If Murray becomes no.1 - Part II

When I first wrote this article "If Murray Becomes No.1 in 2013" after he lost his finals to Roger Federer in 2012 [yes the article was written after his finals defeat to Roger Federer in 2012] people laughed at me, some even believed he will never ever get to win a GS let alone No.1, while some believed he might some how scrap a slam but can never make to no.1 spot of his own.

1 year passed, I wanna know how much has been changed? now in stats Murray is a Multi-time Grand slam champion a multi-surface grand slam champion, a Wimbledon champion, World No.2 an Olympic Gold medallion ,  yea its all true, to be frank I didn't see all these coming however I did visualize some of them coming, the one that I didn't expect him to win is the one that stirred a pot of belief "The Olympic Gold Medal".

A honorable few mentions and some quotes of the old thread

1]Danny a Murray fan - "Personally I don't think Murray will ever make number 1. I think he will win slams,"

2]Lags - "I must stress that I've never been a member of the anti-Murray brigade and would be very happy to see him make the sort of leap you're talking about in 2013. But I don't think it will be anything like as straightforward as your article implies

3]HE  - Ha ha! Very funny. If you are being serious you are basing your prediction on wishful thinking or maybe you've been drinking?

4]Lydian [who never believed my visions let alone this one ]  - " I just dont see Murray doing it.  But above all I dont he has the consistency or strength of mind to get there or sustain a great run across the tennis year, For me #1 is about being a dominant leader...Murray simply isnt that."

5]Bogbrush [Never believed in current generation] - "My reservation about Djokovic is that, apart from 9 glorious months, he's never looked like he 'owned' the sport. That just goes triple for Murray."

6]Born Slippy - "He has the talent to be a dominant number 1 but, through a combination of a bit of poor luck and his own failings at the very highest level, he is probably past the point now when that might have happened."

7]CAS [partially believed it might be possible] - "Its of course possible he can one day get number 1, but I agree he is much more likely to nick a slam or 2. "

8]88chris05 [made a surprise visit to tennis forum for this comment ] - "Can't see any possible angle for Murray to become world number one, to be honest, barring a long-term injury for one of either Nadal or Djokovic as well as a steep decline over the next twelve months or so from Federer."

9]Polished-Man [sorry a bit WUM comment] - "why should Murray become number 1 in first instance, when it is apparent he doesn't possess the charisma, nor the technique, nor the ability, nor the attitude, nor the personality, nor the class of a world number 1 and furthermore is ginger head?"

10]Barrystar - "I think Murray will win a slam or two, but that won't get him to No. 1 other than very fleetingly if he can't address his tendency to suffer shock defeats and, probably also improve a bit on clay."

11]Norestat - "Judging from all the Murray interviews I would say that Murray will become No 1 in 1913."

12]Bitf - "Hopefully it will be Murray and Fed at the top, much more interesting than the other 2. I don't think he needs to be able to do much on clay to be number 1, not if he wins everywhere else."

Finally How ever
13]Banbro was the only one who gave a slight of positive thinking like me
"Good article. But for me, if Andy reaches No.1 then he's a different player ."[/i]

People can re-visit the thread for the comments that time made look funny .  - https://www.606v2.com/t32973p50-if-murray-becomes-no1-in-2013

Andy has not achieved my dreams yet, but he has made tremendous move to believe that it will happen sooner or later, I wanna know what you guys think of that thread and Andy's chances of becoming no.1 in the near future.

Suprisingly people like Socal, Red , JHM and LF never made a visit to that thread .

Why I am wrote this thread is simple, I am very proud of something I see coming in advance when the majority refused to believe, now with it still remaining a prediction I wanna see how the view of general public changed with time.

I'm perfectly happy with what I wrote at the time - I thought he'd get a slam or two, he has now won two slams. #1 is feasible, but if he's going to stay there for any length of time he's got to gain more consistency and either improve on clay or 'make up' for the missing clay points with a barrage of points from somewhere else. The fact is that even though he is currently holding two slams he is well off #1 and the reason is absence of consistency away from the slams - he has been remarkably consistent at the non-clay slams.

Winning Wimbledon is even bigger than I thought. I suspect that the Wimbledon win, and its manner, will enable him to slough off a hell of a lot of baggage - we may see a very substantial figure emerging from the shadow of Fred Perry.

