Wimbledon Round 3: Murray def. Simon 6-1 6-4 6-4 [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Wimbledon Round 3: Murray def. Simon 6-1 6-4 6-4

Ben.
06-26-2010, 08:03 PM
Murray did a good job to close it out in 3, Simon was getting better as it went on, played some nice stuff in the third.

green25814
06-26-2010, 08:05 PM
Excellent third set from both, pity Simon was such a non-factor previously.

Still, Murray looking good here.

henke007
06-26-2010, 08:06 PM
murrays jokedraw could continue with an exhausted Mallisse as Querrey has chooked away 2 breaks in the 5th without even being able to bye an ACE!!

scarecrows
06-26-2010, 08:07 PM
mugs match in the first 2 sets, 3d set was much better

Topspin Forehand
06-26-2010, 08:08 PM
Murray and Soderling get easy draws while Nadal is having the draw from hell. :(

straitup
06-26-2010, 08:08 PM
Good tournament for Simon coming back from injury...showed some signs of why he was top 10. Murray played well at parts from what I saw

tangerine_dream
06-26-2010, 08:08 PM
LOL @ nobody watching this match.

rtgy
06-26-2010, 08:09 PM
great match for Andy and nice come back for Gillou:hug:


:rocker:

Tutu
06-26-2010, 08:12 PM
Gilles killed himself and managed to play fairly well off the ground by the end, but there were just too many errors, still covered in rust, and his serve was non-existant today. His anticipation on returns and shot selection also weren't as good as usual and they are usually two of his biggest strengths, but he just needs matches. Anyway, it's great for him to be back. Hopefully he can continue to find his form in the next few tournaments.

I purposely haven't seen Murray play in a long time, but nice to see he is still so classy -- screaming 'come on' at the top of his lungs after DFs. :worship:

aloniv
06-26-2010, 08:13 PM
Murray was playing too passively (waiting for Simon's errors which unfortunately usually arrived) and hardly ever approached the net even when Simon was giving him really short serves. Simon actually had a good strategy (mixing things up by approaching the net, the occasional serve and volley and playing a winner from the baseline) but couldn't get it done since he was a bit rusty. I'm actually pleasantly surprised by how competitive Simon managed to make the third set (which included saving a few break points) considering his lack of match play.

Drusilla
06-26-2010, 08:26 PM
murrays jokedraw could continue with an exhausted Mallisse as Querrey has chooked away 2 breaks in the 5th without even being able to bye an ACE!!



Yep..the evil Wimbledon planners predicted that would go to 5 sets to help him.

Listen to yourself you paranoid fool of a person.

Rocketsfall82
06-26-2010, 08:33 PM
LOL @ nobody watching this match.

Two of the most passive, boring players on the tour. Too bad one of them is British so they have to waste a CC spot to this snorefest.

Drusilla
06-26-2010, 08:33 PM
Murray was playing too passively (waiting for Simon's errors which unfortunately usually arrived) and hardly ever approached the net even when Simon was giving him really short serves. Simon actually had a good strategy (mixing things up by approaching the net, the occasional serve and volley and playing a winner from the baseline) but couldn't get it done since he was a bit rusty. I'm actually pleasantly surprised by how competitive Simon managed to make the third set (which included saving a few break points) considering his lack of match play.

You're quite right...

Despite the fact he won well....Murray still fails to attack at times.

Tis a shame for he really does possess all the skills to do so.

Unless he changes that mindset he will never win a slam.

That said, he's far to good to not go far here.

Oh how I wish he would be more aggressive.....the f'ing crazy thing is that he could.

His all-round game is up to it.

aloniv
06-26-2010, 08:45 PM
You're quite right...

Despite the fact he won well....Murray still fails to attack at times.

Tis a shame for he really does possess all the skills to do so.

Unless he changes that mindset he will never win a slam.

That said, he's far to good to not go far here.

Oh how I wish he would be more aggressive.....the f'ing crazy thing is that he could.

His all-round game is up to it.


What really surprised me was how Murray chose to deal with Simon's short second serves. Instead of returning them and running to the net he chose to return them (sometimes right back to Simon) and then ran back to the baseline. He would have probably won this match much comfortably had he played the way I suggested. Simon was serving really poorly and shouldn't have held serve so many times.

Ben.
06-26-2010, 08:46 PM
You're quite right...

Despite the fact he won well....Murray still fails to attack at times.

Tis a shame for he really does possess all the skills to do so.

Unless he changes that mindset he will never win a slam.

That said, he's far to good to not go far here.

Oh how I wish he would be more aggressive.....the f'ing crazy thing is that he could.

His all-round game is up to it.

