Murray the heavy favourite now - Part II

by invisiblecoolers Wed 26 Jun 2013, 8:23 pm

First topic message reminder :

No idea what happened to my earlier thread "Murray the heavy favourite for the title" , when I posted the orginal thread I kept Murray's grass court stats in mind which he is 7th overall and 2nd only to Federer among current players.

Now with both Nadal and Federer knocked out Murray is easily the heavy favourite, I know Djoko is still left, but all of a sudden Djoko's draw looks more tough than Murray's draw. Very Happy

No Tsonga, Nadal and Fed , who can expect this luck, the real danger mens are Del Potro and Berdych and both now breathing hard on the other side of the draw.

Murray make merry of it and get the title and the no.1 for the year, Go Muzza go. Yahoo

by JubbaIsle Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:23 pm

bogbrush wrote:Don't take this wrong Murray fans, but I feel tennis desperately needs Andy & Novak to go out soon too. Week two would be like breathing fresh air.

BB, are you saying in the same breath that having the second week without Federer is like a breath of fresh air, my how loyalties change in the space of a day.

You lot are all mad, I told you they could go out in the 1st week and no-one took me seriously. These are transitional times with a pack that is out for blood, even Murray and Djokovic aren't shoe ins for the final, haven't you learnt over the last couple of years ?

by invisiblecoolers Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:23 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
ChequeredJersey wrote:The ground is going to become a lot slower and emulate clay in the second week, who does that favour?

Is that fact or supposition? If fact then it will favour Novak no doubt.

Ferrer the great, case closed. thumbsup

by ChequeredJersey Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:23 pm

Gulbis is going to win Wimbledon Wink

by invisiblecoolers Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:24 pm

Haddie-nuff wrote:
break_in_the_fifth wrote:Murray and Djokovic are solid in a way that Fed and Nadal weren't and haven't been lately.

Excuse me Nadal wasn´t solid lately ???? what the hell was he doing before Wimbledon.

Fishing in spanish shores? Laugh

by Danny_1982 Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:24 pm

Whoever wins Wimbledon will have won it legitimately.

The trophy is no less shiny because certain players have lost.

by CaledonianCraig Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:24 pm

bogbrush wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:The way I see it is that if Federer and Nadal can lose to players ranked 100+ then so can Murray. Hopefully, he can avoid all the media hoo-hah and take one match at a time. Remember that his potential semi opponent is Janowicz who beat him at the end of last year so I am not counting my chickens. In any case the way things have panned out makes it a double-edged sword. More pressure and expectaion and an increased chance (if he makes it) of going into the final under-cooked.
No, lets not forget this only happened because Nadal is crocked and Federer near the end.

A fair point but if I were in either players camp that is what I'd be telling them. Shocks can and do happen - Brown beating Hewitt today for example after Hewitt had beaten Wawrinka and other such upsets as well.

by invisiblecoolers Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:24 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:Gulbis is going to win Wimbledon

Bog brush dream gonna come true then . Laugh

by CaledonianCraig Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:24 pm

Danny_1982 wrote:Whoever wins Wimbledon will have won it legitimately.

The trophy is no less shiny because certain players have lost.

Spot on.

by Haddie-nuff Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:26 pm

ChequeredJersey wrote:
Haddie-nuff wrote:
break_in_the_fifth wrote:Murray and Djokovic are solid in a way that Fed and Nadal weren't and haven't been lately.

Excuse me Nadal wasn´t solid lately ???? what the hell was he doing before Wimbledon.

Nadal has lost to relative unknowns before. He is pretty strange in that his record against the top players is incredible but he can lose to "lesser" players

That applies to Novak .. he lost to Dimitrov did he not.. Murray has and does lose to lesser players.
Novak is far from solid at the moment and he hasnt been this year imo
I still believe an inspired opponent can take Novak out he looks decidely shakey to me

by break_in_the_fifth Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:27 pm

Haddie-nuff wrote:
break_in_the_fifth wrote:Murray and Djokovic are solid in a way that Fed and Nadal weren't and haven't been lately.

Excuse me Nadal wasn´t solid lately ???? what the hell was he doing before Wimbledon.

Sorry about that, up to Wimbledon Nadal's been good. I meant Fed more, though Nadal I thought was more prone to an upset than those two.

by Danny_1982 Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:27 pm

The Special Juan wrote:
Danny_1982 wrote:
ryan86 wrote:15 - Almagro (SF)
20 - Youzhny (4r)
22 - Monaco (QF)
24 - Janowicz (SF)
25 - Paire (SF)

The seeds left in Murray's half.

Isn't Raonic in Murray's half?

Daveed has him. Robredo is though (Murray meets him next).

BBC have him in Murray's half... Well, that's what they say online in the Federer story.

I trust you more than the BBC though Juan. Wink

by invisiblecoolers Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:27 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:
Danny_1982 wrote:Whoever wins Wimbledon will have won it legitimately.

The trophy is no less shiny because certain players have lost.

Spot on.

Nope I just checked it they have removed the polish a bit and they will polish it back if a Polish makes to the final stage.

by Dave. Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:28 pm

Danny_1982 wrote:Whoever wins Wimbledon will have won it legitimately.

The trophy is no less shiny because certain players have lost.

by banbrotam Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:30 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:Thing is though, for all the talk about easy draws, the last days have shown us that anyone is vulnerable.

It's not just Andy - every player left in the draw will see this as tournament as a huge opportunity now.

I expect more upsets.

I actually think that the players now see Andy and Novak as pretty much unbeatable if they are playing well. They obviously don't have the same aura as Fedal - but having at least one of them take part in every slam final (apart from two) of the last the is the reason why. Plus with Murray doing better on average each year, that helps

by The Special Juan Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:32 pm

Danny_1982 wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:
Danny_1982 wrote:
ryan86 wrote:15 - Almagro (SF)
20 - Youzhny (4r)
22 - Monaco (QF)
24 - Janowicz (SF)
25 - Paire (SF)

The seeds left in Murray's half.

Isn't Raonic in Murray's half?

Daveed has him. Robredo is though (Murray meets him next).

BBC have him in Murray's half... Well, that's what they say online in the Federer story.

I trust you more than the BBC though Juan.

Thanks

I believe in Wiki!!

by Haddie-nuff Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:34 pm

I agree with HM I dont think either Andy or Novak are unbeatable at all.
Andy looks more solid than Novak but even then Andy has to keep it together mentally and thats where the problem lies the nearer he gets to the finishing line. If he can do that then hey ho.. the shiney cup will be his.. but I like HM am still waiting further upsets.

by banbrotam Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:35 pm

In fairness to Andy and Novak, they've been pretty impressive in Slams, solidly, since the start of 2011

The only SF failure is Ansy's French one of last year - even then it was a QF

When they enter, they often don't look pretty but they tough it out, thanks to the two great rivals they have keeping their standards high

I don't see either faltering and I remember saying that I saw a future of these two competing in at least half of the slam finals for a four year spell

Bad news for Andy!!

by Danny_1982 Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:36 pm

For their first slam wins Roger beat Philpousis, Rafa beat Puerta and Novak beat Tsonga. Not a slam between them. In fact, not even a slam final before or after for the runners up.

If this one is not legitimate then I guess we have to knock 1 off Roger's, Rafa's and Novak's slam totals. Laugh

by CaledonianCraig Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:38 pm

Oh please don't otherwise hawkeye will be back with her asterisked slams. Rolling Eyes

by The Special Juan Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:39 pm

Danny_1982 wrote:For their first slam wins Roger beat Philpousis, Rafa beat Puerta and Novak beat Tsonga. Not a slam between them. In fact, not even a slam final before or after for the runners up.

If this one is not legitimate then I guess we have to knock 1 off Roger's, Rafa's and Novak's slam totals.

And then Gonzalez, Baghdatis, Soderling, Ferrer................................

by break_in_the_fifth Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:39 pm

Murray has too much skill and talent for the others so if he couldn't at least do it while they were closer to their best (though he was still better than them), then it's not really legit.

by Danny_1982 Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:41 pm

I wouldn't worry Craig. With Rafa and Roger out I don't think Hawkeye will be too chatty.

