Where does Andy Murray go from here?

[herios]

As an aside...One thing we should look for is that while it seems tier 2 and 3 players like Ferrer and Anderson, respectively, seem to be peaking later, more in their late 20s to early 30s, we don't know if the same is true of the tier 1 players - meaning, the Big Four. Stan is an interesting exception in that he was a tier 3 player (top 20ish) who became a tier 1 player, almost over night (Well, not exactly - he was looking like a tier 2 player in late 2013 before winning the AO in early 2014). The first Slam title seemed like a fluke, that he was more of a late-blooming Berdych or Tsonga (tier 2) who got lucky, but the second Slam cemented that he's a step above these guys and closer to Andy.

Stan has played his best tennis at age 28-30, with no sign of declining. Ferrer, Lopez, Anderson, and others are playing their best tennis, even a bit older (although I think Ferrer is slightly reduced in 2014-15 than he was in 2012-13). Roger, despite still being great, showed a more standard career pattern: peaking at 22-27, declining to a lower plateau from 28-31, then after recovering from his disastrous 2013, another slightly lower plateau at age 32-34. As remarkable as he is, it is still a relatively normal pattern - it is just that, as someone said, he came from so high so that a "plate career plateau" is still Himalayan. Couple that with his extraordinary work ethic and health and you have a 34-year old who is #2 in the world and looks like he could remain a top 5 player for a year or two yet.

But what we don't know is how Djokovic, Nadal, and Murray will look in a couple years. Rafa is clearly in decline; best-case scenario and he comes back with a slightly lower late career plateau, like Federer over the last six years. But we don't know yet if Novak and Andy will decline at that time as well, or if they will be able to do what other, lesser players have done - have an equal or higher plateau at age 28-32 as the traditional peak years of 22-27. Who knows, maybe we'll look back at this US Open as the first sign that Andy was dropping a half-step, like Roger's 2010 Roland Garros when he went out in the QF of a Slam for the first time in six years.

So to summarize, what I'm trying to get at is that for whatever reason, it seems that tier 2 and 3 players are more prone to late careers peaks than tier 1 elites are. I don't know exactly why this is. Maybe it is because they aren't elites, that they are more inspired to do what it takes to take their game up a notch - like Agassi being a better player in his late 20s and early 30s because he partially wasted his peak years to partying and such. Certainly Stan Wawrinka is setting a new standard, and is a hope and inspiration for every player in their peak years who hasn't won a Slam. But we can look at a Dimitrov or Nishikori or Raonic, or even a Gulbis, and not be able to assume that they will take the normal age 28ish decline. Maybe it all clicks for Grigor when he's 27 or 28 and he has a Stan-like or better late career peak.

You don't want to give up on Dimi, do you?:devil

OK, I will come back to you on this next week.

 

[Johnsteinbeck]

I think the only people disappointed with Andy are his most ardent fans and Andy himself. Everyone else realizes that he is what he's always been: a great player, but not as great as the truly dominant players of the era - Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic. Andy is to those guys what Guillermo Vilas was to Connors and Borg, or Courier to Agassi and Sampras (although unlike Courier, Andy never had his time at the very top). No shame in that. There's nothing wrong with Andy and his fans thinking that in 2012-13 he was stepping up to finally be an equal to the others, just as Novak stepped up in 2011. But it just didn't happen.

count me somewhere in between. i'm not an ardent fan, but i kinda like him. and again and again, i find myself believing, for a couple of days or weeks, that he could do a little more, maybe get to the Edberg/Becker heights. that said, right now, he's not even Courier/Vilas material, slam-wise. but yeah, that's probably where he'll end up in the slam count (minus Courier's #1), and that's alright indeed. i'll even give him a bonus point for breaking the Grand Slam and Wimbledon droughts for the UK, so he'll be in the Courier league even though he won't make it to #1.

 

[Kirijax]

Wow, lots of great responses. Thanks guys. And I agree with what a lot of you are saying. Murray still has 2 or 3 good years left. He could very well end up with a couple more Slams but No. 1 seems out of reach at this point. Something drastic would have to happen to Djokovic for that to happen. God forbid. A match like yesterday happens. Anderson played maybe the best match he has ever played on such a stage and Murray was off his game. He's not a 50-consecutive Slam semifinals kind of guy anyways. He's still got the Davis Cup and WTF in his sights and you know he'll be gunning for that Aussie title in about 4 months.