This is the most frustrating thing about being a Murray fan, you could see it happening again in the 3rd set today but luckily Gilles didn't have the consistency to keep up his play. He usually steps up the aggressivness against the top players though, it's the players he is better than where he normally plays too passive.

aloniv
06-26-2010, 08:53 PM
This is the most frustrating thing about being a Murray fan, you could see it happening again in the 3rd set today but luckily Gilles didn't have the consistency to keep up his play. He usually steps up the aggressivness against the top players though, it's the players he is better than where he normally plays too passive.

But how will a player become good at being aggressive if he doesn't practice? Today Murray had the chance to improve his aggressive game but chose the easy way out by playing "pusher" tennis. It's funny that Simon, another player who is regarded as a "pusher", actually played aggressively at times and mixed things up by serve and volleying and approaching the net.

Ben.
06-26-2010, 08:58 PM
But how will a player become good at being aggressive if he doesn't practice? Today Murray had the chance to improve his aggressive game but chose the easy way out by playing "pusher" tennis.

Yeah exactly, if you play one way for 4/5 rounds of tennis and then have to play another way it probably isn't going to help you produce your best game.

I was impressed by Simon in the 3rd, I wouldn't have begrudged him the set.

Clydey
06-26-2010, 09:03 PM
But how will a player become good at being aggressive if he doesn't practice? Today Murray had the chance to improve his aggressive game but chose the easy way out by playing "pusher" tennis. It's funny that Simon, another player who is regarded as a "pusher", actually played aggressively at times and mixed things up by serve and volleying and approaching the net.

That'll be why Murray hit 36 winners and Simon only hit 25.

aloniv
06-26-2010, 09:08 PM
That'll be why Murray hit 36 winners and Simon only hit 25.

I think the winners also include the aces, but either way Simon would have played far less winners if Murray played aggressively.

decrepitude
06-26-2010, 09:08 PM
Just conserving his energy.

laurie-1
06-26-2010, 09:12 PM
LOL @ nobody watching this match.

Funny you should say that because I was going to comment that I saw a few brief moments of the 2nd set when I got home but found it quite uninteresting - some of the forehand rallies looked like practice drills and neither player hits a heavy ball.

Certainly Andy Murray is not a very exciting player to watch I'm afraid.

andy neyer
06-26-2010, 09:13 PM
his own personal achievements > Davis Cup.

Yet, some of the Nadal fans who constantly critized Federer for not fully committing to the DC will totally support Rafa in this decision. Double standards anyone?

slicekick
06-26-2010, 09:15 PM
Never in doubt of the outcome this match, Simon comes back from injury and lacks of pratice matches to be competitive.

On the other hand, Murray is his garden and his lovely former girlfriend Kim Sears is back to support him what gives him an extra motivation and confidence to play :o

Corey Feldman
06-26-2010, 09:16 PM
keep going Rod Stewart

laurie-1
06-26-2010, 09:22 PM
his own personal achievements > Davis Cup.

Yet, some of the Nadal fans who constantly critized Federer for not fully committing to the DC will totally support Rafa in this decision. Double standards anyone?

Erm.... What does this have to do with Murray v Simon?

green25814
06-26-2010, 09:24 PM
Murray and Soderling get easy draws while Nadal is having the draw from hell. :(

Not really, Soderling/Murray would beat haase/petzchner in straights.

Arhaych
06-26-2010, 09:29 PM
Simon struggled to handle Murray in sets one and two, but he was playing excellent tennis by the end of the match, a couple of highlight reel forehands.

Murray's serving has been VERY impressive thus far, great variation and he's been pretty clutch with it.

green25814
06-26-2010, 09:36 PM
Simon isn't that bad a player tbh. He needs to cut out only being able to play from behind though, it damages him badly. A better serve wouldnt hurt either.

Persimmon
06-26-2010, 09:38 PM
Murray's draw is so dreamy.

MrChopin
06-26-2010, 09:47 PM
Thank goodness Simon is gone. Murray needs to keep fresh so he can stay focused when Nadal starts taking dives in the SF.

Mike_Hunt
06-26-2010, 10:14 PM
:bigcry:
Ugly game, ugly face and ugly personality wins. :sad:

Topspin Forehand
06-26-2010, 10:20 PM
Not really, Soderling/Murray would beat haase/petzchner in straights.
I don't think so. Soderling getting clay courters and Murray getting someone that can't stay healthy. Has a weak serve. The draw is unfair.

CescAndyKimi
06-26-2010, 10:28 PM
I don't think so. Soderling getting clay courters and Murray getting someone that can't stay healthy. Has a weak serve. The draw is unfair.

Yes I'm sure a previous top 10 player in Gillou is a better draw than the joke of Peztschner and Haase. Shut up.

Nadal can't handle players who throw the sink at him, which is the reason why Soderling will beat him.

Topspin Forehand
06-26-2010, 10:31 PM
Yes I'm sure a previous top 10 player in Gillou is a better draw than the joke of Peztschner and Haase. Shut up.

