Luxilon Borg said:
nehmeth said:
GameSetAndMath said:
Besides, how is it self destructive, when it actually helps the player to vent the frustration
and channelize themselves in a more focused manner. That is what the yelling did to Novak.
But, Murray's yelling does not seem to help his cause more often than otherwise.
I think either Cahill or Gilbert mentioned this about how Murray's outbursts seem to hurt him rather than help him, and how Novak seems to be able to do a reset afterward.
Tignor also made a similar comment:
"But on Sunday, his negativity looked like it sapped his strength and reinforced his mistakes. It also seems to have become habitual against Djokovic. Murray began the match by barking several, uncharacteristic “Come on!â€s, but they didn’t lasted long. Against Djokovic, Murray believes in his chances up to a point, but when that belief is tested, when Djokovic fights back, he reverts to form and lashes out at himself again."
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2015/04/triple-double-trouble/54522/#.VSU3jhPF-Rs
I started a thread a while back saying that a player's on court demeanor and body language absolutely affects their performance, and that Murray was his own victim. I was soundly attacked.
And recently the mainstream press has caught on, I feel vindicated.
Since I debated about Murray's on-court demeanour in a previous thread, I'll just state again that I never disagreed that a player's on court demeanour can negatively affect his performance. [I don't think you've stated some amazing new truth that no one else had thought of, LB.] I think this is a truth that is universally acknowledged. It is also not new to criticise Murray for it, and say that it negatively affects him. People, including the 'mainstreanm press', have been saying this for years.
What I personally disagreed with was the statement that this behaviour has 'cost Murray multiple slams and loads of tournaments', as you put it. It hasn't. I asked you to give me examples, and you never did. Here are some counter examples, anyway. take murray's first gs final. let's forget the fac that federer had the major phsycial advantage adfter murray 2-day win of rafa int eh semis. say murray had been less tentative in the final, and a paragon of mental strength. what lwd have happned? murray would have put up a beeter fight, but lost anyway. i mean, this is a 27 year old fed we're talking about, arguably the greaest player to hold a racket. ebven if murray had been as mentally tough as possible, he
still woudl ahve lost.
or what about the ao sf in 2012? what if murray had somehow mangede to win one of those break points he ahd to serve for the match inteh fifth? and then what if murray has managed to serve out that match? do you think, that after 5 hours against novak, he wluld have been able to beat a more rested rafa in the final? i don't.
even take the final the other day. if murray has been able to take that first set, would he have won the second and thus the title? if murray had wo the first set, the second set wld have gone differertly,. becuase djok wld know he had to win thaqt set or lose the mathc, so he wlsd have rrasied his level. and becaase his level is highter than murray, djok wld have won
anyway.
i stilll contend that murray's mental 'flaws' are exagerratwed by him cotniaully having to face 3 all-tiem greats. if he was mentally toguher, he would just put up a better gight and still lose, fi the top guys are p;laying well. if they're undefrperming, he can win, and does.
[int he 3 big events so far this year, murray has got the final , the sf, and the f. on all three occasions he has lost to the owrld no. 1 and an all-tiem great. he has just racke dup 500 carreeer wins at age 27. and yet the thinhg sthat are said are; 'murray needs to see a psycholoasist' (he is , by the way), 'murray does not have a winning metnality'. not ahve aiwning mentalitt? the guy is world no,3, for pete's sake. not as good as djok? yes. NO the winning mentality of an all-tiem great liek djok? yes. but that is a very high yeardstic, of measurement. for the last 6 MONTHS, only 1 player has beaten novak at a big event (masters or gs) - federer. and he's a btter player than murray./ everyne else - eveyone else - has failed. was it their 'mental demons'? or ios dhjok just the best playuer in the world? i think it'as the latter.]
it;s not like murray cannot reposnd to adverisyt. he has raise dhis game when in trouble SO many times in his career. his mental strength and fighitng spirit is one of the things that separats shim from the berdychs and tongas, althoubh he is rarely prasied for it.
Murray cna chunter away, get annoyed, even when he is tested, when he is behind in a match, and come though qwith flying couliurs. no one talks about his on court demanour being harmfuol then, because he won. When he does not do this it's al;ways when he's [;ayin gthe big 3, who are better than him and wld win anyway, if they play well, and yet under these circumstances murray's loss is somehow attributed to his on court demanour. it's compeltwely illigcasl. if he didn'thave that demanour, he might get a few more games, another set maybe, here or there, but he wnd't wn. he can't win unless the big 3 are underperfmaornig, because they're phsycioally and techcnially supiroir (with the possibel expcetion of rafa physcially right now.)
i would also add thty it's easier to be mentally strong when you're the better player. fed seemed very metnally stong until soemeon came along who cld beat him - rafa - and then it was a different stroy.how wld djok fare against a player who was as better thatn him as he is than murray? wold he be a paragon of mental stenght, or wld he falter? we can't know for sure, but we can certainyl say it wld be a lot tougher for him to be as mentally strong. and let's say he was playuing a better tplayer than himself int eh final the other day, and lost that second set and had that out[burst as he did. then say he was mentalyy strong in the 3rd set, but because the other player was better than him, hwe lost that set, teh matcha dn teh title. then people wld be satying 'djok is not mentally strong', 'he shldn't have shouteed like that at the end of the secnd set - it sent a bad message to his opponent' etc. but becauze djok is abtter player than murrayu, he won and is thus a paragon of mentla strnegth.
murray is VERY mentally sdtrong aginst players he is better than. if you only looked at murray's matches against non-bog 3 players, you would think: wow, what a mentally tougbn guy! he almost alswyas comes through, even in the touigh moemnts, even when he's behind! he raises his level, he finds a way!]
i thin murray's occasianl wins over the big 3 when they're undepepfmding, combined with his otubursts on court, leasd people to think 'if only he was mentally stronger, he'd be as good as teh big 3',. as ui have pointed out before, there are other things goiing on, both technical and phy7scial.]
[as regards murray's recent lack of wins against the big 3:
[murray's 3 losses to djok this year have also been on slwo hards.] in his entier carrer, murray has 8 wins over djok, 6 of which are either on grass or on faster hards - 2 on grass, 2 in cinci, 1 at uso, 1 in dubai. this is no coincendence. murray's 2 ins over djok on slower hards - tonroto 2008 and miami 2009 - were when djok was nowhere near the player he is now. and eve that uso win, djok playwed poorly int he iwnd and trhen waas cramping in the fifth.
murray has only 5 wins against raf in his einter career , and in at least 3 of them rafa was not right physcially. since his surgry, murray's only palyed rafa twice, and both times on clay, and he's never betate4n raf on clay his entir caeer,
murray has had success over fed either at smaller tournamet swhen fed was off, or when fed was tired at the os aand ao sf13. i think it's actualyl mkroe difficlut to murray to beat fed now, cos of fed' new racket and m roe atqacking aporahc. in the past, fed was ocntent to rally with murray form the baseline, with gave murray mro of a shot, espciall if fed was having an off day and was making more ue with his grounstroeks. the mai8n chanve i see for murray to beat fed at this stage is at a slam if fed is tird cos he hadf 5-set mathc the preicvous round, ior seomthign liek that (that wa show murray beat fed at the os (fed pkayed the quelvalent of a 50st match egaisnt de,lpo previosu round) and at aosf13 (fed hasd [polajyed 5 set match agisnt tosgoma previous round), whih arwe murray's only wins over fed in best of 5 set format his entire career.
[a word on djok's fitness:
djok is a naturally different build to murray. he's muscualr yet lighter, and thus tires less eaisly. murray was natually skinny when younger, and had to bulk up to get strong. djokovic has the naturally wiry - slim ywet sotrng - physuique - it's a major advantage thqt muerray acan do nothing about.
surely also novak's amazing ability to sldoe to balls, whereas murray has to run to them, aslo helps novak to expned less enrgy? this wld add up with every point played.
murray also has been very dedicated to yoga throughotu his entire carrer for flexbilty, but he's never going to be as felxible as djokovic.
djokovic has won the gentic liottery with his physiqe.]
[i have a question. this year, djokovic has bagelled players ? times: names. these are players who are perfectly capable of wining 3rd sets, 4th sets, 5th sets against toher players, and have done. when djok bagelled them, i don't recal you posting to say it was because of their 'metnal demos'. i assume, like most people, you thoguht that they were simply yutplayed once djok had taken their legsby their attempts to stay with hjim for 2, 3 hours. but when EXACTLTY the sam erthing happens to murray, it's becasue of his 'mental demons'. inconsistency, methinks.]
:angel: