Murray out of US Open

He has a big game though. He plays Youzhny next round which is very winnable and if he gets his head together he could push Nadal (assuming he goes through :p).
 
In hard court slams (his best surface), 6 attempts when healthy.

Bear in mind that almost all of the slams are either won by Federer and Nadal - very rarely someone else like JMDP or Djokovic will sneak in and grab one. Of course that will change soon.
 
Morba said:
2 out of how many attempts?
Click to expand...

Eh? What difference does that make? The lad has got to two Slam finals. Irrespective of how many times he has attmeted to get there, that is a massive achievement in a period of tennis where we have potentialy the two greatest players to grace the game.

I think because there are four major events per annum in tennis, the general conception is that recahing a slam final is not that big of a deal, which is utterly ridiculous.

He has done great things has the lad Murray.

There will always be the same people who call him "****", like they did with Henman. The moment that statement comes out, I have decided in my head that you really have no real idea of the concept of success on a tennis court. (This last para is not directed at the quoted poster).
 
It makes a huge difference!
Surely you understand that?

If he has been in 40 slams and only made 2 finals then that is poor tbh. If he's been in not many then that's good.
 
Morba said:
It makes a huge difference!
Surely you understand that?

If he has been in 40 slams and only made 2 finals then that is poor tbh. If he's been in not many then that's good.
Click to expand...

It might be poor as a ratio but it's still a huge achievement, considering the strength in depth of mens tennis and the quality of the top two - who barring injury have between them been represented in pretty much every slam final for the past 5 or so years (nb I've not checked this but I'd be surprised if there are more than one or two slam finals where either Federer or Nadal was not present).

Digitalle said:
Wait, but Henamn was "***"! :p
Click to expand...

He really wasn't, he was a very good player, possibly even a great player had he been born in a slightly earlier era but his serve and volley game was becoming increasingly outdated against the modern power game. Unfortunately he never quite took the extra step to get to the finals or win a major but poor he certainly was not.
 
semi-pro waster said:
It might be poor as a ratio but it's still a huge achievement, considering the strength in depth of mens tennis and the quality of the top two - who barring injury have between them been represented in pretty much every slam final for the past 5 or so years (nb I've not checked this but I'd be surprised if there are more than one or two slam finals where either Federer or Nadal was not present).
Click to expand...

jua9mv.jpg


Utter domination!
 
Furthermore, he has surpassed Henman in terms of titles and rankings with plenty of time left on the clock.
 
cheets64 said:
BUt Murray has been in the top 5 for years and looking at the winners hes the only one not to win a major.
Click to expand...

Davydenko was top 5 for ages and still is one of the best players in the world when fit. Nalbandian should have one by now (although was robbed by hometown line judges in 2003 US Open). Ljubicic and James Blake were top 5 for a while and didn't win a major...
 
So plenty of chances for other people to get into the final.
Proves both points ;)

Now, im not saying Murray is bad or anything, you don't get to where he is without being something special.
However, he has under achieved so far imo, however I do think he will win one or two :)
 
There's no general thread about the US Open. Am the only one to think either Sky or whoever is filming in New York has the sound wrong? The crowd is far too noisy, other tournaments seem to have that better balance.
 
I called Djokovic to win when Federer missed both of those match points. I have no idea why he was just chipping the balls back on the match points and break points so that Djokovic could get the advantage.

As a huge Federer fan, it's sad to see him lose in such a fashion, but I think he deserved to lose since Djokovic was the better guy. Just hoping that he gives Nadal the same type of match as he did today, otherwise I wont be happy :p
 
That is one of the best matches that I have seen. Some great tennis in the 5th which is a little unusual as often the final set is a formality. I think Federer was expecting Djokovic to bottle it on the big points, as he often does, as he never really went for a winner which is very strange for him.

Usually I would back Djokovic on a hardcourt against Nadal but the results seem to suggest that Nadal is playing very well- haven't seen much of him. If he repeats tonights form I think he will have too much for Nadal as this is Nadal's weakest surface but Nadal is one of the best competitors in sport......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom