Even though Murray came up short in the semi's it has been a good year with reaching the Australian Open final and the semis of both the French plus Wimbledon so far. So at least he is now reaching deep into the second week of the Grand Slams on a regular basis like he does in the Masters Events. He does need to get a full time coach onto his team to work on the parts of his games that he has problems with like his serve for one. He is knocking at the door to his first Grand Slam he just has to perform at his best all the way through the tournaments to stand the best chance to win one.
Wimbledon 2011
- Thread starter wr8_utd
- Start date
I think he has such a hectic summer that he hasn't always got a lot left for the US Hardcourt season.
I've always thought that he'll eventually win a Slam and he probably needs a bit of luck maybe with some seeds falling out along the way.
He really does need to improve that second serve though.
Yup that is one problem with him. He always plays more tennis than anyone else during the Clay and Grass seasons and is exhausted by the time the USO comes but that's not really an excuse. Until last year he just wasn't good enough on hard courts.
Only because they turned a wet Wednesday in Stoke into a sunny day in Barcelona, more or less.
If Nadal wins on Sunday his odds of overhauling Federer must be pretty decent. That'd have him on 11.
He'll still be 25 by the time the new season starts, and if you allow that he'll play four more years at four grand slams a year, that leaves him eight attempts at winning either Wimbledon or the French. I'd fancy him to win at least two French Opens and probably two more Wimbledons, barring injury. That would leave him conseratively on 15 with 8 hard court slams to play. I still think he'll manage to win one more of each so it's do-able.
All of that is premised on him staying fit, of course. And as we've seen with Federer the margins are quite fine between regular slam winner and regular semi finalist.
He'll still be 25 by the time the new season starts, and if you allow that he'll play four more years at four grand slams a year, that leaves him eight attempts at winning either Wimbledon or the French. I'd fancy him to win at least two French Opens and probably two more Wimbledons, barring injury. That would leave him conseratively on 15 with 8 hard court slams to play. I still think he'll manage to win one more of each so it's do-able.
All of that is premised on him staying fit, of course. And as we've seen with Federer the margins are quite fine between regular slam winner and regular semi finalist.
To be honest, I can't see Nadal competing at the highest level for another 4 years. It's just the style of tennis he plays is so physical and demanding and he already struggles with small niggles and injuries.
I think he'll get to around 15 and that's not too shabby for someone who was just a clay courter
I think he'll get to around 15 and that's not too shabby for someone who was just a clay courter
He was no.3 and now he's No.4 with others coming on. It's over.
It's over?
He's just 24! I'm quite sure he'll win a Slam or two atleast.
He's just 24! I'm quite sure he'll win a Slam or two atleast.
Nadal really raised his game, just as Murray dipped his
Murray lost his forehand and then his first serve, which was key to his winning.
And Nadal played some very good tennis, but knew he could just wait on the errors at times from Murray
Shame Murray couldn't have kept his level, but would have been tough to play like that for three sets
Murray lost his forehand and then his first serve, which was key to his winning.
And Nadal played some very good tennis, but knew he could just wait on the errors at times from Murray
Shame Murray couldn't have kept his level, but would have been tough to play like that for three sets
2nd set 2-1 15-30 on Nadal's serve was really a turning point. And then the smash going long at 2-2.
Not really, Nadal was always going to win. Those are just the incidentals.
That was the killer moment, missing an easy forehand that sat up nicely for him. Seemed to blow the wind out of his sails.
But that's the difference. Nadal kept on digging in when he was on the back foot, not letting it get to him, whereas Murray never seemed to recover.
British sportsperson in mental fragility shocker.
How? You need to be very lucky to win one with 3 better players right now and more bubbling under.It's over?
He's just 24! I'm quite sure he'll win a Slam or two atleast.
Murray will win a Grand Slam sooner rather than later. He is as good as Federer who really struggles when it comes to the nitty-gritty of the latter stages in the Slams these days.
Nadal will get an injury also sooner rather than later which will leave it Murray v Djokovic more than likely. Murray will win soon enough. Beating Nadal or becoming better than Nadal is a slim possibility but he is injury prone.
He bores the crap out of me though to be honest.
Nadal will get an injury also sooner rather than later which will leave it Murray v Djokovic more than likely. Murray will win soon enough. Beating Nadal or becoming better than Nadal is a slim possibility but he is injury prone.
He bores the crap out of me though to be honest.
Well, for a start, saying he's as good as Federer is ridiculous. Regardless of Fed's waining age.
I'm with pete. Yeah he's 24, but so is Nadal & Djokovic, and both are much better players. Murray isn't going to get that much better, and he's certainly not going to get better than them. Fed had beaten Sampras from 2-0 down (I think) on Center Court when he was 19, Nadal was already won a slam by then and Djokovic is the only other player bar Nadal to beat Federer in a Slam more than once...These players were better than Murray to begin with. Murray is a concrete 4th right now.
He may win a Slam, but it depends more on Nadal & Djokovic (plus whomever springs up in the next 3 years as a viable challenger) getting knocked out than it does his improvement. He's not going to win the French, and Wimbledon - despite the supposed home advantage - isn't the type of tournament the non-favorites win often. People usually bring their A-Game.
His best chance is the Australian I reckon. But again, he's not gonna suddenly morph into a slam winner...He'll be a lucky Slammer in a favorable draw at best.
I'm with pete. Yeah he's 24, but so is Nadal & Djokovic, and both are much better players. Murray isn't going to get that much better, and he's certainly not going to get better than them. Fed had beaten Sampras from 2-0 down (I think) on Center Court when he was 19, Nadal was already won a slam by then and Djokovic is the only other player bar Nadal to beat Federer in a Slam more than once...These players were better than Murray to begin with. Murray is a concrete 4th right now.
He may win a Slam, but it depends more on Nadal & Djokovic (plus whomever springs up in the next 3 years as a viable challenger) getting knocked out than it does his improvement. He's not going to win the French, and Wimbledon - despite the supposed home advantage - isn't the type of tournament the non-favorites win often. People usually bring their A-Game.
His best chance is the Australian I reckon. But again, he's not gonna suddenly morph into a slam winner...He'll be a lucky Slammer in a favorable draw at best.
Murray's best tourament is the US Open. Because of the speed of the court and how the ball plays he's often able to return for fun.
I still fancy him to win a US Open at some stage.
I still fancy him to win a US Open at some stage.
Maybe, but if he'd won that set, which he probably would've done if he'd got the set, you'd still expect Nadal to come back at him strong
He's only reached the Final once. 3 years go. Whereas he's reached the Aussie consecutively for the last 2 years.
Though with Federer's decline, that could work for him, with it being Fed's 2nd favorite Slam. Djokovic is still better on hard though...IMO. And Nadal's getting better.
He's clearly got a chance of winning a Slam at some point in his career. Yes, Nadal, Federer and Djokovic are better players. But if it was only those three capable of winning a Slam then Del Potro wouldn't have won the US Open two years ago, and Murray wouldn't have made any finals (let alone three). Yes, he will need a significant amount of things to go his way, but it can happen. I wouldnt write him off at 24 anyways.
Whatever happened to just getting bet by the better player? Not everything is a bottle job, this certainly wasn't.
Yeah, I appreciate that but the best tennis I've seen him play was in the US Open in 2008 against Del Potro and Nadal. I think the following year he was hampered by a wrist or elbow injury and was knocked out pretty easily by Cilic.
In Australia in 2010 he got a clearly injured Nadal in the quarters and Cilic in the semis. Then in the US Open 2010 he was drawn against Wawrinka in the third round and he had some problem with fatigue or conditioning or something, which he wasn't able to explain himself. That's not to say he would have won the tournament but it didn't really come down to the quality of his tennis.
In Oz this year he played Beck, Marchenko, Garcia-Lopez, Melzer, Dolgopoloz and Ferrer until he was beaten by Djokovic in the final. Again, not to take anything away from his achievement but he'd usually expect to have to beat much stronger players en route to a GS final.
I think he has a good chance in any hard court tournament but I don't necessarily think that because he's reached two finals in Australia that it represents his best chance at a win. I think he's had some bad luck in the US Open. Though having said that I still think he can take anyone on his day on a hard court.
In Australia in 2010 he got a clearly injured Nadal in the quarters and Cilic in the semis. Then in the US Open 2010 he was drawn against Wawrinka in the third round and he had some problem with fatigue or conditioning or something, which he wasn't able to explain himself. That's not to say he would have won the tournament but it didn't really come down to the quality of his tennis.
In Oz this year he played Beck, Marchenko, Garcia-Lopez, Melzer, Dolgopoloz and Ferrer until he was beaten by Djokovic in the final. Again, not to take anything away from his achievement but he'd usually expect to have to beat much stronger players en route to a GS final.
