How many Grand Slams will Andy Murray win in his career?

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 10:37 am

This Monday Andy Murray sealed history and became the first British male Grand Slam winner of this millenium! He ended Britain's 76 year wait, in a pulsating and dramatic 5 setter against his good friend Novak Djokovic.

But how many more Grand Slams will he go onto win?

His Rivals:
Rafael Nadal:
In my eyes Rafael Nadal is the player Murray will want to avoid at Slams. The good news for Murray is that Nadak is injured, and will need time to get back to full fitness. Andy has shown he can beat Djokovic in slams, with two 5 setters this year (one going each way) and he has shown he can beat Federer at this age in BO5 with his fantastic display in the Olympics. Now I think any tennis fan can tell you that Murray's results in 2012, well the latter half anyway, is far superior to his results in 2011. In 2011 he lost convincingly in the final to Novak Djokovic at the AO, and then lost to Rafael Nadal 3 times in a row in the remaining Grand Slams. But this year he has not lost to Nadal in a Grand Slam. Incredible!
He hasn't played him.
2011 Wimbledon + USO he loses in the semi of both. Has he improved now? Yes, his forehand and 2nd serve and steadily got better, while mentally Lendl I believe has made a difference to Murray's approach. In 2012 he reached the final of Wimbledon + wins USO. Nevertheless I believe Nadal's absence has been critical for Murray. Murray, by reaching the Wimbledon final and winning the Gold medal, accumulated enough self belief to win the major in the USA. But he can thank his lucky stars Nadal lost early in Wimbledon, and then dropped out due to injury for the rest of the year. Nadal had won the last 4 Slam meetings with Murray, and in tennis terms had Murray in his 'back pocket.'
But now things might change. Murray has more self belief, he has less doubts, mentally and physically he will be better prepared to deal with Nadal.
There is also no doubt that Murray can beat Nadal on hard courts, beating him in USO 2008, and also leading by 2 sets in the Australian Open 2010.
If Nadal regains his full fitness then I believe Nadal and Murray can set up an engrossing rivalry. In my eyes a fully fit Nadal holds the edge, but Murray has to play with more aggression, certainly with more aggression than he played with in this recent US Open final.

Roger Federer:
Murray leads the overall head to head with Roger Federer 9-8. But in Slams Roger leads 3-0, though the recent BO5 match they have played Murray was stunning, winning in straight sets. Federer has had an incredible summer for him, and at this age, is playing great tennis. Nonetheless, I feel Roger is vulnerable. He is not as consistent as he was in his prime, and I think he only has a maximum of 3 years left at the very top of the game. Murray knows he can beat Roger, and I feel after this USO and Olympics win, will feel he has the edge against Roger on any surface apart from clay, or an indoor court. If Murray and Federer were to face in the next AO final, with both fully fit, I would say Murray is 52% favourite. In Wimbledon, before the roof came on, Murray was a set up and had two break points at 4-4. He didn't take those, and it came back to haunt him. Now mentally I feel in these moments he will believe in himself more.

Novak Djokovic:
Well, these two just played the USO Open final, and Murray won in 5 sets! Murray also beat Djokovic in the Olympics, and Dubai, while Djokovic beat Murray in Miami and AO earlier this year. This rivalry promises to be very close for the next few years, and with them both 25 years old, barring injury they should have a lot of success in the future. There is something different about Djokovic now though. In 2011 he had a great year no doubt, but this year mentally in the big moments he has been much worse. Now I am not predicting doomsday, but the only tournaments he has won since the AO are Miami and Toronto. In Miami he faced Isner in the final, in Toronto he had to beat Gasquet. I think going forward from here on, Murray has the edge. (By this I mean I think Murray will add more to his 1 Grand Slam than Djokovic will to his 5, I expect Djokovic to eventually end up with more Grand Slams but the gap will be less than the 4 it is currently).
Djokovic, like true champions do, has to bounce back mentally. This year I feel the pressure has got to him, the huge pressure and expectation of 2011. In the bigger moments he has been poor, double-faulting in key moments and missing shots he would expect to finsh easily. He will be back, but I don't think he will reach the 2011 levels.
So, all in all, I believe we have a fantastic rivalry to come between these two, but I feel Murray at the moment holds the edge.

How Many Slams will Andy Murray win in his career?
My verdict is: 6 slams.

What do you think?
IMBL

by bogbrush Wed 12 Sep 2012, 10:41 am

Andy is 2nd favourite to all, plus others on clay so forget the French.