Nadal can't handle players who throw the sink at him, which is the reason why Soderling will beat him.
Simon is definitely not better than Petzschner or Haase on grass. On a slower surface, it is different. But they are ace demons on grass and play aggressive tennis.

Clydey
06-26-2010, 10:37 PM
Simon is definitely not better than Petzschner or Haase on grass. On a slower surface, it is different. But they are ace demons on grass and play aggressive tennis.

Petz doesn't have a top spin backhand. Nadal was down two sets to one to a guy who was basically forced to slice in 90% of the rallies.

roberthenman
06-26-2010, 10:40 PM
OTHER EASY VICTORY RUN TO TILE
Go Andy :rocker:

jadey
06-26-2010, 11:02 PM
:bigcry:
Ugly game, ugly face and ugly personality wins. :sad:

1st , when Andy Murray plays aggressively , hes a joy to watch
2nd , ugly face , a matter of opinion
3rd, ugly personality , how the hell do you know that ??

I hate posts like this :mad:

Sapeod
06-26-2010, 11:09 PM
Murray and Soderling get easy draws while Nadal is having the draw from hell. :(
Oh yeah, Nadull gets it bad :retard:
LOL @ nobody watching this match.
Ghana 2-1 USA :hug:
I purposely haven't seen Murray play in a long time, but nice to see he is still so classy -- screaming 'come on' at the top of his lungs after DFs. :worship:
Simug lost :awww:
Two of the most passive, boring players on the tour. Too bad one of them is British so they have to waste a CC spot to this snorefest.
:baby: :baby:
But how will a player become good at being aggressive if he doesn't practice? Today Murray had the chance to improve his aggressive game but chose the easy way out by playing "pusher" tennis. It's funny that Simon, another player who is regarded as a "pusher", actually played aggressively at times and mixed things up by serve and volleying and approaching the net.
Simug got much less winners than Murray :shrug: Yep, Murray's the pusher, Simug's the offensive player :retard:
I think the winners also include the aces, but either way Simon would have played far less winners if Murray played aggressively.
Carry on...you must have a point? :shrug:
:bigcry:
Ugly game, ugly face and ugly personality wins. :sad:
1. He's a jot to watch when he's on.
2. He isn't ugly, just not very good looking.
3. He has a great personality and can be funny.
Cry away, Mike. Ugly face will go all the way :wavey: :retard:
I don't think so. Soderling getting clay courters and Murray getting someone that can't stay healthy. Has a weak serve. The draw is unfair.
Not Murray and Soderling's fault that they beat their opponents easily and Nadull gets pushed to 5 sets by a guy who's come back from knee surgery and a player that's played two 5 set matches :retard:


Anyway, good to see Simug out :wavey:

Only 4 more Murray :yeah:

Mike_Hunt
06-26-2010, 11:25 PM
2. He isn't ugly, just not very good looking.

Please. :lol: That's like saying someone isn't fat, just big boned.

ShotmaKer
06-26-2010, 11:26 PM
Please. :lol: That's like saying someone isn't fat, just big boned.

some people are big boned.

syc23
06-26-2010, 11:32 PM
Funny some thinks Soderling will beat Nadal easy. Didn't Rafa spank the Swede 3 sets to love a few weeks ago at RG final? Some people have a short memory.

Anyway, Murray should have been more (much more) aggressive today but did enough to win. His serving wasn't bad either.

green25814
06-26-2010, 11:32 PM
Please. :lol: That's like saying someone isn't fat, just big boned.

Murray is just an average looking guy, not ugly or goodlooking imo. Except when he does his roar, that is pretty scary I admit.

Halba
06-26-2010, 11:39 PM
Petz doesn't have a top spin backhand. Nadal was down two sets to one to a guy who was basically forced to slice in 90% of the rallies.

petz made halle SF and pushed fed in each of the two sets. so he was in good form. don't know what simon and bellucci have done

Sapeod
06-26-2010, 11:41 PM
Please. :lol: That's like saying someone isn't fat, just big boned.
No it isn't :retard: He isn't very good looking, but he's not ugly. He's normal looking.

Sapeod
06-26-2010, 11:44 PM
Funny some thinks Soderling will beat Nadal easy. Didn't Rafa spank the Swede 3 sets to love a few weeks ago at RG final? Some people have a short memory.

Anyway, Murray should have been more (much more) aggressive today but did enough to win. His serving wasn't bad either.
Have you forgotten that that was on clay? This is grass now, or did you think it was green clay?? :retard: Would explain how Nadull's gotten this far I guess :rolleyes:

Soderling will be too powerful for Nadull on this surface.

Mike_Hunt
06-26-2010, 11:45 PM
No it isn't :retard: He isn't very good looking, but he's not ugly. He's normal looking.
:spit:
Just looking at your banner...That ain't normal. :lol:

rocketassist
06-26-2010, 11:48 PM
:spit:
Just looking at your banner...That ain't normal. :lol:

Typical WTA fan only interested in looks.

