|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 23, 2023 15:47:54 GMT
I agree. I think Murray at his best would more than hold his own against any of Sampras, Bjorg, McEnroe, Lendl, Laver etc at their best In which versions of the rules and using what ball/racket/court? Whichever racket they like best, I donāt think rules have changed dramatically, any court. Murray is certainly up there with the aforementioned players.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2023 16:07:08 GMT
In which versions of the rules and using what ball/racket/court? Whichever racket they like best, I donāt think rules have changed dramatically, any court. Murray is certainly up there with the aforementioned players. The reason Murray is prob top 10 all time for me is that he competed in the same era as the 3 GOATs (crazy that they were the same era) and was the only person who came close to being mentioned in the same breath. He was even part of the ābig 4ā for a while. YouTube tennis fanboys are some of the aidsiest sports fans on the internet and a lot scoff at the big 4 term and try to make out itās just British press arrogance (common Anglophobic theory) but around 2010/11 it was a legit term. It was those 4 and then the rest. Wawrinka won 3 slams but his overall career pales compared to Murray (1 masters vs 14 (and I think Murray will win 1 more masters at least!)) Murray has 2 Olympic golds which are almost like slams and the envy of federer/Djokovic, year end championships, year end number 1 etc. Itās just a shame Murray didnāt get to 5+ slams otherwise we wouldnāt have to fight so hard to make this argument. But itās madness to consider the amount of grand slam level winning players who never have/will win slams because of the insane era they played in. You look at guys like ferrer and dimitrov, byrdch etc. Even Andy Roddick prob wouldāve won more than one slam (many wimbledons) in any other era IMO.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jan 23, 2023 18:14:52 GMT
Whichever racket they like best, I donāt think rules have changed dramatically, any court. Murray is certainly up there with the aforementioned players. The reason Murray is prob top 10 all time for me is that he competed in the same era as the 3 GOATs (crazy that they were the same era) and was the only person who came close to being mentioned in the same breath. He was even part of the ābig 4ā for a while. YouTube tennis fanboys are some of the aidsiest sports fans on the internet and a lot scoff at the big 4 term and try to make out itās just British press arrogance (common Anglophobic theory) but around 2010/11 it was a legit term. It was those 4 and then the rest. Wawrinka won 3 slams but his overall career pales compared to Murray (1 masters vs 14 (and I think Murray will win 1 more masters at least!)) Murray has 2 Olympic golds which are almost like slams and the envy of federer/Djokovic, year end championships, year end number 1 etc. Itās just a shame Murray didnāt get to 5+ slams otherwise we wouldnāt have to fight so hard to make this argument. But itās madness to consider the amount of grand slam level winning players who never have/will win slams because of the insane era they played in. You look at guys like ferrer and dimitrov, byrdch etc. Even Andy Roddick prob wouldāve won more than one slam (many wimbledons) in any other era IMO. See your argument, its a good point But top 10?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2023 18:36:39 GMT
The reason Murray is prob top 10 all time for me is that he competed in the same era as the 3 GOATs (crazy that they were the same era) and was the only person who came close to being mentioned in the same breath. He was even part of the ābig 4ā for a while. YouTube tennis fanboys are some of the aidsiest sports fans on the internet and a lot scoff at the big 4 term and try to make out itās just British press arrogance (common Anglophobic theory) but around 2010/11 it was a legit term. It was those 4 and then the rest. Wawrinka won 3 slams but his overall career pales compared to Murray (1 masters vs 14 (and I think Murray will win 1 more masters at least!)) Murray has 2 Olympic golds which are almost like slams and the envy of federer/Djokovic, year end championships, year end number 1 etc. Itās just a shame Murray didnāt get to 5+ slams otherwise we wouldnāt have to fight so hard to make this argument. But itās madness to consider the amount of grand slam level winning players who never have/will win slams because of the insane era they played in. You look at guys like ferrer and dimitrov, byrdch etc. Even Andy Roddick prob wouldāve won more than one slam (many wimbledons) in any other era IMO. See your argument, its a good point But top 10? Ye top 10. Being year end #1 in the same era as the 3 GOATs proves it to me. TBF Murrayās 3x slams puts him joint 13th, but there are 38 male players with more slams. Iād argue heās probably a greater player than some with 7/8 slams like Agassi, McEnroe, Lendl etc (although agree you canāt compare eras really) Iād say the fact he is still competing and regularly beating some of the current top players despite being old and having a metal hip (and having lost years to injury) is a sign of just how good he is. Hopefully he can have a big year, win a few titles and maybe even a deep run at Wimbledon/US Open? I think that would go a long way towards shifting the narrative of disrespect that a lot of online tennis fans throw his way. Also noticed a bit of a shift this last week. A lot of people saying heās earned their respect with his performances at the Aus open. Better late than never. The absolute sporting fairytale would be winning another major. You never know. I wrote federer off but then he won a final flurry of slams. But obviously not arguing Murray is quite that goodā¦ I expect Murray will sit out the clay court season with a view to Wimbledon so hopefully the stars align. Could do with a few atp titles though so he isnāt up against the likes of berrettini in the early rounds of slams.
