Andy Murray

[toonarmy]

He may be Britain's best player of the modern era, but he chokes harder than an Amsterdam hooker when it comes to Major finals.

Henman always got stick for being a bottler in semi-finals of the Majors. I don't see how choking in the final is any better at all.

Personally, I'd like to see the two-handed shot ruled out of tennis and then maybe we'd get some quality tennis to watch again. Seeing ol' Bonkin' Boris on Top Gear last night reminded me of what great tennis looked like, with players that only used their other hand to throw the ball up and didn't only get to the net at the end of the match.

 

[richart]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

Lendl didn't win a slam until he was 24, and then went on to win 8. Plenty of time left.

 

[colint]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

Lendl didn't win a slam until he was 24, and then went on to win 8. Plenty of time left.

Different era, these days player are retiring in their mid to late 20's. Trust me, he's finished

 

[USER1999]

I don't see that he is finished. He is a bit like Henman in that he is a very good tennis player, but not quite good enough. He'll be around for a while yet, but still won't win unless the others mess it up, or get injured.

 

[muttleee]

much like Westwood in golf, surely if he keeps knocking on the door he'll get a win.

Just like Monty did.

 

[Aztecs27]

much like Westwood in golf, surely if he keeps knocking on the door he'll get a win.

Just like Monty did.

Difference being, Lee's actually going to get one.

 

[Screwback]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

So going by that Roger Federer will not win another one because he is far far too old.....Doubt it.

 

[Screwback]

Henman always got stick for being a bottler in semi-finals of the Majors. I don't see how choking in the final is any better at all.

You can only choke in a final if you are good enough to be in it and he was never good enough to choke it in a final!

Better having a silver than a bronze

 

[colint]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

So going by that Roger Federer will not win another one because he is far far too old.....Doubt it.

That's not what I said, I said they win their first before they are 23. Federer won his first at 22, the message is if you're not good enough at 23 you'll never be

 

[USER1999]

Better having a silver than a bronze

Not really. I always prefered bronze. A win is a win, but no one likes coming second. To get a bronze meant you were good enough for a prize, but were never in with a shout on the win. Less disppointing in my eyes.

 

[richart]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

Lendl didn't win a slam until he was 24, and then went on to win 8. Plenty of time left.

Different era, these days player are retiring in their mid to late 20's. Trust me, he's finished

Trust me, your wrong.

 

[richart]

Better having a silver than a bronze

Not really. I always prefered bronze. A win is a win, but no one likes coming second. To get a bronze meant you were good enough for a prize, but were never in with a shout on the win. Less disppointing in my eyes.

Strange outlook, you have to get to a final to win it. The more times you get there the more likely you are to win. Would always want to finish as high as possible, rather be 7th than 8th, and certainly 2nd rather than 3rd.

 

[colint]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

Lendl didn't win a slam until he was 24, and then went on to win 8. Plenty of time left.

Different era, these days player are retiring in their mid to late 20's. Trust me, he's finished

Trust me, your wrong.

Ok, when he wins one you can say you told me so. I'll resist the temptation to do the same at every valiant failure in the rest of this years slams

 

[percy_layer]

I don't think his age counts against him, i just don't see him winning a big one. Impressive through the tournament until the final.....

I hope he proves me wrong soon, i really do.

 

[richart]

He's not good enough to win a slam, end of. In tennis terms he's coming to the end of his best years. I'm sure people will celebrate him losing in a final, but the end of the day he lost and he's a loser

23 and past his best? did you re read your post. have a word with yourself hes got plenty of years in him.

He got beat today becasue his opponent played better than him. He will have other chances regardless of what people on here say the best in the world say he will have chances so thats good enough for me.

In tennis terms 23 is old. Djokovic, Nadal, Federer had old won slams younger than that, if you're not good enough before 23 you're not going to be after 23. Either the old guard who are better than you will still be around, or the younger generation who are better than you will be coming through. He hasn't come close to winning in any of the finals he's been in.

Lendl didn't win a slam until he was 24, and then went on to win 8. Plenty of time left.

Different era, these days player are retiring in their mid to late 20's. Trust me, he's finished

Trust me, your wrong.

Ok, when he wins one you can say you told me so. I'll resist the temptation to do the same at every valiant failure in the rest of this years slams

Don't worry i will !! US Open is his best bet. No chance on clay, assuming Nadal is fit, and unlikely to get past Federer and Nadal at Wimbledon, but US courts suit him best.

Worth remembering that Nadal is injury prone, and Federer is nearing 30. Also there are no great young players coming through at the moment.

 

[colint]

I hope you're right, I honestly wanted him to win but I just can't see it

 

[CannyFifer]

I hope you're right, I honestly wanted him to win but I just can't see it

Cant be bothered quoting the rest but he is up against the best players of all time, just as jimmy white was but no one says he was crap. just a thought..........

 

[colint]

I hope you're right, I honestly wanted him to win but I just can't see it

Cant be bothered quoting the rest but he is up against the best players of all time, just as jimmy white was but no one says he was crap. just a thought..........

It's a fair point, but I don't think I said he was crap, just not good enough