It's complex because it's as much about the others as it is him. I'm guessing 2-4, I'm just not sure he'll go on some massive tear.

I believe that had that match been played in still conditions he'd have lost.

by Guest Wed 12 Sep 2012, 10:58 am

2-4 in my opinion.

For me it isn't so much about the current Slam winners, but the trends.

Take US Open. Last 5 tournaments have seen 5 different winners. It seems post Federer dominance that it has become a difficult Slam to dominate. I don't think it would be at all surprising that someone outside the big 4 with the right mentality could win there. Yes it can be argued that Djokovic has contested the last 3 finals, but someone on an absolute tear could succeed. Murray to successfully defend his title would be based on the season he has up until then. Very difficult to see him winning there again.

Australian Open. Well he has made 2 finals and run the defending champion very close. The conditions are slightly slower than the US Open. Djokovic a 3 time champion there would be very difficult to dislodge. The new and improved Murray could pick up a couple easily. Conditions favour his style.

French Open. Well this is a one man monopoly. The shame for Federer is that as he slows down so does Nadal given his latest bout of injuries. Djokovic the better clay court player at this moment in time behind Nadal. Andy has no Clay titles to his name. Winning here would be a bigger miracle than Jesus coming back from the dead to remove that boulder!

Wimbledon. Well his record here to superb. 3 semi's. 1 final. I feel right now behind Roger he is the best player on Grass. I would fancy him to at least win here once. Faster conditions slightly favour and add some pop to his FH. Being his home Slam would give him all the confidence he would need.

The rest of the field.

Federer it is case of how long can he maintain his current brand of tennis. He is more prone to periods without success ala mid 2010 to end of 2011. He is more vulnerable to the big hitters. I still think he has one last Slam left in him.

Nadal. I would not be surprised if he retired before Federer. If it turns out that only Clay can sustain his style of play, I can't see that would keep him interested enough. If he loses at RG in 2013, well I can't see him hanging around knowing that the other surfaces will offer him no favours or titles.

Djokovic at the moment is the best player in the world. He isn't just going to go away that easily. Same age as Andy and that really is the new rivalry in tennis. Once he finds his A* game I would find it hard to favour Andy winning against him.

Rest of the field. Well they will look at Andy a think a maiden Slam at 25/26 is no longer out of the question. Del Potro is the only one with a Slam victory and age on his side. Wouldn't be surprised if Berdych or Tsonga won a Slam at the US Open/Wimbledon.

For me Andy won't win more than 4 Slams.

by barrystar Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:06 am

For me it's 4-6. I think he's got a very solid chance of 3 more, the question is how many more than that?

by slashermcguirk Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:18 am

dont understand how you can say murray has edge over novak ! absolutely not true. The only time he has beaten novak in a slam was a few days ago in 5 sets in unusually windy conditions. Murray coming from Scotland will have a lot more experience of playing in wind than most other players. Even despite this, Djokovic nearly beat him. Also bear in mind the 1st set tie break could have gone either way.

When they are both on top of their game it is clear that Novak is the better player. Novak has won on all surfaces including clay. There is a reason why Novak has:

Won 5 slams compared to 1 for Murray
Reached 9 grand slam finals including 7 of the last 9
Beaten Federer 5 times in grand slams
Beaten Nadal in 3 grand slam finals

These are the sort of things Murray has never managed and clearly demonstrates that Djokovic has had a far better career than Murray despite being the same age. He has also beaten murray twice in grand slams so dont know how you can say from one match that murray has the edge. Makes no sense. Lets be honest, the olympics is not a grand slam and murray was playing with whole crowd behind him. If it had been played in Serbia, you can be sure Djokovic would have drubbed him. Tennis shouldnt even be in olympics, rather like golf should not be and will be in 2016 (this is coming from a guy who also follows golf).

head to head is 8-7 Djokovic and he has more pedigree at grand slam level. suddently from one match, murray holds the edge............ludicrous !

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:21 am

slashermcguirk wrote:dont understand how you can say murray has edge over novak ! absolutely not true. The only time he has beaten novak in a slam was a few days ago in 5 sets in unusually windy conditions. Murray coming from Scotland will have a lot more experience of playing in wind than most other players. Even despite this, Djokovic nearly beat him. Also bear in mind the 1st set tie break could have gone either way.