|
|
|
Post by milton58 on Jan 23, 2023 18:49:50 GMT
Yes you can give an opinion like anything else. But who knows how good George Best would have been in the premier league era and vice versa. Itās almost a pointless conversation really. Obviously fitness levels have improved ten fold at least and to be honest, as an opinion I think of say todays England team played the 66 team on a level playing field in their peak itād be a cricket score purely down to fitness I agree. I think Murray at his best would more than hold his own against any of Sampras, Bjorg, McEnroe, Lendl, Laver etc at their best no chance of him beating any of them in there prime
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 23, 2023 19:11:59 GMT
I agree. I think Murray at his best would more than hold his own against any of Sampras, Bjorg, McEnroe, Lendl, Laver etc at their best no chance of him beating any of them in there prime Absolute rubbish. I think that without even just one of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic, Murray would have 5-8 grand slams, without two he would have over 10, and without all three, who knows how many he would have.
|
|
|
Post by milton58 on Jan 23, 2023 19:49:49 GMT
no chance of him beating any of them in there prime Absolute rubbish. I think that without even just one of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic, Murray would have 5-8 grand slams, without two he would have over 10, and without all three, who knows how many he would have. stop smoking the weed bro
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Jan 23, 2023 20:20:38 GMT
no chance of him beating any of them in there prime Absolute rubbish. I think that without even just one of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic, Murray would have 5-8 grand slams, without two he would have over 10, and without all three, who knows how many he would have. But he had all 3 thought didn't he!!! What a ridiculous thing to say.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 23, 2023 20:29:43 GMT
Absolute rubbish. I think that without even just one of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic, Murray would have 5-8 grand slams, without two he would have over 10, and without all three, who knows how many he would have. stop smoking the weed bro He has played in 11 grand slam finals, winning 3 and losing 8. In all 8 he lost, he lost to one of the big three. He has played 21 grand slam semi finals, winning 11. Of those 10 he lost, 8 were against the big three. 17 of the 24 career finals he lost were against the big three. He is 5th on the all time list of Masters event winners, despite playing with the big three. 2 Olympic golds. His record is phenomenal.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 23, 2023 20:34:10 GMT
Absolute rubbish. I think that without even just one of Federer, Nadal or Djokovic, Murray would have 5-8 grand slams, without two he would have over 10, and without all three, who knows how many he would have. But he had all 3 thought didn't he!!! What a ridiculous thing to say. Yes, and he reached 21 grand slam semi finals and only twice did then lose to someone other than one of the big three. All 8 of his final losses were against the big three. When the others in my list played, there was one or two at their level. Murray had the three greatest ever to play.
|
|
|
Post by cvillestokie on Jan 23, 2023 22:26:42 GMT
In which versions of the rules and using what ball/racket/court? Whichever racket they like best, I donāt think rules have changed dramatically, any court. Murray is certainly up there with the aforementioned players. My point r.e. the racket is that they would have been very different technology. Itās hard to say whether a player from a bygone era would be better or worse now, in my opinion. Training is better, including at grass roots. There is comparatively good money at lower levels. The presence of the Big 3 could have inspired one of those who played in less competitive times to rise to the top. I think that itās fair to say that one who excelled within their era should be able to do that if they were born in any other, but beyond that I find 1-1 comparisons very difficult to believe in.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2023 3:56:05 GMT
I agree. I think Murray at his best would more than hold his own against any of Sampras, Bjorg, McEnroe, Lendl, Laver etc at their best no chance of him beating any of them in there prime Absolute nonsense. Murrayās record against the big 3. 29-56. 34.1%. So that means that he won more than 1 every 3 times he came up against one of the 3 greatest players whoāve ever lived. And youāre trying to claim he wouldnāt have beaten greats from previous eras? Federer/Nadal/Djokovic all smashed Samprasā slam record whilst competing against each other (and Murray) for their titles. If anything, they all won far less than they wouldāve won in different eras. And Murray beat all of them many times on his way to amassing 46 (and counting) titles. 8 of his masters 1k final wins were vs big 3 members. 2 of his slams were vs Djokovic. As was his year end championship (a match that was also for year end #1) His first Olympic win in 2012 saw him dispatch Djokovic in the SF then federer on the final. Both guys who were desperate for that gold medal. It naturally follows heād have a far better record than his admirable 34.1% against the greats of previous eras. Because the greats of previous eras werenāt as great as the big 3. āNo chance of him beating any of them on their primeā What are you even talking about dudeā¦he beat the 3 greatest of all time in their primes.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2023 14:07:33 GMT
Another two legendary performances in Qatar this week; saving match points to beat Sonego and then beating Zverev last night despite looking on the ropes.
Admittedly Zerev is returning from a major injury but it was still a gutsy effort from Murray.
Heās got a quarter vs a low ranked qualifier today; I donāt expect itāll be a cakewalk (although he could really do with a dominant two sets win) but itās a huge opportunity to get to a semi; even if itās āonlyā a 250.
The tournament is live on prime for anyone interested.
Regardless, the metal hipped one is winning heaps of respect from tennis fans that he inexplicably was being denied of when he was at his peak in 2016.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2023 14:09:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2023 14:20:10 GMT
Brilliant tennis player who would have flourished regardless what era he had played in. If it wasn't for injuries he probably would have doubled his major count and done so while plying his trade against the undisputed 3 best tennis players of all time.
To argue that he couldn't have done it against the best players of yesteryear is just biased rubbish probably down to the perception of his personality. A fierce competitor who is still defying the odds and competing at the top level even though is body should have seen him retire by now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2023 14:33:05 GMT
Brilliant tennis player who would have flourished regardless what era he had played in. If it wasn't for injuries he probably would have doubled his major count and done so while plying his trade against the undisputed 3 best tennis players of all time. To argue that he couldn't have done it against the best players of yesteryear is just biased rubbish probably down to the perception of his personality. A fierce competitor who is still defying the odds and competing at the top level even though is body should have seen him retire by now. As far as I'm aware, he is the only player to return to the top level with a metal hip. His current success (regardless of his he goes on to win some more trophies or not) is miraculous. He has shown what was thought to be impossible, to be possible. And I think he'll return to the top 30 and potentially even higher. I think it cements his legacy as one of the greatest of all time. I stand by top 10 (certainly in the open era) despite major counts alone not placing him there.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2023 16:55:48 GMT
Come from behind again to reach the semis in Qatar. 4-6, 6-1, 6-2
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2023 17:24:40 GMT
The guy is beyond belief.
5-4 down in the decider. 40-0 down against serve. Ends up breaking, then winning the tie break 20 mins later to make the final. Saved 5 match points IIRC.
