two slams without that gritty fight and unshakable self-belief. He needs to rediscover those sort of performances or he won't be winning the next slam. I really think he just needs to win another ATP title in the next few weeks and everything will begin to click back into place.

Rafael Nadal really is in a dark place just now. And no I am not writing him off. Fitness issues or is it mental issues - take your pick. Whatever the reasons he needs to rectify them and also has to get back on the circuit as soon as possible to exorcise the ghost of Rosol which is by far his worst slam defeat in many years so he has multiple issues.

Andy Murray though has no real issues. Signs are he is heading in the right direction as he was far more competitive in his 4th slam final at Wimbledon and won Olympic Gold at Wimbledon beating Djokovic and Federer in back-to-back matches so his self-belief must surely be at the highest point of his career.

That, I believe is the reason IMBL has written this post. I do not think we will ever see Andy dominate but if it wins him a slam or two then that would suffice for me. Lets just wait and see what the coming weeks and months bring.

His time to dominate was in 2009 but he gave up the momentum he had from the previous year. I suppose getting ill in Australia didn't help but I wish he'd kept himself going better. That year was his best chance to win wimbledon as well. Hopefully he'll have another chance now that he's in that position again and there are no good players younger than him except for Del Potro. I don't agree with all this not good on clay stuff either. It's all the same.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I can see where It Must Be Love is coming from in purely as speaking from a here and now situation.

Recent history dictates who the contenders will be - Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic, Rafael Nadal and Andy Murray. Let us look at current form and fitness.

Well Roger Federer will be feeling great about things again after winning his first slam for a while and regaining his No.1 slot so he'll be licking his lips at the prospect of another slam win.

Novak Djokovic recent form has dipped and that is not open for debate really. By his high standards he has went down to tame defeats in the last two slams without that gritty fight and unshakable self-belief. He needs to rediscover those sort of performances or he won't be winning the next slam. I really think he just needs to win another ATP title in the next few weeks and everything will begin to click back into place.

Rafael Nadal really is in a dark place just now. And no I am not writing him off. Fitness issues or is it mental issues - take your pick. Whatever the reasons he needs to rectify them and also has to get back on the circuit as soon as possible to exorcise the ghost of Rosol which is by far his worst slam defeat in many years so he has multiple issues.

Andy Murray though has no real issues. Signs are he is heading in the right direction as he was far more competitive in his 4th slam final at Wimbledon and won Olympic Gold at Wimbledon beating Djokovic and Federer in back-to-back matches so his self-belief must surely be at the highest point of his career.

That, I believe is the reason IMBL has written this post. I do not think we will ever see Andy dominate but if it wins him a slam or two then that would suffice for me. Lets just wait and see what the coming weeks and months bring.

Would have to agree with that. As Lydian has said earlier, his main problem has been his H2H vs the top 3 in slams; we'll have to see if the Olympics gives him more belief from now on.

After Murray's US Open win, this question stays more relevant than ever.

Andy Murray has had the ability to go far for a long time, the only thing holding him back was the doubts swimming in his head. Now he's won his first Grand Slam, those doubts have been removed. So yes, I think he will dominate the World over the next 5 years. Andy Murray, the stage and the World is yours.

I think this final showed why neither will be 'great' No.1's. Neither looked comfortable leading from the front, letting their emotions get in the way

No.1's are not like that

Obviously it will be a shock for me if Andy doesn't spend time at No.1, but I don't see him spending say, 30 weeks on the trot at any time

Mind you 4 wins out of 6, against the Top 2, since the Aus Open is a fair return

I think it's going to be a little while before anyone is going to dominate. Much depends on Rafa's fitness. If he comes roaring back and if Fed can keep going for a while longer then we could see a share-the-slams year next year as we have had in 2011.
You get the impression with the French that as long as Rafa is actually standing then he'll win it, which leaves the rest battling it out for the other three Slams.
Andy will now enter Slam tournaments with new-found confidence. It all adds up to a fascinating time at the top of the men's game.

