H_B Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 I'd disagree. He's nowhere near being physically good enough for that. That'll take at least another 18 months IMO, I expect him to be top 12 or so as theres players below him that may jump back above him( Gasquet, Hewitt, Safin if he gets his act together). He may be top 5 before the US Open in 2008. I'd also disagree with your statement about Federer and Nadal being comfortably ahead. Federer is, I'm no sure about Nadal though( expect on clay obviously), Nadal is definetely beatable. Gilbert has already said that as soon as the hard court season is finished Murray is going to understand what is meant about fitness. I am willing to bet Murray as a physical specimin will look night and day even by the Aussie Open next year. I think if you had to ask everyone in the top 100 who were the 5 guys they least wanted to play just now, Murray would be one of them in a large numebr of cases. I think Nadal is awesome. If you look at the Grand Slam and Masters Series results of him and Federer, they are incomparable to the rest of the tour. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thefamousphilosifer Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Gilbert has already said that as soon as the hard court season is finished Murray is going to understand what is meant about fitness. I am willing to bet Murray as a physical specimin will look night and day even by the Aussie Open next year. I think if you had to ask everyone in the top 100 who were the 5 guys they least wanted to play just now, Murray would be one of them in a large numebr of cases. Regarding fitness, you are entirely correct that Murray will be much fitter by the AO than he is now, but imo at the moment he is so far from the fitness he needs to be to challenge the top players that it is a given he will look much better in January. I still think he won't be physically good enough for another year after that. As for you point about players that you wouldn't want to play right now, again I'd agree. But (and hopefully not) it could just be that he's hit a purple patch and soon enough he will revert to a lower standard. Along with working on his fitness, he really needs to get his serve sorted out. His serve % is far to low for him to consistently beat the top 10 players. He returns the ball fantasticly, but when you're only getting 30-40% of you're first serves in play, you have to. I think he has too much to work on in the next year. I think next season we'll also see Marcos Bagdatis cement his position near the top of the rankings, and I think Roddick will probably move back up into the top 5 as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Last 64 is 35 points, not 50. Clicky Looks like you and your source are correct. I didn't look it up anywhere to be honest. The ATP website credits Murray with carrying 50 points from his last 64 appearance at the same tournament last year. I presumed the points per round would be unchanged. However, on further checking that would appear not to be the case. Looks like they've devalued a last 64 appearance at a major by 15 points for whatever reason this year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 (edited) I dont know. I thought that up until the hard court season and Gilbert took over, but now I'm not so sure. He is a better player than Henman was at 19 obviously and his rate of progress has been incredible. I think in 1 or 2 years he will be at a better level than Tim was at his peak. I think only Federer and Nadal are comfortably better at this point in time. The Davydenkos and Roddicks are 50/50 matches. He'll win some and lose some, until next year when he will start winning far more than he loses. Top 4 in the world by US Open next time round for me. Obviously he's a far better player at 19 than Henman was. Henman was a relatively late bloomer in top level tennis terms. That wasn't the question though and wasn't what I said. I said he was nowhere near as good as Henman at his peak which, whilst perhaps a little exaggerated, is still the case I feel. It's very easy for people with short memories or Anglophobic attitudes to dismiss Henman (and Rusedski for that matter) in terms of past achievements. But he was number four in the world and reached multiple Grand Slam semi finals, something that Murray is nowhere near at the level of doing yet. And I think we're agreed also that Henman did so when the depth in tennis was somewhat better than it is now. He possibly has a better all round game than Tim ever did, though his serve needs a lot of work if he's to progress much higher up the charts. Henman (and Rusedski) were much more one dimensional players who were both better on grass than anything else, which did them no favours in the overall rankings either. His progress has been superb and I agree he'll be better than Henman sooner or later if he knuckles down, stays clear of serious injury and really wants it enough. I also agree about only Federer and Nadal being significantly better than him already (though of course better is still better in the case of others, how much better is irrelevant). I would however be surprised (but delighted) if he's Top 4 in the world this time next year. Top ten hopefully, but top five is asking a little much. As good as he has been this year, he still hasn't even got HALF the points total he'd need to be a top four player. He'll need to start making last four of majors to even get close to that and I don't think he's overly likely to do well at Roland Garros imminently. Edited September 4, 2006 by Skyline Drifter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 I said he was nowhere near as good as Henman at his peak which, whilst perhaps a little exaggerated, is still the case I feel. It's very easy for people with short memories or Anglophobic attitudes to dismiss