Andy Murray is far from finished.

 

[Kirijax]

I wonder which title Murray wants the most. Has to be another Wimbledon. But after all those serving trays from the Australian Open, I would think he would like to get a Norman Brookes Trophy.

 

[Kieran]

I think any slam would be welcome for him right now, but if he was to win only one more? I'd say he'd choose Wimbledon...

 

[El Dude]

You don't want to give up on Dimi, do you?:devil

OK, I will come back to you on this next week.

Well he's just too damn talented to completely right off, and he is still "only" 24. The ship has long sailed on him being a great, and it is unlikely that he is a lesser great like Vilas/Courier/Kuerten/Murray, which I thought he would be a few years ago. But I think he's as good a bet as anyone to sneak out a Slam or two between the Reign of Novak and the Rise of the Young Pups.

 

[isabelle]

I wonder which title Murray wants the most. Has to be another Wimbledon. But after all those serving trays from the Australian Open, I would think he would like to get a Norman Brookes Trophy.

Masters in London could be priceless or another Gold medal in Rio or DC trophy ? he can chose

 

[nehmeth]

You don't want to give up on Dimi, do you?:devil

OK, I will come back to you on this next week.

Well he's just too damn talented to completely right off, and he is still "only" 24. The ship has long sailed on him being a great, and it is unlikely that he is a lesser great like Vilas/Courier/Kuerten/Murray, which I thought he would be a few years ago. But I think he's as good a bet as anyone to sneak out a Slam or two between the Reign of Novak and the Rise of the Young Pups.

"Lesser greats" :-/:s:cover

Sad that two of my favorites have fallen in with the likes of Murray and Courier.

 

[El Dude]

You don't want to give up on Dimi, do you?:devil

OK, I will come back to you on this next week.

Well he's just too damn talented to completely right off, and he is still "only" 24. The ship has long sailed on him being a great, and it is unlikely that he is a lesser great like Vilas/Courier/Kuerten/Murray, which I thought he would be a few years ago. But I think he's as good a bet as anyone to sneak out a Slam or two between the Reign of Novak and the Rise of the Young Pups.

"Lesser greats" :-/:s:cover

Sad that two of my favorites have fallen in with the likes of Murray and Courier.

What's wrong with being a "lesser great?" Aren't Vilas and Kuerten a step down from the Becker/Edberg/Wilander crew? I should probably put Nastase in there.

Vilas was never the best player on tour. Now there's an argument that he should have been #1 in 1977, but even then he was really, at best, equal to Connors and Borg, and only for that one year. Courier was actually #1 for a year, and in the top three for three years - but other than that his career wasn't great at all. And Kuerten? Great on clay, #1 for a year, but his peak was pretty short and his inability to go deep in non-clay Slams tarnishes his greatness. Both Courier and Kuerten also snuck in their year-end #1s between the fall and rise of greater players. Similarly with Nastase.

Andy Murray has consistently been among the four best players in the game for eight years now, going back to 2008. In a way he's more similar to Vilas than he is to Kuerten or Courier in that his best years came alongside all-time greats. Poor Vilas was always behind Connors, Borg, and then McEnroe and Lendl. Poor Andy has had to view with Federer, Nadal and Djokovic.

In fact, "near great" might be a more accurate term. "Lesser great" still means great, but none of these players - Nastase, Vilas, Courier, Kuerten, or Murray - were as dominant as the true greats. So for the Open Era I'd categorize the best players in the following groups:

GOAT candidates: Borg, Sampras, Federer, Nadal, Djokovic
Lesser Greats: Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Wilander, Edberg, Becker, Agassi
Near Greats: Nastase, Smith, Vilas, Courier, Kafelnikov, Kuerten, Safin, Hewitt, Murray

Or something like that. It really depends where you draw the line. If Stan wins another Slam he deserves to be in that third category; he doesn't have the long-term consistency of Andy, so is in the next group down with the likes of Kriek, Bruguera, Rafter, Muster, Roddick, etc.

