What makes Djokovic (so far) better than Murray vs. Nadal on clay? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

What makes Djokovic (so far) better than Murray vs. Nadal on clay?

Pfloyd
04-20-2009, 04:58 PM
Just out of curiosity, what do you think makes Djokovic more effective vs. Nadal on clay, does it have to do with the fact that Djokovic has played Nadal more often on clay?

I my opinion the only thing Djokovic has better than Murray is his inside out forehand, with the backhand down the line being almost even, giving a slight edge to Murray.

What say you?

Har-Tru
04-20-2009, 05:14 PM
Djokovic has grown up playing a lot on clay, while Murray hasn't. His game is much more natural than Murray's on the dirt. The first thing Murray has to learn how to do is skidding. Right now he just plays hardcourt tennis everywhere.

kingfederer
04-20-2009, 05:17 PM
murray is just a skirt wearing ugly ratface mug that learnt to play clay 5 days ago and according to the vulgar and repulsive british media he is already challenging nadal and borg for the greatest clay courter of all time! the only reason murray took nadal to a tiebreak was because nadal went very defensive and choked on serve serving for the match like he has been doing recently! murray should have lost to fognini very easily, this skirt wearing scottish mug has unreal amounts of luck! he gets the easiest draws!

Arkulari
04-20-2009, 05:23 PM
Djokovic has grown up playing a lot on clay, while Murray hasn't. His game is much more natural than Murray's on the dirt. The first thing Murray has to learn how to do is skidding. Right now he just plays hardcourt tennis everywhere.

couldn't agree more, Muzza's movement on clay looks unnatural and forced, he still hits the ball pretty flat for this surface, he's a much better player overall than many many others and that's why he got to the semis in MC, but he's not above Rafa, Roger and Djoker on clay :shrug:

Kiman
04-20-2009, 05:24 PM
2nd serve, forehand and movement on clay.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 05:29 PM
Just out of curiosity, what do you think makes Djokovic more effective vs. Nadal on clay, does it have to do with the fact that Djokovic has played Nadal more often on clay?

I my opinion the only thing Djokovic has better than Murray is his inside out forehand, with the backhand down the line being almost even, giving a slight edge to Murray.

What say you?

Two things in particular. His forehand is more suited to clay and he moves better on clay. He is the only player that I can think of, with the exception of Nadal, who uses an open stance when sliding off both sides. That's a huge advantage, but it's obviously something both Nadal and Djokovic have developed.

rocketassist
04-20-2009, 05:32 PM
Played more matches, more suited to clay, although Muzza showed promising signs.

NadalSharapova
04-20-2009, 05:32 PM
Djokovic is more talented and complete player than murray. He just needs to make sure his head is screwed on.

Branimir
04-20-2009, 05:33 PM
Does it matter? Neither Nadal or Djokovic can beat Nadal on clay, so who is closer doesn't really matter at all...

Lopez
04-20-2009, 05:35 PM
Well it's also a pretty clear matchup issue, Nole's game can blow Nadal off the court on HC, to a lesser extent this also goes on clay. Murray is more versatile than Djokovic but his game still doesn't naturally match up that well against Nadal.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 05:37 PM
Djokovic is more talented and complete player than murray. He just needs to make sure his head is screwed on.

Not sure how you can say he is more complete. The whole talent thing is debatable, but Murray has far more to his game. Djokovic is more of a straight ahead baseliner. He doesn't really change the pace, he doesn't volley particularly well, and his slice makes my eyes bleed. He's fantastic at what he does, has great strokes, moves well (particularly on clay), but variety isn't his strong point. Besides, variety isn't something that you really need on clay, so that has no bearing on why he's better on the dirt.

tennizen
04-20-2009, 05:39 PM
Just out of curiosity, what do you think makes Djokovic more effective vs. Nadal on clay, does it have to do with the fact that Djokovic has played Nadal more often on clay?

I my opinion the only thing Djokovic has better than Murray is his inside out forehand, with the backhand down the line being almost even, giving a slight edge to Murray.

What say you?

I say you stole my idea from Arsen's thread:mad:

nastoff
04-20-2009, 05:39 PM
Djokovic has a longer chin, it gives him more aerodynamics in the forehand.

Arkulari
04-20-2009, 05:40 PM
Muzza has a more versatile game, but Djoker adapts better to the change of surfaces ;)

kingfederer
04-20-2009, 05:45 PM
Djokovic has a longer chin, it gives him more aerodynamics in the forehand.

yea but murray's pointy ratface and weird hair will increase aerodynamics thus aiding his movement!

Kiman
04-20-2009, 06:00 PM
Not sure how you can say he is more complete. The whole talent thing is debatable, but Murray has far more to his game. Djokovic is more of a straight ahead baseliner. He doesn't really change the pace, he doesn't volley particularly well, and his slice makes my eyes bleed. He's fantastic at what he does, has great strokes, moves well (particularly on clay), but variety isn't his strong point. Besides, variety isn't something that you really need on clay, so that has no bearing on why he's better on the dirt.
For me, variety and "far more to his game" are debatable also. If variety equals playing trick shots and slicing a lot - then I agree. Djokovic can put much more spin on forehand but also can hit flatter and faster one than Murray. I call that variety, also. I also think while they both can flatten their backhands (Murray with a slight edge), Djokovic can add more spin to that shot, too. Djokovic's repertoire of serves is much bigger, I see that as another type of variety.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 06:47 PM
For me, variety and "far more to his game" are debatable also. If variety equals playing trick shots and slicing a lot - then I agree. Djokovic can put much more spin on forehand but also can hit flatter and faster one than Murray. I call that variety, also. I also think while they both can flatten their backhands (Murray with a slight edge), Djokovic can add more spin to that shot, too. Djokovic's repertoire of serves is much bigger, I see that as another type of variety.

Changing pace is not just throwing in a slice. We're talking about the use of various spins and paces. Roddick, for example, probably thinks he's changing the pace because he throws in a few slices. There's a hell of a lot more to it than that.

I think Djokovic generally does hit a harder forehand than Murray, but that's more of a choice. Murray has shown that he is capable of hitting it equally as hard. His default game is to counterpunch, though, so you won't often see him crack his forehand. Nole does it more often. It's not a case of Murray not being able to do it. He just chooses to do it less frequently.

Also, I don't know what serve Djokovic hits that Murray doesn't. Both rarely use the body serve. Murray uses the big flat serve, the slice serve, and the kicker mostly. The only department I see Djokovic having an edge is in the second serve. His is obviously much more difficult to attack.

Like I said earlier, Murray has better touch, better volleys, better slice, moves and defends better on a hard court (obviously not on clay). He also uses the short slice, which Djokovic never uses. Djokovic is more naturally aggressive and that is what he has over Murray. His forehand is a better shot because of how he chooses to use it. Murray, on the other hand, doesn't really do as much with his forehand as he has shown that he can.

timafi
04-20-2009, 07:03 PM
Murray is nothing but a hard court specialist while Djokovic has proven himself to be an ALL-surface player
Murray moves great on hard court while Djokovic moves great on clay,knows when to pull the plug and play conservative
Djokovic's forehand is better than Murray's forehand on clay and so is Djokovic's cross court backhand

Djokovic has proven himself on clay by making it to the semis in Paris and winning titles on clay while Murray had a soft draw with the likes of Fognini who was up 5-0 on Murray and choked;Davydenko hadn't played in weeks and was his usual choking self so...:rolleyes:

CescAndyKimi
04-20-2009, 07:12 PM
These comparisons are fucking retarded. Lets wait till Rome and see for fuck sake..This is the one year where Murray has a different edge, the year where he has truly broken through. Anything about Murray from early 2008 cannot be brought into play now. He's almost a completely different beast.

I await rome.

Farenhajt
04-20-2009, 07:17 PM
If Djokovic were winning left and right thus far in the season, no question of this type would ever be presented, since "obviously" he would have the edge over Murray in every department.

And him NOT having the edge comes from only one issue: fitness. Technically, there's absolutely no thing Murray does (can do) that Novak can't match. (Except that where Murray prefers to pass, Novak prefers to lob.) His volleys are improving by the minute, that much is absolutely obvious so far, so it goes to show you he does work on his game even as we speak.

Once he regains his head completely, and finds the right regime of fitness training, he'll have Murray by the balls. Basically, Murray of this year is Novak of the previous year, in terms of blossoming. Not that it will last though.

Har-Tru
04-20-2009, 07:28 PM
The efficiency of the slice on clay is not as big as on the other surfaces. When we talk about "change of pace" on clay (which is a huge part of the essence of the real clay game), it's more about combining short, top-spin, angled shots with long, flatter groundstrokes. The occasional drop-shot when it proceeds, patiently opening up the court until the moment comes to go for the winner... the slice is just a minor weapon.

rofe
04-20-2009, 07:36 PM
Djokovic's long skull and his hydra like characteristics.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 07:45 PM
If Djokovic were winning left and right thus far in the season, no question of this type would ever be presented, since "obviously" he would have the edge over Murray in every department.