Itās a joke at this point. You couldnāt have written the script for his start to this season.
Will be up against either medvedev or alliasime in the final so will be a massive underdog, but chuffed for him regardless. This week has been ridiculous. Even if he loses the final and doesnāt win another tournament, the memories of his comeback will stay with me forever.
A living legend.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Feb 24, 2023 18:09:12 GMT
You have to hand it to him, in this form he is Britains greatest ever tennis player. On the other hand, the next time he loses heāll be Scotlands greatest ever tennis playerš
|
|
|
Post by teenagefanclub on Feb 24, 2023 19:00:24 GMT
There was a video doing the rounds this week from Judy Murray where she took him to the arcades and he set new high score for the basketball throwing game.
Hard not to love this guy (unless you still live in the dark and bring up his joke England comment to some prick from the press who had been taking the puss out of him all week)
Goaarnnn Muzzer
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Feb 25, 2023 1:51:03 GMT
Federer, Djokovic and Nadal are probably the three greatest tennis players of all time, all playing in the same era.
In what is now the second generation of players after them, Murray has still been the only player to regularly compete with them in Grand Slams during that time, and even manage to pick up a few himself.
In any other era he'd have had at least 8 Grand Slams I reckon, if not more.
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Feb 25, 2023 1:54:39 GMT
The guy is beyond belief. 5-4 down in the decider. 40-0 down against serve. Ends up breaking, then winning the tie break 20 mins later to make the final. Saved 5 match points IIRC. Itās a joke at this point. You couldnāt have written the script for his start to this season. Will be up against either medvedev or alliasime in the final so will be a massive underdog, but chuffed for him regardless. This week has been ridiculous. Even if he loses the final and doesnāt win another tournament, the memories of his comeback will stay with me forever. A living legend. Absolutely, this 'second' career is arguably as impressive as his first, even if he doesn't have any trophies to show for it. To come back from hip surgery, effectively with a metal hip, in your mid-30s in a sport as physically demanding as tennis is, is one thing. But to actually be beating players in the top 10 of the rankings is another. Unbelievable. I don't think he's given anywhere near the credit he deserves for what he's doing now.
|
|
|
Post by potters11 on Feb 25, 2023 7:20:27 GMT
The guy is beyond belief. 5-4 down in the decider. 40-0 down against serve. Ends up breaking, then winning the tie break 20 mins later to make the final. Saved 5 match points IIRC. Itās a joke at this point. You couldnāt have written the script for his start to this season. Will be up against either medvedev or alliasime in the final so will be a massive underdog, but chuffed for him regardless. This week has been ridiculous. Even if he loses the final and doesnāt win another tournament, the memories of his comeback will stay with me forever. A living legend. Absolutely, this 'second' career is arguably as impressive as his first, even if he doesn't have any trophies to show for it. To come back from hip surgery, effectively with a metal hip, in your mid-30s in a sport as physically demanding as tennis is, is one thing. But to actually be beating players in the top 10 of the rankings is another. Unbelievable. I don't think he's given anywhere near the credit he deserves for what he's doing now. I couldnāt have put it better myself. He doesnāt anywhere near enough credit and the start to this season has been nothing short of remarkable! I remember when he made his comeback I said to myself if I get to watch one more Murray epic then thatās job done, never did I expect there to be an epic every other week! The best British sportsperson in my lifetime (late 80ās onwards.)
