Who is better? Andy Murray, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Jim Courier? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Who is better? Andy Murray, Yevgeny Kafelnikov, Jim Courier?

Shinoj
11-11-2011, 04:00 AM
Why i am comparing

There was a debate in the Jim Courier thread about Andy Murray and Jim Courier. Kafelnikovs name also came up.
So i thought


Of Course there are many aspects to it.You could look at it from the Players Potential. You could look from the Career they had


I think Out of the three

Jim Courier would be the one. He had a great game and an even better mentality, atleast from 91 - 93

Kafelnikov . Highly talented Russian player. Had an all round game and graceful Forehand and backhand. Great player to watch when on form. ........ But had a smewhat weaker temperament

Andy Murray.. Brilliant Tactical player, has an all round game, Potentially on par with Djokovic and Nadal.........
But a Highly suspect Grand Slam Temperament... TILL NOW..

Who is your pick ? Discuss

tommyg6
11-11-2011, 04:09 AM
Why i am comparing

There was a debate in the Jim Courier thread about Andy Murray and Jim Courier. Kafelnikovs name also came up.
So i thought


Of Course there are many aspects to it.You could look at it from the Players Potential. You could look from the Career they had


I think Out of the three

Jim Courier would be the one. He had a great game and an even better mentality, atleast from 91 - 93

Kafelnikov . Highly talented Russian player. Had an all round game and graceful Forehand and backhand. Great player to watch when on form. ........ But had a smewhat weaker temperament

Andy Murray.. Brilliant Tactical player, has an all round game, Potentially on par with Djokovic and Nadal.........
But a Highly suspect Grand Slam Temperament... TILL NOW..

Who is your pick ? Discuss

while your at it, add more transitional champs like guga and hewitt if u can.

nsidhan
11-11-2011, 04:20 AM
What random comparisons.

Topspindoctor
11-11-2011, 04:21 AM
:superlol::superlol::superlol:

Troll topic.

Mugray should win a slam before he's compared to any decent player.

Rafa = Fed Killa
11-11-2011, 04:39 AM
Murray the mental midget doesnt even have a grand slam.
He is more in the league of weaklings like Davydonkey, Soderclown & Flake

shiaben
11-11-2011, 04:45 AM
Murray hurry up and win a slam or else you will become tortured and owned by the troll topics till eternity.

Shinoj
11-11-2011, 04:48 AM
Morons this is not a troll topic :p .....I explained myself quite clearly there.

We could add Transitional champs like Hewitt, Kuerton too.

MuzzahLovah
11-11-2011, 04:51 AM
Murray is the hottest therefore the best. See my icon for further details.

Shinoj
11-11-2011, 04:57 AM
Murray is the hottest therefore the best. See my icon for further details.


While you are at it ,Murrays too freckled, looks quite sick. He loses on this one.

Arkulari
11-11-2011, 05:13 AM
Murray has to win a GS first before being able to be in the same room Kafelnikov and Courier are.

thegreendestiny
11-11-2011, 06:09 AM
You might as well compare Tomic, Rios and Laver :shrug:

ogre
11-11-2011, 07:47 AM
Murray could beat either of the other two easily..... but of course he could be assisted by them being out of match practice

Shinoj
11-11-2011, 08:08 AM
Flagged for racism.

I left Courier out, you know. :D

Las7
11-11-2011, 02:39 PM
I like Yevgeny overall personally, mainly because Courier was a mental midget

sexybeast
11-11-2011, 02:44 PM
I was debating this issue not so long ago in another thread, I wont bring the same arguments in again. Anyway, here is some interesting stats you could have in mind:

top 10 W/L porcentage for Murray vs some transitional champs:

Murray 0.570
Safin 0.500
Hewitt 0.459
Courrier 0.438
Kafelnikov 0.421
Chang 0.333

You can even include Agassi with 0.548, you should then know Murray is a very special talent..

In fact Murray got a top 10 record that is ahead of Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Wilander and many other great legends of the game.

spencercarlos
11-11-2011, 02:51 PM
I was debating this issue not so long ago in another thread, I wont bring the same arguments in again. Anyway, here is some interesting stats you could have in mind:

top 10 W/L porcentage for Murray vs some transitional champs:

Murray 0.570
Safin 0.500
Hewitt 0.459
Courrier 0.438
Kafelnikov 0.421
Chang 0.333

You can even include Agassi with 0.548, you should then know Murray is a very special talent..

In fact Murray got a top 10 record that is ahead of Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Wilander and many other great legends of the game.
Overrated stat perhaps, that pretty much tells you how relevant is the head to head comparisson, especially when you include the top 10 lot which can be so much different from one player to another.

Imagine a player that faces the bottom half of the top ten more often, or plays a good matchup for him more often than the others. Sorry but head to head alone does not define greatness.

The can be useful to compare players but not to decide which one is better than the other.

sexybeast
11-11-2011, 03:04 PM
Overrated stat perhaps, that pretty much tells you how relevant is the head to head comparisson, especially when you include the top 10 lot which can be so much different from one player to another.

Imagine a player that faces the bottom half of the top ten more often, or plays a good matchup for him more often than the others. Sorry but head to head alone does not define greatness.

The can be useful to compare players but not to decide which one is better than the other.

Yeah, but odd things like that should even out when you get closer to 100 top 10 meetings. Anyway, just for the record Murray has played the top 3 (Federer, Djokovic and Nadal) 42 times out of his 86 top 10 meetings and his record against the top 3 is 17-25. So against the rest of the top 10 he has only lost 12 times and won 44 times.

Anyway, I think most guys I listed have played less than 50% of their top 10 encounters against the top 3. Murray has not been lucky in avoiding the top 3 and has held his own against this top 3 which is the best since Borg-Mcenroe-Connors if not even greater.

Sombrerero loco
11-11-2011, 03:06 PM
in the end of his career, most probably murray
right now, id say kafelnikov

SetSampras
11-11-2011, 03:15 PM
Courier in his prime and peak in the early 90s was by far the most superior. He managed 4 slams. Kafelnikov is slightly more talented then Murray. Murray is talented in his own right, just not a supreme talent.

atennisfan
11-11-2011, 03:49 PM
This choice is so random

no way murray is on par with courier, that is unless he wins a slam

Saberq
11-11-2011, 03:57 PM
Murray needs 4 Slams to be compared to Courier

Chirag
11-11-2011, 04:06 PM
Courier by a mile

Johnny Groove
11-11-2011, 04:08 PM
Courier



Kafelnikov















Murray

Sophocles
11-11-2011, 04:10 PM
I don't know. The question is, "Who is better?" rather than, "Who has achieved more?" Murray's outstanding win-loss record against top-10 players is relevant to that.

zeleni
11-11-2011, 04:36 PM
Courier > Kafelnikov > Murray

Murray is the best player among them though. He just isnt lucky to play in mug era. :p

Mountaindewslave
11-11-2011, 04:53 PM
Courier, this is not even close remotely and a strange question to ask. Courier was by far a more talented player than the other two and his accomplishments are 10X more impressive...

why compare Murray to him? absurd, it's like throwing out the question "why do you think Murray is less talented and less accomplished than so and so?"

Mountaindewslave
11-11-2011, 04:55 PM
You might as well compare Tomic, Rios and Laver :shrug:

hahahaha basically this :wavey:

Shinoj
11-12-2011, 04:23 AM
Courier, this is not even close remotely and a strange question to ask. Courier was by far a more talented player than the other two and his accomplishments are 10X more impressive...

why compare Murray to him? absurd, it's like throwing out the question "why do you think Murray is less talented and less accomplished than so and so?"

Darling what happened? Seems like you missed the first post.

Anyways love to you:smooch:

Shinoj
11-12-2011, 04:26 AM
I was debating this issue not so long ago in another thread, I wont bring the same arguments in again. Anyway, here is some interesting stats you could have in mind:

top 10 W/L porcentage for Murray vs some transitional champs:

Murray 0.570
Safin 0.500
Hewitt 0.459
Courrier 0.438
Kafelnikov 0.421
Chang 0.333

You can even include Agassi with 0.548, you should then know Murray is a very special talent..

In fact Murray got a top 10 record that is ahead of Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Wilander and many other great legends of the game.

Thats a astounding statistic indeed. Shows what one or two Grand Slams makes a difference in a persons career.

He needs to give his all in the GS Semis and Finals. Thats is what it comes to. He has to match the intensity of Nadal or Djokovic. There is no getting away from it

LawrenceOfTennis
11-12-2011, 10:23 AM
Achievement wise: Courier>Kafelnikov>Murray

Murray is a great player but since Murray isn't a slam winner, he is not the same category.

Shinoj
11-12-2011, 10:57 AM
Achievement wise: Courier>Kafelnikov>Murray

Murray is a great player but since Murray isn't a slam winner, he is not the same category.


He is a great player no doubt about it. Nadal,Federer,Mcenroe all have acknowledged it. Its a matter of time.

Marc23
11-12-2011, 11:24 AM
You can even include Agassi with 0.548, you should then know Murray is a very special talent..



So,based on that stat Murray is a better player than Agassi?NO.Agassi won everything,Murray so far nothing...

This stat shows that he is very talented,but the fact that he still hasn't won anything BIG(Grand Slam or Olympic Gold) says that when it matters the most he doesn't produce it(which divide best from the good ones) and makes him fade in comparation to other GS winners...

Marc23
11-12-2011, 11:27 AM
Courier > Kafelnikov > Murray



Although I like Kafelnikov the most,couldn't agree more...but Murray's career is not over so let's wait before we can compare stats.

LawrenceOfTennis
11-12-2011, 11:28 AM
Courier > Kafelnikov > Murray

Murray is the best player among them though. He just isnt lucky to play in mug era. :p

Obviously you started watching tennis like after 2005. Courier had more rivals than any of the current players have.

LawrenceOfTennis
11-12-2011, 11:30 AM
Although I like Kafelnikov the most,couldn't agree more...but Murray's career is not over so let's wait before we can compare stats.

Good luck to Andy but there is no way he can win 4 slams. No doubt, if he wins the first that breaks the ice but Courier played finals at all slams.

nalbyfan
11-12-2011, 01:18 PM
Wait till Muzza retires before comparing people

AnnaK_4ever
11-12-2011, 01:45 PM
Kafelnikov is the better player from technical point of view, Courier is the better match player, Murray is the better player in terms of consistency.

Haelfix
11-12-2011, 01:49 PM
Murray is a better player than either frankly, but he is still far from their achievements (Courier's in particular).

sexybeast
09-11-2012, 07:17 PM
I have been saying that Murray is way better than Kafelnikov and also compared to Courier for some time now. It is finally showing off.

Kafelnikov would never slaughter Federer in an olympic final and defeat Djokovic in a hardcourt slam final. All he could do was make "thank you" speeches to Sampras for beeing inconsistent enought to let him win slams without playing top 10 players.

"Oh such depth the 90s had when top 10 players could disappear like flies in slams" some nostalgitards will claim, some people actually claimed Murray was so bad in slam finals he would not be able to beat Enqvist or old Stich in a slam final, beating peak Nole in a slam final certanly proved them wrong.

Johnny Groove
09-11-2012, 07:21 PM
Come now, Murray fans, let's not get ahead of ourselves.

The Prince
09-11-2012, 07:23 PM
Murray is the better player.

Statistically, maybe not, but in terms of ability, he's the best.

TigerTim
09-11-2012, 08:27 PM
Jim Courier was a fucking machine :worship: and a great commentator :yeah:

stewietennis
09-11-2012, 11:40 PM
The current ranking of Courier > Kafelnikov > Murray still stands, even with Andy's USO win.

sexybeast
09-12-2012, 01:12 AM
The current ranking of Courier > Kafelnikov > Murray still stands, even with Andy's USO win.

I dont care about the ranking, the question was who was better and not who has achieved more.

Topspindoctor
09-12-2012, 01:13 AM
Murray is the better player.

Statistically, maybe not, but in terms of ability, he's the best.

Lmao

Tag
09-12-2012, 02:19 AM
courier by a mile

4 grand slams and reached the finals of all 4 slams when they were distinct and different

stupid comparisons

compare murray to roddick, chang, del porto etc

Tag
09-12-2012, 02:22 AM
The current ranking of Courier > Kafelnikov > Murray still stands, even with Andy's USO win.

correct

Murray needs another slam if he's to be above Kafelnikov (who, despite not winning any masters, won Olympic Gold as well)

and even then, with two slams, he'd be way behind, for example, Hewitt, because of the weeks at no 1 and Year End Championship

compare Murray to other single slam winners

Jimnik
09-12-2012, 02:24 AM
Murray is 25 and he's being compared to retired players. :facepalm:

TennisOnWood
09-12-2012, 10:48 AM
Jim by far

Sophitia36
09-12-2012, 10:52 AM
KAFELNIKOV!!! Sorry what was the question? :lol:

Looner
09-12-2012, 10:53 AM
Courier from the numbers. So far.

Shinoj
09-12-2012, 10:56 AM
I dont know why in the Hell i Opened in this Thread. :superlol:


Because there is no way You can compare People from Different Eras. END OF.

sexybeast
09-12-2012, 02:15 PM
courier by a mile

4 grand slams and reached the finals of all 4 slams when they were distinct and different

stupid comparisons

compare murray to roddick, chang, del porto etc

Even Murray could have reached RG final with Courier's draw. Todd Martin-Stefan Edberg-Michael Stich would be easy for Murray. I think he would beat Agassi in the final aswell.

Stop with the nonsense about 90s beeing so diverse and hard, Courier took advantage of a really weak claycourt era where he dominated the French Open together with Agassi without even caring about claycourt events before RG.

I dont really think you can argue about this, if the 2 RG finalists are americans who together have won 3 matches on clay all season before RG but still reach finals it is a sign of a really weak era. If you can dominate RG without warming up on clay it means there is a real lack of great claycourt players to challenge you.

Ikaron
07-23-2013, 07:53 PM
What a dumb thread.
Courier has 4 GS. When MidgetRay and Kafelnikov has 2.
Courier > Kafelnikov > SlamRay >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ferrer

Tiebreak100
07-23-2013, 08:01 PM
Kafelnikov better than Murray? LOL. Andy would even thump the Russian at golf.

Put down the puff, mate.

Ikaron
07-23-2013, 08:07 PM
Kafelnikov better than Murray? LOL. Andy would even thump the Russian at golf.

Put down the puff, mate.

Kafelnikov was N1.
Because of that he is better.

Tiebreak100
07-23-2013, 08:15 PM
Kafelnikov was N1.
Because of that he is better.

Murray has surpassed the Russian in every aspect/area of the game. To say the Russian is better than the Scot because he got to #1 is absurd.

Ikaron
07-23-2013, 08:19 PM
Murray has surpassed the Russian in every aspect/area of the game. To say the Russian is better than the Scot because he got to #1 is absurd.

I can't argue with you.

Illusive Man
07-23-2013, 09:58 PM
I dont know why in the Hell i Opened in this Thread. :superlol:


Because there is no way You can compare People from Different Eras. END OF.

Not that it'll stop people from trying

Sent from Verticalsports.com Free App (http://www.verticalsports.com/mobile)

Burrow
07-23-2013, 10:24 PM
Best ball striker - Kafelnikov
Best athlete - Murray

Murray loves the game more than these two ever did. He's far more professional. Looks to me like he puts 10x more work in than Kafelnikov in effort off and on court.

Sapeod
07-23-2013, 10:53 PM
Currently, Courier is. He has 4 slams while Andy and Kafel have only 2.

That said, I'd put Andy in terms of talent and ability. That's just me though. He should be comfortably above Courier when he retires.

Rychu
07-23-2013, 10:56 PM
Courier>Murray>Kafelnikov

Murray has a chance to eclipse Jim, but right now he doesn't have any weeks at no1 for example, Courier still has 2 more slams...

latso
07-23-2013, 11:04 PM
Courier>Murray>Kafelnikov

Murray has a chance to eclipse Jim, but right now he doesn't have any weeks at no1 for example, Courier still has 2 more slams...
same here.

i think Murray could match or even do better than 4 Slams and i guess if he does he'd have a shot at beating the #1 weeks spot, but atm still Jim is a more awarded player.

And tbh he'd still be there in my mind whatever Murray does, also because nowadays it is all about who will master "the style" and will be more fit, while at the time it was such a battle of styles, with Courier's being such a distinctive one, hated by some, loved by others, in any case - different.

Sampras, Agassi, Courier, Chang, Edberg, Willander, Becker, Stich, Forget, Pioline, Santoro, etc., etc. - all with very different and distinctive styles, which seems to be very over nowadays and it sucks :sad:

rutinos harcos
07-24-2013, 12:15 AM
Courier
Kafelnikov






















hooligan

ProdigyEng
07-24-2013, 12:17 AM
Courier
Kafelnikov






















hooligan
Hooligan is perhaps better in haggis eating contests though.

thrust
07-24-2013, 01:01 AM
same here.

i think Murray could match or even do better than 4 Slams and i guess if he does he'd have a shot at beating the #1 weeks spot, but atm still Jim is a more awarded player.

And tbh he'd still be there in my mind whatever Murray does, also because nowadays it is all about who will master "the style" and will be more fit, while at the time it was such a battle of styles, with Courier's being such a distinctive one, hated by some, loved by others, in any case - different.

Sampras, Agassi, Courier, Chang, Edberg, Willander, Becker, Stich, Forget, Pioline, Santoro, etc., etc. - all with very different and distinctive styles, which seems to be very over nowadays and it sucks :sad:

GREAT POST! Fair and Accurate.

HKz
07-24-2013, 01:58 AM
I was debating this issue not so long ago in another thread, I wont bring the same arguments in again. Anyway, here is some interesting stats you could have in mind:

top 10 W/L porcentage for Murray vs some transitional champs:

Murray 0.570
Safin 0.500
Hewitt 0.459
Courrier 0.438
Kafelnikov 0.421
Chang 0.333

You can even include Agassi with 0.548, you should then know Murray is a very special talent..

In fact Murray got a top 10 record that is ahead of Djokovic, Agassi, Connors, Wilander and many other great legends of the game.

Arguably though, such stats from Murray will most likely even out a bit closer to such figures you provide.

Courier obviously has the best resume so far but Murray is closing the gap seemingly quickly. In terms of subjective analysis on their games, I would have to go with Courier. He was super effective with his game. He certainly could have achieved more I thought, that Wimbledon loss to Sampras really affected him considering he was going for his 3 slam title in a row, had already a total of 4 slams so I'm sure many people picked him to win because hell, Sampras had only won one slam up to that point which was 3 years prior, he had then lost to Edberg at the previous year's USO final, and he actually didn't have that great of a Wimbledon record considering his first three years he was knocked out R1, R1 and R2 respectively (although he did make the SFs the prior year).

HKz
07-24-2013, 02:01 AM
Courier
Kafelnikov






















hooligan

Damn, where does that leave Novak? He is afterall the only player to lose against "hooligan" in a slam final, mind you twice. So is Novak even lower than "hooligan" in that list? Would Courier and Kafelnikov easily bagel "hooligan" in each set and have golden sets against Novak?

Kyle_Johansen
07-24-2013, 02:29 AM
Right now Courier is clearly the best but I suspect that will change in a few years.

polarisgalaxy
07-24-2013, 03:13 AM
Right now Jim Courier he has 4 slams and unlike Andy Murray he reached NUMBER ONE in the world. How in the world can Andy Murray be considered a legend or a great player without reaching the number one ranking? That's something Murray needs to CORRECT if he wants to advance his legacy. I agree Murray is going to win more slams but right now I feel Jim Courier is better.

Courier had mental toughness something that Murray lacked until recently. I also think Courier has a better forehand than Murray.

BackhandDTL
07-24-2013, 05:58 AM
Since you're asking "who is better" rather than "who is greater", I'll have to go with Murray. Critiques and detractors be damned; there is more to Murray's game than either of these guys had, imo.

Courier was great at what he did well, but had glaring limitations with his game. I don't think he could get away with that now and I wonder if that's what ultimately separated him when Sampras and (sort of) Agassi came into their own.

Kafelnikov was a major overachiever imo. He definitely maximized on his abilities, for sure. Came up pretty fortunate in the draws of the Majors he won. Hopped from tournament to tournament; seemed to see tennis as a nice way to make a paycheck, etc. The original workhorse.

I don't think either guy is a better player than Andy is.

Courier is certainly greater though, by far. I don't think Kafelnikov's 6 weeks @ #1 puts him ahead in terms of achievement.

Johnny Groove
07-24-2013, 07:05 AM
Murray is above Kafelnikov, below Courier, for now at least.

rutinos harcos
07-24-2013, 08:10 AM
Damn, where does that leave Novak? He is afterall the only player to lose against "hooligan" in a slam final, mind you twice. So is Novak even lower than "hooligan" in that list? Would Courier and Kafelnikov easily bagel "hooligan" in each set and have golden sets against Novak?

Try harder.Djoko has more slams,more Masters,more titles & better h2h angainst hooligan.

BackhandDTL
07-24-2013, 08:25 AM
Try harder.Djoko has more slams,more Masters,more titles & better h2h angainst hooligan.

Then why is he losing to such a lowly hooligan in "slam" finals?

Shinoj
07-24-2013, 08:50 AM
kafelnikov was hugely talented. He had almost all the shots. Shame he was a bit of a Mental Midget other wise he could have been a Top 2 Tier All time Great, atleast.

buzz
07-24-2013, 10:21 AM
Courier had about two years in his career his tennis was on a new higher level, with his powerfull inside out forehand and fitness etc. New things he brought to tennis, then others catched up and those guys also had a good backhand and serve and courier wasn't the best anymore, but still legend stuff in my opinion.

Murray did never reach a new unprecedented level, it just feels he does , more or less the same a Djokovic on court. But this has also got a lot to do because tennis had just got an enormous lift in level the last 10years with Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. And Murray has already been in the top5 for much longer than Courier ever did.

Murray is just way more competitive not at his absolute peak, but Murray will never reach Couriers absolute peak. Nor will he ever play shots never seen before. Murrays qualities are more being very solid in his baseline game and being super fit super fast while still being very tall and strong. To me he is some sort of Hewitt with a way better body for tennis.