Men's Final (Preview and Match Thread) - Djokovic V Murray

[CaledonianCraig]

First topic message reminder :

Tomorrow will see the meeting of the World No.1 and World No.2 in the final. I really am in two minds about how it will pan out so I will try to look at the various ways it could go.

I will fancy Andy's chances strongly if his serve operates as well as it did against Janowicz but we know Djoko is a far superior returner. The rule of thumb between the pair is that the better server gets the result but we shall see if this is the case tomorrow.

Aggression is also key and Andy must be prepared to get his attacks in first and put Djokovic under pressure. If Andy lapses into bouts of passiveness as he can then he is asking for trouble and will hand the initiative to Novak and quite probably lose the match.

In my opinion and stats suggest as well that Andy is the better/more natural grass court player so that gives him an edge. On the other hand thus far at this Wimbledon I would say Novak has been more consistent so that works in his favour. That is why this is so tight to call in my opinion.

I am hoping that last year's pain Andy had to suffer in defeat will inspire him to do what it takes to avoid more heartbreak and push him over the winning line tomorrow. This could go either way and I just hope for the neutral that it is a classic match and no doubt the best player will win on the day. Enjoy the final.

Craig

[Born Slippy]

That's odd though. How did he recover from the 5 hour match v. Murray in Oz to outlast Nadal in 6 hours but now can't even play three sets on grass?

[CaledonianCraig]

Well it was brutal out there so surely it is no surprise if either or both were feeling the pace. Some sources saying temperatures on court were around 90 degrees.  

[CaledonianCraig]

That's odd though. How did he recover from the 5 hour match v. Murray in Oz to outlast Nadal in 6 hours but now can't even play three sets on grass?

Those matches were played in the coollness of the evening and not in blistering heat. Not that it really counts for anything as Andy had been on court longer in the tournament than Djokovic.

[ryan86]

Surely there's some sort of scale to the time passed since the exertions though Craig.

Djokovic played (significantly?) longer on the Friday, 2 days before the final, whilst I suspect Murray gathered half an hour here and 20 minutes there throughout the rest of the tournament.

And that 90 minutes on Friday would likely have more effect than 30 minutes extra against Mr Lu than Burt Reynolds 10 days ago.

[CaledonianCraig]

I don't see what you are getting at Ryan.

No doubting that Djokovic had a gruelling semi but Andy himself had a gruelling quarter-final (around four hours) and a longish semi (just under three hours) and his match being second meant he had around three hours less rest than Novak so really don't see tiredness playing a part here has each had lengthy matches.

[barrystar]

Yeah, he's saying he was dodgy from the semi, right?

The lines can cross though, you know. I saw the stat that showed Andy ran about 15-20% more than Novak! I'm fairly certain the dropshots were calculated to drain him.

Absolutely - and in the last 3 games Djoko had him haring around like a maniac, you could see it happening.  The trouble was that the dropshots were counter-productively expensive for Djoko because they left him too exposed mid court when Murray got them back. Djoko did not have enough slack in his favour on the scoreboard to make the risk pay off. The fact that he was prepared to adopt such a high risk strategy rather than just camp out on the baseline and grind out a win in his normal fashion suggests to me that he felt frazzled in either the leg or the brain department and did not have confidence in his ability to last the course either.

[ryan86]

I don't think tiredness as that much of a factor either.

Not that it really counts for anything as Andy had been on court longer in the tournament than Djokovic.

It's this I was questioning. Some of the time I imagine would have been built up in the 1st week of the tournament and what I'm saying is that playing an extra half an hour 10 days before the final would likely have a negligible impact. But I suspect we're disagreeing about something that we actually agree on.

[JubbaIsle]

Interesting service stats for Djokovic.....phenomenal returning from Murray.....





It was difficult for Djokovic to get any free points on serve throughout the match, which resulted in him having to endure the pressure of long service games. This graphic shows where Murray returned Djokovic’s serve from. Murray made a phenomenal 83% of his returns, and managed to achieve 17 break points on the Serbian’s serve, converting 7 of them. He also tore into Djokovic’s second serve, which had been the Serb's weakness in his semi-final, and stood well up the court when returning it, winning 59% of his second serve return points.

[bogbrush]

He broke him 10 times? Don't think so.

[CaledonianCraig]

I think it was seven service breaks for Andy in total.

[banbrotam]

I don't think Djokovic would have improved, it was Murray who I thought was a half set from spluttering for fuel.

Hmm but now Novak is saying he was feeling tired as well according to post-match press conference reports.