 

[brokenshoelace]

For what it's worth I consider Murray to be a better player than Guga ever was, on average. Guga is a true clay court great though, and he was more proficient on clay than Murray is on any surface.

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

now I feel he still could win a major or two but won't be world no1 rank in future.

 

[MartyB]

I have seen Murray play in person and he sucks the air out of the fans like no one else. He has talent & he can do great things on the court but he is without a doubt the most miserable top tennis player I have seen in many years. I could care less if he wins another GS and truth be told I will root for Nadal & Djokovic every time against him & that's saying plenty. The way he mopes, fakes his condition and utter blandness in most respects makes me root for anyone he's playing against. The only thing i was hoping for was watch Fed do another beat down on him at this years Open. Going to the men's semi's and I'm actually glad he's not in it. Seen that guy several times in the past few years and every match makes me go to the stands and get those awful chicken tenders and waffle fries and drinking them down with as large a cold beer as I can get.

 

[Kirijax]

I have seen Murray play in person and he sucks the air out of the fans like no one else. He has talent & he can do great things on the court but he is without a doubt the most miserable top tennis player I have seen in many years. I could care less if he wins another GS and truth be told I will root for Nadal & Djokovic every time against him & that's saying plenty. The way he mopes, fakes his condition and utter blandness in most respects makes me root for anyone he's playing against. The only thing i was hoping for was watch Fed do another beat down on him at this years Open. Going to the men's semi's and I'm actually glad he's not in it. Seen that guy several times in the past few years and every match makes me go to the stands and get those awful chicken tenders and waffle fries and drinking them down with as large a cold beer as I can get.

I guess he bothers some people more than others. lol Just like I can't stand a couple of players but for some reason they have a bunch of fans. To each his own! I really hope Murray can maybe do a "Sharapova" and start his own can.....I mean win each Grand Slam once. Not impossible!

 

[nehmeth]

Well he's just too damn talented to completely right off, and he is still "only" 24. The ship has long sailed on him being a great, and it is unlikely that he is a lesser great like Vilas/Courier/Kuerten/Murray, which I thought he would be a few years ago. But I think he's as good a bet as anyone to sneak out a Slam or two between the Reign of Novak and the Rise of the Young Pups.

"Lesser greats" :-/:s:cover

Sad that two of my favorites have fallen in with the likes of Murray and Courier.

What's wrong with being a "lesser great?" Aren't Vilas and Kuerten a step down

:snicker

E.D. I was just lamenting the fact that you lumped two of my favorite players with the likes of Murray and Courier.

 

[Kirijax]

I think Vilas and Murray could end up side to side as the greatest players to never reach No. 1. Vilas had Connors-Borg-McEnroe and Murray has Federer-Nadal-Djokovic. That's nothing to be ashamed about.

 

[Kirijax]

US Open 2015: Andy Murray faces tough decisions over future

Murray says life will be far less frenetic after next week's Davis Cup semi-final against Australia in Glasgow. He expects to play in just Shanghai and Paris before the World Tour Finals begin in London in the middle of November.

 

[El Dude]

I think Vilas and Murray could end up side to side as the greatest players to never reach No. 1. Vilas had Connors-Borg-McEnroe and Murray has Federer-Nadal-Djokovic. That's nothing to be ashamed about.

Yup. That's basically what I was saying, but you said it much more succinctly.

Anyhow, I think they are already the greatest two players never ranked number one.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

If Andy can win the DC this year outright, that would kind of give him the rights to skip the DC for the next 3 years at least without the British journalists making him guilty in press conferences.

 

[isabelle]

If Andy can win the DC this year outright, that would kind of give him the rights to skip the DC for the next 3 years at least without the British journalists making him guilty in press conferences.

I do hope he'll win DC 2015...

 

[JesuslookslikeBorg]

If Andy can win the DC this year outright, that would kind of give him the rights to skip the DC for the next 3 years at least without the British journalists making him guilty in press conferences.

I do hope he'll win DC 2015...

next week's sf first :exclamation: lets waste those stroppy aussie's. andy and the boys well get the job done.
: :