Djokovic or Murray? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Djokovic or Murray?

Fed=ATPTourkilla
01-31-2010, 11:00 PM
They never play each other as they are always seeded 3 and 4. Likely to play each other more now that Djoko has the no 2 spot.

kengyin
01-31-2010, 11:08 PM
djokovic

tektonac
01-31-2010, 11:08 PM
Murray is more serious in his ambitions, Nole still a headcase. Having said that, my vote goes to Nole, more exciting player to watch when on song.

Persimmon
01-31-2010, 11:42 PM
Djokovic. He is a slam winner.

NyGeL
02-01-2010, 12:15 AM
Djoko in his best vs Murray in his best = Djoko wins.

Marc23
02-01-2010, 02:02 AM
For now Novak...plus more explosive game

chowdahead25
02-01-2010, 03:16 AM
Djokovic when he isn't dealing with one of his brain STD's.

jeremda01
02-01-2010, 03:18 AM
Overall, Djokovic by a small margin.

paseo
02-01-2010, 04:10 AM
Djoko in his best vs Murray in his best = Djoko wins.

It's the other way around, IMO.

Clydey
02-01-2010, 06:22 AM
Murray.

MTF can't acknowledge that, though. The memory of your average MTF member only extends as far back as the last match that was played. Murray just lost, so that makes him inferior.

Then again, there's always the standard 1 > 0 argument. This also applies to Thomas Johansson. He won a slam, while players like Rios, Nalbandian, Davydenko, etc. haven't. Winning a slam automatically makes you a better player than every player who has failed to do so.

Time Violation
02-01-2010, 07:16 AM
I'm sure that 1 > 0 would be your favorite argument if the situation were reversed (Murray 1, Novak 0). :p

serveandvolley80
02-01-2010, 07:23 AM
Murray.

MTF can't acknowledge that, though. The memory of your average MTF member only extends as far back as the last match that was played. Murray just lost, so that makes him inferior.

Then again, there's always the standard 1 > 0 argument. This also applies to Thomas Johansson. He won a slam, while players like Rios, Nalbandian, Davydenko, etc. haven't. Winning a slam automatically makes you a better player than every player who has failed to do so.

Why is Johsnddon's accomplishment diminished just because he did not become a big name or consistent top player? The fact is he still has a slam.

So by contrast, would you rather pick a consistent player like Henman? Over a guy that got the big trophy.

Kiman
02-01-2010, 07:28 AM
Murray.

MTF can't acknowledge that, though. The memory of your average MTF member only extends as far back as the last match that was played. Murray just lost, so that makes him inferior.

Then again, there's always the standard 1 > 0 argument. This also applies to Thomas Johansson. He won a slam, while players like Rios, Nalbandian, Davydenko, etc. haven't. Winning a slam automatically makes you a better player than every player who has failed to do so.

GS: 1:0
WTF: 1:0
WTM: 5:4
Titles: 16:14

Johansson argument just does'nt buy it.

Having said that, I think the match would be very tight, with chances absolutely square.
That, of course, if Novak is not in Dementieva serving mode (then Murray kills him).

Goldenoldie
02-01-2010, 07:32 AM
Djokovic for achievement so far, Murray by the end of their respective careers.

Clydey
02-01-2010, 07:33 AM
Why is Johsnddon's accomplishment diminished just because he did not become a big name or consistent top player? The fact is he still has a slam.

So by contrast, would you rather pick a consistent player like Henman? Over a guy that got the big trophy.

His accomplishment isn't diminished. It's just a fact that the slams are not the be all, end all. Some very ordinary players have won slams. Far too much emphasis is put on them. I made light of that fact when I pointed out that Del Potro had yet to win one of the 9 real majors (The MS events). It was a joke, but the reality is that majors are only different in terms of their scope. It's the same sport with a bigger draw and longer matches. Does it mean anything that Del Potro found it easier to win a major than he did to win a Masters Series title? We attach far too much importance to the majors. I'm surprised anyone on MTF watches the other tournaments, since the majority seem to think they are insignificant.

As for your question, I do feel Tim had a better career than Johansson. Slam or no slam, Henman is generally thought of as the better player.

Clydey
02-01-2010, 07:34 AM
GS: 1:0
WTF: 1:0
WTM: 5:4
Titles: 16:14

Johansson argument just does'nt buy it.

Having said that, I think the match would be very tight, with chances absolutely square.
That, of course, if Novak is not in Dementieva serving mode (then Murray kills him).

Accomplishments have nothing to do with who the better player is right now. They matter in the context of history, but they are irrelevant when it comes to this discussion.