And him NOT having the edge comes from only one issue: fitness. Technically, there's absolutely no thing Murray does (can do) that Novak can't match. (Except that where Murray prefers to pass, Novak prefers to lob.) His volleys are improving by the minute, that much is absolutely obvious so far, so it goes to show you he does work on his game even as we speak.

Once he regains his head completely, and finds the right regime of fitness training, he'll have Murray by the balls. Basically, Murray of this year is Novak of the previous year, in terms of blossoming. Not that it will last though.

It has nothing to do with fitness. We're talking about 3 set matches, each of which were won in straight sets by Murray. If Djokovic is struggling to play 2 sets, he's in deep shit.

There are many things Murray does better than Djokovic. People don't talk about Murray's variety as part of some elaborate hoax.

Kiman
04-20-2009, 08:17 PM
Changing pace is not just throwing in a slice. We're talking about the use of various spins and paces. Roddick, for example, probably thinks he's changing the pace because he throws in a few slices. There's a hell of a lot more to it than that.

I think Djokovic generally does hit a harder forehand than Murray, but that's more of a choice. Murray has shown that he is capable of hitting it equally as hard. His default game is to counterpunch, though, so you won't often see him crack his forehand. Nole does it more often. It's not a case of Murray not being able to do it. He just chooses to do it less frequently.

Also, I don't know what serve Djokovic hits that Murray doesn't. Both rarely use the body serve. Murray uses the big flat serve, the slice serve, and the kicker mostly. The only department I see Djokovic having an edge is in the second serve. His is obviously much more difficult to attack.

Like I said earlier, Murray has better touch, better volleys, better slice, moves and defends better on a hard court (obviously not on clay). He also uses the short slice, which Djokovic never uses. Djokovic is more naturally aggressive and that is what he has over Murray. His forehand is a better shot because of how he chooses to use it. Murray, on the other hand, doesn't really do as much with his forehand as he has shown that he can.

I think we are not talking about same things here. I referred to what you said that Murray plays with more variety and "has far more to his game". The way I get this is that Murray can execute more different shots. I tend do disagree with that, nothing more. I think Novak has more technically sound forehand, backhand (except slice) and serve, which allows him to do more different shots with it in terms of spin, control and angles. I call that variety. I give you volleys, touch and slice any time, but the question is what exactly Murray benefits from good volleying since he is rarely at the net due to his inability to dictate play. Also touch and slice are not big advantages in modern tennis.
My perception is that you are talking more about game plan, but that does not shows variety for me. Game plan is there to show someones strengths and hides someones weaknesses. Why would, lets say Nadal, change pace on clay when he can easily dictate with his forehand? That is not less variety in my book.

Geo
04-20-2009, 08:26 PM
When Djokovic is playing well and not missing, he can consistently pound the ball off both wings with more power than Murray. That's the main difference I think. If you saw in the final yesterday, during the 2nd set, Djokovic was just dictating play and Nadal was really frustrated. It takes Murray a lot more shots to finally put the ball away on Nadal, since he can't really outhit him the way Djokovic can.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 08:35 PM
I think we are not talking about same things here. I referred to what you said that Murray plays with more variety and "has far more to his game". The way I get this is that Murray can execute more different shots. I tend do disagree with that, nothing more. I think Novak has more technically sound forehand, backhand (except slice) and serve, which allows him to do more different shots with it in terms of spin, control and angles. I call that variety. I give you volleys, touch and slice any time, but the question is what exactly Murray benefits from good volleying since he is rarely at the net due to his inability to dictate play. Also touch and slice are not big advantages in modern tennis.
My perception is that you are talking more about game plan, but that does not shows variety for me. Game plan is there to show someones strengths and hides someones weaknesses. Why would, lets say Nadal, change pace on clay when he can easily dictate with his forehand? That is not less variety in my book.

Murray does not have an inability to dictate play. He chooses to counterpunch, but he has shown that he can dictate play. Changing the pace is about constructing the point and forcing errors. If you are constantly throwing different looks at your opponent, it's going to throw them. There were some great observations made by two different commentary teams during Murray's match with Nadal at the AO 07. He gave Rafa 3 different balls in a row in one particular rally and Rafa ended up shanking a shot. They pointed out that it looked like a routine error, but that it was actually due to Murray's changes of pace. The point is that it's just not something you pick up on unless you appreciate that sort of play. Most would just call it an unforced error. That's the sort of thing Djokovic can't do.

