Andy Murray - The Right Era?

First topic message reminder :

History.

Tells us so many things and teaches us other things too. Factually correct when it comes to sports. When you dig, sometimes you find answers that you just don't want to face or accept. Time is something no man can outrun. Stats too. Based on facts yes, but it can also be mis-interpretating to belief.

Take Andy Murray. Petchers came out with some stunning stats. Murray is 7th on all the time list in Grand Slams to lose a match after dropping the first set behind the likes Federer, Nadal, McEnroe, Borg, Sampras. Also Murray is the top of the all time list at the US Open on return points won. Simply he does hold some stats that you would associate with some of the greats of the game.

The one stat that looms large like an everlasting shadow is the Slam count. Zero. Big, fat and very disheartening. See looking back in the history books in Open Era, not many Slam winners can boast being multi ones at that over the age of 25. Nastase won 2 Slams. Orantes 1 Slam. Ivanisevic 1 Slam. Rafter was 4 months short of his 25th birthday when he won the first of his 2 Slams. Me personally I feel underwhelmed when you here Andy's name mentioned with so many quality stats and not have a Slam to his name. For the future generations who see him play may look back and think how has this guy not won more?

Brings me to Era's. This is not about what's weak and what's golden. Simply you're dealt the cards your born with. Now Agassi I know said 'In any other era' Roddick recently lambasted someone who thought there was a gap. So I wonder would Andy have really won a Slam in an era that boasted Borg, Vilas, Connors? Which then lead to McEnroe, Wilander and his current coach Lendl? Then that led to Becker and Edberg. Sampras and Agassi? See I look at the current crop of stars. We have an ageing genius in Federer. Nadal's body is starting to catch up with him. Djokovic is blowing hot and cold. You could now argue there is a gap to exploit because you look at the 'future' stars and they seem so far off the benchmark of a Slam winner. Now if someone said to me that 25 is old I would give the pffffft it deserves. But in tennis years it is the equivalent of a 50 something winding down before the big retirement party. Falling down the strucure as it were before setting out to the wilderness.

It is a question can Andy capitalise on this 'gap' and not so much re-write history, but set a new bar for those who may feel that past 25 mark the maiden Slam is all but a dream? Not only that but also show that multi-slam success can also occur? For me if Andy was to go on a run of Slam success I would very much not just accredit the success to how well he plays to win those Slams, but the hard work he put in to remain in the top 10 for so many years to enable him to get the best out of himself in latter years. Hyena like yes you could argue, but without the laughter. That hopefully will come if and when he wins Slams

time please wrote:Federer had an exhausting semi at OG and Murray had an exhausting (and the later) semi at USO in 2008.

Neither should be used as an excuse because that's tennis and actually you win a tournament with how you come through all your matches, not just the final. However, I do think it's ok to add a caveat if you were looking to predict he result of their next encounter after one of these meetings because you might want to take any potentially extenuating circumstances into account if you were a betting man in the same way its a good idea to look at court conditions, weather conditions and who is on form - far better than just risking your house on the h2h!

Common-sense from a common-sense poster!!

Ta banbro

For me fatigue can be too generalised. Take Murray against Lopez. He was fatigued by the conditions, but his body language portrayed a different picture for me at least. When people say fatigued in terms of the OG match between Federer/Murray I look at it did Federer after being 2 sets down at that time have enough in reserves to mount a comeback on his racquet? That answer is no. I would put that element down to fatigue of his previous encounter wit Del Potro. He was fit to take to court and had more than enough in reserves to have won in 3/4 sets, but not go a 5 set distance. Also Murray playing some very solid tennis made it increasingly more difficult for Federer to have won that match. There is no doubt that Federer put every effort into that match, but for other contributing reasons reduced the amount of effort he was able to exert. His match with Del Potro was almost like a 5 set match if you will.

I agree with your assessment legend.

I think if we look at the OG semi with Delpo which actually was more like a 6 or 7 setter because wasn't it over 40 games in the 3rd and deciding set? Fed definitely fit to take to the court 2 days later but the semi must have blunted his ability if he needed to scrap and fight. He needed to come through quickly but Murray played too well to allow him to.

The 2008 semi was immense - Rafa looked invincible coming into that match and it took really aggressive play late on AA for Murray to come through to his first slam final - a lot of emotional energy was spent in the semi, which is even more exhausting sometimes, and then he had to meet the fresher guy already the holder of 4 titles. Murray looked like his thinking wasn't as sharp and therefore his play looked more leaden and less instinctive.

legendkillarV2 wrote:For me fatigue can be too generalised. Take Murray against Lopez. He was fatigued by the conditions, but his body language portrayed a different picture for me at least. When people say fatigued in terms of the OG match between Federer/Murray I look at it did Federer after being 2 sets down at that time have enough in reserves to mount a comeback on his racquet? That answer is no. I would put that element down to fatigue of his previous encounter wit Del Potro. He was fit to take to court and had more than enough in reserves to have won in 3/4 sets, but not go a 5 set distance. Also Murray playing some very solid tennis made it increasingly more difficult for Federer to have won that match. There is no doubt that Federer put every effort into that match, but for other contributing reasons reduced the amount of effort he was able to exert. His match with Del Potro was almost like a 5 set match if you will.

Correct. But that's part of the deal. Like for instance if Fed and Murray reach the SF's and go the distance then Nole is the beneifcary

However, people couldn't then expect to get away as making this out to be the only reason!!

You and the likes of time please, understand this. I too actually think Roger's DP match was a factor - but it's often used by the usual Murray detractors to denigrate the Scot, which is wrong

Thanks TP

I just think elements like fatigue are too generalised. Murray looked fresh as a daisy Monday night compared with Saturday. Can Federer afford nowadays to have more than 2 scrappy matches in a Slam without it coming back to bite him later in a tournament? Look at Wimbledon 2010 in the early rounds Falla 5 setter, Bozoljac 4 sets. It does add up towards the end of a Slam.

Well BB I would argue that fatigue probably caught up with Murray in the 2008 final. Thrilling 4 setter with Llodra and then a 5 setter with Melzer saving MP's in the early rounds. Who is not to say that those early matches with Llodra, Melzer and then with Del Potro and Nadal? Anyone that says fatigue wasn't an issue especially that he played the last semi after rain delays. Anyone that thinks otherwise quite frankly needs shooting.

True and I'm all too ready to agree

But also Andy's inability to win those earlier matches (due to his lack of knowledge in how to pace yourself in a major) caused the fatigue - to a degree

My biggest issue is when you used to get Andy and Novak playing all the day matches with Fed and Nadal the cooler night ones - which thankfully seems to have stopped

hey legend - I think when you watch matches closely, especially an ex pro sportsman like you, you understand the little things that can affect concentration and energy.

It's amazing the sort of mental letdown that can happen, with a break of play for rain, in the player who had the momentum. Generally they are the one with the best intensity and commitment and it takes energy to pick that up again when you have made that investment - glass of wine, sofa after hard day at work anyone?

legendkillarV2 wrote:Well BB I would argue that fatigue probably caught up with Murray in the 2008 final. Thrilling 4 setter with Llodra and then a 5 setter with Melzer saving MP's in the early rounds. Who is not to say that those early matches with Llodra, Melzer and then with Del Potro and Nadal? Anyone that says fatigue wasn't an issue especially that he played the last semi after rain delays. Anyone that thinks otherwise quite frankly needs shooting.

Murray wouldn't have been in that final if fatigue hadn't caught up with Nadal in that semi. Don't start me on that match...

Ah TP I haven't been professional, semi-professional at football many moons ago before injuries caught up.

BB I would agree that yes for Murray it was all too much physically and mentally. With Federer just still near the peak of powers and an in-experienced player like Murray who faught some wars prior to the match was always going to be a tall order for Andy.

2010 Australian Open was the best preparation I had seen from him at a Slam in terms of physically how he came into and a small improvement in mentality. He had strict game plans and executed them beautifully. Against Isner and Cilic he played some super tennis. See Federer was wise enough to know that Andy's gameplan would've involved him defending more after his US Open outing the 18 months before. The final was a hitting masterclass by Federer.

hawkeye wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Well BB I would argue that fatigue probably caught up with Murray in the 2008 final. Thrilling 4 setter with Llodra and then a 5 setter with Melzer saving MP's in the early rounds. Who is not to say that those early matches with Llodra, Melzer and then with Del Potro and Nadal? Anyone that says fatigue wasn't an issue especially that he played the last semi after rain delays. Anyone that thinks otherwise quite frankly needs shooting.

Murray wouldn't have been in that final if fatigue hadn't caught up with Nadal in that semi. Don't start me on that match...

I won't get you started

Phew! Thank you.

Right era, wrong set of players!

It is a question can Andy capitalise on this 'gap' and not so much re-write history, but set a new bar for those who may feel that past 25 mark the maiden Slam is all but a dream?

