2014 Wimbledon Quarterfinals: Murray vs. Dimitrov

[britbox]

^Agreed, even more telling when you consider it was 3 rather than 4 and in the time period selected, McEnroe was only on the scene toward the end.

 

[britbox]

This is a much tougher match to call than you'd have suspected 6 months ago.

Dimitrov, who will probably become my favourite player, is slowly beginning to fulfill his destiny and develop into a top player. I still think it's too early for him and reckon he's a year or two away from winning a major, so picking Murray in 4.

 

[coban]

Dim in four.

Signed, sealed and delivered!

 

[Fiero425]

Fiero, you're comparing Sampras with the sum of four top players with that assessment. Like Sampras, Federer has been beaten at Wimbledon. Nadal has lost at Roland Garros. Djokovic has lost at Melbourne...

The main difference is that the field then didn't have 3 or 4 "Sampras" type dominating players to go through. They might knock off one, but then generally they get another.

Is this unprecedented? No - You could say a pretty similar situation was happening when Borg, McEnroe and Connors were dominating proceedings. If you discount the AO, as these guys rarely played it (I'll even discount Connors' 74 title for the purpose of the comparison) then 3 players won 22 of 27 slams taking in Wimbledon, USO and FO in the same 9 season time frame from 74-82.
That's just 3 players doing the damage not 4. That was also hailed as a golden era.

Some players do lack mental fortitude, but that's always been the case. (I agree on Verdasco by the way)

But the bigger reason is that they are not consistently good enough. I emphasize "consistently" because it's not as if any of these players are titans week in week out and then just folding against the big four... They are inconsistent period. For instance, it's not as if Berdych or Tsonga are dominating everywhere until they meet a member of the elite - they are inconsistent without the Big 4 being anywhere on the radar.

[Edit: nehmeth pre-empted my post with the last couple of sentences above - I agree with him on the last part of the post]

True enough! Well at least you guys understand where I'm coming from when I use the description of "gutless!" :clap :snigger :angel:

 

[Kieran]

I agree with Fiero.

But looking at Murray against Dimi, I like Grigor for this one. I think he's ready and I like how he's handled himself so far. Murray has been great too - but like Federer, it's been too slight and serene a draw. He'll need a fire in his belly tomorrow, I'm not sure he has it...

 

[DarthFed]

I think you're mistaking someone playing really well and dominating with someone who had played a bunch of cream puffs. Murray has won easy because he has played that well. I think Dimitrov will have to serve extremely well to have a chance

 

[Kieran]

I don't think Murray has played anyone of note. The guy in the second round was named after a Bond villain. Who was it in the first? I think Murray - like Federer - is doing his thing well enough, but I expect Grigor to take this one...

 

[DarthFed]

Agut in 3rd round and Anderson in 4th is not a breeze. Roger not playing anyone so far is good and bad. He has limited energy so he has a lot left now for later rounds but it'd be nice to have a test before a huge increase in level that he will see tomorrow.

But really, who has had a tough path to the QF? I'd say Djokovic probably the toughest but Tsonga isn't good anymore.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

With Rafa gone from the other half and with Nole having his late stage slam issues, I am starting to think this might be Andy's to lose...

 

[Front242]

I always considered Murray the favourite personally. His early Queens loss meant nothing.

 

[Kieran]

No, I wouldn't think Murray is the favourite: he hadn't won anything since last Wimbledon. Agut and Anderson have never affected anyone on the big stage, and I wonder if he has the intensity in his camp since he hired Amelie. I remain to be convinced there.

I would have Grigor, Novak, Roger and Stan ahead of Murray - or at least alongside him. It's wide open and if anything it looks more like Federer's than murrays, since Rafa is gone.

But I'll be happy to be surprised tomorrow, and I think it could be a great match.

Djoker would be the single favourite, if you put a gun to my head. His level has been the most impressive...

 

[Front242]

Besides Federer, Murray is the most natural on this surface although big serving Raonic and Kyrgios have a legitimate shot too how well they're playing.

 

[Correspondent Kiu]

I am picking upset here.
Dimi in 4 although it could go 5

 

[sid]

No, I wouldn't think Murray is the favourite: he hadn't won anything since last Wimbledon. Agut and Anderson have never affected anyone on the big stage, and I wonder if he has the intensity in his camp since he hired Amelie. I remain to be convinced there.

I would have Grigor, Novak, Roger and Stan ahead of Murray - or at least alongside him. It's wide open and if anything it looks more like Federer's than murrays, since Rafa is gone.

But I'll be happy to be surprised tomorrow, and I think it could be a great match.

Djoker would be the single favourite, if you put a gun to my head. His level has been the most impressive...

Anderson is ranked as high as he's ever been.Also I seem 2 recall he beat Djokovic on the big stage:huh:

 

[Front242]

^ Miami '08 was Anderson's only win over Novak.

http://www.matchstat.com/Compare/7459/5992/8049

 

[TennisFanatic7]

If you're talking about players "of note" or who have upset big names on the big stage, who a top 4 seeded guy can face before the quarter finals of a slam, you're talking about anyone seeded 13th or lower. The only player that really fits that description is Tsonga and he's not necessarily a threat anymore.

Murray hasn't had the toughest of draws but if you're judging his chances on who he's beaten rather than his performances that suggests to me you haven't actually seen him play in those matches. He's been in pretty much flawless form. First two rounds were soft but Agut won a grass court title last week and is just outside the top 20, Murray dismantled him. Anderson is a big serving giant who actually played pretty well, he was serving massive on indoor grass yet Andy only let a handful of aces past him and set up a load of break point opportunities for himself.

Trust me, Murray of last year is at least 95% back. Dimitrov will have to play the match of his career so far to get this victory, without any doubt. That's not to say he won't though.

 

[TennisFanatic7]

Oh also, regarding the favourite argument, my list reads Federer, Murray, Djokovic, then Dimitrov.

 

[TsarMatt]

Really happy how far Dimitrov has come over the last year. I can see this being a tight match, but with Murray ultimately prevailing in 4.

7-6, 6-3, 6-7, 7-6

 

[tented]

Reading through this thread again, I come away with the feeling everyone knows everything, yet no one knows anything. Could be a great match.

Mainly I'm thinking: if nothing else, until Dimitrov shows me he can win at this level, I'm going with Andy.

 

[isabelle]

I'm not worried. My boy in 3. At a push 4.

Totally agree with you my Dear...C"mon Andy !!