Andy Vs Roger

[richart]

He's also won 2 slams before he was 25. All of the modern greats have, not some, all. You don't suddenly improve that much past 25 in the modern game

Lendl won 8 grand slams, the first one when he was 24 years old. He was also being written off before he won his first one at the French. Not sure that Murray being one year older means he should be written off.

Plenty of sportsman, including tennis players have peaked later in their career. Korda was 30 when he won his grand slam,Ivanisevic was 29. Johansson was 26 Krajicek was 25,Costa was 25, and they are all 25 year old plus who have won a grand slam in the last 15 years.

 

[JustOne]

What a great thread..... !!!

Firstly I don't see why all the Scottish people need to run to Murray's defence... we had a British winner and not one Scot even posted in the thread (weird huh?). We don't run around Henman just because he's English.... we openly admit that he's crap! :thup:

Murray is a great player... #4 in the world (does he get to #3 now?) and he has been #2 in the world. Will he win a slam? maybe... will he win Wimbledon... maybe. I don't even think Murray's future is worth argueing about... he's a good player.. rarely does a crap one make it to a slam final.. certainly not as many times as Murray has.




On to the game.... he was great for 2 1/2 sets but that 19 min game in the 3rd set was where he blew it, with a school boy error, he had Federer out of court and hit a soft overhead that he should have put away, after that break of Murray's serve Federer was playing in a different gear.

Federer's forehand topspin drive... WHAT A WEAPON!!! I think that shot alone is the one that takes him to the top on grass... and he just seems to find the angles better than most. Federer has really grown on me.. he too was a bit of a knob when he first came on the scene... perhaps that's just sport?

 

[Tiger]

Hutl abuse if it make you feel better Tiger. He doesn't just need to get better, he needs the top guys to decline as well, and also hope that some new blood doesn't appear. He needs a perfect storm and I can't see it coming

Wow you really are breathtakingly obnoxious...

 

[HomerJSimpson]

He's won 1 slam in over 2.5 years, his longest ever gap.That proves he's past his best, or maybe you'd like to argue that it proves he's approaching is peak ?

Rubbish. How can anyone be past their best when ranked #1 in the world. Just because he hasn't won a major for 2.5 years isn't the end of the world. The gap between the top players has narrowed and if you put it back into a golf analogy, look at some of the multiple winners of the majors and the gap they had.

Murray played great until the roof closed and then it became a bit of a foregone conclusion. With Lendl in his camp he'll get better technically and this must have done wondes for his self belief. Federer is coming close to the Autumn of his career but has the potential to win more but Murray will start getting more opportunities and I feel he will win won, hopefully at SW19

 

[colint]

Wow you really are breathtakingly obnoxious...

Feel better ?

 

[colint]

Rubbish. How can anyone be past their best when ranked #1 in the world. Just because he hasn't won a major for 2.5 years isn't the end of the world. The gap between the top players has narrowed and if you put it back into a golf analogy, look at some of the multiple winners of the majors and the gap they had.

Murray played great until the roof closed and then it became a bit of a foregone conclusion. With Lendl in his camp he'll get better technically and this must have done wondes for his self belief. Federer is coming close to the Autumn of his career but has the potential to win more but Murray will start getting more opportunities and I feel he will win won, hopefully at SW19

So if you're number 1 in the world that automatically means you're as good now as three years ago ? The golf analogy doesn't work, we get unexpected major winners all the time, cream rises to the top in tennis much more than in golf

 

[SS2]

Federer deserved to win. Calm, composed and in control throughout. His backhand and service returns were of the highest standard.

Murray is still too emotionally attached, perhaps Lendl can hammer that out of him.

All-in a great afternoon's entertainment.

 

[Tiger]

Federer deserved to win. Calm, composed and in control throughout. His backhand and service returns were of the highest standard.

Murray is still too emotionally attached, perhaps Lendl can hammer that out of him.

All-in a great afternoon's entertainment.

Don't think Federer was that composed in the first couple of sets. The number of unforced errors was high for him and I think that was partly down to the occasion but also how Murray played. However that break he won in game 12 of the second set transformed him. Obviously the roof closing helped but you are spot on that Murray got increasingly emotional and Federer increasingly serene as the match wore on.

I think it's that composure that Murray lacks on the big occassions. Like you, I think Lendl can help him address that. He was emotionless in the player's box!!!

I do wonder though if Murray had taken one of those four break points and won the second set if Federer would have come back as strongly...