Not that I'm gloating, I actually wish both of them were still in it. They add a little stardust to a slam.

by ChequeredJersey Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:42 pm

Danny_1982 wrote:For their first slam wins Roger beat Philpousis, Rafa beat Puerta and Novak beat Tsonga. Not a slam between them. In fact, not even a slam final before or after for the runners up.

If this one is not legitimate then I guess we have to knock 1 off Roger's, Rafa's and Novak's slam totals.

Well, Novak did have to go through a pre-decline Fed and Hewitt first, Roger went through Roddick who won the US Open after Wimbledon that year and Rafa beat Federer, so they all beat Major winners en route!

But I agree it shouldn't matter whom they beat along the way, as long as tehy win they are worthy Champions

by Danny_1982 Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:43 pm

Not really legit.... Laugh

by bogbrush Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:43 pm

JubbaIsle wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Don't take this wrong Murray fans, but I feel tennis desperately needs Andy & Novak to go out soon too. Week two would be like breathing fresh air.

BB, are you saying in the same breath that having the second week without Federer is like a breath of fresh air, my how loyalties change in the space of a day.

You lot are all mad, I told you they could go out in the 1st week and no-one took me seriously. These are transitional times with a pack that is out for blood, even Murray and Djokovic aren't shoe ins for the final, haven't you learnt over the last couple of years ?

No, I'm disappointed that Roger is near the end of his magnificent career. However, if he must go he must, and I would take more consolation from a new era.

by CaledonianCraig Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:44 pm

bogbrush wrote:
JubbaIsle wrote:
bogbrush wrote:Don't take this wrong Murray fans, but I feel tennis desperately needs Andy & Novak to go out soon too. Week two would be like breathing fresh air.

BB, are you saying in the same breath that having the second week without Federer is like a breath of fresh air, my how loyalties change in the space of a day.

You lot are all mad, I told you they could go out in the 1st week and no-one took me seriously. These are transitional times with a pack that is out for blood, even Murray and Djokovic aren't shoe ins for the final, haven't you learnt over the last couple of years ?
No, I'm disappointed that Roger is near the end of his magnificent career. However, if he must go he must, and I would take more consolation from a new era.

Yes BB embrace the Murrovic era. thumbsup

by bogbrush Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:46 pm

Not quite what I meant.

I don't want to annoy anyone but it is precisely that prospect that would see me checking out of the sport until something more interesting happens (as I mostly did in late 90's).

by CaledonianCraig Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:48 pm

I can only taske from that comment BB that you utterly DO NOT appreciate anything Murray and Djokovic bring to a tennis court. Would that be correct?

by bogbrush Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:51 pm

CaledonianCraig wrote:I can only taske from that comment BB that you utterly DO NOT appreciate anything Murray and Djokovic bring to a tennis court. Would that be correct?

No that would overstate it considerably, but I don't find the brand too exciting for sure.

To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.

by coolpixel Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:51 pm

same here. to some extent, i have already checked out of Wimbledon now mentally. i think it will be a Djokovic/Murray final and will watch that, but there isn't a contrast in style that interests me anymore. This Ukrainian, now he plays uniquely, but i seriously doubt he will last a bout against Murray or Djokovic

bogbrush wrote:Not quite what I meant.

I don't want to annoy anyone but it is precisely that prospect that would see me checking out of the sport until something more interesting happens (as I mostly did in late 90's).

by CaledonianCraig Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:53 pm

bogbrush wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:I can only taske from that comment BB that you utterly DO NOT appreciate anything Murray and Djokovic bring to a tennis court. Would that be correct?
No that would overstate it considerably, but I don't find the brand too exciting for sure.

To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.

