Relative merits of McIlroy and Murray

First topic message reminder :

[note by Davie: The following posts which descended into a discussion on the relative merits of Andy Murray and Rory McIlroy were split off another topic where they were largely irrelevant to the topic in question, but which were interesting enough to retain them in their own right]


McIlroy's far from mediocre, I agree. If he was then the BBC would hype him up more.

As for Murray - top 3 and then the rest of the tennis world. Murray is just part of the 4 and downwards in the rankings...

I do however agree that Murray has a lot to learn about the mental side. He might learn a lot by reading Doctor Bob in regard to how he responds to a bad shot. In fact I think every footballer could learn this too, bad shots and misses are part of the game, but the way in which Murray and most footballers react to bad shots seems to suggest that they expect to hit perfect shots every time.

Del Potros win was not a fluke but it was a major suprise. His head to head against the top four guys is not great and although he has won some tour events a lot of them have been fairly low level.
Im not sure he will win another major as I think injuries could plague him and he isnt that mobile anyway, I certainly would see Murray as more likely to do so. Hopefully as teh US Open next month....then both McIlroy and Murray will have one each.

Agreed, I don't even think DP has a Masters level tournament under his belt, just a solitary "slam"

Rossa, but then your stats might also mean that there are a lot more players capable of winning a major then winning a slam? Realistically, Murray only has to win two proper matches in a slam because he seems quite capable of getting to the semi's so that means he will play one of the top three in the semi's and then in the final. As soon as he can compete mentally with the other three then it will be far easier for him to win a lot of slams whereas a golfer will always have big fields with lots of players capable of winning to contend with.

SR, I'm not saying that Murray has crumbled at all?!?! I am merely stating that he is missing the mental strength to win a slam and could learn from Rory in that sense. I again reiterate, Rory is 22 years old and assuming that he is competitive for another 15 or so years is very much in the infancy of his career. Murray is already half way through so needs to step up rather quickly to reach the heights that you predict...

Digs, s_r,
I watched DelPot play a couple of matches in Montreal two or three weeks ahead of his Open win, and you could just tell his level was peaking, much the same way Djoko rose to the top two years before. Remember, DP hasn't played a Major at full fitness since then, but it's just a matter of time . . .

We shall see, cant see it myself for the reasons Ive listed, I dont think he is in Djokovic's class personally...or Murrays for that matter. Murray has a 5 - 1 record against him, 4 - 0 to Novak. But he is younger so maybe some of it is down to that.

I agree his mental game requires serious work, his body language for starters, but I don't think Mcilroy has demonstrated enough for Murray to learn from given that he's only worth three tournaments and it appears that people are getting carried away. I would say that Murray could learn far more from someone like Goran Ivanisevic who knows exactly what he feels like.
McIlroy just happened to blow the field away, I think that was more ability than mental.

Kwini, I think DP is a potential number 5 again, taking over from Soderling perhaps, but he's a long way off challenging the top 4.

kwinigolfer wrote:
But Del Potro's US Open win was no fluke, certainly not in the same breath as Curtis and/or Hamilton. I'd be more surprised if DP doesn't win another Major than if AM doesn't win.

Not sure I'd go that far kwini, DP hasn't looked quite the same since his injury and his time at the top, before he got injured, was pretty brief. But I agree it wasn't a fluke when he won either. I think it shows the difference between the two sports, it's far less common for an unexpected guy to win a Slam than a golf major. If you go back to 2000, you've probably only got Ivanesevic and Johansson as really unlikely winners, plus a couple in the French which is often a bit more open (Gaudio, Costa). Even guys like Hewitt, Roddick and Safin were top 4 or 5 in the world when they won Slams. In the same timespan golf has had Curtis, Hamilton, Beem, Micheel, Glover, Oosthuizen and Yang as complete outsiders, and Cabrera, Campbell, Weir, McDowell, Immelman and others as people from outside the elite in the rankings, who were basically comparable with a low-seeded or unseeded player winning a Slam.

sharrison01 wrote:Rossa, but then your stats might also mean that there are a lot more players capable of winning a major then winning a slam? Realistically, Murray only has to win two proper matches in a slam because he seems quite capable of getting to the semi's so that means he will play one of the top three in the semi's and then in the final. As soon as he can compete mentally with the other three then it will be far easier for him to win a lot of slams whereas a golfer will always have big fields with lots of players capable of winning to contend with.

There are two ways of looking at this i suppose...

I agree that there are more players capable of winning a major, is this because they are all soooo good that there is a level playing field or is it because there is a lack of a dominant player? I would suggests the latter as we have all seen that Tiger has dominated the majority of players with the exception of most under 25s in the mid late 2000s and before...