Job done, 4 more to go.

Roamed
06-26-2010, 11:53 PM
Only watched the end but if I thought Simon was making too many bad errors then, dread to think what it was like earlier :S I remember a nice BH passing shot from Murray on the run. Anyway, one step closer for him, the hype builds :o

Sapeod
06-27-2010, 12:03 AM
:spit:
Just looking at your banner...That ain't normal. :lol:
My what?? :retard:
My sig, my avi??? WTF is a banner??? :retard:

OMG, are all WTAtards like this :o

leng jai
06-27-2010, 12:05 AM
Feel sorry for the crowd.

.-Federers_Mate-.
06-27-2010, 01:09 AM
My what?? :retard:
My sig, my avi??? WTF is a banner??? :retard:

OMG, are all WTAtards like this :o

yes they are. They are sick. Have no clue what they are on about, and only watch tennis for the off court stuff. They are not people but some kind of creature. Seriously that guy is just a troll from wta world trying to start shit, becuase he is bored of his shitty site.




i actually watched this match. It bemuses me how people think that Murray is boring to watch. He mixes everything up has a nice technique etc. I personally think he is great to watch.

straitup
06-27-2010, 01:14 AM
yes they are. They are sick. Have no clue what they are on about, and only watch tennis for the off court stuff. They are not people but some kind of creature. Seriously that guy is just a troll from wta world trying to start shit, becuase he is bored of his shitty site.




i actually watched this match. It bemuses me how people think that Murray is boring to watch. He mixes everything up has a nice technique etc. I personally think he is great to watch.

I agree...he may enter stages where he's not as aggressive, but I think his shots look very good and he mixes things up well...he may not be flashy but he gets the job done. It seems though that if one doesn't like Simon, they probably don't like Murray, and so this match wouldn't suit them

ORGASMATRON
06-27-2010, 01:49 AM
My what?? :retard:
My sig, my avi??? WTF is a banner??? :retard:

OMG, are all WTAtards like this :o

:haha: i dont know what that guy is doing here lol. it must suck being dissed 24/7. wta is not a sport. if i played in the wta i would be the GOAT. i would be so fucking rich i could get pussy on tap.

I♥PsY@Mus!c
06-27-2010, 03:27 AM
Nice to finish the match with an ace. :)

HKz
06-27-2010, 03:44 AM
Murray and Soderling get easy draws while Nadal is having the draw from hell. :(

:rolleyes:

HKz
06-27-2010, 03:46 AM
My what?? :retard:
My sig, my avi??? WTF is a banner??? :retard:

OMG, are all WTAtards like this :o

Don't worry. People who actually enjoy tennis do have respect for Murray. Those are the people that have legitimate opinions.

Rafatards don't appreciate tennis however...

aloniv
06-27-2010, 06:02 AM
Simug got much less winners than Murray :shrug: Yep, Murray's the pusher, Simug's the offensive player :retard:

Did you actually see the match? Simon's tactics were much better than Murray's (he mixed things up by approaching the net, serve and volleying and throwing in a few winners from the baseline), and Murray should have won much more comfortably had he played more aggressively. It's not like Simon held his service games due to many aces or big second serves, is it? :)

Clydey
06-27-2010, 06:28 AM
Did you actually see the match? Simon's tactics were much better than Murray's (he mixed things up by approaching the net, serve and volleying and throwing in a few winners from the baseline), and Murray should have won much more comfortably had he played more aggressively. It's not like Simon held his service games due to many aces or big second serves, is it? :)

Simon's tactics were much better, even though he lost 6-1, 6-4, 6-4? You're taking the concept of player bias to a whole new level.

Pirata.
06-27-2010, 06:39 AM
Murray and Soderling get easy draws while Nadal is having the draw from hell. :(

Yes, just like what was essentially a bye to the RG final for Rafa earlier this month :o

Pirata.
06-27-2010, 06:41 AM
My what?? :retard:
My sig, my avi??? WTF is a banner??? :retard:

OMG, are all WTAtards like this :o

:haha:

if i played in the wta i would be the GOAT. i would be so fucking rich i could get pussy on tap.

:eek: :spit: :haha:

Rafaspin
06-27-2010, 06:44 AM
He is looking sublime, but is he going to peak too early and play flat against Nadal, Soderling or Tsonga?

If things keep going the way they are though he's the only one i'd give a chance to return some of these soderling serves.

aloniv
06-27-2010, 07:18 AM
Simon's tactics were much better, even though he lost 6-1, 6-4, 6-4? You're taking the concept of player bias to a whole new level.

He would have lost 6-1 6-1 6-1 (or with a similar scoreline) had Murray played aggresively.

Clydey
06-27-2010, 07:26 AM
He would have lost 6-1 6-1 6-1 (or with a similar scoreline) had Murray played aggresively.

I didn't realise a triple breadstick was required in order to progress.

aloniv
06-27-2010, 07:31 AM
I didn't realise a triple breadstick was required in order to progress.

It isn't, but if you are winning your service games as comfortably as Murray was you can try different tactics on your opponents service games. Murray let Simon, who was serving pretty poorly, hold his service games from 2-0 in the second set until 4-4 in the third. And yet everyone is praising him because he got it done in straights, even though he defeated a player who won his first ATP match this year a week ago (and only won 3 matches this season as he got a walkover in the second round).

Duncan
06-27-2010, 07:48 AM
Some people in this thread are just too funny :eek:

Anyways i will get back to the tennis, great win for Andy! Totally outclassed Simon from start to finish(Simon didn't even creat a break point chance) and some of the rallies in the 3rd set were just a joy to watch.

Tutu
06-27-2010, 10:03 AM
Simon isn't that bad a player tbh. He needs to cut out only being able to play from behind though, it damages him badly. A better serve wouldnt hurt either.
Yep, even when he got going and the nerves went, his serve was the biggest problem today. It's usually much better than that though, obviously it isn't huge but he usually places it well, with a much higher % and so gets many more free points. But he has basically been injured since the end of last year so he just needs more matches.

Typical WTA fan only interested in looks.

Typical Brit, only interested in nationality.
Simon's tactics were much better, even though he lost 6-1, 6-4, 6-4? You're taking the concept of player bias to a whole new level.
Simon's tactics were perfect as usual, his big problem was the fact that he has been injured since last year and so he was rusty, making silly errors and serving horribly.

That said, Murray's tactics were fine too. He stood at the back and just sliced 90% of his shots, which obviously isn't ideal for Gilles who likes power and will obviously overpress since he has been without matches/isn't confident in himself yet. However, the bottom line is, that is how he always plays. He has variety in his strokes, a big serve and he comes up with one or two great shots per match but he's essentially an uber-defensive minded player, and no matter how many times you all bring up the myth that he is a great player when aggressive, he will always be that way. Murray is so overrated on this forum and in the UK, I can't wait to see him lose again and the reactions from the when he does. :shrug:

Ouragan
06-27-2010, 01:32 PM
Wtf with all the tards arguing here? Murray won straightforwardly against a rusty Simon, that's it. No analysis needed.

aloniv
06-27-2010, 03:02 PM
Wtf with all the tards arguing here? Murray won straightforwardly against a rusty Simon, that's it. No analysis needed.

This is true. However if he plays the way he played against Simon against the top players he doesn't have a chance of winning the tournament, as he probably won't be able to become an adequate aggressive player without practicing. He could have practiced aggressive play against Simon and he would have still won comfortably since Simon was rusty, yet he preferred the easy way out by "pushing".

Persimmon
06-27-2010, 03:06 PM
Who made Murray's draw? Judy Murray?:o

Sapeod
06-27-2010, 03:08 PM
:haha: i dont know what that guy is doing here lol. it must suck being dissed 24/7. wta is not a sport. if i played in the wta i would be the GOAT. i would be so fucking rich i could get pussy on tap.
:haha :haha: :haha: :yeah:
Don't worry. People who actually enjoy tennis do have respect for Murray. Those are the people that have legitimate opinions.

Rafatards don't appreciate tennis however...
Totally agree with you :yeah:


LOL @ all the whining Simugtards. Give up, your pusher lost :wavey:

alansk
06-27-2010, 03:50 PM
Murray will lose to Tsonga 100%, maybe even Querrey.

paseo
06-27-2010, 04:03 PM
Funny some thinks Soderling will beat Nadal easy. Didn't Rafa spank the Swede 3 sets to love a few weeks ago at RG final? Some people have a short memory.

Nadal on clay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nadal on other surfaces.

yes they are. They are sick. Have no clue what they are on about, and only watch tennis for the off court stuff. They are not people but some kind of creature. Seriously that guy is just a troll from wta world trying to start shit, becuase he is bored of his shitty site.

:lol:

:haha: i dont know what that guy is doing here lol. it must suck being dissed 24/7. wta is not a sport. if i played in the wta i would be the GOAT. i would be so fucking rich i could get pussy on tap.

I wonder if they will allow a man who had sex change surgery to play in the WTA? :D

Sapeod
06-27-2010, 04:33 PM
Murray will lose to Tsonga 100%, maybe even Querrey.
Wrong.

Mike_Hunt
06-27-2010, 04:46 PM
Shut up, Dani. :rolleyes:

Sapeod
06-27-2010, 04:47 PM
Shut up, Dani. :rolleyes:
Um, no?

Guy Haines
06-27-2010, 05:03 PM
Shut up, Dani. :rolleyes:

Let Glory have his moment of glory.

Ouragan said it best.

ORGASMATRON
06-27-2010, 05:09 PM
Nadal on clay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nadal on other surfaces.



:lol:



I wonder if they will allow a man who had sex change surgery to play in the WTA? :D

:haha::haha::haha:

angry1
06-27-2010, 05:21 PM
Murray will lose to Tsonga 100%, maybe even Querrey.

Do you want to reword that so that's it's not complete gibberish?

If it's 100%(sic) then there aren't any maybes.

HTH

Commander Data
06-27-2010, 05:33 PM
Murray and Soderling get easy draws while Nadal is having the draw from hell. :(

Going by the seedings (assuming the seedings have some kind of meaning) Rafa has clearly the second easiest 4th round, only topped by Roddick.

alansk
06-27-2010, 05:55 PM
Do you want to reword that so that's it's not complete gibberish?

If it's 100%(sic) then there aren't any maybes.

HTH

:retard:

Just think for a second about what I mean.

angry1
06-27-2010, 06:34 PM
:retard:

Just think for a second about what I mean.

I assume you meant,should Murray beat Querrey he will 100% certainly lose to Tsonga,and that Tsonga is 100% certain to win his last 16 match.What you wrote more or less meant that there was a 100% chance of Murray losing to Tsonga and an additional chance he wouldn't even meet him.

100% is the total of all possible outcomes.

I'm not retarded,BTW,but thanks for your concern.I'm just annoyed both by your sentiment and your way of expressing it.

HTH

alansk
06-27-2010, 07:35 PM
I assume you meant,should Murray beat Querrey he will 100% certainly lose to Tsonga,and that Tsonga is 100% certain to win his last 16 match.What you wrote more or less meant that there was a 100% chance of Murray losing to Tsonga and an additional chance he wouldn't even meet him.

100% is the total of all possible outcomes.

I'm not retarded,BTW,but thanks for your concern.I'm just annoyed both by your sentiment and your way of expressing it.

HTH

Would love Murray to progress. Just pessimistic about his chances. :)

Congrats on your maths skills :yeah:

angry1
06-27-2010, 07:41 PM
Would love Murray to progress. Just pessimistic about his chances. :)

Congrats on your maths skills :yeah:

That s on the end of maths has got you back in my good books.:)

No objection to Americans saying math particularly,but Brits sound like pretentious prats when they do so.

I was in a miserable mood,shouldn't take it out on other people.Saying that I know I'll keep doing it then saying I shouldn't have done so.

gusavo
06-28-2010, 06:44 PM
This is true. However if he plays the way he played against Simon against the top players he doesn't have a chance of winning the tournament, as he probably won't be able to become an adequate aggressive player without practicing. He could have practiced aggressive play against Simon and he would have still won comfortably since Simon was rusty, yet he preferred the easy way out by "pushing".
so if he plays above average he has no chance of winning the etournament. so thats why hes 6.6 to win, interresting.
thats not the easy way out, thats the hard way out

Murray is so overrated on this forum and in the UK, I can't wait to see him lose again and the reactions from the when he does. :shrug:
nice bias. hes extremely underrated at this forum.

Simon's tactics were much better, even though he lost 6-1, 6-4, 6-4? You're taking the concept of player bias to a whole new level.
lol what, youre using the scoreline to prove he had better tactics?
you are saying that whatever the scoreline is, that is how much better that players tactics are

Clydey
06-28-2010, 06:56 PM
so if he plays above average he has no chance of winning the etournament. so thats why hes 6.6 to win, interresting.
thats not the easy way out, thats the hard way out


nice bias. hes extremely underrated at this forum.


lol what, youre using the scoreline to prove he had better tactics?
you are saying that whatever the scoreline is, that is how much better that players tactics are

No, I'm saying it's idiotic to criticise a player's tactics when they win 6-1, 6-4, 6-4. Clear?

aloniv
06-28-2010, 07:02 PM
so if he plays above average he has no chance of winning the etournament. so thats why hes 6.6 to win, interresting.
thats not the easy way out, thats the hard way out

I think it's quite clear that for Murray it is easier to play a style he is comfortable with ("pushing") than to try other tactics (eg serve and volley).

gusavo
06-28-2010, 07:46 PM
No, I'm saying it's idiotic to criticise a player's tactics when they win 6-1, 6-4, 6-4. Clear?
I thought the point is to try to try to find the tactics that are the best.

Clydey
06-28-2010, 07:58 PM
I thought the point is to try to try to find the tactics that are the best.