Erm, I dunno BB. Andy fools us all by often looking half dead - he seemed remarkably 'springy' he went to the players box. I honestly think he can take anyone on over five sets away from the dirt.

I think it's a good victory for Tennis, but ironically think that Roger could have won this - he'd had loved today's conditions

Him and Roger have proved, yet again that they are the two best fast conditons players

[banbrotam]

Surely there's some sort of scale to the time passed since the exertions though Craig.

Djokovic played (significantly?) longer on the Friday, 2 days before the final, whilst I suspect Murray gathered half an hour here and 20 minutes there throughout the rest of the tournament.

And that 90 minutes on Friday would likely have more effect than 30 minutes extra against Mr Lu than Burt Reynolds 10 days ago.

Ryan. I think the answers simpler and it's the reason why I was always confident, when I saw the forecast particularly when Federer went out

These were the fastest and hotest conditons that Novak would have faced in years, at both the SF / F stage of a slam. Roger and Andy have proven themselves to be the best players in very fast conditons - this is of course relevant to today's slowish hard court courts

That's why he lost to Andy in Dubai last year and The Olympics. The former is fast for obvious reasons, the latter because come August, no matter what the weather Wimbledon would be faster than a month previously - add on the fact that The Olympics was relatively dry and you see what I mean

Wimbledon was great this year, because we got back to it being a unique event, which is why we saw players like Novak losing their feet when the pressure was on. It's no coincidence that in the absence of Serena it was Bartoli a former finalist winning the event

In other words, for the first time in year, Wimby went back to been a specialist event - rather than just another 'meh' medium fast event

[bogbrush]

I agree he sandbags, big time, I just thought he was doing the harder work out there. What he put into that penultimate game was awesome.

The better player by a mile won, I was dreading fitness deciding the day if Murray really did run out.

[ChequeredJersey]

Well won Murray, I wish continued success to him from the half match I saw he was by far the better player today.

[laverfan]

I think it was seven service breaks for Andy in total.

Djokovic v Murray.

4 of 13 = 31 % Break points won 7 of 17 = 41 %

[whocares]

1st things 1st : Well done Murray for winning that game with authority.

Read one of the many post matches interviews of novak and I thought he analysed this final quite well:
- Murray defense was exceptional and he was returning about everything. That made him try some risky shots or force a bit too much a serve which wasnt as good as before (although he recognises its partly down to Andy returning skills).
- he should have been more patient at times but mainly he couldnt count on his 1st serve when he needed it more when Andy could.
- as someone pointed out above, the fact he had a tough long game vs del potro 2 days ago is no excuse for him as he's been there before.

[bogbrush]

Hey! Look what Andy says!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/23229819

I was OK at the change of ends before coming out to serve for the title, and I was just thinking: 'This is where I'm going to hit my first serve on the first point.' I know how important stats are when you win the first point on serve, so I was just concentrating on that.
It wasn't until 40-30 that I started to get nervous, and by the time Novak had break points it was panic time. I must admit that if I'd lost that game, I don't know if I'd have recovered.

I wasn't so off after all.

Well done for him coming through it though, no iota of credit being removed here, Jubba!

[CaledonianCraig]

On the other hand BB, Novak has likewise admitted to being tired. Now even if he had broken back the score would have been 5-5. Would 'a tired' Novak have had enough in the tank to turn it all around. Considering fatigue and his play yesterday I would say extremely unlikely given the stiflingly hot temperatures.

[banbrotam]

I think Novak grew wary of the faster conditions on Friday and with the heat was even more cautious

Hence, it was bad thinking due to a lack of confidence rather than tiredness

More so than ever before, him winning the first set was vital - which is why he played his best stuff in the second in an all out attempt to make sure it was no more than four. Remember, at this time he looked fresher than Andy

[Guest]

On the other hand BB, Novak has likewise admitted to being tired. Now even if he had broken back the score would have been 5-5. Would 'a tired' Novak have had enough in the tank to turn it all around. Considering fatigue and his play yesterday I would say extremely unlikely given the stiflingly hot temperatures.

CC consider the situation. Serving for a Slam and you lose your serve and championship points? Murray has never been that position and that would've killed him mentally which then for me would've swung the match around in Novak's favour even if he felt tired. He would've been able to summon the energy without a doubt breaking Andy serving for his home Slam.

