Exploiting Murray [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Exploiting Murray

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 08:00 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AmYlLjGjcI&NR=1

1) Hit drop shots to exploit court positioning.
2) Rush the net after attacking the backhand, he will float a weak slice more often than not, put it away.
3) Kill the second serve.

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 08:02 PM
did i forget anything

Boognish
08-24-2009, 08:03 PM
'Exploiting Murray'

sounds like a tennis themed porno movie

Clydey
08-24-2009, 08:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AmYlLjGjcI&NR=1

1) Hit drop shots to exploit court positioning.
2) Rush the net after attacking the backhand, he will float a weak slice more often than not, put it away.
3) Kill the second serve.

So simple.

I don't expect Murray to win many matches now that you've posted the blueprint to beat him.

Certinfy
08-24-2009, 08:10 PM
:lol:

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 08:22 PM
So simple.

I don't expect Murray to win many matches now that you've posted the blueprint to beat him.Nalbandian went into the match with those 3 tactics in mind.
Had he played a passive counter punching game it's unlikely he'd have won the match in straights.

tennishero
08-24-2009, 08:22 PM
lol good post

Apemant
08-24-2009, 08:22 PM
Damn, I miss David :sad:


So entertaining to watch when he's on...


On the other hand, so painful to watch when he isn't :eek:

Clydey
08-24-2009, 08:26 PM
Nalbandian went into the match with those 3 tactics in mind.
Had he played a passive counter punching game it's unlikely he'd have won the match in straights.

Yeah, it was that simple. He just attacked the Murray backhand and rushed the net. It's not like Murray is particularly good at passing off the backhand.

jonathancrane
08-24-2009, 08:27 PM
What a great match it was :worship:

Certinfy
08-24-2009, 08:28 PM
FlavorNuts, u do realise if Muzza loses in New York, i'm coming after you. :devil:

Sapeod
08-24-2009, 08:31 PM
Not so simple. Murray will see that his opponent is using that strategy sooner rather than later, and will change his approach and change his tactics.

It's not as simple as you say it is.

simplet
08-24-2009, 08:34 PM
It really was an awesome match. Murray can actually be really fun to watch, but you really have to smack him around the court to force him to be entertaining.

edit : wow those two points around 4:30 are absolutely ridiculous.

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 08:37 PM
Not so simple. Murray will see that his opponent is using that strategy sooner rather than later, and will change his approach and change his tactics.

It's not as simple as you say it is.It's not simple. But unless you're Federer or Nadal, it's the difference between winning and losing.

Clydey
08-24-2009, 08:41 PM
Not so simple. Murray will see that his opponent is using that strategy sooner rather than later, and will change his approach and change his tactics.

It's not as simple as you say it is.

It's not just that it's not simple. It's suicidal. :lol:

His suggestion is that you rush the net against one of the best passers in the game. And not to his weaker side, the forehand. No, you are to rush the net and approach to the backhand, which is one of the best in the game.

Sapeod
08-24-2009, 08:41 PM
It's not simple. But unless you're Federer or Nadal, it's the difference between winning and losing.
I know it's kind of good way of exploiting Murray but it won't work half of the time. Murray will always find a way to win in the majority of those matches were his opponent does that. Murray can't be exploited as easily as you say in your first post. And as Clydey said above me, Murray has one of the best passing shots in tennis and rusing to the net won't do you any favours.

Smoke944
08-24-2009, 08:43 PM
Umm...I believe the strategy Nalbandian used to great success was called "being better"...

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 08:43 PM
Now might be a good time to watch the link in the opening post.

Clydey
08-24-2009, 08:48 PM
Now might be a good time to watch the link in the opening post.

We can cite one or two matches as examples to prove a particular point. I can point to matches that would lead one to believe that Federer has the worst forehand in the top 100. You can't isolate a single match and then go, "This is what you do. Works every time".

Murray wants you to come to the net. He also wants you to come in on his backhand.

rubbERR
08-24-2009, 08:48 PM
another genius with his tennis advices :lol:

ShotmaKer
08-24-2009, 08:55 PM
Umm...I believe the strategy Nalbandian used to great success was called "being better"...

lol.

Good one.