When they are both on top of their game it is clear that Novak is the better player. Novak has won on all surfaces including clay. There is a reason why Novak has:

Won 5 slams compared to 1 for Murray
Reached 9 grand slam finals including 7 of the last 9
Beaten Federer 5 times in grand slams
Beaten Nadal in 3 grand slam finals

These are the sort of things Murray has never managed and clearly demonstrates that Djokovic has had a far better career than Murray despite being the same age. He has also beaten murray twice in grand slams so dont know how you can say from one match that murray has the edge. Makes no sense. Lets be honest, the olympics is not a grand slam and murray was playing with whole crowd behind him. If it had been played in Serbia, you can be sure Djokovic would have drubbed him. Tennis shouldnt even be in olympics, rather like golf should not be and will be in 2016 (this is coming from a guy who also follows golf).

head to head is 8-7 Djokovic and he has more pedigree at grand slam level. suddently from one match, murray holds the edge............ludicrous !

I think you've misunderstood here.
I have said overall when both their careers finish Djokovic will have a better record, with more slams.
Currently Djokovic has won 4 more slams than Murray, I think Murray may close this gap down to 2-3 by the end of their careers.

By 'have the edge' I am saying at the moment I feel Murray is playing better tennis than Djokovic. Mentally in the bigger moments, Djokovic looks out of it. Of course next year I fancy this will change, as Djokovic relaunches himself, but atm I feel Murray would fancy himself against Djokovic on all surfaces apart from clay.

by slashermcguirk Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:25 am

My prediction at end of their respective careers is:

Federer: 18
Nadal: 15
Djokovic: 9
Murray: 4

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:27 am

slashermcguirk wrote:My prediction at end of their respective careers is:

Federer: 18
Nadal: 15
Djokovic: 9
Murray: 4

I hope you are right, but let's see Wink

by Born Slippy Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:38 am

Yeah, I don't see Murray as having an edge over Novak. I'd disagree that the balance is significantly the other way either. The matches between them are very hard to call. On hard court it is now 6-6 overall and 3-3 since super Novak turned up at the start of 2011. Even on clay, where Novak has a clear edge, murray served for the match the only time they played last year.

In relation to the original question, we need to see how Murray responds to achieving his lifetime goal. If he remains driven, then i would expect to see a less edgy Murray in the latter rounds of slams going forwards. If so, he would only be a clear underdog against any of the other top 4 on clay. Wimbledon is the slam he might be able to dominate for a couple of years, especially if Fed does start to fade.

by slashermcguirk Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:40 am

apologies it must be love, must have misunderstood you slightly.

by The Special Juan Wed 12 Sep 2012, 11:51 am

I'm not going to jump on the bandwagon Mats Wilander is currently driving but I reckon he'll pick up a few more for a couple of reasons:

1) The "New" Murray hasn't played Nadal yet and I reckon their matches will be much closer than the ones in the past.

2) I'm not saying he'll win the FO, especially with Nadal about, but Lendl was great on clay and he can help Murray with his clay court game.

3) He's probably the 2nd best player on grass at the moment.

My prediction for Murray (even though I'm delighted with the solitary USO he has):

1 AO
2 Wimbledon
1 USO

And he'll win every non-clay Masters at least once, plus the odd WTF.

by barrystar Wed 12 Sep 2012, 12:07 pm

slashermcguirk wrote:My prediction at end of their respective careers is:

Federer: 18
Nadal: 15
Djokovic: 9
Murray: 4

That's an additional 12 slams - 1 for Fed, 4 for Nadal, 4 for Djoko, 3 for Murray.

They'd take a minimum of 3 more years to win those if they can continue to exclude everyone else from winning slams. That makes the overall number seems a bit on the large side to me. I think 4 more looks a bit high for Nadal - I'd say 1-2 and I think he's pretty much limited to natural surfaces looking forward. I was delighted when Fed proved me wrong this summer, but now I'd be really surprised if he has another slam left in him because I think he's too vulnerable on bo5 HC and Clay. Even his marvellous Wimbledon win involved two extremely narrow squeeks. I think 4 for Djoko is fair enough, and I think (hope) Murray may do a bit better than three.

by newballs Wed 12 Sep 2012, 12:34 pm

This idea in some quarters that from now on Andy will regularly or more often than not beat Novak whilst feasible is not guaranteed. Djokovic will go away (just like he did to start beating both Nadal and Federer) and look at what improvements he needs to make to his game.