Murray just has more tools. And he doesn't use his volleys as much as he should, but he still makes good use of them. I just disagree with you at a fundamental level. I certainly don't think Djokovic has a technically superior backhand. It's a great shot, but I think it's ugly as hell. It's not technically superior, and I think Murray's is much more versatile. And of course touch and slice are big advantages. The fact that you don't think a good slice is a big advantage tells me that you haven't watched a lot of tennis. A good slice can be incredibly effective.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree.

Kiman
04-20-2009, 09:06 PM
Murray does not have an inability to dictate play. He chooses to counterpunch, but he has shown that he can dictate play. Changing the pace is about constructing the point and forcing errors. If you are constantly throwing different looks at your opponent, it's going to throw them. There were some great observations made by two different commentary teams during Murray's match with Nadal at the AO 07. He gave Rafa 3 different balls in a row in one particular rally and Rafa ended up shanking a shot. They pointed out that it looked like a routine error, but that it was actually due to Murray's changes of pace. The point is that it's just not something you pick up on unless you appreciate that sort of play. Most would just call it an unforced error. That's the sort of thing Djokovic can't do.
That is again game plan question. If that works for him, great. But again I see it as one of his main weaknesses, since he depends on opponents play. He runs into in form player at the day and he could be in trouble (happened more than once).

Murray just has more tools.
This is the part where we disagree most obviously.

I certainly don't think Djokovic has a technically superior backhand. It's a great shot, but I think it's ugly as hell.
Whoa, I heard a lot about Djokovic but that his two hander is ugly as hell, never. But beauty is subjective category, so I wont take that away from you.

It's not technically superior, and I think Murray's is much more versatile.
My opinion is that Novak can add more spin to it, and use it as more dictating rally shot, and that Murray has better slice.

And of course touch and slice are big advantages. The fact that you don't think a good slice is a big advantage tells me that you haven't watched a lot of tennis. A good slice can be incredibly effective.
Watched - key word here. I watched a lot of tennis, slice was a big advantage, but again my opinion is as the game progresses it is less and less an advantage. Especially on clay, heavy forehand may kill even a good slice any time. Of course due to tremendous amount of spin these new types of players add to their shots.

Anyway, let's agree to disagree.
Never a problem, but a healthy conversation did not kill anybody.

sawan66278
04-20-2009, 09:20 PM
I don't think Djokovic is better than Murray on clay when it comes to playing Rafa. Novak played a better overall match, but Andy WILL defeat Rafa on clay sometime this year or next. And I'm not the only one who believes this. Here's Steve Tignor from www.tennis.com:

Djokovic was even better against Nadal. He weathered a first-set storm without getting visibly discouraged. He served lights out in the second set. He took his shots high and early. He moved Nadal off the court before coming forward. He wrong-footed him with his volleys. Most important and most difficult, Djokovic executed the riskiest of shots—like, say, the backwards-falling, inside-out forehand from the behind the baseline that lands smack on the sideline in the opposite corner—to perfection, which is the one true key to hanging with Nadal on clay. Then Djokovic made two simple but fatal mistakes: At 0-1 in the third, on two separate game points, he double faulted. That was enough. Nadal won the third 6-1. Why, after all that, would Djokovic—or we—believe that he could ever beat the guy on this stuff? Not that it matters to me much: I’m just happy to see them bringing out the best in each other again.

I get a different feeling with Murray. While he lost in straights to Nadal on Saturday, I think he believes he can beat him either in Paris or Rome. After playing poorly and testily until 6-2, 5-3, Murray loosened up when all seemed lost. As he said after the match, he used high looping defensive strokes well when he was pushed out of position, and like Djokovic he walked the tightrope of risk well, which, against Nadal, means he just barely reined his most aggressive instincts in. The last few games and the tiebreaker were spectacular and emotional (the effort required in a quality clay match also seems to drag out deeper emotions from players and fans—everyone leaves a little drained). Nevertheless, as Murray said afterward, when all the emotions had been spent and the spectacular shots hit, it was Nadal who won the two most colossal and crucial points of the tiebreaker. Still, I’d give Murray a decent shot at cracking the code against him on clay. Unlike Djokovic, he still believes anything is possible. Even the impossible.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 09:24 PM
That is again game plan question. If that works for him, great. But again I see it as one of his main weaknesses, since he depends on opponents play. He runs into in form player at the day and he could be in trouble (happened more than once).