------------

Certainly. The Olympic gold will give him the confidence that he can go that extra step. In many ways I think it will act as the unlocker and inside himself he'll feel like he's now already solved the grand slam riddle. Given Nadal's pull out and the other two big ones faultering I predict the grand slam win will come sooner rather than later.

It may all have been oh so different if Federer had disposed of Del Potro in the Olympic semi final in routine fashion rather than be involved in a dog fight lasting many hours. In saying that Murray deserves his luck now after putting himself in the position to capitalise on so many previous occassions. Murray is the perfect British hero template. Try and try and try again until you succeed. If he captures the USO he'll suddenly be loved by the public and almost certainly swoop the end of year luvvie fest BBC SPOTY award.

The Special Juan wrote:Depends which Del Potro appears. When he's at the top of his game, Del Potro swats everyone off the court regardless of who they are or how fast they can run. We saw it with Nadal in '09 and, to a lesser extent, Djokovic at the Olympics. I really do think that at his best he's unbeatable, but if he's not at his best he is very beatable. As I said, it will be interesting to see how he is feeling physically provided he beats Roddick.

However, I think he'll have a career similar to Nadal's in that he'll always be carrying a dodgy injury. Nadal's knees, Del Potro's wrist, it depends on how he manages his body. At the moment, I don't think he's a huge threat to the top guys in the crunch matches in the majors at the moment due to the fact he has to play about 4/5 matches before he faces them. I think he needs more time, but if he were to down Djokovic in the next few days I will radically change my opinion of that.

Sorry, that's a little off topic.

Never seen anything whatsoever to say he's unbeatable at his best, yea if he keep rallying with him from the back with no variation but mixing it up plus he doesn't have an outstanding serve he's far from unbeatable. Nadal in 2009 had just returned from injury, had no confidence whatsoever, he rarely got his seve above 120mph in the whole tournament, good performance in the bronze medal match but again didn't Murray just do the same to him a couple of days before when Novak was actually motivated..

monty junior wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:Depends which Del Potro appears. When he's at the top of his game, Del Potro swats everyone off the court regardless of who they are or how fast they can run. We saw it with Nadal in '09 and, to a lesser extent, Djokovic at the Olympics. I really do think that at his best he's unbeatable, but if he's not at his best he is very beatable. As I said, it will be interesting to see how he is feeling physically provided he beats Roddick.

However, I think he'll have a career similar to Nadal's in that he'll always be carrying a dodgy injury. Nadal's knees, Del Potro's wrist, it depends on how he manages his body. At the moment, I don't think he's a huge threat to the top guys in the crunch matches in the majors at the moment due to the fact he has to play about 4/5 matches before he faces them. I think he needs more time, but if he were to down Djokovic in the next few days I will radically change my opinion of that.

Sorry, that's a little off topic.

Never seen anything whatsoever to say he's unbeatable at his best, yea if he keep rallying with him from the back with no variation but mixing it up plus he doesn't have an outstanding serve he's far from unbeatable. Nadal in 2009 had just returned from injury, had no confidence whatsoever, he rarely got his seve above 120mph in the whole tournament, good performance in the bronze medal match but again didn't Murray just do the same to him a couple of days before when Novak was actually motivated..

Ok, I might be being a bit biased towards Del Potro, but what about in the final v Federer? He was bludgeoning the forehands left, right and centre. As for Nadal, he always seems to have an excuse for getting beaten. He was smacked off the court that day. And I can't believe Djokovic wasn't motivated. He had a chance to win a medal for his country. He seems to be a really patriotic person and would love to help his country out during the Olympics as arguably their biggest superstar (ahead of Nemanja Vidic IMO).

The Special Juan wrote:
Ok, I might be being a bit biased towards Del Potro, but what about in the final v Federer? He was bludgeoning the forehands left, right and centre. As for Nadal, he always seems to have an excuse for getting beaten. He was smacked off the court that day. And I can't believe Djokovic wasn't motivated. He had a chance to win a medal for his country. He seems to be a really patriotic person and would love to help his country out during the Olympics as arguably their biggest superstar (ahead of Nemanja Vidic IMO).