Guga_fan
08-24-2009, 08:55 PM
It was a good match by Dave, I sure miss him. But one gameplan is not enough to beat a player like Murray, David is an incredibly good tactical player and he can construct every single point differently, that's the reason he beat Murray.

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 08:55 PM
We can cite one or two matches as examples to prove a particular point. I can point to matches that would lead one to believe that Federer has the worst forehand in the top 100. You can't isolate a single match and then go, "This is what you do. Works every time".

Murray wants you to come to the net. He also wants you to come in on his backhand.Murray wants you coming into net on his terms. When he's getting attacked and pulled wide, he constantly floats slices to give himself time to get back into position.
Nalbandian (the best tactician in tennis) wouldn't have employed the tactic if there wasn't enough evidence to support this.

Nadal_Fanatic
08-24-2009, 08:56 PM
Murray didn't look as good in Cincinnati as in Montreal. We'll see which Murray shows up at the US Open. I assume the Murray in Montreal. ;)

General Suburbia
08-24-2009, 08:59 PM
'Exploiting Murray'

sounds like a tennis themed porno movie
You're confusing "exploiting" with "exploding" :cool:

HattonWBA
08-24-2009, 09:02 PM
Every player in the world has weaknesses and more than Murray for 95% of the players, shall i post an 'exploiting Gulbis' thread, yes they are his weaknesses but very few players can actually exploit them all, Nalbandian happens to be one of the rare talents that can along with guys like Federer when on form.

FlavorNuts
08-24-2009, 09:09 PM
Every player in the world has weaknesses and more than Murray for 95% of the players, shall i post an 'exploiting Gulbis' thread, yes they are his weaknesses but very few players can actually exploit them all, Nalbandian happens to be one of the rare talents that can along with guys like Federer when on form.Why do Murray fans have a problem with this thread.
Murray is the world no.2, it makes sense that we should talk about his game rather than a player like Gulbis who is outside the top 100 and irrelevant.

Singularity
08-24-2009, 09:14 PM
Now might be a good time to watch the link in the opening post.
Watching the video, Nalbandian was killing Murray with the backhand DTL and forehand DTL, which is why he was getting the short replies that he would put away at the net. So really it was Nalbandian's amazing movement and timing that did the damage: he was just hitting the ball really cleanly, and there wasn't much Murray could do.

If you don't have Nalbandian's groundstrokes though, you're going to have to work a lot harder to finish points at the net. When not completely out of position (as he was many times in that match) Murray is able to pull off great passing shot after great passing shot. As always, you either need a really good approach or a really good first volley, to stand a chance, and that's as much a question of execution as it is of tactics.

HattonWBA
08-24-2009, 09:16 PM
Why do Murray fans have a problem with this thread.
Murray is the world no.2, it makes sense that we should talk about his game rather than a player like Gulbis who is outside the top 100 and irrelevant.

I dont see any problem with this thread at all mate, but where excactly is it going, you have identified what parts of his game can be exploited and so if guys are good enough to do what Nalbandian did then they will beat him, if not they will lose, its not a bad post at all i am just saying its not really a thread where a debate can start, his weaknesses are the ones you have listed along with his inability to play more agressivley on more ocassions and come away from his natural game because in my opinion top guys are playing too well late on in Grand Slam to make the errors nessecary for his common game style.

Vida
08-24-2009, 09:25 PM
so wonderful to see fans of a player agreeing on a topic concerning their fave :rolleyes:

murray is a fine player. very talented but full of holes. look for someone like verdasco to 'muster it up' and blow him off the court at the Open. oh, there is this guy from Argentina also who I hear is not fond of him (also)... he is loaded as well.

scoobs
08-24-2009, 09:30 PM
I think there's quite a lot to the original post.

Nalbandian has shown that if you go into Murray's forehand wide then down the line to his backhand, you will, if you do it right, get a floated backhand response. Most players do not take advantage of that. David ghosts into the net to knock off a volley on the angle, or back behind Murray, and wins the point. It's a tactic he used repeatedly in Paris and it's one that I'm surprised more players haven't at least attempted - although maybe because it requires you to be pinpoint accurate off the ground and more than competent on the volley, it's not as simple to execute this tactic as it sounds.