If it's Andy and Novak who dominate for the next couple of years (Federer is surely not quite the force her was and there must be question marks concerning Rafa) then several more slam titles could follow. You also have to bear in mind that two years in tenis is along time and there will undoubtedly be at least one genuine new challenger who'll come through to complicate matters.

by Guest Wed 12 Sep 2012, 1:33 pm

Not more than 500 and not less than 1. At this moment in time I would have to say 2-4 slams seems to be the most likely outcome. If Murray wins two or more slams next year then I might have to reassess this prediction.

by banbrotam Wed 12 Sep 2012, 1:40 pm

slashermcguirk wrote:dont understand how you can say murray has edge over novak ! absolutely not true.head to head is 8-7 Djokovic and he has more pedigree at grand slam level. suddently from one match, murray holds the edge............ludicrous !

slasher, I remember on another forum that you get very sensitive about this subject. Fact is that the 2012 Andy Murrray leads Novak 3-2. You seem to want to (as you did before) give us some kind of history lesson, rather than talk about what is real and what is now

It's not ludricous to say at the moment Andy has the edge. I don't agree with this opinion, but it is not such a daft one

I also like your joke about the wind, because as we know Spain is a very windy country which is where Andy learned his trade

And please have a bit of grace - of course Novak could have won, so could Andy at the Australian and what about his unusual rest before the Miami match, but no you didn't here us make excuses

So there we have it. Andy won his first slam because it was windy which gives him the advantage coming from Scotland and because he got lucky in the first set where he had 6 set points to Nole's none. Hilarious stuff!!

by banbrotam Wed 12 Sep 2012, 1:47 pm

Born Slippy wrote:In relation to the original question, we need to see how Murray responds to achieving his lifetime goal.

Has anyone noticed how very few of the multiple slam winners, won their first two at consecutive slams

Indeed I can't think of a single won post 1980

Anyone

by sirfredperry Wed 12 Sep 2012, 1:48 pm

Debated whether I would go for 2-4 but plumped for 5-7 in the end. Then I read one post that said Fed could go on for another three years. If that is the case, then may be Andy might not win so many slams - at least over the next two to three years.
The way the seedings are at the moment it's far more likely that Andy and Fed will meet in Slams.
The real imponderable in all this is Rafa. We've seen in the last two GS what happens when the Spaniard gets knocked out early/doesn't play at all - a guy who has not won a slam for 30 months and a guy who's never won one end up with trophies.
This is not to belittle Fed and Andy's achivements. But it does go to show what can happen if one of the big four aint around.
Some were surprised that Andy even won one slam. Now, few would bet against him winning several more.

by Guest Wed 12 Sep 2012, 1:49 pm

Murray was always leading in that match against Djokovic. Djokovic tried to play catch-up but was unable to do it. Murray had an easy final set.

The match panned out very similar to the AO2012 semi-final - Murray tending to break first and then being broken back. Murray was never able to take advantage of his breaks and Djokovic eventually won.

However since AO2012 he has developed and become better especially through experience and through a toughening of mental resolve.

Hence in terms of progression an argument could be made that Murray has the advantage over Djokovic come hard courts / grass courts. Murray has still to master the clay.

This fits in with the notion that ultimately Murray has more tennis "talent" than Djokovic, and Djokovic more tennis talent than Nadal. Of course on clay Nadal is king as his game and movement are perfectly attuned to that surface.

by newballs Wed 12 Sep 2012, 1:59 pm

NS indeed winning your first two slams back to back does not appear to have happened at least since the start of the Open era. Vilas came close in 1977 winning the French then the US then the Aussie Open to make his first three slams three out of four consecutive ones before going on to win a second Aus Open the following year.

The main reasons Andy might be able to do just that are obviously it's another hard court tournament plus his recent record in slams which would suggest the semis at least. Could be a very interesting challenge.

by Josiah Maiestas Wed 12 Sep 2012, 2:10 pm

hey guys i've got a new nickname for Andy Murray now after that victory who wants to hear it.

by FedsFan Wed 12 Sep 2012, 2:20 pm

1) Murray is now full of confidence but let's not forget he let a 2-0 set lead slip. This could have gone the other way had Novak's body not started to feel the effects of having to play 3 consecutive days. Do this against the top 3 when they are not on any other day and it may well have been a different outsome.

I doubt Murray has Novak's number and will dominate him at slams. Is this not the first time he has beaten him in a slam? There again it took 5 sets. It appears that these two now are most likely to meet in slam finals as Fed/Nadal are questions marks and the rest of the tour do not appear to have any outstanding talents capable of winning a slam.

2) Its true Murray was fortunate not to have to play Nadal in the last 4 slams. If Nadal had not withdrawn/lost would Murray have been able to topple him? Murray has had success vs Nadal twice at slams before so there is no clear answer there. We shall have to wait and see where Nadal's game is at when he gets back after his time off.

3) The only player who has managed to keep Murray at bay at slams is Federer. Murray has come off second best 3 times in finals. Actually Federer now is the only player not to have lost to Murray in a slam, something which is bound to change sooner rather than later. Murray may lead he h2h 9-8 but it is the big tournaments that matter. Good news for Murray is that Federer is not what he was and before they meet in say the semis of a slam or final it is more than likely someone like Berdych or Tsonga beat him.

No one can predict the future. After a poor 2009 Nadal stormed back in 2010 and swept aside everyone to take 3 slams. When tipped to achieve the 'Rafa Slam' at the AO, Djokovic goes on a tear which brings a haul of titles and 3 slams. Again, something no one predicted and this year in a strange twist Federer rises to No 1. You cannot predict where Murray will end up. He may win everything from hereon in or maybe not win another slam. By the AO 2013, things will become clearer as we will know where the top 4 are at in terms of their game.

by bogbrush Wed 12 Sep 2012, 2:21 pm

Josiah Maiestas wrote:hey guys i've got a new nickname for Andy Murray now after that victory who wants to hear it.

Doesn't look like it.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 12 Sep 2012, 2:22 pm

Josiah Maiestas wrote:hey guys i've got a new nickname for Andy Murray now after that victory who wants to hear it.

The poster in me wants to hear it, the Moderator isn't quite so sure Smile

by Josiah Maiestas Wed 12 Sep 2012, 2:38 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
Josiah Maiestas wrote:hey guys i've got a new nickname for Andy Murray now after that victory who wants to hear it.

The poster in me wants to hear it, the Moderator isn't quite so sure

Grandy Murray

Run

by dummy_half Wed 12 Sep 2012, 2:59 pm

I've always thought Andy had the game to be a multiple slam winner, but he has left it quite late before winning his first one. Based on that, I reckon 2 to 4 slams is most likely.

He's probably got about 4 more years at the top of his game (assuming he can avoid injuries), which gives 12 slams where he has a realistic chance (discounting any chances of winning the French). It is reasonable to think that for most of this time Federer will not be a factor, and it remains to be seen how well Nadal recovers from his knee issues. As such, it is likely that for most of these slams Djokovic will be the biggest threat, with an increasing likelihood of a winner from outside these four (I expect Del Potro to have at least one or two more slams where he plays near the top of his game).

Based on all that, I think Andy would be slightly disappointed if he doesn't pick up at least 2 or 3 more slams.

Of course, there's also the possibility that he will go on something of a tear and take 3 inside 12 months, which would certainly put the 5-7 range easily in range.

by CaledonianCraig Wed 12 Sep 2012, 5:12 pm

I voted 2 to 4 slams myself as that appears the most likely option. Interesting though that hawkeye or others haven't voted for 1. A silent admittance of Andy's talent? Wink

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 12 Sep 2012, 5:18 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:I voted 2 to 4 slams myself as that appears the most likely option. Interesting though that hawkeye or others haven't voted for 1. A silent admittance of Andy's talent?

Hawkeye's waiting for the 1* option

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 5:21 pm

Josiah Maiestas wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:
Josiah Maiestas wrote:hey guys i've got a new nickname for Andy Murray now after that victory who wants to hear it.

The poster in me wants to hear it, the Moderator isn't quite so sure
Grandy Murray

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 5:24 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:I voted 2 to 4 slams myself as that appears the most likely option. Interesting though that hawkeye or others haven't voted for 1. A silent admittance of Andy's talent?

Hawkeye's waiting for the 1* option

by The Special Juan Wed 12 Sep 2012, 5:32 pm

It used to be "Andy's too good a player not to win a major." Now it's "Andy's too good a player to only win 1 major". I'm delighted with one!!

Lendl says he will work with Andy now to avoid his 1-6 record in his 1st 7 finals.

by newballs Wed 12 Sep 2012, 6:25 pm

Surely even the most myopic AM fan must realise 8 + smacks of over the top belief in their man.

2-4 may form a reasonable spread as I would suggest it would be a surprise if he remained a one slam wonder (though nothing in this world is guaranteed).

