Andy Murray: The Future King Of Tennis

[ClayDeath]

Clay will probably always be a problem for Andy. That makes it hard for him to get to #1.

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

As long as Andy can't start making semis or finals on clay on constant basis, he just can't be the best player in the game when there are guys like Nole who succeed everywhere.

I hear ya general august but 50% of the slams are on hard courts and then there is Wimbledon.

clay probably will be a bit of a problem with andy but he almost beat nole in rome 2 years ago. so he can certainly improve on clay anyway.

 

[ClayDeath]

thanks for posting the info general sid. nadal, andy, and gasquet are somewhat close friends and hit together when they can.

 

[August]

Clay will probably always be a problem for Andy. That makes it hard for him to get to #1.

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

As long as Andy can't start making semis or finals on clay on constant basis, he just can't be the best player in the game when there are guys like Nole who succeed everywhere.

I hear ya general august but 50% of the slams are on hard courts and then there is Wimbledon.

clay probably will be a bit of a problem with andy but he almost beat nole in rome 2 years ago. so he can certainly improve on clay anyway.

Even though there are two HC slams, there's one bad thing for Andy. He has an edge over Nole on faster surfaces but AO is a slow HC. Nole has mostly won their matches on slow HCs, Andy on fast HCs.

 

[ClayDeath]

excellent point general. lets see if andy can change that going forward.

he is a different man these days. he says he is more motivated now than ever before.


he is finally armed with a rock solid belief for one thing.

 

[Riotbeard]

Clay will probably always be a problem for Andy. That makes it hard for him to get to #1.

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

As long as Andy can't start making semis or finals on clay on constant basis, he just can't be the best player in the game when there are guys like Nole who succeed everywhere.

I hear ya general august but 50% of the slams are on hard courts and then there is Wimbledon.

clay probably will be a bit of a problem with andy but he almost beat nole in rome 2 years ago. so he can certainly improve on clay anyway.

Even though there are two HC slams, there's one bad thing for Andy. He has an edge over Nole on faster surfaces but AO is a slow HC. Nole has mostly won their matches on slow HCs, Andy on fast HCs.

This is the thing. The one surface where Andy has a big edge on nole is grass. You can argue he has an edge at the USO but it is debatable and small at best. Nole plays quite well on fast hard courts as well as slow, hence his vastly superior indoor record over murray. Murray has a downright abysmal clay record (no finals, no titles) which is a much larger part of the season than his trump, grass courts. And nole's 4 titles at the AO and now three in a row make that his home almost like wimbledon was for Fed (nobody can be compared to rafa RG during his peak years). It will be more difficult IMO for murray to win an AO than novak to win a USO.

We also still haven't seen how the new murray (which this is a legitimately new murray, I don't debate that) will fare against his longtime roadblock, nadal. There are a lot more questions on the table about murray's future than there was after nole breakthrough year IMO.

It's also worth remembering that even though murray was dominant in the wimbledon final, he hardly eased into it, even though he was up against a relatively easy draw once it opened up. His draw also opened up at the USO last year until the final. He has not one a major facing multiple top tier opponents. I am not saying he won't, i think he will eventually. This shouldn't take anything away from murray's achievement, but it's worth noting when trying to predict his future results.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

Clay will probably always be a problem for Andy. That makes it hard for him to get to #1.

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

As long as Andy can't start making semis or finals on clay on constant basis, he just can't be the best player in the game when there are guys like Nole who succeed everywhere.

I hear ya general august but 50% of the slams are on hard courts and then there is Wimbledon.

clay probably will be a bit of a problem with andy but he almost beat nole in rome 2 years ago. so he can certainly improve on clay anyway.

Even though there are two HC slams, there's one bad thing for Andy. He has an edge over Nole on faster surfaces but AO is a slow HC. Nole has mostly won their matches on slow HCs, Andy on fast HCs.

This is the thing. The one surface where Andy has a big edge on nole is grass. You can argue he has an edge at the USO but it is debatable and small at best. Nole plays quite well on fast hard courts as well as slow, hence his vastly superior indoor record over murray. Murray has a downright abysmal clay record (no finals, no titles) which is a much larger part of the season than his trump, grass courts. And nole's 4 titles at the AO and now three in a row make that his home almost like wimbledon was for Fed (nobody can be compared to rafa RG during his peak years). It will be more difficult IMO for murray to win an AO than novak to win a USO.

