GB draw Croatia away in Davis cup

First topic message reminder :

Just saw this on the daviscup twitter page.

Thoughts? Toughy but I think very winnable. A vociferous home support, with the likes of cilic, dodig, karlovic will make it tough but with andy there we have a good shot.

Other ties are:
Japan v Colombia in Japan
Belgium v Israel in Belgium
Australia v Poland in Poland
Germany v Brazil in Germany
Switzerland v Ecuador in Switzerland
Croatia v Great Britain in Croatia
Austria v Netherlands in Netherlands
Spain v Ukraine in Spain

you mean like when Murray offered to pay for any British youngster who wanted to come to Miami and have a hit/get some advice from him? that sort of "care and attention"? you do know the number of people who took him up on that offer right? a big fat zero... as pointed out the problem isn't talent, it's attitude. These guys get actually given too much by the LTA when they're young and thus don't feel the need to work hard enough. Similar problem Tomic had IMO (though he's much more talented than Evans so got by further on his talent alone).

Love how a post about Evans not working hard enough (by his own admission) gets turned into a negative view on Murray, you really are pathetic sometimes

save it mfc, she doesn't read sensible comments that debunk her opinions re murray.

hawkeye wrote:lydian.

Those recent comments combined with the description of the harshness of life on the lower rungs of pro tennis just leave me feeling sorry for Evans. No wonder there is a lack of young talent coming through not just in this country but generally.

I'm not really sure what the answer is but unless someone really has a passion for the sport pro tennis is not a good career path. One of the few things that could perhaps help is feeling part of a team. The top players have their own team around them to shelter them but for lower ranked players national associations could play a part. Sadly the LTA (from the glimpses we get from the outside) looks like the sort of place were you could just as likely get stabbed in the back as find a few friendly faces (Not literally stabbed in the back I hasten to add...)

People may have guessed that I do think the LTA focus way too much care and attention on Murray at the expense of other things that could benefit more. Murray doesn't need care and attention from the LTA he can buy his own. But Murray is in the position to give some care and attention back and by that I mean a little more than a few (reported) text messages.

Let's say that LTA / or Murray suddenly start to ring / text / tweet Evans daily and give him all the support you think they should. How on earth will that resolve that attitude of a player who has openly says "I don't train hard enough and don't work hard enough day in day out"?

Mad for Chelsea wrote:you mean like when Murray offered to pay for any British youngster who wanted to come to Miami and have a hit/get some advice from him? that sort of "care and attention"? you do know the number of people who took him up on that offer right? a big fat zero... as pointed out the problem isn't talent, it's attitude. These guys get actually given too much by the LTA when they're young and thus don't feel the need to work hard enough. Similar problem Tomic had IMO (though he's much more talented than Evans so got by further on his talent alone).

Love how a post about Evans not working hard enough (by his own admission) gets turned into a negative view on Murray, you really are pathetic sometimes

To be fair to some of the GB players, both Baker and Golding joined Murray at his camp last December. There are a few putting the hard work in.

Golding is a definite future star, I just hope the LTA can start to nurture our elite players better...giving them realistic goals and rewards for achieving them, not just throw money at them without ranking improvements, etc.

Speaking of Murray I just read this: http://www.10sballs.com/2013/04/08/andy-murray-makes-money-while-admitting-he-lacks-charisma/

Seems the headline is unjustified when the article ends on a positive tone....It could have been called "I do it for my family and friends" or something. Seems the media always want to paint the negative headline with Murray.

Looks like the DC effort took a lot out of Ward:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/apr/09/david-cup-british-no2-james-ward-hospital

Do you think the top guys would have ended up on a drip after 7 hours tennis split over a days rest?

He is just luring everyone into a false sense of security before his assault on the French Open title! You heard it here first folks.

lydian wrote:Do you think the top guys would have ended up on a drip after 7 hours tennis split over a days rest?

No!! It shows, as I think most agree that good conditioning is vital to any sport. Look how Woods has transformed Golf - even Westwood starting paying attention to his fitness once he saw what the mulit-major winner was doing

It is fair to say (and let's not continue this argument ) that maybe there is an over-reliance, in all sport, on too much fitness v skill

I agree with HE. I blame Murray for the state of the LTA and the mens game

legendkillarV2 wrote:I agree with HE. I blame Murray for the state of the LTA and the mens game

And the North Korea situation

And Ward ending up on a drip! (actually if he had played...er, lets not go there)

Indeed banbrotam - we know the Brit players besides Murray could be better conditioned, who knows maybe had Ward been 5% fitter he might have won that 5th against Tursunov. The A&E trip should tell him to spend more time in the gym no matter what his skill level.

lydian wrote:And Ward ending up on a drip! (actually if he had played...er, lets not go there)

Indeed banbrotam - we know the Brit players besides Murray could be better conditioned, who knows maybe had Ward been 5% fitter he might have won that 5th against Tursunov. The A&E trip should tell him to spend more time in the gym no matter what his skill level.

