Re: Why is Murray not good on clay?
As everyone has said, still too early to say for sure that he is "not good" on the surface, however, compare him to Hewitt. Both are perceived counter-punchers, and both of their success has come on faster surfaces. Personally, I think their minimal topspin has a lot to do with it. The majority of FO winners are clay specialists, and therein are heavy topspin players. I'm not sure if a pure counter puncher has ever been spectacular on the surface-certainly not one with flatter than topspinnier shots.
Look at Agassi. He won the French, but he was a much more gifted player than either Hewitt or Murray. And even he lost two other finals to better clay court players than himself, though he was a "better player" than either of them...
If I lose the first set, the match will be complicate, no?
My favorite Federer and Nadal quotes following their 2008 Wimbledon final:
“But right now, it’s not much of a how do you say? a feel-good thing.”
"In the last game, I didn't see nothing. The true, I wasn't see nothing, no?"