Rubbing in face article.

Cor I don't remember that article. Must've thought it was a WUM article j/k

I didn't comment on the original article either and glad I didn't!

Murray's got a good shot at getting to No.1 however it will depend on a couple of things: consistency in the Masters 1000 series and probably winning the WTF. These days, to become World No.1 requires winning around 3 masters 1000 tournaments and not just getting to finals. Just a quick glance at Djokovic's tournament wins and how Murray's done shows up two important tournaments he needs to surpass Djokovic in: Canadian Masters and Shanghai. Given Murray's won the latter and won the former in previous years, he certainly can make a real attempt for No.1 and even End Year No.1 too.

However, he'd need to retain the USO and probably need the WTF to get the Year End No.1 so I'm not as sure if he'll get that but he's certainly got the opportunity to get to World No.1 at some point in the next year. I don't think I've had the opportunity to, but I'd like to congratulate all the Murray fans (I count myself as one yesterday lol) on his splendid win. It was a joy to watch and I was amazed how he outgunned Djokovic in many of the long rallies, something for Nadal to consider when he plays Djokovic off clay next time! Djokovic is certainly not as invincible as he once seemed (at least to me)!

Quite happy with my comments. Multiple slam winner but unlikely to reach number 1.... Exactly my position today.

Quite interesting to see the majority of comments are quite positive (aside from the odd expected ones) even after another slam final defeat.

Hang on a minute....

1 Murray probably won't get to no 1 in 2013.
2 Most of the comments made that were quoted still look perfectly accurate...

Most of the comments still seem fairly accurate? I confess I didn't see him recovering from the Federer defeat as well as he has done. Two slam wins and a final in his next three slams is remarkable. However, he's still a long way short of number 1. Needs to defend his US Open and push on from there to have a chance to do so for YE/early 2014.

Murray says himself that in the last year he's won the Olympics, won the US open, runner up in Australia and won Winbledon yet is still miles off number 1.

This underlines 2 things for me, how remarkably consistent Djokovic is and how Murrays clay form may stop him ever reaching number 1 while such a great all rounder is playing.

Danny
Remember of course Andy missed RG and withdrew from Rome because of injury - probably cost him about 500 points, although he might have exceeded expectations at RG and made the semi-final with a favourable draw.

True though that Djokovic will always build a cushion thanks to the points he gets on clay - you can realistically see him picking up 3000 points between the 3 MS events and RG even when Rafa is fit and in form, while anything over 1000 for Murray would be a good clay season.

Andy may be marginally the better grass court player, but there isn't sufficient grass court season to really have much of an impact, while on hard and indoor there isn't much to choose between them.

Chances for Andy reaching #1 by year end or early next year? Pretty slim. Has a chance of closing the gap a bit between now and the USO. Short term isn't so good, as Andy will be dropping almost 500 points more than Novak when the Olympic points come off - if I understand the rankings correctly, neither have non-counted tournaments they can add in to offset these. After that though it looks up for Andy, as he is only defending 90 points in each of Cinci and Canada where Djoko is defending a win and a runners up (1600 points total). Still should see Novak at least 1500 points ahead at the start of the USO, where Andy can't improve his points.

Realistically, for Andy to even have a shot at #1 in the WTF needs Novak to have a surprisingly poor run on the hard courts - Even if Andy tore through the summer unbeaten I don't think the gap would close sufficiently if Djoko maintains his consistency.

I think my comment looks even more brilliant than it did when first said, especially about Djokovic.

My comment wasn't so far off the mark, potentially.

"Can't see any possible angle for Murray to become world number one, to be honest, barring a long-term injury for one of either Nadal or Djokovic as well as a steep decline over the next twelve months or so from Federer."

Well, Nadal HAS been out for a long time, missing two Slams, with an injury, and Federer has had a pretty poor twelve months since winning Wimbledon last year by his own lofty standards (I appreciate that Roger is long in the tooth, but even so, after his little 'revival' in 2012 I doubt anyone predicted such a relatively barren 2013).

Given Nadal's form since returning, Wimbledon aside, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that he'd be at least world number two right now had he not had that spell of around eight months on the sidelines and, as such, Murray's chances of nicking the number one spot have been significantly improved by the Spaniard's absence. That's not a dig at Murray, just a simple fact.