[sirfredperry]

Having finally now seen the whole match, I was surprised at how poorly Djoko played. We've come to admire his rock-solid temperament and ultra fitness, but what did we get? - some very poor service stats, numerous unforced errors and some strange shot selection.
Andy will probably play a lot better than this against one of the big four and lose. His all-court covering was excellent and he served well, but I'm not sure his hitting was that good. May be he felt that Djoko was gonna make more mistakes then usual and that it was best to keep the rallies as long as possible.
Of course it will be considered a great match due to the circumstances. But it was far from that. Not sure any British fan is complaining, though.

[CaledonianCraig]

On the other hand BB, Novak has likewise admitted to being tired. Now even if he had broken back the score would have been 5-5. Would 'a tired' Novak have had enough in the tank to turn it all around. Considering fatigue and his play yesterday I would say extremely unlikely given the stiflingly hot temperatures.

CC consider the situation. Serving for a Slam and you lose your serve and championship points? Murray has never been that position and that would've killed him mentally which then for me would've swung the match around in Novak's favour even if he felt tired. He would've been able to summon the energy without a doubt breaking Andy serving for his home Slam.

I am not denying it would have been hard but he has proven he can deal with adversity. Look at the US Open - two sets up and sees the lead dwindle away. Back at 2-2 and you'd think Novak with all the momentum and psychological advantage but no - Murray powered to the win. Also heartbroken after losing the final last year he bounced back three weeks later to become Olympic Champion. Besides are people here suggesting Novak was playing to the form and belief that he could turn it around? I sincerely doubt it.

[FedsFan]

Going off the main topic, just a quick question.

Is it likely that after this win Murray's earning potention will be more than the other top guys such as Fed, Nadal and Novak? When large sponsorship deals are considered, I would imagine the whole persona to be a factor too? Reason is a colleague (who admitted to 'hate' tennis and never watches or follows it but has been reading a lot about in the media) said that now that he has won Wimbledon after 77 years he will earn £50m a year and internationally will be bigger than the others.

Can we see this happening?

[CaledonianCraig]

Having finally now seen the whole match, I was surprised at how poorly Djoko played. We've come to admire his rock-solid temperament and ultra fitness, but what did we get?  - some very poor service stats, numerous unforced errors and some strange shot selection.
    Andy will probably play a lot better than this against one of the big four and lose. His all-court covering was excellent and he served well, but I'm not sure his hitting was that good. May be he felt that Djoko was gonna make more mistakes then usual and that it was best to keep the rallies as long as possible.
  Of course it will be considered a great match due to the circumstances. But it was far from that. Not sure any British fan is complaining, though.

A very accurate assessment.  

It is much as I saw it. At the end of the day Novak was below his best by a bit and Murray has played a lot better but he got the win. At the end of the day he deserved the win but can play better to win a slam. In a way it was satisfying because I have seen the other side - Murray putting in poor performances in slam finals and losing.

[Calder106]

Was just going to write much of which CC has done above (not the Olympic bit). It's obviously one of theese 'what if's' that are fun to debate but there can never be an answer to as it didnt happen. My thought's would be that it would probably have gone to 5 setter but then like the USO it would be wide open again.
Although never sure though I actually had quite a calm feeling that when he broke back 4-2 in the final set that he wasn't going to let the match slip. The focus and determination seemed to be there and the critical points when his back was to the wall were played well.

[FedsFan]

Going off the main topic, just a quick question.

Is it likely that after this win Murray's earning potention will be more than the other top guys such as Fed, Nadal and Novak? When large sponsorship deals are considered, I would imagine the whole persona to be a factor too? Reason is a colleague (who admitted to 'hate' tennis and never watches or follows it but has been reading a lot about in the media) said that now that he has won Wimbledon after 77 years he will earn £50m a year and internationally will be bigger than the others.

Can we see this happening?

[barrystar]

Going off the main topic, just a quick question.

Is it likely that after this win Murray's earning potention will be more than the other top guys such as Fed, Nadal and Novak? When large sponsorship deals are considered, I would imagine the whole persona to be a factor too? Reason is a colleague (who admitted to 'hate' tennis and never watches or follows it but has been reading a lot about in the media) said that now that he has won Wimbledon after 77 years he will earn £50m a year and internationally will be bigger than the others.

Can we see this happening?

Not for a while. People have a vision, or an idea, of who Fed and Nadal are that they like and buy into, and that has taken quite a few years to develop. At the moment people are only just beginning to decide who Andy is - that will take time (and Andy may not be particularly interested in co-operating with attempts to create it), and only once that has set in do 'his people' have a known product to sell to the media I suggest.