|
|
|
Post by noustie on Feb 25, 2023 7:52:57 GMT
no chance of him beating any of them in there prime Absolute nonsense. Murrayās record against the big 3. 29-56. 34.1%. So that means that he won more than 1 every 3 times he came up against one of the 3 greatest players whoāve ever lived. And youāre trying to claim he wouldnāt have beaten greats from previous eras? Federer/Nadal/Djokovic all smashed Samprasā slam record whilst competing against each other (and Murray) for their titles. If anything, they all won far less than they wouldāve won in different eras. And Murray beat all of them many times on his way to amassing 46 (and counting) titles. 8 of his masters 1k final wins were vs big 3 members. 2 of his slams were vs Djokovic. As was his year end championship (a match that was also for year end #1) His first Olympic win in 2012 saw him dispatch Djokovic in the SF then federer on the final. Both guys who were desperate for that gold medal. It naturally follows heād have a far better record than his admirable 34.1% against the greats of previous eras. Because the greats of previous eras werenāt as great as the big 3. āNo chance of him beating any of them on their primeā What are you even talking about dudeā¦he beat the 3 greatest of all time in their primes. Saw this on YouTube the other day - I'd forgotten what the atmosphere was like and that he didn't just beat Federer but absolutely fucking hammered him. Hyperbolic but genuinely don't think anyone would have beaten Murray that day: Did the village of Dunblane not pretty much win the Davis Cup too? The way he conducted his wedding too was quality- walked out to be greeted by the locals whilst the media were fucked off to the side. Bought the hotel and all to keep it open and did it up. The lad's a role model for kids not just in his own sport all day. And most importantly of all he fucking loves England getting pumped at football š
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2023 13:55:08 GMT
Actually lads the YouTube comments are full of people saying thing along the lines of āI never liked Murray but heās won me over with his gutsā āused to hate Murrayās style but now his matches are must watch for the dramaā etc.
So I think his current comeback has won over a lot of haters.
Thereās still a lot of ignorance and disrespect but Iāve definitely noticed a change in overall attitude towards him. Heās won many fans for how heās battling away despite effectively being handicapped. I think the fact he is even able to compete with (and sometimes even beat) some of the top young players, despite being so far from his physical peak, is the proof many needed to realise just how good he was/is.
The final is at 3pm on prime vs Medvedev. I think itāll be a step too far (Medvedev is a slam winner and probably one of the few newer generation players who mightāve been the Murray of the big 3/4 era? think Alcaraz though is the one who might become an all time great) but you can never write off Murray. Heās so tactically astute and intelligent, despite physical limitations. And itās one match of course so anyone can have an inspired day.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2023 14:43:13 GMT
Good effort in the final but Medvedev just a step too far. But Murray broke a few times and got some look ins.
Will rise 18 places in the rankings to 52. Needs to get to top 32 really before Wimbledon/US Open to have a chance of favourable draws and deeper runs.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2023 22:16:41 GMT
Starts his Indian Wells campaign shortly. Widely viewed as the "5th grand slam". He really needs to start producing some 2 set wins rather than every victory being a physically/emotionally draining epic. Especially at this tournament which is 8 rounds from first round to final I believe! (higher ranked guys get 1st round byes)
Hopefully another deep run, but could get interesting if he makes it to round 3. Jack Draper and Dan Evans will play each other in round 2, and if Murray makes it past the first two rounds then will be an all british 3rd round. (obviously not a given, 2nd round match would be vs 15th seed/17th ranked Pablo CarreƱo Busta)
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2023 2:02:27 GMT
Into the 2nd round. Won 6-7, 6-1, 6-4. Very tight, entertaining match. Could've gone either way but Murray finding a way to win this year. It becomes a habit. The highlights reel will be amazing but lots of inconsistency too from Murray.
Will need to play close to his current A game to make it past Busta to set up all UK 3rd round.
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 11, 2023 11:16:49 GMT
Does Murray ever win/lose in straight sets these days?
I get tired just watching him.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2023 18:23:52 GMT
Does Murray ever win/lose in straight sets these days? I get tired just watching him. Very rarely it seems. Busta has withdrawn injured so Murray will be up against a lucky loser Aldot (ranked just outside the top 100) instead. On paper an easier task to reach the 3rd round and guarantee an all British 3rd round clash. But this is Murray weāre talking about so Iām expecting a 3h epic. Also some potential curveballs from facing a late opponent switch and a guy who might have a nothing to lose mentality. He really needs to get through in straight sets though to boost his chances in the following round. The whole tournament is available live on prime btw.
|
|