CINCINNATI - ATP 1000 - 15th to 21st Aug. 2016

[Front242]

I think everyone acknowledges Andy is way more consistent but it's also obvious his game is more defensive/pusher/counterpuncher/grinder than offensive and Cilic's offensive power poo poos on Murray from a great height. Sadly you're right though, it comes down to a handful of matches where we've actually seen him play at this level.

 

[mrzz]

That's a very daring declaration. By "peak Cilic", do you mean two great performances over the last 8 years? Because strictly speaking, Cilic had a great USO in 2014, and now this.

And nothing else.

And his "peak" hasn't extended through all points in between.

Whereas Andy has a much greater pedigree and has proven himself at the highest levels so often, without anybody ever getting the sniffy suspicion that his success were mere flashes in the pan...

In fact, I was being even more restrictive, as what I had in mind were precisely the quarters, semis and final of USO 2014. I have not watched this final.

Yes, his peak is extremely narrow, but that wasn´t my point. And the fact that you had not countered it directly shows that you agree, at least to some extent, to it.

But I´ll be honest: I wasn´t being neither constructive or positive. Andy Murray is one of the few things that come from Scotland that I don´t like (even if I obviously agree that he is a very good tennis player) and I wrote my post (which I stand by, all things considered) solely to annoy people.

It seems that I have succeeded...

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I think every acknowledges Andy is way more consistent but it's also obvious his game is more defensive/pusher/grinder than offensive and Cilic's offensive power poo poos on Murray from a great height. Sadly you're right though, it comes down to a handful of matches where we've actually seen him play at this level.

Problem with Cilic is not that he is peak in very few matches. He is actually peak in many more matches, but only for an hour or so. I had seen Cilic beat the crap out of Novak on more than one occasion with a score line like 6--1 or 6-2 and just when I think he is going to win it, he starts fading away. In the matches, where he is winning, he is able to sustain it.

So, my feeling is that he peaks frequently, but unable to sustain the peak for sufficiently long time to win the match except on few occasions.

 

[Front242]

^ Very true. If he sorts that out, he'll be deadly. The Wimbledon match against Novak comes to mind.

 

[Kieran]

I think every acknowledges Andy is way more consistent but it's also obvious his game is more defensive/pusher/grinder than offensive and Cilic's offensive power poo poos on Murray from a great height. Sadly you're right though, it comes down to a handful of matches where we've actually seen him play at this level.

Problem with Cilic is not that he is peak in very few matches. He is actually peak in many more matches, but only for an hour or so. I had seen Cilic beat the crap out of Novak on more than one occasion with a score line like 6--1 or 6-2 and just when I think he is going to win it, he starts fading away. In the matches, where he is winning, he is able to sustain it.

So, my feeling is that he peaks frequently, but unable to sustain the peak for sufficiently long time to win the match except on few occasions.

They're not "peaks", they're "blips", or anomalies. I like Cilic, I like his shotmaking and his demeanour, and I hope he makes the USO interesting again, by having a blip - I mean, "peak" - and funny enough, he may just get a bounce from having a new coach. Or he may just have experienced the bounce and Bjorkman brings him back down to earth... :snicker

 

[Rational National]

That's a very daring declaration. By "peak Cilic", do you mean two great performances over the last 8 years? Because strictly speaking, Cilic had a great USO in 2014, and now this.

And nothing else.

And his "peak" hasn't extended through all points in between.

Whereas Andy has a much greater pedigree and has proven himself at the highest levels so often, without anybody ever getting the sniffy suspicion that his success were mere flashes in the pan...

In fact, I was being even more restrictive, as what I had in mind were precisely the quarters, semis and final of USO 2014. I have not watched this final.

Yes, his peak is extremely narrow, but that wasn´t my point. And the fact that you had not countered it directly shows that you agree, at least to some extent, to it.

But I´ll be honest: I wasn´t being neither constructive or positive. Andy Murray is one of the few things that come from Scotland that I don´t like (even if I obviously agree that he is a very good tennis player) and I wrote my post (which I stand by, all things considered) solely to annoy people.

It seems that I have succeeded...

Might I add more: Midgies, The Buckfast Triangle, Sean 'tax avoidance' Connery, Sectarianism, Edinburgh traffic (during the festival !)

I think Murray stacks up quite well in comparison !

 

[Kieran]

That's a very daring declaration. By "peak Cilic", do you mean two great performances over the last 8 years? Because strictly speaking, Cilic had a great USO in 2014, and now this.

And nothing else.

And his "peak" hasn't extended through all points in between.

Whereas Andy has a much greater pedigree and has proven himself at the highest levels so often, without anybody ever getting the sniffy suspicion that his success were mere flashes in the pan...

In fact, I was being even more restrictive, as what I had in mind were precisely the quarters, semis and final of USO 2014. I have not watched this final.

Yes, his peak is extremely narrow, but that wasn´t my point. And the fact that you had not countered it directly shows that you agree, at least to some extent, to it.

But I´ll be honest: I wasn´t being neither constructive or positive. Andy Murray is one of the few things that come from Scotland that I don´t like (even if I obviously agree that he is a very good tennis player) and I wrote my post (which I stand by, all things considered) solely to annoy people.

It seems that I have succeeded...

Might I add more: Midgies, The Buckfast Triangle, Sean 'tax avoidance' Connery, Sectarianism, Edinburgh traffic (during the festival !)

I think Murray stacks up quite well in comparison !

Don't forget the Krankies! :laydownlaughing

 

[Murat Baslamisli]

Did someone just talk smack about Sean Connery????:wow::wow::wow::wow:

 

[Rational National]

Did someone just talk smack about The Krankies ????:wow::wow::wow::wow:

Its ok I corrected you.

Ps, does anyone else get the sense that Cilic is the heir apparent to Nalbandian - great on the highlights reel but without the minerals to do it game by game, set by set, match by match, tournament by tournament.

 

[Kieran]

Well I suppose the difference between Cilic and Nalbandian is a slam, so far. I liked Daveed, but he was overrated as a potential slam winner. That lad would find a way to lose if his opponent withdrew before the final. Prolly he'd kick the bloke who's about to announce he won by default. I know brother Cali, late of this parish, adored him, but that was more a fetishistic nonsense to avoid liking the really great players, like Nadal. Hipsterism, if you like...

 

[BratSrbin]

I think every acknowledges Andy is way more consistent but it's also obvious his game is more defensive/pusher/grinder than offensive and Cilic's offensive power poo poos on Murray from a great height. Sadly you're right though, it comes down to a handful of matches where we've actually seen him play at this level.

Problem with Cilic is not that he is peak in very few matches. He is actually peak in many more matches, but only for an hour or so. I had seen Cilic beat the crap out of Novak on more than one occasion with a score line like 6--1 or 6-2 and just when I think he is going to win it, he starts fading away. In the matches, where he is winning, he is able to sustain it.

So, my feeling is that he peaks frequently, but unable to sustain the peak for sufficiently long time to win the match except on few occasions.

It is not truth. He won only couple sets against No1e but only one, ONLY ONE, 6-1. One was 6-3 and three in tie-brak. That is all as long as I know.