It's not a weakness. It's one of his biggest strengths. He doesn't use it out of necessity. He uses it because it works, not because he lacks anything. He has shown on many occasions that he can attack as well as anyone. And it's not a case of depending on an opponent's play. In his last 69 matches, he has won 61 and lost 8 (since the start of the hard court season after Wimbledon). Along with Rafa, he has the best win/loss this year (29-3). Your theory doesn't really hold up. There's a reason that his recent record is so good. It's because he has a lot to his game.

Kiman
04-20-2009, 09:46 PM
I don't think Djokovic is better than Murray on clay when it comes to playing Rafa. Novak played a better overall match, but Andy WILL defeat Rafa on clay sometime this year or next. And I'm not the only one who believes this. Here's Steve Tignor from www.tennis.com:
Quoted text is nothing but a wild guess. Why on earth would Djokovic lose believe, while Murray would gain even bigger? I dont see that progress with Novak. His performances against Rafa on clay dont degrade, but slowly upgrade.
The prerequisite for eventually beating Rafa is that he obviously does not play his best at the day, and that goes for any opposition. If you assume that, I see things this way.
Novak needs to play his best possible aggressive baseline game, and serve really well (he did not in the final, by the way), but generally does not have to do anything he is not doing in any other match (when his head is ok, of course).
Murray needs to change his game a lot. No "changing of pace", no trick shots, but pure aggressive ball hitting. When was the last time you see Murray go for that much, as in few last games of that second set? And that is risky. That is not his territory Those few last games could easily go into error fest, because of "all or nothing" type of game he tried.
So saying, Murray has a better chance just like that, does not hold water for me. But time will tell.

Kiman
04-20-2009, 09:53 PM
It's not a weakness. It's one of his biggest strengths. He doesn't use it out of necessity. He uses it because it works, not because he lacks anything. He has shown on many occasions that he can attack as well as anyone. And it's not a case of depending on an opponent's play. In his last 69 matches, he has won 61 and lost 8 (since the start of the hard court season after Wimbledon). Along with Rafa, he has the best win/loss this year (29-3). Your theory doesn't really hold up. There's a reason that his recent record is so good. It's because he has a lot to his game.
I said, great when it works. But somewhere along these 8 are three from the biggest tournaments in that period. And what happened, he ran into opposition that broke his game plan at the day. He was outhit and he could not change anything about that. That was my point.
I never said he does not have a lot to his game, I only showed my doubts that he has "much more" than Djokovic, that is all.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 09:58 PM
Quoted text is nothing but a wild guess. Why on earth would Djokovic lose believe, while Murray would gain even bigger? I dont see that progress with Novak. His performances against Rafa on clay dont degrade, but slowly upgrade.
The prerequisite for eventually beating Rafa is that he obviously does not play his best at the day, and that goes for any opposition. If you assume that, I see things this way.
Novak needs to play his best possible aggressive baseline game, and serve really well (he did not in the final, by the way), but generally does not have to do anything he is not doing in any other match (when his head is ok, of course).
Murray needs to change his game a lot. No "changing of pace", no trick shots, but pure aggressive ball hitting. When was the last time you see Murray go for that much, as in few last games of that second set? And that is risky. That is not his territory Those few last games could easily go into error fest, because of "all or nothing" type of game he tried.
So saying, Murray has a better chance just like that, does not hold water for me. But time will tell.

When was the last time? He does it whenever he plays Nadal on a hard court. That's how he beat him at the US Open.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 10:02 PM
I said, great when it works. But somewhere along these 8 are three from the biggest tournaments in that period. And what happened, he ran into opposition that broke his game plan at the day. He was outhit and he could not change anything about that. That was my point.
I never said he does not have a lot to his game, I only showed my doubts that he has "much more" than Djokovic, that is all.

No, he wasn't outhit. He lost, just like everyone loses. There's no logic to what you're saying.

So because Murray lost he got outhit and couldn't change anything to stop it? Utter nonsense. So basically unless Murray goes undefeated, you'll say that he got outhit and couldn't change his game?

What about when Djokovic loses? And he loses a lot more often than Murray. What about Federer? What about Nadal? What you are saying makes no sense.

Farenhajt
04-20-2009, 10:08 PM
It has nothing to do with fitness. We're talking about 3 set matches, each of which were won in straight sets by Murray. If Djokovic is struggling to play 2 sets, he's in deep shit.

There are many things Murray does better than Djokovic. People don't talk about Murray's variety as part of some elaborate hoax.

Murray won on clay? :confused: I must have missed quite a few of Murray's and Novak's matches.

People talk. People also fart. Especially British press. And tennis "experts".

Kiman
04-20-2009, 10:08 PM
When was the last time? He does it whenever he plays Nadal on a hard court. That's how he beat him at the US Open.
Hmm, no. That wasn't even nearly as aggressive.

rocketassist
04-20-2009, 10:10 PM
If anyone doubts Murray can hit Nadal off court go and watch their US Open match. :)

rocketassist
04-20-2009, 10:11 PM
Murray won on clay? :confused: I must have missed quite a few of Murray's and Novak's matches.

People talk. People also fart. Especially British press. And tennis "experts".

Some people are turning this into an who's better all round contest, when it's supposed to be clay exclusive.

rocketassist
04-20-2009, 10:11 PM
Hmm, no. That wasn't even nearly as aggressive.

Yes it was, his two hander bludgeoned Nadal into submission.

PiggyGotRoasted
04-20-2009, 10:15 PM
I get the feeling murray is just feeling his game out on clay at the moment.

Once he finds his way of playing on clay he might be unbeatable for a short while.

Kiman
04-20-2009, 10:15 PM
No, he wasn't outhit. He lost, just like everyone loses. There's no logic to what you're saying.

So because Murray lost he got outhit and couldn't change anything to stop it? Utter nonsense. So basically unless Murray goes undefeated, you'll say that he got outhit and couldn't change his game?

What about when Djokovic loses? And he loses a lot more often than Murray. What about Federer? What about Nadal? What you are saying makes no sense.
Utter nonsense - cool.
In those games he was outhit - fact.
He did nothing to change that - fact.
It is basically vice versa, Murray much more often goes undefeated without outhitting his opponent, which is ok with me. Only, it is impossible to do on clay against Rafa. That is final from me for tonight, or I ll be dead tomorrow at work.

Arkulari
04-20-2009, 10:16 PM
If anyone doubts Murray can hit Nadal off court go and watch their US Open match. :)

well, that's Muzza's best surface and Rafa's worst ;)
let's see how he goes on Rome and Madrid and then we can talk :)

Farenhajt
04-20-2009, 10:16 PM
It's not a weakness. It's one of his biggest strengths. He doesn't use it out of necessity. He uses it because it works, not because he lacks anything. He has shown on many occasions that he can attack as well as anyone. And it's not a case of depending on an opponent's play. In his last 69 matches, he has won 61 and lost 8 (since the start of the hard court season after Wimbledon). Along with Rafa, he has the best win/loss this year (29-3). Your theory doesn't really hold up. There's a reason that his recent record is so good. It's because he has a lot to his game.

Not really. The reason is the players kept considering him "Ah, Murray, that Scottish headcase? No sweat." So by reducing the headcase percentage, he simply got them by surprise.

But as Verdasco and Nadal have proven, there's ALWAYS the way to bring that indestructible loser out of Murray.

Clydey
04-20-2009, 10:17 PM
Hmm, no. That wasn't even nearly as aggressive.

Hitting 65 winners in 4 sets isn't aggressive?

Clydey
04-20-2009, 10:20 PM
Not really. The reason is the players kept considering him "Ah, Murray, that Scottish headcase? No sweat." So by reducing the headcase percentage, he simply got them by surprise.

But as Verdasco and Nadal have proven, there's ALWAYS the way to bring that indestructible loser out of Murray.

Wow, these guys aren't very bright. He's taken them by surprise consistently for the last 9 months?

You're not the sharpest lightbulb in the shed, are you?

Clydey
04-20-2009, 10:25 PM
Utter nonsense - cool.
In those games he was outhit - fact.
He did nothing to change that - fact.
It is basically vice versa, Murray much more often goes undefeated without outhitting his opponent, which is ok with me. Only, it is impossible to do on clay against Rafa. That is final from me for tonight, or I ll be dead tomorrow at work.

He was outhit by whom? In maybe 3 of those losses he was outhit.

Federer at the US Open, Davydenko at TMC, Verdasco at AO (ill at that tournament and actually won more points than Verdasco, so that one's highly debatable).

And yes, you are spouting nonsense. I have little patience for people who ignore the facts and have selective memories. Was Djokovic outhit when Murray hit more winners than him in their last 3 encounters? Was Federer outhit when Murray hit more winners than him in their last 4 matches?