Del Boy has hit that sort of form rarely, I'd say:

RG 2009
USO 2009
WTF 2009
OG 2012

Fed got him, just, at RG 2009 and OG 2012. At USO 2009 you've got to accept that Nadal was under par, it's not a question of supporting Nadal, but putting Del Boy's performance into it's proper context. He was brilliant, for sure, but he was not playing Nadal at anywhere near his best. In the final he beat Fed fair and square, but not by pummelling Fed off the Court. When Fed was playing to his strengths in the first two sets he had Del Boy on the rack, then he got pee'd off and stupidly chose to try and beat Del Boy at his own game which was suicide. Del Boy was absolutely great at the WTF 2009, but DD did beat him in the end.

In short, Del Boy is damn difficult to beat when he's absolutely on song - he can overwhelm you, but a guy who can keep his confidence, can take it early, mix it up, move him around and find angles has always got a chance.

barrystar wrote:

The Special Juan wrote:
Ok, I might be being a bit biased towards Del Potro, but what about in the final v Federer? He was bludgeoning the forehands left, right and centre. As for Nadal, he always seems to have an excuse for getting beaten. He was smacked off the court that day. And I can't believe Djokovic wasn't motivated. He had a chance to win a medal for his country. He seems to be a really patriotic person and would love to help his country out during the Olympics as arguably their biggest superstar (ahead of Nemanja Vidic IMO).

Del Boy has hit that sort of form rarely, I'd say:

RG 2009
USO 2009
WTF 2009
OG 2012

Fed got him, just, at RG 2009 and OG 2012. At USO 2009 you've got to accept that Nadal was under par, it's not a question of supporting Nadal, but putting Del Boy's performance into it's proper context. He was brilliant, for sure, but he was not playing Nadal at anywhere near his best. In the final he beat Fed fair and square, but not by pummelling Fed off the Court. When Fed was playing to his strengths in the first two sets he had Del Boy on the rack, then he got pee'd off and stupidly chose to try and beat Del Boy at his own game which was suicide. Del Boy was absolutely great at the WTF 2009, but DD did beat him in the end.

In short, Del Boy is damn difficult to beat when he's absolutely on song - he can overwhelm you, but a guy who can keep his confidence, can take it early, mix it up, move him around and find angles has always got a chance.

I'd be inclined to agree with all of that, even the Nadal bit. As I said, I've only seen highlights of those matches so I can only go with what I see in about 10 minutes. I think Del Potro stuggles with consistency but whether that's down to injury or himself or both I don't know.

CaledonianCraig wrote:BB,

Sorry have to disagree with you. Roger Federer is the favourite at the moment and quite a warm one too in my opinion. Why?

1. He came into the tournament as the form player.

2. He has had a very comfortable route through to the quarters and played a match less so should be as fresh as a daisy.

3. I have been on many forums and had Murray's win over Federer at the Olympics put down to Federer fatigue, Federer's non-interest and and a range of other reasons. Therefore, if that is the case then on what grounds do you have Murray as the favourite considering the result the last time they met in a slam.

4. Finally, and the old favourite, Federer is the GOAT and so automatically that makes him the favourite.

That is my take on it.

As for the OP - a good post. One thing is sure those wishing to still claim Nalby is above Murray as greatest player never to win a slam are living in cloud cuckoo land. There is still time for Andy to get that elusive slam win under his belt but I think his better chance will come in Australia or at Wimbledon next year. If you look at Murray's record at Flushing Meadows it is nowhere near that of his record at Melbourne and Wimbledon. As long as Murray keeps hammering on the door at the slams I remain hopeful it will one day open.

Could you quantify the view in the way I have? You can see my approach, just put your own percentages in.

No real need for percentages though is there? Those are my reasons and like I said in another post later I said Murray needs to bring his best game to court to stand a chance but as we have seen tonight (at the start) against Cilic that is not always guaranteed. Whereas Federer is super consistent wherein you can guarantee he'll bring high first serve percentage, top focus and aggression and is why he has the huge amount of slams to Andy's none. Hence why I cannot see how Federer is anything but a warm favourite. Jeez if that was me posting what you did about Murray being favourite then we all know what feverish reaction there would have been to that.

He probably would have fared better in another era without the 3 guys in front of him winning slams. I think Andy is the kind of tennis player that could be very successful in any era. Despite talk of Andy playing a grinding style he has plenty of power and touch and feel in his game. The thing that is so unique about Andy is athletically he is so big and tall but moves like he is 5 foot 3 and not 6 3. What I mean by that is that he has little man's explosive first step and change of direction in a big man's body. I was stunned watching him in his last match how effortlessly he returned Raonic and chased down those big shots. The bigger you get the harder it is to have that first 5, 10, or 15 yard burst that is crucial in tennis and Andy has it in spades, and technically he has all the shots so you got the best of both worlds.