Clydey
02-01-2010, 07:36 AM
I'm sure that 1 > 0 would be your favorite argument if the situation were reversed (Murray 1, Novak 0). :p

It wouldn't. I don't place as much importance in the slams as others do. The majority of MTF think a different sport is played at the majors.

Getta
02-01-2010, 07:54 AM
Djokovic for achievement so far, Murray by the end of their respective careers.

yeah, the best way to make an accurate prediction is to leap directly into the light... and keep the window closed and locked...

madmax
02-01-2010, 07:59 AM
I'm pretty sure Murray is more talented player and has more variety than Joker has ever dreamed of having...that said serbian knight has very steady baseline game and when he's on, he can beat anyone too - so my pick goes to Murray anyway, as his game is more interesting to watch, at least for me

rocketassist
02-01-2010, 12:55 PM
Murray was raw and way behind when Novak won their contests, since he became big time he hasn't dropped a set.

There's very little between them if they both play their A games. Only now do I realise how overhyped Faker is.

Vida
02-01-2010, 01:10 PM
Murray was raw and way behind when Novak won their contests, since he became big time he hasn't dropped a set.

There's very little between them if they both play their A games. Only now do I realise how overhyped Faker is.

eh, you can say faker was in dubious, no wretched form when he lost to murray last 3 times they met. yes murray won in straights but 3 out of 6 sets were TB's even so.

rocketassist
02-01-2010, 01:18 PM
eh, you can say faker was in dubious, no wretched form when he lost to murray last 3 times they met. yes murray won in straights but 3 out of 6 sets were TB's even so.

Not true.

In Toronto, which is understated as a huge breakthrough win for Murray in general, Novak was the favourite for the title and favourite for the USO after securing the AO and was thought of as #1 on hard, with Fed off colour and losing to Simon in the same week. Murray played a mature match and beat him at his own game.

Cincy was pretty close and both of them played decently. But yeah Novak was a bit shitty in the Miami final. They're quite similar players tbh except Novak's forehand has far more penetration and power and Murray has better volleys and his backhand is more explosive.

Guga_fan
02-01-2010, 01:18 PM
In my opinion Djokovic is a better player and has a game more suited to win slams. But since he is a headcase these days and is losing his serve, I'll go with Murray.

Guga_fan
02-01-2010, 01:24 PM
Not true.

In Toronto, which is understated as a huge breakthrough win for Murray in general, Novak was the favourite for the title and favourite for the USO after securing the AO and was thought of as #1 on hard, with Fed off colour and losing to Simon in the same week. Murray played a mature match and beat him at his own game.

Cincy was pretty close and both of them played decently. But yeah Novak was a bit shitty in the Miami final. They're quite similar players tbh except Novak's forehand has far more penetration and power and Murray has better volleys and his backhand is more explosive.
It's hard to know when Djokovic started playing crap in that year, but he was not convincing that much in those tournaments apart from the fluke win against a dead tired Nadal. I would really like to see them playing a high level match in a big tournament, but Djokovic never manages to get far enough. :o

R.Federer
02-01-2010, 01:27 PM
It wouldn't. I don't place as much importance in the slams as others do. The majority of MTF think a different sport is played at the majors.


The slams are a whole order of magnitude more important than other tournaments. No one remembers you for winning the masters tournaments year after year. Dis-exaggerating the point about a "different sport" played at the majors, the perception about slams at MTF is also how the vast majority of actual ATP players see it, btw.

Vida
02-01-2010, 01:30 PM
Not true.

In Toronto, which is understated as a huge breakthrough win for Murray in general, Novak was the favourite for the title and favourite for the USO after securing the AO and was thought of as #1 on hard, with Fed off colour and losing to Simon in the same week. Murray played a mature match and beat him at his own game.

Cincy was pretty close and both of them played decently. But yeah Novak was a bit shitty in the Miami final. They're quite similar players tbh except Novak's forehand has far more penetration and power and Murray has better volleys and his backhand is more explosive.

its been talked about it at the time. djokavic's form dipped after queens and it was obvious. he might've been favored on numbers but who followed the stuff saw less bite in him, his serve in particular. and even so it was a close match something 75 76 murray. sincy was I think 2 TB's, close as hell not much to separate the two but djokos dip in confidence. and it was pretty obvious in body language. he started having some personal issues at the time and GS win started sinking after Wimby loss (as he explained later on, pressure of a GS champ got to him). Miami this year should not be counted the way he played, hell he should have not been there in the first place, given how poorly fed played in the semis.