Clydey
04-20-2009, 10:29 PM
well, that's Muzza's best surface and Rafa's worst ;)
let's see how he goes on Rome and Madrid and then we can talk :)

But that's Murray's worst surface and Rafa's best. Why is that fair? You're not being very consistent if you won't accept the US Open example, yet you'll gladly accept a clay court example. Speaking of which, here's one such example.

Murray hit more winners than Nadal in their match in Monte Carlo. And guess what? He almost hit more winners in one set than Nadal did in two (22-25, I believe)

Mechlan
04-20-2009, 11:48 PM
If we're just talking clay, so far Djokovic is better than Murray (and he'll stay that way for now if he plays well). But the way they match up against Nadal, Murray has a better shot for the simple reason that he is better than Djokovic physically. Nadal makes you work for everything on clay and Djokovic has a ways to go in the physical department before he'll be able to beat Nadal. If Djokovic has an amazing day, it's possible he'll beat Nadal, but I'm guessing he's not going to be beating him in straight sets anytime soon.

Roddickominator
04-20-2009, 11:52 PM
It is hardly a matter of talent....Djokovic and Murray are VERY similar in actual skill and athletic ability.

Novak simply knows that he must attack Nadal to win.

Murray is kind of stupid and thinks that his counterpunching and retrieving skills are better than Nadal's apparently. Maybe one beatdown set was all he needed to learn otherwise....that 2nd set against Nadal he took it to him. We'll see if that continues into the future.

Kiman
04-21-2009, 06:32 AM
He was outhit by whom? In maybe 3 of those losses he was outhit.

Federer at the US Open, Davydenko at TMC, Verdasco at AO (ill at that tournament and actually won more points than Verdasco, so that one's highly debatable).
If you have read what I said, you ll find out I was talking about those 3 exactly.

And yes, you are spouting nonsense. I have little patience for people who ignore the facts and have selective memories. Was Djokovic outhit when Murray hit more winners than him in their last 3 encounters? Was Federer outhit when Murray hit more winners than him in their last 4 matches?
Ok, man, we could continue like this for ages, but we would obviously go in circles. I could go on and said that in all those matches Murray did not dictate, and majority of the winners came from defensive passing shots, and then you ll tell it is his game style, change of pace, whatever. Just as we had different perceptions on variety, it s probably the same with outhitting your opponent.
Two points I wanted to make and we obviously disagree on them:
- You think Murray has more variety and "much more to his game" than Djokovic, I think it s not exactly like that (you may find interesting I never said it was completely oposite)
- To have any chance to beat Nadal you have to dictate points, and I have my doubts in Murray's abilities to do that regularly, because it is out of his usual game style
I am not going to take anything away from your precious patience from now on.

batavlada
04-21-2009, 11:02 AM
I hear that Nadal eating 5-6 chocolate cookies before match. He used to eat over 15 but he said he have stomach pain when he eats more than a half dozen.

Well, Djokovic started to eat them too, but he can eat only 2. But Murray does not eat them at all!

Sapeod
04-21-2009, 04:56 PM
murray is just a skirt wearing ugly ratface mug that learnt to play clay 5 days ago and according to the vulgar and repulsive british media he is already challenging nadal and borg for the greatest clay courter of all time! the only reason murray took nadal to a tiebreak was because nadal went very defensive and choked on serve serving for the match like he has been doing recently! murray should have lost to fognini very easily, this skirt wearing scottish mug has unreal amounts of luck! he gets the easiest draws!

He's better than any of the players you have, so just shut your ugly mouth. It's a kilt you racist son of a bitch, not a skirt.

MalwareDie
04-21-2009, 05:13 PM
Shut the fuck up :mad: He's better than any of the players you have, so just shut your fucking ugly ratass mouth :mad:

This fart is not going to listen to you.

This retard will continue to spout nonsense like from that last post, praise Mugboar, and pretend to like Federer even though anyone who frequented GM from February until the end of March knows that it's a load of bs.

Sapeod
04-21-2009, 05:37 PM
This fart is going to listen to you.

This retard will continue to spout nonsense like from that last post, praise Mugboar, and pretend to like Federer even though anyone who frequented GM from February until the end of March knows that it's a load of bs.
I know. BS and more BS. That's all that :retard: keeps talking :mad:

Arkulari
04-21-2009, 05:41 PM
guys, just don't fuel the fire of the person with the Homer Simpson's Syndrome :retard:

Sapeod
04-21-2009, 05:45 PM
guys, just don't fuel the fire of the person with the Homer Simpson's Syndrome :retard:
:lol: Homer Simpson syndrome :lol:

ORGASMATRON
04-21-2009, 05:48 PM
murray is just a skirt wearing ugly ratface mug that learnt to play clay 5 days ago and according to the vulgar and repulsive british media he is already challenging nadal and borg for the greatest clay courter of all time! the only reason murray took nadal to a tiebreak was because nadal went very defensive and choked on serve serving for the match like he has been doing recently! murray should have lost to fognini very easily, this skirt wearing scottish mug has unreal amounts of luck! he gets the easiest draws!