I presume you do realize that Murray travels with a team! He has people on his payroll with nothing to do but ensure that Murray is in top condition. They will monitor him closely and there is no way it would be left to a NHS A&E dept to have anything to do with ensuring his recovery.

No wonder there are so few young British players coming through with this sort of attitude. Like Evans said in the quote from The Telegraph article the margins between winning and losing can be small. Sometimes the difference may even rest between having a support team like Murray (I wonder how much the team costs in total?) and not. British tennis appears more divisive than most. Everything is about Murray. Who would want to wade about in the mud at the bottom of British tennis?

As it was the recent winning team was put together at the last minute and included at least one member who receives no LTA funding. Another member of the team was sent home after a grueling and exceptional win without adequate post match care and was left in such a poor state he had to make his own way to an NHS hospital for treatment. Whilst he was there he would have been able to read newspaper reports of Henman's criticism and Neil Harman's reports of Murray's heroic "tweets". If anyone intends to watch GB v Croatia be careful to take your bat. With the way members of the team are treated they may just decide they have better things to do and you may just need it!

Quick question Hawkeye. You are an advocate of spending more money at grass roots level. Lydian has written a good article on this and the people who provide funding seem to have twigged to this as well.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/12/18/tennis-britain-funding-idUKL4N09S3DF20121218

So how do you feel about using some of this funding money on Dan Evans who admits himself that he doesn't put enough effort in. Was this and results not part of the reason his funding was removed.

hawkeye wrote:

lydian wrote:And Ward ending up on a drip! (actually if he had played...er, lets not go there)

Indeed banbrotam - we know the Brit players besides Murray could be better conditioned, who knows maybe had Ward been 5% fitter he might have won that 5th against Tursunov. The A&E trip should tell him to spend more time in the gym no matter what his skill level.

I presume you do realize that Murray travels with a team! He has people on his payroll with nothing to do but ensure that Murray is in top condition. They will monitor him closely and there is no way it would be left to a NHS A&E dept to have anything to do with ensuring his recovery.

No wonder there are so few young British players coming through with this sort of attitude. Like Evans said in the quote from The Telegraph article the margins between winning and losing can be small. Sometimes the difference may even rest between having a support team like Murray (I wonder how much the team costs in total?) and not. British tennis appears more divisive than most. Everything is about Murray. Who would want to wade about in the mud at the bottom of British tennis?

As it was the recent winning team was put together at the last minute and included at least one member who receives no LTA funding. Another member of the team was sent home after a grueling and exceptional win without adequate post match care and was left in such a poor state he had to make his own way to an NHS hospital for treatment. Whilst he was there he would have been able to read newspaper reports of Henman's criticism and Neil Harman's reports of Murray's heroic "tweets". If anyone intends to watch GB v Croatia be careful to take your bat. With the way members of the team are treated they may just decide they have better things to do and you may just need it!

How is that even feesable when he pays for his own team out of his own pocket??????

Gilbert was on the LTA payroll. When Murray dispensed with his services he was given the delightful task of coaching Bogdanovic!

Murray displayed positive junior results. Has Ward? Evans? Have they even made the effort to draw more support from the LTA? No. Take Golding. He doesn't have the cushy buffer that Murray had when he broke through, however Golding at least is looking to Murray as an example of how to succeed in the tennis world, had it not been for an injury setback who knows where Golding could be now.

Evans attitude is urine poor. Why should he be rewarded on the basis of a DC display when he can't be bothered to apply the effort?

But hey it's all Murray's fault.

I think DC is a bit of an outlier, that shouldnt be looked at when discussing a players tour (day-to-day) ability. In South Africa Rik de Voest, who hasnt won an ATP match this year, ranked 224 at the age of 32, beat Lukasz Kobot away from home. Twenty-year old Ruan Roelofse ranked 750, took a set off Janowicz. National pride does things to certain players. But it doesnt mean that their ATP ranking is unjustified.

Hawkeye, do you know what you're writing sometimes? Your post smacks of sensationalism and absence of facts. Murray is in top condition because he puts the hours in - he doesn't sit there and the conditioning floats into his body from his staff. Hitting a treadmill and weights isn't difficult - the will power to sustain doing so is. You're familiar with the expression 'you can lead a horse to water...' right? Murray has been self-driven to succeed, to keep on improving himself from a young age. Its this inner fire that has taken him to the top, not his raw talent per se. Its that inner fire that drove him to hit the gym when other guys were probably on Friday nights out. Its all a matter of how much they want it (success). I dare say Murray wants it a whole lot more than Ward or Evans. Just like Henman did.

Besides, Ward has a team - what are you talking about? Read this: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/253756/Wimbledon-James-Ward-is-out-to-rattle-cages
He has a coach and a fitness specialist. He's on the AEGON Elite Player list - which supports the most promising 21 British players each year. The Team Aegon programme provides the top players with full training support, either at the National Tennis Centre or, if they prefer, a high performance venue either nationally or internationally. They also receive funding for travel and top-level sport science support, including medical, physical, psychological and nutritional assistance as well as regular evaluation of their progress. Ward (and Evans still via LTA) have all the facilities they need to push on to the next level.

Evans has self admitted he's not been putting the effort in and Ward is still too skinny - he's simply not in good enough condition to last 3-4 hours of hard tennis. He needs a new fitness coach I'd suggest. If you're an aspiring tennis player in todays conditions then you know stamina and strength are just as important as technique in climbing the rankings. Murray realised that ages ago - and improved his conditioning, through a largely British set-up I might add (a lot of the big gains happened under McLagan).

You talk like these guys are out on a limb when they aren't. As mentioned, being on the AEGON Elite list grants Ward access to world class facilities. He's funded I believe to the tune of around £48,000 a year to get the specialist developmental help he needs. Given most conditioning work is simply a matter of following a rigorous programme of multi-exercise, diet and rest I don't see why Ward needs a massive entourage and £100,000s to achieve the gains he needs. I'm sure Murray wouldn't need a full set of travelling resources to sustain him in the top 75. He can simply afford it now - through his own success of course.

I'm not asking Ward or Evans to become a top 4 player...but they can push on to top 50-100 if they fully use the specialist facilities granted to them. In my opinion they simply don't want it enough or the hard hours would be put in.

It feels like you're downplaying the massive will to win/improve that Murray has inside him. Its a trait all the best players share...all the top 20 aren't massively more talented with a racquet, they just simply want it more and will do what it takes to get to the top. Where there's a literal will, there's a way. A major problem with British tennis (to add to my list on the other thread) is too much settling for 2nd best, being rewarded for comparative failure and not fully selling their soul to tennis. Its the only way you break into the top 100 - it feels like Ward and Evans just don't want it enough to me. Their good DC performances and then not much else all year round kind of show that too.

Calder106

That article just proves that having a top ranked player doesn't increase participation in tennis. Numbers have dropped since 2008. Being told to cash in on the "Murray Effect" is stupid advice. Participation can only increase by spending money in ways that will make participation easier and more accessible.

IMHO increasing participation is a great way to spend some of the riches that the LTA rakes in. And by that I mean participation for it's own sake. ie to enable the greatest number of people to have fun and not necessarily with the aim of producing a national champion. Of course this could be a by product and this would be great. But the very top players are freaks and you couldn't plan one with the best intentions.

Should the LTA fund Evans? Certainly participation in Davis Cup should be rewarded. He provided a fair bit of entertainment and should be paid appropriately. Not just for the court time but supported for the preparation required.

To criticize his effort and call his attitude "urine poor" when he was one of the best of four players that this country has who was willing to take to the court is appalling to say the least. It's not only Murray who might have wanted to rest up, put in a spot of training or avoid injury in order to put more effort into tournaments that might be more beneficial to their individual careers. The GB "boys" might have wanted to do this too. But they didn't they played. They made up the best team that GB have.

lydian. Your last post makes it sound like tennis is just a sideline to discover who is the fittest. Who's put the most work in at the gym. Or even if this is the case who's got the best secret doctor (Where is tenez?). I don't think you really believe this do you? If that becomes the case I personally will lose interest completely as watching cycling will be as interesting. Zzzzzz....

There are probably lot's of talented players who feel the same way?

And I also don't believe that stuff about "you have to want it the most"

I do think that the support that the top players have means they are often playing a very different game to lower ranked players. Like everything else the gap between the top and bottom is getting greater and movement between the two sides is becoming increasingly difficult. Also the very best might not necessarily be at the top or make it there. Despite what we're encouraged to believe.

You know what. I feel depressed now...

Now you know the feeling how Murray fans feel after reading your denigrating posts.

Wow if that really is your view on lydian's post I can only think you are Stevie Wonder if you don't think Nadal fits that mould.

Hawkeye. Please be aware that I never said that Evans attitude was 'urine poor' that was another poster. I'll expect your apology. I merely said what he had said himself about his lack of effort and how it had held him back. He was being funded and not making the most of his funding. Therefore it was removed. There have often been comments on this forum about how the LTA spend the money they have and how much is being wasted. Tennis like most things in life nowadays is results based. So if someone is not getting results and admits it is down to lack of effort do you keep paying them infinitem in the hope that sometime it will twig.

I've nothing against Dan Evans and would expect that he got paid for his excellent weekends work but it is up to him to maximise the talent he has. Again he says himself that he thinks he could be top100 so now he needs to show that.

hawkeye loves murray, they are going to get married.

Kim, is that you?

lydian wrote:Hawkeye, do you know what you're writing sometimes? Your post smacks of sensationalism and absence of facts. Murray is in top condition because he puts the hours in - he doesn't sit there and the conditioning floats into his body from his staff. Hitting a treadmill and weights isn't difficult - the will power to sustain doing so is. You're familiar with the expression 'you can lead a horse to water...' right? Murray has been self-driven to succeed, to keep on improving himself from a young age. Its this inner fire that has taken him to the top, not his raw talent per se. Its that inner fire that drove him to hit the gym when other guys were probably on Friday nights out. Its all a matter of how much they want it (success). I dare say Murray wants it a whole lot more than Ward or Evans. Just like Henman did.