Murray needs to get a a Grand Slam win or two over Federer and Nadal and improve against Nadal in general before he can even start thinking about domination.

I posted quite in depth on another thread about Murray's troubles in this respect but as it stands Murray is 0-3 in Grand Slams v Federer and 2-6 in Grand Slams v Nadal. That needs addressing next year. Federer and Nadal were not a factor in New York, they will be factors for the next couple of years at the very least and Murray needs to improve in the biggest matches against those two and also against Djokovic, whom he is 1-2 against in Grand Slams.

If in a year Murray has beaten Federer and Nadal in any of the Grand Slams and landed another Major then maybe this will start to carry some merit, but he definitely has the ability to now do it.

I still believe that Nadal and Djokovic (with a little bit of Federer and Murray) will continue to dominate the slams - in terms of winning them. Assuming Nadal comes back to 100%.
Dont get me wrong, Andy did brilliantly at USO but personally I think Murray had a good spell of fortune - both his SF and F were heavily influenced by the wind...and both Berdy and Novak failed to handle that well. Ok, you might argue that's their fault but my point is that wind isnt usally something you can rely on and in better conditions I think Berdy and/or Novak would have made life much tougher for him. And will continue to. He still seems a little prone to lapses, and some technical faluts vs the very best can still rear their ugly head at times. But who knows...being a solid top 3-4 player for years is pretty good and he's already helping to dominate the tour as it is.

I don't know. I watched the DC yesterday and the wind was quite ferocious in the Berdych/Berloq match and Berdych looked comfortable playing in it.

For me I can't see Nadal winning another Slam off Clay. Federer might still throw in a Slam next year. For me Murray and Djokovic the men to beat next year.

I see it the same way really for the next couple of seasons as being a fight between Novak and Andy for the number 1. In regards to Nadal he will certainly be in the mix, whether he can ever be top dog again depends on his health more than anything. Unfortunately, Nadal seems incapable of completing a full season due to chronic leg problems. That is really the only reason I discount my prediction for his future performance. A fit and healthy Nadal would very much make it a 3 horse battle over the next couple of seasons.

I was the first to originally post this article IMBL @ https://www.606v2.com/t32973-if-murray-becomes-no1-in-2013 , when I said this, none of the forum member agreed with my view including some die hard Murray fans may be they were scared of backlash.

I didn't fear to say what I felt that Murray getting to No.1 sooner or later and if he gets so he will hold it with iron hands better than Djoko or Nadal did.

Oh I still think Nadal can win Wimbledon...you cant discount a guy with his record on that surface. The problem for him is that it comes so soon after RG.

Of course we assume Murray can continue onwards in his current form/health, etc...but dont forget he's been grinding it out himself for a few years now and has his own share of niggling injuries. To put it another way, a big guy of 6'3' playing the ralleying/retrieving game he does will also be pushing the physical envelope.

Good point lydian after federer the most durable injury free of the top 4 has been Djokovic. However Murray has played a pretty full match schedule the last 5 years and that speaks to his determination and health. Also we have to look out for the first slam blues, which Novak had for 3 years and many other greats have had. But then you also have lendl who won a slam and then was simply unstoppable for years afterwards. So it is difficult to predict.

What I will say is this I think Murray will be more energized by his first slam victory and will go on to fight for the #1 ranking from here on out. I think both Murray and djoko have been pretty healthy despite criticisms surrounding their style of play for the last 5 years. That is one of the principal reasons I rank those two as having better prospects in the immediate future.

Quite socal.
And if you look at Nadal his knee issues were actually created by his congenital foot problem due to the supporting arch in his trainers putting strain on his knee joint and tendons. It was a risk they knew they had to take rather than retire him from tennis in 2005. So if not for that he'd have likely been pretty much injury free to this day.

Clearly Murray will have the bit between his teeth now, and what better period for him to battle onwards!