Sophocles
02-01-2010, 01:35 PM
Djokovic has the better record so far. Murray played far better at the Australian Open and is in my opinion more talented.

Dini
02-01-2010, 01:38 PM
When they're both playing well, this is very tough. I think Murray has the mental edge though. :scratch:

Aaric
02-01-2010, 01:40 PM
Nole of course

samanosuke
02-01-2010, 01:41 PM
Djoko in his best vs Murray in his best = Djoko wins.

+1

rocketassist
02-01-2010, 01:45 PM
its been talked about it at the time. djokavic's form dipped after queens and it was obvious. he might've been favored on numbers but who followed the stuff saw less bite in him, his serve in particular. and even so it was a close match something 75 76 murray. sincy was I think 2 TB's, close as hell not much to separate the two but djokos dip in confidence. and it was pretty obvious in body language. he started having some personal issues at the time and GS win started sinking after Wimby loss (as he explained later on, pressure of a GS champ got to him). Miami this year should not be counted the way he played, hell he should have not been there in the first place, given how poorly fed played in the semis.

It was 6-3 7-6 in Toronto when Djokovic was considered hardcourts' number one player (Fed had just lost to Simon and went on to lose to Karlovic the week after) and he had spanked Soderling with ease the round before.

But yeah he was shit in Miami. Had Tsonga broke back in the QF he'd have probably made the final himself.

Vida
02-01-2010, 01:56 PM
any case its a pity we havent seen them play each other in good form and at a slam, now that they have matured and gone through stuff. hopefully that will change this year.

Team_Roddick
02-01-2010, 02:21 PM
I believe in Nole.

Manon
02-01-2010, 02:40 PM
At this moment Murray.
At their best - both.

I like them both, they play different tennis, I would like to see more Novak-Murray matches.

Lopez
02-01-2010, 03:03 PM
Murray.

MTF can't acknowledge that, though. The memory of your average MTF member only extends as far back as the last match that was played. Murray just lost, so that makes him inferior.

Then again, there's always the standard 1 > 0 argument. This also applies to Thomas Johansson. He won a slam, while players like Rios, Nalbandian, Davydenko, etc. haven't. Winning a slam automatically makes you a better player than every player who has failed to do so.

I think you're being a bit biased yourself here.

Murray is the better player at the moment, but Djokovic has had a better career so far. If they played against each other in their peaks it would be a close match. Murray is more versatile and probably more talented, Djokovic more devastating with his DTL shots when he's playing well. People also forget how good he actually was in late 2007/early 2008.

Djokovic has the better serving technique, though recently it's broken down.

MatchFederer
02-01-2010, 03:33 PM
I think you're being a bit biased yourself here.

Murray is the better player at the moment, but Djokovic has had a better career so far. If they played against each other in their peaks it would be a close match. Murray is more versatile and probably more talented, Djokovic more devastating with his DTL shots when he's playing well. People also forget how good he actually was in late 2007/early 2008.

Djokovic has the better serving technique, though recently it's broken down.

It's looking REALLY awkward right now...

Lopez
02-01-2010, 03:37 PM
It's looking REALLY awkward right now...

Yeah I don't know what's happened to it. Timing is off probably. Looks to me like he doesn't make contact with the ball high enough. His serve was great at times. McEnroe even said better than Federer's, though that was taking out of his arse.

Amber Spyglass
02-01-2010, 04:08 PM
Yeah I don't know what's happened to it. Timing is off probably. Looks to me like he doesn't make contact with the ball high enough. His serve was great at times. McEnroe even said better than Federer's, though that was taking out of his arse.

Completely agree with that.I was looking at some of the DF's he hit in slow motion on my sky + box and every time he hit a double the toss had come down way too close to him.It doesn't look like choking to me like some people might think,just a timing issue which hopefully he'll be able to rectify.He said he likes to toss the ball high to get his legs involved as much as possible,so clearly there's just a timing issue at the moment with trying to reach up at the right time,when his legs have generated enough power but without letting the ball drop too much

HKz
02-01-2010, 04:11 PM
Better or more accomplished? Obviously Novak. But since last year, Murray has been a bit more solid of a player throughout the months despite both having disappointing Grand Slam success.

gusavo
02-01-2010, 04:30 PM
Djoko in his best vs Murray in his best = Djoko wins.
berdych at his best vs murray in his best= berd probably favourite.

obviously murray is way better and has been for a long time.
and the slam argument is obviously absolutely unbelievable

Vida
02-01-2010, 04:53 PM
berdych at his best vs murray in his best= berd probably favourite.

obviously murray is way better and has been for a long time.
and the slam argument is obviously absolutely unbelievable

why?

Time Violation
02-01-2010, 05:28 PM
Better believe it. :) And it's not just the MTF, wherever you turn to - whether other tennis sites, commentators or the tennis pros themselves - the hottest story each year is always the same: who will win the slam, how will a player perform at the slam; every player dreams of winning Wimbledon (not Belgrade Open :D), etc.

LEGENDOFTENNIS
02-01-2010, 05:33 PM
HC: Murray
Grass: Murray
Clay: Novak

Overall imo Murray

DrJules
02-01-2010, 05:40 PM
Djokovic will have a better chance at the French Open and Murray at Wimbledon with similar at US Open.

TennisMindCamp
02-01-2010, 06:50 PM
Murray all the way.

BIGMARAT
02-01-2010, 08:24 PM
Slams and TMC.

Nole by far!!!

Farrow
02-01-2010, 08:39 PM
Slams and TMC.

Nole by far!!!

And, y'know, the Olympic bronze.

bizzle
02-01-2010, 08:49 PM
"Who is better" = "Who is more popular" on this forum.

Noleta
02-01-2010, 09:10 PM
Think Murray...but only with a slight margin.Think Murray is much better at the net,while Nole is getting is still improving.Voted for Nole cause i like watching his game:)

Apemant
02-01-2010, 09:22 PM
They are both amazing players. :shrug: I like Andy a little bit more, as I believe he has more 'raw talent', however Nole is also very talented and if they both play their best, it'd definitely be a wonderful match with no certain winner. I also believe they are evenly matched with no player having a distinct match-up advantage.

cocrcici
02-01-2010, 09:52 PM
I like both,Nole little more.

freeandlonely
02-01-2010, 09:52 PM
At this moment I feel Murray is physically, mentally, and even tactically all a bit above Nole. But I still think Nole will win most of the matches wherever they meet, OK I'm biased.:lol:

BIGMARAT
02-01-2010, 09:54 PM
Opinions are subjective. We can all agree to disagree!

One thing is solid though, their Slam results, TMC and Olympic. Nobody can deny these facts. And we all know who got the better hand.

gusavo
02-02-2010, 04:35 PM
why?
they have reached 2 gs finals each, and djok has won one of them. the argument is stating that hes won one match more than murray in that situation.

Dini
02-02-2010, 08:26 PM
In terms of achievements, Nole.

In terms of form (stating the obvious), Murray.

A first best of five match between these two in the near future now that they can meet each other before the finals is a mouth watering prospect. Could be very entertaining with loads of baseline rallies.

crude oil
02-03-2010, 04:01 AM
these guys will along with nadal and del potro are set to have a phenomenal rivalry. Then throw in guys like cilic ...it is gonna be sick.

Hopefull all will be healthy.

Mr. Oracle
02-03-2010, 04:18 AM
His accomplishment isn't diminished. It's just a fact that the slams are not the be all, end all. Some very ordinary players have won slams. Far too much emphasis is put on them. I made light of that fact when I pointed out that Del Potro had yet to win one of the 9 real majors (The MS events). It was a joke, but the reality is that majors are only different in terms of their scope. It's the same sport with a bigger draw and longer matches. Does it mean anything that Del Potro found it easier to win a major than he did to win a Masters Series title? We attach far too much importance to the majors. I'm surprised anyone on MTF watches the other tournaments, since the majority seem to think they are insignificant.

As for your question, I do feel Tim had a better career than Johansson. Slam or no slam, Henman is generally thought of as the better player.

I agree with this statment. Slams test a players endurance both mental and physical, whereas the masters series can be a valid test of raw tennis talent. The only thing that diminishes masters series is that it seems that many top players seem to "skip" them in one way or another, or view them as a warmup, which is unfortunate.

RFederer90
02-03-2010, 11:32 AM
Overall, Djokovic by a small margin.

:) for me it's the same!

Nole fan
02-03-2010, 11:40 AM
Murray.

MTF can't acknowledge that, though. The memory of your average MTF member only extends as far back as the last match that was played. Murray just lost, so that makes him inferior.

Then again, there's always the standard 1 > 0 argument. This also applies to Thomas Johansson. He won a slam, while players like Rios, Nalbandian, Davydenko, etc. haven't. Winning a slam automatically makes you a better player than every player who has failed to do so.

They are the same age and made the transition from juniors to seniors at the same time, right? Numbers don't lie...