Besides, Ward has a team - what are you talking about? Read this: http://www.express.co.uk/sport/tennis/253756/Wimbledon-James-Ward-is-out-to-rattle-cages
He has a coach and a fitness specialist. He's on the AEGON Elite Player list - which supports the most promising 21 British players each year. The Team Aegon programme provides the top players with full training support, either at the National Tennis Centre or, if they prefer, a high performance venue either nationally or internationally. They also receive funding for travel and top-level sport science support, including medical, physical, psychological and nutritional assistance as well as regular evaluation of their progress. Ward (and Evans still via LTA) have all the facilities they need to push on to the next level.

Evans has self admitted he's not been putting the effort in and Ward is still too skinny - he's simply not in good enough condition to last 3-4 hours of hard tennis. He needs a new fitness coach I'd suggest. If you're an aspiring tennis player in todays conditions then you know stamina and strength are just as important as technique in climbing the rankings. Murray realised that ages ago - and improved his conditioning, through a largely British set-up I might add (a lot of the big gains happened under McLagan).

You talk like these guys are out on a limb when they aren't. As mentioned, being on the AEGON Elite list grants Ward access to world class facilities. He's funded I believe to the tune of around £48,000 a year to get the specialist developmental help he needs. Given most conditioning work is simply a matter of following a rigorous programme of multi-exercise, diet and rest I don't see why Ward needs a massive entourage and £100,000s to achieve the gains he needs. I'm sure Murray wouldn't need a full set of travelling resources to sustain him in the top 75. He can simply afford it now - through his own success of course.

I'm not asking Ward or Evans to become a top 4 player...but they can push on to top 50-100 if they fully use the specialist facilities granted to them. In my opinion they simply don't want it enough or the hard hours would be put in.

It feels like you're downplaying the massive will to win/improve that Murray has inside him. Its a trait all the best players share...all the top 20 aren't massively more talented with a racquet, they just simply want it more and will do what it takes to get to the top. Where there's a literal will, there's a way. A major problem with British tennis (to add to my list on the other thread) is too much settling for 2nd best, being rewarded for comparative failure and not fully selling their soul to tennis. Its the only way you break into the top 100 - it feels like Ward and Evans just don't want it enough to me. Their good DC performances and then not much else all year round kind of show that too.

HE, you're doing exactly the same thing Tenez used to do - make "talent" and stamina mutually exclusive bedfellows. Divide and conquer. Modern tennis requires huge levels of racquet skills and stamina to succeed. Racquet talent alone is not enough to make it into the top 100 anymore. Every top player is working out like a Trojan no matter their base talent level. Its not about having a large team - Federer has never needed one - its about having the talent to know what its going to take to win. I suspect Murray doesn't really need one either, he just prefers it and can afford it. However, he was beating Roddick at age 18 - the talent shone through. He just needed to toughen up. Same with Federer. Same with many guys. Are you telling me Ward cant be fitter, or Evans more focused without a large team around them? The desire to sustainably improve has to come from within.

What do you think is going to propel Ward and Evans up to top 100? A bigger team? To do what? They aren't going to improve racquet skills at their ages. Ward is maybe as high as he can go, a bit more fitness might push him to 150 or so but I don't really see him as a top 100 player. Evans could be but lacks fundamental focus to improve. Perhaps he's a case of too much natural talent obscuring the need to work on the mind and body. The very best players don't just rely on raw talent, they hone everything they have to support it. They want to do so - they're self-driven to improve, you know that with Nadal. The lower ranked guys usually aren't as mentally strong - they often dont like the grind of travelling, cant sustain the need to improve, are unable to mentally overcome setbacks and cannot cope with the solitude of tennis life away from friends and family. Don't forget Murray was bundled off to Spain at 14 and he not only coped but flourished. These top guys find the way to succeed in the situations they find themselves in. As in all walks of life you simply get those who are able to forge ahead more than others. What the LTA seems unable to do is identify and nurture mental strength - too much focus is put on innate skills because the Talent ID system in the UK identifies racquet skills and physical attributes. If we could identify those juniors who have the highest talent/drive in mind and body then we may finally end up backing the right horses. I guess the counter is that the LTA knock the drive out of people - I don't buy that, good support is given, I just think we're backing the wrong horses too soon through a one dimensional ID system.

Absolutely spot on lydian.

In this day and age to get to the top in tennis you need both talent and stamina. One without the other and no dice....you are destined to languish amongst the also rans or worse. Superb movement is also key as well in my opinion.

Interesting arguments. Lydian - identifying innate talent has to be the correct approach initially. Look at the success of GB in rowing, where they basically identified candidates by body shape. However, you then have to weed out those whose mental approach isn't right. That seems to be what the LTA are doing much better now than in the past. Getting funding is measured on achievements in a way it wasn't a few years back. That can only be good moving forwards.

I do actually agree with HE in relation to Davis Cup performance. Players get bonuses for doing well in individual tournaments and, if they don't currently, it would make sense to give bonuses for a strong DC showing. However, Dan has to make the move himself now to succeed. If he does so then the LTA will reward him and assist him. Seems a good approach to me.