[banbrotam]

Serving for a Slam and you lose your serve and championship points? Murray has never been that position and that would've killed him mentally which then for me would've swung the match around in Novak's favour even if he felt tired. He would've been able to summon the energy without a doubt breaking Andy serving for his home Slam.

I disagree. Yes, it would have been a big blow - but I firmly believe Andy would have re-grouped

We forget he broke in first, got broken back. Dusted himself off an broke again

2nd set. Went behind as he what as his meandering worse. Broke twice to win the set

3rd set. Went in front and hence only had to hold his serve five times to win a major. Didn't do it. But still broke back twice

Logically, I can't see him collapsing if it had gone wrong againt. He's tough mentally - his more consistent play would have won

I also don't think there were many energy issues for him - he always looks half knackered in the sun. If he was that bad, he made an amazing recovery once he'd one

[bogbrush]

Going off the main topic, just a quick question.

Is it likely that after this win Murray's earning potention will be more than the other top guys such as Fed, Nadal and Novak? When large sponsorship deals are considered, I would imagine the whole persona to be a factor too? Reason is a colleague (who admitted to 'hate' tennis and never watches or follows it but has been reading a lot about in the media) said that now that he has won Wimbledon after 77 years he will earn £50m a year and internationally will be bigger than the others.

Can we see this happening?

No, the number I've heard is £50m over his career. Federer earns more than that a year.

Murray isn't going to be the global figure Federer or Nadal are, it's just not his profile. Plus the others have quite a lot more on their CV's.

[banbrotam]

Having finally now seen the whole match, I was surprised at how poorly Djoko played. We've come to admire his rock-solid temperament and ultra fitness, but what did we get?  - some very poor service stats, numerous unforced errors and some strange shot selection.
    Andy will probably play a lot better than this against one of the big four and lose. His all-court covering was excellent and he served well, but I'm not sure his hitting was that good. May be he felt that Djoko was gonna make more mistakes then usual and that it was best to keep the rallies as long as possible.
  Of course it will be considered a great match due to the circumstances. But it was far from that. Not sure any British fan is complaining, though.

Fair assessment. I actually think Andy played better at times in his Fed Aus defeat and certainly last year.

But I maintain, it was simple. Up against the very best in some of the fastest conditions we get - he's second to the likes of Andy and Roger (up to last year). They both rely on their hands, i.e. if these aren't working they look terrible. Novak is all about movement and getting to the ball fast. His movement isn't quite as good on grass as hard courts and he is going to be slower getting to a faster ball (logically!!). So these produce small negative changes in his play and hence the unforced errors

I remember Dubai last year, where he sprayed the ball all over the place, against Andy. Everybody said that it was because he wasn't interested. It was easily the fastest conditions for a while as the GOAT showed Murray in the final

Ironically, I would have fancied Roger if he's played either in the final

And it's good that this year (and last) Wimbledon was a different slam to the others. Now if we can speed up the US Open, we then would have four genuine different condition slams

[banbrotam]

Murray v Djoko - Dubai 2012 is within this link, click on the graph button for the stats

They are remarkably in proportion to Sunday although there are no winner / error stats


http://www.matchstat.com/Compare/5992/1075/8950

[invisiblecoolers]

On the other hand BB, Novak has likewise admitted to being tired. Now even if he had broken back the score would have been 5-5. Would 'a tired' Novak have had enough in the tank to turn it all around. Considering fatigue and his play yesterday I would say extremely unlikely given the stiflingly hot temperatures.

I don't quite agree with Novak's tiredness, Andy knows how to play in grass and he made Novak look a kid in grass, the problem was Andy's jitter of playing for the Wimbledon title, it got worse when he was serving for it, luckily by GOD's grace he held it, had he be broken there who knows he might have ben more nervous and that would have completely spoiled his game, everybody needs a bit of luck and Andy had his share when serving for the match specifically the match point. Fortune favors the brave and it rightly favored Andy in the crucial moment.

[JubbaIsle]

Fact is Novak had quite a few chances to break in the last game and didnt, Murray had a few chances to serve out the Match and did.

Do you really think Djokovic would have won the next three sets in a row, considering his game play over three sets ? Where was Djokovic when the 3rd set was tied at 4-4 and he was serving ? got broken again is where and that was the tale of the match, he could not consolidate any breaks and lost the match on that stat alone.

Even though Murray looked whacked out in between serves, watch the replays again and you will see him running everything down as usual, not leaving shots to go through or standing still, that's not a mark of a man with no energy left.

Mentally he was taxed beyond belief, that's a given, everyone could feel the pressure on him to serve out, in interviews after he says as much, he didn't know if he could have recovered, but c'mon, that's just a bit of artistic licence in the moment and a nod in Djokovic's direction to acknowledge his resolve.

[bogbrush]

Can I just help by saying that Murray had this match sewn up throughout, that Djokovic had no chance and in fact the defeats of Federer and Nadal had no bearing because Murray would have beaten anyone.

I think I might finally have written the post that Jubba will agree with.

[LuvSports!]

I think nadal would have been the only one to be able to beat murray 2bh.

[Chydremion]

Murray was the deserved winner. Both guys rely enormously on movement for playing their gamestyle. Right now Murray is the best mover on grass, so he beats Djokovic (who regularly loses balance and slips on grass) at Wimbledon. Djokovic wins at the AO, cause he's the best mover on that surface, his sliding is perfect there. Murray won at the US Open, cause in the wind he moves better (Djokovic fails to make last adjustment steps needed when playing in the wind). Djokovic beats Murray on clay, cause Murray moves like a cow on clay, while Djokovic can slide on it (but not as good as the real claycourters). It comes all back to movement between these two, as it does in so many matches in this modern era.

[JubbaIsle]

Can I just help by saying that Murray had this match sewn up throughout, that Djokovic had no chance and in fact the defeats of Federer and Nadal had no bearing because Murray would have beaten anyone.

I think I might finally have written the post that Jubba will agree with.

You could help by admitting to yourself that the best man won and deserved the victory and say so with a "well done" post here and there as most Murray fans do when federer used to beat him.

Its called being courteous and affable to other posters on this site. It lends itself to being accepted as a respectable poster, other than one that continually mocks and derides any victory against federer or as a Murray hater, against any of his wins against other opponents.

Its indicative from almost all your posts regarding the Wimbledon 2013 final, that you abhor his victory because it goes against all you believe in to be acceptable in the tennis arena, that of exciting, inspiring contests that border on perfection in the federer style you continually ram down our throats.

Sorry, but your crocodile tears don't work on me.

Thats the last thing I'll say to you, you'll be pleased to know, as I don't regard you as fun or in a serious way a contributory poster of note.

[YvonneT]

JubbaIsle, as far as I understand bogbrush was happy for Murray to win. Perhaps from a neutral perspective, the match-up in the final didn't produce the most entertaining tennis - perhaps Djokovic was a bit flat after his long semi. I don't see any need for anyone to get annoyed by someone suggesting that. What would be silly would be to suggest that Murray only won because of that - no-one knows how the match would have gone in different circumstances.

[time please]

I don't see what BB has done except have an opinion, which I thought he was entitled to?

I worried when Murray struggled to serve out the match because you could see Djokovic the champion just lifting visibly.  It may have been ok, but on such moments matches can turn.  It is perfectly valid to think it could have gone the other way had AM been broken then, and perfectly valid to think it would have been of no consequence. As it is, BB was merely pondering that it could have changed the match, not that it would have.

I am sure a lot of posters are still happy to play BB    

[Danny_1982]

How the semis go always affect the outcome, if there is a disparity in match length.

From a Murray perspective at USO 2008 he played Rafa which was played over 2 days meaning he played the day before the final. Disadvantage for Murray.

AO10 & AO11 - no match day before for either man, no match longer than 4 sets in either semi. No advantage.

W12 both Roger and Murray had 4 set semi wins. No advantage.

USO 2012 Novak had to play the day before the final. Advantage Murray.

AO 2013 Murray played 5 setter with Roger, while Novak had breeze against Ferrer. Disadvantage Murray.

W13 Murray played 4 setter against Janiwicz. Novak 5 setter against Delpo. Advantage Murray.

Swings and roundabouts. You could * most slams based on semis and recovery time. I don't like to detract from any winners achievement, so I always say the guy with the trophy at the end deserves it.

[invisiblecoolers]

That's odd though. How did he recover from the 5 hour match v. Murray in Oz to outlast Nadal in 6 hours but now can't even play three sets on grass?

Coz he is not a good grass court player, I have been advocating this for quite a while even before start of the tournament , this is the same guy who lost.e to Marat Safin in Wim 2008 after self portraying himself as the joint fav for the cup, traditionally Marat Safin sucked in grass, the defeat followed by Haas in the next year edition.

Djoko struggles in grass, a very good grass court player should always come through if he has his day, Murray is a very good grass court player and he had his day and hence Djoko had no chance. 

[CaledonianCraig]

Perhaps as well he recovered at the Oz Open as that semi was in the cool of the evening unlike at Wimbledon played during the heat of the day.