Getting to 6 (never mind 8 or more) would mean winning a couple of slams per year for the next 2 to 3 years) and that could be quite a challenge. Getting to 8 or more though would mean he would have to have that level of dominance for the next 4 years or thereabouts. Factor in the likelihood that most of these slams would be on hard courts plus maybe a Wimbledon (or two) but the French?

Hence my vote (like most rational members of this forum) will be 2-4 and i would be pleasantly surprised if I was proved wrong and he got 5 or more. Equally though I'd feel a little disappointed if he stays as a "one slam wonder" and hope that next year he adds to his total.

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 6:27 pm

slashermcguirk wrote:apologies it must be love, must have misunderstood you slightly.

Now worries Slasher Ok!

Anyway, good to have more Djokovic fans on here!

by User 774433 Wed 12 Sep 2012, 8:26 pm

newballs wrote:Surely even the most myopic AM fan must realise 8 + smacks of over the top belief in their man.

I agree, 8+ will be very difficult.

newballs wrote:
Hence my vote (like most rational members of this forum) will be 2-4 and i would be pleasantly surprised if I was proved wrong and he got 5 or more. Equally though I'd feel a little disappointed if he stays as a "one slam wonder" and hope that next year he adds to his total.

Are you accusing me of being not rational! drumroll

by socal1976 Thu 13 Sep 2012, 7:06 am

I think like most people I voted for the 2-4 number. A couple years back I wrote that murray was a 1-3 slam winner and Djoko was a 3-6 slam winner I think I underestimated both youngsters by a couple of slams possibly although not bad prognostication.

I really see the future for both Andy and Novak to be very bright. They have clearly mastered all of the players of their generation and younger than them with exception of Nadal which they both can beat Djokovic albeit does it more regularly. And Nadal, I take no joy in this I think is not going to be able to keep playing at the same level with those knees. I really see this next couple of years as Novak and Andy's time to pile up trophies and slams and pass the 1 and 2 ranking between each other.

The Rog and Rafa will still be there I think we are going to see a very competitive fed for the next 2 or 3 years and the same goes for Rafa. But fed will give ever so gradually and Rafa poor snakebitten Rafa will have his runs when his leg permit. But I said from the start of the year and I will say it now the 2-3 years will be a Andy and Novak's time.

by sirfredperry Thu 13 Sep 2012, 9:12 am

FedsFan. Clearly, Andy WAS fortunate not to have met Rafa in a Slam this year. But, without going anywhere near the draw conspiracy theories, Andy did have rotten luck meeting Rafa in so many consective slams before that.
Ironically, they would not have been in the same half in New York this year due to the ranking and it seems almost certain that they will be in separate halves in the 2013 AO.
Interesting the number of posters who talk about Fed being around for two to three years. Of course, it would be great to see him still playing in, say, 2015. But a lot can happen by then. It's fairly certain that he'll be around for the whole of 2013, while 2014 is a possibility. But after that, who knows?
Fed's longevity and Rafa's fitness could be the key to Andy's "slamability".

by User 774433 Thu 13 Sep 2012, 11:23 am

sirfredperry wrote:FedsFan. Clearly, Andy WAS fortunate not to have met Rafa in a Slam this year. But, without going anywhere near the draw conspiracy theories, Andy did have rotten luck meeting Rafa in so many consective slams before that.
Ironically, they would not have been in the same half in New York this year due to the ranking and it seems almost certain that they will be in separate halves in the 2013 AO.
Interesting the number of posters who talk about Fed being around for two to three years. Of course, it would be great to see him still playing in, say, 2015. But a lot can happen by then. It's fairly certain that he'll be around for the whole of 2013, while 2014 is a possibility. But after that, who knows?
Fed's longevity and Rafa's fitness could be the key to Andy's "slamability".

Spot on

by barrystar Thu 13 Sep 2012, 12:13 pm

banbrotam wrote:
Born Slippy wrote:In relation to the original question, we need to see how Murray responds to achieving his lifetime goal.

Has anyone noticed how very few of the multiple slam winners, won their first two at consecutive slams

Indeed I can't think of a single won post 1980

Anyone

Nastase won the USO in 1972 on grass and RG in 1973 on clay without playing the Australian Open between them.

Otherwise Vilas (1977 RG and USO - both on clay, losing at Wimbledon in between) and Fed (2003 Wimbledon and 2004 Aus, losing to Nalbandian at 2003 USO) played 3 consecutive slams and each had one loss between their first and second slam wins.