Personally, I think the top 4 have needed to get so fit to deal with each other. They probably don't need to be at the levels they are to manage the rest of the tour. Both Murray and Djokovic were physically frail teenagers but still made the top 10 before turning 20.

I think Ward is being a little unfairly criticised here though. He had a few injury problems last year and is steadily improving his fitness. Least we forget, he did actually win the second 5 setter he played and actually looked quite strong at the end. I'm sure his conditioning could be better but he is hardly in poor shape and does seem to have a good attitude.

I dont think that is true BS. Murray bulked up in 07 (gilbert and michael johnson), his days of retirement i think ended in 06, he got stronger physically before djoko did (continued retirements up until 09 i think) and yet djoko at the end of 07 was ranked 3 and murray was ranked outside the top 10.
This for me is why djoko is more talented than murray.

Pretty odd comments LS. Yes, Murray had started to improve his fitness in 2007 but he was still very thin and his fitness was still questionable. He lost to Nadal at the Australian largely on fitness and then was clearly struggling physically when he lost to Novak in back to back Masters semis in the spring.

He then picked up the wrist injury in Hamburg and missed a fair chunk of the season - even when he did return he only started to recover confidence in the wrist post US Open and was still only one match away from making the Masters Cup. Obviously, during that period Novak accelerated away in the rankings.

And "days of retirement"? I think he's retired from one ATP tour match in his career - the wrist injury against Volandri mentioned above.

Im not sure talent-identification work an awful lot in tennis, nor do I think it ever has, at least to the ratio of other sports. I think it has to do with the fact that professionals need to learn the nitty-gritty technical stuff at a gloriously young age, before they physically mature, this can lead to variances in what should have happened and what did happen. Ex. Theres a girl in my local club, she was 5'9 at twelve years, and just over-powered everyone. Fast forward four years, she hasnt actually grown an inch, and now the players who physically caught up to her have the added advantage of having had to add to their skill set to compete with her when they were younger. Tennis is a game so ruled by circumstances that Talent-identification is really hit-and-miss. Nadal for example. Would he be an 11-time slam winner if his uncle didnt presume him to be left-handed? Would Sampras have won 14 slams if his coach didnt change his backhand from a double to a single? 14 is awfully late for a tennis player to change something thar vital. I am currently reading an early John McEnroe biography, in it I caught a very interesting passage which said one of Johns biggest advantages is that he had a father who wasnt paticularly skilled at tennis, and thus could learn the game without any resentment, or expectations for the great game.

I think whats more important is creating a culture of playing the game. It creates a scenario whereby a country has a few world-class players sprouting up in one generation. Look at France, theres what- 18 months between Monfils, Gasquet, Tsonga, and Simon, yet they all have been in the top 10.

Born Slippy wrote:Pretty odd comments LS. Yes, Murray had started to improve his fitness in 2007 but he was still very thin and his fitness was still questionable. He lost to Nadal at the Australian largely on fitness and then was clearly struggling physically when he lost to Novak in back to back Masters semis in the spring.

He then picked up the wrist injury in Hamburg and missed a fair chunk of the season - even when he did return he only started to recover confidence in the wrist post US Open and was still only one match away from making the Masters Cup. Obviously, during that period Novak accelerated away in the rankings.

And "days of retirement"? I think he's retired from one ATP tour match in his career - the wrist injury against Volandri mentioned above.

Yes, he really started to improve his fitness in December training in 2007 so it was 2008 onwards that it showed.

Pretty impressive retirement record there

kingraf wrote: I am currently reading an early John McEnroe biography, in it I caught a very interesting passage which said one of Johns biggest advantages is that he had a father who wasnt paticularly skilled at tennis, and thus could learn the game without any resentment, or expectations for the great game.

Mike Agassi was the exact opposite despite being a boxer. And Agassi (I hate Tennis phase) eventually came to love the sport as well.

kingraf wrote:I think whats more important is creating a culture of playing the game. It creates a scenario whereby a country has a few world-class players sprouting up in one generation. Look at France, theres what- 18 months between Monfils, Gasquet, Tsonga, and Simon, yet they all have been in the top 10.

As has Spain... Lopez, Ferrer, Nadal, Almagro, Granollers (yes even the farmer). Serbia is similar on both Mens and Womens side. Us, Australia in their DC heydays. Lots of examples.

lydian wrote:HE, you're doing exactly the same thing Tenez used to do - make "talent" and stamina mutually exclusive bedfellows.

There are many echoes of such on another forum, as LK and LS are witness to. These two qualities complement each other and always have and always will.

Born Slippy wrote:Pretty odd comments LS. Yes, Murray had started to improve his fitness in 2007 but he was still very thin and his fitness was still questionable. He lost to Nadal at the Australian largely on fitness and then was clearly struggling physically when he lost to Novak in back to back Masters semis in the spring.

He then picked up the wrist injury in Hamburg and missed a fair chunk of the season - even when he did return he only started to recover confidence in the wrist post US Open and was still only one match away from making the Masters Cup. Obviously, during that period Novak accelerated away in the rankings.