[invisiblecoolers]

Can I just help by saying that Murray had this match sewn up throughout, that Djokovic had no chance and in fact the defeats of Federer and Nadal had no bearing because Murray would have beaten anyone.

I think I might finally have written the post that Jubba will agree with.

  

[invisiblecoolers]

I think nadal would have been the only one to be able to beat murray 2bh.

Not in the current grass and current form , I tipped Murray has the heavy favorite before the tournament fro several reasons including his form, in this tournament is form was a level above than all his competitors and rightly fully the result. 

[lydian]

That's odd though. How did he recover from the 5 hour match v. Murray in Oz to outlast Nadal in 6 hours but now can't even play three sets on grass?

Maybe he's not as 'gluten-free' as before?

Disagree that BB is not a contributor of worth. Opinions are fine, not every one here is Murray's biggest fan and some have counter opinions about where his game is right now.

[LuvSports!]

I think nadal would have been the only one to be able to beat murray 2bh.

Not in the current grass and current form , I tipped Murray has the heavy favorite before the tournament fro several reasons including his form, in this tournament is form was a level above than all his competitors and rightly fully the result. 

Nadal always starts slow at wimby but when the court cuts up, slows up and gets more bouncy nadal is so hard to stop as murray has seen on 3 occasions and was dismissed fairly routinely.
You can't just ignore it.

[LastDamnation]

How the semis go always affect the outcome, if there is a disparity in match length.

From a Murray perspective at USO 2008 he played Rafa which was played over 2 days meaning he played the day before the final. Disadvantage for Murray.

AO10 & AO11 - no match day before for either man, no match longer than 4 sets in either semi. No advantage.

W12 both Roger and Murray had 4 set semi wins. No advantage.

USO 2012 Novak had to play the day before the final. Advantage Murray.  

AO 2013 Murray played 5 setter with Roger, while Novak had breeze against Ferrer. Disadvantage Murray.

W13 Murray played 4 setter against Janiwicz. Novak 5 setter against Delpo. Advantage Murray.

Swings and roundabouts. You could * most slams based on semis and recovery time. I don't like to detract from any winners achievement, so I always say the guy with the trophy at the end deserves it.

Given the level of doping in top-level tennis the difference in recovery is much lower than you are making out.

[JuliusHMarx]

How the semis go always affect the outcome, if there is a disparity in match length.

From a Murray perspective at USO 2008 he played Rafa which was played over 2 days meaning he played the day before the final. Disadvantage for Murray.

AO10 & AO11 - no match day before for either man, no match longer than 4 sets in either semi. No advantage.

W12 both Roger and Murray had 4 set semi wins. No advantage.

USO 2012 Novak had to play the day before the final. Advantage Murray.  

AO 2013 Murray played 5 setter with Roger, while Novak had breeze against Ferrer. Disadvantage Murray.

W13 Murray played 4 setter against Janiwicz. Novak 5 setter against Delpo. Advantage Murray.

Swings and roundabouts. You could * most slams based on semis and recovery time. I don't like to detract from any winners achievement, so I always say the guy with the trophy at the end deserves it.

Given the level of doping in top-level tennis the difference in recovery is much lower than you are making out.

None of the players mentioned have been caught doping, so your argument has no evidence to back it up.

[LastDamnation]

How the semis go always affect the outcome, if there is a disparity in match length.

From a Murray perspective at USO 2008 he played Rafa which was played over 2 days meaning he played the day before the final. Disadvantage for Murray.

AO10 & AO11 - no match day before for either man, no match longer than 4 sets in either semi. No advantage.

W12 both Roger and Murray had 4 set semi wins. No advantage.

USO 2012 Novak had to play the day before the final. Advantage Murray.  

AO 2013 Murray played 5 setter with Roger, while Novak had breeze against Ferrer. Disadvantage Murray.

W13 Murray played 4 setter against Janiwicz. Novak 5 setter against Delpo. Advantage Murray.

Swings and roundabouts. You could * most slams based on semis and recovery time. I don't like to detract from any winners achievement, so I always say the guy with the trophy at the end deserves it.

Given the level of doping in top-level tennis the difference in recovery is much lower than you are making out.

None of the players mentioned have been caught doping, so your argument has no evidence to back it up.

It's pretty hard to get caught if you never get tested...

[JuliusHMarx]

Agreed. In which case you have beliefs or opinions, but no evidence. Without evidence, any claims made against any particular player are merely individual supposition.

[Sponsored content]