This huy is the biggest racist of all time surely :lol: kingfederer i would have thought you learned your lesson after all the epic bans. Want to get banned for life this time?

ORGASMATRON
04-21-2009, 05:52 PM
Anyhow back to the topic. Djokovic has maybe a slightly better forehand and he is a better attacking player then Murray. Murray may catch up though he hasnt had a lot of matches on clay so far.

Sapeod
04-21-2009, 05:52 PM
This huy is the biggest racist of all time surely :lol: kingfederer i would have thought you learned your lesson after all the epic bans. Want to get banned for life this time?
He does :o He's like Jaap. He doesn't give a toss :o

Djokovic is better at attacking but Muzza is just so bloody good at defending. You have to smash him 2/3 times before he actually misses the ball :lol: Best player at returning smashes :lol:

ORGASMATRON
04-21-2009, 06:13 PM
He does :o He's like Jaap. He doesn't give a toss :o

Djokovic is better at attacking but Muzza is just so bloody good at defending. You have to smash him 2/3 times before he actually misses the ball :lol: Best player at returning smashes :lol:

Where did kingfederer go?

Yeah thats true incredible defensive player which of course helps on clay, but have you noticed how good Djoker's defense is?! I dont know if people notice it but he gets out really well to the sides, specially on the BH. Murray has got good speed on the other hand and is just much better physically then Djoker.

Sapeod
04-21-2009, 06:36 PM
Where did kingfederer go?

Yeah thats true incredible defensive player which of course helps on clay, but have you noticed how good Djoker's defense is?! I dont know if people notice it but he gets out really well to the sides, specially on the BH. Murray has got good speed on the other hand and is just much better physically then Djoker.


He's probably banned again, hopefully :o

I noticed that too. Djoko's defense on the forehand is o.k, but he can pull winners from defensive positions on the backhand side. That winner against Wawrinka to get match point showed it all.

finishingmove
04-21-2009, 06:40 PM
murray is still pretty 'raw'

if u know what i mean.

Certinfy
04-21-2009, 06:43 PM
Both are good, but Nole is better.

ORGASMATRON
04-21-2009, 07:18 PM
He's probably banned again, hopefully :o

I noticed that too. Djoko's defense on the forehand is o.k, but he can pull winners from defensive positions on the backhand side. That winner against Wawrinka to get match point showed it all.

Cant be very smart, whats the point of getting banned and coming back to do the same thing again? :confused:

I didnt see the end of that match actually. I thought Stan might take it after going a break up in the third. Guess Djoker just started playing better? Or did Stan choke? But yeah he can do just about anything with that BH on the stretch.

Arkulari
04-21-2009, 07:19 PM
Cant be very smart, whats the point of getting banned and coming back to do the same thing again? :confused:

I didnt see the end of that match actually. I thought Stan might take it after going a break up in the third. Guess Djoker just started playing better? Or did Stan choke? But yeah he can do just about anything with that BH on the stretch.

who says trolls are smart my dear? :shrug: ;)

ORGASMATRON
04-21-2009, 07:35 PM
who says trolls are smart my dear? :shrug: ;)

I dont think kingfederer is a stupid guy, thats why this doesnt make sense. I guess he just doesnt give a toss.

BaselineSmash
04-21-2009, 09:40 PM
There will be lots of blazingly sunny days to contend with for Djokovic in Rome and Madrid; I'm curious about how he'll hold up in hot conditions. Clay is good in that it doesn't absorb and reflect heat like hardcourts, so stifling conditions are less severe. But I expect the Serb's dodgy form to resurface all the same when the heat is turned up.

Luckily for him, the weather in Paris is usually quite moderate, so he'll be assured of producing his best at the clay event that counts the most.

Byrd
04-21-2009, 11:45 PM
Better forehand, doesn't junkball which is good against Nadal on Hard, but a liability on Clay. Also has better movement like people have mentioned.

Merton
04-22-2009, 11:02 AM
It is simple, the Murray forehand is not sufficiently heavy to push Nadal out of position. Therefore, Andy has to be super aggressive to make it competitive, something that is not sustainable (until proven otherwise).