88Chris05 wrote:I appreciate that Roger is long in the tooth, but even so, after his little 'revival' in 2012 I doubt anyone predicted such a relatively barren 2013

Surprisingly a few of us did and I am one of them . 

I don't back the injury excuses of Nadal for being a reason for Murray's escalation, Murray's escalation is due to his efforts more than to do with anybody else, anyways it doesn't matter the original question is can Murray become No.1? very much a possibility which was once considered close to no chance by many 12 months back.

bogbrush wrote:I think my comment looks even more brilliant than it did when first said, especially about Djokovic.

Your comment on Djoko was spot on, I believed too that 2011 can never be repeated again by himself and he will only decline with time from that and not better it, but your comment is reverse in respect to Murray however  

luciusmann wrote:I didn't comment on the original article either and glad I didn't!  

I am upset with you now  

Actually Lucius its just funny to look how things could change rapidly, Murray for all those n number of years was considered as slam less wonder/moron up until USO by many inspite of making several finals and ranked as high as number 2, and now in space of 12 months he is already a Multi- Grandslam winner and Multi-surface winner , even Murray and his camp wouldn't have believed this if we would have said it 12 months back. 

Henman Bill wrote:2 Most of the comments made that were quoted still look perfectly accurate...

Oh come on HB, really I didn't expect this from you.  

Danny_1982 wrote:Quite happy with my comments. Multiple slam winner but unlikely to reach number 1.... Exactly my position today.

Quite interesting to see the majority of comments are quite positive (aside from the odd expected ones) even after another slam final defeat.

People always liked Murray and I am not sure that due to his origin, I liked him for the way he handled himself during serial of defeats at the very finishing stages, seriously he was tested a lot and yet he proved to be a brave warrior and never gave up and here you go he is a multi 0 grandslam winner.

The reason I felt this 12 months back is simple I saw how much Andy capable of accepting defeats and still work hard for success that kept eluding him, so this guy won't throw the success off easily coz he worked hard to earn it, so if and when he reaches no.1 he won't let it slip out of hands by taking it easy, coz he knows he earned it.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Cor I don't remember that article. Must've thought it was a WUM article :laugh:j/k

  

barrystar wrote:I'm perfectly happy with what I wrote at the time - I thought he'd get a slam or two, he has now won two slams.  #1 is feasible, but if he's going to stay there for any length of time he's got to gain more consistency and either improve on clay or 'make up' for the missing clay points with a barrage of points from somewhere else.  The fact is that even though he is currently holding two slams he is well off #1 and the reason is absence of consistency away from the slams - he has been remarkably consistent at the non-clay slams.

Winning Wimbledon is even bigger than I thought.  I suspect that the Wimbledon win, and its manner, will enable him to slough off a hell of a lot of baggage - we may see a very substantial figure emerging from the shadow of Fred Perry.

Barry don't you think his performance in clay will improve gradually if the performance on the rest of the surface is dominating? he will start to win in clay when people starts to fear his name.

Murray might play the same game of 2011/2012 FO yet could do better than those results in 2014 just coz the way his opponents will treat him if he to reach more success. 

invisiblecoolers wrote:

barrystar wrote:I'm perfectly happy with what I wrote at the time - I thought he'd get a slam or two, he has now won two slams.  #1 is feasible, but if he's going to stay there for any length of time he's got to gain more consistency and either improve on clay or 'make up' for the missing clay points with a barrage of points from somewhere else.  The fact is that even though he is currently holding two slams he is well off #1 and the reason is absence of consistency away from the slams - he has been remarkably consistent at the non-clay slams.

Winning Wimbledon is even bigger than I thought.  I suspect that the Wimbledon win, and its manner, will enable him to slough off a hell of a lot of baggage - we may see a very substantial figure emerging from the shadow of Fred Perry.

Barry don't you think his performance in clay will improve gradually if the performance on the rest of the surface is dominating? he will start to win in clay when people starts to fear his name.

Murray might play the same game of 2011/2012 FO yet could do better than those results in 2014 just coz the way his opponents will treat him if he to reach more success. 

He showed us glimpses of what he might be capable of in 2011 with some very tough performances on clay so he might - equally if movement on clay is harmful to his back he may take a long-term view about the efforts he is willing to put in on a surface that is his least good. We'll see.