I think everyone can agree that in the last 5 years Federer/Nadal have been contending for the title of Greatest Ever (thats another thread) so there have been dominant players in tennis.

The other is that Tennis Slams are head to head contest, a kin to matchplay golf, if all the majors were matchplay comps, i would suggest that we would see the best players win more often and we'd have less suprise winners.

SR, he blew the field away at The Masters and mentally lost it so that does make his US Open win far more of an achievement than just winning a major. Regardless of his previous wins, I just think that he handled himself perfectly after losing The Masters and that set him up for his US Open win. Rory did not dwell on his disappointment and this proved to be to his benefit whereas Murray seems to take losing less well - after all, he has only been beaten by better players so should be more philosophical about losing. It is in this respect that I think that he can learn from Rory. You may be right in that Murray can learn more from other sportsmen but Rory would be a great example of how to deal with disappointment and learn from it.

The reason for him suddenly being high profile is that he has now given himself the opportunity to become a legend. It took Mickelson years to get that monkey off his back and Monty sadly never could - Garcia would have also been touted as a potential record breaker had he won a major early but as such it has gone the other way. Would you really be that surprised if Rory won multiple majors? Now that he has started, anything could happen...

Rossa, interesting point regarding matchplay. It would certainly not benefit someone like Westwood who can comfortably shoot 4 good rounds but would be beaten by someone that has a 62 in their locker. Tiger may have also had a very different career because his majors generally went along the format of a solid but unspectacular first round, two really good rounds and then another solid but unspectacular fourth round where everyone else has already been beaten by the sight of him at the top.

Harrison, I would agree with you if McIlroy wins a hatful of tournaments in the next year then he'd be a good example of how to recover from defeat, but all he has done is win one major, it could be a flash in the pan like Bible Thumper Johnson for all we know.
If he fulfils his promise and hype then Murray should get on the phone, until then he needn't bother as most people who have won solitary majors are often unremarkable golfers who just had a good week.

I agree and I think that this thread is drawing to a close. Lets hope that Rory does win a hatful of majors and whoever Murray gets his inspiration from can find the mental game to break his slams duck. I'm sure that once he does he can then compete with the top three on a regular basis so until then I will see it as a top three and everyone else but join you in hoping he will be as good as them.

I think if he was english he wouldnt get the slagging he gets. The problem is beause the english dominate the media in britain so they they take credit when a brit wins if hes not from england eg mcilroy and practicaly dis-assosiate themselves from ones that havent won a major tournament. Tim Henman got an easy time from the media when he wasnt winning despite the fact murray has already proved hes much better than tim henman was. The english come up with phrases like british and irish golf is doing great when harrington was winning majors. Its currently uk golf because mcilroy and gmac are winning. If donald or westwood wins it will be back to just english golf.

If Henman got an easier time .... and I don't think he did.....it's because anyone can see Murray is a far better player and thus the hope and expectation is higher. But I dont see that he gets a lot of stick , most articles about Murray always mention what a good guy he is. If anything the negativity I read about him is on neassageboards or in pub conversations, not on the press.

I think if he was english he wouldnt get the slagging he gets.

Wrong. Murray gets his slagging because of his negative attitude on the court; swearing,punching his racquet,fist pumping on opponent's bad hits, don't be so deluded that it's to do with him being a Scottish.

skiddy wrote:I think if he was english he wouldnt get the slagging he gets. The problem is beause the english dominate the media in britain so they they take credit when a brit wins if hes not from england eg mcilroy and practicaly dis-assosiate themselves from ones that havent won a major tournament. Tim Henman got an easy time from the media when he wasnt winning despite the fact murray has already proved hes much better than tim henman was. The english come up with phrases like british and irish golf is doing great when harrington was winning majors. Its currently uk golf because mcilroy and gmac are winning. If donald or westwood wins it will be back to just english golf.

This is a ridiculous argument. I get by far the easiest time from the media of Henman, Murray and Hibbz despite the fact they have proved they are both better tennis players than I. Also how could anyone other than coaches/parents take "credit" when someone from the same country as them wins a sporting event?

I would also suggest that Donald is winning, McIlroy did win the last major so he is winning still but Graeme McDowell (I refuse to call him G'Mac, it's his pet name for himself) won plenty last year but diddly squat this and as a personal opinion I'd be unpleasantly suprised if he were to win another major.

Rossa wrote:The last 20 golf Majors have been won by 14 different players with Tiger winning 4, Harrington 3 and Cabrera 2, who are ranked 19th, 57th and 75 respectively.... so there is no dominant players and the majors are spread around quite a lot...

