Andy Murray hopeless against big hitters?

[Fastgrass]

This year big hitters like gulbis , wawa, berd(twice) , Delpo outclassed him though he is in peak .
So it's easy to predict Peak Murray lacks explosiveness and more prone to loss to big hitters .
I think his defensive attitude hurting him against big hitter .
Your Thoughts?

 

[brokenshoelace]

His game is actually tailor-made to counter them. Good defense, great counter-punching, slices, changes of pace, great return of serve, high tennis IQ, etc...

It's just that sometimes, they're playing too hot and there's little anyone can do about it. In any case, he's far from hopeless against them, and much of it depends on the surface.

 

[Aung Aung]

I think he can handle them pretty well and he more often than not beats them when it matters.

I mean he pass through karlovic last yr on his way to wimbeldon final and also handles JJ in wim semi this year quite well.

Even against Raonic who he has a negative h2h, he took him out in straight sets in their only slam meeting so I wouldnt say he is hopeless against big hitters. Also in previous years, especially in Wimbledon, i think he has handled big servers like Ljubicic and others pretty well.

The main reason is for me is Murrays being always prone to concentration lapses and periods when he lost the plot/ disappear from game during the match. If such things happen in best of 3 and the opponent (big hitter) also happens to be playing hot, he cant recover or like Broken said above, if big hitter is just playing too hot, he cant do much. But usually in best of 5 sets, i think he has a better chance to picks himself back and recovers to win and also there is less chance of big hitter playing hot the whole match.

 

[bobvance]

Eh, I think BS is right--when a skilled ball basher is playing lights out there isn't much most players can do. I think Nole and Rafa are the two best at "disarming" the big hitters, but I don't think Andy is too far behind.

 

[Fastgrass]

his last 3 losses were against big hitters and in straight sets . if peak Murray can't handle them , then which version can do that?
Fact is he is pusher, and terms like he offers variety of spin , pace is part of overeating by certain media.
His mug work can lead him against players like Raonic
but not against explosive hitters.

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

his last 3 losses were against big hitters and in straight sets . if peak Murray can't handle them , then which version can do that?
Fact is he is pusher, and terms like he offers variety of spin , pace is part of overeating by certain media.
His mug work can lead him against players like Raonic
but not against explosive hitters.

If this conversation was taking place 5-6 years ago, I might have agreed with you. Andy was very defensive, just a good counter-punch guy. But you do not win slams by being a pusher...not Wimbledon, not Us open, not any slam...His forehand has improved a lot and he already had an amazing backhand. Maybe he does not attack like Roger, but who does really?

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think the OP may have a point here. However, I believe Andy Murray
is very solid against players with big serve and not much else i.e, Andy
nevery has trouble against the Raonics, Karlovic, Isnerovics of the world.
In fact, I personally think he is one of the best against this kind of players.

However, big hitter is not the same as big servers and I do feel, just like OP,
Andy still has problems against them. This is especially relevant as this year
is supposed to be Andy's peak.

I strongly believe Andy will surely not surpass any of the other big three
in slam count, not even Djokovic when everybody is completely done with
their career. However, I do believe Andy will win few more slams.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Raonic leads Murray 2-1.
And all their meetings were in 2012.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Raonic leads Murray 2-1.
And all their meetings were in 2012.

You are right. May be I am underappreciating Raonic due to personal bias against him.
I am surprised that the facts did not match up with my feeling of Andy's record against
big servers. How does Andy perform against other big servers? Can you at least confirm
that my overall feeling is in alignment with facts.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

Maybe its a surface thing. For example, Nadal has outstanding success versus big servers on hardcourt. However Nadal has had some trouble versus big servers on grass.

Murray is the other way around. Murray is great versus big servers on grass, but lost to Raonic on hardcourt and clay. But I'm not interested enough to check Murray's records versus big servers on hardcourt compared to grass.

 

[Iona16]

Raonic leads Murray 2-1.
And all their meetings were in 2012.

One loss on clay and another match in Tokyo. A match in which Andy had match points. Murray beat Raonic in straight sets at the US Open last year. It was embarrassingly one-sided.

Del Potro
Wawrinka
Gulbis
Verdasco
Tsonga
Isner, Cilic etc etc etc. Andy leads them all in their h2h.

Check any big hitter and chances are Andy has the advantage in their h2h. The only other player I can think of with a positive h2h is Berdych. Even then it's close - Berdych 6-4.

This is a tedious thread but I would expect nothing less from the poster that started it.

 

[DarthFed]

Murray is just fine against big hitters. Berd is the only one who gives him a whole lot of trouble. Milos is 2-1, small sample size, and the one that mattered was a beatdown for Murray. Wawrinka obviously causes trouble but there is more to his game than just power unlike someone like Berd, Tsonga, etc.

 

[Iona16]

Maybe its a surface thing. For example, Nadal has outstanding success versus big servers on hardcourt. However Nadal has had some trouble versus big servers on grass.

Murray is the other way around. Murray is great versus big servers on grass, but lost to Raonic on hardcourt and clay. But I'm not interested enough to check Murray's records versus big servers on hardcourt compared to grass.

Perhaps if you checked Andy's record against big servers (in general) you would see that you are talking complete and utter nonsense.

 

[NADAL2005RG]

You couldn't pay me a billion dollars to check his record versus big servers. That's why I said "But I'm not interested enough to check Murray's records versus big servers...."

 

[Iona16]

You couldn't pay me a billion dollars to check his record versus big servers. That's why I said "But I'm not interested enough to check Murray's records versus big servers...."

You're one for hyperbole aren't you?

Perhaps you shouldn't pretend to know what you're talking about then. I won't hold my breath.

 

[Moxie]

Clearly the OP comes in with a degree of bias. :dodgy: To propose that Murray, the world #3, is "hopeless" against big hitters rather says it all. I think posters have done a good job of arguing down the claim. When they're hot, some of these big hitters are hard to neutralize, on a given day, and Murray is not unique in that. However, his ROS, movement on court, and wider range of shots in the quill will get the job done more often than not.

 

[brokenshoelace]

Fact is he is pusher

That is not a fact, and the term "pusher" is probably the most inaccurately overused in tennis.

 

[Riotbeard]

Stan actually does quite well against murray, but yes Andy Murray is hardly hopeless against big hitters. I would say if you are comparing him to nadal and novak, I would put him a little behind them, but not much.

 

[tenniskiosk]

Andy is more of a defensive player, and uses the opponents pace to generate much of his power. i disagree that Murray is hopeless against big hitters, he plays a pretty similar game to Novak and perhaps this is just the style of tennis that is required of players nowadays to compete among the top players. i would say Murray doesn't have any strength in particular, but he is a very well rounded tennis player.

 

[Fastgrass]

his last 3 losses were against big hitters and in straight sets . if peak Murray can't handle them , then which version can do that?
Fact is he is pusher, and terms like he offers variety of spin , pace is part of overeating by certain media.
His mug work can lead him against players like Raonic
but not against explosive hitters.

If this conversation was taking place 5-6 years ago, I might have agreed with you. Andy was very defensive, just a good counter-punch guy. But you do not win slams by being a pusher...not Wimbledon, not Us open, not any slam...His forehand has improved a lot and he already had an amazing backhand. Maybe he does not attack like Roger, but who does really?

Moderators post here?
Very good idea for good conversation between moderators
and members .
On the topic - I am agree with this he is much improved
after arrival of lendl but Tomatoes are Tomatoes , Even GOD
can't change them to Apples .