NOVAK DJOKOVIC

Singles Career Titles (16):

2009 (5) ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Paris (Indoor/Hard) , Basel (Indoor/Hard) , Beijing (Outdoor/Hard) , Belgrade (Outdoor/Clay) , Dubai (Outdoor/Hard)

2008 (4) Tennis Masters Cup (Indoor/Hard) , ATP Masters Series Rome (Outdoor/Clay) , ATP Masters Series Indian Wells (Outdoor/Hard) , Australian Open (Outdoor/Hard)

2007 (5) Vienna (Indoor/Hard) , ATP Masters Series Canada (Outdoor/Hard) , Estoril (Outdoor/Clay) , ATP Masters Series Miami (Outdoor/Hard) , Adelaide (Outdoor/Hard)

2006 (2) Metz (Indoor/Hard) , Amersfoort (Outdoor/Clay)

Singles Career Finalist (11):

2009 (5) ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Cincinnati (Outdoor/Hard) , Halle (Outdoor/Grass) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Rome (Outdoor/Clay) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Monte Carlo (Outdoor/Clay) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami (Outdoor/Hard)

2008 (3) Bangkok (Indoor/Hard) , ATP Masters Series Cincinnati (Outdoor/Hard) , London / Queen's Club (Outdoor/Grass)

2007 (2) US Open (Outdoor/Hard) , ATP Masters Series Indian Wells (Outdoor/Hard)

2006 (1) Umag (Outdoor/Clay)


ANDY MURRAY

Singles Career Titles (14):

2009 (6) Valencia (Indoor/Hard) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Canada (Outdoor/Hard) , London / Queen's Club (Outdoor/Grass) , ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Miami (Outdoor/Hard) , Rotterdam (Indoor/Hard) , Doha (Outdoor/Hard)

2008 (5) St. Petersburg (Indoor/Hard) , ATP Masters Series Madrid (Indoor/Hard) , ATP Masters Series Cincinnati (Outdoor/Hard) , Marseille (Indoor/Hard) , Doha (Outdoor/Hard)

2007 (2) St. Petersburg (Indoor/Carpet) , San Jose (Indoor/Hard)

2006 (1) San Jose (Indoor/Hard)

Singles Career Finalist (7):

2010 (1) Australian Open (Outdoor/Hard)

2009 (1) ATP World Tour Masters 1000 Indian Wells (Outdoor/Hard)

2008 (1) US Open (Outdoor/Hard)

2007 (2) Metz (Indoor/Hard) , Doha (Outdoor/Hard)

2006 (1) Washington (Outdoor/Hard)

2005 (1) Bangkok (Indoor/Hard)

Marc23
02-03-2010, 02:55 PM
Well,based on this Novak so far...

Sophocles
02-03-2010, 03:05 PM
I agree with this statment. Slams test a players endurance both mental and physical, whereas the masters series can be a valid test of raw tennis talent. The only thing that diminishes masters series is that it seems that many top players seem to "skip" them in one way or another, or view them as a warmup, which is unfortunate.

This ignores the fact that *for players themselves*, slams are far more important than other tournaments - disproportionately so, if you look at the ranking points on offer. Players peak for the slams & play their best tennis there - as does the competition. Everybody agrees Federer, for example, plays better at the slams than elsewhere. Most of the great matches in history have been at the slams (& Davis Cup, in which players are also desperate to win). The slams are where you have to play your best tennis to win, because everybody else does.

stebs
02-03-2010, 03:09 PM
Still Djokovic at the moment acheivements wise. Even apart from the 'slams > anything' line of thought the Serbian has had stronger results and made bigger waves. However, Murray is catching up in that respect and game wise I would say right now they are even.

It kind of depends what you call 'right now' as well. Obviously Murray had a good AO and Djokovic had his illness problems and such. However, over the last 12 months (usually a fair amount of time to judge people on) they have probably been just about as close as possible. Only time can tell.

Match up wise, if Djokovic plays his best, he will beat Murray imo. It's actually a bad match up for the Scot even though he overcame that to win in previous matches. Murray is just playing long rallies on the backfoot, Djokvoic more on the front foot. If they both hit form, Djokovic will push Murray back and has the class to finish points consistently with either FH or BH. Whilst Murray's counterpunching is also a succesful tactic, constant applied pressure tends to tell over the course of a whole match.

Matt01
02-03-2010, 07:32 PM
Sorry but the answer is obviously: Djokovic by faaaaar.

rocketassist
02-03-2010, 07:59 PM
Sorry but the answer is obviously: Djokovic by faaaaar.

:haha: Never in doubt.

xargon
02-03-2010, 08:08 PM
One thing is solid though, their Slam results, TMC and Olympic. Nobody can deny these facts.

This is exactly why he is better so far.