Two years ago, he had the highest winning percentage. Every one of those players have gone on to number 1 and won a slam.
Murray was born in 1987, so he's 24, coming up on his 25th birthday. 3 slam finals 5 slam SFs.
Lendl won his first slam when he was 24, and a couple months. I figured Murray would have won a slam by now.
4 slam finals, and a SF. So Murray has actually done a fair bit more than Lendl before he won his first slam.
1 Slam win, 5 finals 2 SFs and a QF for Lendl.
0 Slam win, 3 finals 5 SFs. So out of 8 trips to the SFs, Murray has 3 finals and 5 semifinals.
He lost to Wilander, Borg, Connors, Connors, McEnroe (semis) Noah (eventual winner QFs), McEnroe (QFs), and Kevin Curren.
Curren is the WORST loss that Lendl had, and he went onto the finals.
Nadal, Nadal, Nadal, Nadal, Nadal, Federer, Federer, Djokovic, and Gonzo.
Gonzo is the only bad loss that Murray has had past the QFs.
So if, Nadal = Borg, and Federer = Connors and McEnroe = Djokovic and Wilander = Soderling.
If Murray's situation is like that of Lendl, what has to happen is that he has to beat Djokovic in a final and Soderling has to make a SF.
So you get it like this:
Borg left in 1982- the first chance Lendl had to supplant Borg, he lost to Noah.
The problem for Murray is that Nadal - the stronger claycourter, is still, very much, in the picture. Connors, being like Federer and Djokovic being like McEnroe, are also still in the picture.
After Lendl won in '84, he lost to Connors at Wimbledon and Johnny Mac at the USO.
He would begin his 25th year like this:
French Open: Loss to Wilander. So, he would beat Federer, only to lose to the Sodaking in the French. Sodaking defeats Djokovic on the way there. Nadal would not be in the picture.
Lendl, first bad loss in a long time. To Leconte, Becker, the other young gun emerges.
So, in 1985 you have the 25 year old Lendl, with the changing of the guard already underway with Becker and Edberg coming up, with Connors, and McEnroe fading. One slam under his belt. 6 finals, and 2 semifinals.
1985 USO - Defeats NOAH, defeats, Connors, defeats number one McEnroe to finally, overcome everything and win his second slam. Fast forward to many more slams over the years, and 5 years of dominance.
Loss to 19 year old up and comer Edberg - 5 years younger and ranked 5th closed out the year.
This was significant for two reasons. 1985 was a changing of the guard. Borg had retired and was gone. McEnroe bombed out. Connors was gone. It was just Lendl, and Wilander, but instead of either winning, the up and comer one.
So what's in store for Murray?
Good news - there is no Wilander. Soderling is not as strong as Wilander. However:
Borg did not retire. And Connors, rather than being 8 years age difference, is only 6 years. So you have a younger Connors, plus Borg. Still in the mix.
This year, we would predict some of the young guns (21 and under), to break through and win a slam.
It's too early quite yet to tell whether Murray succeeds or whether his peak will be the Finals, and he gets overtaken by the young guys and blocked by Fed + Nadal. But, his time is in the next 2-3 years. After that, his chance for a Lendl style career will be gone.