When I say if X wants to achieve that he needs to improve in the Y department I'm not saying he can't, I'm just saying that he needs to. It is a fact that unless his clay results improve he's giving up a lot of points to Djoko and Nadal which makes the #1 ranking more difficult to attain, and certainly to hold.

For me the most exciting imponderable is what winning Wimbledon might do for him.

barrystar wrote:For me the most exciting imponderable is what winning Wimbledon might do for him.

I think it will only do good since he earned it the hard way:thumbsup: , I see people throw of success and doesn't capitalize it if it comes easy for them like Gulbis, but rarely people throw the success off if it came the hard way.

invisiblecoolers wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I think my comment looks even more brilliant than it did when first said, especially about Djokovic.

Your comment on Djoko was spot on, I believed too that 2011 can never be repeated again by himself and he will only decline with time from that and not better it, but your comment is reverse in respect to Murray however  

I don't see how we can say Murray rules tennis more than Djokovic.

Murray holds more slams than anyone right now, but nobody is dominating tennis. The last 3 slams have been won by 3 different players.

I can't see anyone dominating the next 18 months or so. I think the slams will be shared between the last 3 winners, and who knows... Maybe someone new.

bogbrush wrote:

invisiblecoolers wrote:

bogbrush wrote:I think my comment looks even more brilliant than it did when first said, especially about Djokovic.

Your comment on Djoko was spot on, I believed too that 2011 can never be repeated again by himself and he will only decline with time from that and not better it, but your comment is reverse in respect to Murray however  

I don't see how we can say Murray rules tennis more than Djokovic.

Murray is not ruling Tennis but his performance and stats are way better than what it was before 12 months and its very good possibility that he might rule the tennis in the near future.

Yeah, but until then I'm looking good!

bogbrush wrote:Yeah, but until then I'm looking good!

Yea you are and for that sake most of them so far, but the question is has the view changed that he could never become the no.1 from 12 months back to now  , future is unpredictable and we know nothing is guaranteed unless its secured.  

Thanks for that!!

The comment stands - it's quite simply Andy is better than he was in 2011 which was better than he was in 2009 which was better than he was in 2007

If he could go back to winning 2 or 3 Masters then that's say 2500 points. A couple of slams per year takes him to 6500
Assume he can pick up another 3000 points from the other events and he's nearly 10000

Then it's a matter of what he can get on the clay. Could he get 2000 points? Certainly and without doing much more than 2011

But it still needs another improvement - which is possible as I think his peak is 2 years away and his knowing style of Tennis will keep him at the top until 32 (barring injury)

Anyone think Murray could now go on and do a Novak 2011, sans clay? I think so.....

Dave. wrote:Anyone think Murray could now go on and do a Novak 2011, sans clay? I think so.....

Novak couldn't have done what he did in 2011 without beating Nadal in Madrid and Rome. Beating Nadal at "home" was the key.

88Chris05 wrote:My comment wasn't so far off the mark, potentially.

"Can't see any possible angle for Murray to become world number one, to be honest, barring a long-term injury for one of either Nadal or Djokovic as well as a steep decline over the next twelve months or so from Federer."

Well, Nadal HAS been out for a long time, missing two Slams, with an injury, and Federer has had a pretty poor twelve months since winning Wimbledon last year by his own lofty standards (I appreciate that Roger is long in the tooth, but even so, after his little 'revival' in 2012 I doubt anyone predicted such a relatively barren 2013).

Given Nadal's form since returning, Wimbledon aside, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that he'd be at least world number two right now had he not had that spell of around eight months on the sidelines and, as such, Murray's chances of nicking the number one spot have been significantly improved by the Spaniard's absence. That's not a dig at Murray, just a simple fact.

I'm not really bothered if Murray ever becomes world number 1 I'd rather he won a few more slams. However you quote Nadal as missing two slams but omit to mention that Murray has missed one as well. Yes it was the FO on clay which is his pooorest surface by far but in 2011 and 2012 he got to the SF and QF respectively. Rafa's last two slams off clay have both been at Wimbledon and have been Round2 and Round1 defeats respectively. I know he won on hard in IW but then he pulled out of Miami. He may get back to number 2 (or even 1) by year end but IMO he is going to have to rely very heavily on his clay results to achieve that.