If the tactics you employ allow you to win so comfortably, there's no cause for complaint. Had he been dragged into a tough 4th set, I could see your point.

gusavo
06-28-2010, 09:11 PM
If the tactics you employ allow you to win so comfortably, there's no cause for complaint. Had he been dragged into a tough 4th set, I could see your point.
I thought we were talking about how he decided to play. why do you bring the score up

Clydey
06-28-2010, 10:26 PM
I thought we were talking about how he decided to play. why do you bring the score up

Because the score is relevant. If you're going to criticise a player's tactics, you should have a reason for doing so. A routine 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 win does not give cause to criticise the winner's tactics. It's a bit like criticising a football team's tactics after they've just won 4-0. It is beyond ridiculous.

Corey Feldman
06-28-2010, 10:31 PM
still dealing wth keyboard warriors Clydey ;)

gusavo
06-28-2010, 10:37 PM
Because the score is relevant. If you're going to criticise a player's tactics, you should have a reason for doing so. A routine 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 win does not give cause to criticise the winner's tactics. It's a bit like criticising a football team's tactics after they've just won 4-0. It is beyond ridiculous.
ah yes, remember when federer played against his grandfather, he played right into his best shot, the forehand every time and the ball never came back to him. also didnt attempt a shortish ball a single time despite his opponent being in a wheelchair. definitely must have been the right tactics.
the score is not relevant
that is not rediculous one bit

Clydey
06-28-2010, 10:50 PM
ah yes, remember when federer played against his grandfather, he played right into his best shot, the forehand every time and the ball never came back to him. also didnt attempt a shortish ball a single time despite his opponent being in a wheelchair. definitely must have been the right tactics.
the score is not relevant
that is not rediculous one bit

I literally have no idea what you're talking about. Federer playing against his grandfather? What?

Clydey
06-28-2010, 10:51 PM
still dealing wth keyboard warriors Clydey ;)

It's a hobby of mine.

gusavo
06-28-2010, 10:52 PM
I literally have no idea what you're talking about. Federer playing against his grandfather? What?
uhh, its obviously to show how wrong your comment was

Clydey
06-28-2010, 10:56 PM
uhh, its obviously to show how wrong your comment was

I gathered that. Your intentions aside, I still didn't understand the point you were trying to make.

gusavo
06-28-2010, 11:38 PM
I gathered that. Your intentions aside, I still didn't understand the point you were trying to make.
"he didnt lose a point= his tactics must have been the best there has ever been."
no thats irrelevant, his tactics was the worst

Clydey
06-29-2010, 02:59 AM
"he didnt lose a point= his tactics must have been the best there has ever been."
no thats irrelevant, his tactics was the worst

I didn't say that his tactics were "the best there has ever been". :lol:

This is getting silly now. Murray's tactics against Simon were the "worst"?

aloniv
06-29-2010, 04:02 AM
Murray's tactics against Simon worked fine, but his tactics won't work against the top players and thus he should have tried other tactics as well since he would have won comfortably anyway.

Clydey
06-29-2010, 04:35 AM
Murray's tactics against Simon worked fine, but his tactics won't work against the top players and thus he should have tried other tactics as well since he would have won comfortably anyway.

He'll use different tactics against different opponents, regardless. You don't experiment in the majors. Dicking around with different tactics, particularly when Simon was playing well from midway through the second set, is a recipe for disaster. You don't just take wins for granted in the majors.

gusavo
06-29-2010, 07:06 AM
I didn't say that his tactics were "the best there has ever been". :lol:

This is getting silly now. Murray's tactics against Simon were the "worst"?
eh, im talkinga bout the hypothetical scenario of someone not losing a point despite playing every shot to the opponents best side. the tactics are clearely wrong but you somehow claimed you cant criticise tactics when someone wins comfortably when in fact it has very, very little relevance at all. its just crazy how you think that

Murray's tactics against Simon worked fine, but his tactics won't work against the top players and thus he should have tried other tactics as well since he would have won comfortably anyway.
so if murray plays extremely good and with tactics that you consider wrong he will lose 100% against the top players. id like to see some proof of that

aloniv
06-29-2010, 09:24 AM
so if murray plays extremely good and with tactics that you consider wrong he will lose 100% against the top players. id like to see some proof of that

This isn't mathematics ;) Anyway, I don't think Murray will be able to beat Federer, Nadal, or Soderling on grass without approaching the net on weak serves or to finish off points. The occasional serve and volley might also help him gain cheap points.

Clydey
06-29-2010, 10:14 AM
eh, im talkinga bout the hypothetical scenario of someone not losing a point despite playing every shot to the opponents best side. the tactics are clearely wrong but you somehow claimed you cant criticise tactics when someone wins comfortably when in fact it has very, very little relevance at all. its just crazy how you think that


What planet are you on? How can someone win every point in a match and be playing with the wrong tactics? If those tactics are working, they are not wrong.

bokehlicious
06-29-2010, 10:23 AM
Good thing with Murray back to winning matches is that it brings out the best out of Clydey :cool: :lol:

Sophocles
06-29-2010, 10:32 AM
What planet are you on? How can someone win every point in a match and be playing with the wrong tactics? If those tactics are working, they are not wrong.