Attacking the second serve is also a sound strategy, but again, easier than it sounds. Murray has started to improve the second serve, but you will still get some looks at a nothing serve middle of the box, and it's generally best to take that hard down the line into his forehand side or deep to his baseline in the middle of the court - either way you stand a good chance of a forced error. If you do it into the backhand side there's more chance he'll be able to create a shot to get back into the point. It's also a good strategy because he can become irritable if he's not getting enough first serves in and his second serve is under constant pressure - it will earn you double faults from him and these can come on crucial points too.

Hitting dropshots is a risky strategy, though - he may be quite a way behind the baseline, but he is very fast and very capable of making something off the shot when he gets there so it has to be hit very well and while most players can hit a competent dropshot, against Murray it better be superb unless you're on clay.

Other tactics that also work fairly well are to approach to his forehand side deep into the corner - 90% of the time he will go short crosscourt with the pass attempt, and about 8% of the time he'll attempt the lob. So if you cover the crosscourt and you're a decent volleyer you have to time it and pick the volley off. He very rarely passes down the line on the forehand his fh dtl is his most inconsistent shot, so it's nearly always pointless to cover that. His passing lob attempts are also often short so as long as you're alert you can get back quick enough and take it out of the air.

Also, going very big down the line into his forehand is a good play - he can pick those up and angle them crosscourt off the forehand but he makes much more error with that than the equivalent off the backhand. And if you do get a crosscourt forehand response, the best play is a short angled crosscourt forehand for the winner - he nearly always covers down the line to his backhand as the next shot and will be caught flatfooted.

Corey Feldman
08-24-2009, 09:44 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AmYlLjGjcI&NR=1

1) Hit drop shots to exploit court positioning.
2) Rush the net after attacking the backhand, he will float a weak slice more often than not, put it away.
3) Kill the second serve.Muzza thanking his luck he doesnt run into you at US Open

Nidhogg
08-24-2009, 09:48 PM
And here I thought this would be about Simon Reed.

Burrow
08-24-2009, 09:51 PM
Murray is one of the worst number 2 players of all time, pathetic. :lol:

Sapeod
08-24-2009, 09:55 PM
Murray is one of the worst number 2 players of all time, pathetic. :lol:
Haas hasn't reached a GS final or won 13 titles... :shrug:

Certinfy
08-24-2009, 10:01 PM
Haas hasn't reached a GS final or won 13 titles... :shrug:Maybe that's why Burrow said "one of the worst", not "the worst".

Tyler_Durden
08-24-2009, 10:01 PM
Haas hasn't reached a GS final or won 13 titles... :shrug:

Hence why he said ONE OF the worst. :rolleyes:

andylovesaustin
08-24-2009, 11:01 PM
'Exploiting Murray'

sounds like a tennis themed porno movie

:rolls:

You all are too funny today!

Gaudio2004
08-24-2009, 11:06 PM
It's not just that it's not simple. It's suicidal. :lol:

His suggestion is that you rush the net against one of the best passers in the game. And not to his weaker side, the forehand. No, you are to rush the net and approach to the backhand, which is one of the best in the game.

Not really, not as good as the Nadal forehand, Nalbandian backhand or Federer forehand, it's no-where near those shots, Murray needs to add more explosive power to his backhand. He needs to deal with low slices to that shot better as well.

Clydey
08-24-2009, 11:11 PM
Not really, not as good as the Nadal forehand, Nalbandian backhand or Federer forehand, it's no-where near those shots, Murray needs to add more explosive power to his backhand. He needs to deal with low slices to that shot better as well.

On a hardcourt, I'd take the Murray backhand over the Nadal forehand any day. On other surfaces, I'd take Nadal's forehand.

Nalbandian's backhand is a great shot...when it's on. How often is it on, though? Murray has a better backhand because it's consistently excellent. Nalbandian's backhand is out of this world once in a blue moon.

And the Federer forehand is the best shot in tennis, so I wouldn't dispute that.

I disagree with everything else in your post. Murray has no problem generating "explosive power" when he wants to be offensive.

Gaudio2004
08-24-2009, 11:17 PM
On a hardcourt, I'd take the Murray backhand over the Nadal forehand any day. On other surfaces, I'd take Nadal's forehand.

Nalbandian's backhand is a great shot...when it's on. How often is it on, though? Murray has a better backhand because it's consistently excellent. Nalbandian's backhand is out of this world once in a blue moon.

And the Federer forehand is the best shot in tennis, so I wouldn't dispute that.


You would take a flat shot (incredibly hard to hit a Nadal-like shot with a 2 handed backhand as you cannot "roll" over the ball, while with a one handed backhand it's very easy) that can be miss-and-hit, over a topspin shot that makes pretty much no errors? Nadal's forehand is almost the perfect shot, it may be ugly and at the moment it's landing very, very short so it can be attacked, but that shot has won him 6 Grand Slams, not his serve or backhand.. Murray's backhand has brought him nothing yet, on a hard-court too?

Nalbandian's backhand is usually "on" when he plays, and when it's "on" it can rip every single player in the game (bagelling Djokovic and Nadal is not easy to do), I rarely see Murray bagelling Djokovic or Nadal? Just because Murray plays more tennis than Nalbandian, it does not mean his backhand is more consistent, did you used to watch Nalbandian in early 2000? His backhand was very consistent, this is when he was Murray's age, naturally..

I wouldn't call Federer's forehand the best shot in tennis, it's definitely decreased over the last 2 years or so, what about Karlovic's serve, some argue that Nadal's forehand (in 2008 mainly) was the best shot in men's tennis.

malisha
08-24-2009, 11:20 PM
Murrays passing shots on BC always go CC or CC topspin lob or CC slice-lob
rarely goes DTL

edit:scoobs allready wrote it

Sapeod
08-24-2009, 11:25 PM
Hence why he said ONE OF the worst. :rolleyes:
Yes. I know. Just saying that Murray isn't the worst, pal :wavey:

Clydey
08-24-2009, 11:28 PM
You would take a flat shot (incredibly hard to hit a Nadal-like shot with a 2 handed backhand as you cannot "roll" over the ball, while with a one handed backhand it's very easy) that can be miss-and-hit, over a topspin shot that makes pretty much no errors? Nadal's forehand is almost the perfect shot, it may be ugly and at the moment it's landing very, very short so it can be attacked, but that shot has won him 6 Grand Slams, not his serve or backhand.. Murray's backhand has brought him nothing yet, on a hard-court too?

Nalbandian's backhand is usually "on" when he plays, and when it's "on" it can rip every single player in the game (bagelling Djokovic and Nadal is not easy to do), I rarely see Murray bagelling Djokovic or Nadal? Just because Murray plays more tennis than Nalbandian, it does not mean his backhand is more consistent, did you used to watch Nalbandian in early 2000? His backhand was very consistent, this is when he was Murray's age, naturally..

I wouldn't call Federer's forehand the best shot in tennis, it's definitely decreased over the last 2 years or so, what about Karlovic's serve, some argue that Nadal's forehand (in 2008 mainly) was the best shot in men's tennis.

I don't rate Nadal's forehand on hard. Certainly not against great two-handers. It's a borderline liability against the likes of Djokovic, Murray, and Nalby on hard. It sits up at the perfect height for them to attack it.

It doesn't matter how good Nalby's backhand was years ago (and it was great). It's still an inconsistent stroke. When it's "on", it's better than Murray's. It's just not consistent enough now, though.

When I said the best shot in tennis, I meant groundstrokes. Taking everything into consideration, then I'd easily take the Karlovic serve as the best shot in tennis.

Gaudio2004
08-24-2009, 11:32 PM
How is the Nalbandian backhand an inconsistent stroke? He doesn't play a lot, is that why? When he plays it's usually a very good shot, that's consistent for you, am I correct?

Nadal's forehand "not rated" on hard? So why does he have a Grand Slam on a hard-court? .... He faced players with good backhands (Haas just naming one) and he beat them convincingly? ... His Forehand is an excellent shot on a hard-court, especially a fast-one like the US Open.

Clydey
08-24-2009, 11:38 PM
How is the Nalbandian backhand an inconsistent stroke? He doesn't play a lot, is that why? When he plays it's usually a very good shot, that's consistent for you, am I correct?

Nadal's forehand "not rated" on hard? So why does he have a Grand Slam on a hard-court? .... He faced players with good backhands (Haas just naming one) and he beat them convincingly? ... His Forehand is an excellent shot on a hard-court, especially a fast-one like the US Open.

I said great "two handers". It's very effective against one-handers on hard. They simply can't be as aggressive as you can with the two hands, since the ball leaps up so high. Two-handers can really lean into the shot and flatten it out.

And no, I don't agree that Nalbandian's BH is usually "on" when he plays. His forehand is not so bad that you can blame all of his frequent losses on it.

Gaudio2004
08-24-2009, 11:43 PM
I said great "two handers". It's very effective against one-handers on hard. They simply can't be as aggressive as you can with the two hands, since the ball leaps up so high. Two-handers can really lean into the shot and flatten it out.

And no, I don't agree that Nalbandian's BH is usually "on" when he plays. His forehand is not so bad that you can blame all of his frequent losses on it.

I disagree, I think if you have a good one-hander it makes it just as efficient if not more efficient at handling Nadal's FH, look at Gaudio bagelling Nadal on clay, his BH completely ripped Nadal apart in his strong surface, same with Gasquet when they play, on a hard-court the one-hander is a better shot (in my view) against topspin or flat strokes, it's just that the one hander requires more strength to play.

Give me some losses where Nalbandian's BH has evidently not "been on". It's a very consistent stroke, just like Safin.

Clydey
08-24-2009, 11:48 PM
I disagree, I think if you have a good one-hander it makes it just as efficient if not more efficient at handling Nadal's FH, look at Gaudio bagelling Nadal on clay, his BH completely ripped Nadal apart in his strong surface, same with Gasquet when they play, on a hard-court the one-hander is a better shot (in my view) against topspin or flat strokes, it's just that the one hander requires more strength to play.

Give me some losses where Nalbandian's BH has evidently not "been on". It's a very consistent stroke, just like Safin.

I could give you a shitload of losses. It would be pointless, though. You would just disagree and the argument would go nowhere.

And I'm pretty much done with you now, given that you think a single-hander works better against Nadal's forehand. You're just annoying me now, since you clearly don't have a clue.

philosophicalarf
08-24-2009, 11:48 PM
Has this Nalbandian chappie ever produced a good performance in European indoors masters before? I think we should be told.

Clydey
08-24-2009, 11:51 PM
Has this Nalbandian chappie ever produced a good performance in European indoors masters before? I think we should be told.

No. Never.

Gaudio2004
08-24-2009, 11:52 PM
I could give you a shitload of losses. It would be pointless, though. You would just disagree and the argument would go nowhere.

And I'm pretty much done with you now, given that you think a single-hander works better against Nadal's forehand. You're just annoying me now, since you clearly don't have a clue.

Haha you are wound up in stereotype again, why cannot the single-hander work against Nadal? Just because Federer struggles against the Nadal forehand? You need to open your eyes - have you ever seen a live tennis match between professionals or even semi-professionals?

Clydey
08-24-2009, 11:56 PM
Haha you are wound up in stereotype again, why cannot the single-hander work against Nadal? Just because Federer struggles against the Nadal forehand? You need to open your eyes - have you ever seen a live tennis match between professionals or even semi-professionals?

Use some common sense. Jesus, you're unbearable. I'm trying desperately to not call you a ****.

It's not a stereotype. It is simply much tougher to generate pace from shoulder height when you use a single hander. How can you not know that?

Sapeod
08-24-2009, 11:59 PM
Haha you are wound up in stereotype again, why cannot the single-hander work against Nadal? Just because Federer struggles against the Nadal forehand? You need to open your eyes - have you ever seen a live tennis match between professionals or even semi-professionals?
God, you're an unbearable oaf, you know that :retard:

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:02 AM
Use some common sense. Jesus, you're unbearable. I'm trying desperately to not call you a ****.

It's not a stereotype. It is simply much tougher to generate pace from shoulder height when you use a single hander. How can you not know that?

Of course it's harder to hit at a shoulder height with the one hander, but the good players (Haas, Gasquet, Gaudio, even Federer) who can hit on the rise, don't let the ball reach shoulder-height, especially on a fast-hard court where you can hit on the rise with a one handed backhand with little swing and it will usually put Nadal on the back-foot... how can you not know this?

I understand tennis better than you and I can appreciate both the one handed and two handed backhand, you on the other hand just have no alternative view to it!

Are you educated in anyway, Clydey? You're 27 years old (hint).