Dave. wrote:Anyone think Murray could now go on and do a Novak 2011, sans clay? I think so.....

Murray will command Novak from here on and I am not saying as a Murray fan, Novak seems rattled.

Calder106 wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:My comment wasn't so far off the mark, potentially.

"Can't see any possible angle for Murray to become world number one, to be honest, barring a long-term injury for one of either Nadal or Djokovic as well as a steep decline over the next twelve months or so from Federer."

Well, Nadal HAS been out for a long time, missing two Slams, with an injury, and Federer has had a pretty poor twelve months since winning Wimbledon last year by his own lofty standards (I appreciate that Roger is long in the tooth, but even so, after his little 'revival' in 2012 I doubt anyone predicted such a relatively barren 2013).

Given Nadal's form since returning, Wimbledon aside, I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that he'd be at least world number two right now had he not had that spell of around eight months on the sidelines and, as such, Murray's chances of nicking the number one spot have been significantly improved by the Spaniard's absence. That's not a dig at Murray, just a simple fact.

I'm not really bothered if Murray ever becomes world number 1 I'd rather he won a few more slams. However you quote Nadal as missing two slams but omit to mention that Murray has missed one as well. Yes it was the FO on clay which is his pooorest surface by far but in 2011 and 2012 he got to the SF and QF respectively. Rafa's last two slams off clay have both been at Wimbledon and have been Round2 and Round1 defeats respectively. I know he won on hard in IW but then he pulled out of Miami. He may get back to number 2 (or even 1) by year end but IMO he is going to have to rely very heavily on his clay results to achieve that.  

+1

Let's see if he can defend his US Open title first up

ChequeredJersey wrote:Let's see if he can defend his US Open title first up

I only see either an inspired Roger or Del Potro stopping Murray from winning it, considering the form and match fitness of Roger I have to rule him out of contention eventhough he is the greatest player of all time, Del Potro will be a mystery card, it will tricky for the player on whose side of the draw he gonna be drawn on.

Del Potro usually gets his vengeance back, 2009, he got humiliated in AO and a very close in FO but came back strongly to win the USO against Fed , likewise Del Po if faces Djoko in USO will get his vengeance back with a hard fought win. 

Don't agree at all IC but each to their own.

LuvSports! wrote:Don't agree at all IC but each to their own.

Which one you don't agree luvsports? the article or the previous comment?  

I think Nadal and djoko can beat murray, dp maybe, agree re feds.
I can't see DP beating djoko either.
That's all .

I don't think Murray is nailed on for New York at all. I think Novak will probably be number 1 when it starts and therefore will be the rightful favourite.

Sure Murray has all the momentum right now, but after the AO a lot of people were saying "I think Novak has worked Murray out now" and now we're hearing people say the opposite. It wasn't true in January and it isn't now in my opinion.

This is a match up with no obvious weakness which plays into the others strength. It's not like Rafa's forehand vs Roger's backhand. It's 2 top players who for the foreseeable future will share wins when they play each other.

When they next meet I have no idea who will win. They have met 4 times in slam finals and its 2-2. That should show that neither has the upper hand.

And both of them can be beaten by good players who have a hot day. Wawrinka, Verdasco, Delpo, Janowicz... These guys have all been not far off knocking them out if slams. How will both of them fare on a HC against Rafa, assuming he's fully fit... No idea. It's guesswork.

Danny_1982 wrote:I don't think Murray is nailed on for New York at all. I think Novak will probably be number 1 when it starts and therefore will be the rightful favourite.

Sure Murray has all the momentum right now, but after the AO a lot of people were saying "I think Novak has worked Murray out now" and now we're hearing people say the opposite. It wasn't true in January and it isn't now in my opinion.

This is a match up with no obvious weakness which plays into the others strength. It's not like Rafa's forehand vs Roger's backhand. It's 2 top players who for the foreseeable future will share wins when they play each other.

When they next meet I have no idea who will win. They have met 4 times in slam finals and its 2-2. That should show that neither has the upper hand.

And both of them can be beaten by good players who have a hot day. Wawrinka, Verdasco, Delpo, Janowicz... These guys have all been not far off knocking them out if slams. How will both of them fare on a HC against Rafa, assuming he's fully fit... No idea. It's guesswork.