Not wrong, no, but what if one tactic enables you to win 1, 4, & 4, & another enables you to win 0, 0, & 0?

Clydey
06-29-2010, 11:42 AM
Not wrong, no, but what if one tactic enables you to win 1, 4, & 4, & another enables you to win 0, 0, & 0?

Then those tactics are better. The other tactics are not wrong. As I said earlier, it's a bit like criticising a football team for winning 4-0 instead of 6-0.

If you are winning 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 at this level, it's safe to say that your tactics are sound.

Clydey
06-29-2010, 11:43 AM
Good thing with Murray back to winning matches is that it brings out the best out of Clydey :cool: :lol:

Murray or no Murray, I cannot abide stupidity.

Sophocles
06-29-2010, 11:55 AM
Then those tactics are better. The other tactics are not wrong. As I said earlier, it's a bit like criticising a football team for winning 4-0 instead of 6-0.

If you are winning 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 at this level, it's safe to say that your tactics are sound.

Of course. But as I understand them, the other posters were just saying it's possible Murray could have had *better* tactics. Though I admit I too have difficulty understanding precisely what they meant.

Clydey
06-29-2010, 12:09 PM
Of course. But as I understand them, the other posters were just saying it's possible Murray could have had *better* tactics. Though I admit I too have difficulty understanding precisely what they meant.

Every player on tour could employ better tactics. There's not a single performance that could be described as being tactically perfect. Complaining about a player's tactics after they have just won 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 is pointless pedantry. I don't see what purpose it serves, other than to highlight the fact that Murray wasn't flawless against Simon.

Sophocles
06-29-2010, 12:56 PM
Every player on tour could employ better tactics. There's not a single performance that could be described as being tactically perfect. Complaining about a player's tactics after they have just won 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 is pointless pedantry. I don't see what purpose it serves, other than to highlight the fact that Murray wasn't flawless against Simon.

Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the others, I'm just arguing for the sake of it.

What they're getting at is the obvious point that against good aggressive players, Murray cannot afford to be too passive. They seem to be missing the fact that Simon is not currently a good aggressive player. Querrey is, but Murray wasn't passive against him and beat him comfortably, which I'd have thought would allay their concerns, at least until the next round.

leng jai
06-29-2010, 12:59 PM
If Murray played 1% more tactically he would have triple bagelled Simug.

Clydey
06-29-2010, 01:07 PM
Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the others, I'm just arguing for the sake of it.

What they're getting at is the obvious point that against good aggressive players, Murray cannot afford to be too passive. They seem to be missing the fact that Simon is not currently a good aggressive player. Querrey is, but Murray wasn't passive against him and beat him comfortably, which I'd have thought would allay their concerns, at least until the next round.

Which is why I said this earlier:

He'll use different tactics against different opponents, regardless.

They seem to be under the impression that Murray will play the same way against every opponent.

scarecrows
06-29-2010, 01:22 PM
i love it how Clydey starts posting much more when Murray is winning

leng jai
06-29-2010, 01:24 PM
i love it how Clydey starts posting much more when Murray is winning

I haven't noticed this.

Clydey
06-29-2010, 01:45 PM
i love it how Clydey starts posting much more when Murray is winning

Whether or not you want to believe me, I was simply busy with my dissertation prior to the summer. If he goes on a losing streak during the hardcourt season, I'll still continue to post.

malisha
06-29-2010, 01:47 PM
hopefully he meets Nadal in semi

i do not fancy his chances against Soderling

Clydey
06-29-2010, 01:48 PM
I haven't noticed this.

I still love you, no matter how often you insult me. :inlove:

gusavo
06-29-2010, 08:38 PM
This isn't mathematics ;)
huh?? so you withdraw what you said?

What planet are you on? How can someone win every point in a match and be playing with the wrong tactics?
I JUST TOLD YOU.

Not wrong, no
of course they would be wrong, depending on how you define wrong and depending on how far from optimal strategy they were.


If you are winning 6-1, 6-4, 6-4 at this level, it's safe to say that your tactics are sound.
its safe to say that you were very likely quite dominating

Of course. But as I understand them, the other posters were just saying it's possible Murray could have had *better* tactics. Though I admit I too have difficulty understanding precisely what they meant.
what I am talking about is his argument that the score of this match makes it certain that the winners tactics were very good and not possible to complain about.

NYCtennisfan
06-29-2010, 10:19 PM
i love it how Clydey starts posting much more when Murray is winning

:lol:

Sapeod
06-29-2010, 10:21 PM
i love it how Clydey starts posting much more when Murray is winning
Not as bad as some Nadulltards atleast :shrug:

And I doubt Clydey wasn't posting because Murray wasn't winning. He wouldn't do that.

Serenidad
06-30-2010, 03:31 AM
Epic performance. Lu is going down in the final.