Great match though

 

[NWJocko]

So if you're number 1 in the world that automatically means you're as good now as three years ago ? The golf analogy doesn't work, we get unexpected major winners all the time, cream rises to the top in tennis much more than in golf

Have you considered that he's remained at the same level but the competition has improved?

Djokovic has made a huge leap forward over the past 18 months and nadal has improved (from a good starting point) on surfaces other than clay.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

So if you're number 1 in the world that automatically means you're as good now as three years ago ? The golf analogy doesn't work, we get unexpected major winners all the time, cream rises to the top in tennis much more than in golf

Are you on a mission to alienate as many people as possible. It's a forum and about opinions and you don't have a given right for our opinion to be the only and right answer

As it happens, surely if yo get back to #1 then you are back to your bst as the rankings reflect performance over a period of time.

As for golf, I'm sure Harrington, Woods, Mickleson etc will be pleased to read your reply that cream doesn't rise. Heck in your wolrd why not just reduce the tennis tour to the top 4 at each event and only let Murray in to make up the numbers so the top 2 canjust play against each other every week

 

[Deke]

Can someone please explain why the roof being closed was better for Roger? How would it affect either player? I don't get it!

 

[JustOne]

I don't know Deke as Murray already complained about himself finding it harder to play in the wind the other day... seemed fairly even to me... Murray just missed a few chances which Federer didn't.

 

[Neddy]

Can someone please explain why the roof being closed was better for Roger? How would it affect either player? I don't get it!

The closing of the roof does two things,

It removes the "natural" element of the game, ie no wind, the temperature is controlled etc so the ball goes where you hit it, the elements have no factor.

Secondly an indoor environment is typically slower than a warm outdoor environment, so the ball travels a bit slower.

Personally don't believe the closing of the roof had much to do with it. Just think Roger went to a different level, but it does make the playing environment different.

 

[Deke]

The closing of the roof does two things,

It removes the "natural" element of the game, ie no wind, the temperature is controlled etc so the ball goes where you hit it, the elements have no factor.

Secondly an indoor environment is typically slower than a warm outdoor environment, so the ball travels a bit slower.

Personally don't believe the closing of the roof had much to do with it. Just think Roger went to a different level, but it does make the playing environment different.

Neddy mate,thank you! This has been bothering me all day! ;-)

 

[colint]

Are you on a mission to alienate as many people as possible. It's a forum and about opinions and you don't have a given right for our opinion to be the only and right answer

As it happens, surely if yo get back to #1 then you are back to your bst as the rankings reflect performance over a period of time.

As for golf, I'm sure Harrington, Woods, Mickleson etc will be pleased to read your reply that cream doesn't rise. Heck in your wolrd why not just reduce the tennis tour to the top 4 at each event and only let Murray in to make up the numbers so the top 2 canjust play against each other every week

And I'm giving my opinion, if that alienates me then so be it. If you the golf analogy works, then look back over the last 10 years and see how many one off, unexpected slam winners they've been, and then do the same for golf. I said cream rises more often in tennis, not that it doesn't rise in golf. Retread my post if its difficult

 

[Tiger]

Deke if you look at Federer's indoor record it's frightening. The man is phenomenally gifted and can aim and hit the edges more freely in a controlled environment. With the elements players don't push the limits as much to allow a greater margin for error. They are both world class players but I don't think Federer has lost a match indoors since 2010

 

[HomerJSimpson]

And I'm giving my opinion, if that alienates me then so be it.

It just seems to be that your view has to be the right one all the time on this thread. No concession to other points of view

 

[Deke]

Deke if you look at Federer's indoor record it's frightening. The man is phenomenally gifted and can aim and hit the edges more freely in a controlled environment. With the elements players don't push the limits as much to allow a greater margin for error. They are both world class players but I don't think Federer has lost a match indoors since 2010

Cheers mate,I am quite new to watching tennis and this stuff fascinates me!

 

[DaveM]

I'm not a fan of watching tennis. But thought it was a great game. Both of them played some great shots. Murray was better than I had been lead to believe as well. There was not much in it all the way.

 

[Piece]

So if you're number 1 in the world that automatically means you're as good now as three years ago ? The golf analogy doesn't work, we get unexpected major winners all the time, cream rises to the top in tennis much more than in golf

Food for thought: Lee Westwood's best year was in 2000, winning 7 events and leading the Euro Tour list that year. He was aged 27. Two years later he dropped out of the world 100 and wasn't in contention. Was he past his best? Just saying...

There is nothing to prevent a sportsman from getting back to his best. I believe we are seeing this with FedEx and Tiger.