That is your opinion and your entitled to it. We have all been there before at some point. My time for such thoughts were during the serve dominated period in the 1990's but I still watched it. Didn't like it but I didn't 'check out'.

by invisiblecoolers Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:54 pm

bogbrush wrote:
CaledonianCraig wrote:I can only taske from that comment BB that you utterly DO NOT appreciate anything Murray and Djokovic bring to a tennis court. Would that be correct?
No that would overstate it considerably, but I don't find the brand too exciting for sure.

To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.

I second you here, Del Potro excited me for a while, but his injury means he is boring me as well, it would be a good time off from Tennis for me I guess.

by Danny_1982 Wed 26 Jun 2013, 9:57 pm

Each to their own, but I love the Murray Djokovic match up.

The AO 2013 wasn't great, but last season they had some unbelievable matches. AO, Olympics, USO, Shanghai, WTF... All tight, all dramatic, and most of them really high quality in terms if the tennis.

As i say, each to their own, but its a tremendous rivalry I think.

by banbrotam Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:14 pm

I struggle to understand how anyone who professes to be a Tennis fan, can be underwhlemed by Murray or Djoko

Murray, in particular, on form has every shot in the book and often uses them to win the same point

Those looking for a new version of Roger, will probaly have to wait a 1000 years

by coolpixel Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:24 pm

i struggle to understand how you think people SHOULD be overwhelmed by Murray or Djokovic. i did read the 10 commandments again and it isn't in there.

by HM Murdock Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:32 pm

bogbrush wrote:To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.

Watching tennis without the trauma of being emotionally committed? That's sounds brilliant! It might make watching tennis a relaxing experience!

by bogbrush Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:48 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:
bogbrush wrote:To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.
Watching tennis without the trauma of being emotionally committed? That's sounds brilliant! It might make watching tennis a relaxing experience!

That's very interesting. Is relaxing the antithesis of sporting enjoyment though?

by bogbrush Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:51 pm

banbrotam wrote:I struggle to understand how anyone who professes to be a Tennis fan, can be underwhlemed by Murray or Djoko

Murray, in particular, on form has every shot in the book and often uses them to win the same point

Those looking for a new version of Roger, will probaly have to wait a 1000 years

I realise you don't see it that way.

Today I enjoyed the play so much I can stand Feds loss. If he'd lost to a baseliner I'd have been really hacked off.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:51 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:
bogbrush wrote:To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.
Watching tennis without the trauma of being emotionally committed? That's sounds brilliant! It might make watching tennis a relaxing experience!

You have to get the balance right - be emotionally involved without being emotionally committed. Sometimes I can be rooting for one player at the start of a match and rooting for his opponent by the end of it.

by The Special Juan Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:55 pm

HM Murdoch wrote:
bogbrush wrote:To make me interested enough to watch, and in particular to become emotionally committed, I need a different brand of tennis. Maybe that's just me but it's what it is.
Watching tennis without the trauma of being emotionally committed? That's sounds brilliant! It might make watching tennis a relaxing experience!

That's why I enjoyed the French Open much, much, much more than I normally would. I was on the Monfils bandwagon and all!!

by The Special Juan Wed 26 Jun 2013, 11:00 pm

invisiblecoolers wrote:
The Special Juan wrote:I think Stakhovsky and Darcis' performances were completely out of the blue. Darcis was superb and I'm not sure how to describe Sergiy's performance except unique. Does Robredo have the weapons to beat Murray? Not really. Youzhny or Troicki? Maybe the Colonel. Gulbis, Monaco or Verdasco? Probably yes to Gulbis and Verdasco, no to Monaco, and Gulbis and Verdasco could blow themselves out before the QF. In the other quarter, you're looking at Paire, Almagro or Janowicz. Frankly, I don't know which Paire would turn up so he's an unknown quantity. Murray would probably crush Almagro on grass again so, funnily enough, Janowicz is the most dangerous and there's no guarantee he'd get there. And after typing this I've completely forgotten what the point I'm trying to make was....

Lemme know when you remember it.

I kinda remember what I was going to say. Stakhovsky and Darcis are barely on TV and almost never play these top players so therefore they had the element of surprise in their favour. Funnily enough, the higher ranked players might be less likely to cause these upsets because the top players play them more often and know how to beat them.

by Born Slippy Wed 26 Jun 2013, 11:15 pm

Janowicz the big danger I feel. Just have an inkling this may be his time for a slam breakthrough. On grass, if he serves well, even Murray will struggle to stop him.

by socal1976 Thu 27 Jun 2013, 1:37 am

banbrotam wrote:In fairness to Andy and Novak, they've been pretty impressive in Slams, solidly, since the start of 2011

The only SF failure is Ansy's French one of last year - even then it was a QF

When they enter, they often don't look pretty but they tough it out, thanks to the two great rivals they have keeping their standards high

I don't see either faltering and I remember saying that I saw a future of these two competing in at least half of the slam finals for a four year spell

Bad news for Andy!!

I have been saying the same thing about Novak and Andy taking over and competing for #1 and most of the major honors over the course of the next couple of years. Nadal will be in the mix as well if he can maintain his health off of the clay, unfortunately that doesn't seem to be something he has been able to manage for quite some time.

I don't know if it will be bad news Andy, I think Novak is better than Andy but I think Andy will score some big slam victories in the future against Novak. Many fans of other players might not like it but these guys have paid their dues and have the ability separates them from the rest of the competition.

by invisiblecoolers Thu 27 Jun 2013, 2:21 am

Danny_1982 wrote:For their first slam wins Roger beat Philpousis, Rafa beat Puerta and Novak beat Tsonga. Not a slam between them. In fact, not even a slam final before or after for the runners up.

If this one is not legitimate then I guess we have to knock 1 off Roger's, Rafa's and Novak's slam totals.

Didn't Phillipousssi make 2 more slam finals before that Whistle

by invisiblecoolers Thu 27 Jun 2013, 2:24 am

banbrotam wrote:I struggle to understand how anyone who professes to be a Tennis fan, can be underwhlemed by Murray or Djoko

Murray, in particular, on form has every shot in the book and often uses them to win the same point

Those looking for a new version of Roger, will probaly have to wait a 1000 years

I do like Murray, the problem is he loves playing defensive tennis more than aggressive tennis even though he is capable of playing aggressive. Djoko started an aggressive player but with time completely modeled himself like Nadal.

by break_in_the_fifth Thu 27 Jun 2013, 5:13 am

They both modelled themselves like Nadal as Fed wouldn't say nice things about their game for free and probably the conditions favoured it. Maybe if the conditions become faster again or some other styles prevail they can go back to what they were.

by banbrotam Thu 27 Jun 2013, 6:43 am

ChequeredJersey wrote:The ground is going to become a lot slower and emulate clay in the second week, who does that favour?

What? Like last year Whistle

If it becomes dull cool and damp - then yes. But if it stays dry and mainly OK weather, then it will remain fast, giving us a return like last year meaning that at least we have a slightly different slam to the others!!

by banbrotam Thu 27 Jun 2013, 6:46 am

invisiblecoolers wrote:
banbrotam wrote:I struggle to understand how anyone who professes to be a Tennis fan, can be underwhlemed by Murray or Djoko

Murray, in particular, on form has every shot in the book and often uses them to win the same point

Those looking for a new version of Roger, will probaly have to wait a 1000 years

I do like Murray, the problem is he loves playing defensive tennis more than aggressive tennis even though he is capable of playing aggressive. Djoko started an aggressive player but with time completely modeled himself like Nadal.

IC. Don't you think that this is a bit of a myth now? I mean whoever you are, you must have some kind of defence. Even Del Boy has developed this. I also never understand the problem with defensive Tennis. One of my favourite things about Murray is his ability to slow things down, speed up, slow down, speed up, wow! what a winner (when on form of course!!). It takes some skill to do this

by banbrotam Thu 27 Jun 2013, 6:47 am

One of the reasons for the slipping etc is obviously that players are struggling to keep their grip as they get surprised by balls coming onto them faster

It's great news (apart from the injuries that is!!)

by slashermcguirk Thu 27 Jun 2013, 7:59 am

So much for Novak having the easier draw !!!?????

by Sponsored content