We also still haven't seen how the new murray (which this is a legitimately new murray, I don't debate that) will fare against his longtime roadblock, nadal. There are a lot more questions on the table about murray's future than there was after nole breakthrough year IMO.

It's also worth remembering that even though murray was dominant in the wimbledon final, he hardly eased into it, even though he was up against a relatively easy draw once it opened up. His draw also opened up at the USO last year until the final. He has not one a major facing multiple top tier opponents. I am not saying he won't, i think he will eventually. This shouldn't take anything away from murray's achievement, but it's worth noting when trying to predict his future results.

Good analysis RB. Fans are hyping up Andy; that's all. Need to
wait and see.

 

[Emma]

Clay will probably always be a problem for Andy. That makes it hard for him to get to #1.

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

As long as Andy can't start making semis or finals on clay on constant basis, he just can't be the best player in the game when there are guys like Nole who succeed everywhere.

Not true at all. Sampras kept his clay performance to average and yet, that didn't stop him from winning 14 Majors and stay at No. 1 for six straight years. Andy's poor performance on clay so far, which btw is subject to change and improve going forward, will have no bearing if he maximizes his performance on hard and grass.

While Nole is better than Andy on clay, Andy has the upper hand on Nole on grass and you will see that going forward. Andy already has the better results on grass than Nole as well as H2H on grass (2-0 on Major occasions). On hard, Nole's leading at the moment but that will change as well.

All Andy will have to do is to keep his performance at average level during the clay season and make the qtrs at RG going forward and maximize his results everywhere else. That way he'll have a clear shot at 3 of the 4 Majors, all the tournaments on grass and hard and WTF which should be 60/70% of the total tournaments. That's how Sampras did and Lendl's a very smart calculative guy.

 

[Riotbeard]

Emma, you may be right, but much of your analysis is based in the confidence of being a fan, as opposed to proven track record (although he won't have a track record until he establishes one to be fair).

 

[GameSetAndMath]

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

Excuse me, are you equating Roger's performance on clay with
Andy's performance on clay?

Roger won FO once and made it to the finals of FO Five times.
Further he has about 10 titles on clay.

FYI, Roger does not have a clay problem, he has a problem
playing FONs (Freak of Nature) on Clay; that's all.

On the other hand, Andy has a real clay problem clearly
illustrated by his performance in FO thus far and lack of
any clay titles.

 

[Emma]

Emma, you may be right, but much of your analysis is based in the confidence of being a fan, as opposed to proven track record (although he won't have a track record until he establishes one to be fair).

But the subject matter is based on the future, "The Future King of Tennis", so I need to point out what lies ahead based on the past and present. It's a fact that Andy is better than Nole on grass.

Murray leads Nole on grass: 2-0

Nole leads Andy on clay: 2-0

Nole leads Andy on hard: 9-6

Nole has 5 Slams on hard while Andy has 1. In Slams, Nole leads Andy 2-1.

Clearly right now Nole is better than Andy on hard and this is where I believe the main fight will take place as they tend to meet far more on hard than anywhere else. Their matches on hard have always been very, very close and Andy has already made the leap by winning USO over him just last year, so while yes, I am basing my assumptions based on the confidence I have on my man, it's a good and reliable confidence to strongly take into account. Just as much I have always maintained that Andy would not only win a slam but many and this was even when some of his own fans wrote him off.

And yes, I am aware of the fact that Andy has lost 4 matches in a row to Nole including the AO final since the USO, but I had sort of expected that as he was still getting over the fact that, he had finally won his first Slam. I believe the real Andy will show up now after the Wimbledon win, which was his biggest obstacle despite the support thus far.

So once Andy makes that leap on hard court over Nole, everything else will be within his reach including the No. 1 ranking. Right now, it's only a matter of time.

 

[August]

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

Excuse me, are you equating Roger's performance on clay with
Andy's performance on clay?

Roger won FO once and made it to the finals of FO Five times.
Further he has about 10 titles on clay.

FYI, Roger does not have a clay problem, he has a problem
playing FONs (Freak of Nature) on Clay; that's all.

On the other hand, Andy has a real clay problem clearly
illustrated by his performance in FO thus far and lack of
any clay titles.