Yes Del Po could come up to challenge the murray, djoko, and Nadal group (when healthy) but I just see him as being always a step back of murray and Djoko. In normal circumstances and form in a match between Del Po against Murray or Djoko I pretty much would always take Andy or Novak. The thing that really impressed me and lead me to believe that there would be more success for murray soon is how handled his win. He acted like no biggie,I expected that about time, and now lets get more. He didn't act like a satisfied and relieved man, he acted like an expectant man who didn't doubt it for one minute. Plus Lendl in your corner and the fact that fedal are now on the downslope bodes wonderfully for his future prospects. Djoko the same in my mind maybe his prospects are even a little better. I see him being the number 1 and I see Andy as 1A or a strong 2.

Certainly needs to keep working on the 2nd serve element if he wants to progress on to multiple slams. Apparently he stopped practising his serve coming into USO and it looked more natural when he hit, than the mechanical robot serve he had before.

Lets see if Nadal really is on the downslope when he comes back before being categorical. By all accounts it was a new injury and the knee joints are prefectly healthy...there is no reason why he cant have another 3-4 great seasons (with good scheduling too).

If he comes back at full strength, or rather able to, then I see him and Djokovic as the dominant pairing. Murray just doesnt like playing Nadal...I think Nadal gets in his head more than the other players...what else can be responsible for the massively skewed H2H between them.

Agree JM, Murray has been over-drilled, to the point where his natural Mecir-like game had been suffocated. Perhaps Lendl recognised this and told him to start playing his old way again. If so its a masterstroke from Ivan.

For the HC slams I think Djoko/Murray should be the marginal favourites from now on - but should a fit Nadal get through to the SF stage at any slam he joins them. It's not impossible for Fed to win one, but he probably needs a turn-up, including not having to play Nadal (true for all slams).

On clay Nadal replaces Murray as the favourite with Djoko.

On Grass I think it's pretty level pegging between Fed/Djoko/Murray/Nadal - probably Djoko is at his relative weakest. Murray has it all to prove against Nadal on grass, but it could turn out to be his best surface.

Nadal gains momentum in the course of HC slams or Wimbledon - he's been knocked out early (by his standards) at Aus Open and can have a wobble at Wimbledon if faced with someone playing great grass court tennis in an early round. If he's through to the SF in any slam he's invariably one of the favourites - always fancied on clay, vs. Fed, probably still vs. Murray, and who knows what vs. Djoko these days.

barrystar wrote:For the HC slams I think Djoko/Murray should be the marginal favourites from now on - but should a fit Nadal get through to the SF stage at any slam he joins them. It's not impossible for Fed to win one, but he probably needs a turn-up, including not having to play Nadal (true for all slams).

On clay Nadal replaces Murray as the favourite with Djoko.

On Grass I think it's pretty level pegging between Fed/Djoko/Murray/Nadal - probably Djoko is at his relative weakest. Murray has it all to prove against Nadal on grass, but it could turn out to be his best surface.

Nadal gains momentum in the course of HC slams or Wimbledon - he's been knocked out early (by his standards) at Aus Open and can have a wobble at Wimbledon if faced with someone playing great grass court tennis in an early round. If he's through to the SF in any slam he's invariably one of the favourites - always fancied on clay, vs. Fed, probably still vs. Murray, and who knows what vs. Djoko these days.

I couldn't agree with this post more- nail on the head there.

Only thing is we are waiting to see when Nadal gets back to full fitness.

I just don't have faith anymore that Nadal will be able to beat this injury bug in the longterm. I don' t take any joy in that statement but it is my objective assessment. The guy simply can not complete a full year and as time goes by I think the problems can only get worse. I will be very happy if I am incorrect about this prediction, I think it is a sad day for the game when one of the brightest stars in its history is ruined by injury so early in the game.

Quite possibly socal. The problem is that the foot adjustment renders his knees at risk. It'll be interesting to see how he adapts his calendar to play less HC given that's what he said he's been told to do.

Anyone know when the ATP grant older players exemptions from playing a full calendar without penalties? Is it after a certain number of matches?

The Special Juan wrote:I've said something similar before and I'll say it again, before there's any talk of Murray "d*********" he needs one major. Once he wins said major, he can then think about more titles and pushing on. Until he wins, use of the "d" word is premature at the very least. It is my belief that Murray will win one major, anything more than that is a bonus to me as a fan.

Well I'm happy now!!

You wise old sage!

lydian wrote:Lets see if Nadal really is on the downslope when he comes back before being categorical. By all accounts it was a new injury and the knee joints are prefectly healthy...there is no reason why he cant have another 3-4 great seasons (with good scheduling too).

If he comes back at full strength, or rather able to, then I see him and Djokovic as the dominant pairing. Murray just doesnt like playing Nadal...I think Nadal gets in his head more than the other players...what else can be responsible for the massively skewed H2H between them.

Agree JM, Murray has been over-drilled, to the point where his natural Mecir-like game had been suffocated. Perhaps Lendl recognised this and told him to start playing his old way again. If so its a masterstroke from Ivan.

I'd tend to disagree with this. I think Murray does quite enjoy playing Nadal. He has just shown him a bit too much respect at times. Conversely, I'd say that Murray is a bad match up for Rafa as has been shown most times Murray has turned up with his A-game.

Whilst the H2H looks very one-sided, a closer analysis shows it is not really the case. Since Murray's first win it is only 8-5 to Nadal, with Murray leading 5-3 on his preferred hard courts. Even the clay matches have been far closer than one would expect given their respective records on the surface. The anomaly is the grass, where I would expect Murray to beat Nadal more often than not. However, it is fair to say that Murray didn't seem to truly believe when he was on top in last year's semi-final. Now he is a grand slam champ, I think it is less likely he will collapse in that fashion. I will state now that I think that Murray will edge the non-clay H2H against Rafa moving forwards.

We'll have to see. Yes the H2H since Murray's first win is 8-5....but you dont mention 1 'win' is a walkover at Miama this year and 1 win when Nadal was almost literally playing on one leg at Rotterdam 2009.

Let's look more recently - last year Nadal beat Murray in semis of French Open, Wimbledon and US Open. Yes matches may be closer in future but then again Nadal may bring his A game too...and I believe when he does he's the better player.

I don't mention it because walkovers aren't included in H2H stats.

Sure, Rafa got some big wins last year but I don't think even the most myopic of Rafa fans would suggest that Murray played anywhere near his best either in the wimbledon semi or the US Open one. In the US Open one in particular he was atrocious.

We'll have to wait and see what happens. Certainly hope Rafa can recover and we'll see them match up as Murray-Rafa matches have produced some real classics in the past.

Born Slippy wrote:I don't mention it because walkovers aren't included in H2H stats.

Sure, Rafa got some big wins last year but I don't think even the most myopic of Rafa fans would suggest that Murray played anywhere near his best either in the wimbledon semi or the US Open one. In the US Open one in particular he was atrocious.

We'll have to wait and see what happens. Certainly hope Rafa can recover and we'll see them match up as Murray-Rafa matches have produced some real classics in the past.

If Nadal plays his best and is fully fit, and brings his A game, he'll beat Murray.

Murray is a sensational player and all that, but Nadal at his best simply has a gear Murray doesn't posses.
It all depends on Nadal.

But this could be opening up very very nicely for Murray:
-Nadal injured (knee)
-Federer saying he is 'wounded' and 'exhausted' at this age you feel Murray will have his chances against him in BO5.
-Like Vettel, Djokovic has not been at his best this year, and has looked mentally drained in the key moments. It's not that he's lost big matches, it's the fact that he's looked so edgy throughout them.
-No real clear young threat coming up that can challenge Murray.