And "days of retirement"? I think he's retired from one ATP tour match in his career - the wrist injury against Volandri mentioned above.

Odd comments because you dont agree with me? Can i say your comments are odd as I dont agree with them?
What evidence is there that he was struggling physically in 07 miami? I think he had a long match with haas in IW (apparently was injured but no mention of a fitness issue so maybe he was tired there) but miami he just got thrashed, no fitness issue.
Murray had worked over the 06 winter with johnson and gilbert with johnson saying his fitness issues were over (i.e. no cramping, vomiting etc) http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42439000/jpg/_42439091_murray_train203.jpg winter 2006/7 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/6251535.stm

In the bigger tournaments murray didn't do very well late 07. How do you know he would have done well on clay? And he had points to defend at wimby.

I still think djoko is more talented.

No, I think its odd to say someone stopped retiring from matches when they had no history of doing so. I also think its odd that you said he finished outside the top 10, without acknowledging that the likelihood is that without injury he would have probably been well inside it. Whether he had points to defend at Wimbledon is obviously irrelevant to his year end ranking. It does however give me the opportunity to point out that the reason he had significant points to defend is because he had demolished twice finalist Roddick there the year before.

In relation to the 2007 Miami match I can remember suggestions that he was carrying an injury but I can't recall what it was and his movement certainly seemed impaired during the match. Perhaps he wasn't injured but he certainly didn't give the impression of someone physically strong enough to go through the rigours of a masters event, let alone a slam.

Obviously, you are completely entitled to regard Djokovic as more talented but I'd suggest there are better arguments to make on that point than their relative positions at the end of 2007.

Also worth adding in to the melting point is the mental side of the game (speaking of Djokovic V Murray here). Novak cracked the mental side early doors when he won the Australian Open in 2008 beating Tsonga. That is a big mental threshold for anyone to cross - their first slam win. Murray on the other hand took several mental blows in losing slam finals against Federer (three times) and Djokovic (once) before finally cracking it and crossing that threshold. Physically and talent-wise it really is too close to call in my opinion.

An interesting topic of debate as to who is the most talented (as always) between the two. Looking at results:
If you look at slams its Djokovic (6-1)
If you look at Masters won its Djokovic (13-9)
If you look at titles won then its Djokovic (36-26)
If you look at all round success its Djokovic (hard, grass, clay titles)
If you look at rankings its Djokovic (#1)
If you look at weeks in top 4 its Djokovic (296-217 wks)
If you look at H2H its Djokovic (11-7)
If you look at career W:L its Djokovic (80 vs 76%)
If you look at career HC W:L its Djokovic (81.5 vs 78.3%)
If you look at W:L at all slams, Djokovic is higher than Murray in all inc. grass

Murray has won Olympic Gold though. Its hard to make a case for Murray being more talented to be honest given they're just about the same age.

Yes damning stats lydian. However, put them together in slam finals and big match ups of late and it is anybody's guess who will win. Those stats as I say clearly point to Djokovic as being most talented or is it the mental side that gives them those edges? I mean as a Murray fan I have seen Murray lose many matches he should have and could have won from winning or competitive positions due to lacking that final 5 to 10% winning mentality. That will and has had a knock on effect to help create those damning stats in my opinion. You may well be right but right now as both stand it is really too close to call for me (apart from on clay).

Looking at their ranking milestones ascent it actually quite interesting.

Top 100:
Djokovic July 4, 2005 - 18y 1m 12d
Murray October 3, 2005 - 18y 4m 18d

Top 50:
Djokovic June 12, 2006 - 19y 0m 21d
Murray February 20, 2006 - 18y 9m 5d

Top 25:
Djokovic July 31, 2006 - 19y 2m 9d
Murray August 14, 2006 - 19y 2m 30d

Top 10:
Djokovic March 19, 2007 - 19y 9m 25d
Murray April 16, 2007 - 19y 11m 1d

Top 5
Djokovic April 30, 2007 - 19y 11m 8d
Murray September 8, 2008 - 21y 3m 24d

Top 3
Djokovic July 9, 2007 - 20y 2m 25d
Murray May 11, 2009 - 21y 11m 361d

Top 2:
Djokovic Feb 1, 2010 - 22y 9m
Murray August 17, 2009 - 22y 3m 2d

Top 1:
Djokovic July 4, 2011 24y 1m 12d


Their ascent was remarkably similar into the top 10. Djokovic then broke top 3 much sooner (21 months earlier than Murray), infact breaking top 3 over a year before Murray broke top 5, and well before his Australian 2008 win.

I think this demonstrates at the very highest reaches of the game Djokovic did start to pull away sooner - and importantly was mentally stronger sooner.
Ok, Murray is now doing better than before relatively speaking but it remains to be seen where they go from here.

Absolutely I agree lydian. Although people may be bored with the same old top four etc and same old contenders but the demographics are still shifting. In the past year and a half or so Murray has made great strides, Djokovic has cemented himself as world No.1 and the man to beat whilst Nadal bids to re-establish himself as a consistent slam winner and top dog and Federer bids to remain competitive at slams by better managing his schedule. Very interesting times ahead.

CC, mental edge is part of their overall talent IMO. Infact, its a massive part and has been part of the discussion re: Evans et al on this thread. You say its too close to call but Djokovic has won their last 3 matches, all on Andy's (and Novak's) favourite surface HC. But I agree the gap has narrowed. The other dynamic of interest is how well they've both done vs. Nadal and Federer.

If you look there:
Djokovic is 27-35 (43.5% win rate)
Murray is 16-22 (42.1% win rate)

That's interestingly close - although we know Murray's record vs Nadal isn't great. Despite the overall W:L vs Nadal/Federer being very close and these 4 guys have reached the overwhelming majority of slams and Masters finals since 2004/5, Murray's and Djokovic's career have met with very different success metrics so far. So far...sands are shifting and the top 4 dynamic has changed. As you say interesting times ahead, a lot rests on how well Nadal continues to return.

Really? The same four guys in a slightly rearranged order, with the top two match up being the most boring of all the permutations.

I can think of more interesting scenarios.

hawkeye wrote:And I also don't believe that stuff about "you have to want it the most

An attitude that has worked for all the all time greats of any sport and hasn't been used by virtually every 'nearly man' going, is nonsense in the world that hawkeye inhibits

What's that phrase, that has "digging", "hole" and "stop" in it??

lol BB...well if you're getting into qualitative, not quantative, discussions then that's different! I use the word "interesting" from a stats point of view. We know Federer is likely now going to decline more seriously, we don't know where Nadal is at or whether he can sustain a return. So these records to date are now locked into a former era almost - kind of pre- and post-Federer. From 2013 onwards we move into a different dynamic it feels.

What I'm getting at above is that despite similar metrics for Djo/Murray getting into the top 10, having similar W:L's vs Nadal and Federer its been Djokovic carrying off the major silverware between the two. He's been the stronger player when it counts. Murray's fans will point to this being the Lendl era and he being mentally stronger.

I'm not so convinced that Murray has suddenly leapt up a huge distance. Barely beating Ferrer at Miami is very different from taking Nadal or Djokovic on again in a slam. Infact, Murray has actually only faced 4 top 10 players so far this year. He's won 2, loss 2 (and MP down vs Ferrer). I'm not convinced he's an amazingly different player yet.

LuvSports! wrote:I dont think that is true BS. Murray bulked up in 07 (gilbert and michael johnson), his days of retirement i think ended in 06, he got stronger physically before djoko did (continued retirements up until 09 i think) and yet djoko at the end of 07 was ranked 3 and murray was ranked outside the top 10.
This for me is why djoko is more talented than murray.

Murray's true benefit from the fitness started at Wimbledon 08' - previous to that he had still been lacking, partially due to his quite serious wrist injury which meant (in affect) he missed 6 months of crucial development (wasn't out for 6 months, but the lost points and further advancement of Nole meant he 'lost' this time)

For me Andy is the most talented one, simply because he has a better natural touch - but this illustrates Lydian's point, mental and physical attitudes are just as important

But talent in tennis is so freakin subjective though. I mean BB just stated that Murray is a more talented player because of his touch (Nothing wrong with that in fairness), yet people could point to Djokovic's superior ball-striking as evidence that he is in fact the more talented player.

lydian wrote:CC, mental edge is part of their overall talent IMO. Infact, its a massive part and has been part of the discussion re: Evans et al on this thread. You say its too close to call but Djokovic has won their last 3 matches, all on Andy's (and Novak's) favourite surface HC. But I agree the gap has narrowed. The other dynamic of interest is how well they've both done vs. Nadal and Federer.

If you look there:
Djokovic is 27-35 (43.5% win rate)
Murray is 16-22 (42.1% win rate)

That's interestingly close - although we know Murray's record vs Nadal isn't great. Despite the overall W:L vs Nadal/Federer being very close and these 4 guys have reached the overwhelming majority of slams and Masters finals since 2004/5, Murray's and Djokovic's career have met with very different success metrics so far. So far...sands are shifting and the top 4 dynamic has changed. As you say interesting times ahead, a lot rests on how well Nadal continues to return.

I dont quite agree on the mental edge being a talent lydian.
Personally I feel that the fitter someone gets the stronger mentally they can get (obvs not the case for everyone).
For example djoko was deemed as not the strongest mentally before '11. However after getting super fit it seemed he became mentally stronger so much so that he outlasted nadal physically and mentally as nadal seemed powerless to stop him on that losing streak. There for me rafa actually didn't show great mental strength as he couldn't find a way through novak.

In 2012 I think novak was unwilling to go toe-to-toe physically with rafa after the aus final. It seemed he didnt want to get into those very long rallies and tried to go for the winner too soon which led to more errors. The tables turned and novak who could not find a way through, threw in df's in a number of matches at key points (mp's).
So as novak was now mentally stronger it seemed from 09/10 to '11, was he now more talented as he was mentally stronger? Novak since '11 somehow plays fearless tennis at times when he is match points down, i did not see that before '11.