Great post Danny, I really do agree. It comes down to which of the two players are feeling the ball better on their strings that day. I think that is what is so unnerving for both guys when they play each other is that they both feel under pressure to find a way through the others defenses and return games. I didn't think back in January that murray was down in the count in this rivalry after Novak had won 3 straight matchups and I don't feel that Novak now has a murray problem because he lost this match. He always had a murray problem and vice versa for Murray, it is not easy for either man to get an edge in the baseline exchanges or to gain supremacy in the rivlarly.

Good post Danny but would make one point.

If we were talking of the Djokovic of 2011,2012 and early 2013 then I would agree. However, since the Australian Open Novak has lost a edge somewhere. Clues are there such as him losing against Dimitrov, blowing a winning position V Nadal in the French Open and not raising his game when needed against Murray the other day. He needs to address that alarming trend that has crept into his game in the last few months. If he can get back on track with strong showing in the two Masters Cups coming up with a win at one or both then I'd say he was back on track and favourite for the US Open. However, if there are more worrying losses then he'd be one of the favourites but not THE favourite.

Fair point craig he is certainly playing at a lower level than we are used to seeing from Novak over the course of the last two and half years. But these things come and go for players, Novak has been a bit tight in close matches and at close stages of matches as of late, but I have full confidence he will figure it out soon and be back on form. That is why he has such a lead in the rankings because he just keeps winning.

I am not writing Novak off in any way but at this moment in time his performances have dipped and I'd say it was a mental issue rather than technical. He needs to address that to return to form of 2011 and 2012.

LuvSports! wrote:I think Nadal and djoko can beat murray, dp maybe, agree re feds.
I can't see DP beating djoko either.
That's all .

Well thats interesting, will see who got it right end of USO  

CaledonianCraig wrote:Good post Danny but would make one point.

If we were talking of the Djokovic of 2011,2012 and early 2013 then I would agree. However, since the Australian Open Novak has lost a edge somewhere. Clues are there such as him losing against Dimitrov, blowing a winning position V Nadal in the French Open and not raising his game when needed against Murray the other day. He needs to address that alarming trend that has crept into his game in the last few months. If he can get back on track with strong showing in the two Masters Cups coming up with a win at one or both then I'd say he was back on track and favourite for the US Open. However, if there are more worrying losses then he'd be one of the favourites but not THE favourite.

+1

Craig and socal, agree with you both.

Murray has gone a few percent up and Novak a few percent down. That will probably fluctuate up to and beyond New York. Both of them will feel if they play as well as they can they'll probably win.

It will go up and down, as it has between them for the last 18 months. We didn't get a long term defining answer from Wimbledon. We got one of them being better than the other on that day. Same as Melbourne.

An even bigger unknown is Rafa. Both if them have lost big HC matches to him in the past. Both are playing at a different level since, but who's to say Rafa won't find top form and fitness over the next few months? I can barely even remember how Rafa matched up against the old Murray, let alone how he'll match up now.

My overall point I guess is that on these forums people (not you two I hasten to add) always assume that what has just happened will always be the case. Short termism, if you will. But it's never the case.

Murray has had a fantastic year and is in the ascendancy now. Before that Novak had a quite unbelievable year. Before that Rafa was top dog. Who's gonna rule the roost over the next year, if any of them? We just don't know.

Dave. wrote:Anyone think Murray could now go on and do a Novak 2011, sans clay? I think so.....

Now you are going a step ahead of me I guess  

Still can't see him ever becoming WN1 to be honest as long as Djokovic is around. Murray simply doesn't have the consistency off clay, and none on it.

Danny_1982 wrote:

My overall point I guess is that on these forums people (not you two I hasten to add) always assume that what has just happened will always be the case. Short termism, if you will. But it's never the case.

Well pointed out, that why people think Novak gonna have an amazing run in the tail part of the season and certainly they gonna be disappointed.  "Short Termism" is not a word or definition but if that exist currently it applied to people backing Novak to sweep the reminder of the season. 

Murray isnt that bad on clay and is getting better as he finds ways to play the stuff, but his back problems will have to be sorted. He has made 2 Q/F's and a Semi at the FO, so he has a clay game, but Federer did well at No1 without a commendable clay court season in any given year.