In Murray's favour is the fact that USO and Aus O are on surfaces that very much favour him, he's been in 2 of the last 3 Aus Open Finals, and he's got 4 months to settle down with his new status. Let's see what happens eh?

by User 774433 Thu 13 Sep 2012, 1:10 pm

Well Murray could win the AO of course.
But by then Nadal could be fit, Djokovic could regain some of his confidence, while we know Federer will be there or there-abouts.

So it won't be easy. I'd say at the moment I'd still put Djokovic as marginal favourite, followed by Roger, followed by Murray.

by Guest Thu 13 Sep 2012, 1:46 pm

It Must Be Love wrote:
sirfredperry wrote:FedsFan. Clearly, Andy WAS fortunate not to have met Rafa in a Slam this year. ...
Spot on

I fear I am going to have to use the label "nonsense". Crying or Very sad

Andy would have been very fortunate to HAVE met Rafa in a Slam this year. It would have been a VERY EASY victory as Nadal hobbled around the court. Furthermore Nadal would surely have aggavated the "injury" and would have likely had to retire from the sport, spending the rest of his life in a wheelchair or on crutches.

by time please Thu 13 Sep 2012, 9:59 pm

I have voted for 2-4, and after his showing at Wimbledon this year, I think/hope that there is a really good chance that victory could be his at SW19 next year. A lot depends on how Nadal comes back, but even if the knees are perfect, RG and Wimbledon are so close together and I would think that it is quite difficult for someone with the miles on his body that Rafa has, to do both in the future.

by Henman Bill Fri 14 Sep 2012, 12:46 pm

Sooner or later more competition will come from outside the top 4.

Also, Murray has never reached a clay final. That might make a good target for him in 2013.

by sirfredperry Fri 14 Sep 2012, 2:44 pm

H'Bill. The competition from outside the top four could be later rather than sooner. Even with Rafa not around for, effectivcely, two successive Slams, no one from outside the top four was able to make a final.
Even the more experienced guys from 5-10 are finding it hard to make GS progress. Berdych is the only one to reach a slam final in the last two years, and S-F appearences are not all that frequent either.
In fact the "lower" orders are making it harder for the top guys to win a slam, not easier. I realise Nada's absence helped Andy reach two GS finals in a row but by not springing many surprises the guys ranked 5 and under are ensuring the top four have to beat each other to take GS titles.
Doubt if there's been a more worthy winner of GS tournaments than Djoko in 2011/12 due to the ranking of his opponents at the business end of each event.
Would that Andy had had the likes of Baggy or Puerta or Gonzo in his first GS final.

by harrpau7 Fri 14 Sep 2012, 5:07 pm

I think at least 5 majors over the next few years but I liked your opinion on his 3 rivals, for me after the defeats by Nadal in 3 consecutive grand slam semi-final's last year it was a shame that Murray couldn't get a crack at Rafa this year and I was also slightly disappointed that Federer didn't make the US Open semi-final as it would be nice to see Murray get Federer at a major. He has however defeated Nadal twice in a major (US Open 2008 and Australian Open 2010) and defeated Federer in a best of 5 set final at the Olympics so he can beat them both. Beating Federer at the Olympics and Djokovic in the US Open final is 2 big monkeys off his back, but there are still other monkeys to get rid of:

Roger Federer
Head to Head: AM 9-8 RF
GS Head to Head: AM 0-3 RF

This makes painful reading in terms of their biggest 3 matches, especially when all 3 defeats were in Grand Slam finals. In 2013 I want to see Murray defeat Federer at least one grand slam event. We know he can beat Federer, he has a winning head to head against him and won their most recent meeting, which was on Centre Court, in a best of 5 set final. How nice would it be if that could happen next year........

Novak Djokovic
Head to Head: AM 7-8 ND
GS Head to Head: AM 1-2 ND

A very close head to head, Djokovic dismantled Murray in the 2011 Australian Open final. The rematch in this years Australian Open SF was a very close 5 setter which could have gone either way. Murray leads 3-2 for matches this year, including big victories in the Olympic SF and of course the US Open final. No real monkey for Murray to shake here, and I expect them to face off in big matches for the next few years. By the end of 2013 I predict Murray and Djokovic being the top 2 players in the world.