Also i think ferrer has gotten fitter in the last couple of years and he has got mentally stronger against the rest but not the big 4 as his fitness just does not work against them (closest to toppling murray).
If you can rely on your superior fitness I think that is a big part of mental strength as it says "you have to hit bigger and bigger and closer to the lines to beat me whereas I don't".
Just my view.

LuvSports! wrote:

lydian wrote:CC, mental edge is part of their overall talent IMO. Infact, its a massive part and has been part of the discussion re: Evans et al on this thread. You say its too close to call but Djokovic has won their last 3 matches, all on Andy's (and Novak's) favourite surface HC. But I agree the gap has narrowed. The other dynamic of interest is how well they've both done vs. Nadal and Federer.

If you look there:
Djokovic is 27-35 (43.5% win rate)
Murray is 16-22 (42.1% win rate)

That's interestingly close - although we know Murray's record vs Nadal isn't great. Despite the overall W:L vs Nadal/Federer being very close and these 4 guys have reached the overwhelming majority of slams and Masters finals since 2004/5, Murray's and Djokovic's career have met with very different success metrics so far. So far...sands are shifting and the top 4 dynamic has changed. As you say interesting times ahead, a lot rests on how well Nadal continues to return.

I dont quite agree on the mental edge being a talent lydian.
Personally I feel that the fitter someone gets the stronger mentally they can get (obvs not the case for everyone).
For example djoko was deemed as not the strongest mentally before '11. However after getting super fit it seemed he became mentally stronger so much so that he outlasted nadal physically and mentally as nadal seemed powerless to stop him on that losing streak. There for me rafa actually didn't show great mental strength as he couldn't find a way through novak.

In 2012 I think novak was unwilling to go toe-to-toe physically with rafa after the aus final. It seemed he didnt want to get into those very long rallies and tried to go for the winner too soon which led to more errors. The tables turned and novak who could not find a way through, threw in df's in a number of matches at key points (mp's).
So as novak was now mentally stronger it seemed from 09/10 to '11, was he now more talented as he was mentally stronger? Novak since '11 somehow plays fearless tennis at times when he is match points down, i did not see that before '11.

Also i think ferrer has gotten fitter in the last couple of years and he has got mentally stronger against the rest but not the big 4 as his fitness just does not work against them (closest to toppling murray).
If you can rely on your superior fitness I think that is a big part of mental strength as it says "you have to hit bigger and bigger and closer to the lines to beat me whereas I don't".
Just my view.

I agree with you LS. It seems to me that if someone knows that they can physically match their opponents (and even outlast them) then it gives them more confidence to play their own game. As you said, I think that's something Novak has done over the past few years. He's become super-fit and negated one of Nadal's big assets; his fitness (he could outlast everyone on a tennis court when injury free). He knows he can match Nadal in fitness terms for hours and hours and can play his own game to beat him.

The big difference between Andy and Novak has been consistency.

Novak has had about 3 years of incredible consistency. It's very rare that he has lost before a semi final or to someone outside the top 10.

Andy's form in that period has been all over the place, really from the sublime to the ridiculous and all points inbetween.

I don't think there is a huge difference between the pair in terms of fitness and physical ability, which make me conclude that Novak's greater success is down to greater mental strength and other temperamental reasons.

Yes, mind & body are linked, all good stuff but not relevant to what I was actually saying. I said "mental edge is part of their overall talent". That's not a comparison of the small differences between Djokovic and Nadal, but the differences that Djokovic AND Nadal have over many other players. Fundamentally, mental strength does not come from physical strength. Rather, its an innate set of attributes that some players have more of than others. The ability to not panic, the ability to stay focused (Djokovic vs Gulbis anyone?), the ability to produce your best tennis at massively pressurised points of a match. Do you think getting fitter makes you a clutch player? Guys like Djokovic were always mentally strong vs your average tour player - sure he diet, etc, in 2011 made him even stronger but it only added a small margin to the enormous capability he already had. When guys like Nadal, Djokovic and Murray were breaking through into the top 10 by 18-19 yrs old they were not particularly adept in stamina or strength, but they had minds of strong resolve even then.

But then there's another element too. You could argue Djokovic's mental strength was such that not only did he KNOW he had to increase his physical stamina, he had the dedication and sense of purpose to achieve the gains he needed. From a psychologists point of view, we're all very different - certain innate traits - or those we gather from our upbringing into adolescence - are important in tennis as mentioned. At a fundamental level you cant coach someone to be a champion, just like you cant coach someone to become a general of an army of a CEO of a multinational company. Sure you can improve them once they're in that seat, but the ability has to come from within to start with and as I've said on other threads the true talent is these guys minds from an early age. The mind of a champion drives them to practice for 10,000 hrs when others fall by the wayside, to continually seek to improve when others think they are good enough, to carry them through harder times when others give up, to make them want to get fitter and stronger when others focus on other areas. That's the kind of mental strength I'm talking about.