That's why I had Roger in parenthesis. Clay isn't a problem for him but still his worst surface.

 

[shawnbm]

I know Federer is the only player in the post-2000 generation to win AT LEAST 10 titles on all surfaces played on tour. Can anyone tell me what other players have done this in the Open Era? I am thinking that if you count Har-Tru (green clay), then only Connors, Borg and Lendl might have done it, but I don't know. El Dude or whomever has the ability to search for such things, can you help me out? (I don't think we can count carpet since it has been discontinued, but I know McEnroe, Connors and Borg won on carpet too). Thanks

 

[Emma]

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

Excuse me, are you equating Roger's performance on clay with
Andy's performance on clay?

Roger won FO once and made it to the finals of FO Five times.
Further he has about 10 titles on clay.

FYI, Roger does not have a clay problem, he has a problem
playing FONs (Freak of Nature) on Clay; that's all.

On the other hand, Andy has a real clay problem clearly
illustrated by his performance in FO thus far and lack of
any clay titles.

That's why I had Roger in parenthesis. Clay isn't a problem for him but still his worst surface.

Clay is indeed his weakest surface. I had done an extensive research on his performance on clay not so long ago, where I'd shown how most of this clay titles came winning the same tournaments year after year. In fact, he has only won 10/15% of his total titles on clay.

 

[August]

And his poor performances on clay make it hard for him to be called the best player in the game. Right now there's one player who can succeed everywhere, it's Djokovic. Andy (and Roger) have hard time on clay, Rafa struggles on fast surfaces.

Excuse me, are you equating Roger's performance on clay with
Andy's performance on clay?

Roger won FO once and made it to the finals of FO Five times.
Further he has about 10 titles on clay.

FYI, Roger does not have a clay problem, he has a problem
playing FONs (Freak of Nature) on Clay; that's all.

On the other hand, Andy has a real clay problem clearly
illustrated by his performance in FO thus far and lack of
any clay titles.

That's why I had Roger in parenthesis. Clay isn't a problem for him but still his worst surface.

Clay is indeed his weakest surface. I had done an extensive research on his performance on clay not so long ago, where I'd shown how most of this clay titles came winning the same tournaments year after year. In fact, he has only won 10/15% of his total titles on clay.

Hamburg and Madrid, I guess. He doesn't usually play much on clay outside M1000s and RG. Hamburg's lower bounce suited him well and Madrid, esp. blue clay in 2012, was unusually fast clay.

 

[shawnbm]

Weakness is relative. I still believe he is the third best player I have seen on the red stuff (need I say who the two on top are?). Nadal plays significantly in the analysis. Roger beat Rafa in two clay finals (Hamburg and Madrid) while Rafa beat Roger in something like 12 clay court finals over the same time (Paris four times, plus one semi in 2005; twice in Monte Carlo, twice in Rome, once in Hamburg, once in Madrid and I am forgetting others). They usually met in the finals of events so it was pretty clear for some six or seven years who the best on that surface were.

 

[ClayDeath]

this thread is on fire.

we may have to test it for doping.

 

[sid]

thanks for posting the info general sid. nadal, andy, and gasquet are somewhat close friends and hit together when they can.

Hi Hurc it's good to know these guys hitting together,i'm sure it will help once thay play in Rogers cup.

 

[sid]

excellent point general. lets see if andy can change that going forward.

he is a different man these days. he says he is more motivated now than ever before.


he is finally armed with a rock solid belief for one thing.

Murray has become a different animal since Ivan Lendl came onboard.Lendl will be working on Andy's game for Ozz i'm sure.Clay one man owns this surface,Nadal is just Amazing onit.

 

[ClayDeath]

afffirmatve general sid.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I know Federer is the only player in the post-2000 generation to win AT LEAST 10 titles on all surfaces played on tour. Can anyone tell me what other players have done this in the Open Era? I am thinking that if you count Har-Tru (green clay), then only Connors, Borg and Lendl might have done it, but I don't know. El Dude or whomever has the ability to search for such things, can you help me out? (I don't think we can count carpet since it has been discontinued, but I know McEnroe, Connors and Borg won on carpet too). Thanks

Definitely not Lendl (I did not search). He had grass problem, it
is difficult to imagine he having 10 titles on grass.