Henman (and Rusedski for that matter) in terms of past achievements. He possibly has a better all round game than Tim ever did, though his serve needs a lot of work if he's to progress much higher up the charts. Henman (and Rusedski) were much more one dimensional players who were both better on grass than anything else, which did them no favours in the overall rankings either. I agree that people dismiss Henman's achievements too easily, but I just see so much more in Murray's game than Henman's. Even against World Class ground games like Gonzalez he looks comfortable. The mechanics of his serve are actually quite good I think. I agree with Petchey that when his strength improves so will his serve. It clearly needs to, but for a coach I would reckon that would be the easiest thing to fix. I would also have said that Henman's best surface was indoors, though that is perhaps debateable. Certainly his biggest title win was indoors in Paris. Time will tell,but I have been pleasantly surprised with his improvement in the last 8 weeks. Can anyone remember the last time he pulled up with an injury or hobbled abuot on court for example? I assume Gilbert has told him he will get a beating if he starts any of that nonsense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted September 4, 2006 Share Posted September 4, 2006 Time will tell,but I have been pleasantly surprised with his improvement in the last 8 weeks. Can anyone remember the last time he pulled up with an injury or hobbled abuot on court for example? I assume Gilbert has told him he will get a beating if he starts any of that nonsense. He certainly hasn't done it since Gilbert arrived on the scene (which might easily be coincidence given the time span involved). I recall him limping about in one of the summer tourneys though. Not sure which one. On your other points I agree, apart from that for me Henman's best surface was grass, most suited to his serve volley game. The fact that his biggest win was indoors no more indicates differently than the fact that Murray's best major progress before this week was at Wimbledon indicates that his best surface is grass! Henman had a wonderful record on grass through the years. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 It's not looking good in the first set Come on Andy! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 First set 6-1 to Davydenko! Glad i'm at work really. C'mon young man, get it going! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thefamousphilosifer Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 He's got a break of serve in the 2nd. No doubt he'll waste it straight away 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterhead Dave Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Murray just broke to go 2-1 up in the second. He seems to have settled a bit and is finding a wee bit more rhythm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterhead Dave Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 He's got a break of serve in the 2nd. No doubt he'll waste it straight away Incorrect, sir! Two aces 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterhead Dave Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Davydenko has now broken back as Murray was serving for the set. 5-5. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterhead Dave Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 (edited) Murray breaks back immediately. EDIT: ...and takes the second Edited September 5, 2006 by Peterhead Dave 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Murray takes the set 7-5 One set all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thefamousphilosifer Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Davydenko is a break up in the 3rd 5-2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waspie Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 Had a break at 2-0 in the third...but is now 2-4 down 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo Stu Posted September 5, 2006 Share Posted September 5, 2006 2-1 down now.Repeat of Gonzalez match needed now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 Never got back on court after rain interupted yesterday's match at 2-1 in sets to Davydenko. First on Armstrong Court at 11am this morning (US time) which will be 4pm our time I think. It's been topsy turvey so far with Davydenko dominating the first set, Murray edging him out in the second having earned an early break then given it away when serving for the set but got it straight back again. Murray then led 2-0 in the third before losing five straight games on his way to a 6-3 loss. The break probably came at the right time for him but if he starts like he did yesterday he'll be out before he warms up! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centralparker Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 Andy Murray has been one of the best things to happen to Scottish Sport in decades. Sure, his performances are erratic but he's just a young laddie playing a man's game. Sometimes he says rash things but again he's young and inexperienced. Mind you, tennis is an individual sport and the personalities of the players are a key factor in its appeal to the wider public. It's not a bad thing to have a brash new kid on the block. I cannot remember the last time Scotland had a serious contender on the world tennis circuit. We are probably talking decades ago. All Scots should rejoice in this young talent and back him to the hilt. After all, we will probably never see his like again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted September 6, 2006 Share Posted September 6, 2006 I cannot remember the last time Scotland had a serious contender on the world tennis circuit. We are probably talking decades ago. We are probably talking never. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.