I think he has a good chance in any hard court tournament but I don't necessarily think that because he's reached two finals in Australia that it represents his best chance at a win. I think he's had some bad luck in the US Open. Though having said that I still think he can take anyone on his day on a hard court.
Gutted...had high hopes for him this time.
The US is his best tournament, just because he reached the final of the Australian twice doesn't prove it isn't.
I don't see why you flagged up Brophs informed post.
The one to watch is Del Potro. If he is fit and in form he'd hammer them all on the hards.
And well he's still a defending champion going into this years one, him and Tsonga being fit, very interesting US Open indeed, since one of the top 2 could potential get a draw like Raonic fourth round, DelPo/Tsonga QF, Federer/Murray SF, the other in F. Insane.
Hope Raonic does well in the North American masters though, hopefully this injury isn't too bad.
Hope Raonic does well in the North American masters though, hopefully this injury isn't too bad.
Murray will eventually win a Grand Slam - he's already in two finals and though he's lost, sooner or later he'd be in a Grand Slam final against a Nadal/Djokovic who's facing an off-day. You'd think it's only inevitable.
I'm more gutted for Tsonga, at least he didn't play boring tennis.
As a brit I can see us being at the top of the womens game sooner than the mens, Heather Watson and Laura Robson look very good.
Del Po is a better player than Murray and he's more likely to reach Nadal/Djo/Fed's level. If it wasn't for his injury, he'd be in the big4 instead of Murray.
Tennis is going to be quite boring after this batch retire though. There don't seem to be any promising youngsters out there. I think Fed mentioned it in an interview - no one under 20 in the top 100.
Tennis is going to be quite boring after this batch retire though. There don't seem to be any promising youngsters out there. I think Fed mentioned it in an interview - no one under 20 in the top 100.
I like the look of the Bulgarian Dimitriov; he has the look of Federer about him and I think he is one for the future and he is about 20. I think Murray has to win soon as the next crop of players will be coming up in the next 2 years and it will be too late. It is going to be very hard for him to get through Nadal, Djokovic and Del Potro and I think Federer probably has one slam left in him.
Aye. This is very much the golden age right now as far as the mens tennis goes. We had the fantastic Nadal-Federer rivalry and now Novak has stepped up to a similar level. Tsonga-Djokovic yesterday was a testament to the high quality of men's tennis right now. I reckon any other player possibly even including Nadal, Tsonga would have beaten yesterday.
Chances are still small. Del Potro must have been the only winner of a slam named other than Federer/Nadal/Djoko in the last 20-odd slams.
flagged up?...eh?
I wasn't trying to prove it wasn't. But it's the one he stands the best chance of winning IMO. The problem with the US is that it's also a lot of other people's best tournaments. It's not just Murray who plays well on Deco, pretty much all the heavy servers do for a start. We're not just (or at least I'm not) going off the idea that Murray will win it because he plays good tennis there. The whole point of my earlier post was that Murray will win a slam when the conditions and opponents are favorable IMO, not by being the best Tennis player of it....he's got a better chance of doing this at the Aussies IMO.
Murray has the game to win a Grandslam or two but he's still mentally not a champion. Against Nadal he had the open court and a very simply forehand which had he made would have given him two break points in the second set having been up a set. Those are the moments that he has to improve on. Instead, he not only missed a chance to break but also went on to lose some 6 games in a row after.
Murray is a bottler. He doesn't have it in him just like Henmen didn't - he might be a better player than Henmen but he hasn't really done anymore than him as of yet.
Only chance he has of grandslam titles is the hard courts and even then - the likes of Fed, Del Potro, Djoko are still there and Nadal will keep on improving on those hard courts as well.
Only chance he has of grandslam titles is the hard courts and even then - the likes of Fed, Del Potro, Djoko are still there and Nadal will keep on improving on those hard courts as well.
Maria to lose her first set today?
Sharapova has very oddly shaped breasts. They're sort of one breast divided into two.
He was flying through the first set. His performance just took a dip and then the unforced errors came into play. Murray will win a grand slam in the next couple of years.
Murray is just unfortunate. One to be british and secondly that he's around in an era with the players that there are.
People are so harsh and quick to judge him a failure. I think it's quite a remarkable achieving what he already has. To be the best tennis player from britain since the war or something... i mean give the guy a bit of credit.
He lost to Nadal in a semi final...
People are so harsh and quick to judge him a failure. I think it's quite a remarkable achieving what he already has. To be the best tennis player from britain since the war or something... i mean give the guy a bit of credit.
He lost to Nadal in a semi final...
I think he'll be another Henman