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:06 AM
Of course it's harder to hit at a shoulder height with the one hander, but the good players (Haas, Gasquet, Gaudio, even Federer) who can hit on the rise, don't let the ball reach shoulder-height, especially on a fast-hard court where you can hit on the rise with a one handed backhand with little swing and it will usually put Nadal on the back-foot... how can you not know this?

I understand tennis better than you and I can appreciate both the one handed and two handed backhand, you on the other hand just have no alternative view to it!

Are you educated in anyway, Clydey? You're 27 years old (hint).

Mate, you do not understand a thing about tennis. You're a figure of fun around here. You are exactly the type of poster I hate to engage. You think you know it all, when in reality you know very little.

I'm done wasting my time on you. You're beyond both reason and help.

Sapeod
08-25-2009, 12:08 AM
Of course it's harder to hit at a shoulder height with the one hander, but the good players (Haas, Gasquet, Gaudio, even Federer) who can hit on the rise, don't let the ball reach shoulder-height, especially on a fast-hard court where you can hit on the rise with a one handed backhand with little swing and it will usually put Nadal on the back-foot... how can you not know this?

I understand tennis better than you and I can appreciate both the one handed and two handed backhand, you on the other hand just have no alternative view to it!

Are you educated in anyway, Clydey? You're 27 years old (hint).
Whose double account are you?

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:08 AM
Mate, you do not understand a thing about tennis. You're a figure of fun around here. You are exactly the type of poster I hate to engage. You think you know it all, when in reality you know very little.

I'm done wasting my time on you. You're beyond both reason and help.

Never at one point did I say "I know it all", please quote me where I said that?

Sapeod
08-25-2009, 12:10 AM
Never at one point did I say "I know it all", please quote me where I said that?
Whose double account are you?

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:11 AM
Never at one point did I say "I know it all", please quote me where I said that?

I didn't say that you said that. However, it's clear that you do think you know it all. You're beyond reason. No wonder you started posting under a different name. People must have been avoiding you like the plague.

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:17 AM
I didn't say that you said that. However, it's clear that you do think you know it all. You're beyond reason. No wonder you started posting under a different name. People must have been avoiding you like the plague.

Clear that I know it all? How do you form this knowledge, from reading my mind, with your great Scottish brain?

Started posting under a different name? I explained that "account" matter to the moderators, I do not have a different account at the moment or have been banned or anything in the past, this is a new account and I was a decent poster, certainly not avoided "like the plague", it seems only you have these subtle digs at me - almost resorting to calling me a ****, that would be really childish, 'specially from a 27 year old man.

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:20 AM
Clear that I know it all? How do you form this knowledge, from reading my mind, with your great Scottish brain?

Started posting under a different name? I explained that "account" matter to the moderators, I do not have a different account at the moment or have been banned or anything in the past, this is a new account and I was a decent poster, certainly not avoided "like the plague", it seems only you have these subtle digs at me - almost resorting to calling me a ****, that would be really childish, 'specially from a 27 year old man.

I didn't say that you had another account at the moment. I said that you're posting under a different name. Learn to read.

I just think you're the worst kind of poster. Pointless engaging you in a discussion.

Sapeod
08-25-2009, 12:22 AM
Clear that I know it all? How do you form this knowledge, from reading my mind, with your great Scottish brain?

Started posting under a different name? I explained that "account" matter to the moderators, I do not have a different account at the moment or have been banned or anything in the past, this is a new account and I was a decent poster, certainly not avoided "like the plague", it seems only you have these subtle digs at me - almost resorting to calling me a ****, that would be really childish, 'specially from a 27 year old man.
Whose triple account are you?

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:23 AM
I didn't say that you had another account at the moment. I said that you're posting under a different name. Learn to read.

I just think you're the worst kind of poster. Pointless engaging you in a discussion.

Posting under a different name? Explain this to me, if you will. You think I am someone else?

Worst kind of poster? Surely fanboys like Rafawinsusopen are worse, but again you cannot take an alternate view and just take digs at me - fine with that, I am the more mature here and can learn from this.

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:28 AM
Posting under a different name? Explain this to me, if you will. You think I am someone else?

Worst kind of poster? Surely fanboys like Rafawinsusopen are worse, but again you cannot take an alternate view and just take digs at me - fine with that, I am the more mature here and can learn from this.