The last 20 Tennis Grand Slams have been won by just 4 players, Nadal 8, Federer 8, Djokovic 3 and Del Potro 1, with Nadal ranked 2, Federer 3 and Djokovic 1.

My point is i think its a lot easier for a golfer to win a Major than a tennis player to win a Slam...at least in recent years.......

Eh?? That doesn't follow at all. You could argue the depth in the men's game at golf is far greater than in tennis. Just because the golfing Majors have been shared around a lot more doesn't mean it's easier to win one.

Not sure about this thread; a bit like comparing apples and oranges...

skiddy wrote:I think if he was english he wouldnt get the slagging he gets. The problem is beause the english dominate the media in britain so they they take credit when a brit wins if hes not from england eg mcilroy and practicaly dis-assosiate themselves from ones that havent won a major tournament. Tim Henman got an easy time from the media when he wasnt winning despite the fact murray has already proved hes much better than tim henman was. The english come up with phrases like british and irish golf is doing great when harrington was winning majors. Its currently uk golf because mcilroy and gmac are winning. If donald or westwood wins it will be back to just english golf.

We really do need a muppet emoticon round here.........

skiddy wrote:I think if he was english he wouldnt get the slagging he gets. The problem is beause the english dominate the media in britain so they they take credit when a brit wins if hes not from england eg mcilroy and practicaly dis-assosiate themselves from ones that havent won a major tournament. Tim Henman got an easy time from the media when he wasnt winning despite the fact murray has already proved hes much better than tim henman was. The english come up with phrases like british and irish golf is doing great when harrington was winning majors. Its currently uk golf because mcilroy and gmac are winning. If donald or westwood wins it will be back to just english golf.

not the first time I've seen this argument, but it's still rubbish. Just look at the meedja coverage of the English football team.

skiddy wrote:I think if he was english he wouldnt get the slagging he gets. The problem is beause the english dominate the media in britain so they they take credit when a brit wins if hes not from england eg mcilroy and practicaly dis-assosiate themselves from ones that havent won a major tournament. Tim Henman got an easy time from the media when he wasnt winning despite the fact murray has already proved hes much better than tim henman was. The english come up with phrases like british and irish golf is doing great when harrington was winning majors. Its currently uk golf because mcilroy and gmac are winning. If donald or westwood wins it will be back to just english golf.

What an absolute chimp of a comment. I'm guessing from your xenophobia that you live in some remote place where you still fear an English invasion. Murray is largely overly praised by the English press in my opinion and I think that if you speak with the average Englishman then they will probably relate more to Murray than Henman who was born with a big fat silver spoon in his mouth and is mocked for being everything that is wrong with the British class system. Irish golf was doing great when Harrington won because he is Irish and proud to be so, just like German golf is doing well with Kaymer. Rory and Gmac both class themselves as British and we shall laud them as such.

As a reluctant Scotsman I also see this statement as completely ridiculous. The Scots are just as pious and small minded by claiming Murray to be Scottish, he may well be but in Tennis all competitors from these isles represent Britain, not some small, insular country that isn't even recognised by the United Nations.

Are the Scots so insecure that they have to grasp at every straw to reinforce their Scottishness. In a sporting sense in terms of Tennis at least we are British and those who compete, do so under the British flag.

super_realist wrote: in fact he's probably the top British sportsman in mainstream sport (not sure golf can be counted as a proper sport in the strictest sense).

Not this again. What exactly is 'the strictest sense' of what a sport is? How about this definition from oxforddictionaries.com

'noun /spôrt/ 
sports, plural

An activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment'

Golf fits all those definitions - there is physical exertion, great skill and competition. Just because those taking part don't finish exhausted, hot and sweaty (unless you play golf in the summer in good weather!) doesn't make it any less of a sport. The amount of training which pro golfers do is tremendous, both hitting balls and more physical work such as gym workouts, yoga for flexibility etc. Mentally, golf is one of the toughest sports out there - it still amazes me how some players can produce shots of amazing skill going down the stretch in a major, or indeed any tournament.

To say golf isn't a sport shows, in my opinion, total ignorance of what sport actually is.

Aye, Shane Lowry clearly does a lot of physical work lifting pies to his cavernous mouth. In comparison to proper athletes of virtually every other sport, Golfers are by and large the worst conditioned sportsmen around.

I think that your constantly used Shane Lowry example is a bit more of an anomaly these days. F1 is also a sport that might eat into your argument as those guys make a lot of other athletes akin to a Lowry pie eater, especially when you bear in mind that they are only driving around a track...

Yes, Harrison, I know they are "only" driving but it is the forces that act upon them that necessitate extreme fitness, incidently I rate footballers as very poor athletes in comparison to many other sports.