Rafael Nadal
Head to Head: AM 5-13 RN
GS Head to Head: AM 2-6 RN

As much as Murray's GS head to head against Federer makes for painful reading, his overall head to head against Nadal is even worse. Should it really be this bad? Murray lost his first 5 matches against Rafa before defeating him in the US Open SF in 2008 and the Rotterdam final in early 2009. But Rafa has more often than not won the big matches. After the 2010 Australian Open quarter final, they were tied 2 a piece in GS matches, Rafa then won their 2010 Wimbledon SF to lead 3-2. However Rafa inflicted a lot of pain in 2011 with 3 consecutive GS victories at the French Open (expected), Wimbledon (that damn forehand in the second set) and the US Open. Murray did win their most recent match, the final of Tokyo which included a final set bagel but I'm sure Murray would like to improve against Nadal, and that chance will surely present itself in 2013. I'm sure Murray isn't too pleased going 0-3 against Rafa at Wimbledon either, hopefully that can change in Murray's favour in the future.

I firmly believe Murray will now win multiple majors. Apart from the French Open I really fancy his chances at the moment. But I also would like to see him defeat Federer, Nadal and Djokovic in order to do so. His records against Federer and Nadal especially in majors isn't brilliant but now he has defeated Djokovic to win the US Open I feel he can do it.

Here is what I would like to see in 2013 (pure fantasy now)

Australian Open - Murray def Federer (SF) and Nadal (F) to win.
French Open - Federer to win beating Nadal en route/in the final
Wimbledon - Murray to win by beating Rafa and Roger back to back
US Open - Federer defeating Nadal (only major they have never played at) but then losing to Murray in the final.

But, the most important thing is to win the tournament defeating whoever is in front of you, Murray now has the confidence to do this and 2013 could be a very big year for him and the other bog 4 members. Roll on Australia!!

by User 774433 Fri 14 Sep 2012, 5:12 pm

Absolutely sensational post and analysis Harrpau clap

by harrpau7 Fri 14 Sep 2012, 5:28 pm

It Must Be Love wrote:Absolutely sensational post and analysis Harrpau

I thank you Very Happy

.

Hope Rafa returns before end of year so Murray has a chance to beat him after his big victories over Federer and Djokovic this year.

Can't wait for 2013.

by User 774433 Fri 14 Sep 2012, 5:31 pm

Indeed Harrpau, indeed! Bubbly

Anyway poll currently reads Murray to win 2-4 in the huge majority at 68%.

by Guest Sat 15 Sep 2012, 2:58 am

Here's an interesting stat that no-one has mentioned. Since the ATP has started collecting these stats since the beginning of the 90's - who has the best stats for returns on hard courts??

Number One Is Andy Murray: That's right Andy Murray is the best at returning on the hard courts since records began.

Novak Djokovic ranks 8th on this all time list.

All leasts these stats were correct at the time of the start of the US Open 2012 - as they were mentioned during it.

by Guest Sat 15 Sep 2012, 3:04 am

At the end of the US Open 2012, there wasn't much smiling from Murray.

In fact he was clearly in pain and was hobbling around the court.

It just shows that even though he is in remarkable physical condition - the match as well as the tournanament drained him of everything.

It's not surprising since the final match itself was five hours long - filled with extreme physical exertion and extreme mental focussing. Not only had Murray to concentrate on what his opponent was doing with the ball (mano a mano) but also pay attention to what the wind was doing to the ball - tugging it this way and that.

It's true what Lendl said to Murray - he had to go through the pain barrier and through the limits of physical endurance and beyond in order to win. Lendl gave Murray the confidence he could do this and survive.

by carrieg4 Sat 15 Sep 2012, 9:32 am

Nore Staat wrote:At the end of the US Open 2012, there wasn't much smiling from Murray.

In fact he was clearly in pain and was hobbling around the court.

It just shows that even though he is in remarkable physical condition - the match as well as the tournanament drained him of everything.

It's not surprising since the final match itself was five hours long - filled with extreme physical exertion and extreme mental focussing. Not only had Murray to concentrate on what his opponent was doing with the ball (mano a mano) but also pay attention to what the wind was doing to the ball - tugging it this way and that.

It's true what Lendl said to Murray - he had to go through the pain barrier and through the limits of physical endurance and beyond in order to win. Lendl gave Murray the confidence he could do this and survive.

It was a very impressive feat. It is finally sinking in now Very Happy

by User 774433 Sat 15 Sep 2012, 9:37 am

Who were the people who voted 1 slams and 8+ slams?

Personally I think both are unrealistic.

by Sponsored content

How Many Slams will Murray win in his career