After predicting Murray's win at the Australian Open and saying Verdasco is the future Britain's best comedian Simon Reed is at it again.
Most notable points:
* Favours Murray to win the final against Federer
* Kohlschreiber or Safin more likely to defeat Murray than Nadal/Federer
Wimbledon - Reed: A tale of two players
Eurosport - Tue, 16 Jun 11:05:00 2009
Eurosport commentator Simon Reed reflects on the contrasting fortunes of Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic one week before Wimbledon.
It was a very interesting start to the grass court season with Andy Murray winning the title at Queen's and Novak Djokovic losing to Tommy Haas in Halle.
I'm not sure what is going on with Djokovic at the moment. Obviously I was head down concentrating on Murray at Queen's so I didn't see the match with Haas.
Recently I had the feeling that Djokovic was finally starting to click after a poor start to the season. He had some very impressive performances in the Masters Series but then came his poor performance at the French Open and now he has gone and lost to Haas.
I think he has the game for grass and I could see him getting to the semi-finals, but I'm not sure he can do any more than that.
In contrast, there was a real sense of occasion in watching Murray at Queen's.
He has lifted his game a division above from where he was, even at the start of this year, and is now certainly way beyond his level at Wimbledon last year.
There is a lot of buzz around him right now and it is difficult not to get caught up in all the excitement.
I do think that he has the game to win Wimbledon and in many ways I see him now as the favourite for the event.
The package is just all there. From a grass court perspective I think the key ingredient to his game is the improvement in his serve. His serve looks so much better than it did last year, and mentally he seems much more in tune with things.
The way he immediately took control of matches at Queen's was something I have never seen from him before.
Previously he seemed to go into his matches without any pre-conceived ideas. This meant he often started slowly and had to suss out things on the court to find a way to win.
At Queen's he was more aggressive, started positively, knew exactly what he wanted to do, dictated more and did not run into any problems at any stage of any match.
To be fair, he didn't play anyone who is going to win Wimbledon - he had a pretty easy path - but his mindset was still mightily impressive.
The final was a perfect example. Blake is a player we thought might be a threat, but Murray knew exactly what he wanted to do and just went out and did it.
(Blake are you serious?)
Another key moment at Queen's was how he dealt with the on-court interview with Sue Barker after the final. When it began I thought to myself this could be one of the moments that defies his approach to Wimbledon.
I thought he was realistic, not unduly modest, but he really played down the significance of the win. I was as impressed with the way he conducted himself afterwards as I was with his play.
He's a genuine guy with his feet firmly on the ground and I don't think external pressures will get to him at all. In fact, I can see him relishing the pressure and using it as a positive.
I think the only danger is that he might put too much pressure on himself because Wimbledon has now become such an important event in his season.
He has to make sure this doesn't become a factor in the early rounds. I believe if he gets to the final and meets someone like Federer or Nadal then he can beat them.
What I'm more worried about is if he comes up against an inspired player in a third or fourth-round match.
If someone like Philipp Kohlschreiber or even Marat Safin, for example, is playing exceptionally well and if Andy's game is not where he wants, then there is a danger he might get frustrated with himself.
The inner pressure he puts on himself, nothing to do with anything external, might be the one thing to get him into trouble.
However, if he gets to the semi-final or final, I think he can ride that wave of pressure and hype and really make it work for him. You could see he loved it on Sunday at Queen's when the crowd were roaring him on and expecting him to win. I think that again could make the difference at Wimbledon.
Going back to Djokovic just for the moment, I wouldn't put him in the top division with Federer, Nadal and Murray for Wimbledon.
I would put in the group just below that with the likes of Fernando Verdasco, Juan Martin Del Potro, Andy Roddick and possibly Safin - if he turns up - or Robin Soderling, if he can repeat his French Open form.
Looking at the 'big two', well Nadal's fitness makes him somewhat of an unknown quantity. I suspect he is not quite right. His play was strange at Roland Garros. Yes he was beaten by an inspired Soderling, but he hadn't been playing his best even up to that match.
If you had to nail me to the floor I would say that Wimbledon is between Federer and Murray.
I think the win at Roland Garros helps Federer's chances. In the past couple of years I feel he has been putting too much pressure on himself to win the French and equal Pete Sampras's Grand Slam record.
But now that he has done that I think there is a huge weight off his shoulders.
If he hadn't won the French I would have felt that a handful of players could have beaten him at Wimbledon. But I've changed my tune and feel that on current form Murray is the only player who can stop him.
It would be great to see them contest the final and if they did, as I said before, I'd fractionally favour Murray.
I say that because he has such a good record against Federer, because they are playing in the UK and because Murray is playing so well at the moment - while Federer hasn't had a grass court build-up.
We are still only talking in fractions though - for me it would be a 55 to 45 per cent match in Murray's favour.
Simon Reed / Eurosport