If we are talking here about the here and now compared to other eras then there is no doubting how tough it is to win a slam in this day and age owing to the massive consistency of the top players. Murray consistently reaches semis and almost entirely is left in a position where he needs to beat two players ranked above him to win a slam. I'd bet my bottom dollar that say ten years ago the top four were nowhere near as consistent slam contenders and so the semis had players ranked 10+ making semis - or maybe even lower.

To back this up lets look at 2002 season at the slams:-

Australian Open:-

Semi-Finalists

Tommy Haas (No.7 Seed) V Marat Safin (No.9 Seed)

Jiri Novak (No.26 Seed) V Thomas Johansson (No.16 Seed)

French Open Semi-Finalists:-

Albert Costa (No.20 Seed) V Alex Corretja (No.18 Seed)

Juan Carlos Ferrero (No.11 Seed) V Marat Safin (No.2 Seed)

Wimbledon Semi-Finalists:-

Leyton Hewitt (No.1 Seed) V Tim Henman (No.4 Seed)

Xavier Malisse (No.27 Seed) V David Nalbandian (No.28 Seed)

US Open Semi-Finalists:-

Leyton Hewitt (No.1 Seed) V Andre Agassi (No.6 Seed)

Pete Sampras (No.17 Seed) V Sjeng Schalken (No.24 Seed)

I would hazard a guess a lot of other years have similar type stats. You see today the top three are bullet-proof virtually in reaching the semis and that makes for a massive hurdle to overcome for any player.

Murray's time has come! No Federer to stop him in the semi and then Djokovic or Delpo in the final. He won't get a better chance than now....and hot on the heals of a final @ Wimbledon and Olympic Gold, I'm firmly in the Murray camp...!

luciusmann wrote:Murray's time has come! No Federer to stop him in the semi and then Djokovic or Delpo in the final. He won't get a better chance than now....and hot on the heals of a final @ Wimbledon and Olympic Gold, I'm firmly in the Murray camp...!

On paper he's in a decent position, but not that much better on paper to where he's been before. He was in a similar position facing a non top-three Semi-Finalist at Wimbledon 2009, 2012, and Aus 2010. Also, Berdych is a tough, tough opponent for him, worst outside the top 3, and Berdych has been to and won a slam SF before so we'll see. I think Murray's position is undoubtedly better than Djoko's or Del Boy's.

luciusmann wrote:Murray's time has come! No Federer to stop him in the semi and then Djokovic or Delpo in the final. He won't get a better chance than now....and hot on the heals of a final @ Wimbledon and Olympic Gold, I'm firmly in the Murray camp...!

I'm rooting for him really hard too, but I'm as worried for him with Berdych as I was for Fed. I didn't see the end of the Cilic match - perhaps I would feel better if I had, because I don't think he can afford to start slowly against a Berdych who has found his rhythm.

Anyway, c'mon Murray - it really would be the most fantastic end to the summer if he could take the USO crown.

time please wrote:...I'm rooting for him really hard too, but I'm as worried for him with Berdych as I was for Fed. I didn't see the end of the Cilic match - perhaps I would feel better if I had, because I don't think he can afford to start slowly against a Berdych who has found his rhythm.

Anyway, c'mon Murray - it really would be the most fantastic end to the summer if he could take the USO crown.

I am not worried for Murray. I am certain Berdych will have to play his best tennis if he hopes to beat / unsettle Murray. Personally I would make Murray favorite to beat Berdych.

Craig

Further to your comment above about consistency, the 'stat of the day' from the BBC (in the report of Berdych v Federer) is that this is the first time since the French Open 2004 that neither Federer nor Nadal have been in the semi-final of a slam.

I'm guessing it is also the first slam in at least 2 years where fewer than 3 of the top 4 have reached the semi-final stage, and isn't it also now 3 years since someone outside the top (current) 4 even appeared in a slam final?

Berdy when on can be unplayable, as Federer found out - dont think he even got a hit in the game where Berdy served it out.
Thankfully for other players he's rarely on for 5-7 matches in a row.
But it'll be closer than the Cilic match...for me it just depends on which Berdy turns up, too hard to call otherwise.

dummy_half wrote:Craig

Further to your comment above about consistency, the 'stat of the day' from the BBC (in the report of Berdych v Federer) is that this is the first time since the French Open 2004 that neither Federer nor Nadal have been in the semi-final of a slam.