Posting under a different name. What is it that you don't understand? You changed your name.

And no, those posters are not worse. They are at least honest. You run around fanboying Federer, while trying to lend credence to your views by telling everyone that you're not really a Federer fan. Do you think you come across as being more objective if you keep repeating, "I'm not a Federer fan!"?

Sapeod
08-25-2009, 12:29 AM
Posting under a different name? Explain this to me, if you will. You think I am someone else?

Worst kind of poster? Surely fanboys like Rafawinsusopen are worse, but again you cannot take an alternate view and just take digs at me - fine with that, I am the more mature here and can learn from this.
I think extreme fangirls/boys are the worst. They are the most biased bastards on the forum. What really irks me anout them is their constant bashing of that beat their player.

I'm glad that you've taken this in like a man and are learning from this.















Oh BTW, whose double account are you? HAHAHA jshfjhsflajsdghjjgfs

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:32 AM
Posting under a different name. What is it that you don't understand? You changed your name.

And no, those posters are not worse. They are at least honest. You run around fanboying Federer, while trying to lend credence to your views by telling everyone that you're not really a Federer fan. Do you think you come across as being more objective if you keep repeating, "I'm not a Federer fan!"?

You mean I changed my username on MTF? I don't even know how to do that.

I'm not a Federer fan - sure I don't mind watching him play, but I support Gaston Gaudio, it's a shame he doesn't play as much tennis as Nadal or Federer or Murray because of his injury, so I watch other top-level tennis, and out of the current crop Federer is one of the best therefore, I watch his matches... Would love it if you could backup your claims about me being a Federer fan, but you won't find much evidence there, as usual you are close-minded and don't take the alternate approach - researching before posting. :wavey: Think Clidey, think!

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:39 AM
You mean I changed my username on MTF? I don't even know how to do that.

I'm not a Federer fan - sure I don't mind watching him play, but I support Gaston Gaudio, it's a shame he doesn't play as much tennis as Nadal or Federer or Murray because of his injury, so I watch other top-level tennis, and out of the current crop Federer is one of the best therefore, I watch his matches... Would love it if you could backup your claims about me being a Federer fan, but you won't find much evidence there, as usual you are close-minded and don't take the alternate approach - researching before posting. :wavey: Think Clidey, think!

I won't find much evidence of you being a Federer fan? You fanboy him constantly and rush to his defence at every opportunity. Fucking throw a rock and you'd hit an example of you creaming your knickers over him. That would be all well and good if you were actually honest about it.

Sapeod
08-25-2009, 12:39 AM
You mean I changed my username on MTF? I don't even know how to do that.

I'm not a Federer fan - sure I don't mind watching him play, but I support Gaston Gaudio, it's a shame he doesn't play as much tennis as Nadal or Federer or Murray because of his injury, so I watch other top-level tennis, and out of the current crop Federer is one of the best therefore, I watch his matches... Would love it if you could backup your claims about me being a Federer fan, but you won't find much evidence there, as usual you are close-minded and don't take the alternate approach - researching before posting. :wavey: Think Clidey, think!

Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account. Double account.

straitup
08-25-2009, 12:40 AM
This thread has turned from "Exploiting Murray" to "Exploiting Posters on MTF" :eek:

And how does Nadal win matches on hard if his forehand isn't good on the surface...I don't see him hitting a lot of forceful backhands on the surface. The truth is, Nadal's forehand has so much spin that it may sit up, but he is able to dictate and keep the ball deep with it.

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:42 AM
I won't find much evidence of you being a Federer fan? You fanboy him constantly and rush to his defence at every opportunity. Fucking throw a rock and you'd hit an example of you creaming your knickers over him. That would be all well and good if you were actually honest about it.

27 years of age and you resort to this :rolleyes: . Are you an uneducated man Clidey?

batavlada
08-25-2009, 12:43 AM
'Exploiting Murray'

sounds like a tennis themed porno movie

:)

It is. Nalbandian doing lots of things while Murray is on floor.

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:46 AM
27 years of age and you resort to this :rolleyes: . Are you an uneducated man Clidey?

Very well educated, actually.

That has nothing to do with my opinion of you, though. Common sense is sufficient.

tennishero
08-25-2009, 12:47 AM
this thread has been overrun by murraytards.

leng jai
08-25-2009, 12:48 AM
MTF has been overrun by murraytards.

Agreed.

Everko
08-25-2009, 12:49 AM
Step onto the scourt with him. Murray's so brain-dead he will lose if anyone plays tennis with him, instead people play cupcake tag with him.

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:49 AM
Very well educated, actually.

That has nothing to do with my opinion of you, though. Common sense is sufficient.

Very educated in what? Making a fool of yourself? (I must note, you are very educated in this field) As if you didn't need the heat being a very passionate Murray fan..

That same common sense that thinks Nadal's forehand is a liability on a hard-court? That is some unbelievable common sense from Clidey right there.

Clydey
08-25-2009, 12:54 AM
Very educated in what? Making a fool of yourself? (I must note, you are very educated in this field) As if you didn't need the heat being a very passionate Murray fan..

That same common sense that thinks Nadal's forehand is a liability on a hard-court? That is some unbelievable common sense from Clidey right there.

I said borderline liability. And it is sometimes. You like to twist the facts, though.

If you think his forehand wasn't a liability on Saturday night, you're blind.

Gaudio2004
08-25-2009, 12:57 AM
I said borderline liability. And it is sometimes. You like to twist the facts, though.

If you think his forehand wasn't a liability on Saturday night, you're blind.

You're just too much fun Clidey, a man well into his life who just knows nothing about tennis, you are calling one of the best tennis strokes in the game a liability? If Nadal's FH, who has bought him 6 Grand Slams is a liability, then what is Murray's forehand? Simply unbelievable, you have no common sense really.

FlavorNuts
08-25-2009, 01:01 AM
Gaudio2004, why are you wasting your time with this clown?

Clydey
08-25-2009, 01:02 AM
You're just too much fun Clidey, a man well into his life who just knows nothing about tennis, you are calling one of the best tennis strokes in the game a liability? If Nadal's FH, who has bought him 6 Grand Slams is a liability, then what is Murray's forehand? Simply unbelievable, you have no common sense really.

I said on hardcourt and I didn't say all the time. Quit twisting the facts.

And what is Murray's forehand? A fucking massive liability sometimes.

Also, I'm not sure why you're deliberately misspelling my username. Does changing "Clydey" to "Clidey" pass for wit where you come from?

Clydey
08-25-2009, 01:04 AM
Gaudio2004, why are you wasting your time with this clown?

I love it. A couple of loons united in their distaste for me.

"Rush the net to the Murray backhand! It works everytime!"

out_here_grindin
08-25-2009, 01:37 AM
I don't think anyone considers Nadal's forehand one of the best on the hard courts. Nadal's game just isn't built for the hard so he must adapt hid play. Nothing wrong about what Clydey said.

Ichiban1920
08-25-2009, 02:12 AM
Nadull's forehand is nothing more than glorified moonballing.

SaFed2005
08-25-2009, 02:24 AM
Nalbandian is one of the extremely rare players who can do that to just about anyone when they are on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VduH7KNppA&feature=related

Just look at that clip and see what he does to Federer especially in that fifth set.

Roddickominator
08-25-2009, 02:45 AM
I'm not so sure Nalbandian's technique in that match would work nearly as well anymore.

A better example of tactical dominance against Murray would be when he played Roddick at Wimbledon.

1. You CAN rush the net on Murray with a decent approach, just cover crosscourt because he hardly ever passes down the line(on either wing really).
2. Give him junk deep down the middle, so that Murray is forced to create his own angles and can't counterpunch effectively(because he is very good at using angles created by his opponent against them).
3. Obviously attack the joke of a 2nd serve. Against Fed he was hitting a few of them harder, which at least shows that he's trying to improve it. But it isn't nearly to where he wants it to be yet.
4. If all else fails....make Murray do what he doesn't want to do. Just push right along with him until he gets tired of it and has to play aggressively....this takes him out of his preferred element.

Mechlan
08-25-2009, 04:32 AM
Nalbandian is one of the extremely rare players who can do that to just about anyone when they are on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VduH7KNppA&feature=related

Just look at that clip and see what he does to Federer especially in that fifth set.

Just stupendous. That really is Fit Dave. What a shame that he didn't make more of his awesome talent.