I'm guessing it is also the first slam in at least 2 years where fewer than 3 of the top 4 have reached the semi-final stage, and isn't it also now 3 years since someone outside the top (current) 4 even appeared in a slam final?

Exactly my point. In recent years the top three have been bullet-proof at slams and always there and on top of their game. In the past though the top threes or even four have been nowhere near as consistent and so it was very probable to reach a slam semi and face a player ranked outside the top ten. Now I know Andy says he is glad he plays in this era as it has made him a better player and I would agree with that but if time travel was possible and you could transport back to some of those semis that I listed above can people here put their hands on their heart and said he wouldn't have won a slam?

time please wrote:

luciusmann wrote:Murray's time has come! No Federer to stop him in the semi and then Djokovic or Delpo in the final. He won't get a better chance than now....and hot on the heals of a final @ Wimbledon and Olympic Gold, I'm firmly in the Murray camp...!

I'm rooting for him really hard too, but I'm as worried for him with Berdych as I was for Fed. I didn't see the end of the Cilic match - perhaps I would feel better if I had, because I don't think he can afford to start slowly against a Berdych who has found his rhythm.

Anyway, c'mon Murray - it really would be the most fantastic end to the summer if he could take the USO crown.

Fed pretty much said in his interview that the loss of that close first set was quite devastating to his chances last night and it's easy to see why: when Fed has lost the first set to Berdych in matches, typically he loses them, Madrid this year being the notable exception. It may come down to match ups (Berdbrain being a big hitter) however, the match would have been very different had Berdych lost that first set because I think Fed realises that once Berdbrain wins the first set and settles into a rhythm, he becomes very difficult to beat. We saw why Berdbrain doesn't often progress far into slams when he started losing the third set and it affected his play in the beginning of the 4th set and had he lost the 1st set, there can be little doubt that Fed would have taken this match very much in ascendancy.

There are certainly lessons for Murray to learn here. As you say, he can't afford a slow start and although he can mount a fight back, such attempts are very difficult and if Fed couldn't manage it, I think Murray will find it just as tough. It's easier just to make sure he edges out Berdbrain in the first set and that will stop Berdbrain finding his range and then capitalizing on it and taking a second set off Murray through errors (pretty much what happened to Fed in the second set as well as the first). I think in some ways a tough opponent is good for Murray and will give that extra mental resilience he needs to see off Djokovic who he's come so close to seeing off before (Aussie Open this year). So even though my favourite player is out, I'm still hopeful for Murray!

Obviously it's preferable that Murray plays someone outside the top 4 in his semi, so as a Murray fan I can't really complain... But the very last person I'd want it to be is Berdych.

He seems to have no inferiority complex against Murray. Even on the couple of occasions he's lost he's played well. I think it could be a very tight one. Apart from Delpo, I've always thought Berdych was the one with the most complete game outside the big 4. Good off both wings, moves pretty well, serves well.

He can mentally implode though, and I'll be hoping he does so again tomorrow. I'd go for Murray in 4 very tight sets but I say it in hope as much as expectation. Murray has to find good length and get over 60% first serves I think. His match against Raonic was the blueprint.

Berdych leads the head to head with Murray 4 to 2.

Hmmm maybe Murray is not quite the favorite I had made him out to be

Nore Staat - you'd have to put Murray as favourite, but not by that much. Every time they've played Berdych has played well. I've never felt Murray is in full control. They are at 2-2 on hard court matches. Berdy is the one guy outside the top guys who I've seen beat Murray when Murray has played really well, and that worries me.

I think Murray will be ok. He's due a good match (bad, good, bad, good, bad...) and Berdych is breakable. How many times did an under-par Federer break Berdych even when he was playing well?

Two things in Murray's favour IMHO. Bit simplistic admittedly, but Berdy may not play as well as he did against Fed, while Murray has blown hot and cold in this tournament and after the awful start against Cilic we could get the "hot" Murray in the semi.
It is a tough one. If people - including me - were worried about Fed meeting Berdbrain, then it follows there should be concerns for Murray in the semi. Glad I'm not having to put money on this one.

Juan - those 'bad' performances have all been played on Armstrong. Murray doesnt like that court, and has a bizarre history of bad performances on there. It's there where he struggled against Haas last year, nearly losing, and it was also there that Wawrinka beat him 2 or 3 years ago.

He says it's much quicker and takes a while to get used to, and it favours big hitters. To the naked eye I'm not sure I see more than a slight difference in the speed. Barring more rain, he won't see that court on Saturday. Thankfully.